Imprimatur.  
Geo. Royse, R. R. in Christo Patri ac Dom. 
Febr. 5. 1694.  Dom. Johanni Archiep. Cantuar. a Sacris Domest.   

A DISCOURSE Concerning LENT, In Two Parts. 

The FIRST, an Historical Account of its Observation:  
The SECOND, an Essay concern ing its Original:   This Subdivided into Two Repartitions: Whereof 

The First is Preparatory: and shows, that most of our Christian Ordinances are Derived from the Jews: And  
The Second Conjectures, that Lent is of the same Original.    
LONDON, Printed by Tho. Warren for Walter Kettilby, at the Bishop's-Head in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1695.   

TO THE READER.  
I Am not unsensible, that a Discourse, concerning Lent, which declares not against it, may be apt to be suspected at first sight, of a very Ill, or Morose, Design; either of retrieveing some Antiquated Superstition; or of bringing back upon the World some old Rigours and Austerities, from which they have been happily set Free.  
But the Title Page, or at least the Summary of the Contents, may, I hope, ease the Reader of that Jealousy: and if he will bear but the Penance, of perusing the Treatise; he will find, that the Historical Part aims only at Truth in matter of Fact; and that such an Origination is offered, as neither complies with the Romish Errors, nor induces any other Restraints, than what he, in the Liberty of his own Discretion, shall think fit to Enjoin himself.  
The Derivation of our Christian Lent, from a like Preparatory Time of the Jews, has seemed to me to be very Probable, a long while: and having intimated so much of it in a late Royal Audience, as served to Exhort, and to Direct, to the Duty of the Season; I was easily persuaded to consider it more expressly, in some, as I then thought, short Discourse, but which by degrees has increased to a greater bulk.  
For presently it appeared necessary, to the better Adjusting this Parallel Line, as it were, of Jewish Practice; that I should first distinctly view that of the Christian; tracing it from its beginning, by the Elder Accounts; and Ascertaining it, as I went, with what exactness I might. And here, the differing Opinions of, the justly Celebrated, Monsieur Daille meeting me in in my Progress, obliged me, to stay longer on some Places; and to clear the Ground, of the Objections he had thrown in the Way.  
And then, when this Work was dispatched; and there seemed to remain no more, than that I should bring forth the Reason, and Usages, of the Jewish Lent, and propose its Agreement and Affinity with ours: it was further judged Requisite, lest this single Similitude should be thought only Casual; to show, that there were, in the Christian Religion, many other like Correspondencies, which must apparently be attributed to the same Original.  
This therefore chief occasioned that Addition to the second Part, which makes the first Repartition: and finding the subject to be copious, I enlarged the more willingly upon it; not only to serve my first Intention the more effectually; but to try, if by this means some more tolerable account might not be given of many an Ancient, and now Uncouth, Christian Practice. For, though of late many very Learned Men of our own, and Foreign Nations, have much illustrated the New Testament by such Comparative Observations; yet their Curiosity has not happened to carry them so far, as to hold their Jewish Light to the dark Corners of our Unscriptural Antiquity. A Task, I hearty wish such a one, as our Able Dr. Lightfoot, had undertaken: if only, that he might have saved me the Hazard I now run, in pretending to make Other things understood, by the help of what I understand so little.  
But concerning these elder Unscriptural Customs, the Reader is desired to observe, that I intent not to Recommend them, by the Original I endeavour to Assign: my Attempt designing nothing more, than to propose the Fact, and Conjecture at its Rise; a Curiosity allowed in all searches after Antiquities, of any kind; and commonly received by the Learned World with Favour. For as the Scripture commands us 
* Jerem. 6.16. , to stand in the Ways, for our Direction; and see, and ask for the Old Paths, that we may walk therein: so we may also stand a little, and see the Old Disused Paths, though we are to leave them; as we view the Old, Forsaken, Fosseways; looking about, for our Delight, and Instruction.  
For, if the Derivations I offer at, should have the good fortune to Obtain; there will be no worse Consequences than these: On one hand, That such Rites were not so much borrowed from Heathenism; nor otherwise contrived, and super-induced, towards the latter end of the second Age; as some have suggested: and on the other hand that though they might be as old as the Apostles, and have had the honour to be practised by them; yet they were not then newly Erected, and purposely Instituted, as the Popish Authors would persuade us; nor all of them Recommended, much less given in Precept, to Posterity.  
But the Obligation, or Unlawfulness, Expedience, or Inconvenience, of their Continuance, is a consideration of another kind; to be judged by the Nature of the Respective Rites; by the Intimated, or Presumed, Intention of the Apostles; and by the Declaration of the Primitive, Apostolical Church. I pretend not therefore to Intermeddle in it; nor undertake to determine, whether some of those Customs, though designed, as they say, for a more Honourable Interment, were not however kept too long; or whether some have not been since Buried, that were never Dead: professing, in this whole matter, to adhere still to the Judgement of our Church; whose Prudent and Pious Moderation, if I may speak from my own Experience, the further any one shall Consider, the more he will see cause to Approve.  
This Allowance for the Sincerity of my Intention, the Justice, I hope, of the Reader will not deny me: but I shall never the less want the Pardon still, both of the Learned, and Unlearned. For, though I have endeavoured, what I could, to make the Discourse Plain, and Intelligible; and have therefore rid it of all strange Languages, and their Criticisms, setting them aside, and by themselves; yet the subject itself may in some places be strange, and nice, to the Unacquainted; and require a little better Attention. And so, though I designed to shun being Tedious, especially in matters commonly known; and would have been glad, elsewhere to have avoided Mistakes: yet, I know, I am much at the Mercy of the Learned; as I shall be always ready to be instructed by their Corrections.   

A SUMMARY OF THE CONTENTS.  

PART I. THE Historical Account of Lent. 

Chap. I. Concerning the Festival of the Resurrection. Sect. I. The Weekly Festival, or Sunday. Sect. II. The Yearly; the many Differences about it. Sect. III. The Difference between the Asiatic Churches, and the Others; and the Proof thence in general, for the Apostolical Antiquity of Easter: Sect. iv In Particular, from the Letters of Polycrates and Irenaeus Page 1, 2  
Chap. II. Concerning Fasting. Sect. I. The several Kind's of Fasts. Sect. II. Several Occasions of Fasting: particularly Penitence, and Baptism p. 20  
Chap. III. Concerning the Fast before the Festival of the Resurrection. Sect. I. The General Presumption for its Apostolical Antiquity. Sect. II. A Particular Proof of it from Irenaeus. Sect. III. The different Length of that Fast down to Irenaeus his time: with some, probably, of 40 days p. 31  
Chap. IV. The Practice of Fasting mentioned about the Year 200, by Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian. Sect. I. The Weekly Fasts of Wednesday and Friday, mentioned by Clemens Alexandrinus. Sect. II. Testimonies out of Tertullian, concerning both the Weekly, and Ante-Paschal Fasts. Sect. III. Observations upon those Testimonies. Some part of the Ante-Paschal Fast thought Necessary by the Catholics of his time; the rest Discretionary p. 46  
Chap. V Sect. I. A Testimony from Origen for the Devotion of Fridays, and of the Paschal Season, and thence to Whitsuntide. Another from him, but of Ruffinus his Transtation, concerning the Fast of the Quadragesima, or the Forty Season. Sect. II. A distinct Account of the Passion-Week from Dionysius of Alexandria, about the middle of the Third Century. Sect. III. What were the first Paschal Solemnities mentioned by St. Cyprian: and concerning the Passion-Week. p. 70  
Chap. VI Sect. I. A mention of a Forty Days Fast, by Peter of Alexandria, before the Council of Nice. Sect. II. Very probably they were the Days before Easter p. 88  
Chap. VII. Sect. I. Good-Friday, and Days of solemn Fasting mentioned by Constantine. Sect. II. The Forty Season expressly mentioned by the Council of Nice. Sect. III. And that Forty Days are to be understood, proved from St. chrysostom p. 98  
Chap. VIII. Sect. I. This Forty Season particularly observed by the Candidates for Baptism. Sect. II. And by Penitents p. 112  
Chap. IX. Sect. I. A Lent always, and every where observed, though not of Forty Days. Sect. II. Mr. Daille 's Objections against it from Cassian; Sect. III From St. Jerome; Sect. iv From St. chrysostom p. 122  
Chap. X. Sect. I. Sozomen 's Account of the keeping of Lent, in his Time, about Ann. Chr. 440. Sect. II. What Additions have been made since. Sect. III. Socrates his Account of the Practice of the same Age, I suppose, by the Novatians. Sect. IU. His Wonder, That Lents of differing Lengths should all of them be called the Forty Season. Sect. V The Conclusion p. 133    
PART II. The Essay concerning its Original. Preface p. 149 

REPART. I. That most of the Ancient Christian Ordinances were derived from the Jews. 

Chap. I. [or II. for so it is to be reckoned hereafter, by the error of the Press] Sect. I. Not dishonourable for Christian Ordinances, to be borrowed from the Jews: and they generally were. First such considered, as are mentioned in Scripture: as Sect. II. Baptism. It was a Rite by which, as well as by others, Proselytes were admitted into Judaisme. Sect. III. Christian Baptism, as expressed in the New Testament, an Imitation of it p. 153  
Chap. III. Sect. I. The Nature of the Paschal Sacrifice, and the Description the Jewish Traditions give of that Supper; Sect. II. Agreeable to the History in the Gospels of our Lord's Supper, and to the Nature of it p. 167  
Chap. IV. Sect. I. The Church of Christ succeeds to the Church of the Jews. Sect. II. The Officers of the One, raised from the Officers of the Other. The Apostles of each. Sect. III. And the Bishops. Sect. IU. The Presbyters, or Elders of the Jews. Sect. V The Christian Presbyters, and their Power. Sect. VI The Ministerial Officers of the Jews; Sect. VII. Answered by our Deacons p. 175  
Chap. V Sect. I. The Excommunicates of the Jews, and their Condition. Sect. II. The Condition of Mourners among the Jews, compared with that of the Excommunicate. Sect. III. Their Excommunicates restrained from the Liberty, not only of Civil Conversation, but of Religious Communion. Sect. IU. Excommunication mentioned in the New Testament, as practised by the Jews, and by Christians p. 209  
Chap. VI Sect. I. Circumstances relating to Baptism, under Five Heads; practised in the Church of Christ, in the Second Century. Sect. II. These all agreeable to Jewish Custom: and First, in General; as to the Persons baptised and Baptising, and the Solemn Time of Baptism: Sect. III. In Particular; Secondly, as to the Distinction and Instruction of its Candidates; Sect. IU. Thirdly, As to the Action of Baptism; Sect. V. Fourthly, Its Confirmation; Sect. VI. And Lastly, the Sequel and Close of the whole Ceremony p. 236  
Chap. VII. Sect. I. Several Particulars practised in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, by the Primitive Christians, which varied from those of the Paschal Supper. Sect. II. These speak Our Lord's Supper to have succeeded the Paschal in its general nature, as a Memorial of Thanks. Sect. III. The Description of a Jewish Offering of Praise and Thanks, with the Feasting upon it. Sect. IU. The Christian Eucharist answered to it: and in what manner. Sect. V A Tradition of the Jews, That in the days of the Messiah, only the Eucharistical Sacrifice should remain. p. 266  
Chap. VIII. Sect. I. The Distinction of Clergy and Laiety, specified by Tertullian: That of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, by Him, (Irenaeus also being his Leader, for the Apostolical Authority of Bishops;) Sect. II. And by Ignatius; as the other, at least of the Laiety and Clergy, by St. Clemens of Rome. Sect. III. The First Distinction, derived from the Language of the Old Testament: The Offices of the Second, from those of the Jewish Sanhedrim, and likewise of the Temple; the Upper parts of our Churches, being also supposed to answer the Temple Courts, of the Priests, and the Altar. p. 291  
Chap. IX. Sect. I. The Sentence and Effects of Excommunication with Christians, as with Jews: and the Relaxation of it alike. Sect. II. Their Agreement, in the estimate of the Gild of Sins; and the appointments of Penance p. 318  
Chap. X. Sect. I. A Parallel of Christian Rites, mentioned by Tertullian: and Sect. II. Of those Usages mentioned by Origen, particularly about Prayer: 

(1.) Disposition of Mind.  
(2.) Posture of Body.  
(3.) Direction of the Face. Sect. III.  
(4.) Times of Daily Prayer. Sect. IU.  
(5.) Matter and Method.   Sect. V The Ancient Order of Christian Prayer, Sect. VI And the Order of the Jewish, Sect. VII. Compared. Sect. VIII. A Parallel of some few other Usages p. 332  
Chap. XI. Sect. I. The Second Prejudice against a Jewish Origination of Lent, from want of Authority in the Talmudical Writings; Sect. II. Answered: by showing (1.) That those Traditional Accounts were not without some Ancient Foundation of their own; Sect. III (Secondly,) That they are Confirmed in many points by Collateral Evidence; Sect. IU. And (Thirdly,) That they were not borrowed by the Jews from Foreign Authors. Sect. V The Third Prejudice against such an Origination, from the Novelty of it: Answered p. 364    
REPART. II. A Conjecture concerning the Original of Lent. 

Chap. I. Our Easter, kept for some time with the Jewish Passover. Sect. II. The Notification of Easter by Paschal Letters, agrees with the Practice of the Jews. Sect. III. The Ante-Paschal Preparation of Christians, answers to a like Preparation of the Jews before their Day of Expiation p. 389  
Chap. II. Sect. I. The Sacrificial Performance on the Jewish Expiation Day, Sect. II. Compared with that of our Saviour on his Passion-Day p. 396  
Chap. III. Sect. I. The Devotional Duty of the Jews on their Expiation Day, Sect. II. Practised by Christians, on the Passion Day. Sect. III. Some Circumstances of the Eves of those Days, Compared p. 406  
Chap. IV. Sect. I. A Penitential Season with the Jews, Preparatory to their Expiation Day: some certain Days next before it, kept Vniformly by All; More also, generally, though in various numbers; and Forty, by many; but the First of the Forty, universally observed. Sect. II. Forty Days, a solemn space of Penitence in the Jewish Discipline. Sect. III. The Christian Lent, compared with the Jewish p. 418  
Chap. V Sect. I. This Origination of Lent, very Probable: and its Observation, a Testimony to our Lord's Expiatory Sacrifice. However, Sect. II. The Consideration of that Expiatory Sacrifice, is a good reason for our observing the Passion Day; and likewise Sect. III. Some Preparatory time before it p. 431        

Corrigenda, & Addenda.  
PAge 7. line 21. deal that he may if, etc. p. 19 l. 15. deal in, p. 30. l. 12. read Oris de Jej. p. 67. l. 23. r. Paschatis, p. 68 l. 5. r. choose, p. 69. after the 18. line add, However I will venture to offer, that the following Sabbatum continuatis, may be understood of Saturday alone, and without any Connexion with a Friday preceding; and mean no more, than the Passing it without food, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Dionys. Alex: [See the next Ch. §. 2. and Note (e).] p. 75. l. 7. put §. II. l. ult. for Trusty, Faithful, p. 79. l. 12. put §. III. p. 87. for (n) put (p) p. 122. l. 16. for Fast r. Fact, p. 153. l. 6. etc. Ch. I. to be reckoned Ch. II. p. 224. l. 8. put in the Margin See Fig. I. l. 14. for impurer r. certain, p. 229. l. 21. deal from him, p. 231. l. 24. deal so, p. 232. l. 6. after anon, add (n); and in the Margin, n. ch. 9 p. 252. l. last save 3. for little r. tittle, p. 267. l. 24. r. Ingenuous, p. 317. l. 11. r. High Priests, and are in some, l. 12. for now, r. also, p. 323. l. 27. r. Pattern, p. 326. l. 3. deal the second that, p. 328. l. 26. r. Lapsed, p. 336. l. 15. deal (l) l. 19, 20. deal of some, l. 20. r. (l). p. 381. l. last save 2, for from r. for, p. 385. l. 5. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 392. to p. 401. the Running Title to be, as afterwards it is, A Conjecture, etc. p. 403. l. 16. r. Depellendus ab Hominum consortio, [under a Niddui, See pag. 232. lit. (b)] whose, etc.   

PART I. AN Historical Account OF THE Observation of LENT.  

CHAP. I. Concerning the Festival of the Resurrection.  
§. I. The Weekly Festival, or Sunday.  
§. II. The Yearly: the many Differences about it.  
§. III. The Difference between the Asiatic Churches, and the Others; and the Proof thence in general, for the Apostolical Antiquity of Easter.  
§. iv In Particular, from the Letters of Polycrates and Irenaeus.  
LENT, in the old Saxon, is known to signify the Spring; and thence has been taken in common Language, for the Spring-Fast, or the Time of Humiliation generally observed by Christians before Easter. And as it is a Season of Recollection and Repentance, ending at that Festival of our Saviour's Resurrection, and annually regulated by the Time of it; so the Historical Knowledge of the one depends upon the other, and the Fast cannot well be understood, without the Feast be first settled, and some Account of it premised.  
§. I. NOW the Feast of the Resurrection is of two Sorts: either the Weekly, the Lord's Day; or the Yearly, called Easter. And as to the Weekly; It is on all hands acknowledged to have been perpetually and universally observed, ever since the beginning of Christianity. It is particularly remembered in the New Testament, as a Day for Christian Assemblies, under the name of the 
(a) Acts 20.7.1 Cor. 16.2.  First Day of the Week: and in the Book of Revelation it is called 
(b) Rev. 1.10.  the Lord's Day. Pliny in his Relation he made to Trajan, concerning the Christians of Bythinia, about the Year of our Saviour 104, is supposed to have intended it, when he says, (c) They were used to meet together before Light, on a Certain day. And Justin Martyr (d) in his Apology about the Year 138, giving an account of the Day of their ordinary Assemblies, expresses it to be Sunday. So has the weekly Day of the Resurrection been all along kept Holy; nor has any Christian Church ever censured, or thought fit to set aside, the Practice.  
§. II. AND if there has been constantly such a Weekly Memorial of the Resurrection, we shall little doubt but it had too an Yearly Solemnity. It is true, there is not so early a mention of that Annual Festival, (neither is it likely, that there should have been as much occasion for the Remembrance of what happened but once a Year, as of that which was done every Week:) but neither has there been wanting very good Evidence for its great Antiquity; a Dispute that arose about the Year 190, concerning the Time of keeping it; giving us accidentally to know, That such a Day had been always kept, down from the Apostles time.  
About the Time of the Weekly Feast, the First Day; there could be no Disagreement: but about the Annual there might be very much. For if all Nations of Christendom had then reckoned by the same kind of Year; (suppose by the Jewish, which was Lunar, and consisted of so many Revolutions of the Moon;) and besides, if all had agreed, That our Saviour arose on the 16th. day of the first Month; yet, after all this, there was a very obvious Question, and which would frequently return: Whether they should keep the Yearly Feast on that 16th. day precisely, whatever day of the Week it happened to be, if on a Friday, the Weekly Day of the Passion; or whether they should not rather make the Yearly Remembrance to fall in with the Weekly, and so keep it on some First day of the Week, which should be near to that 16th. day of the Month.  
This was the Variety which was actually the Occasion of that Debate I am now to mention. Other Differences there might have been raised from the difference of Years, and some were insisted on in after times; which I shall here remark, not for present use, but to help the understanding of what may be hereafter incidentally mentioned. For if all had agreed to celebrate the Annual Festival, on the Sunday near to the Annual Day; yet this Yearly Day must have been different, if they reckoned by different Years, or by different Beginnings of the same sort of Year. So those Montanists in Sozomen, 
(e) Lib. 7. cap. 18.  who went by the Solar Year, and kept the Resurrection-day on some Sunday near the sixth of April, would no more agree with those who placed it by the 14th. day of the first Lunar Month of the Jews; than the 14th. day of the Moon 's Age, would always be upon the same day of April. And so those who agreed to use the Year of the Moon's according to the Jewish Form, might still differ among themselves; if some followed the erroneous Calculation of their cotemporary Jews, and begun their Year sooner than Moses had directed, as the Christians of Cilicia, Mesopotamia, and Syria, did before the Council of Nice: and if others amending the Jewish Calendar, stayed till the Aequinox, according to the Original Appointment, as the rest of the World did, to whom those Easterns therefore by the direction of that Council, in a little while conformed.  
And further, those who were so far agreed, as to keep their Easter-day on a Sunday, and to observe the same Reformed Jewish Year, might yet differ in their placing of the Sunday in that Year: Some, as the Latins 
(f) Buch. in Victorii Can. Pasc. c. 11. , assigning it to the 16th day of the first Month, on which day our Saviour was by them supposed to have arose; and thenceforth to any of the six days after, on which the Sunday should happen; and some to the 15th day, the first and great day of the Jewish Paschal Feast, and thenceforward to any of the six days after of the same Jewish Solemnity; (a Practice to which the Western Church has since agreed); as the Alexandrians used to do, who supposing the Resurrection to have been on the 17th (f), might think they came near enough to it, when the Sunday was never to be further from it, than two days before, or four after: And some might allow it to be on the 14th day, the day in which the Paschal Lamb was sacrificed, as amongst others, the old British Inhabitants of our Isle were found to do; who, if they thought our Saviour to have risen on the 16th day, placed their Easter-Sunday as exactly near it, as the Alexandrians placed theirs; and if they thought he risen on the 17th, they were yet more exact than any, and put it as near as was possible; so as never to be more distant from it than three days, either before or behind it. For such Reasons our old Predecessors might have thought fit thus to keep their Easter: however they were blamed by our Austin for it; and afterwards called Heretics and Quartodecimani, a term of Dislike more justly given to those of whom we are going to speak, and who occasioned this too nice and too long Digression, which the Reader therefore finds in another Letter, that he may, if he pleases, pass it over.  
§. III. THE most likely Question to happen, concerning the Place of the Yearly Resurrection-Day, [whether it should be always kept on a Sunday, or no,] was the great Controversy between the Churches of Lesser Asia and Rome, and in which all Christendom became engaged: a Dispute managed by the Bishop of Rome too warmly, but which has done so much good, as to give occasion for the preserving some Records relating to this part of the History of Christianity, by which we are certainly informed of the Great and Universal Antiquity of Easter, and its preceding Fast. Those Asiatic Churches, besides their singularity in breaking off their Fast on the 14th, day, celebrated the Solemnity of the Resurrection on a fixed day of the first Month of the Jews, whatever day of the Week it proved to be: and the rest of the Christian World, if it happened not to be a Sunday, observed it on some Sunday near it. But both the Parties kept the Festival, and each of them contended, That it had been so kept in their several Churches from their first Plantation.  
For about this Matter, at the Request of Victor Bishop of Rome, the several Bishops of Christendom met in their several Synods; and all of them, except those of Asia, properly so called, agreed on these two Points, as derived to them from Apostolical Tradition.  
1. That the Solemnity of our Saviour's Resurrection was not to be celebrated on any other day, but the Lord's Day:  
2. And that the Paschal Fast ought not to be ended till that Day.  
This was the Answer of all those Synods, to the Questions in difference: and the Returns of many of them are mentioned by Eusebius to have been extant in his time (g).  
The general Result of those Synodical Determinations, which Eusebius gives us, is sufficient to satisfy us, That the Bishops of both sides were fully possessed of the Apostolical Tradition of their different Customs of observing Easter. And such an uniform Concurrence of so many venerable Persons, from such distant Places, about such a solemn and observable a Practice, and at a time no more remote from the Age of the Apostles, cannot but induce us to give credit to this their single Affirmation, as it is by him Authentically reported. For as to the time of this Dispute, it is well judged to have been agitated about the Year 190 of our Lord's Birth, not 160 after his Passion and Resurrection, the Memorial of which we now speak of; not much above 120 Years from the Martyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul, nor above 90 after the Death of St. John.  
§. IU. GREAT Regard is therefore to be had to the Judgement of the whole Christian Church of that time, which Eusebius summarily reports to us (g), of their Tradition concerning Easter. Had indeed the several Answers, the Bishops of the Provinces sent, remained to our days, or had Eusebius given us more Extracts of them; we could not have failed of many remarkable Particularities, alleged by them, in Favour and Justification of this general Assertion. But they are all lost: neither was it agreeable to that Historian's purpose, to fill his Books with Proofs for the Antiquity of this Solemnity, a Matter in his days never doubted by any. For which Reason, neither does he give us out of them any Instances in Confirmation of that particular Usage, in which the great part of the World agreed with Victor, and which afterwards generally prevailed: He rather thought fit, at a time when the Asiatic Custom was left off, to preserve some little Account of what they had to say for their singular Fashion: and even out of that little, we shall be able to see, how well the general Tradition was grounded.  
Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus, the chief of the asiatics, in his Letter to Victor, (a Fragment of which Eusebius gives) 
(h) Euseb. Eccl. Hist. 5.24.  professes, That they kept the true Day unfalsified; and then says, (in answer, I suppose, to Victor, who had boasted of the Sepulchers of St. Peter and St. Paul, and other Saints, from whose Authority he might have recommended the Custom of his side,) That there were too deposited in Asia, the Remains of very great Saints and Martyrs, Philip and his three Daughters, St. John who lay in our Lord's breast, Polycarp, Thraseas, Sagaris, and Melito, who all had kept the 14th day of the Passover, according to the Gospel; and so (adds he) have I, according to the Tradition of my Kinsmen, [or Countrymen, or my Predecessors in this See (i)] with some of whom I conversed. They were seven and I am the eighth; and they always kept the Day when Leaven was forbid: I therefore, who am now 65 Years old in the Lord, and have conversed with our Brethren of the whole World, and have perused all holy Scripture, am not at all moved at those who trouble and threaten me. For my Betters have said, God is rather to be obeyed than Man.  
This Holy Man was himself a great Evidence of the Antiquity of the Custom for which he stands. He was about the 8th Bishop from St. John, (for however the Word is to be rendered, about so many sat in the same interval at Rome) and writes this about 90 Years after his Death, when he himself had been a Christian 65 Years of them, and able to testify of all those Years, if he was baptised Adult, as they then generally were. We may too think, that he had some particular Instances in his View, of the Practice of those Persons, whose Names he vouches, if we may infer from what we chance to know of two of them, Melito and Polycarp. For Melito, who was Bishop of Sardes, had, (as Eusebius tells us in another place) 
(k) Hist. Eccl. 4.26. , some twenty Years before, wrote a Treatise of the Lord's Day, and two Books concerning the Passover, or the Christian Solemnity at that time of the Year; there having been a great Dispute raised about it at Laodicea, then when Sagaris, the Bishop of that Place, (named here by Polycrates) received his Martyrdom; a Dispute, I suppose, of the same nature with This. And in it Polycarp (here too mentioned) had been engaged before; who went to Rome (as St. Jerome 
(l) Catal. Sc●ip. Eccl.  expresses it) about some Questions, concerning the Paschal Observation, in Anicetus his Pontificate. And the Conversation which he had with Anicetus, about that Subject, we have related by Irenaeus a Disciple of Polycarp's, and who had been bred up in Asia. He, now Bishop of Lions in France, though declaring for Victor, yet interposing and endeavouring to moderate the Heat of the Controversy, in a piece which Eusebius has saved of that Letter 
(m) 5.24. , among other things, told Victor as follows.  
And the Presbyters before Soter, who presided in the Church which you now govern, I mean Anicetus, and Pius, and Hyginus, and Telesphorus, and Xystus, neither kept [the 14th day] themselves, nor permitted those of their Church to do it. And, nevertheless they, not keeping [it], held Communion with those who came from other Dioceses, where it was kept, Although [then when they were together in Rome] the keeping [[it] was more contrary to those who kept [[it] not (n): And none were ever refused Communion for this Matter. But the Presbyters before you, who kept [[it] not, sent the Eucharist to those of the Dioceses who kept [it]. And when Blessed Polycarp was at Rome in Anicetus his time, and there were some Differences between them about other things, They presently agreed, never proceeding to have any Contention on this Subject: Anicetus not prevailing with Polycarp, to forego a Custom, which he had all along observed with St. John, the Disciple of our Lord, and the other Apostles with whom he had conversed; and Anicetus alleging, That he, for his part, aught to keep the Custom of the Bishops his Predecessors. And these things standing so, they communicated together; and in the Congregation Anicetus gave Polycarp the Respect of Celebrating the Eucharist: and they departed from each other in Peace: in all the Churches, those who kept, and those who did not keep, preserving Peace [and Communion] one with another.  
Here than we have Polycarp a Disciple of St. John, attesting to the Asian Tradition, an undeniable Witness of its Apostolical Antiquity. We know too that this Discourse of his with Anicetus must be at farthest in the year 161, if we reckon Anicetus his Death, with Bishop Pearson; and in the year 153, if with Mr. Dodwell; between 30 and 40 years before this Dispute of Victor's. And indeed it seems plain from the same piece of Irenaeus his Letter, that this Difference had been taken notice of almost from St. John's time, though mutually tolerated. For to that purpose he mentions the behaviour of Anicetus, Pius, Hyginus, Telesphorus, Xystus, all Bishops of Rome up to the year of our Lord 101 by Bishop Pearson, 102 by Mr. Dodwell, very near the time of St. John's Decease.  
From all which we see not only what good Authority the asiatics disputing with Victor, had for their Tradition: but that this matter had been long before brought into Question; and made so remarkable very early, that those of both sides, must have had some distinct, and more than general remembrance of the successive Practice of their several Customs conveyed down to them. Neither indeed could those of Victor's Judgement have ever opposed the Asiatic Observation, whose Antiquity was so well proved; if they had not produced on their side as good Evidence for their own: such Evidence, I say, as they might well be furnished with, from the elder Memorials of the same debate.  
And thus did both sides of this Great Dispute, however they differed in the particular manner of their Paschal Observation, absolutely agree in the general, concerning the Apostolical Antiquity of it. A little while after this time, Clemens of Alexandria wrote a Treatise concerning the Paschal Observation, and some Dissertations concerning Fasting, all which are lost. And the Design of his Paschal Book, as Eusebius tells us 
(o) Eus. Eccl. H. l. 6. c. 13. , was to deliver down the Traditions, which he had received from those before him, about that subject: and in it he made mention of Melito, and Irenaeus, whose Relations he set down. Hippolytus likewise a Bishop, and Martyr, a Disciple of Irenaeus, in the year 221, wrote a Book of the Paschal Season: in which 
(p) Eus. E. H. lib. 6. c. 22.  as Eusebius says, he gives an Account of the past Times, by a repeated Cycle of 16 Years; concluding in the first Year of Alexander the Emperor's Reign, which Book is wanting. But a Table of his, engraven in Stone, was happily dug up at Rome the last Age; which, beginning at that first Year of Alexander, gives all the Easter Days which were then to come for 112 Years, with as much Formality and Method, as they have been used to be calculated since, 
(q) Apud B●●her. in Vidorium. .  
Such express Accounts of the Paschal Season, there have been heretofore given, very near the Apostles times; which, had they been preserved, might have more particularly informed us: serving however to let us know in gross, That the Solemnity was not then held an inconsiderable Matter; but all along much debated, and studied, and determined with great Exactness.  
Upon the whole Matter therefore we have seen, that as we had some reason to presume the Apostolical Observation of a Yearly, from the Weekly day of the Resurrection; so this Presumptive Probability is besides actually confirmed to us by sufficient Authority. And from these Premises I hope I may have leave to conclude, if not, That this Paschal Observation was delivered by the Apostles to all the Churches with the Weekly Lord's Day; yet, That it was a Tradition received by many Churches in the Apostolic Days. And this I presume to take for a Truth in so high a degree of Evidence, that it will not be questioned, by such as shall consider impartially.   

(c) Plin. Ep. l. 10. Ep. 97. Soliti stato die ante lucem convenire.  
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(g) Euseb. Hist. Eccles. l. 5. c. 23. In that time a great Controversy was raised: the Bishops of Asia [strictly so called] judging, by their Ancient Tradition, That the Paschal Solemnity was to be kept on the 14th day of the Moon, then when the Jews sacrificed the Lamb; and that their Fasting aught to break off on that day, whatever day of the Week it happened to be: and the other Bishops, of the rest of the World, observing from Apostolical Tradition a different Custom, and which now obtains, That it was not fit to break up the Fast on any other day but the Day of the Resurrection. Upon this there were several Synods and Consultations held by the Last; and they all unanimously by their Letters declared this to the World for an Ecclesiastical Rule, That the Solemnity of our Saviour's Resurrection from the Dead, was to be kept on no other day but a Sunday: and that on that Day only, the Paschal Fasting was to cease. There is yet to be seen the Writing of those of Palestine, over whom Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea presided; and Narcissus Bishop of Jerusalem. There is another too from those of Rome, concerning the same Question, speaking Victor to be Bishop. Another of the Dioceses of France, where Irenaeus was Bishop. Another of those of Osroene, and the Cities thereabouts. One particularly from Bacchyllus Bishop of Corinth: And several others, all concurring in the same Opinion, and giving the same Determination.  
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here commonly translated Kinsman: but I have ventured to guests it may signify a Countryman; one of the same City, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: or a Bishop of the same See; making the Succession to have been in a Family, and the Kindred Spiritual. This is certain; the Number of Seven Predecessors agree well with the Distance between Him and St. John.  
(n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in this Epistle of Irenaeus it seems very evident, That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be understood, not absolutely, but in construction with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as well in this place as others; according to the common rendering: notwithstanding a contrary Suspicion elsewhere suggested, and to which a Defect in this place, of some Particle to be understood, gave the Occasion. That Defect Valesius supplies, by reading from Conjecture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I have rather supposed then, or something of that Sense, to be understood.   

CHAP II. Concerning FASTING.  
§. I. The several Kind's of Fasts.  
§. II. Several Occasions of Fasting: particularly Penitence and Baptism.  
§. I. SO far we have viewed the Evidence, for the Antiquity of the Paschal Solemnity in general, with a more particular respect to the Festival of the Resurrection: we now come expressly to consider the preceding Fast, and its various Observation.  
But first, for the better understanding of what is to follow, it will be fit to premise some Account of Fasts, and their Variety, and what were the more solemn times for that Duty.  
There are Three Sorts of Fasting, which Tertullian reckons up to us 
(a) De Je. jun. c. 2. ; consisting either in the Lessening, or Deferring, or Refusing, of our Food.  
The first sort is Abstinence, not from all Food, but from some kinds of it; a Fast in part, as Tertullian calls it 
(b) Tert. de Jejun. c. 9 Portional. Jejunium. : Abstinence from Flesh especially and Wine; Or not only from Flesh and Wine, but from any thing of Broth, or any Juicy, Vinous Fruit. Such a Dry Diet as Tertullian speaks of, appropriated by him to his Fellow-Sectaries, the Montanists 
(c) De Jejun. c. 1. ; but used by Christians before, and by Daniel 
(d) Dan. 10.2, 3. ; when he mourned three full Weeks, and eat no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in his mouth; neither did he anoint himself at all.  
The second sort was, when they did not Dine, but deferred their Eating to some time of the Afternoon, till after Three; as the Catholics did in Tertullian's Age, who on certain days continued their Assemblies to that hour 
(e) De Jej. : and both that their Assembling, and that Fasting, was called a Station, from the Military Word, says Tertullian 
(f) De Orat. c. 14. ; but immediately from the Jewish Phrase, and the Custom of those devout Men, who either out of their own Devotion, or as Representatives of the People, Assisted at the Oblations of the Temple, not departing thence till the Service was over (g). Such Stations are termed Half-Fasts 
(h) De Jejun. 13. Stat. semijejunia.  by Tertullian, and were held later by the Appointment of Montanus. But before their time we know from Hermes, an Author very ancient, and in the beginning of the Second Century, that the Stations of the first Christians were sometimes kept as severely, and that when they came at last to Eat, nothing was to be tasted but Bread and Water that day (i).  
Such a kind of Fast as this, ending in a moderate Refreshment towards Night, is generally to be understood, when any great number of Days is said to be fasted together.  
This Fast is too supposed to have begun from the Evening before, when the Stars appeared. For then the Day began with the Jews, as well as with the Athenians (k).  
But under this kind, which allows some time for Food in the 24 hours, the Periodical Day, we may too reckon that manner of Fasting, which forbids to eat or to drink while the Sun is up, the Vulgar Day; but either gives liberty all the Night; the Fast of the Mahometans, during their Month Ramazan 
(l) Ricau●● l. 2. c. 22. : or else gives leave to refresh themselves, provided it be done before their first sleep, as is the manner of the Jews, in all their ordinary Fasts 
(m) Maim. de Jejun. c. 1. §. 8. .  
The third sort is, when they Eat not at all, the whole day, from Sunset, or the Appearance of the Stars, till the same season again: as the Jews now do in their strictest Fasts, as on the Ninth of their Month Ab, or on their Propitiation-Day 
(n) Ibid. c. 5. §. 6. .  
And in this manner not one, but more days were sometime passed in a continual Fast: as three days were by Esther 
(o) Esther 4.16. , and the rest of the Jews of that time: and as the forty were miraculously by Moses, Elias, and our Blessed Saviour. And such a protracted Fast of two, or three, or more days, was afterwards in Use with Christians; especially before Easter, as we shall find hereafter.  
These are the several Kind's of Fasting, a Duty all along observed by devout Men, and acceptable to God under both Testaments; whether as it was helpful to their Devotion, or as it became a part of it. It was helpful, as it served medicinally to restrain the loser Appetites of the Flesh, and to keep the Body under; and as it gave Liberty and Ability to the Mind, to Reflect, and Consider, and Attend, either while they were actually assisting at Divine Service, or preparing for some solemn part of It. It was too an Act of Worship itself; either as it proceeded from a Sense of their Sins, and of the Misery of their Condition from those Sins: or as it was expressive of that Sense before God, and intended to deprecate his Anger, and to supplicate for his Mercy and Favour; to which purpose it was accompanied with such Circumstances of an Afflicted, Humbled State, as were proper to raise Commiseration, and obtain Relief. Thus under the Old Testament, they put on Sackcloth, lay in Ashes, mourned and wept: and thus Esther is expressed by J●s●phus (p), to have supplicated God (as he says) after the Custom of her Nation. Casting herself down upon the Ground, Putting on a Mourning Habit, and Abstaining from Meat and Drink, and all things Delightful for those three days. Neither was the Practice of the first Christians much different from this of the Jews, on the like occasion, as we shall presently find.  
§. II. We have seen the various Manner of Fasting, and proceed now to the Occasions and Times of Fasting in the Primitive Church.  
That which I shall first mention, was the Fast of a Penitent; one who had committed after Baptism some grievous Sin, and was excluded from the Assembly, either by his own Conscience, or by Public Sentence; and desired to be reconciled to God and the Church. The Course of this their second Repentance, was much more severe than of that before their Baptism; it appeared so upon the sight of them, as they are described by Tertullian (than a Catholic, and about the Year 200). (q) Neither Washed nor Trimmed, Neglected and ; taking no Delight in any thing; living in the Roughness of Sackcloth, and the Filth and Harshness of Ashes; their Faces disfigured with Fasting. For the Discipline they were under directed them (as before he tells us at large, in his manner of Style (r),) To lie in Sackcloth and Ashes; to disfigure their Body with a neglected Uncleanness, and to deject their Mind with Grief: All the while to use no other Meat or Drink, but what is simple and natural, [Bread and Water]; not to satisfy the Appetite, but to keep up Life: and frequently to nourish and strengthen their Prayers with [strict] Fasting; to Groan, to Weep, to Roar to the Lord their God, day and night; to fall down at the feet of the Presbyters, to kneel to the Friends of God, and to beg of all the Brotherhood to intercede for them. Such was the rigorous Penance of lapsed Christians, and their Fasting truly an Affliction of their Souls, as it is termed in the Old Testament.  
Another solemn Occasion of Fasting was the Profession of Repentance those made who were converted to the Faith, and preparing to be Baptised. Before the Reception of that Sacrament, it was not only the Practice of the Candidates to Fast, but of the whole Congregation with them: as Justin Martyr in his admirable Apology has informed the Emperor and us. He is supposed by Mr. Dodwell to have wrote no later than the Year 138; and there, after he had given an account of our Faith, he adds this Relation. (s) As many as are persuaded, and do believe, that these things taught and said by us are true, and promise to be able to live accordingly; they are instructed to Pray, and, with Fasting, to beg of God Remission of their Sins, we Praying and Fasting together with them. Then they are brought by us to the Place where Water is, and are regenerated in the same manner of Regeneration wherewith we were regenerated before. For, in the name of the Father, etc.  
Such a Common Fast there was anciently at the Administration of this Sacrament, that it could not be the work of every day of their Assembling, but must have had some set time: as we know the most solemn time was on Easter-Day; those who were baptised into his Death, then as it were rising up with him: The whole Congregation having Fasted together with them before, not only upon that particular Reason, but upon a common Account, as we shall immediately see.  
And though the Fast and Humiliation of the other Penitent, was proper to his Person, and to be undertaken at any time whensoever he was sensible of his Offence: yet there might too have been some more solemn time, even for this Duty; whether the Penance were enjoined upon a notorious Sinner, or something of it voluntarily undergone by a more secret Offender. And no time could be more fit for this purpose, than that in which the whole Congregation would join together in Prayer and Fasting, for themselves and them: such a time as the Season before Easter was, in which all prepared more worthily to receive, and some therefore strove to be again thought worthy in any degree to receive, the solemn Communion of that Great Day.  
Thus did the Fasting on both those occasions, frequently take the opportunity to close in with the Fast before Easter: an Observation I now only mention incidentally, designing no more by the early Practice of these two occasional Fasts, the one Public, and the other both Public and Common; than to prepare the Reader the easier to admit the great Antiquity of this both Public and Universal Fast, which we are now coming particularly to consider.   

(g) Maimonides de Cultu Divino, put out by Lud. de Viel, Tract. 2. Cap. 6. Because the Sacrifice of the Congregation belonged to all the Children of Israel, and all of them could not assist; it was provided of old, that there should be chose ●it Men, who should be present at them, as Deputies of the whole Nation. And as the Priests and Levites were divided into their Courses, so were these; each Course serving their Week, and giving their Attendance, either at the Temple, i● they lived near it, or else at the Synagogues of their Habitation: Praying four times a day, and Fasting the Mundays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays of their Week. Their meeting at these Prayers, and their Attendance on this Duty, was called a Station: and they, the Men of the Station. This is to be seen more at large in Lightfi●● of the Temple-Service, cap. 7. §. 3.  
(i) Hermae Past. l. 3. sim. 5. Cum jejunarem & sederem in monte quodam, & gratias agerem Deo pro omnibus que fecerat ●●cum; video Pastorem illum sedentem juxta me, & dicentem mi●●, Quid tam mane hue venisti? Respondi, Quoniam, Domine, Sta●i●●● habeo. Quid est, inquit, Statio? & dixi, Jejunium— Ill● D●e quo jejumbis, nihil omnino gustabis nisi Panem & A●●●●. Here Statio is taken simply for a Fast, from the Practice, I suppose, of those Stationary Men on those four Days: as it is otherwise in Tertullian, for a Fast till after Three, from the Custom, it may be, of other Devout Men, who might not departed from the Temple till about that Hour, when the Evening S●●ris●ce was done.  
(k) Plin. Nat Hist. l. 2. c. 77. Ipsum Diem alii aliter observavere. Babylonii inter duos solis Exortus: Athenienses inter duos Oceasus: Umbri à Meridie in Meridiem: Vulgus omue à Luce ad Tenebras: Sacerdotes Romani, & qui Diem definiere Civilem, item Aegyptii & Hipparchus, à Media Nocte in Mediam.  
(p) Jos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arch. 11.6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
(q) Tert. de Poenit. c. 11. Illotos, Sordulentoes, extra laetitiam oportet diversari, in Asperitudine Sacci, & Horrore Cineris, & Oris Jejunio Vanitate.  
(r) Cap. 8. Exomologesis prosternendi & humilificandi hominis disciplina est, conversationem injungens Misericordiae illicem; de ipso quoque Habitu atque Victu mandat; Sacco & Cineri incubare, Corpus Sordibus obscurare, Animum Moeroribus dejicere, illa quae peccavit tristi tractatione mutare; caeterum Pastum & Potum pura nosse, non Ventris seilicet sed Animae causa: plerumque vero Jejuniis preces alere, Ingemiscere, Lachrymari, & Mugire dies noctésque ad Dominum Deum suum; Presbyteris advolvi, & Caris Dei adgeniculari, omnibus Fratribus Legationes deprecationis suae injungere.  
(s) Justin. Apol. 2. Edit. Commel. p. 73. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc.   

CHAP. III. Concerning the Fast before the Festival of the Resurrection.  
§. I. The General Presumption for its Apostolical Antiquity.  
§ II. A Particular Proof of it from Irenaeus.  
§. III. The different Length of that Fast down to Irenaeus his time: with some, probably, of 40 days.  
§. I. IT is to be remembered, That the second Point of that Dispute between Victor and the asiatics, was concerning the Ending of the Ante-paschal Fast; whether or no it ought to be left off before the Resurrection-Day: the asiatics, as it seems, concluding their Fast at the Lord's Supper, on the 14th day of Nisan in the Evening; and the Others, who kept the Festival of the Resurrection on a Sunday, not breaking off their Abstinence before, thoughpossibly their Fast might have been more strict on the Friday, the Anniversary of the Passion of our Lord.  
Now this Question, concerning the Determination of the Fast, so summarily reported by Eusebius, is sufficient to let us know, That there was such a Fast then kept by both sides; and had been, in all probability, as anciently kept as the Feast of the Resurrection; (for, of That, we do not perceive that there was the least doubt made:) so much, to use Ensebius his Words, which here follow, to this purpose, Does their Difference of Fasting commend their Agreement in the Faith.  
For a further Confirmation of this Truth, it were to be wished, now in an Age wherein it is doubted, That there had been preserved to us, either Melito's Treatises, or the several Synodical Answers upon this Debate, with Victor's and Irenaeus his Circular Letters; or at least, That Eusebius had given us a more circumstantial Extract. But those Writings are lost, either by the common Fate of many other Books; or else because neglected, when the Dispute was given up, and the Practice of Victor universally prevailed. And Eusebius for his part might not think himself concerned to collect out of them any Authorities for a Practice, in which those of that time all agreed, and which none of his time questioned. It was the more proper business of his History, to give an Account from them of the Controverted Points; and for the rest to leave us to this their general and common Conclusion, That each way of Ending the Fast (and consequently the Fast itself) was derived from Apostolical Tradition 
(a) Faseb. E●d. Hist. 5.23.   
§. II. HOWEVER it has chanced, that a short Scrip of the former part of the same Letter of Irenaeus we cited before, and which Eusebius produced to give a taste of the Temper and Address of that Good Man; does not only serve to inform us, with what Variety this their Lent was then kept, (which is one part of our Task to observe), but helps us besides to a particular Argument for its High Antiquity.  
For that Numerous Part of the Church that agreed with Victor about the Time of Ending the Fast, did however observe that Fast very differently, though without any Opposition or Division: The Account of which amicable Variety among themselves Irenaeus thus briefly gives to Victor, the better to qualify his heat against the asiatics, raised by that other angry Difference (b).  
For there is not only a Dispute about the Day, but also about the Manner of the Fast. For some think they ought to fast One day, some Two, A B and some More. Some too measure their Day by Forty Hours, both of Day and Night. and some More, some Forty. Their Day too (c) they measure by the Hours of the Day [only] and [also] by the Hours of the Night. And this Variety of those that keep the Fast, is not now risen in our days, but long before, in the time of those before us:  those who it seems governed [in the Churches] with less exactness than they ought, giving down to their Successors such Custom as had its Beginning from Simplicity and want of Knowledge. those who it seems (d) retained [what had been delivered to them] with less exactness than they ought, delivering to their Successors such Custom for Traditional, which had been taken up by Simplicity and want of Knowledge [Singularity]. And yet nevertheless all of them did, and we now do, keep Peace [Communion] one with another: and the Difference of our Fasting commends the Agreement of our Faith.  
Differences, we see, will still happen upon this Subject: for neither is the World at an Agreement about the Meaning of this Place. Though indeed it be no great wonder, that the sense of such a concise Fragment should be a little uncertain; where we have no help, from what went before, or came after, to determine it. I have therefore given a double Rendering of the doubtful Passage; One marked with the Letter A, according to Valesius, which is embraced by Daillé, and those who have a mind to depress the Antiquity of Lent, and especially of the forty Days: and another marked with B, much according to Russinus his Version, made about the End of the fourth Century.  
And, to begin with what concerns the Fast in general, it can never be supposed, though some would be willing it should, That Irenaeus, in the last of the two doubtful Passages however rendered, speaks any thing to the Disparagement of the Fast itself: as if those who long before his time had Governed the Church less exactly, had showed their less Exactness in the Institution of a Lent. Had He said so, he had indeed effectually silenced one part of the Grand Dispute, that concerning the End of the Fast; for he had declared against any Fast at all: but he must have been taken then for an ill Arbitrator by Victor and the rest, as well as by Polycrates, who all equally joined in the Tradition of the Fast; and must of necessity, by the change of the Question, have become a common Adversary and turned the whole Dispute upon himself.  
But this Great Man used another method, and went by the common Principle. For he speaks to Victor of the Practice of those of his own side; who differed from the common Custom, but with whom Communion had been always held, and was not now refused by Victor himself. Some of those Differences, it is plain, he charges with less Exactness; and reflects upon the Authors of them, whoever they were, but not upon Victor's Predecessors or his own: and his Argument then for Peace proceeds thus with great force, That the Bishop of Rome should not break off Communion with the asiatics for their different manner; for those who joined with him against them, and remained in his Communion, had their different Customs too.  
There is therefore no Reflection from this place upon the Original of Lent: but, on the contrary, there is a strong Confirmation of its Apostolical Antiquity under either Version. For those who (according to Valesius) Governed the Churches with that little Exactness, as to be Authors of an undue Custom, were very Ancient, long before the days of Irenaeus, and are supposed here to have had Cotemporaries, who observed the right Manner. But further, in the other, I think, more exact Interpretation, those who were long before Irenaeus his time, and consequently very near to the time of St. John, are said expressly to have been, (though not faithful and exact, yet) Retainers and Keepers of a Custom, which had therefore been rightly practised yet earlier, even before the days of those, who were long before Irenaeus.  
§. III. Thus much concerning the Antiquity of a Lent, I could not omit to add, from these few Lines of Ireneaus, casually preserved to us, and which speak very casually to that Matter: To the Manner of Keeping Lent they are more express and direct; but very brief and concise, as wrote on another design, and not for Victor's or our Information in the Particular we desire to see.  
In this transient Mention of the Manner, he says, some observed One day, some Two, and some More: not expressing who they were, or in what they were less Exact, for Victor might understand him well, though we do not. Those who kept but One day, and whose Resurrection-day was a Sunday, in all probability kept what we call Good Friday, the Weekly Day of the Passion: and if they did not too use some sort of Abstinence though not so strict on the Saturday, they were so little exact, as to offend against the Rule, and to br●●● 〈◊〉 their Fast before Easter-Day. But if there were any, whose One Day was the Saturday, they who begun their Fast so late, little wanted that Rule to tell them when to end it; and their neglecting the Passion-Day could not seem very exact to those that observed it.  
As to the Two or More days, it is not neither determined after what sort they were kept: whether in One continued Fast uninterrupted by any Food, as two or more of those days were certainly fasted by some of the next Age, especially in the Passion-Week; or whether the Fasts were several, though the Days were continued, each Day ended with some Refreshment. If those More days were very Many, they were (as we have intimated already 
(*) Ch. 2. §. 1. ) likely to have been kept in the last Manner. There might too have been more Days than Two kept together, not only once just before Easter, but oftener, and at some distance within the Compass of a larger time. Hereafter Examples will appear of such Fasts: and the several Practices may have been old, though the mention of them in Books be later.  
Hitherto the Words are plain, and of certain Construction; though we may not know every particular Case to which they might refer●● but those that follow are of ambiguous Interpretation, and particularly the word Forty is expounded, as we see▪ by some of Days, and by some of Hours.  
It is not absolutely necessary to any design of these Papers, That forty Days should be here named expressly: for they may well be admitted under the latitude of the word More, if we shall hereafter see Reason to understand them so early. I hope therefore I am not partial, when I judge the Old Translation of this Place, to be preferable to the Modern.  
For first, a Day of 40 Hours, is a space of time never before heard of; neither determined by the Sun's Appearance, nor Revolution. And if we should admit of such a single Day, measured not by the Sun's Motion, but by our Saviour's lying in the Grave; yet it would be strange to join two or more of those days together. Valesius, therefore wonders, That the Absurdity has been endured, and that no Body has seen, that the Greek word for Day must be changed into that for Fast, and the Sentence run so. Some measure their Fast by 40 Hours, etc. This Change he is forced to by the Sense, not countenanced by the Authority of any Copy. But not to object the Odness of this Fast, that was to begin at soon after Breakfast on the Friday, and which took notice of our Lord's Burial, but not of his Crucifixion, much less of his previous Sufferings and Apprehension; to pass this over, for this might be one of those less exact Manners, which once had place, though afterwards left off: yet still the mention of Hours of Day and Night would be very redundant, especially where the Author is so Brief; for what need is there of this Circumstantial Description? and how could Forty Hours have otherwise come together?  
Such Objections as these, to which the New Interpretation lies open, do put us upon looking out for another more proper: which I take that of Ruffinus to be.  
For the Forty Days, which som● are unwilling to find so soon in the Church, will appear hereafter not to have been so unh●●●●●f, for a Fast, as 40 Hours: but rather to have been a Number much celebrated within 〈◊〉 little while in the Christian Lent, and in all probability sacred before to Abstinence in the Jewish Church.  
Ruffinus his Version is thus, (e) And some Forty [Days]: so that they make the Day, by Computation of Hours of Day and Night. And if the Place be understood as commonly it is, and there be no more meant by it, than that the One or More days before spoke of, were the Civil or Periodical Days, and consisted each of 24 Hours; yet the Inconvenience Valesius urges will not follow; and a Fast of Forty such Days will not exclude, we know, so much Refreshment every Evening as may support Nature. The greatest Incongruity I can find in that Acception of the Words, is, That it makes Irenaeus, on a Subject he does but touch, to give Victor unnecessarily a verbose Description of a Day, one and the same thing; where the only Intention was to put him in remembrance of a Variety. I should rather therefore think, That when he had given a short Account of the different Numbers of Days, he should then add a short mention of the different Quantities of a Day: That some computed the day Vulgarly, by the Appearance of the Sun; and some Civilly, by its Revolution. And according to this Design of Irenaeus I have directed one of the Translations above, to which this of Ruffinus will agree.  
Neither will it, I suppose, be very material to object, That a Fast only from Sunrising to Sunset, has not been usual since among Christians: for it might have been practised then, though disused afterwards as less exact; and (as we have seen) the Jews have all along fasted in that manner upon most Occasions, and the Mahometans continually do. Neither will it be wondered, That so known a Difference, as that of the Vulgar and Revolutional Day, should have been expressed so negligently in few Words. And as for any other lesser Criticism (c), it may easily be satisfied for, if only by the natural force of the Sense, and its apposite suitableness to the Scope of the Place.  
And thus far have we learned from Irenaeus, That the Observation of Lent was very Ancient: and that its Fast than consisted not of One, or Two days, but More; and in some Places, very probably of Forty.   

(b) Euseb. Hist. 5.24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(c) All Valesius his Manuscripts put no stop after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that determined him to his way of Rendering this Place. But Ruffinus his Copy seems to have had the stop; and Sir Henry Savil reads so, as to change the place of the Copulative Particle thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Mr. Thorndy●e [in his Service of God at Relig. Assemb. p. 247.] says, This Reading is acknowledged by Petitus. This Lection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— if it has any Copy to justify it, is certainly to be preferred for the Reason at the End of this Chapter. But if it had no Manuscript on its side, and a Change must be somewhere made in this Sentence, such a Trajection of a Particle by conjecture is much more allowable, than the Substitution ● alesius makes afterwards of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Sense by the one is much more advantaged than by the other. And indeed the advantage of the Sense is so great, that if such an Alteration is not to be admitted to join this last Sentence to the preceding, I should then take the Sentence to begin there without Connexion, and as it might happen in the Excerpts of a Letter.  
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is true, may signify to Govern in a Church, but it does as well to ' Hold or Keep a Practice; as in St. Mark seven. 3, 4. And this last Sense is more suitable to the Place.  
(e) Quidam enim putant uno tantum die observari debere jejunium, alii duobus, alii vero pluribus, nonnulli etiam quadraginta: ita ut Horas diurnas nocturnásque computantes Dient statuant.   

CHAP. IU. The Practice of Fasting mentioned about the Year 200, by Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian.  
§. I. The Weekly Fasts of Wednesday and Friday, mentioned by Clemens Alexandrinus.  
§. II. Testimonies out of Tertullian, concerning both the Weekly and Ante-Paschal Fasts.  
§. III. Observations upon those Testimonies. Some part of the Ante-Paschal Fast thought necessary by the Catholics of his time; the rest Discretionary.  
§. I. NEXT in Order of the Christian Authors that remain to us, is Clemens of Alexandria; and who would have assisted us much in this Argument, had his Book, Of the Paschal Season, his Dissertations about Fasting, and possibly that about the Ecclesiastical Canons, and against those that followed the Error of the Jews 
(a) Euseb. Hist. 6. 1●. , been now extant. In what is come to our hands, there is nothing to be found of the Anniversary Ante-Paschal Fast, or Paschal Feast: of the Weekly Fasts and Festivals there 〈…〉 accidental mention made, and only for the sake of an Allegory. (b) The truly knowing Person says he, knows the hidden Meaning of the Fast of those two days, Wednesday and Friday: whereof the first belongs to Mercury [the Idol God of Gain]; the other to Venus [the Heathen Goddess of Pleasure]. For he fasts all his Life from Love of Money, and of Pleasure.— And such a one having performed what is commanded, makes that the Lord's Day, in which he puts off the Evil Mind, and takes up the Knowing one: celebrating that Resurrection of our Lord, which has been so wrought in himself.  
This is indeed Allegorical all: but it has a certain Ground, upon which it descants; and supposes as constant an Observation of those two days of the Week, as of the weekly Day of the Resurrection. They were the ordinary days of Christian Assemblies, the Stations we before heard of 
(c) Ch. 2. §. 1. , commonly fasted to a Certain Hour; as the Jews had their Meetings in their Synagogues on their Mundays and Thursdays, when generally the devouter Sort did likewise Fast 
(d) Luke 1●. 12. . Of these Days Friday was apparently chose for one, because on it our Saviour had suffered; and Wednesday is said to be the other, because he had been then sold to the High Priests: and further, we cannot but think, that these which were kept in some manner every Week, in the Memory of our Lord's Passion, should, in the Passion-Week itself, have been kept with great Solemnity.  
§. II. But this stated Observation of those two Days in the Week, is more directly mentioned by Tertullian, a Cotemporary of Clemens: as the Paschal Solemnity is also expressly remembered by him. He wrote the Treatises now extant, about the year 200 and a little after: and when most of them were wrote, was of the Heresy of Montanus; so that what we are to cite out of him, cannot be well understood, without some knowledge of his Sect.  
Montanus, whom our Author unhappily followed, is supposed to have begun his New Doctrine about the Year 172. He is said not to have differed from the Catholics in the main Articles of Faith (e), (though some of them were accused of Sabellianism (f), but only in some Rigours of Practice, which he enjoined as by Divine Command. He absolutely forbade all second Marriages: condemned all declining of Danger in time of Persecution: made the Abstinence of the ordinary Stations to be longer, and more severe, dismissing their Assemblies later, and allowing then a very spare Refreshment. He ordered the Fast before Easter to consist of Two Weeks (f 2); and besides, instituted two New Lents, or Seasons of Fasting (g), each of a Week, excepting the Saturday; for they fasted no Saturday, but that before Easter (b). These and such like Ordinances he pretended to be dictated by the Holy Spirit, to him and his two Prophetesses; on whom the Comforter had at last, according to our Saviour's Promise, descended, in a more plentiful manner than upon the Apostles, and with fuller and more perfect Instructions. Consequently those of this Sect, from the●r pretences to the Spirit, and to a stricter manner of Life, took themselves to be the only spiritual Persons, calling the Catholics Carnal and Animal Men (i): and esteemed the Writings of their two Prophetesses, above the other Books of the New Testament (k); supposing them to be both the Completion and Conclusion of it, and admitting afterwards no more (l).  
Of this Sect was Tertullian, a Man of an austere Life, and rigid Temper, and a fierce Disputer: but excellently Learned, and after his peculiar fashion very Eloquent. His Book concerning Fasting happens to be preserved; where in Justification of his own Party, he sums up the Opinion and the Practice of his Adversaries, the Catholics, about that Matter. (m) They accuse us, saith he, that we keep Fasts of our own; that for the most part we prolong the time of our Stations to the Evening; and that we use the Dry Diet, feeding on no Flesh nor Broth, nor any Juicy Fruit, neither Eating nor Drinking any thing that is Vinous: and that besides we then abstain from Bathing, an Abstinence consequent to such a Dry Food. This they object to us for an Innovation, and conclude it to be unlawful; either to be judged Heretical, if it be a Humane Doctrine; or to be condemned for false Prophecy, if it pretends to be an Ordinance of the Spirit. So that we are either way to be Accused, as those who preach another Gospel. For as to Fasts, they tell us, That certain Days have been appointed by God. As when, in Leviticus, the Lord commands Moses, That the 10th day of the 7th Month should be a Day of Propitiation; saying, 
* Leu. 2●. 27.  It shall be holy to you; and you shall afflict your Souls; and every Soul that afflicts not itself that day shall be destroyed from among my People. And in the Gospel, they suppose those Days determined to Fasting, in which the Bridegroom was taken away; and that those only now are the days appointed in ordinary for Christian Fasts; the old Observances of the Mosaical Law and the Prophets being now abolished, (for when they have a mind, they can understand what is meant by that, the Law and Prophets were unto John:) and therefore that, as for any other time, Fasting is to be used according to Discretion, and upon particular Occasions and Causes, not by the Command of any new Discipline: For so did the Apostles, not laying upon the Disciple any other Burden, of Set Fasts and such as should be observed in common by All; and consequently not of Stations neither, which have indeed their Set Days, Wednesday and Friday, but so as that they are to be kept discretionally, not by force of any Command, nor beyond the last hour of the Day, the Prayers then being generally ended by Three in the Afternoon, after the example of St. Peter mentioned in the 
* Acts 10.30.  Acts. But the Dry Diet, our Xerophagy, is, they say, a new Name for a new affected Duty; too like the Heathen Superstition: being such an Abstinence as is used to Apis and Isis, and the Mother of the Gods.  
This is his Representation of the Catholics Thoughts, concerning the Ante-Paschal Fast, from which he argues in the 13th Chapter. (n) You plead, says he, that the Christian Faith hath its Solemnities already determined by Scripture or Tradition; and that no other Observation is to be superadded, because of the unlawfulness of Innovation. Keep to that ground if you can; for here I find you yourselves both fasting out of the Paschal Season, besides those days in which the Bridegroom was taken away: and also interposing the Half-fasts of your Stations, and sometimes too living on Bread only and Water, as every particular Person thinks fit. You answer indeed that these things are done at your Liberty, and not by Command: but than you have quitted your Ground, and gone beyond your Tradition, when you do such things as have not been appointed you. And so in the next Chapter (o), in answer to those who compared them to the Galatians, as Observers of Days and Months, he replies; That they observe not the Jewish Ceremonies: but that to the New Testament there belong new Solemnities. Otherwise, says he, if the Apostle has abolished all Religion of Days and Times, and Months and Years; Why do we [both Montanists and Catholics] celebrate the Paschal Season yearly in the first Month? Why do we pass the fifty days following in Joy and Exultation? Why do we consecrate Wednesday and Friday to Stations, and Friday, [or Good-Friday (p)] to Fast?— Although you Catholics also sometimes continue Saturday, a day never to be fasted, except in the Week before Easter, for a Reason given in another place (q). And lastly, in the next, the 15th Chapter (r), taking notice that the Apostle condemned those who commanded to abstain from Meats, foreseeing Martion and Tatian, and such Heretics, who would enjoin perpetual Abstinence in contempt of what the Creator had made; in Vindication of their own Sect from Heresy, he subjoins; For how very little is the Prohibition of Meat we have made? We offer to our Lord two Weeks of Dry Diet, and those not whole Weeks neither, Saturdays and Sundays being exempted; abstaining then from such Food, which we do not reject, but only defer.  
To these Testimonies of Tertullian out of this Book, we may subjoin another out of his Dissertation about Prayers. (s) Where after he has explained the Lord's Prayer, and spoke of some Requisites to Prayer, he than comes to censure some superstitious Observances about it, and particularly taxes a Custom that had began to prevail: Those who were in a Fast, towards the Conclusion of their Assemblies, and just before the Communion, not saluting their Brethren with the Holy Kiss, than always used on that occasion. This declining to salute had been the Fashion of the Jews in their Fasts, as a sign of Sorrow: and is reproved here by Tertullian in Christians, as being a kind of Ostentation of their Fasting, and contrary therefore to the Direction of our Saviour, which commands us not to appear to men to fast. For now, says he, we are known to fast by abstaining from that Salutation. But if there be any reason for such a Custom, you may at your own home if you please, and among your Family, from whom your fasting cannot well be concealed, defer that Ceremony of Peace: but otherwise wherever you may conceal your Fast, you are to remember the Command; and by this means you will both keep your Rule abroad, and your Custom at home. For so on Good Friday, when the Devotion of Fasting is Common, and as it were Public; we justly forbear the Salutation; taking no care to conceal from the rest, what is done together by us all.  
§. III. NOW from these Testimonies of Tertullian, it appears, First, That the Religious Assemblies, or Stations, of Wednesday and Friday, were now well known and practised in the Christian Church, and generally supposed to have descended from the Apostles; as recommended by their example to the devouter Christians, and not as enjoined the whole Body by any Precept.  
Secondly, The constant Opinion of the Catholics of his time presumed, That those days in which the Bridegroom, our Saviour, was taken away, were to be fasted not at Pleasure, but by Direction; being designed and determined to that Duty from the Beginning. This is certainly the Catholic Sense; as it is represented by Tertullian in the second Chapter in express words, where he speaks both of the Designation of our Saviour, and the Observation of the Apostles; and as it is again intimated by him in the 13th. Nor could it have been brought in question by Mr. Daillé, had he not studied his own Hypothesis too much.  
Neither is that judgement of the Catholics, concerning those days, any ways disparaged by the Interpretation they give there to our Saviour's Words 
(t) Matth. ●. 15.  For though this Saying of his may be well understood at large, as it is by most Commentators, of those Distresses and Afflictions the Disciples should fall under upon his Departure; the very mention of which they could not now bear: yet it will too very properly admit the other Meaning, and particularly imply some stated Days of Fasting, hereafter to be observed by them: and which our Saviour here predicts at least, if not directs. They were privileged now, by their attendance on the Bridegroom the Messiah, from the ordinary Monday and Thursday Fasts of the stricter Jews; or from others extraordinary set up by John: but when the Bridegroom should be taken away, that Exemption, he tells them, would cease; and, withal, new Cause of Fasting would arise, and new times be appointed. And then he adds, under the Figures of a Garment, and of Bottles of Wine; That neither would those Fasts of his new Institution be proper as yet, under the old Dispensation; neither were his Disciples prepared now to undertake and observe them: but that hereafter, when all things should be new, his New Dispensation should have New Fasts of its own; and his Disciples too become for them New Men, by the Renewing of the Holy Ghost. This Exposition of the Text, concerning such new Fasts in general, after our Saviour's Death, seems to be most natural; very apt, I am sure, it is to the Occasion, and Prosecution, of that Saying. And if than those general Words were by the first Christians applied in particular, to that very time of the Year in which He suffered, and on which they fasted, as by Apostolical Tradition; it is no wonder. For such secondary Applications of Scripture, to Subjects not seeming at first sight to have been intended by it, is very usual in the New Testament. And it is the known manner of the Jews, to accommodate the words of the Bible to such Practices as they take to be of Divine Authority, though they are hinted only and alluded to there, not expressed, much less commanded.  
Thirdly, Those Days which were to be so fasted, are twice expressly mentioned in the Plural Number. And of Those Two are obvious, the Friday and the Saturday, in which he was Taken, Crucified, and Buried. These at least, must, I think, be understood by Tertullian's Catholics: neither has he given any where any contrary Intimation. For in the 14th Chapter of his Treatise of Fasting, the Saturday said there to be fasted sometimes, is, in all probability, not the Holy Saturday, but any other Saturday in the Year. (p) And in his Book of Prayer, Good-Friday is mentioned peculiarly, not simply, for its being a Common Fast-Day; but because it was a Fast-Day in which there was the usual Opportunity for the Holy Kiss, and in which it was omitted. Whereas on the Saturday they Assembled late, and spent the Evening in Baptising the Catechumen: and that Day having in its Office no Place for that Ceremony, consequently gave not our Author the same occasion to speak of it. And thus much seems evident concerning Two of Those Days. But they were reckoned by others, as we have observed before, from Wednesday; and by some from Monday, the Fifth day before the Passover, the day of the Caption of the Paschal Lamb, ordered by Moses 
(u) Exod. 12.3. : in conformity to which they supposed our Saviour to have been at that time singled out, as it were, by the High-Priests, and determined for Sacrifice. This is certain, That, by many, all those Days were particularly observed; as we shall presently know from an Author but fifty Years younger: who is indeed the first that tells us of such a Practice; but, as we often intimate, must not therefore be supposed the first that knew it done.  
Fourthly, Of Those Days the Friday was the most remarkable: for in that He was taken away actually; Apprehended, Crucisied, and laid in the Grave; and accordingly It was always kept with a singular Devotion by the whole Church: the latter half of the Night (in which the Apostles should heretofore have watched) in Watching, and the Day too in Fasting and Praying. And for this Reason only we need not have wondered if Good-Friday had been particularly mentioned in the 14th Chapter of Fasting, as it is in the Treatise of Prayer. I confess from some words of the last Mr. Daillè would infer, That Good-Friday was not then observed by all Christians: because the Devotion of that Day is said to be Common, and as it were Public; or, as he sometimes understands, almost Public. And his Observation would have been true, had Tertullian said as it were or almost Common: but when it is first termed Common, without any Restriction, and after too said to be kept by All; that Consideration alone should have lead that very Learned Person to the true Meaning of this Phrase, as it were Public. For Public, he knew, does not only signify what belongs to all; but what is exposed, or appears to all: which last Sense, opposed to Hiding and Concealing, the Scope of the place evidently requires. And besides it is plain, why Tertullian puts in his as it were: for he had after his strict manner urged the Command of not Publishing a Fast so absolutely; that he could not, in the usual Nicety of his Style, call even this Public without some Limitation.  
Fifthly, Of other Days than those in which our Saviour was taken away, there is no express mention in Tertullian. But for aught appears thence, other Days there might have been observed, and some reason from him there is to think they were.  
We have seen before how very probable it is, That the Montanists had a Fast before Easter of Two Weeks, besides their other two Fasts at other times of the Year: and had not the Catholics of that Age observed some such Lent too, additionally to the ordinary prescribed Days; Tertullian must have been obliged to have accounted for this Innovation also, as well as for the other. Whereas in the 15th Chapter, he thinks himself bound to defend the other two Weeks only, as the Fasts peculiar to those of his own Sect: and leaves us therefore to infer, That there was little difference between them concerning the Ante-Paschal Fast: the Catholics, it seems, having nothing to object to the Montanists about the Length of it, but only about the Necessity as by Divine Command; and the Montanists, on the other side, not being able to defend their certain fixed Fortnight, by producing any number of Days tho' more, which the Catholics kept, because they were kept by them uncertainly, and under no Divine Obligation.  
From Tertullian's Management of this Dispute, such reason there is to think that the Catholics of his time had a longer Lent than of those days only. And upon the same Considerations, the violent Presumptions of Mr. Daillè against it, will be found of no force; neither is he to be suffered to conclude, That the Catholics then kept no such Lent, because he did not find it formally mentioned amongst Tertullian's Objections in the 13th and 14th Chapters. Had indeed their Lent been then as Determined and Formal, as that of the Latin and Greek Church is now; the Forty Days before Easter might probably have been mentioned, as well as the Fifty after: but in that Age there was a great difference between them. For the Feast of the Fifty days was universally kept by all, and very solemnly: conspicuous if only by the Posture they used, their not kneeling at their Prayers. But neither was Forty, nor any other number of Days fixed then generally for a Fast: and besides, as the Days were at Discretion, and rarely, I suppose, Forty; so the Fast was for the most part Private, and not distinguished by any Public Action. For the same Reason of Uncertainty, the same Additional Days ought not to have been specified in the 13th Chapter, nor mentioned in any other manner than they there are, under the general Title of other days besides those in which the Bridegroom was taken away. Neither, I suppose, did he in that place think so much of justifying his Ante-Paschal Lent, (a thing the Catholics would easily allow in Substance, though not in Form;) as of his other two Lents, which were absolute Novelties in the Church of Christ: and upon that account he might retort so upon the Catholics in general, concerning the Abstinence they thought fit to use through the Course of the rest of the Year. But if any Adversary will impose upon Tertullian the necessity of pleading there only for his Ante-Paschal Lent; I may then, I think, with as much reason desire him to understand the Author there (as the word will signify, we know (n 2)) not speaking of other days Besides, but of other days Before those in which the Bridegroom, etc. And then this Passage, instead of being an Objection against such a Lent at that time, will become an express Testimony for it.   

(b) Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. ' O 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
(c) Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
(f) Hier. ad Marcellum. Theodor●t. Ibidem.  
(f 2) In Sozomen's Time, as we shall find hereafter, Ch. 10. §. I. the Ante-Paschal Fast of the Montanists was of Two Weeks: and there is all Reason to think, That it had been so from the beginning of their Separation. For by that time the Catholics, we shall see, fasted a much longer Space: and these great Fasters would hardly have been left behind, had not those Two Weeks been the Space determined them by their Prophet; and they obliged, as here follows, to keep punctually to all his Institutions.  
(g) Hieron. ad Marcel. Illi tres in anno faciunt Quadragesim●s, quasi tres Passi sint Salvatores. This is express for Three Lents: and that one of them was kept after Pentecost, the same Author informs us in his Comm. in Matth. cap. 9 Montanus, Pris●illa, & Maximilla etiam post Pentecosten faciunt Quadragesimam. When the other New one was kept, I do not find ascertained. But it is plain from Tertullian that both made but Two Weeks, without the Saturday; as you may see in his Book, the Jejun. cap. 15. which we are going to cite. They were therefore of a Week each; and were kept, as appears from the 13th Chapter, at the same time when their Two Yearly Synods were held.  
(h) This I take to be evident, from that place of Chap. 14 de Jejun. hereafter to be alleged; where Tertullian expressly says of the Saturday, and according to the Opinion of his Sect, that it was Nunquam nisi in Pascha jejunandum.  
(i) These Names occur every where in Tertullian, and in this Treatise de Jejun. particularly.  
(k) Theodoret. in loco supra alleg. (e).  
(l) Epiphanius concerning this Heresy, number. 2.  
(m) Tertul. de Jej. c. 1. Arguunt nos, quod Jejunia propria custodiamus, quod Stationes plerumque in Vesperam producamus, quod etiam Xerophagias observemus, siccantes Cibum ab omni Carne & omni Jurulentia & Widioribus quibusque Pomis, nequid Vinositatis vel edamus vel potemus: Lavacri quoque abstinentiam, congruentem arido Victui. Novitatem igitur objectant de cujus Illicito praescribant, aut Haeresin judicandam, si Humana Praesumptio est; aut Pseudoprophetiam pronunciandam, si Spiritalis Indictio est: dum quaqua ex parte Anathema audiamus, qui aliter adnunciamus. Nam quod ad Jejunia pertineat, certos dies à Deo constitutos opponunt.  cum in Levitico praecipit Dominus Moysi decimam Mensis septimi, Diem Placationis; Sancta, inquiens, erit vobis dies, & vexabitis animas vestras, & omnis anima quae vexara non fuerit die illa exterminabitur. Certè in Evangelio illos dies Jejuniis determinatos putant, in quibus ablatus est Sponsus; & hos esse jam solos Legitimos Jejuniorum Christianorum, abolitis Legalibus & Propheticis vetustatibus. Vbi volum enim agnoscunt quid sapiat, Lex & Prophetae usque ad Johannem. Itaque de caetero indifferenter jejunandum, ex arbitrio, non ex imperio novae Disciplinae, pro temporibus & causis uniuscujusque. Sic & Apostolos observasse, nullum aliud imponentes jugum, certorum & in common omnibus obeundorum Jejuniorum; proinde nec Stationum, quae & ipsae suos quidem dies habeant, Quartae Feriae & Sextae, Passiuè tamen currant, neque sub lege Praecepti, neque ultra supremam diei; quando & Orationes fere Hora Nona concludat, de Petri exemplo quod Actis refertur. Xerophagias vero, novum affectati officii nomen, & proximum Ethnicae superstitioni; quales castimoniae Apim, Isidem & magnam Matrem certorum eduliorum exceptione purisicant.  
(n) Ibidem Cap. 13. Praescribitis constituta esse solennia huic Fidei, Scriptures vel Traditione Majorum: nihilque observationis amplius adjiciendum, ob illicitum Innovationis. State in isto gradu si potestis. Ecce enim convenio vos, & praeter Pascha jejunantes, citra (n 2) illos dies quibus ablatus est Sponsus, & Stationum semijejunia interponentes, & vero interdum pane & aqua victitantes, ut cuique visum est.  
(n 2) The very Learned Dr. Beveridge [in his Cod. Canon. Apost. Vindic. l. 3. c. 6.] suggests, That citra illos dies may well signify the Season just before them, and denote a larger Lent to have been kept by the Catholics of that time. That Meaning the Phrase will bear, but I have not given the Translation according to it, lest any one should complain, That I produced a Testimony in a straitened, though a very proper Sense, which was capable of a larger.  
(o) Quod si nova Conditio in Christo, jam & nova Solemnia esse debebunt. Aut si omnem in totum devotionem temporum, & dierum, & mensium, & annorum erasit Apostolus; Curio Pascha celebramus annuo circulo in Mense primo? Cur quinquaginta exinde diebus in omni exultatione decurrimus? Cur Stationibus Quartam & Sextam Sabbati dicamus, & Jejuniis Parasceven (p)? Quanquam vos etiant Sabbatum siquando continuatis, nunquam nisi in Pascha jejunandum (q), secundum rationem alibi redditam.  
(p) Parasceve by many is understood here to signify Good-Friday in particular: because of the ordinary Fridays, as well as of Wednesdays, mention is made before. But the Word is never found to signify after that manner in any other place: and besides, our Author has already spoke of the Pascha in the same Period; and with him we know Dies Paschalis is Good-Friday, (as we may see in the next Testimony to this, cited out of his Book de Orat.) and here in the Close of this Passage, the Saturday following is Sabbatum Paschae. He seems therefore, after he had mentioned the Yearly Solemnities of the Pascha, and the Pentecost which begun on Easter-Day, to come now to the Weekly: and is understood by Petavius, [in his Notes upon Epiphan. p. 358.] to imply, That as both Wednesdays and Fridays were the Days assigned for Stationary-Meetings, So the Fridays were appointed for Fasts: supposing the Word Statio not so much to signify the Half-Fast, as the Assembling; and the Jejunia to be much above those Semi-Fasts, and of the stricter sort. This is certain, though Wednesdays and Fridays are joined together often; yet Friday is at other times particularly remembered, and as the more solemn Day: as you will see hereafter, Ch. 5. §. I. and Ch. 7. §. I. And such a Sense the Words may carry, if at that time all the Wednesdays and Fridays were Stationary, and all the Fridays were fasted. But if the Fridays were not always fasted, but only held the most proper Days of all the Week for a Fast; yet then there might remain a Sense apt enough, after this manner; How come we to appoint Wednesdays and Fridays as most proper for Stations, and the Fridays as most proper for stricter Fasts? And so the Christians might have chose a Friday, as the Jews, if they are to have a solemn Fast, chose for it their Monday, or Thursday.  
All this is said upon this Passage as it is now read. But if there were any Manuscripts to be consulted, I should look after the Words Quartam & Sextam Sabbati, to see whether & Sextam were not an Interpolation of some Copyist, who had observed them above, and thought they were wanting here.  
(q) Mr. Daillé, willing to have Montanus the Enlarger of the Ante-Paschal Fast, would fain suppose the Two New Weeks of Fasting, which he instituted, to have been placed by him before Easter: and for that purpose cannot allow, That the Montanists fasted the Saturday before Easter; because, as we see out of Tertullian in the next Paragraph, in those Two Weeks they fasted not the Saturdays. But, on the contrary, we have learned from St. Jerome, That those Two Weeks were Two New Lents (note g): and we have found too (f 2) some Reason to think, That their Lent before Easter was of Two other Weeks, differing, we suppose, from such a Lent of the Catholics only in this, That it was enjoined as by Divine Precept. And besides, this very place will not endure such an Interpretation easily. For the Montanists are known to have declined Fasting on Saturdays, as much as the Catholics: and upon that Account only, the Sabbatum nunquam jejunandum nist in Paschate, may be said by them as of their own Judgement, and their own Practice. It is too most reasonable to understand it in such a manner. For here Tertullian speaks, and not the Catholics; and must be therefore rather presumed to have given his Own, than Their Opinion: which Opinion besides, he says, was founded upon a Reason elsewhere given; and to say elsewhere, might be proper enough, if the Reason was any where given by himself in some Treatise of his, but it was too lose and uncertain, if the Reason was given by some Catholic in general; for where should one look for it? And who was he that gave it? To all this we may add, That if a Catholick's Opinion were here expressed, and his Reasons meant, it would have been rather thus, Quanquam vos etiam Sabbatum siquando continuatis, in Paschate Jejunandum secundum rationem alibi redditam: for the Fasting on the Saturday of them who did it but sometimes, was to be the Doubt, and to require a Reason: though for Tertullian to give a Catholick's Reason, and not to censure it, would have been very unnecessary and very flat; Faults not usual in his Style. And on the other side, if the Montanists Judgement is there spoke, and they fasted not that Saturday, but the Catholics did; it should then instead of nisi have been nec, and conceived in this manner, to the Reproach of the Catholics, Quanquam vos etiam Sabbatum siquando continuatis nunquam nec in Pascha jejunandum, etc. Such a Reproof of the Catholics was likely from Tertullian, and such a Reflection is obliquely made in the Translation above; which tells of the Catholics, That they too continue the Saturday, but that they should only fast that Saturday and no other, which yet some of them were used to do.  
This is all true upon the common Supposition, That Parasceve signifies Good-Friday in this place. But if it be to be taken for any Friday, the Sense of the place is plain, and Mr. Daillé hath nothing to say.  
(r) Cap. 15. Quantula est enim apud nos Interdictio Ciborum? Duas in anno Hebdomadas Xerophagiarum, nec Totas, exceptis scilicet Sabbatis & Dominicis, offerimus Deo.  
(s) De Orat. cap. 14. Jam enim de abstinentia Osculi agnoscimur jejunantes. Sed & siqua ratio est, ne tamen huic Praecepto reus sis, potes domi si forte, inter quos latere jejunium in totum non datur, differre Pacem. Vbicunque autem alibi operationem tuam abscondere potes, debes meminisse Praecepti: ita & Disciplinae foris, & Consuetudini domi, satisfacies. Sic & die Paschae, quo communis & quasi publica jejunii Religio est, merito deponimus Osculum; nibil curantes de occultando, quod cum omnibus faciamus.   

CHAP. V.  
§. I. A Testimony from Origen for the Devotion of Fridays, and of the Paschal Season, and thence to Whitsuntide. Another from him, but of Ruffinus his Translation, concerning the Fast of the Quadragesima, or the Forty Season.  
§. II. A distinct Account of the Passion-Week from Dionysius of Alexandria, about the middle of the Third Century.  
§. III. What were the first Paschal Solemnities mentioned by St. Cyprian: and concerning the Passion-Week.  
§. I. THE Age in which we now are from the 200th to the 300th Year from our Saviour's Birth, afforded not many Ecclesiastical Authors; and of their Writings most is lost: Neither was there any Dispute then in the Church about any thing relating to our Subject; so that we are not to expect very much Light thence. Hippolytus indeed, as we have mentioned above, wrote a large Treatise, as it should seem, concerning the Paschal Season, Entitled, A Declaration of the Times of Easter: but of that, as we have seen, a very small Fragment is preserved. Neither, may be, would it have conduced much more to our present Purpose, than that Ancient Treatise which we have ascribed to St. Cyprian, or that other of Anatolius which Bucherius has given us: which are only Calculations of the Time in which Easter should be kept, and not Accounts of the Duty and Season that was supposed to go before it. The little help therefore we shall find will be from Origen, and his Scholar Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria.  
And from Origen we have but a transient mention of the Devotion of Fridays, and of Easter; and a doubtful one of the Season before it. The first is in his Apology for the Christians against Celsus: and there in Answer to an Accusation of our Religion, as if it were ill-natured, because the Christians did not join in the Festivals of those Times; he replies, that, according to the excellent Saying of one of the Heathen, To do one's Duty, was to keep a Holiday; and that St. Paul had truly said, ye observe days and months, etc. I am afraid of you. But, continues he, (a) if any one shall object to us our Lords-days, and Fridays, and the Passover, and Pentecost: we reply, That a Perfect Man being always conversant in the Words and Works and Thoughts of the True Lord, makes every Day His, and always keeps the Lord's-day. And so being always in a Preparation of the True Life, and always abstaining from Pleasure, and keeping under the Body, he always keeps the Preparation-Day, [Friday]. In such a manner he keeps the Passover, passing from this Life to God, and hastening to his City. And thus he who can say with Truth, We are Risen with Christ, keeps the Pentecost. But one of the Common Believers, and not of the better kind, who cannot, or who will not keep every day a Holiday, wants such sensible Images for his Remembrancers, that he be not wholly deficient. This Passage is Allegorical, and like that of Clemens, our Author's Master, which we have cited above (in Chap. 4. §. I.): and it is here given, not only for a further Confirmation of the Practice of observing Fridays and Easter, etc. but that the Reader may the better judge of a Reflection he may find made by Socrates, as if Origen had done wisely to turn the Passover into Allegory, as he has done here, but more largely in that his Homily upon Leviticus which we shall next mention. For such Allegorical Speculations, to which the Platonists were much inclined, may be admitted to refine and spiritualise, but not to evacuate the Letter. This we find here, where the Observation of the Lords-days is allegorized, as well as of Fridays, and of the Passover. And we might give another Instance from the same Clemens of Alexandria, who refines in the like manner upon the Ten Commandments 
(b) Strom. 6. versus Finem. ; but when he assigns his Spiritual Meaning, of Thou shalt not commit Adultery, or Kill, or Steal, must not be therefore supposed to have set aside the Plain and Literal Sense.  
Much more to our Design would that other Passage of Origen be, which we find in his Tenth Homily on Levitisus: where, after he has enlarged in an Allegory, against those who thought the Propitiation-day of the Jews was to be kept by Christians, he subjoins; (c) But this we do not say, to let lose the Restraints of Christian Abstinence; For we have the Days of the Forty Season consecrated to Fasting, and we have Wednesdays and Fridays in which we solemnly fast. And here, under that name of the Forty Season, now first met with, we should either understand a Lent of Forty Days, or some number of Days denominated at least from Forty; were we assured of our Authority, and had we the Text of the Author, and not the Translation of Ruffinus, for it. Ruffinus, I know, lies under an ill Name for Translating; and has not the Reputation of any great Exactness: but we have found reason to think, that he did not do Irenaeus wrong; and it may be he has been suspected here much more upon Design, by those that are against Lent, than he has been asserted by those that are for it. However I shall be content at present, that this Testimony at the second hand, may pass for a Half-Proof; both out of the just Confidence I have, That within a little time it will appear, we wanted not this single Evidence; as also with a certain foresight, that it will then become highly Credible, and be seconded and supported by the whole Church.  
In the mean time, from a Letter of Dionysius, a Scholar of Origen's, and Bishop of Alexandria, which chanced to escape the Fate all his other Writings have suffered, and which was writ about the middle of this Age; we may learn something more particular, concerning the Fast of the Passion-Week. We have seen above, what a great Controversy had risen about the Day, in which the Ante-Paschal Fast should end: and some, it seems, in those Parts were now grown so curious, as to desire to have the Hour determined, if not the Minute; proceeding upon that general Supposition, That the Fast was to end at the Time of our Saviour's Resurrection. A Bishop of the Neighbourhood having been troubled about this Nicety, sends to Dionysius, the Famous Bishop of that Capital City, for a Resolution; and his Answer here follows. (d) You wrote to me, right Trusty and most excellent Son, enquiring what Hour of Easter-Day the Fast should end. For some Brethren, you say, think it ought to end at Cockcrow, and some the Evening before. For the Brethren of Rome, as they say, wait for the Crowing of the Cock: and those here, you tell me, are something sooner. But you desire me to give you the exact Hour, and that very precisely and scrupulously determined; a thing troublesomely nice, and in which it is easy to mistake. This indeed will be agreed by all, That we ought to begin our Festival Joy after our Saviour's Resurrection; Humbling our Souls with Fasting till that time comes. But you have proved in your Letter very well from the Holy Gospels, That it is not very exactly determined there, at what Hour it was that he arose. Those places of the Gospels he then considers, and infers thus: That the Setting out, and the Going of the Disciples, to the Sepulchre, was in the deep of the Morning, and very early; but that they spent in their Going, and about the Sepulchre, to Sunrising. This (says he) being the State of that Case. To those who are so scrupulous as to inquire for the very Hour, or Half, or Quarter of an Hour, when to begin the Festival, we Answer thus. We blame those who make too much haste, and give over before Midnight— And those who hold out longer, and continue till the Fourth Watch, we commend— But to those who leave off in the mean time, as their Inclination or Ability has served them, we are not severe. For, (not to be nice about Hours) the Six Days of Fasting themselves are not kept equally, and alike by All. Some continuing without Food pass over (e) the whole Six Days; some Two; some Three; some Four; and some not One. Now to those who have endured such Pass over without Sustenance, and grow unable to hold out, and are ready to faint, to them leave is to be given for an earlier Refreshment. But if there be any, who have been so far from thus passing over the preceding [Four] Days, that they have not so much as fasted (f), nay, it may be, have feasted, and then coming to the Two last and only Days, and passing over the Friday and Saturday, think they do a great thing if they hold on to : As to these, I cannot think that they have striven alike [for the Mastery], with those who had been engaged in the Exercise more Days before.  
Here is, from great and unquestionable Authority, a very accurate Account of the Manner in which the Christians of Alexandria, and that Country, passed the Week before Easter. Nor is it to be doubted, but that those generally of other Places observed it with more than ordinary Abstinence; though they might not come up to all this Austerity; and though the Egyptian Christians, as well as Jews, (for so I take Philo's Essenes' to have been) may have been the greatest Fasters each of their own Religion. Some, we are told, wholly abstained from Food, or passed over all the Six Days; some Four, beginning with Wednesday; some Three, and some Two. And these last did the least of those who pretended to Pass Over: for he mentions none who thought fit to begin on the Saturday, and so to pass over but One whole Day. He mentions indeed some who passed over not so much as One: but it is plain, that these were very few in comparison of the Rest; and it is besides observable, that those who did not Pass over a day altogether, might however in the Language of this Author have Fasted a day till the Evening: and in this manner it is probable they that Passed not over one day, did however Fast more than one, and possibly all the Six, in the selfsame Manner in which we now keep the most solemn of our Fasts.  
Such Abstinence was used in the Passion-Week at Alexandria; and, in probability, in most other Churches: for the Account of Dionysius gins with the mention of Rome, and Other places; and does not at all seem to appropriate the Practice to that single City. When therefore St. Cyprian, a Cotemporary and Correspondent of Dionysius, speaks occasionally of the first Solemnities of the Passover, which detained his Brethren, the Bishops, at their own Churches (g); we may very well understand them to be the Devotions of the Holy Week: and suppose, that the Season of Seven Days before Easter, and Seven after, which by the Law of Theodosius the Great was made a Vacation in the Courts of Justice (h); had been before kept holy by the pious Usage of the elder Christians.  
And this will seem the less strange, if we reflect upon the Practice of the Jews about the same Season. We shall hereafter endeavour to show, that very much of the Christian Usages were derived from them: and it will not be denied by any, That our Easter answers in some sort to their Passover-Day, and the Seven holidays after the one, to the Seven after the other. This is acknowledged: but it is not improbable, that the Days before Easter had some such regard too. The Monday of that Week, we have seen in the last Chapter, was supposed to be the Day, in which the High-Priests resolved on our Saviour's Death; as it was appointed in their Law for the Day, in which they were to single out their Paschal Lamb: and this, as we there observed, may have seemed sufficient Reason to the Ancient Christians, to begin their stricter Devotion then. But it is besides observable, and remarked by Theophylact (i), That the Jews commonly began to make Entertainments, and commenced their Festivity the Day before, that on which he supposes our Saviour was entertained at Bethany, the sixth day before the Passover: (if they did not earlyer). And this, in the general, is the more probable, from the Appellation the Jews now give the Sabbath before the Passover, calling it the Great Sabbath: a Greatness, I suppose, in which the rest of the days of that Week had their share. For as the Scripture tells us 
(k) John 11.55. , That many came up before the Passover to purify themselves, and to offer Sacrifices for their Sins: so too we may presume, many came to pay the Peace-Offerings they had vowed; and of them, the most solemn, the Eucharistical, were not capable, by reason of their Leavened Bread which accompanied them 
(l) Levit. 7.13. , to be offered on any of the latter seven days, and made up therefore, as we have reason to think, the Solemnity of the Season before. Now if those days before the Passover were thus distinguished among the Jews, by their Festivity; they might be among Christians as much distinguished by their Abstinence: according to the Rule of that Apostolical Constitution, (produced by the Audaeans, for their keeping the 14th Day, after the manner 
(l 2) See Ch. 1. §. 3. , I suppose, of the asiatics); which Epiphanius thus gives us (m). When They [the Jews] Feast, do you Fast, and Mourn for them; for in the day of their Feast, they Crucified Christ: and when they Mourn, eating their Unleavened Bread, with Bitter Herbs; do you Feast. For here the time of Feasting, first mentioned, might be extended also to those Days Before 
(m 2) See Part 2. Rep. 2. Ch. 1. §. 2. Ch. 3. §. 3. : and not to a Week only, but a Fortnight. For with the Jews the First Twelve Days of that Month are esteemed Festival, 
(n) Buxt. S. Jud. c. 17.  as sacred to the Erection of the Tabernacle. And though we are told, that the Jews do no Penitential Office this whole Month; yet its Festivalness must be understood of its first half. For from, the Morrow of the Passover, the 16th day, they are like Mourners; and continue under that sadness; some, above Thirty Days; and some, all save one, to Pentecost 
(o) Ibid. c. 19 . And so, tho' that Constitution specifies the 14th day only, for the time of Jewish Mourning; because on that only they were bound to eat the bitter Herbs, and that (p) Unsavoury Bread; yet the reason of the Ordinance might reach to the 7 Weeks from the 16th, in which the Jews forbidden themselves all cheerfulness; and which, as we have seen, were still passed by Christians, on the other hand, with all demonstrations of Joy.  
But to return to the Instances of this Age, of which we were now speaking. It is plain, from what we chance to know of this Matter, That the Passion-Week was strictly observed: And it will be unreasonable to think, as some would persuade us to do, That there was then no time fasted before that Week, because here is no mention made by Dionysius of such a Time. For the Holy Man describes the Fasting of this Week but casually, and upon occasion only; being led from the different Ending of the Fast, to consider its different Beginning. The Beginning therefore of such a Fast only was to be considered by him, which continued without Interposition of Food till Easter-Day: and for that Reason the Fasts of the preceding Weeks, which were discontinued, and separated from the last Week, by the intervening Saturdays and Sundays, had no place here, and could not properly be mentioned by him on this Argument.  
On the contrary, we cannot but presume, That those who kept this Week so strictly, did not fail to use some sort of Abstinence more than ordinary in the time before; if any such Season was then any where in use with Christians: such a Season as we had some Reason to infer from Irenaeus, and Tertullian; and shall find in the beginning of the next Age much celebrated, and observed well nigh universally. To which I may add, That if the Conjecture I offer at on Socrates 
(q) Ch. 10. §. III.  be admitted; it will then be probable, That full Three Weeks were formally kept at this time in Rome. For if in the Days of Socrates, when the Catholics generally observed so large a Lent, the Roman Novatians observed but Three Weeks; it was, in all likelihood, for this Reason; Because the Novatians of that Place, where the Schism was first founded, adhered more stiffly to the Usages of their first Separation, and would not comply with the Enlargements the Catholics made, as those of the same Sect, in other Cities might have been induced to do.   

(a) Orig. cont. C●is. l. 8. p. 392. Edit. C●●●. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(c) Orig. Hom. 10. in Levit. H●● tam 〈◊〉 ideo 〈◊〉, ●t Abs●inenti● Christianae fran● lax●●●●. 〈…〉 Qua●●ag 〈◊〉 die● jejuniis consecratos: liabemus Quartam & Sext●●● Septiman●● dies 〈◊〉 solenniter jejun●m●s.  
(d) Dion. Alex. Can. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may properly signify to Passover, Put off, Postpone; from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vltra, Post; [as in Phot. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is, Post quinque dies]: and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may be that their Food was put off for a Day, or a Day put off for their Food; as the word Prorogate will agree in both Constructions: and, in the latter, I suppose, Dien Cibationi solitoe superponere, is to be taken in Solinus [Cap. 28.]; tho' Salmasius understands it not the cibo sumendo, but de sumpto, [Exerc. Pl. in Sol. p. 324. Epist. Simplic. Ver. p. 203.] as if the Day were put upon the Food. Or, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may answer to that other signification of the Latin Pro in Prorogare; as in Prolatus, productus, protractus: and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may be, to Prolong, and Protract, or put over the Fast for one, or more Days; in which sense Jejunii superpositio [Conc. Illiber. Can. 26.] and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [See Ch. 8. lit. e] may be well understood: And possibly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉], may also be much the same with our Author's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and signify transigere, Producere Diem, jejunio; to Pass the Day, in Fasting; so, as Tertullian might mean by his Sabbatum continuare. [See the last Ch. lit. (0)].  
(f) Fasting a Day, must be understood here in Contradistinction to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the passing over a Day: and must therefore be taken for such an Abstinence, as will allow some Sustenance, at least, at the latter end of the Day.  
(g) Cyprian. Epist. 56. Edit. Oxon. Quoniam scripsistis, ut cum plur thus Collegis de hoc ipso plenissime tractem;— & nunc omnes fere inter Prima Paschae Solennia apud se cum Fratribus demorantur: quando Solennitati celebrandoe apud suos satisfecerint, & add me venire coeperint, tractabo cum singulis plenius.  
(b) Just. Cod. Lib. 3. Tit. 12. §. 7. Inter dies Feriales recensentur, Sacri Pasch●e Dies, qui Septenario numero vel pracedunt, vel sequuntur.  
(i) Theophyl. in Joan. 12.1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (i 2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(i 2) This Particular may be spoke by our Author out of Exodus. For according to Maimon. (De sacr. Pasch. Tract. 1. Cap. 10. §. XV.) this Circumstance, with some others prescribed at the first Institution, were observed the first Passover only, and never after.  
(m) Epiph. Haer. 7. §. XI. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(n) Maimonid. de solenn. Pasch. seu de Ferment. & Azm. Cap. 6. §. I. This is observed by Petavius upon the place.   

CHAP. VI  
§. I. A Mention of a Forty Days Fast, by Peter of Alexandria, before the Council of Nice.  
§. II. Very probably they were the Days before Easter.  
§. I. AND so have we seen all along through the three first Centuries, as much mention of the Ante-Paschal Fast, as could be expected from the scarcity of Authors, and the rarity of the Occasion for such a mention: the Church having been generally employed hitherto, either in Apologies for their Religion against the Heathens, or the Defence of it against Heathenish Heresies, or the suffering of Persecution for it. But now in the next Age, when Christianity comes to be owned, and countenanced by the Government; their Writings will be more frequent, and more copious, and express: and amongst other Observations of our Religion, we shall not fail to find sufficient Information of this, after which we are enquiring.  
But before we come to those happy Days; the last fierce Persecution itself began by Diocletian in the East, according to Baronius, in the Year 302, and there continued by the Cruelty of those who governed that part of the Empire, gave occasion for some sort of mention of Forty Days, which it may be to our Purpose to observe. Before the Persecution began, and in the beginning of this Century, the Episcopal Chair of that great Christian City, Alexandria, in which the abovenamed Dionysius had sat, was now filled by one Peter, a very venerable Person, Eminent for his Knowledge and Sanctity, and who at last suffered Martyrdom in the Year 311. And upon the rising of this sharp Persecution, the Christians had behaved themselves very differently; some had endured to the last with admirable Constancy; some yielded and denied their Religion, after the suffering of grievous Torments; some upon the offer of Torture, after they had undergone the Pains of Imprisonment; and some at the first Accusation. Of those too, who had not renounced, some had escaped by Flight; some by buying off the Prosecution; and some by hiring Witnesses, to attest to some Idolatrous Act of theirs, which had been never done. Of all these sorts, there were many who desired to be readmitted to the Communion of the Church, and some had now long sought it with much Lamentation: to whose various Circumstances different Rules were therefore to be suited, such as this Peter, after deliberation had with his Brethren, delivered in a Discourse now lost; but from which some Excerpts had been made in form of Canons, and by that means preserved to us. The first Canon, as Zonaras and Balsamon give it, is thus (a);  
Whereas now the fourth Easter is come upon this Persecution; it may suffice for those, who were accused, and imprisoned, and endured insufferable Tortures, and intolerable scourge, and many other grievous Cruelties, but after all were betrayed by the Weakness of the Flesh; [for those, I say,] though they were not admitted into Communion at first, by reason of that their great Apostasy; yet because they strove much, and resisted a long while, (for they fell not upon Choice, but were betrayed by the Weakness of the Flesh,) and because they bear still in their Bodies the Marks of their Lord, and some of them have been mourning these three Years; [for these, I say, it may suffice,] That a Penance of Other Forty Days, to be reckoned from after their Admission, should be additionally inflicted on them, for their Admonition: which Forty days, tho' our Saviour had fasted after Baptism, yet He was tempted of the Devil; in which they too being exercised supper abundantly, and more earnestly sober, may watch unto Prayer, continually meditating on that Answer, given by our Lord, when he was urged by the Tempter to fall down and worship him; Get thee behind me, Satan, for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.  
This is the first Canon: and for the better understanding of it we only add, That the second imposes another Year's Penance, upon those who had suffered the Pain and Misery of Imprisonment, but did not resist Torture; and that the third puts those off to the End of another Year for Trial, and not till then to receive their Sentence, who out of Fear and Cowardliness had yielded presently.  
§. II. Forty Days of Fasting, and strict Devotion are here singularly and eminently mentioned: but in what part of the Year they were placed, it is not here certainly determined. If by the fourth Easter is come, as I have rendered it, may be understood is now coming; and the Bishop's Discourse may be dated before Easter: those Forty Days would then be in all probability before Easter too, and the very Lent which we are now looking after. They must undoubtedly have some near Aspect upon Easter: For why else is it mentioned, and the Years of Persecution reckoned by it? And no time was so proper to re-admit Penitents solemnly to Christian Communion, as this of the Passover; when the Pardon of our Sins was recognised, by the solemn Memory of our Saviour's Death on the Friday; and the Holy Communion, the Sacrament of his Death, was so solemnly frequented on the Sunday: neither was any Season of the Year more fit for the stricter Humiliation of the Penitent, than that on which all good Christians were ready to join in something of the like Devotion. For this Reason, we may justly suppose, St. Cyprian 
(b) Ep. 56. Edit. Oxon.  was consulted before Easter, about the same Case, the Reconciliation of those who had been Penitents three Years; that if he had answered favourably, they might have been admitted at the approaching Festival. So have we, under this Supposition, a Lent of Forty Days for Penitents at least, to be kept throughout by them, and with great Severity: while the rest, beginning as early, and using such Abstinence as their Discretion directed, and the Necessities of their Conscience required; equalled generally the Austerities even of those, at the latter End. And this way if we are allowed to conceive the Canon, the Other Forty Days there mentioned, may then respect the former Three Lents that had gone before: except any one would rather understand that one particular Lent to be intimated, which had been kept by these Christians just before they were Baptised, (which too was done generally at Easter,) and which they were now ordered to keep in the same manner again, before they should be again received into the Church.  
And thus the Forty Penitential. Days will be the very Forty Days of Lent, if we suppose the Synod to be held before Easter: as the Nicene Council did order afterwards. But if it was not, and they did not concur with such a Lent, they will however infer It. Let us then suppose the Synod to have been assembled after Easter. And very probably it was; for it is not unlikely that the Order of the Council of Nice, in this Particular, was a Change of the old Practice; which Order was reversed in a little time, by the Council of Antioch: and besides we see that the Synod of Ancyra, a Synod held on occasion of the same Persecution, and much about the same time, did meet after Easter; for they speak of the Great Day, the Day of Easter; and seem to reckon it to be about a Year, before it would come again.  
Under this Supposition, that Synod of Ancyra will help us to understand the other of Alexandria more particularly. In its 6th Canon, it decrees, (c) That those who had yielded cowardly to bare Threats, and had not professed their Repentance till the time of the Synod, should be only admitted to Hear the Scripture and the Sermons, (as hopeful unbelievers were permitted to do) until the Great Day: and that after the Great Day they should be of the Class of those who Kneeled, and Prayed, and Supplicated for Pardon, (as the Catechumeni did for Baptism) and so continue three Years: And then for two Years more, they should Communicate with the Brethren in Prayer, but not in the Eucharist: And finally, after six Years thus spent, they should be received into full and free Communion.  
We find by this Canon, that the Penitential Space of time, were it longer or shorter, was generally determined by Easters: and see that Peter of Alexandria therefore reckoned by them. And further, when he does those miserable Penitents the Favour, after some Years Mourning, to enjoin them only the Penance of Forty Days: we understand his Indulgence to have been so much, as to have remitted that Yearly time, they should otherwise have been kept, at least, from the Eucharist; and to have given them their Lent immediately. For lastly, when he says they should fast other forty days, and says this after Easter; we cannot doubt but that he refers to the Forty days lately passed in Abstinence, and which concluded the preceding Year; which too, as it seems, were passed in ordinary course, and not by any particular Injunction of his, for he appears not to have given any Orders in this Matter before. So very probable it is, even from this accidental Testimony, That a Lent of Forty Days was kept at Alexandria before the Council of Nice: and that we should so think, we are now going to see what great Reason there is from that Council itself.   

(a) Dion. Alex. Can. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(c) Conc. An●yr. Can. VI 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

CHAP. VII.  
§. I. Good-Friday, and Days of solemn Fasting mentioned by Constantine.  
§. II. The Forty Season expressly mentioned by the Council of Nice.  
§. III. And that Forty Days are to be understood, proved from St. chrysostom.  
§. I. WE come now to the first General Council, Assembled at Nice, under the first Christian Emperor, in the Year 325: and amongst other things taken into their Consideration, another Paschal Difference was then adjusted. The Syrians, it seems, (a) and Cilicians without Taurus, and the Mesopotamians, though they kept the Resurrection-day on a Sunday, according to the Resolution in Victor's time (b); yet agreed so much with the Jews, as to follow their wrong Calculation, and begin the Year sooner than they ought; by which means this Paschal Season often happened before the Aequinox: whereas the rest of Christendom had all used a more Reformed Account of their own, agreeable to the Directions of Moses. It was therefore thought fit by the Council, That such a notable Difformity among Christians, and such an Agreement with the Jews, in the Principal Christian Solemnity, things in that time, as it appears, very scandalous, should no longer continue: which Regulation the Emperor himself considered so much, as to notify and recommend it to the Churches in a Circular Letter, transmitted to after Ages by Eusebius. There (c) he tells them, That a Question having been raised about the most Holy Day of the Passover, it was thought fit, by unanimous Consent, to keep it every where on the same Day.— That it was extremely improper to keep that most Holy Feast, from which we have received the Hopes of Immortality, after the Custom of the Jews, who embrued their hands in that wicked Action. That setting aside the Jewish Manner, there was a truer Course and Calculation, by which the Solemnity of that Observation, which had been kept from the first Passion-Day, might be hereafter perpetuated to all Ages—. That besides, the Absurdity of Erring with their Enemies the Jews, there was an unfitness in their Disagreement among themselves. That our Saviour had delivered to us One Feast, the Day of our Redemption or Freedom, that of his most Holy Passion, and that he had ordained one Catholic Church: and that therefore they might consider, How improper it was for some Parts of that Church to be Fasting, whilst others were Feasting; and some after the Days of the Passover were over, to be in Joy and Festivity, while others were at their Solemn Fasts; and both of them for the same common Reason.— That he promised himself their Assent to that, which was already uniformly observed in Rome, and afric, and all Italy; in Egypt, Spain, France, Britain, Libya, all Greece; the Dioceses (d) of Asia and Pontus, and in Cilicia within Taurus; and not only because there were the Greater Number; but because it was the right Course, and the Christians were besides to have no Communication with their and our Saviour's Enemies the Jews.  
In this Imperial Letter, we may 

(1) observe the extraordinary Notice that is taken of Good-Friday: That alone of all the Paschal Season is specified; and Easter-Day itself is unmentioned, as if it were the less Principal. And this, it may be, was done in Honour to the Catholic Doctrine, and against the New heresy of Arius; which depressed infinitely the Dignity of our Saviour, and the Merit of his Sufferings; as it was the Day of the Passion of God, and not of any Creature. Whereas on the contrary, the Resurrection of a Creature, should have been mentioned before its Passion, as the more Extraordinary and Remarkable of the Two, both for its Cause and Manner, and its Effects and Virtue. But whatever might be the Reason of this singular Mention of Good-Friday; this is certain, That every Friday, for the sake of the Passion, had by an Edict of this Emperor (e) the like Exemption from Civil Business with the Lord's Day itself: as, we may remember, Origen above gave it an equal Remembrance, if Tertullian too did not distinctly specify it before.  
(2.) Solemn and prescribed Fast are here spoke of, and before Easter: But how many they generally were, and how far they reached, we are not told from this, no more than from other Authorities we have heretofore vouched. We should indeed presume that they might have made up the Holy Week from Dionysius; or it may be a Week or two before, from what we observed on Tertullian; and when we concluded from Peter of Alexandria, That they were about Forty, a Term remembered by Irenaeus before, we could not have been thought to have stretched too far, and been overfond of that Number. But a Canon of the same Council, accidentally mentioning the Ante-Paschal Fast, will sufficiently authorise the Opinion.    
§. II. THE 5th. Canon (f) after it has decreed, (upon the Occasion, it is supposed, of Arius, having been received into Communion by Eusebius, notwithstanding his Excommunication;) That those who have been Ejected by one Bishop, should not be Admitted by another: to provide against unjust Excommunications upon Quarrel and Passion, does order, That for the Examination of such Causes, Two Synods a Year should be held in every Province. And these, says the Canon, shall be held, The One before the Forty Season, that all Quarrel and Animosity being first laid aside, [as our Saviour directs,] a Pure and Acceptable Gift may be offered unto God, [in the Devotions of that Holy Time;] and the Other in Autumn.  
Here now is a certain undisputed Mention of the Forty Season, made by this Great Assembly of Confessors: but Mr. Daillé is very unwilling to understand them of Forty Days. He rather would think, because the word Forty Season will be found hereafter some times to signify a Lent in general, and of uncertain Space; that therefore it arose first from the Forty Hours he fancied in Irenaeus, and afterwards gave its name to that Fast as it increased in Space; and was now at length come to signify the Passion-Week; as it will hereafter in some time have so many Days added to it as shall make up the Number Forty. And, he says, Forty Days must not be understood here: for in so large a time, new Quarrels might be raised; and the Synods too must be held in February, an inconvenient Season for the Bishops to travel.  
But this Original of the Forty Season from so many Hours, is a mere Singularity, and grounded upon a very doubtful Construction of Irenaeus his Phrase, which rather requires to be understood of Forty Days, as has already appeared. Neither is it reasonable to imagine, That a Word which signifies Forty, should be put to signify Six Days of Fasting; now when we know from the Church of Alexandria, that Forty Days have been before observed for a Solemn Space of Penitential Devotion: and much less reasonable when we shall know, that so many Days in this self same Age hereafter will always be aimed at, and as near as may be approached to, in the Computation of Lent, as we shall presently see.  
§. III. THERE is therefore little need that I should go further for the fixing the Signification of that Word in this Canon: but it may be further cleared from St. chrysostom. He was in Antioch, the chief place of the East, where that Jewish Account of the Passover was kept, which the Council of Nice had ordered to be reformed: and the People were so addicted to it, (as they were too to other Customs of the Jews); that though the Observation of it was again forbid by a Council at Antioch in the Year 341; yet some of them continued superstitiously to adhere to it, and obliged this Eloquent Priest, to interrupt the Order of his Discourses, and to bestow one whole Sermon upon the Correction of their Schismatical Dissent. They imagined that Easter was necessarily to be kept at the Time of Unleavened Bread, and pretended that this had been their Ancient Use. St. chrysostom therefore acquaints them, That the Alteration was made by the Wisdom and Piety of the Great Council of Nice, those illustrious Confessors of the Christian Faith: that they thought it unfit for them any longer to follow the Jews in their erroneous Calculation, and that the whole World agreed to the Ordinance. He tells them, That the Jewish Passover is abolished; That Christ is the Passover of the Christians; and That it is celebrated by them every Communion. To which he adds, (g) Why then, say you, do we fast these Forty Days? Because anciently many were used to come to these Mysteries without due Preparation, and particularly at this time in which our Saviour instituted the Sacrament; the Father's knowing well the Mischief of such a Negligence, being come together, appointed Forty Days of Fasting, Praying, Hearing, and Assembling; that we being all carefully purified in these Days both by Prayer, and by Alms, and by Fasting, and by Watching, and by Tears, and by Confession, and by all other Duties; may so draw near, as far as is possible for us, with a pure Conscience. And how great the Success of this Ordinance was, in bringing us to a Custom of Fasting, is very evident hence. For if we all the Year long Cry up and Preach the Duty of Fasting never so much, there is no body that hearkens to what is said: but when the Season of the Forty Days is once come, tho' none exhort or advise them; yet every one, even the most negligent, sets himself to it, by the Advice and Exhortation of the Season.  
Now I take it to be very plain, That the Fathers here spoke of for Lent, are the same with those mentioned but just before for Easter. For had they been of any other Council, or Synod; they would have been named with some distinction. And if any one would be so unreasonable, as to suppose some other Council meant, yet he must remember, that it must be such a one as might be styled Ancient about the Year 390; and therefore rather before that of 325, than after: and then he must withal reflect, that he gives me an Earlier Authority, than that for which I now contend. But unquestionably, as I think, St. chrysostom must be understood of the Nicene Fathers: and if we take his Judgement, we see evidently that they, by their Forty Season, could intent nothing else but their Forty Days. It is true indeed, that there is no particular Canon to be found, that injoins this Lent of Forty Days: but neither is the Ordinance about Easter, found in the Canons, though it was such a disputed Point. A●● it may too very well be, that the Observation of Forty Days was rather interlocutorily agreed upon, than formally determined; and not therefore enjoined in any other Canon, but employed in this of which we now speak; and that the Churches of differing Customs, voluntarily came in to this Uniformity of Lent, upon the general Direction they received to Conform in the Celebration of Easter.  
So has it appeared, That Mr. Daillé's Refusal, to understand Forty Days by the Forty Season, was not only ungrounded and arbitrary, neither derived from the Practice just before the time of the Canon, nor agreeable to that after; but withal directly contrary to the express Affirmation of St. chrysostom. For as to the Objections he has brought, if they are worth mentioning: the Inconvenience he fancies, that in so long a time as Forty Days they might quarrel again, after their Synodical Reconciliation; seems to be said with more Favour to his own Hypothesis, than Respect to those Venerable Persons: and the other of a February Journey, though of Elder Men, to the Metropolis of a Province, where other Business too might call them, is not very great; it was not at least so considerable to the Nicene Fathers, as that of their continuing at Difference one with another in the Holy Season. But not to be difficult in small things; we will grant that this Inconvenience might be one of the Reasons, why the  Council of Antioch, by the 24th Canon, restored it to its former Place after Easter, and settled it in the 4th Week: and it seems indeed by the special Assignation of a Reason, for the time of a Synod before Lent; that it was first fixed there, by this Council of Nice. However after all, the Forty Season there must stand for Forty Days: and we cannot but observe, That it is not set down as any newly raised word, but as one already well known, and of as common a Signification as Spring or Autumn. From whence what we have before suggested, plainly now appears, That such a Number of Days had been in much Use before in many places, at least in the last Age: tho' no mention of them happened to occur, in the few Writings that remain.   

(a) Athan. ad Afr. Ep. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
(b) So Socrates understands. For after he has given an Account of the Astatick Custom, against which Victor declared; he proceeds to peak of the Usage this Council rectified, in these Words. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Socrat. l. 5. c. 22. Beside, it is plain from that Homily of St. chrysostom we shall presently cite, (notwithstanding what is said to the contrary by Mr. Daille, de Quadrages. pag. 422; that those of Antioch in his time, who did not conform to the Council of Nice, did however keep their Easter on a Sunday. For he tells them, That were the Calculation of the Jews never so exact, etc. yet they could not keep the precise Day, because the First of Unleavened Bread and a Friday would not always come together. [Edit. Savil. Tom. 6. p. 383. l. 7.] and it is in that Case, says he, impossible for us, you, or my one else, to hit the very Sunday, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. [ibid. p. 384. l. 33.] He lays the Difference too in the different Reckoning of the Months, (as Socrates does;) when he says, That they should be careful of coming to the Sacrament worthily, and with the Wedding Garment; but that they need not be so fearful of keeping their Easter after the Christian Account, were it less accurate. For they were to Answer, and should be Punished, for the other Neglect: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [ibid. 382. l. 32.] b●● no man was ever punished, or so much as found fault with, for keeping Easter in this Month, and not in another.  
(c) Eus. de Vit. Const. l. 3. c. 17, 18.— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in this place to be understood properly, and exclusive of the Asia Proconsularis; if the Bishops of Asia Minor, strictly so termed, continued to observe the 14th Day, as Anatolius affirms for his time, and Socrates seems to assert for the time of the Nicene Council. Though it be hard to think that the Churches of the Proconsular Asia, if they had still retained the old Quartodecimarian Error, should not have been included in this mention: and that the Council would have been so silent concerning this Error, kept up against the Ancient Determination in so near and famous a Country; when we find them so zealous against those who were at a greater distance, and whose Practice was less Judaical.  
(e) Euseb. de Vit. Constantin. l. 4. c. 18. ex emendatione Vales●i. Sozom. l. 1. c. 7.  
(f) Concil. Nicen. Can. V.— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tomo Sexto Savil. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 381.   

CHAP VIII.  
§. I. This Forty Season particularly observed by the Candidates for Baptism.  
§. II. And by Penitents.  
§. I. FOR the time that follows, we shall have little Dispute about the Practice of Forty Days: that there was such a Solemn Time before Easter, some way or other observed in all the Churches, none will deny. This is evident and absolutely unquestionable, from St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Ambrose of Milan, St. chrysostom, St. Jerome, and St. Augustine; who expressly mention Forty Days; as the Council of Laodicea, and Athanasius, speak of more Weeks than one of the Forty Season. I shall not therefore trouble the Reader with the unnecessary Allegation of all those Testimonies; but only with such who inform us, That this Lent was still most particularly observed by those two kinds of Men we heretofore intimated 
(a) Ch. 2. §. II. , the Candidates for Baptism, and the Penitents.  
Of a Fast before Baptism, I gave there a very early Testimony from Justin Martyr: and what was then further intimated, might have been confirmed from Tertullian, That for Baptism the Paschal Season afforded a solemn Day. And now in this Age, we cannot but think, That the Lent of Forty Days, which is acknowledged to have been kept commonly by all the Faithful, was more particularly observed by those who were to be baptised at the conclusion of it. On this Subject therefore it will be enough, to produce the single Evidence of St. Cyril of Jerusalem.  
He is judged to have been made Bishop there in the Year 350: and was Presbyter Catechist before; whose Duty it was to instruct and prepare those Candidates, and whose Catechistical Lectures are still preserved. In the Prologue he forewarns them, to take care and provide the Wedding-Garment. I admonish you, says he, (b) now before the Bridegroom of our Souls comes, and sees your Dress. There is a large Time given you. You have the Penance before you of Forty Days: sufficient Space and Opportunity, to put off the old Garments, and to wash off their Filth, and to put on the new ones, and to come in. Likewise the first Sermon to them, he thus gins: (c) You Disciples of the New Covenant; and Partners of the Mysteries of Christ, by Call and Invitation now, and within a little while by actual Gift and Grace; make to yourselves a new Heart and a new Spirit. Then he tells them, That they shall have a new Name; and he that was called a Catechumen before, shall now be styled Faithful.— But though this Grace is freely given, they must not therefore be negligent: the present Season is a Season of Confession— All worldly Cares are to be laid aside: for you strive, says he, for your Souls. Adding, And you that have been busy about the things of the World, troubled in vain so many Years: Will ye not bestow Forty Days in Prayer, for the Salvation of your Souls. And when the Catechumen had in this manner spent the Forty Days, abstaining from Flesh and Wine (d); and had passed over the Friday and the Saturday of the Passion Week, in Vigils and a continued Fast (e); they were then in the Evening before Easter baptised.  
This was unquestionably the Practice of the Fourth Century: and now I shall leave the Reader to observe, how much of this Tertullian, in his Book of Baptism, describes as done in his time. After he had said what we now cited, That there was in the Paschal Season a more solemn Day for Baptism, he adds in the next Chapter, (f) Those who are going to be baptised, aught to pray with frequent Prayers, with Fast, and Kneel, and Watch, and with the Confession of all their former Sins. For by this Affliction of the Flesh and the Spirit, we at the same time make some Satisfaction for what is past, and fortify ourselves against Temptations for the future. Watch and pray, says he, that ye enter not into temptation. And I presume they [the Disciples] were therefore so far tempted, because they slept— Our Lord himself was surrounded with Tentations, presently after his Baptism, when he had performed [his] Fasts Forty Days. And therefore may some one say, We too should rather fast after Baptism:— Now in this place I confess, it is not evident, that the Paschal Vigils, and the Forty Days Fast before Easter are particularly meant; and therefore heretofore I did not bring this Passage for a Proof: but neither is it improbable that they are intended; for the time of the Apostles sleeping agrees to the time of those Vigils; and the Forty Days Abstinence of our Saviour, being not mentioned with any intimation of the one continued extraordinary Fast, but as so many Fast, may also well refer to those of the Catechumen.  
§. II. IT has appeared already from the Synod of Alexandria, That Forty Days had been in Use for a Penitential Fast before th●● 〈◊〉; and that in all likelihood those Days were just before Easter. I shall therefore be content to add only two Authorities: The one concerning the Number of those Days, and the other concerning their Place.  
And as for the Fast of Penitents, how proper Forty Days are for that Office, I shall give the Authority of St. Jerome in his Commentary on Ionas: excribing the whole Passage, the rather because it will be of further Service hereafter. The old Translation of the 3d. Chapter of Ionas at the 14th. Verse, was thus, Yet three days and Nineveh shall be destroyed: upon which he says, (g) The Number Three, which is put by the Septuagint, is not proper for Penitents. And I can't but wonder how it came to be so translated; seeing in the Hebrew there is no Agreement either in the Letters, or Syllables, or Accents, or Words. Besides the Prophet sent from Judaea, on so long a journey, was to require a Penitence worthy of his Preaching; that such old and putrid Ulcers might be cured with a Plaster, that should lie some longer time upon them. Now Forty is a number that is proper for Penitents, and Fasting, and Prayer, and Sackcloth, and Tears, and Perseverance in deprecating God's Anger. For which reason Moses also fasted forty days in Mount Sinai: and Elias, flying from Jezabel, and the Wrath of God impending upon Israel, is described to have fasted forty days. Our Lord likewise himself, the true Ionas, who was sent to preach [Repentance] to the World; fasted forty days: and leaving to us the Inheritance of his Fasting, still prepares our Souls for the Eating of his Body by the same Number.  
Here we have the Fitness of Forty Days for Penance, in the Judgement of St. Jerome, and we suppose of the Church of his time; the only Remark thence we make as yet.  
The Fitness of Easter-day for the Readmission of those Penitents into the Bosom of the Church, we shall find from Gregory Nyssen; in the Preface of that excellent Letter, which he wrote to Letoius Bishop of Metilene about Canonical Penances, and sent him probably for an Easter Present. It thus gins: (h) This too is one of those things which appertain to the Holy Festival, the consideration of the Rightful and Canonical Dispensation which is to be exercised upon Offenders; that every Spiritual Malady, which has been contracted by any Sin, may have its proper Cure. For seeing this Catholic Festival, the Festival of the Creation, kept throughout the World every Year, in the stated Period of the Annual Circle, is celebrated for the Resurrection of him that fell; and Sin is a Fall, and Rising up from the Fall of Sin is a Resurrection: it must be very proper on this Day, not only to bring to God by the Grace of the Font, such as are transformed by Regeneration; but those too, who by Penitence and turning to God are come back from dead Works into the way of Life, to lead these as it were by the hand to that saving Hope, from which they have been estranged by Sin.  
The meaning of this Preface is plain, That a Penitential Discourse was as proper a Subject before Easter, as a Catechistical. And this he might think fit to premise; because in those times there might seem to be more occasion for the Catechistical; then when by the Grace of God the number of those who needed solemn Penance was very inconsiderable, in respect of the multitude of Adult Converts to Christianity. And for the same reason, I presume, Penance appears more formally in the Lents of some Ages hereafter, than it did before; because few grown Persons were then to be baptised, to whom Catechistical Discourses belonged; and occasion for the other, the Penitential Exhortations, there was then too much: not but that the solemn Preparation of Penitents by Lent, might have been as ancient well nigh, as that of the Candidates for Baptism. The Reason certainly for their Admission at Easter was the same: as our Author has suggested, and we have before observed.   

(b) Cyr. Hieros. Prologus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(c) Catech. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,—. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉;  
(d) Catech. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(e) Catec●. 18. In his Discourse on the Saturday, he tells them, he spares them, in Consideration of the fatigue they had undergone, from their continuing on the Fast begun on Friday, and from their Watching. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And this both Watching and Fasting, is expressed by St. Hilary to have been commensurate to the time of our Lord's Passion: and is therefore reckoned to have continued three days. Hilar. in Can. 15. Matth. Venturi ad Baptismum prius confitentur, credere se in Dei Filio, & in Passionc & Resurrectione ejus: & huic Professionis Sacramento sides redditur. Arque ut bane verborum sponsionem, quaedam rerum ipsarum veritas consequatur; toto in Jejuniis Passionis Dominicae tempore demorantes, quádam Domino Passionis societate junguntur. Igitur sive ex Sponsionis Sacramento, sive Jejunio, omne illud Passionis Dominicae cum Domino agunt tempus: & huju● spei ●rque comitatûs Dominus misertus, ait. Secum Triduo esse.  
(f) Tert. de Bapt. c. 20. Ingressuros Baptismum Orationibus crebris, Jejuniis, & Geniculationibus, & Pervigiliis orare oportet, & cum confessione omnium retro Delictorum— Simul enim & de Pristinis satisfacimus conflictatione Carnis & Spiritus, & subsecuturis Tentationibus munimenta praestruimus. Vigilate & Orate, inquit, ne incidatis in tentationem. Et ideo, credo, tentati sunt, quoniam obdormierunt,—. lpsum Dominum post Lavacrum statim tentationes circumsteterunt, quadraginta diebus jejuniis functum. Ergo & nos dicet aliquis, à Lavacro potius jejunare oportet. Et quis enim prohibet, nisi necessitas Gaudii, & gratulatio Salutis?  
(g) Hieron. in Joh. c. 3. Trinus numerus qui ponitur à Septuaginta, non convenit Poenitentiae: & satis miror cur ita translatum sit; cum in Hebreo nec Literarum, nec Syllabarum, nec Accentuum, nec Verbi sit ulla Communitas.— Alioqui & de Judea tanto itinere missus Propheta in Assyrios, dignam suae Praedicationis Poenitentiam flagitabat: ut antiqua & putrida vulnera diu apposito curarentur Emplastro. Porro Quadragenarius numerus convenit Peccatoribus, & Jejunio, & Orationi, & Sacco, & Lachrymis, & Perseveranti●e deprecandi: ob quod & Moses quadraginta diebus jejunavit in Monte Sina: & Helias fugiens Jezabel, & Dei desuper ira pendente, quadraginta dies jejunasse describitur. Ipse quoque Dominus verus Jona missus ad Praedicationem Mundi, jejunavit quadraginta dies: & haereditatem nobis Jejunii relinquens, ad esum Corporis sui sub hoc numero nostras animas praeparat.  
(h) Greg. Nyss. Ep. Can. ad Letoium. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

CHAP. IX.  
§. I. A Lent always, and every where observed, though not of Forty Days.  
§. II. Mr. Daillé's Objections against it from Cassian.  
§. III. From St. Jerome.  
§. iv From St. chrysostom.  
§. I. THE Reader may perceive, by the liberty we have taken of this Digression, concerning Baptism and Penance, that we are now at leisure, and free of all Difficulties concerning the Actual Observation of the Forty Season. And indeed about the Fast of it Mr. Daillé henceforth gives us no trouble; but against the Apostolical Right, he is still looking out for Evidence. But in that Point the Reader may have already understood, how little we are concerned: who do not pretend to prove, That a Lent of so many certain Days was observed in the latter end of the Apostolical Age; but that some Lent there then was generally kept by all, and probably of Forty Days by some in the second Century; a thing that will not, I presume, appear so strange, when we come to the Second Part of this Discourse. Though therefore I am inclinable to believe, that there was very anciently some regard had to the Number Forty; and that this in process of time increased very much, so as to have been the Solemn Number of Lent in many Churches by the End of the Third Century: yet I am willing to allow, from what we have seen of St. chrysostom, That this Observation grew so universal from the Recommendation of the Nicene Fathers. Those Forty Days too, though regarded and observed, yet I do not say, that they were all of them fasted, and every where equally: but am ready to allow what St. chrysostom intimates 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 15. , that in his time at Antioch, some fasted Two, some Three, and some all the Weeks of them, at their own Discretion; and what Socrates will hereafter tell us of the same kind.  
§. II. That also which Cassian a Disciple of St. Chrysostome's says, and is used to be produced upon this Argument, as an unanswerable Objection against the Antiquity of Lent, I have no need to dissemble. It is to be known, says he, (b) that this Observation of forty days, [as it is now strictly enjoined,] had no being as long as the Perfection of the Primitive Church continued. For those who enlarged the Fast throughout the whole Year, were not confined by the necessity of this Ordinance, nor within such narrow bounds of Fasting, as if under a Legal Restraint. But when the Multitude of Believers, daily falling off from that Apostolical Devotion, began to grow worldly—: than it was thought fit by the Bishops of the Universal Church, That Men, immersed in the Cares of the World, and wholly ignorant, if I may so say, of any such thing as Abstinence and Repentance, should be reduced to the Holy Duty by this Canonical Injunction of Fasts; and compelled to it, as it were, by the Imposition of a Legal Tenth (c): An Injunction advantageous to the weak, and which cannot be prejudicial to the perfect; those, who being under the Grace of the Gospel, by their voluntary Devotion [already] exceed the prescribed Law.  
I shall not now observe, what some might venture to say; That Cassian speaks all this upon Mistake, supposing with Eusebius here, what he evidently does in another place (d), That the Egyptian Essenes', described by Philo, were Disciples of St. Mark, and that the Primitive Christians lived all at first in that Austerity. I shall only remark, that Cassian speaks here of the forty days, and not of a Lent in general; and of their being fasted by Injunction, and not at Discretion. And therefore those Perfect Men of his, who fasted the whole Year, might however have fasted some peculiar time before Easter, with a more peculiar Devotion; (for that they fasted all the Days cannot be meant by him, much less with an equal Abstinence:) and they might too, some of them, have so particularly fasted Forty Days, though not by Legal Direction, yet by their own Choice, notwithstanding any thing said in this place. If too we understand the time, when these Forty Days were first imposed by common Consent, to have been that of the Nicene Council; this is no more than we before had from his Master St. chrysostom. But if he means some elder Times, and he may the very first Age; (For they began to be lukewarm very early, as we learn from some parts of the New Testament); we have then a Testimony from Cassian of a much higher Antiquity, for this Quadragesimal Institution. However that which he adds, concerning the Imposition of Forty Days, whenever it began, that it was no hindrance to the Perfect; is very observable, and to be considered by all Pretenders to Perfection. For the Injunction, he intimates, though not made for the Perfect, would however be kept by them: and they would show they were under Grace, by Exceeding, and not by Transgressing the Ecclesiastical Law. In as much as he that fasts every day, will not fail to fast forty: and he that is ready to offer his whole Time, will not hold back the Tenth.  
§. III. WE see how far Cassian's Expressions are from any Reflection upon the Institution of Lent: and those of St. Jerome, alleged usually for the same Purpose, apparently require the same Construction; and need only to be seen, if the Reader will bear the length of the Passage. (e) Some may say, if it be not lawful to observe Days and Months, etc. we then are under the like Gild, who observe Wednesday, and Friday, and the Lord's Day, and the Fast of the Forty Season, and the Holy Days of the Passover, and the Joy of the Pentecost, and the several Days that are kept in several Countries in Honour of Martyrs. To this he that will give the plain Answer, will reply; That the Days the Jews observe, are not the same with ours. For we do not celebrate the Passover of Unleavened Bread, but of the Resurrection, and the Cross: neither do we in Pentecost reckon the Seven Weeks with the Jews, but in Veneration of the Coming of the Holy Ghost. And lest the want of orderly Assembling should be a Cause of Decay of Religion, therefore Days in which we should come together have been appointed: not that the Day in which we meet is of itself more solemn; but that in what day soever it be we meet, there may arise a Festival Joy from our mutual sight one of another. This is the plain Answer. But he that would endeavour to give a more Acute and Refined one, will say; That all Days are equal, and that Friday is not the only day of the Crucifixion, nor the Lord's Day of the Resurrection: but that there is always a Resurrection-Day to Him, and that he always feeds on our Lord's Body: but that such Days of Fasting and Assembling have been prescribed by Wise Men, for the sake of those who are employed more about the World than God, and cannot, or rather will not, assemble together every day of their Life.  
The Plain Answer, for aught appears, is not judged by St. Jerome to be the worst. And the other, the more Subtle one, relishes, we know, of the Refinement and Allegory of Origen, and Clemens Alexandrinus, from whom, I suppose, it was taken: and what we before observed, is now to be remembered, That the Lord's Day itself is here put in the same Case with the Days of Lent, etc. and that the reason for their Institution is common, and that they are said alike all of them to have had Prudent Men for their Authors. Now those prudent Men, if they were the Authors of the Observation of the Lord's Day, must have been the Apostles themselves, as we presume the Authors of the Observation of a Lent were at least Apostolical: but if they are to be understood the Authors of the Injunction of such an Observation; in that sense possibly the Authors for the Lord's Day, might have been Apostolical; and those for an Additional Lent beyond Good-Friday or Saturday, yet later. He too that makes this last answer, and seems to slight the Ordinance of Times and Days; does it in Virtue of his great Perfection, such of which Cassian now spoke: One who is above the Ordinance, because he never wanted it; as a charitable Christian is above the Law against Stealing: and does not plead for the Abridgement of the Fast, but for the Extending it throughout the Year; therefore accounting no Single Day Holy, because All are so to him.  
§ iv THESE are the Objections against the devout Institution of Lent, brought out of St. Jerome and Cassian: others there are from St. chrysostom, but of the like Nature, and not worth the answering. As when he says, in the Passage above produced, That every Communion is a Passeover; he speaks it partly in the sense now mentioned; and besides in opposition to the Jewish Superstition of those Syrians, who took the Levitical Designation of the Passover to be still in force. And when he elsewhere prefers the Abstinence from Vice, as from Swearing, before that from Meats; it is plain he speaks not against the Observation of that Abstinence, as a thing not to be practised; but as a thing absurd and unprofitable, without a suitable Conversation, a necessary Concomitant, and always to be presumed.  
As therefore we have Mr. Daille's Confession for the Universal Observation of these Forty Days at the latter end of this Age, and that Lent hereafter increased rather than diminished: so we hope the equal Reader will confess, That the Prejudices that very Learned Person would have raised against it, from some Authors about that time, are very unjustly grounded. I have therefore now no more to do in this first Part of my Task; and am to shut up my Evidence, and conclude here with a brief Recapitulation: But in that I shall be assisted by two Cotemporary Authors about the Middle of the fifth Age. Sozomen, and Socrates, whom the Reader will be pleased to hear.   

(b) Cassian. Coll. 21. Cap. 30. Sciendum sane bane Observantiam Quadragesimae, quamdiu Ecclesi●e islius Primitivae ●ers●●tiv permansit, penitus non fuisse. Non enim Pracepti bujus necessiate, nes quasi legali sanctione constricti, ar●tissimis J●●●ierum ter●●inis cla●debantur, qui totum anni spariam aquali jejan●● concludebant. Verum cum ab illa Apostoli●a Devotione d●scendens quotidie Cred●●ium multitudo suis opibus ●●cubaret;— id tune universis Sacerdotibus placuit; ut bomines this secularibus illigatos, & pene ut ita dixerim continent●e & compunctionis ignaros, ad opus sanctum ●●anonied jejuniorum indictione revocarent, & velut Legalium Decimarum (c) necessitate compellerent: qua●utique Infirmis prodesse possu, & Perfectis prajudicare non possi●, qui sub gratia Evangelli constiu●i vol●●●aria Legem devotione transcendunt.  
(c) This Tenth of the Days of the Year is 36, the Number of Fast Days in a Lent o● 6. Weeks, such as the Alexandrians kept as well as the Lui●s. And this Number is the Integral Tenth of the Days of a Solar Year: but exactly so of the Egyptian Year, which reckoned but 360 days, and accounted the other as super-numerary. For this Notion of Tithing of the Year, looks like a Subtlety of their Calculation.  
(d) Cass. de Coenob. Inst. 2.5. In primordiis ●id●i punck quidem, sed proba●issimi, snui a Marco Norman sus●●p●re ●l●●●●l non solum illa magnifica retinebam, quae pri●●us Cr●●enti● 〈◊〉 bas legimus celebrass●; verum his multo sabl●●lo●●●●●rant— Ea igitur tempasiate, cum E●ele●i● 〈…〉 Perfectio penes sucessores suos adhue recenti memoria inviolata permaneret, fervensque Paucorum sides needum in Multitudinem diffusa repuisset;—  
(e) Hieron. in cap. 3. Ep. ad Galat. Dicat aliquis, si Dies observare non licet, & Menses, & Tempora, & Annos: Nos quoque simile Crimen incurrimus, Quartam sabbati observantes, & Parasceven, & Diem Dominicam, & jejunium Quadragesimae, & Pasch●e Festivitatem, & Pentecostes Laetitiam, & pro varietate Regionum diversa in honorem Martyrum tempora constituta. Ad quod qui simpliciter respondebit dicet; non eosdem Judaicae observationis dies esse, quos nostros. Nos enim non Azymorum Paschà celebramus, sed Resurrectionis & Crucis: Ne septem juxta morem Israel numeramus Hebdomadas in Pentecoste; sed Spiritus sancti veneramur Advemum. Et ne inordinata congregatio populi fidem mimueret in Christo; propterea dies aliqui constituti sunt, ut in unum omnes pariter veniremus: Non quo celebrior sit dies illa, qua convenimus; sed quo, quacunque die conveniendum six, ex conspectu mutuo latitia major oriatur. Qui vero oppositae quastioni acutius respondere conatur, illud affirmat; omnes dies ●quales esse; nec per Parasceven tantum Christum crucifigi, & Die Dominica resurgere, sed semper sanctam Resurrectionis esse Diem, & semper cum Carne vesci Dominica. Jejuniorum autem & Congregationum interea dies, propter eos a Viris Prudentibus constitutos, qui magis seculo vacant quam Deo; nec possunt, immo nolunt, toto in Ecclesia vitae suae tempore congregari. Quotus enim quisque est, qui saltem b●co pauca quae sta●uta sunt, vel Orandi tempora vel Jejunandi, semper exerceat?   

CHAP. X.  
§. I Sozomen's Account of the keeping of Lent in his Time about Ann. Chr. 440.  
§. II. What Additions have been made since.  
§. III. Socrates his Account of the Practice of the same Age, I suppose, by the Novatians.  
§. iv His Wonder, That Lents of differing Lengths should all of them be called the Forty Season.  
§. V The Conclusion.  
§ I. THE Novatians, who held it unlawful to re-admit any into the Church, who had either renounced the Faith in time of Persecution, or had committed some other grievous Crimes; and who had on this account themselves renounced the Communion of the Church in St. Cyprian's time, about the middle of the Third Century; were now greatly divided among themselves in this Age, about the Observation of Easter: the same Dispute, which the Authority of the Nicene Council had composed among the Catholics, now breaking out among those Schismatics, and making a new and very angry Schism between them. This Quarrel of theirs Sozomen relates; and upon occasion of it, he mentions the peaceable Behaviour of Anicetus and Polycarp, remembered on the same Subject by Ireneus: and in Imitation of the same Author, and to show that it is not fit to break Communion about such Traditional Differences, he represents at large the great Variety of Usages in the Churches of his time professing the same Faith (a): That among the Scythians, there is but one Bishop over all their Cities: whereas in Arabia, etc. there are Bishops in Villages: That in Rome, there are no more than seven Deacons; and they sing Halleluiah there, but once in the Year on Easter Sunday: that there either (b) the Bishop preaches, or some one else; but in Alexandria the Bishop only, etc. And (he adds) the Forty Season, as it is called, before Easter, in which the People use to fast, some reckon by six Weeks; as those of Illyricum do, and all Europe, westward; and those of afric, and Egypt, and Palestine: some by seven; as in Constantinople, and the Countries about it, as far eastward as the Phoenicians. And some fast three of the six or seven Weeks discontinued: and some the three before Easter together: and some two, as the Followers of Montanus.  
That the Followers of Montanus kept their Lent the Fortnight before Easter, we find here, and have observed in its proper place.  
§ II. WHAT the Author says concerning the different Reckoning of the Forty Season in the West, and in the East, is not only observable for the History of his time, but for the understanding of modern Practice. The Western Empire, with Egypt and Palestine, accounted the Forty two Days of six Weeks, to be their Forty Season; as the LXXII Interpreters are commonly called the LXX: but of these they fasted only Thirty six; all the Sundays being exempted. The Eastern Empire (Palestine and Egypt then excepted) called seven Weeks, that is Forty nine Days, their Forty Season: for they were still under the Number Fifty. But then because they did not think it fit to fast on the Sabbath, no more than on the Sunday, unless only on the Saturday of Passion-Week; they likewise deducting their seven Sundays, and six Saturdays, fasted effectually no more than thirty six Days. Since that time, the Greek Church, that they may in some sort be nearer to the Number Forty, have added an Eighth Week of previous Abstinence; beginning on those five days to fast from Flesh, though they allow themselves the use of Eggs, and Milk, and Cheese, and Butter, things from which in the seven following Weeks they strictly forbear. And they besides, for an Introduction to this whole Fast, set apart another ninth Week, wherein they specially prepare for it, by Confession of their own Sins, and Forgiveness of the Sins of others against themselves. This is the additional Practice of the Greeks. And the Latins likewise have enlarged their Lent: and whereas before they rather adjusted the space of Time within which they kept their Fast, than the number of Days they did actually fast, to the Number Forty; (forty two being nearer to Forty, than thirty six); they have since thought it better to make up the Number Forty precisely of such fafling Days; and have therefore added Four to the former, beginning on the Wednesday of the seventh Week, as is well known.  
§ III. WHAT we have from Sozomen is express, and without Dispute: what follows from Socrates is more confused and ambiguous, but may serve however to give us some light. He, writing at the same time with Sozomen, and taking the same occasion from the Novatian difference, to enter upon the like Discourse, says, among other things, (b 2) Those of the same Faith differ in their Usages— The Fast, for Example, before Easter is differently observed in different places. For those in Rome fast Three continued Weeks before Easter, except Saturdays and Sundays: But the Illyrians, and Grecians of Europe, and Alexandrians keep a Fast of Six Weeks before Easter, calling it the Forty Season. And besides these, there are others, who beginning seven Weeks before, and fasting by Intervals only Three Weeks of five Days apiece, call that space of Time nevertheless the Forty Season. And I can't but wonder, how those who differ so in the Number of the Days should agree to give them that common Name, of which Denomination several inquisitive Men have given several Accounts. Neither is there a difference only about the Number of Days, but about the Abstinence of their Diet. Some abstain from all that has Life: some eat of no Animal but Fish; some of Birds too: some abstain from Fruits and Eggs: some take only dry Bread; and some admit not that: but others Eating not till Three in the Afternoon, after that use their Liberty. And infinite are the differences about these things; concerning which we have no written Precept: and thence it is plain, that they are left by the Apostles to every ones own Judgement and Choice; that every one may voluntarily do what is Good, not for Fear, or out of Necessity.  
This Account of Socrates has been much questioned in what relates to Rome: it being apparent from Sozomen and otherwise, That in that time not Three Weeks, but Six were observed in that City. He himself too afterwards says, that they fasted there all Saturdays (as they are known to have done in that Age from other hands) excepting that before Easter only. The Author for this has met with a very hard Censure from some: others have endeavoured to salve the Matter with new Readins: and Valesius stands so much on his side, as to take up the Paradox, and justify every Tittle, he is supposed to say, against all Opponents. But, it may be, the fairer way would be, not to understand him of the Practice of the Catholics, of which Sozomen and others speak; but of the Novatians, of whose Affairs all own that he had a particular Knowledge, if he was not inclined to their Sect. From their Dispute it was, he entered upon this Discourse; and from some Memorials of theirs, he may have drawn up something of this Account; which otherwise might easily have been as plain and full as that of Sozomen, had it not been wrote in a different View. And so, if we suppose the Regard to Forty Days to have first prevailed universally from the Council of Nice; we may suppose, that the Novatians having had no share in that Council, continued at least at Rome in their old Custom, and kept on their Three Weeks. If this Conjecture pass for the Three Weeks. I should then either think that the Romans had not begun to fast on Saturday, till after the Novatians had left them: Or that a Word, or rather a Numeral Letter (c) should be supplied in the Original, and Thursday be understood: a Day, as St. Augustine tells us (d), not commonly fasted in his Time, and possibly not in Lent by the Romans in the Time of Novatian.  
§. IU. BUT on this I lay no stress; and shall only take notice of the Remark which Socrates makes with some Wonder, That Numbers of Days so different should all have the same Denomination, and be called from the Number Forty. It is plain, that neither the Western nor Eastern Church of his Time did measure adequately either the Days they fasted, or the Term of Days within which they fasted, by the Number of Forty: but however a regard they had to it, and a Forty Season they all pretended to keep. We have withal seen how that Denomination obtained so much, that all spaces of Fasting, and in all Seasons of the Year, were called by it. For so St. Jerome termed the Two Fasts instituted by Montanus 
(e) Ch. 4. Note (g). : though they were but of a Week each of them, and in other times of the Year.  
What Reasons were then assigned for this Common Name, Socrates tells us not, and I wish we knew. It should seem at first sight, That the Christians aspired, in a Fast of so great Devotion, to the Imitation of the most Solemn Fasts recorded in Scripture, those of Moses and Elias, and that particularly of their blessed Master. And then, when the Church had once fixed upon that Number of Days for their Example in general; the Fasts of lesser duration might well go under the same Name by an easy Metonymy. But all this will be yet more natural, if those Fasts so recorded, were rather miraculous in the Manner, than singular in the Extent of Days; and the Number Forty had been always with the Jews the proper Number for an extraordinary Humiliation: a Conjecture we are to offer hereafter, in the other Part of this Discourse.  
§. V AND thus have we viewed the Practice of Lent through the first 400 Years. We have seen in the last of those Centuries, when Christianity came to be more openly professed under the Christian Emperors, and abounded in Writers, many express and undeniable Testimonies of the general Observation, though in a different manner, of the Forty Season, then commonly so called from Forty Days. In the next Age above it, the Third, and as high too as the middle of it, a time that affords us not many Authors, and when there was little occasion to speak of this Matter; we have however a very punctual Account of their strict Manner of keeping the Passion-Week, from one of the greatest Men of the Church, who happened to be consulted about a Nicety of Ending this Lent. And that their great Strictness in the Holy Week, equal to any that was used after, may well induce us to imagine, That these Men had not left the Devotion of all the preceding Weeks to be added by the very next Generation: Especially when we find the Forty Season expressly mentioned in Origen, a Master of this Dionysius, as consecrated to Fasting. For that place of Origen, though we have it only from the Version of Ruffinus, and he none of the most exact Translatours; yet certainly if he was not the worst that ever was, is much more likely to be truly rendered than wrong: there being no reason to fasten the Falsity on this Word, more than on any other of the Sentence; nor any wonder to find that spoke of now, which not long after was celebrated so much. But to proceed, we have seen further from Tertullian, an Author to be reckoned to the Second Century as well as to the Third, that the Days in which our Lord was taken away, Good-Friday and the Holy Saturday at least, if not the whole Week, were in the Opinion of the Church of his Time, to be fasted by all from Apostolical Authority; and that no other Days were to be fasted necessarily, and as by Divine Precept, but at Discretion only, and as Christians should think fit in Godly Prudence. Upon the account of which Discretionary Uncertainty, the Argument he was engaged in made it not proper for him to say any more concerning them, nor to tell us the several Customs of several Churches about that Arbitrary part of Lent: though it may otherwise be collected, even from him, that there was then such an Additional Time observed. But to go yet higher, and nearer to the Apostolical Age; about the Year 190, and not 90 from the Death of St. John, Irenaeus a Venerable, and now a very Old Bishop, who had conversed familiarly with the great Polycarp, as Polycarp had with St. John and other Apostles, has happened to let us know, though incidentally only, the various observation of his Time; that some thought they ought to fast One, some Two, and some More Days, and some Forty: as we have learned too in the general, both from him and the Bishops of almost the whole Church concurrently with him, that some such Ante-Paschal Fast had been all along observed in all Places, up to the Time of the Apostles themselves.   

(a) Sozom. l. 7. c. 19— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(b) In this place, that our Witness may be the more credible hereafter in our Cause, I have ordered at a small Correction of the Text, to reconcile it to the Truth of the Fact. For it has been abundantly proved, and particularly by Quesnel, in his Edition of Leo, That the Bishop of Rome preached there very often in Sozomen's time: who is therefore commonly delivered up here to a Charge of ●gaer●●● an● Negligence: whereas a very slight Change of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (a thing in which Critics are not used to be difficult in Favour of any Author;) would have saved his Credit, and rectified ●he whole Matter.  
(b 2) Socrat. Hist. E●●les. 5.22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(e) The Guess, I intimate, is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be inserted before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the Exception run thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(d) August. ad Casulan. Videant ergo Romani quid agant, quia etiam ipsi nimium contumeliose bujus Disputatione tractar●tur: apud quos omnibus istis sex diebus, p●ater pauciss●●os claines out Monachos, quotusquisque invenitur qui frequentet quo●●lima J●junia, maxim quia ibi jejunandum quinta Sabbati non vid●●●? Hoc de omni Septimana dictum, ut è praemidis patet.    

PART II.  
AN ESSAY Concerning the ORIGINAL OF LENT, Subdivided into Two Repartitions.   

PART II. AN ESSAY Concerning the ORIGINAL OF LENT, Subdivided into Two Repartitions: The First Showing preparatorily, That most of the Ancient Christian Ordinances were derived from the Jews. The Second Conjecturing, That Lent is of the same Original.  
HAving viewed the Ancient Observation of Lent, we now proceed to inquire into its Original: and concerning That, the Conjectures are various. Some ascribe its Rise to Apostolical Constitution; some to casual Practice, imitated and enlarged by others: the one supposing forty Days to be the prescribed Number, and that those who fasted sewer were deficient; others imagining, That one Day only, the Day of the Passion, was first kept by the Grief, rather than Devotion, of some good Christians, and that this afterwards grew to that large number of Days by the Piety, if not Superstition, of following Ages: all agreeing in this, That it was a novel Institution at the earliest, being wholly Christian, and having no Precedent from any former Usage. Now to these Conjectures not seeming to be very satisfactory, I have adventured to add another, drawn from the Custom of the Jews, concerning their Great Fast, and their Penitential Preparation before it: hoping if it appears reasonably well grounded, that it may help to give a clearer light, as well as a better colour, to a Season so much and so long observed in the Church of Christ.  
And here I intended at first to have entered immediately upon the View of the Expiation-Day of the Jews, and their Preparatory Season, comparing them with our Expiation, the Passion-Day, and its previous Lent: and the Parallel, if I mistake not, is so exactly correspondent, as to make one apt to believe at the first sight, that one of those Lines was drawn by the other. But because I am sensible that some Objections may be raised, both against the Design itself, and the Authorities I am to use; I shall endeavour first to remove them: and possibly by the Answers I am to give, I may not only smooth the way; but make such Advances, as may bring us at the same time nearer to the Admittance of what I have proposed.  
There are Three Prejudices, I foresee, which may encounter this Undertaking.  

1. The first may be, That it is not probable the Primitive Christians would imitate the Jews, or fit they should:  
2. The other, That the Traditional Writings they have, are not sufficient Authority for the Knowledge of their ancient Customs:  
3. And the last may be this: That such a Derivation of Lent must be false, because it is new.   
These Three Prejudices have occasioned the Addition of the first Member of this Part, and the Reader, if he pleases, may pass it over. But of Those the Two last will be easily satisfied by the Consideration of the First, and upon that Subject I shall enlarge the more freely, because it may be as delightful and instructive to observe the Original of many other Christian Institutions, as of Lent.   

PART II. REPARTIT. I. That most of the Ancient Christian Ordinances were derived from the Jews.  

CHAP I.  
§. I. Not dishonourable for Christian Ordinances to be borrowed from the Jews: and they generally were, First such considered as are mentioned in Scripture, as  
§. II. Baptism. It was a Rite by which, as well as by others, Proselytes were admitted into Judaisme.  
§. III. Christian Baptism, as expressed in the New Testament, an Imitation of it.  
§. I. AMONG the Ancient Heretics, some, it is known, received our Saviour and his Gospel, but rejected the Mosaical Law, and blasphemed its God. And there may be many now (though more innocent) who at this distance from the Rise of Christianity, may either have lost the Remembrance of its Original, and forget that the last Covenant has any Dependence on the first: or else in Pride of our greater Privileges, may scornfully overlook the Dispensation of Moses as a beggarly Element; and in the Vanity of a Neighbour-Nation, may think it a Disparagement to the Christian Religion, to be thought of Jewish Extraction. And there may seem to have been more cause given for this Conceit, from some learned Books of late, which have treated concerning the Jewish and the Egyptian Antiquities; and which have been misunderstood so far by some to the Prejudice of the old Testament, that those who have not considered the Matter well, may look upon it as very dishonourable to Christianity, to borrow any thing from that Nation, which is suspected to have borrowed so much of all its Neighbours, and to have robbed even the Religion of the Egyptians. But they need not fear; for Truth can never suffer from Truth: and if it shall indeed appear, that the Mosaic Religion was conformable to the Worship of their Eastern Neighbours; It may notwithstanding no less maintain its Divine Authority. Knowledge, we know, as well as Empire, began in that part of the World; and there the many Traditions concerning God, descended from Noah and others of his inspired Sons, were lodged and preserved: blended, we may think, and much corrupted with many Falsities and Superstitions; variously too by its various Depositaries, the Chaldeans, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Arabians, etc. Now all These had something of the same Religion, as they had of the same Language, but in a different Dialect and Manner: and what if God was pleased, by the Ministry of Moses, to reform it from the many Additions, impious or immoral, with which it had been severally adulterated, Retaining some indifferent Customs innocently introduced, Instituting others in opposition to the more dangerous Errors, and directing some eminent Parts of the whole to a further Prospect of another and more perfect Revelation yet to come; and all these Laws, for the Use of a Peculiar People, to reduce into one Code, and authorise by a new Sanction.  
Such a Reformed Religion, we may suppose that of the Jews to have been; and need not therefore be afraid, if our Religion be said to be a further Reformation of that Judaisme: a Title Mr. Selden frequently gives it, but to be understood, not as if it were a Repurgation of the Old from any Error, but as it is the Completion and Perfection of it according to the Original Design. And as certainly as our blessed Saviour and his Apostles were of Hebrew Lineage, so certain it is, that our Religion is grafted on the Jewish. Neither do the Expressions only and Allusions of the Gospel relate to the Customs of the Law, not well otherwise to be understood: but some of its chief Institutions are known to be derived thence. For as before, many of the Mosaic Rites were unquestionably designed to presignify our Saviour; so some of them were afterwards taken into his Service, always to minister unto him: not admitted only for the present, out of condescension to the Native or Proselyte Jews, of whom then the greatest Number of Converts consisted; but some formally adopted, and others laudably continued, for Perpetuity. This has in part been already copiously demonstrated by many very Learned Writers: and if any thing shall chance to be added by me, I offer it with all submission. And indeed it would not be pertinent to my Business, to pretend in this Matter to any new Discoveries; who am rather now, by such Observations as are well Agreed and Received, to try to favour another Guess, I am by and by to advance.  
But besides, to be honest to the Reader, and withal to put him out of any fear; I am here to profess, That I pretend not to the Depths of the Talmudical Learning, nor intent to engage him in it: having never dug in the dark Mine myself, but only seen something of that which has been brought above ground by others, and exposed to common Use, either in the Translations of the Misnah, or of Maimonides, (for of him I have not read much more than is in Latin) or in the Works of modern Authors.  
The Reader therefore will be pleased to go on and see how much of the Christian Appointments appears to have been copied from the Jewish. And here he will presently find it agreed by all, That the Two Sacraments were taken thence; That the Weekly Observation of the Lord's Day, was in Imitation of their Sabbath; That the Discipline of the Christian Church came from the Jewish; And that the Apostles, Presbyters, and Deacons, were Officers after their Model. But besides these Principal Ordinances, which are expressed in the New Testament, he will find too, That many Circumstances, which in the second Age attended those Ordinances, were likewise Jewish; as well as many other unscriptural Customs, which are known to have been in use in those Days.  
I shall first consider the Scriptural Usages: and afterwards those which are remembered in the next Age▪ And the Scriptural I take by themselves, both because of the Authority for their Practice, and of the Consent for their Derivation: though in the expounding of the Jewish Customs for the first, I may happen to join what belongs to the later sort, to avoid hereafter unnecessary Repetition.  
§. II. AND to begin with Baptism; This was with the Jews a Sacramental Rite, whereby those who were converted from Heathenism, were initiated into their Religion. A Rite little practised among them now: for they have had a long while but very few Converts; and such People, as they tell us 
(a) M●i●●. Issure Bia● c. 13. §. 14, 18. ex Ed. Dom. Prideaux Oxon. 1679. , were always suspected by them, as apt to Apostatise, and draw away others; as it happened, in their Opinion, in the Matter of the Golden Calf, and at Kibroth Hattaavah. For these Reasons, it may be, the Jewish Traditionaries have not been very particular on this Subject; neither hath Maimonides treated of it by itself, and expressly, but occasionally only, in a Treatise of Prohibited Marriages.  
There he tells us 
(b) Issure Biah, c. 13. §. 1. , That the Admission of a Convert was made by these Three Steps: First, If he was a Male, by Circumcision; Then, By Baptism; And, Last of all, By Sacrifice.  
First, He that offered to become a Jew, was examined by them concerning the Cause of his Conversion, whether it was Religious; and had some Part of the Law especially proposed to him, that of the Unity of God, and of the Crime of Idolatry: and if he professed himself willing to adhere to it, they circumcised him 
(c) Ibid. 14, 15. . Then, after some convenient time, they proceeded to baptise him. This was to be done in the Presence, and by the Authority, of Three, at least, as Commissioners for the Action. They stood over him when he was in the Water, and again interrogated him, proposing some of the harder, and some of the easier Precepts of the Law; and if he persisted in his former Resolution, of taking upon him its Obedience, they baptised him 
(d) c. 14. §. 6. . Thus were Grown Persons baptised upon their own Engagements: and Children too were admitted to the same Favour, by the permission of the Consistory, their Fathers, or three others instead of a Father, undertaking for them 
(e) c. 13. § 7. Lightfoot. vol. 2. p. 118. .  
And now by Virtue of this his Baptism, he is taken out of the number of the Gentiles 
(f) Iss. Bi. c. 13. §. 17. , and ceases to have any Kindred upon the account of his natural Birth; so much that, as they say, if his Mother should turn Jew also, he may marry her by the Letter of Moses his Law, though by the Decretals of the Canon Law he was bound to observe the prohibited Degrees on the Mother's side 
(g) Ibid. 14.12, 13. . So was the Proselyre held to be as an Infant then new born 
(h) 14.11. , and to have become an Israelire; to be in a state of Sanctity 
(i) 14.14. , and under the Wings of the Divine Majesty 
(k) 13.4. .  
So absolutely are they understood to be rendered Israelites now by this Baptism only; but heretofore, when their Temple was up, the Proselytes were not reckoned to be fully Holy, nor to have lodged themselves perfectly under the Wings of God's Majesty, until they were further admitted to his Worship by Sacrifice. This Sacrifice is said to have been a Burnt-Offering, either out of the Fold, or else of two Turtles, or two young Pigeons, for an Atonement 
(l) 13.5. . For he was (it seems) in the condition of those Israelites, who when they were free from their Uncleanness, and had washed, wanted still an Atonement for their complete Purification, that they might be able to partake of the Sacrifices 
(m) Maimon. ex Interpr. Lud. deVeil. Lib. de Sacr. Tract. 5. c. 1. §. 1, 2. : Only in this he differed, that he wanted no Sin-Offering, as they did, because the Sins of his former State were already entirely remitted by his Baptismal Regeneration. And to this I suppose I may add, under the favour of the instance which follows, and upon which they ground the Proselyting method; that the Proselyte was (like a Leper washed, and wanting the Atonement) himself Sprinkled and Purified by the Blood of his Offering. And lastly, according to the same Pattern I am just going to mention, there was commonly after the Burnt-Offering 
(n) Mai. ibid. item Interpret eodem de Cultu Divino Ir. 5. c. 1. §. 6.  a Peace-Offering presented; that when he was in the Morning by the one made capable of partaking of the Sacrifices, he might exercise that capacity in the Afternoon, and by the actual partaking of the other, be rendered in all Points of Privilege a perfect Israelite, being admitted up to the Altar, and entirely taken in under the Holy Wings.  
The Pattern I now spoke of, upon which they found this Proceeding, is the course that was taken with the Children of Israel before Mount Sinai, upon their Receiving of the Law 
(o) Mai. Issur. Biah. 13.2, 3. . They are supposed to have been all already Circumcised, the House of Levi all along in Egypt, and the Rest before the First Passover; and now being come to the Mount, they were Interrogated by Moses concerning their Obedience to the Covenant offered them 
(p) c. 19 Exod. 5. , to which when they had agreed, they were then directed to Sanctify themselves, and to wash their Clothes 
(q) v. 8. , [their whole Bodies]; upon which the Decalogue, and some other Precepts were delivered them. And then after another Stipulation made by the People, both Burnt-Offerings and Peace-Offerings were Sacrificed 
(r) Exod. 24. ●. , with the Blood of which themselves, and the Book of the Covenant were sprinkled. And lastly, afterwards the Elders, in their Name, were admitted to come nearer to the sight of God; and when they returned, they eat of the Peace-Offerings 
(s) Aben Ezra in lo●um.  given them, as it were, from the Table of God.  
§. III. THIS was the manner of Initiation into the Jews Religion. And when our Blessed Saviour was pleased to Ordain a New Covenant, though he set aside Circumcision, as belonging to one Sex, and not agreeable to his general Design, with whom there was to be neither Male nor Female, no more than Jew or Greek: Yet he retained Baptism for the same use, and commanded the Apostles to admit the Converts to his Religion by that Ceremony, Go teach, says he, [or make Disciples of] all Nations, baptising them 
(t) Matth. 28.19. . And accordingly the Baptised Christian was esteemed thenceforth to be born again by that Water 
(u) Joh. 3. , (for so Nicodemus, who was a Master in Israel, aught to have understood our Master;) and Baptism is also styled the Washing of Regeneration 
(x) 1 Pet. 1.23. . And with such a regard St. Paul might say, 
(y) 2 Cor. 5.16.  thenceforth he knew no man after the flesh, whatever Kindred he might have had with him as a Hebrew of the Hebrews; no, not if he had so known Christ himself, as some might then pretend to do. For he that is in Christ is a new Creature, and old things are passed away. And as the new Man, and new born Babes are spoke, in the Phrase of the Jews, of the Baptised; so in respect to the Interrogatory, used in that Office, after their Example, the Answer of a good Conscience towards God is mentioned, we find, together with the washing by Water, or the putting away of the filth of the flesh 
(z) 1 Pet. 3.23. . And lastly, the Christian Proselytes, by being baptised, were likewise rendered capable of receiving the Holy Ghost; or, as the Jews would speak, of being over-shadowed by the Wings of the Divine Majesty; and from that also they were in a State of Holiness, and to be called the Saints of God.  
So plainly does what the Scripture speaks concerning the Sacrament of Baptism discover to us, that our Saviour was pleased to take it up from the Jewish Church, to use it to the like purpose, and to assign to it the same effect, not varying so much as the Phrase. This Accommodation in the general is manifest I say from the Scripture, where Baptism is simply mentioned, and without such Circumstances as might have attended it, though not expressed. But in the next Age we shall find it accompanied with such Rituals, as may answer those other particulars of that Jewish Sacrament, which we have set down above, and are to remember in their proper place 
(a) Ch. 6. .   

CHAP. III.  
§. I. The Nature of the Paschal Sacrifice, and the Description the Jewish Traditions give of that Supper;  
§. II. Agreeable to the History in the Gospels of our Lord 's Supper, and to the Nature of it.  
I Come next to the other Sacrament of our Lord's Supper, which He was pleased to institute at a Paschal Supper; and to borrow thence its Provision, the Bread and Wine.  
§. I. THE Paschal Lamb was a Sacrifice of a peculiar compounded Nature 
(a) Exod. 12. . As it was to be roasted with Fire, it had something of a Burnt-Offering, and might seem to be expiatory; as it was then, when the Blood of it was sprinkled upon their Doors at the first Institution. By the same Blood it was federal also, the Children of Israel entering by it into a New Covenant. And as it was to be eaten all that night, or burnt with fire, and none left to the morning; so it seemed to be as an Offering for Thanksgiving 
(b) Le●. 7.15. . Now answerable to the kind of the Sacrifice, was the Supper for which it was prepared. It was a Festival Entertainment for Joy of the great Deliverance: but it was to be eat with unleavened Bread, and with bitter Herbs 
(c) 8. , as Memorials of their former Afflictions. And the manner of this Supper was thus, as Maimonides pretends to tell 
(d) Tract. de Solemnitat. Pasch. eodem de Veil interpret, Cap. 8. .  
In the first place, They mingled a Cup of Wine to every one of the Company; and the Master of the Family praising God the Creator of the Fruit of the Vine; [in the ordinary Form which they use at other Meals]; He and they all drank: beginning so, and consecrating the Paschal Action, which they were going now to celebrate. [For so too they used to consecrate, and separate other sacred Actions from the common Actions of Life: the Solemnity of the Sabbath, for Example; beginning it with a Cup of Wine, at the Supper of the first Evening, and concluding it with another, at the close of the next Day.] And now, after they had washed, with a Common Prayer used at other Washings, the Table was set, furnished with bitter and sweet Herbs, unleavened Bread, a Sauce red like Brick, and the Body of the Lamb, [for that is their manner of Expression,] together with the Flesh of the solemn Peace-Offering, [which was to be offered on some day of the Feast 
(e) Deut. 16.2. , and was commonly sacrifced on this Day in the Morning 
(f) Maim. de Sacr. Pasch. cap. 10. §. 12, 13. , to help out the Supper.] When the Table was so set, the Master, blessing God, for having created the Fruits of the Earth, [in the ordinary Form, and as at other times they use to do;] took of the bitter Herbs about the Quantity of an Olive, and dipping them in the red Sauce eat of them, and distributed as much to each of the rest. After this, the Table was to be removed a little way from him, to give Occasion and Space for the Questions supposed in Exodus, 
(g) Exod. 12.26.  about the Particularities of this Supper. And in Answer to them, the Master tells the Story of the Miseries of their Forefathers; using also the Words in Deuteronomy, 
(h) Deut. 26.5.  A Syrian ready to perish was my Father, etc. Upon this the Table was brought again; and He taking the Paschal Lamb in his hands, and Elevating it, proposed to himself the Question, Why it was offered, and gave the Reason. And so he elevated severally both the bitter Herbs, and the unleavened Bread; and after all the several Reasons given, he subjoined a Hymn, Let us therefore celebrate, praise, extol— him, who has done so many and so great, and such stupendous Wonders— To Him let us sing Hellelujah, Praise the LORD, ye Servants of the LORD—: concluding so, Thanks be to thee, O GOD, King of the World, who didst redeem us and our Ancestors, and hast brought us to this Night.  
Here they all drank again, in the same manner as at first, and washed again likewise; [hear again beginning their Supper.] For than he took two unleavened Cakes, and dividing one, he put one half of it over the other Cake; [the half Cake being, as they say, to remember them of their former Poverty]: and so said over the Bread a Blessing. After he dipped a piece of the Cake, with some of the bitter Herbs, in the Sauce, and eat; having blessed God with a proper Prayer; [and distributing to the rest to eat likewise.] So with a proper Prayer they tasted of the Peace-Offering; and with another, of the Lamb: and after they fed freely of what was before them. Only each was bound at the close of the Supper, to end with some of the Lamb; eating the Quantity of an Olive at least: [as they now do with a piece of one of the half Cakes, which they substitute in place of the Lamb.]  
When they had done eating, they washed their hands: and each having a third Cup distributed to them, the Master having said over it the Grace after Meat, [and it is termed thence the Cup of Blessing,] they drank it off. And then there was another, the fourth Cup, put into their hands; and the Hymn being recontinued, with its proper Conclusion, they again thanking God for the Fruit of the Vine, drank that also; and after that no more that night: [it being now towards midnight, and they being after this to meditate yet on their Paschal Deliverance].  
Thus, according to the Tradition of the Jews, the Paschal Supper was celebrated, while the Temple stood: and ever since it has been kept much after the same manner, though the Paschal Lamb has been wanting. And possibly, (if I might be allowed to interpose a Guess in this matter,) this Supper might have been observed, as now it is, without the Sacrifice, even when the Temple was in being; by such as after the first Dispersions by the Assyrian and Babylonian Kings, continued afterwards in remote Parts; and not being able to keep the Feast at Jerusalem, by reason of their Distance, were however willing to keep up the solemn Memorial of that great Deliverance, in the best manner they could, and as it is now done.  
§. II. NOW to this Account the History of our Saviour's Paschal Supper agrees. The Cup mentioned by St. Luke 
(i) Luk. 22.17, 19, 20. , which he took before the Bread, and, giving thanks, divided it amongst his Disciples; seems to have been their first Cup; and might be however their second. And the Bread which after he had given thanks, he broke, and gave to them; was the same they now so bless, and distribute after the second Cup. And lastly, the Cup after Supper, the Cup of Blessing, as it is called by St. Paul in express Terms 
(k) 1 Cor. 10.16. , what should it be, but what the Jews call by that name, and with which they thank for the Meal, the third Cup? Neither because our Saviour says in St. Matthew 
(l) 26.29.  after the Cup, that he would not henceforth drink any more of the fruit of the vine; will it therefore follow, that he did not drink the fourth Cup. For the same Saying is put in St. Luke, 
(m) Luke 22.18.  before the first Cup; and can there signify no otherwise than in general, and that after that Solemnity was wholly over, he would not drink of it: except we will suppose, that what he gave to the Disciples, he took not himself. But however this may be, the Gospel hath yet one farther Particular, agreeable to the Description of the Jews: That when they had supped, they sung a Hymn, and went out to the Mount of Olives 
(n) Matth. 26.30.  [to meditate]. And it has besides been observed, that our Saviour, when he spoke the Bread to be his Body, might have had a peculiar respect to that Phrase of the Body of the Lamb: and could it be admitted that in those days, as now, an unleavened Cake was by any substituted for the Body of the Lamb; It might then have been the easier understood, to represent our Lord's Body. These are the particular Correspondencies, between the Paschal and the Lord's Supper: and there was too another general one in their Nature; as they were both of them to be Memorials of a former bloody Atonement; Feasts of present Joy and Thanks, but not without some afflictive Remembrance for the Past.  
Here therefore it appears, and from the Relation of the Scripture, that our Lord thought fit to raise his other Sacrament likewise out of a Festival Commemoration, the Jews were commanded to keep for their old Deliverance. And hereafter it will appear further, by the Construction the Primitive Church made, that our Saviour in the Institution of his Feast, did not consider only that single Annual Solemnity of theirs, but their other more frequent Sacrificial Entertainments of Praise and Thanksgiving 
(o) See C. 7. of this Repartit. .   

CHAP IU.  
§. I. The Church of Christ succeeds to the Church of the Jews.  
§. II. The Officers of the One, raised from the Officers of the Other. The Apostles of each.  
§. III. And the Bishops.  
§. iv The Presbyters or Elders of the Jews.  
§. V The Christian Presbyters, and their Power.  
§. VI The Ministerial Officers of the Jews;  
§. VII. Answered by our Deacons.  
THE Two Sacraments, we see, as they are described in the Scripture, appear to have been transferred from the Old Testament to the New; and by the one of them we are Admitted into the Christian Covenant, and by the other we Recognize it. Now those who were admitted into the Mosaical Covenant, were admitted into a Body or Society; and this Body had its Governors and Officers: and whether the Christian Church were not a like Body, and with like Officers, we shall next inquire, and from Scriptural Authority.  
§. I. And first, It is plain that the Church of Christ comes into the place of the Congregation of Israel. For it is known that the Word in the New Testament, which we Translate Church, is the same with that which stands in the Greek of the Old for the Congregation or Body of that People: and as they had Moses for their Leader and Lawgiver under God, their King, and also Chief Priest, (for he consecrated Aaron and his Sons;) so are we a Society or Body united in One Head, our Lord Jesus, who under the Father is our King, and High Priest. And accordingly we succeed to the Style and Title of the Children of Israel 
(a) Exod. 19.5, 6. Deut. 7.6. , and their Dignity and Privileges are devolved upon us. For so are we become a peculiar People, which Christ has purified to himself 
(b) Tit. 2.14. . We are made by him Kings, and Priests unto God the Father 
(c) Rev. 1.6. . We are a chosen Generation, a Royal Priesthood, a Holy Nation 
(d) 1 Pet. 2.9. .  
§. II. THIS his People, Our Prince and Highpriest himself still Governs; but by such subordinate Officers below, as are denominated from the Jews; and also with the same Discipline; as far as was consistent with his Empire, which was to be neither Local nor Temporal, not dependent upon any one place, nor regarding Worldly Interests.  
The Officers of the Christian Church, mentioned in the Scripture, are Apostles, Bishops, Elders and Deacons: and what signification such Titles did bear in the Church of Israel, we are now to see. Only I am to premise, That as we shall find all those Titles in several significations; so we are to observe the same of the Words Church and Synagogus, to whom those Titles belong. For each of these, as is well known, signifies either the People united under the same Covenant, a Society; or a Local Assembly of those of that Society; or the Place where they are to Assemble.  
The highest Office of the New Testament is that of the Apostles: and it is a term of large signification, both in Greek, and Hebrew or Chaldee. It is in both Languages the same as Sent, (a) and so may stand for a common Messenger, Deputy, or Mandatary, or for an Envoy from some great Person, for an Ambassador Ordinary, or Extraordinary, or any Plenipotentiary-Commissioner. With the Jews therefore the Minister of the Synagogue, who takes care of the Business of it under the Superior Governors, and reads the Prayers, and who is called now more commonly Chazan 
(b) See §. VI ; is also known by this Name, as being the Deputy of the Congregation. It is said too (c) that he goes by that Name with them, who was sent by the Priests to collect their Deuce, the First-Fruits and Tenths; and so they are termed in the Imperial Law. Neither do I find that the Talmud speaks of any higher Authority under that Style; nor I suppose will the Rabbins themselves pretend, that they have a complete Information of all their former Government. But however, it is certain from Epiphanius, that it was the Name of such Plenipotentiary-Commissioners, as were sent by the chief of the Jews, the Highpriest, or Patriarch, not only to gather Money, but to visit and reform a Province, and to confirm and displace its Officers: For so he says (d) of one Josephus, who was sent with that Power, from their Patriarch, then residing in Palestine into Cilicia; that he brought back to him the Tenths, and First Fruits of the Province; and besides had displaced there many of their Rulers of the Synagogues, and of their Priests, and of their Elders, and of their Azanites, which are their Deacons or Ministers. And before (d 2) Apostles are described to be Men of great Authority, who are Assessors to the Patriarch.  
Answerable in some manner, to this different acception of the Word with the Jews, is the Use of it in the Christian Church. For it is observed that Epaphroditus is called by St. Paul 
(e) Phil. 2.25.  an Apostle of the Philippians, in an inferior Sense; for the Office he discharged, of conveying their Contribution to him, their great Apostle, and as it were Patriarch. And such it is justly supposed those Brethren were, who are spoke of to the Corinthians, (in a Discourse concerning Contributions) and are termed 
(f) 2 Cor. 8.23.  the Apostles of the Churches, the Glory of Christ. But this Name imported a higher Dignity, and greater Power, when it was attributed to the Twelve, or to St. Paul. They were as Assessors to Christ, our Priest, and our King: hereafter in the places of the Princes of the Tribes, to sit on Twelve Thrones, and judge the Twelve Tribes of Israel 
(g) Matt. 19.28. ; and in the mean time, endued with Power from above, to Act and Speak in his Name, and to Govern his Church, appointing Officers and prescribing Orders. Of this sort was Saint Paul; and such an Apostle he professes himself 
(h) 1 Cor. 15.9. , not worthy to be called. And further, as They all were in this manner Apostles of Christ, so is Christ himself said 
(i) Heb. 3.1.  to be our Apostle, (as well as Highpriest), being 
(k) John 20.21.  SENT by the Father, as they were sent by Him.  
§. III. NEXT to the Apostles are Bishops: And this too is a Word that signifies at large, both in the Hebrew and Greek (a) of the Old Testament In the Greek of the Septuagint, it is said of the Officers of an Army, both Captains over hundreds, and Captains over thousands 
(a 2) Nu. 31.14. 2 Kings 11.15. ; of the Provost or Alderman of a Ward 
(b) Neh. 11.9.  of Overseers of Works and Payments 
(c) 2 Chr. 34. . And so the Office is an Oversight or Charge; as Eleazar had the Oversight and Charge of all the Tabernacle 
(d) Num. 4.16. ; and his Office or Charge let another take 
(e) Psal. 109.8. . The word answering to this in the Hebrew, denotes a Steward over a Household 
(f) Gen. 39.5. , a Superintendant over a City 
(g) 41.34. ; and in the Temple it stands for the Head and Director of any Office. And the Overseer or Officer of the Highpriest 
(h) 2 Chr. 24.11. , is said, by Rabbi Solomon on the place, to be the High-Priest's Vicegerent, usually called the Sagan 
(i) Jer. 20.1. ; as also, the chief Governor in the House of the Lord (k) is understood to be by Jonathan the Targumist, (l) whom Kimchi (m) therefore styles the High Overseer under the Highpriest. Thus is this Word found to signify in the Old Testament: but the Talmudists, as far as I can see, take no notice of its Office, and leave us to be informed of this, as well as of the Apostleship, from other hands.  
The same Word in the Greek of the New Testament is taken in some Latitude too. First of all, our blessed Lord himself, is called the Bishop and Shepherd of our Souls 
(m) 1 Pet. 2, 25. , as having the chief Oversight and Care of the Flock. In a lower degree, the Office of Bishopric, mentioned in the 109th. Psalms, is applied to the Apostleship, which Judas lost and Mathias took 
(n) Acts 1.20. . And yet lower; Those also who are called Presbyters, are at the same time named Bishops; as those Presbyters or Elders, which S. Paul sent for from Ephesus, were admonished to take care of the Flock, over which the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops 
(o) Acts 20.28. . And the Presbyter, of whose Ordination St. Paul speaks to Titus, is in the next Verse save one, styled Bishop 
(p) Tit. 1.5, 7. .  
We see therefore that the New Testament has not only taken the Name from the Old, but the largeness of its signification too; which is all at present I am concerned to observe: Tho' I presume this Word, as well as Apostle, had now a peculiar Office, of which it was properly spoke, and to which, in the next Age it is known to have been always determined 
(q) See Ch. VIII. .  
§. iv THE next that follows, (for so I take leave to place in the Christian Church, what some would set in equal rank,) is the Presbyter or Elder. This Word in the Greek of the Septuagint, is known (answerably to the Hebrew) to signify not only a Man of Years, but Authority; as Words of the like import have always done in Ancient and Modern Languages (a). So the Steward of Abraham's House, (styled by our Translators the eldest Servant of his House,) who ruled over all that he had 
(b) Gen. 24.2. , is supposed to be called by those Interpreters, the Presbyter, or Elder of his House (c). In that Sense we have the Elders of Pharaoh's House, and of the Land of Egypt 
(d) Gen. 50.7. . And when it is said, Hezekiah took Counsel with his Princes and his mighty Men 
(e) 2 Chr. 32.3. , in the Septuagint it is with his Presbyters and mighty Men. And in like manner by the Presbyters or Elders of the People of Israel, Princes and great ones of them are understood at large 
(f) Num. 11.16. , of which the greatest and chief were the Twelve Heads or Princes of the Tribes.  
Of such Elders or Governors there were Seventy, we know appointed by Moses, at the command of God 
(g) Num. 11.16, 17. , to bear part of the burden of the Magistracy with him, and to be a Council unto him, endowed therefore with a Communication of the Spirit. Of this great standing Council, known afterwards by the Name of the Sanhedrim, the Jewish Tradition speaks very copiously; and though the Scripture says nothing of any Superiority amongst those Seventy, yet they tell us expressly, what otherwise we must have presumed, That one of them was Precedent of this Council, and Vicegerent to Moses the Prince. Such a Council as this, they say, sat at Jerusalem in after Ages, and governed the whole People; consisting of a Chief and Prince, (for that is the signification of Nasi) in the place of Moses, and of Seventy more, one of whom was the Vicegerent of that Chief or Prince, called by them, the Father of the Council.  
Besides this Sovereign Court sitting in the Temple, there were also Inferior Provincial Consistories, according to the appointment of God in these words, Judges and Officers shalt thou make thee in all the Gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee 
(h) Deut. 16.18. . And whereas the number of these Judges or Elders is here left undetermined, Josephus, repeating the same Injunction, directs them to be Seven 
(i) Archaeol. 4.8. ; supposing, I presume, that they were so many in the times near to Moses. But the Traditionary Jews, will have them in every great City to have been twenty three; they too, as I also presume, speaking from the practice of some later times. Of these twenty three, they tell us, One was styled also the Nasi, or Prince, (the Chief of that Tribe or Place); and another likewise was his Vicegerent, called also the Father of that Consistory. And the like distinction we may suppose to have been between Josephus his Seven; and that Two of them, were a Chief, and a Deputy, and the other Five ordinary Elders.  
These were the Consistories of great Cities; but in lesser Districts there was, as the Rabbins tell us, a Magistracy or Presbytery of Three, which Judged in lesser Matters. And further, it seems (k), there are those who sometimes go by the Name of Elders; but whose chief business is to take care of the Goods of the Commnnity, and whose Authority extends only to causes of voluntary Jurisdiction: and these are called the Seven good Men of the place; retaining the number, though not the Power, of Josephus his Magistrates.  
The Talmudists, who have been silent concerning Apostles and Bishops, are very particular, as we may perceive concerning Presbyters, and pretend to give us a punctual account of their Creation and Office, as we may see at large in Mr. Selden 
(l) De Syn. l. 2. c. 4, 5, 6. . And an Abstract of what is further necessary here follows, out of that very Learned Gentleman's copious Collections on this Subject.  
These Presbyters than were of two sorts, the One had a Full, and the other a Limited Authority 
(m) Seld. de Syn. lib. 2. cap. 7. .  
An Elder of the first kind was capable of being called up to the Courts of great Cities and Provinces, having Authority not only to expound the Law, and to resolve Cases of Consciences, but to Judge in all Causes both Criminal and Civil: And these were called Rabbi.  
The other, the Limited Elders, were either such as had Power to be of one of the inferior Consistories of Three in lesser Districts, and to Judge only of Pecuniary Causes; or such who were not capable of Jurisdiction, and could only expound the Law; or else who were not qualified to direct in the whole Law, but were confined to particular Cases.  
To this Office of Eldership they were ordained by Imposition of Hands, with Words signifying the Authority committed; or else by Letter-Patent, or Missive. And every Presbyter of the first sort was, they say, permitted to Ordain at first; but afterwards it was not to be done but by Three, and not without the leave of the Prince or Chief, or by the Chief and his Vicegerent together.  
Now there are three things concerning these Presbyters which Mr. Selden particularly remarks; and which we will not therefore forget, but remember as occasion shall offer. The first is, That no Presbyter with full Power, could be Ordained by any out of the Holy Land; for from that place only Authority in Criminal Causes could proceed, and thence only a Faculty could be given, that would be good through the whole World. Whereas those whom the Head of the Captivity himself ordained out of that Country, had Jurisdiction in none but Pecuniary Causes, and were called only Mar or Rab; and those who were ordained by others, had Jurisdiction only in the District where they were ordained 
(n) Seld. Ibid. cap. 7. §. 5. .  
Accordingly, as Buxtorf observes, 
(n2) Buxt. Syn. I. 46.  The Jews of Spain and the Levant do not honour themselves with the stile of Mar or Rab, being content to be called the Disciples of the Learned: though in Germany they make bold with those Titles, and promote with the old Formality; where too they have an order of Rabbins above the ordinary Rabbins, who preside over them, and are as the Princes or Fathers of the Consistory heretofore.  
Secondly, As the Talmudists tell us, there Presbyters were indifferently of any Tribe; neither was it necessary that they should be of the Tribe of Levi, who composed the great Consistory of Jerusalem 
(o) Seld. Ibid. cap. 7. §. 5. ; though that Consistory, in their opinion, governed even in the Temple, and over all that officiated there 
(p) Ibid. cap. 8. cap. 15. §. 12, etc. .  
And the Truth is, according to the Modern Traditions, those of the Tribe of Levi were not so absolute in the Temple, nor of that consideration out of the Temple, as they seem to have been by the Scripture, and by Josephus. And now at this time, though the Priests receive sometimes some little due for the Redemption of the Firstborn, and are called before others to Read the Law, and are preferred to give the Solemn Blessing in the Synagogues, and to say Grace at Meals; yet for the rest they are as common Israelites, and under the Jurisdiction of the Rabbins. For these Rabbins have ordered the Matter so, that they are reputed, to Represent the Priests, and to succeed into their Sacerdotal Right, claiming therefore to be free from Taxes, and from Watch and Ward, to have the Prevendition or Pre-emption in the Market, and to have their Causes first dispatched in Courts of Justices 
(q) Leo de Mod. Cere. des Juifs. S. 12.3. Buxt. Syn. J. 46. Maim. Tal. Tor. cap. 6. 〈◊〉. 10. . And this possibly came to pass, not only from the superseding of the main part of the Priestly Function, by the Destruction of the Temple, and from the ceasing of their Tithes and other Deuce, by the banishment of the People from their own Country; but also from the great destruction that must have been suffered by the Tribe of Levi, in those cruel Devastations made by Tites and Adrian of the Holy Land and City, in which places the Levites had their Residence and Employment, and which they would be sure to defend most zealously: Whereas many other Jews lived at the same time dispersed in remote Provinces, escaping the War and its fury. For then, when very few Priests remained, and those of all Jews durst least own themselves; and when they were debarred from the Execution of that Office, by which they had been so honourably distinguished; no wonder if the other Tribes took the advantage, and, as it happens amongst Rival Offices, encroached and usurped upon them: And if any of the Rest were to deliver down the Law, which the Priest's Lips had been used to preserve, as Rabbi Juda took upon him the Office; He, as Holy as he was, might comply so far with Modern Usurpation, as to record it with the Traditions from Mount Sina.  
And lastly, We are all along bid to observe, that these Presbyters and Rulers were Civil Magistrates, who had the Government of the Commonwealth, and by that Title controlled the High-Priests themselves 
(r) Ibid. l. 3. c. 8.11. : an observation we need not dissemble, if we are at the same time allowed to remember, that God Himself was the Supreme Governor of that Commonwealth; that even its Civil Laws were enacted by Him; and therefore that the Judges of that Law were Sacred Officers, and of a Policy that was Divine.  
Hitherto these Elders have been chief considered as Administrators of their Civil Policy; they had too the direct Administration of all their Worship, that was not Sacrificial, directing its Services, and appointing its Officers. Whereas therefore in a great City, the Nasi, or his Vicegerent, and even the Presbyters in a larger Sense, were the [Archisynagogi] Rulers or Heads of the Synagogue, as it meant the Body or Community of the City: So they were also Rulers of the Synagogue, or Synagogues of that City, as they were Congregations for Worship. And where there were many Synagogues, (as there were in those Cities,) the same were Rulers over all of them; though by their appointment, and in their Name to particular Synagogues, particular Presbyters, and sometimes possibly of Limited Power, might be especially deputed to take care of them.  
§. V SUCH were the Elders of Jewish Commonwealth and Church: and correspondent in some manner to these, are the Christian Presbyters in the New Testament.  
And first, those properly called Apostles are styled Elders; as representing the Twelve Princes of the Tribes, who were the first and great Elders of Israel. So St. Peter styles himself a Fellow-Elder 
(a) 1 Pet. 5.1. ; and so the Appellation of Elders seems in one place of the Acts 
(b) Acts 11. 3●. , to comprehend the Apostles also.  
Next there are Elders distinct from the Apostles, those mentioned often in the Acts just after them, The Apostles and Elders 
(c) Act; 15.2, 4, 6.  And these, because there is no mention made before of their Creation, as there is of the Deacons; may be presumed to be the Seventy, whom our Saviour had ordained; according to the Number of the Consistory erected by Moses, and then continued at Jerusalem.  
And if these were Seventy Elders; then St. James the Bishop of Jerusalem, may be supposed to have been the Precedent of them; and if not the Prince (for that honour they might leave to our Saviour, always reputed as present with them) yet the Vicegerent of the Prince, and Father of the Council of the Seventy; to which the other Apostles had joined themselves, in the manner of Assistants Extraordinary, and as the High Priests and Princes of the Tribes had, I suppose, used to have an extraordinary Place in the Consistory of their Sanhedrim.  
We find too, that in all the considerable Cities, where the Apostles founded Churches, they Ordained Elders; as Barnabas and Paul are recorded 
(d) Acts 14.23.  to have done in Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch. What was the number of these we are not told, nor what Superiority there might be amongst them: and in these circumstances also they answer to their Predecessors, the Presbyters or Judges of Israel; of whom (as we have seen) the Scripture has only said, Judges and Officers shalt thou make thee in all thy Gates, not expressing the number of those Provincial Judges, nor distinguishing between the Prince or his Vicegerent, and the rest of them. The number, I presume, of our Christian Elders, was various in various Places. Where there were many, one of them was appointed to be their Chief, and Father of the Consistory; if we will be guided in our Opinion by the very early uniform Practice of the next Age 
(e) Chap. VIII. : and where there was but one, he too in probability was a Presbyter of that rank, and had Authority to assume to himself Colleagues, as the occasions of the Church should require. And in this Supposition these Father's Presbyters, are those who are properly to be called Bishops, in the determined sense of the Word; as all Presbyters might be, in the larger acception of it.  
These Christian Elders have, by Mr. Selden's Concession, the Power of the Limited Elders of the Jews 
(f) De Syn. 2.7. ●. : and so, in his Opinion, they were only to Instruct and Direct, by Expounding and Exhorting; and to Bind and Lose, by Decision of Cases of Conscience, and pronouncing Lawful and Unlawful, as in the First Council at Jerusalem. And this Limitation he thinks proper, because the Presbyters of the Jews, we have seen, had no power in criminal Causes, if ordained out of Judea; and in his Opinion even their other Authority, out of their own Country and Dominion, was only from the Agreement of their People, and the connivance of Princes under whom they lived.  
It were enough for my present Intent, if the Christian Elders answered the Jewish but thus far. But that they had a greater Authority given them, the very Expressions of the Scripture seem to speak: As, Obey them that have Rule over you, and submit your selves 
(g) Heb. 13.17. : Those that are over you 
(h) 1 Thes. 5.12. , preside over you; such who are over the Church, so as to Rule it 
(i) 1 Tim. 5.17. , as the Master of a Family is over his own Children, and Rules his House 
(k) 4.4. : Which Expressions, though they may be strained by narrow Construction to signify Teaching and Exhortation only; yet they most naturally imply something of Coercion besides; and that they were used always to connote in the Old Testament. But the comparison St. Paul makes in the last place, between a Family and a Church, will hardly bear the restrained Interpretation; unless the Paternal Power was abridged as well as the Presbyteral, and was left to Instruct and Exhort only.  
Now as the Words are ready to signify a greater Power, so such a one there was remaining to be signified; that of Admitting into the Christian Communion, suspending from it, and ejecting out of it; a Power which the Jewish Presbyters had, and the Christian Society did not want, as we shall presently find 
(l) Chap. 5. &. 9 .  
Neither did even Capital or Civil Power cease to belong to Christian Presbyters, for the reason given by Mr. Selden: not because they were created out of Judeas' for Christ's Kingdom was no longer confined to one Country, and every Land was holy: nor because no sort of Civil Power could be exercised in another Kingdom; for such a Power might have demanded Obediences in Conscience, though it could not have obliged it by armed Force: But rather, because the Kingdom, in which they were Officers, was not of this World; was not to judge, or divide Inheritances; nor to entertain Legions for the Peace of its Government, and Execution of its Sentences; they being to conduct the Church to another Life, and Authorised to Rule over it and control it by that Respect.  
Though therefore the Christian Elder be not ordained to Temporal Power, yet he succeeds to the Jewish Presbyter in his fullest Right; not wanting that Power, because he wants any thing of Proper Authority; but because he is commissioned to act in another Sphere, and above these lower concerns: as our blessed Saviour's Authority, abstracted from his Omnipotence, was not less than that of the former Lawgiver, Moses; though he was pleased to waive the Power of Life and Death.  
And thus far we have considered the Christian Elders resembling the Jewish, in respect of the Church, as a Society; in like manner they presided over it as an Assembly, Appointing, Directing, and Governing their Meetings, by Doctrine and by Censure; as is well known, and will appear further hereafter.  
§ VI FROM this Agreement of the Jewish and Christian Church, in the Superior Officers, we have reason to look for the same in the Lower which remains, that of a Deacon.  
In the Appointment before cited from Deuteronomy, we are to remember, That Officers are mentioned as well as Judges; and these, though acknowledged to be Rulers and Men of Authority (a), were yet of an inferior rank, and subservient to the Elders. And accordingly Josephus styles them Ministers, or Under-Officers; and speaks as if to every Court of Seven Elders, there were (in the earlier Days) two of these ●●●●●ers appointed, and out of the Tribe of Leut (b).  
This Ministerial Office seems to have consisted of several Employments, and of different Degrees; whatever belongs to Sheriffs, Protonotaries, and Clerks of Courts, to Marshals and Criers, Bailiffs and Executioners: The business of it was, to write the Orders of the Senate, and to Proclaim and Execute them, to send out Process, to Summon, Arrest, and Punish. And it is observable, that the Rabbins 
(c) Seld. de Syn. 2, 5, 4. Maim. Tract. San. c. 1. §. 10.  allot to every Consistory of Twenty Three, two Scribes Attendant (d), and also two Under-Sheriffs, or Executioners, whom they call by the same Name they give to the Reader of their Prayers, as we shall presently see; a Name common heretofore to all Under-Officers, in the head of whom were the Two Scribes, mentioned therefore by Josephus more particularly.  
Besides these Officers of Judicature, there were others who had the charge of their Charity.  
Now the Jews take themselves to be very strictly obliged to provide for the Necessitous of their Religion, and to support them in some measure answerably to their Quality 
(e) Maim. de Donis Paup. cap. 7.3. . For this purpose there are Collectors in every City deputed, some who go about every day to gather Bread and Meat, Collectors of the Basket. Others, commonly two, and to whom a third is to be joined in the Distribution, who go about every Week to gather the Alms, and if need be, the Tax for the Poor 
(f) Ibid. c. 9 . These were called Collectors from their Gathering, and Parnasim (f 2), or Pastors from their supporting and Maintaining; a Word that signifies not only this Office, but Government in general, and might be said of Elders, or any other Rulers.  
Answerable to these Collectors of Cities, there were in the Temple 
(g) Light●oot's Temple Service.  Collectors too; called Gizbarim: and it may be observable, that these were under seven others named Immarcalim, who had the Custody and Keys of the Sacred Treasury. We have seen also 
(h) §. iv  that Seven good men of a City are particularly remembered, and though their employment be not well ascertained; yet it is plain, that the Goods of the Community were under their Ordering.  
The Officers now spoken of, belong to their Civil Society: for their Religious Assemblies there are others.  
The ordinary Synagogue-Officer is known by the name of Chazan; (the same, as I have said, which they give to their Executioner.) This Name Epiphanius, one not unacquainted with the Affairs of the Jews, expressly renders by Minister (i): the very same word, which Josephus had used to signify those Officers in Deuteronomy, attendant upon the Judges.  
This is their Preceptor, who under the Higher Rulers, the Elders (now the Rabbins,) takes care of the Service of the Synagogue; Says Prayers, shows the Lessons, calls and directs those who are to read; such a one as that Minister is supposed to be, to whom our Saviour, when he had closed the Book, gave it again. And this Minister has commonly under him another Servant of the Synagogue, a Sacristan, who looks to it, and keeps all things safe and clean.  
§. VII. TO these Civil, and Religious Officers of the Jewish Synagogue, Deacons, I suppose, are answerable: Bishops and Deacons, or Presbyters and Deacons, being joined together in the New Testament, as Judges and Officers were in the old.  
Now in the Christian Use the word Deacon or Minister is very differently applied, according as the Services are different, in which he is employed. Our Saviour is the Minister of Circumcision 
(a) Rom. 15.8.  a King the Minister of God 
(b) Rom. 13.14. . And the Apostles Ministers of Christ 
(c) 1 Cor. 4.1. . But a Minister or Deacon, absolutely so called in the New Testament, is an Officer under the Bishop or Presbyter: and the first appointed were the seven 
(d) Act. 6. , Ordained by the Apostles with Imposition of hands.  
These were Men of Honest Report, who were to ease the Apostles of the Administration of the Charitable Revenue of the Church; not to be Gatherers of the Basket, I suppose, or Servers of Tables; for that the Apostles sure did not do before: but to be Treasurers and Superintendants, such as were the Seven of the Temple, or the Goodmen abovementioned of a City.  
For though the Greek word for Ministering, does sometimes signify, to wait and serve at a Table; yet, as we just now noted, it is by no means restrained to that low sense; but is said as well of the Office of our Blessed Lord, and of his Apostles, and also of Kings; that is, of any the Noblest Administrations; and may therefore answer the word Parnas, in its Highest meaning.  
Neither is it at all necessary, that the Office of a Deacon should be wholly Oeconomical; because it was first erected in the Christian Church, on that occasion. While the whole Church was yet but as one Family, under the immediate Government of the Apostles, and they had not yet Created any other Officers; the first Officers were indeed instituted upon the first emergent want, and were ordered then especially to take care of that, and to manage the public expense: but they were also to be, as we may well suppose, subservient to the Apostles in other administrations, and to Publish and Execute all their Orders. For the Qualification of them was, to be full of the Holy Ghost and Wisdom: and certainly a Wisdom, beyond that of common managery; and a Spirit, more than Oeconomical, was then understood. Though therefore those Deacons were not to give themselves up to Prayer and the word only; yet they might have had their part even in those Functions: as St. Stephen we find had; whose Preaching the Scripture records, more than his Good Husbandry; and who speaking by that Wisdom and Spirit, for which he was but now chosen into his Office, became the first Martyr, as well as first Deacon, of the Gospel.  
These Deacons, it should seem, were Extraordinary; attending Ministerially upon the Apostles, as upon the twelve Princes of Israel: having been created before the appointment of any Bishops, or Subaltern Presbyters. But afterwards in every City where Bishops or Presbyters were placed, the Officers of this Order were constantly subjoined. So the Epistle to the Philippians is addressed to the Saints there, with the Bishops and Deacons: and so in the Epistle to Timothy, after Directions given concerning Bishops, there follow others immediately concerning Deacons: Likewise must the Deacons 
(e) 1 Tim. 3.8. . And there, we may observe, the Qualifications of the lower Office, are near the same with those of the Higher, and as much almost required in the Deacon: enough to induce us to think, that some Spiritual Duty was also to be discharged by Him.  
So much Reason there is from Scripture to conclude, that Christian Deacons did not only Keep and Dispense the Public Contributions, as the Jewish Parnasim; but that they served under their Superiors even in the Ministry of the Word and Prayer: as we shall certainly find them hereafter 
(f) Chap. VIII. , to be Attendant upon their Bishops upon all other Business; and particularly employed in Assemblies, in the Office of a Jewish Chasan.  

§. II. (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(c) Grot. in Matth. c. 10. v. 5.  
(d) Epiphan. Haeres. 30.11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(d 2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haeres. eâd. §. iv  
§. III (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Visitavit, Praefecit: cui respondet Arabicum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (Conjugat. octav.) Inquisivit, Inspexit. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exponitur per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
(l) The Chaldee of the Targum is much the same with the Hebrew of Rabbi Solomon.  
(m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
§. iv (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Senatus, Seignieur, Alderman. Vid. Selden. de Synedr. l. 1. c. 14.  
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(k). 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De quibus consuli poterit Rhenfordius, Dissertat. Philolog. 1. de decem O●iosis Synag. §. 109. etc.  
§. VI. (a) Upon those Words of the Text, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 R. Solomon expounds the last by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and Aben Ezra by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And upon this occasion I would only offer, whether the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of St. Paul, [1 Cor. 12.28.] may not be understood of this Office, as it was supplied by the Deacons of the New Testament, according to what is proposed in the next Section. And this the rather, because the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, mentioned just before these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may well be taken for Presbyters: the Word in the Old Testament, by which their Duty is expressed, and which we translate, Bear the Burden with thee, [Exod. 18.22. Numb. 11.17.]; being in both places rendered in the Septuagint by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. These Offices, I would suppose, had, in the Beginning of the Gospel, the Spiritual Gifts of proper Abilities: as the first Seventy Elders were endued with a Portion of Moses his Spirit; which is judged too by the Jews not to have rested upon them long, much less to have continued to the Order. For as to the Higher Degrees, with which the Apostle there gins, of, first, Apostles; secondarily, Prophets; (to which Evangelists are subjoined in the Enumeration made Ephes. 4.11.); and thirdly, Doctors; these also may well be taken to bear Proportion to the different Distributions of the Holy Spirit, which the Masters of the Jews observe to have been made to the Authors of the Old Testament, and according to which they are known to divide its Volumes: The First consisting of the Five Books of Moses, their great Apostle; the Next of the Prophets, whom they distinguish by the First, (as Joshua, Judges, etc.) and by the Latter, (as Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc.) who may be reckoned for Evangelists; and the Last, being made up of the Holy Writings, (as they call them) which are chief Doctrinal.  
(b) Joseph. Archaiol. 4.8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is known to stand for Minister Publicus, qui Magistratui apparet.  
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of the Text, has, in the Hebrew and Chaldee of the Scripture, the general Signification of Government and Command. And in the Arabic Dialect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Praefuitut Inspector; as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Praefectus, Inspector: but this last Word is, besides, the same as Commentarie●s●s, Is qui annotat quae cunque ad rem curandam aut gerendam spectant, as Golius renders it; and so carries the Signification of its Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Delineavit, Scripsit; and likewise expresseth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Septuagint, and the Scribes attending upon the Rabbinical San●●drim.  
(f 2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Signifies Gubernare, Regere; and also Pascere, Cibare: and so in the Arabic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Summus Pagorum Praefectus; & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mulier oeconomica, quae rem Domesticam egregie administrat.  
(i) Azanitae are rendered by Epiphanius (as above, § II. d.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Jews signifies not only the Minister of the Synagogue, as a Place of Worship, but any other Minister of a Society; and is the Name of those that have the Night-Watch of a City, and of those who wait upon their Judicial Consistories, and serve their Writs, and keep their Prison, and execute their Sentences even to Corporal Punishment. It is used to be derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vidit; and so has been supposed by some to answer to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if from this Employment the Episcopal Office was to be derived likewise. But this Etymology gins to be disliked, and is rather fetched from the Arabic, where it seems to be answered in part by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 custodivi●, and by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thesaurarius, Condus: though if a Radical Man may be admitted to be changed into a Nun, (as the Servile, it is known, usually are in the Chaldee Dialect); I would then choose to bring it from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whose simple Signification is Inservivit, Ministravit, and directly answers to the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.    

CHAP. V.  
§. I. The Excommunicates of the Jews, and their Condition.  
§. II. The Condition of Mourners among the Jews, compared with that of the Excommunicate.  
§. III. Their Excommunicates restrained from the Liberty not only of Civil Conversation, but of Religious Communion.  
§. iv Excommunication mentioned in the New Testament, as practised by the Jews, and by Christians.  
AFter this Parallel of the Officers of either Church; I proceed to the Discipline they are remembered in Scripture to use, That of Excommunication: A Subject upon which Mr. Selden hath much enlarged; and an Abstract of it from him I here give you.  
§. I. EXCOMMUNICATION, or the Debarring a Man by Command from the Liberty of Conversation with his Brethren, was a Method used by the Jews long before our Saviour's time, as well as the other corporal Restraints by Imprisonment or Banishment; and the Shame and Inconvenience, even of the lighter kind of it, was almost equal to that of Stripes, and intended to prevent them.  
Indeed there was with the Jews a kind of Censure, called by them a Rebuke (a), which, from the Mouth of a Grave Person pronounced for an Offence committed before him, had that Force, as to shame the Delinquent, and oblige him to his good Behaviour, and a particular Modesty, for the space of Seven Days. But this was a Reproof, rather than a Sentence; and seems to have obliged in good Manners only: neither did it restrain the Party from ordinary Converse: or needed any Satisfaction to be given, but expired at the end of the Week.  
But the Excommunication of which we speak, was a formal Sentence, pronounced for some Misdemeanour or Crime; either by the Consistory, or by a Qualified, or even by a Private, Person.  
The First and lighter Degree of Excommunication (b), was that by which the Person was obliged to keep from all other Israelites, (and they likewise, in most Cases, from him) the Distance of Four Cubits, a Distance the Jews are bound to put between themselves and some sorts of impure things, whenever they are about their Prayers or their Law; as he was also obliged to suffer some other Inconveniences, which shall be presently mentioned.  
This Sentence was inflicted either by a Private Man, for some Offences done in his Presence, whereof there are Twenty four Cases expressed 
(c) Maim, Jad. Ch. l. 1. Tract. 3. cap. 6. sub finem. ; or further, by a Graduate in their Law, for the Contempt of his Person; or by the Magistrate, as they should see Cause: and in Pecuniary Causes brought before the Consistory, it is particularly noted, that they proceeded not to Excommunication, until three Admonitions had been made to the Defendant, three Court-days before; and that then the Excommunication passed, not in Consideration of the Plantiff's Wrong, but for the Contempt of the Court.  
This Excommunication, of Course, was to continue upon him Thirty Days; and within that time he was to endeavour for Absolution, making Satisfaction as the Case should require. And this Satisfaction possibly was to be offered in Judicial Cases to the Injured Party, by the same Method we find directed on another Occasion 
(d) Buxtor. Syn. Jud. cap. 25. : as when an Offender, endeavouring on the Expiation-Eve to be reconciled to his Brother, is first ordered to go to him, and beg Pardon; and if he obtains it not, then to take with him three Witnesses, and twice more to make the like Application; and until than he is not supposed to have discharged his Duty.  
But if this Sentence, though passed by a Private Man, was suffered by the Excommunicate to remain upon him those Thirty Days; he was then to be excommunicated by the Consistory for that his Contumacy, and so remain for another Thirty Days, if not restored before by their Decree.  
This, all the while, is that Lighter kind of Excommunication; and in all those Cases the Restraint of the Distance of Four Cubits did certainly obtain. There are also other Inconveniencies and Penalties, that belong to this sort of Sentence as certainly; (for whether they lay the first thirty Days in the Case of one suffering under a private Excommunication, I need not determine;) and they are these, according to Maimonides 
(e) Maim. ibid. c. 7. §. 4, etc. . It was not lawful for him all the Days of his Excommunication, to trim his Hair, or cut his Nails; to wash Himself, or his , or to put on New: no more than it was for a Mourner. He was not to be one of those with whom Grace was said, at a Meal where there were Three or more; neither was he to be reckoned one of the Ten, who were to make up the full Number of a just Assembly: although he might Teach the Unwritten Law, or be Taught; and might Hire, or be Hired. But if he died excommunicate, they sent and laid a Stone upon his Coffin, declaring thereby, That they stoned him, for his Separation from the Congregation.  
There was another, a heavier and more Terrible, kind of Excommunication (f), which the Consistory might upon some weighty Cause pronounce at the first Instance, but which was inflicted generally upon those who persisted excommunicate those  Sixty Days. And then the former Penalties were aggravated with others: and the Party was Disabled to Teach, or to be Taught; to Hire another, or be Hired himself; to Give, or to Receive: neither was there to be any Communication with him, but for Sustenance only 
(g) Maim. eodem c. 7. .  
This was a Horrible Sentence, full of Curses and Execrations upon the Party; and to the Observation of it, the Congregation was obliged, as by a Vow confirmed with an Oath. It was therefore, and is 
(h) Leo de Mod. 2, 3, 4. , pronounced with great Solemnity; by Sound of Horns, and Black Torches burning.  
The Penalties I have specified above belonging to both these Degrees of Excommunication, (for the Third commonly added (i), seems now not to be well grounded), are from Maimonides; where he speaks succinctly and occasionally only of Excommunication. But of the Second Sort of Excommunicates I am to add, That in some Cases they were not only kept at the ordinary Distance, but were absolutely secluded from promiscuous Conversation, as Lepers, (for with them they are ranked 
(k) Mor. de Poen. 4.25.7. ); and shut up in some remote Cell: and that their Estates were sometimes forfeited to Sacred Uses; and they themselves reputed as wholly separated, and cut off from the Congregation of the Children of Israel; as the Decree in Ezra 
(l) Ezra 10.7, 8. Selden, de Syn. 1.7.  imports.  
I am likewise to add further, what belongs certainly to this Second kind; if it does not to the First, as Morinus supposes; that it was much questioned by the Ancient Masters, whether an Excommunicated Person were not bound to Rent his , to Cover his Head, and to Turn his Bed, (the lower Part, I suppose, upwards;) and whether he were not forbid, (as to wash, so) to anoint; to come near his Wife; to make, or return Salutations; and to wear the Tephillim or Praying Ornaments 
(m) Mor. ib. 4.23.4. : as it was commonly agreed by them, that he was not to wear Shoes in a City, though abroad and in the Country he might; and that he was not to exercise his Trade by day; nor to wash, except Face and Hands, and Feet, and in cold Water.  
§. II. AND these Particulars, tho' very minute, I have the rather mentioned, that the Correspondence, which is generally supposed, between the Excommunicate and the Mourners, may better appear.  
For a Jew that has lost a near Relation, is obliged to mourn for him Thirty Days, (for a Father or Mother Eleven Months): and, besides that, the next of Kin to the Dead is bound to tear his Garment, upon the first News of his Death, and at his Burial, (as all are bound to do who are present at his Death); all Mourners on the First day, for their deep Sorrow are supposed to Groan; the Three First, they are presumed to Weep; the Seven First, to Lament; and on all the Thirty, to express their Sadness by some Neglects of themselves, 
(a) Maim. 7.14. Tra●tat. 4. seu de Lugeme, cap. 13. §. 11.   
On all the Thirty, those who mourn for any of their Near Kindred forbear to cut their Hair or Nails; to wear any Garment that is White, and Pressed and New; to Marry; to be present at any Feast of Mirth; and to go Merchandizing from their own Town to another 
(b) Maim. ibid. c. 6. : neither was it proper for others to ask after their Health by way of Salutation 
(c) Ibid. c. 5.20. .  
On the First Seven, it was further forbid the Mourner to wash his ; or to wash himself, except his Feet and Hands only, and that in cold Water; to anoint; to come near his Wife; to have Sandals on in the City; to do any Work, either hired himself, or hiring others; or to open his Shop, or give and receive in Merchandise; to read the Written Law of Moses, etc. or to learn or explain the Oral: To have any Bed in his House standing, and not to lie himself upon one turned; to have his Head and Upper part of his Face uncovered; or lastly, to salute or ask after another's Health, except saluted first 
(d) Ibid. cap. 5. . Further, on the Three first Days, He was not to resalute, tho' he were saluted 
(e) cap. eodem. §. 20. ; nor to do any Work, not in Private, and though he were fed by Alms 
(f) § 8. .  
And lastly, on the First Day, it was unlawful for him to eat or drink of his own Meat or Drink, (though even Flesh sent by others he might eat, and drink for Digestion of their Wine;) neither was he to wear his Tephillim; and he was bound to sit upon his Bedstead turned 
(g) Ibid. c. ●. 9 .  
But if his Dead was yet in his house, (and their Dead they think it their Duty to bury as soon as they can;) he was not to eat in his own House, if any Friend's were near: however (except on a Sabbath) he was not to eat sitting; nor to eat Flesh, or drink Wine; nor to say a Solemn Blessing or Grace himself, neither was any other of his Company to do it before him; and he was excused from all Offices of Worship and Prayer 
(h) §. 6. .  
This is an Abstract of the Usage of Mourners among the Jews; and may help us to understand the better, what shall follow, as well as what has been premised, concerning Persons Excommunicate: the same Restraints, as we see, lying upon Both. And it may be, as Thirty Days were a common Number both to Excommunicates and Mourners, so the Excommunicate of the first Thirty Days, were first reckoned as Mourners at large; of the latter Thirty, as the Mourners of the Seven Days; and the Excommunicates of the other Degree, the Cherem, might be ranked with the Mourners of the Three days, or rather of the First, if not with those that had not buried their Dead; while some of them, the Cutt off, were esteemed even in a worse Condition than the Dead themselves.  
§. III. AND thus I have given you a brief Account of the Jewish Excommunication, and not disagreeable to wha● Mr. Selden has discoursed at large in his Book de Synedriis: tho' in what I am next to mention, I shall be obliged to differ from him.  
He indeed has given himself some pains to prove, That this Excommunication was not directed by Moses, nor is observed any where in Scripture before the Babylonish Captivity: neither am I much concerned in that Point; it being sufficient for our purpose, that it had been in Practice four or five hundred Years before our Saviour, and was in his time the Received Law, and Canonical Discipline of their Church.  
But of their Church I desire to be understood, and in the fullest Sense; notwithstanding Mr. Selden's Express Dissent: which I am bound therefore, with the Reader's Leave, a little to consider.  
This eminently Learned Gentleman, as he observes, that Excommunication with the Jews was a Civil Punishment, inflicted in Civil Cases, and by Civil Officers; so he very frequently, and very positively affirms, That it did not take place in their Synagogues or Temple, and had no Influence at all upon their Religious Worship 
(a) De Jure N. & G. juxta Heb. lib. 4. cap. 9 De Anno Civ. veterum Judaor. cap. 18. De Synedr. lib. 1. cap. 7. .  
But how far this first Observation is true, we have seen already 
(b) Cap. 4. §. 4.  in the Case of Presbyters, by whom the Sentence was juridically pronounced. For as they were Civil Officers, but at the same time Sacred, as being Officers in God's Commonwealth, and for the Execution of His Laws; so this Excommunication, however Civil, was in the same manner Sacred, being the Punishment used in that Nation, which was the Church of GOD.  
And as for his other Assertion, That Excommunication did not operate in the Synagogue or the Temple; it is both very strange, and, I believe, not well founded.  
Strange it is at the first sight, that those who were separated from their Brethren as unclean, in all Civil Conversation, should freely mingle in Religious; and should be allowed to tread on their Heels in the Synagogues, from whom they were to keep such a distance in the Streets. And very strange it is, that those who were esteemed as Lepers, much more those who were cut off from the People of Israel, should be admitted into the Temple, and promiscuously allowed to worship in that Holy Place in the Company of the Holy People. Though all this might not seem so strange, when Mr. Selden wrote; then when People were privileged in the Houses of God, from such mannerly Ceremony, as they observed in their own Houses, and in the Streets.  
But this peremptory Assertion is not only Suspicious, but Erroneous. And as to the Synagogue, I have the express Affirmation of Leo de Modena (an Author in Esteem with Mr. Selden) directly to the contrary 
(c) Cerem. des Juifs, 2.3.3. . I shall not therefore urge any more Authority than what may be useful on another Occasion; and that is of the Practice of the Jews, the day before their Expiation-Fast. In that Evening before the Prayers for the following day begin, from the Desk of the Synagogue they suspend the Excommunications of all Transgressors whatsoever, without their Desire; and give them leave to come in, and pray with the Congregation, which in that day reputes itself as a Company of Sinners. And that such a Relaxation may appear to be more necessary, it is very formally pronounced by the Preceptor, assisted with two of the chiefest Rabbins on either side; and is conceived in this Authoritative Manner: By the Power of the Consistory above, and of the Consistory below; by the Authority of GOD, and by the Authority of the Church; we grant Leave and Licence, to pray with the Wicked 
(d) Buxtor. S●n. Ju●. cap. 26. .  
Now if Excommunication excludes from the Synagogue, we may presume it does from the Temple. But Mr. Selden offers to prove for the Temple, what he supposed only of the Synagogue: and his Proof is from a Passage in the Misnah 
(e) Midd. c. 4.2. , which Maimonides has also exscribed 
(f) Maim. de Aedif. Temp. c. 7. §. 3. , and which with him runs thus: All who entered into the Temple, went in on the Right Hand, and came out on the Left. But if any one lay under any Misfortune, he went on upon the Left Hand: And then they asked him, Why goest thou to the Left? and, if he answered, Because I am in Mourning; they replied, He comfort you who dwells in this House: but, if he said, Because I am Excommunicate; they replied, He who dwells in this House give thee Grace to hearken to thy Brethren, that they may restore thee.  
And here indeed we find one Excommunicate within the Precinct of the Temple; but it is neither considered, how far he was suffered to go, nor under what Excommunication he lay; things Mr. Selden would have examined with great Accuracy, if they would have made for his Design.  
For if we do but read what follows of the very same Chapter, we shall see (what is to be remarked also for other Purposes) that the Ground belonging to the Temple was very large, and several Courts to be passed, before one came to the House or Temple properly so called. Six are reckoned from the first Gate, and in this Order: Into the First and outmost Court [A], the Gentiles, and the Defiled by the Dead, and even the Dead Bodies themselves, were admitted: tho' not only Lepers were excluded, For they might not come within Jerusalem; but others, who were under some impurer kinds of Uncleanness. Into the Second [B], neither Gentiles, nor the Defiled with Dead, could enter: but those might, who were washed for Lesser Defilements which polluted but for a Day, and waited only for Sunset to be perfectly clean. The Third [C], was what was called the Court of the Women, and into it the last mentioned could not come: but they who were otherwise Purified, and only wanted to be Expiated by Sacrifice, might. The Fourth [D], was the Court of the Israelites, for those who were Clean and Perfect. Beyond this there was a Fifth [E], for the Sons of Levi: and then, lastly, a Sixth [F]; where the Altar [G] stood, and the Sacrifices were made, just before the Porch [H] of the House [I K].  
And now what sort of Argument is this, that the excommunicated Israelite was not debarred the Liberty of worshipping in the Temple; because he was admitted into the Outmost Court, and where a Gentile might come as well? Whereas, for aught appears, he might be suffered to go no further; and might be kept off at the Distance of Three Courts from the Place of the Israelites Devotion. But how much less will this avail for an Argument, if the Excommunicated Person there spoken of was not one of the more guilty sort, or not of that kind which are compared with the Leper, much less of those who are wholly Cut off from the People of GOD?  
Notwithstanding therefore this Argument of Mr. Selden's, the Presumption from the Practice of the Synagogue would hold good for the Temple; and on that I might rest: but there are other very probable Arguments that will concur to exclude the Excommunicate, at least, from any near Approach in the Temple.  
For tho' Excommunicates are not at all reckoned by Maimonides in this place, and those only are mentioned here whom the Law pronounces unclean; yet we may suppose that these were named only for Example sake, and that other States of Men lay under the same Restriction.  
For, First, it appears from the same Author (g), that none was to come into the Court of the Israelites in an uncomely Dress, with torn Clothes, or long neglected Hair. By which it is plain, That Mourners were not permitted to enter there during the whole Thirty Days; and consequently that all Excommunicates were likewise debarred thence.  
And further, of the Mourners of the first seven Days, he elsewhere (h) tells us, That they sent no Offerings to the Altar, not so much as Wine, or Wood, or Frankincense: [not for their Sins, and less of Peace, and much less of Thanks.] By this Prohibition of Sending, it is employed, They could not come: and seeing it is the same Prohibition which lay upon the Defiled with the Dead; we may conclude, That these Mourners likewise were obliged to stop with them in the Outer Court, and could not pass beyond.  
Now that there were Excommunicates who answered these Mourners, we have seen 
(i) §. II. ; and that they kept them company there in the Court of the Gentiles, we might well presume. But the Excommunicates happen in this Case to be mentioned by our Author: and in a manner, that though it may seem to weaken the Inference, will be found to confirm it. It is said there (k) of the Excommunicates, That it was doubted whether they might send; and also that if they did send, the Oblation would be good. And if this Place would have concluded any thing for their Freedom of Access, or for their Advantage from those Sacrifices; it would not have been omitted by Mr. Selden: whereas he rather seems to have passed it by, because he foresaw it would make against him. For he knew well that the Offering being good, signified no more than that (though it were regularly to be forborn, yet) the Reception of it by the Priests was no Profanation (k): and he could not but discern, That this Unlawfulness of Sending implied the Unlawfulness of their Coming; for otherwise no such Doubt could have been made concerning them.  
And lastly, As for those Excommunicates, who were ranked with Lepers, or who were absolutely Cut off; it cannot but seem probable, That these were denied Entrance not into the Temple only, but even into the Holy City.  
The contrary therefore to what Mr. Selden so often asserts is very evident, That no Excommunicate Person could go into the Court of the Israelites, and that many of them could go no further than the Outmost Court: and it appears to be very likely, That those who lay under the more grievous Sentence, were utterly excluded even from the Privileges of a pious Heathen. This distance They themselves were obliged in Conscience to keep: and if any of them were suffered by the Priests to come nearer; it must have been from the Want, either of Authority in the Judge that did excommunicate, or of a Certificate of the Excommunication.  
§. IU. AND now we come to the New Testament; and there possibly we may have an Instance of the  Rebuke, in that Reproof given by our Saviour to St. Peter, 
(a) Matth. 16.23.  Get thee behind me, etc. but of their Excommunication the Mentions are confessed. And in that Case when any One is said there to be put out of the Synagogue 
(b) Joh. 9.22.16.2. , as Mr. Selden is ready to understand him separated and secluded from the Communication of the People of Israel in Civil Affairs; so we are to have leave to suppose him ejected likewise out of the Synagogue Place, and deprived of the Liberty of the Temple.  
And further, when our Saviour directs 
(c) Matth. 18.15.  an offended Brother to admonish the Offender first in Private, afterwards before Two or Three Witnesses, and then to bring him before the Church or Consistory, and if he does not then amend, but continues obstinate, to esteem him as a Heathen and a Publican: this may well be taken to direct a Private Charitable Course, (used on other Occasions by the Jews 
(d) §. I. ,) to be tried in this Case, before the Judicial Proceed begin. And than what follows, may be very properly understood of the Validity of the Sentence of Excommunication, if, by the Obstinacy of the Party, the Process must be carried so far; What ye bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven, and what ye lose on Earth, shall be loosed in Heaven. That is (in the Jewish way of Speaking, something of which may be seen in this Chapter 
(e) §. III. ,) the so Condemned and Excommunicated Below, and by Men, shall be held as Excommunicated Above in Heaven, and by GOD himself: and the Absolved by the Consistory below, shall be Absolved by the Consistory above. This Meaning supported by the Practice of the Jews, and consonant to their Expressions (f), the Place certainly admits; and so naturally, as not to be easily set aside by the bare force of an uncertain Criticism upon a single Word (g).  
Our Saviour in all probability may be supposed to speak of Excommunication there: but we find expressly the Actual Excercise of it in the Church of Corinth, directed by St. Paul upon the Person of a grievous Offender; and the Sentence given, Therefore put away from yourselves that wicked Person 
(h) 1 Cor. 5.13. . And though any one should insist upon the Variety of Rendering which may be used on that Text, and translate it wicked Thing, yet that Thing must be understood of the Person that did this Deed 
(i) 5.2. , and who ought to have been taken away from among the Congregation, and delivered to Satan 
(k) 5. , that is, Cast out of the Communion of Christ our Saviour and Comforter, or Advocate, and delivered up to Satan, to be accused and tormented by him. Here is an Act of Excommunication: and a Precedent of Absolution from it we have upon the same Person in the Second Epistle; the Forgiving and Comforting of him by the Church 
(l) 2 Cor. 2.7. , confirmed by the Apostles Forgiveness also 
(m) 2.10. .  
And thus Excommunication, so which whenever it was introduced among the Jews, whether by Moses, or some other Prophet, had long obtained among them before our Saviour's time; is, as we find, in probability countenanced and ordered by Him, and certainly commanded and executed by his Apostle: and how this Practice was continued in the succeeding Ages, we shall see anon.  

§. I. (a) They call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Morinus de ●oen. lib. 4. c. 28.4.  
(b) This is known by the Name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Niddui, a word that signifies Separatio, Elongatio; as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Separatio, Amotio, propter Immunditiem. And to this the Arabic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abegit, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aversatus est, Abhorruit, agree.  
(f) Called Cherem from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Excludere, Anathematizare, Devovere, Disperdere: The Hebrew word, as is usual, containing in it the Signification of two Arabic Words of similary Initial Letters; the One 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 firmiter Ligavit, Repulit, Prohibuit, Vetuit; and the Other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Resecuit, Excidit, Perdidit, Extirpavit.  
(i) The supposed third Degree was styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shammatha: and taken to be derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibi est mors; or from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deus venit, as if it were the same with Maranatha. But the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, instead of such a peculiar Notion, is known to signify at large separare, excludere à Societare hominum; and to be put frequently for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and so it may be the same with the Arabic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is of the like Signification, connoting the same Inm●ndities.  
§. III (g) Maim. lib. 8. seu de Cult. Divin. Tract. 3. cap. 1. §. 17. ex Interpret. Ludou. de Veil. Porro cuivis Interdictum erat Sacerdoti, juxta atque Israelitae, ne Vino usus, vel quacunque ratione Temulentus, new incultè atque horride Capillatus, aut Pannis Obsitus, omnino in Templum veniret; ne intra primum quidem illud Atrium Israelitarum. Id enim lege sancitum non erat: verum Gloria & Reverentia hujus Magnificae Domus non patiebatur in eam quemquam intrare Sordidatum [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉].  
(h) Ibidem cap. 2. §. 11. Lugens igitur Hebdomada tota munus ad Alta●e mittebat nullum, nec Vinum quidem, neque Ligna, neque Thus. Similiter Homo Leprosus nihil quicquam muneris ad Altare mittebat. Nam quamdiu hominem intra Castra venire non licebat, nec licebat cum Sacrificia facere. De homine autem ab Ecclesi● communione sejuncto [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] dubium est, Is utrum munus ad Altare mittere posset, necne. Quare Sacrificium ejus, si factum esset, bene fuisset [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] (k). §. 12. Nam per Serpentem Animantem aut Rem Consimilem Inquinatus Homo, item & Incircumcisus, si Sacrificia ad Altare misisset, sane pro illo sierent.— Verum enim pro homine Funere Poliuto nullum siebat Sacrisicium, interea dum Purificabatur.  
(k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies in many places not an Acceptation with Favour, but with Pardon; a Connivance and Sufferance. For so it is used often; as, (to give but one Instance) when it is said, [Lib. eodem, Tract. 7.11.20.] That a Handful of Frankincense, taken out of an Offering afterwards Polluted, was itself not to be burnt on the Altar: but if it were burnt, it was accepted [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉]. And so, though in another Phrase where the Discourse is concerning the Intention with which the Sacrifice was to be offered, [Cap. 14. §. 1.] It is also said, That the wrong Intention of the Priest made the Abomination: but if That was Right, though the Owner of the Sacrifice were heard to speak what would cause Abomination, yet the Sacrifice was Good [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉].  
§. iv (f) Several Persons are said by the Jews to be Excommunicated in Heaven, or by GOD, [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉]: as the Children of Israel in the Wilderness, (so mentioned in the Cheseph Misna upon the above-cited Place of Maimonides, 8, 3, 2.11.); and those spoke of in the Gemara, alleged by Mr. Selden, de Syn. 1.7. The Form too of a Cherem, produced by him in his Book de Jure Nat. & Gent. 4.7. is said to be pronounced ex sententia Dei, & ex sententia Ecclesiae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(g) His Assertion in his Book, de Syn. l. 1. c. 9 towards the End, is thus: Expresso Obligationis seu Ligationis nomine ipse Excommunicandi actus nuliibi, quantum observavi, apud Hebraos veteres d●●iga●●ur: And he had shown there before (and afterwards at large, l. 2. c. 7. §. 2.) That the Phrase to Bind and to Lose, in the Usage of the Jews, signifies to Declare Unlawful and Lawful, to Forbidden and Permit.  
This, it is true, is now the usual Signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and commonly an Excommunicate is not termed Bound, but Separated or Devoted, [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉]. But the Word still continues most properly to signify Bound, and stands for Illicitum, as it is quid Inhibitum: just as the Arabic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for Vetitum, under the Notion of Prohibitum. And besides it frequently in the Old Testament stands for something bound upon another: as our Saviour speaks of those that did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [Matth. 23.4.]; and as a Condemned Person may be said to be Bound by a Sentence. And whatever the Reason was, why the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not commonly used to signify One Excommunicate; it was not, because the Notion of Binding did not agree to that Sentence. For that of Absolving still remains, when the Excommunication is withdrawn; and the Ordinary Expression for that Act is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to Lose and Set at Liberty. Nay, contrary to the Learned Author's Negative Observation, the very Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for Excommunication in one Passage of the Gemara, cited by himself (the seventh Chapter of the same Book); where one Rabbi Samuel is brought in speaking of the Sound of the Horn, with which the Sentence was Pronounced and Revoked, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
I therefore may more reasonably suppose, That the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not so frequently used for Excommunication, not because it more properly signified to Declare Unlawful, (for Words of Losing, though signifying to declare Lawful, continued also to signify the Absolution of an Excommunicate); but because it bore another Sense of being Tied and Bound up together, (as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are Fasciculus, Manipulus,) a Sense opposite to Separation and Distance, which Excommunication implies. This also is one of its Arabic Significations where both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in itself and Derivatives, imports besides the Sense of Binding, that of Proximity of Kindred: and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, besides that of inclusit, Coercuit, and Peccatum, and Onus, has in it also that of Cognatio, Affinitas; and the more general Signification of Propinquus; and thence Vicinus fuit, Tentorium fixit Proxime à Tentorio alterius. And this last Acception (if the Excursion is pardonable) the like Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apparently requires, in that known Phrase [1 King's 14.10.] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is commonly rendered Shut up and Left, but seems rather to mean, Those who live together in neighbouring Tents, and those who live alone, and at a Distance, with their  in the Field; (for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have in them the Significations of Long à Mansione & seorsim abesse, sub dio versari, cum pecoribus suis procul ab hominibus pastum recedere:) these Two Sorts of People, with those that lived in Walled Houses, making up the whole Number of the Children of Israel.    

CHAP. VI  
§. I. Circumstances ralating to Baptism, under Five Heads; practised in the Church of Christ in the Second Century.  
§. II. These all agreeable to Jewish Custom: and First, in General; as to the Persons baptised and Baptising, and the Solemn Time of Baptism:  
§. III. In Particular; Secondly, as to the Distinction and Instruction of its Candidates;  
§. IU. Thirdly, As to the Action of Baptism;  
§. V. Fourthly, Its Confirmation;  
§. VI And Lastly, the Sequel and Close of the whole Ceremony.  
§. I. HOW much the Ordinances of Christianity, Recorded in the Scripture, agree with those of the Jewish Church, we have seen. Now several Circumstantials of those Ordinances are remembered to have been practised in the next Age; as well as several other Usages, of which the Scripture is silent: and whether they were not derived from the Jews also, we now come to consider.  
I begin with the Rituals and Circumstances of Baptism, many of which were undoubtedly practised very early in the second Age, being mentioned by Tertullian at the latter end of it, as used then by the Church time out of Mind.  
Now this Author, in his Treatise which he writ expressly of Baptism, and besides scatteringly in other places, hath happily informed us, both in general, concerning the Persons capable of Receiving this Sacrament, Those Able to give it, and the Common Time of Administering it: and also, particularly, concerning the Administration of it, letting us know some Circumstantials of the Preparation to the Action, of the Action itself, of the Seal or Confirmation of it, and of the Solemnity that afterwards attended it.  
First, 
What I have added in this Column for Explication, is taken out of other Authors, not later than the IVth. Century.  The Church at that time Baptised Children, their Godfathers undertaking for 'em (a); as well as Grown Persons: and the Solemn Time for the Administration of that Sacrament was (b) the Paschal Season 
1 [Saturday in the Evening before Easter-Day, Cyril. Cat. Mist. 1. Ambr. de Sacram. 1.1.] . The High Priest, who is the Bishop, had the Right of conferring it; and the Presbyters and Deacons by his Authority: tho' the Lay-Men, in Case of Necessity, had Right to give it also (c).  
Secondly, The Church then made a Distinction (d) between the common Gentile or Jew, and one of them in some measure persuaded to Christianity, called a Hearer, or one under Instruction; who professed Repentance for his past Life; as well as between the last sort, and a perfect Christian 
2 [Those of the Middle Kind, and not yet Christians, were also (at least afterwards) subdistinguished. The Hearers were such as had been informed of some general and Preliminary Points of the True Religion (e), and were half come over: if Heathens, having renounced their Idolatry and gross Immorality; and if Jews, acknowledging the True Messia; but not yet entirely satisfied in all Points necessary: suffered therefore to hear the Scriptures and Sermons for their further Conversion. The Catechumen, or those under Instruction, were willing to become Christians, and resolved it; but either did not esteem themselves worthy as yet, or were not fully approved by the Church: and these had their particular Instruction, from whence they were called; and professing Repentance for the Sins of their Unconverted State, had the Privilege to stay after Sermon, and to have the Prayers of the Congregation for them, and to be dismissed with a Blessing. And lastly, when they were admitted to stand for Baptism, they then entered into a stricter Course of Repentance, and had the peculiar Articles of the Faith more plainly inculcated, called now the Enlightened; and after frequent Examination and Scrutiny, were at last Received into the Body of the Faithful (f)]. . And those were not promiscuously admitted in its Assemblies; but had their distinct places assigned 'em 
3 [The Places of Assembly, or Churches, had commonly an Area, or Court before them, Cloistered on either Hand (Fig. 2. aa); beyond the Court, to the East generally, was the Building, which we may conceive, at present, to have been in Three Divisions, whether they were separated or not within by any Raised Partitions, or distinguished without by any Difference of Structure. The Lowermost next the Outer Doors, we may call the Ante-Church (Fig. 2. AB), the Next was the Church CD, and the Last the Apartment of the Altar, or Sanctuary (OF). Now the Ante-Church was also subdivided into Two Parts: and in the Lowermost Part, or Portico (A), and next to the Court, was the Place of the Hearers properly so called: The Catechumens' Station (B), was above them, next to the Church: And in the Head of them the Enlightened or Immediate Candidates were, I suppose, posted; being those who were in a little while to proceed further, and to be taken into the Church itself, the Place of the Faithful. And so the Faithful themselves were orderly disposed, according to the Difference of their Sex and Age: and the Church was likewise in Two distinct Parts; having the Desk or Pulpit (S), in the Middle: that Below the Desk answering near to the Body of our Collegiate Churches (C), belonging to the Women chief, who were seated in the Sides of it beneath, and in Galleries above (cc): and the Upper Part (D), belonging to the Men; the Whole, or the greater Portion of which, is now taken up by our Choir (g). .  
Thirdly, The Person to be Baptised protested first, [among other things,] before the Congregation, That he Renounced the Devil, his Pomp, and Angels (h). Thence he went to the Water, and made the same Renunciation again 
4 [For being come to the Porch of the Baptistery, he turned to the West, and stretching out his Hands, spoke to Satan as if present; I renounce thee, Satan, etc. Cyr. Cat. Mist. and then turning to the East, he said the Creed; and going into the Baptistery, he was stripped, ibid.] : and then he dipped thrice, with solemn Responses (h) 
5 [For being asked, whether he believed in God the Father, etc. he answered, I believe, and was dipped: and so at the second and third Questions concerning the other two Persons of the Trinity. Cyrill. Cat. M. 2. Ambr. de Sacr. 3.2.] .  
Fourthly, When he came out of the Water, he both tasted (h) of a mixture of Milk and Honey; and was anointed (i) with the Blessed Ointment, [the Chrism] as heretofore the Sons of Aaron had been anointed to the Priesthood.  
He was also signed (k) or sealed with the Sign of the Cross on the Forehead 
6 [Some Difference of Practice there was here between the Latin and Greek Church. In the Greek the Chrism was given by the Person that officiated, on the Forehead as well as on the other Parts of the Body: [Cyril. C. M. 3.] as now their Priest Anoints the Baptised, signing them with the Cross, in the Forehead, and Eyes, and Nostrils, and Ears, and upon the Breast, and on their Hands and Feet; and leaves only Impositio of Hands to be conferred by the Bishop at any time afterward; the Practice, as I conceive, of our Church (l). Whereas in the Latin Church the Priest anointed the other Parts, pouring the Chrism upon the Head: but it was reserved to the Bishop's confirmation, to sign the Forehead with the Chrism at the same time he laid on his Hands [Innoc. ad Decent.]. And this signing they called the Spiritual Seal, [Ambros. de Sacram. 3, 2.] the Holy Ghost being supposed to be given by that and the Imposition of Hands. And this Confirmation the Bishop, when present at the Baptism, administered to the Baptised when he had put on the white Garments after his first Anointing. [Ambros. de ●is qui Mist. Init. c. 7.] . And lastly, Hands were laid upon him with a Blessing, calling and inviting down the Holy Ghost (m); and, as the same Author expresses it, he was overshadowed by the Imposition of Hands (n).  
Fifthly, The next Morning (if not immediately) on Easter-day, they proceeded to the Eucharist (k) 
7 [In the Greek Church, even the Infants receiving it.] : and wore their white Garments all the next Week; not allowing themselves the Use of Bathing for that time (h) 
8 [When also they had more perfectly expounded to them the Nature of those two great Mysteries, the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist, to which they had been lately admitted: (as we see in the Mystagogick▪ Discourses of Cyril of Jerusalem, made for that purpose.) .  
§ II. WITH so many Circumstances was the Initiation into the Church begun, and perfected, in those early days of Christianity: neither is it to be imagined that all these Rituals were the pure Invention of such Simple Plain men, as the first Christians appear to have been; much less can it be thought that they were borrowed, by those pious men, from the Heathen Idolatry. Whence therefore should most of these Circumstantials be derived, but from the same Religion, from which the Sacrament itself was taken? And whence else should They derive them, who had been originally of that Religion, or Well-willers to it, as most of the first Christians were?  
This conjectural Conclusion the account given above of Jewish Baptism 
(a) Ch. I. § 2, 3. , which we suppose the Reader to remember, will confirm: and it may be so far, as to make us willing to suppose, that a more exact Correspondence would have appeared, if the Information from the Jews had been less defective.  
For First, That the Jews proselyted Children by Baptism we have there seen: and also that they required Sureties for them; which we shall the less doubt, when we know that they do not Circumcise a Natural Jew, without a Godfather and Godmother 
(b) Buxt. Syn. Jud. ●. 4. . The Passover also was their chief Festival; and their Converts in probability capacited themselves by Baptism, then particularly, for its celebration: neither could the natural Jews themselves 
(c) Maim. de Sacrific. Tract. 1. cap. 9 § 9  partake of it, if they had any Servant of their House Uncircumcised; and, as I suppose consequently, Unbaptised. These sorts of men therefore I presume were amongst those who purified themselves before the Feast, and added to the Solemnity of the Week or Fortnight before 
(d) Part 1. ch. 5. § 3. . And lastly, tho' any Three would serve to confer it, yet regularly it was to be done by commission from the Consistory, and I presume by the Appointment of the Father or Precedent of it, to whom we suppose the Bishop to answer 
(e) Ch. 4. § 5. .  
§. III. Secondly, There was likewise a great Distinction of Persons made by the Jews. There was a Common Gentile: and there was one who believed the Unity of God, and took upon him to observe the Precepts to be kept by all the Descendants of Noah 
(a) Maim. Tract. de Regibus, cap. 8. § 11. , tho' he did not oblige himself further yet; and this was a degree of approach into which he was solemnly admitted, being called a Proselyte of their Gate, as one permitted to live amongst them in the Holy-land. Further, there were those who professed their desire to become Jews 
(b) Ibid. § 10. : and this Profession we find was solemn, and they reputed by it of another rank; for if they did not proceed to make it good within a Twelvemonth, they were degraded, we are told, and to be esteemed as a mere Heathen. There was too yet, as it should seem, a further Class, of such Stranger Servants as were Circumcised and Baptised in the Quality of Servants 
(c) Maim. Tract. de Proh Congressu, cap. 13. § 11. , but wanted still a further Baptism to complete them Jews: as there were others, who were Circumcised and Baptised into perfect Judaisme, but not yet Sanctified by a Sacrifice 
(d) Above Ch. 2. §. 2. . The Proselytes of the Jews were distinguished by these Advances: and it is plain, that their Proselyte of the First kind, the Proselyte of the Gate, was of the same rank with a Hearer; and also that he who undertook to become a Jew, was in the nature of a Christian Catechumen; as he who was in immediate Preparation to be Circumcised, or was Circumcised, but waiting to be Baptised, was in a like Class to that of the Immediate Candidates and Probationers for our Baptism; and he too who was actually Baptised into Judaisme, but not yet Expiated by Sacrifice, was in the Condition of one Baptised a Christian, but yet Unconfirmed, and not admitted to full Communion. So were the Steps made by a Convert of the Jews, agreeable to those of a Proselyte to Christianity. The Instruction also by which he was gradually brought on 
(e) The same §.  was much alike to that recommended in the Apostolical Constitutions 
(f) See Note (e) of the former §. , proceeding gently and by easy ascents. Neither is it to be doubted, but that the Jews were severe enough in their Scrutiny of him, since they were so shy of Proselytes 
(g) The Section above cited of the Second Chapter. , and that a solemn Profession of Repentance for his former Heathenism was required of him.  
Now it is probable likewise, that these different sorts of Persons with the Jews, had their different Places and liberties of Access. For the Apostolic Constitutions themselves suppose the placing of the Faithful in the Assembly according to their Sex and Age, to be after the pattern of the Temple (h). And as a Christian Church has been described to be separated in two Partitions, whereof the Upper part [D Fig. 2] belongs to Men, or the Chief of them, and such as peculiarly attend on the Sacred Offices; and the Lower part [C] to Women, who are disposed of on either side of it, leaving the middle for a Passage, and to be taken up by Ordinary men, or such who are not provided to go higher: so we see 
(i) Ch. 5. §. 3.  that in the Temple the Jews were likewise ordered in two Courts; whereof the Lower [C Fig. 1] called that of the Women, had Galleries for them on either hand [cc], and in the middle those Men stayed, who came only to Worship, and had no Offering to make 
(k) Lightfoot Temple-Serv. ch. 18. ; whereas the further Court of the Israelites [D] was the proper place of those private Persons who brought their Oblations, and of those Stationary men, whose Office it was to attend upon the Daily Service.  
And as the two Courts of the Temple belonging to the Israelites, Men and Women, correspond with the places of the Faithful in our Churches; so will the Stations of the Aspirers towards Judaisme be found answerable to those of the Advancers towards Christianity. The Second Court, or rather Alley [B Fig. 1.] next the Court of the Women, where those stood who were Circumcised into Judaisme, but not Baptised, is represented by the Inner Portico, or Narthex, [B Fig. 2.] of an old Christian Church, where the immediate Candidates were placed, and to whom all the Catechumeni were properly enough added. And so the First Court, that of the Gentiles [A Fig. 1.] is manifestly parallel with the outward Portico [A Fig. 2.] of the Christian Hearers: as the space without the Temple, within Jerusalem, [a Fig. 1.] answers to the Cloistered Area [a Fig. 2.] before a Church.  
This Resemblance the four first Partitions of a Church bear to the four first Courts of the Temple: and the same Correspondence was, I suppose, formerly observable in a Jewish Synagogue. For this sort of Edifice is described by Maimonides 
(l) Tract. de Precibus, cap. 11 sect. 2, 3, 4. , with a Desk [S Fig. 3.] in the middle, from which the Law is read, and Sermons are made; and by which it was of old divided in Two Parts. In the Highest, at the upper end looking towards the Holy-land, the Law is placed in the Wall (m), in an Ark [P Fig. 3.]; and on each side the Elders are seated in a Semicircle, their Faces towards the Desk and the People, none else being suffered regularly to sit there (m 2). And in the Lower the People were orderly disposed of, the Women being in Galleries on the sides. So do these two Divisions of the Synagogue answer to the two Temple-Courts of the Men and Women: and tho' they now have no Provision for Newcomers, because they expect not Proselytes (g); yet it can't be doubted but that heretofore the Pious Heathens had their places; and those who desired to be made Jews, theirs; the Heathens, I suppose, in an outward Porch [A Fig. 3.]; and the designed Converts in an inner [B Fig. 3.], the place next within the Door, and beyond which those who come to Pray are now directed to go 
(m) Main, Tract. de Precibus, cap. 8. sect. 2. .  
§. IU. Thirdly, AS the Christian Proselyte, so the Jewish, no doubt, made his first Renunciation in a Congregation; for if he was a Male, he was not to be circumcised, but in the Presence of Ten Persons 
(a) Buxt. Syn. c. 4. . And, I suppose, as he was not admitted without the Approbation of the Consistory, so not without the Privity of the Synagogue, that any person might have the opportunity and liberty to object in the case of a new Member, as they had in case of an Officer (b).  
When too this Proselyte of the Jews came to the Baptistery, or place of Water, he had the Interrogatories put to him again, as we are told expressly; and upon that was dipped, etc. and here the Parallel is very clear, as we have seen before 
(c) Ch. 2. sect. 2. .  
Further, I would with the Reader's leave offer a guess, that the Renunciation was made too by the Jew, towards One Point of the Compass; and that he after turned to the contrary, and so entered the Water. For it is certain, when he was once from under the Water, and was become a Jew, he had then for ever afterwards a new Point of Direction impressed, and in all his Devotions was to turn his Face towards the Holy Temple 
(d) Maim. Tract. de Precibus, cap. 5. sect. 3. . Nor is it unlikely therefore that he put himself in that Position, when he entered upon that Sacred Action; and that taking his leave of the opposite part of the World, he took care to rise up with that Prospect before him: after the manner of the Jews their Predecessors, when they were baptised again in Jordan, and passed through it to the Holy-Land.  
In like manner I am apt to think, that the proselyted Jew tasted of Milk and Honey; both as it was the first Food of a Newborn Infant, and the Product of the Land into which he was now naturalised. Neither let it be thought that such Conjectures beg the Question; and that where I should prove a Parallel, I only fancy it. For as soon as we know that this Ceremony, for Example, was in use so early in the World; we cannot but observe, that it was very proper for the Jews, more proper for them than for Christians: and that therefore in all likelihood it was rather invented by them, from whom the Christians confessedly borrowed many other remarkable Circumstances of the same Action, and with whom such Ceremonies as these abounded. And no question, as the Rabbins inform us of many a Rite, of which the old Testament speaks not a little; so there were many more, which they have passed by, and left in Oblivion, even in Subjects of which they expressly treat; and much more in this of Proselytism, on which the Talmudical Treatise is missing, as Mr. Selden informs me 
(e) De jure Nat. & Gent. Sec. Hebr. lib. 2. cap. 5 sub finem. . But of this particular Rite we shall much less wonder, that the Use of it with the Jews is forgot; when we consider, that were it not for some few Writers, there would have been no footstep of its Practice left amongst us Christians.  
§. V. Fourthly, I proceed to the Seal of this Baptismal Action, its Confirmation; and shall again offer to the Reader the probability of its correspondence with the Jewish Rites on the same occasion.  
It will be easily imagined, that this New Convert, who was now become an Israelite, and had the Title to all the Honours and Privileges of it, would make haste to be put into possession of the Greatest, the Admission into the Holy Temple, and to the Solemn Worship of God: Neither will the Reader think, after so much Ceremony used upon this Proselyte before, that this last Act of introducing him into the House of God, was without its share of Formality.  
And that there was to be a Confirmation of the Jewish Baptism, we know already in gross: and also in particular, that it was performed by a Burnt-Offering, joined most ordinarily with a Peace-Offering, the Proselyte sprinkled with the Blood 
(a) Ch. 2. sect. 2. as afore. : but other Circumstances of that Action I do not find; and beg the Reader's leave again to conjecture at them from other similary cases.  
For, first, a Proselyte new baptised, and purged from all his former Sin, and admitted to the number of Believers, but not yet received into their Station in God's House, was very like to a Leper, recovered from the Plague of his Leprosy, (which with the Jews resembles a Sinful Life) whose Flesh was as that of a Child; and who, being now purged and washed, and restored thereby to the Society of his Brethren, was at the distance of seven days to be readmitted into his former place in the Temple. And that Solemnity was performed in the following manner, as we know both from the Scripture and Maimonides 
(b) Lib. de Sacr. Iract. 5. Cap. 4. . The clean Leper being again washed in the Court of the Women, and come up to the Door of the next Court, the Court of the Israelites, offered there a Sin, and a Trespass, and a Burnt-Offering; and was then anointed with the Blood of the Sin-Offering on the tip of his Ear, on the Thumb and great Toe of his right side. Afterwards, (for this might be done 
(c) Ibid. cap. 5. sect. 4. de Cult. Divin. Tract. 7. Cap. 18. Sect. 8.  many days after the other) he was anointed with Oil on the same parts out of the Priest's hand; and what remained was poured on his Head.  
And further, the Purification of a Proselyte to come near to God into that Court, was something of the same nature with the Consecrution of a Priest, which was nothing else but his Purification to come nearer yet, and to pass into another Court: and how that was done we learn from Leviticus 
(d) Leu. 8. . There was first a Bullock offered for their Sins, and a Burnt-Offering; and then after a Peace-Offering, with the Blood of which Aaron and his Sons were anointed, in the same parts in which the Lepers were. After this, with a mixture of that Blood and the Holy Ointment, they and their Clothes were sprinkled. And besides, on Aaron's Head (if not on his Son's too) the Holy Ointment was poured; and on his Forehead (as the Rabbins 
(e) Maim. de Cult. Diu. Tract. 2. Cap. 1. Sect. 9 Seld. de Success. in Pont. lib. 2. cap. 9  tell us) Moses the Consecrator made with part of it the Sign of a Cross, like a Greek X (they say) or what we call St. Andrew's Cross. For tho' the Forehead be not mentioned in the Text to be so marked, yet it was the place on which the Plate of Gold was wore by Aaron, that had on it the Inscription of the Name of God, graven in it like the graving of a Signet 
(f) Exod. 28.36. . There too one of the two Phylacteries (or, as the Jews style them, Praying-Dresses) are now always placed, hanging down from the top of the Forehead between the Eyes, and having on it a Name of God 
(f 2) Buxt. Syn. Jud. cap. 9 . And there those were marked with a Mark 
(g) Ezek. 9.4.  in Ezekiel, who were to be spared by the Destroyer's: and marked they were, as some of the Rabbins understand 
(h) Ki●chi in locum. , with the Hebrew Letter Ta●, which St. Jerome tells us was like a Cross in the old Samaritan Alphabet; like to which is the last Coptick Letter of the same sound; and as probably the old Greek T might be first made when it came from Phaenice, the downright Stroke beginning a little higher above the transverse. Answerable to this Mark of Ezekiel is that made for the same purpose in the Revelations 
(i) Rev. 7.2.— 13.16. , by the Seal of the Living God upon the Forehead of the Elect: as there were others who had the Mark of the Beast on their Hands, or on their Foreheads, (the two places where the two Phylacteries of the Jews are fastened;) and as it was the Custom of the Eastern Idolaters to be marked with the peculiar Mark of their supposed Deity, and particularly on the Forehead.  
Thus was the Consecration of Aaron and his Sons performed: and tho' the succeeding High-Priests were for some time Anointed; yet, as the Rabbins say, they ceased to be so inaugurated before the first Captivity. And as for the ordinary Priests that followed, they were never admitted to their Office by a new Unction: but their Consecration was, in this like the Baptism of a Proselyte, not to be reiterated, and supposed to descend down upon them from their first Progenitors. The Kings also of the Jews, we are to remember, were anointed with an Ointment, but not of the Holy Composition; and those only, according to their Tradition, who were the First of their Race, or under a questioned Title 
(k) Selden. ut Supra litera e.   
Now then, as the Leper and Priest were Purified much after the same fashion, and as the Case of a Proselyre agrees with either of them, so I am willing to suppose that his Purification was performed in a mixed manner, betwixt those used to the other two.  
The Offerings for Sin used to both of them, a newborn Proselyte did not want; and he therefore might be purified by Ointment, as both of them were, either alone, or mixed with the Blood of the Burnt-Offering; which Ointment might neither be simple Oil, nor was it to be of the Holy Sort, but of another kind, as that for Royal Inaugurations was. The Ointment was poured on the Heads of the Leper and Highpriest, and also of their Kings: and so, I suppose, it was upon the Head of the Proselyte, after some parts of him had likewise been anointed with it before. For, as he was clean from the sinful Leprosy of his former state, so he was now admitted to be one of that Holy Nation a Royal Priesthood, or Kingdom of Priests: and therefore, I presume, the Ointment on his Head was accordingly on his Forehead drawn in some such Figure as might mark him to be Holy to God. And after all, it cannot be doubted but that the Priest laid his Hands upon him, and blessed him; that God might list up the Light of his Countenance, and his Holy Spirit might rest upon him. And if this was performed upon a Proselyte, probably it was not all to be done by an ordinary Priest; but the Proselytism was confirmed by the leave and direction of the Highpriest, or his Vicegerent, and the Blessing at least received from a superior Hand.  
I again confess, that this Rubric of Jewish Confirmation is drawn from Conjecture: but we are sure of our Ground, having their Authority, that there was actually such a Confirmation of a Jewish Proselyte: and we had reason, from the Agreement in other parts of this great Ceremony, to presume it here. We know too, that Things and Persons were Consecruted by Ointment, as well as by Blood; that the Ointment was used alone to the Priest, and apart to the Leper; and that the Forehead was the place with them for a Mark of the Name of God, which all the Faithful were supposed to wear.  
Tho' therefore we have no express account left us of this Proceeding, yet we have reason to surmise it; and not only from the Practice I have given of the Jews in similary cases, but from frequent Allusions to such Particulars as these made in the New Testament. And, to mention but one, tho' I do not at all think with some, that St. Paul refers to Christian Practice, yet I do not know but he may to Jewish, and give us the Process of their Confirmation, when he says, Now he who establisheth [confirmeth] us with you in Christ, and has anointed us in God; who hath also Sealed us, and given the Earnest of the Spirit in our Hearts (l).  
§ VI Fifthly, And lastly, what followed after the Christian Baptism so confirmed is consonant likewise to Jewish Practice. For as the Christians new Baptised omitted not to partake of the Eucharist the next morning; so the Jewish Proselytes added ordinarily to their Holocaust a Peace-Offering 
(a) Ch. 2. §. 2. , on which they also might feast before the Lord: neither can it be doubted but that their Infants, if proselyted with them, did partake of the same Sacrifice.  
And as to the White Garments, and the following Weekly Solemnities, tho' we know not certainly whether they were used by the Jewish Proselytes, or no; yet this we know, that they were at other times used by the Jews, and on like occasions. A Jewish Baptism, with the subsequent Confirmation, was, as we have observed, a kind of Consecration of the Proselyte: And as to the consecrated Priest, his Habit was White Linen; that he put on at his entrance into his Office, and in that he is said to have appeared, when upon any Question concerning his Sacerdotal Pedigree, the Sentence was given for him, and he was declared to be of that Order 
(b) Maim. de Cult. Diu. Tract. 3. cap. 6. sest. 11. . When too the Priests received their first Consecration, the Holy Action, we know 
(c) Levit. 8.33. , continued for a Week, to exercise and perfect them in their Office; and all that while they were to attend incessantly in the Tabernacle, for the anointing Oil of the Lord was upon them 
(d) 8.7. . And for the last reason, I suppose, they washed not all that while, no more than the Stationary Men, who were not to wash, as we are expressly told 
(e) Maim. de Cult. Diu. Tract. 2. cap. 6. sect. 11.  in their Weekly Wait.  

§ I. (a) Tertull. de Baptisino, cap. 18. Itaque pro cujusque personae conditione at Dispositione, etiam Aetate, cunctatio Baptismi utilior est: praecipue tamen circa Parvulos. Quid enim necesse est Sponsores etiam periculo●●ingeri; qui & ipsi per mortalitatem destituere Promissiones suas possunt, & proventu malae Indolis falli?  
(b) Ibid. cap. 19 Diem Baptismo Solenniorem Pascha praestat.  
(c) Ibid. cap. 17. Dandi jus habet Summus sacerdos, qui est Episcopus; dehine Presbyteri, & Diaconi; non tamen sine Episcopi autoritate, propter Eccles●ae honorem, quo salvo salva pax est. Alioquin etiam Laicis jus est.  
(d) That there was in general such a distinction as follows of Persons and Places, appears from this single Passage of Tertull. De Prefer. Haeret. cap. 41. Non omittam ipsius etiam Conversationis Haereti●oe descriptionem. Inprimis quis Catechumenus, quis Fidelis, incertum est: pariter Adeunt, pariter Audiunt, pariter Orant. Etiam' Etknici si supervenerint; sanctum canibus, & Porcis Margaritas licet non veras, jactabunt. And as the word Catechumenus is used here, so in his Book De Poenit. cap. 6. Auditores and Audientes are opposed to Intincti; and they are there spoken of as Novitioli, Qui incipiwt Divinis Sermonibus aures rigare,— & dicunt Tristinis Renunciare, & Poenitentiant assumunt.  
(e) In the Apostolic Constitutions, lib. 7. 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is directed to be first taught, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc.  
(f) This Subdistinction is evident from the 〈…〉 IVth Century, and particularly from St. Cyril of Jeru●●●●● 〈…〉  
(g) Such an ancient distinction of Places in general 〈…〉 ●●ted already from Tertullian (Note d), and denied by none 〈…〉 such a particular form of an Ancient Church; as I have 〈◊〉 given (Fig. 2.) is the same with that represented by Gear it. 〈◊〉 Euchologium.  
Neither do I choose Goar's Model, because it will ●●st suit w●●n the comparison I am going to make; but because it se●● more agreeable to the Truth, and has less of Confusion in it, th●n that which Leo Allatius (De Temp. Gracorum) has figured out, and which others have chose to follow. And for this I have the Authority not only of Morinus, who had considered the matter, and wrote a Treatise about it (as he tells us, De Paenit. lib. 6. cap. c. §. 8.); but also of Du Fresne more lately, who in his Description of Sancta Sophia has given the Controversy on Goar's side.  
For they both rightly judge, that the Name of Narthex, which is now given, and has been so a long while to the Nave [C] of a Grecian Church, did not anciently nor properly belong to it, but to the Porticoes before it: Morin●s discerning [Ibid. cap. 3. sect. 2.], and Du Fresne further demonstrating [Constantinop. Christ. lib. 3. cap. 18.], That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a Narrow Oblong, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. They think therefore that the Audientes and Catechumeni were there at first in their proper places, tho' upon extraordinary occasions they might come into the lower part of the Church, (as Gentiles also might crowd in with them); and that afterwards, when they began to go more ordinarily into the Body of the Church, (either they taking more liberty, or the Churches wanting such Porches), they then brought in with them the Names of those Places, and the Nave was called Narthex from their assembling in it; the upper part [D], or the Choir, being thenceforth called the Church, and the names also or the Doors transferred [Mor. Ibid. c. 1. sect. 12. Du Fresne, cap. 25.]. Upon that occasion the Desk too, we may suppose, was removed from its former place [S], to an higher in the Choir, either in the middle it [Σ], or on the sides; as there was also another left in the Nave. [Of this Desk or Ambo., Morinus may be consulted in the 6th Chapter of the abovementioned Book; and Du Fresne, in the 74th and 75th Chapters of his above-cited Book; besides what Gore has said]. But, to show the ancient place of the Ambo; still, as I am told, in some Churches the Lessons are read from the Lost over the Choir Door. And so from the modern place of the Font in a Greek Church, which was used anciently to be in a House apart, but is now commonly in the inner Narthex [B], we are left to judge, where of old the place of the Catechumeni was.  
(h) This, together with what follows on this and the other Articles, is thus expressed by Tertullian, De Coron. cap. 3. Aquam adituri ibidem, sed & aliquanto prius in Ecclesia, sub Antistitis manu contestamur nos Renuntiare Diabolo, & Pompae, & Angelis ejus. Debinc ter Mergitamur, amplius aliquid Respondentes quam Dominus in Evangelis determinavit. Ind suscepti, Lactis & Mellis concordiam praegustamus: ex eaque die Lavacro quotidiano per totam hebdomadem abstinemus.  
(i) Tertull. de Baptismo, cap. 7. Exinde egressi de Lavacro perungimur benedicta Vnctione; de pristina Disciplina, quâ Vngi Oleo de cornu in Sacerdotium solebant. This Unction is expressed antecedently to the Milk and Honey in the Enumeration the same Author makes, lib. 1. advers. Marc. cap. 14. Nec aquam reprobavit Creatoris, qua suos abluit; nec Olenm, quo suos ungit; nec Mellis & Lactis societatem, qua suos Infamat; nec Panem, qno ipsum Corpus suum repraesentat.  
(k) Tertull. de Resurr. Carnis, cap. 8. Scilicet Caro eluitur, ut Anima emaculetur. Caro ungitur, ut Anima consecretur. Caro Signatur, ut & Anima muniatur. Caro manus impositione adumbratur, ut & Anima Spiritu illuminetur. Caro corpore & sanguine Christi vescitur, ut & Anima de Deo saginetur. And, that this Sign was made on the Forehead, he elsewhere tells in the comparison he makes, De Praeser. Haer. cap. 40. Mithra signat illic in Front Milites suos.  
(l) When the Priest, in our Office of Baptism, signing the Child with the Sign of the Cross on the Forehead, receives it into the Congregation of Christ's Church: for that Sign might also have been made in the Ancient Church, with Water only; according ording to that of the 22d Chapter of the 7th Book of the Apost. Constit. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(m) De Baptism. cap. 8. Dehinc manus imponitur, per Benedictionem advocans & invitans Spiritum Sanctum.  
§ III. (b) Constit. Apost. lib. 2. cap. 57 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(m) This place in the Wall, and as it were beyond the Floor of the Synagogue, seems to be, at least, as the Gate [p] entering into the Court of the Priests, from whence the Law is supposed to be fetched; if it be not as a Desk or Ducan of that Court, (of which see Lightf. Temple's. cap. 23.) by which name, if I mistake not, the Jews now call the space railed in before their Ark or Heical.  
(m 2) This last Particular is employed by Maimonidess in the place last cited, and affirmed by Buxtorf, in his Syn. Jud. cap. 10. (an Author very exact, and so esteemed by the ablest Judges): however the Jews may have given themselves the liberty to vary from it, as they do also in other disposals of the Synagogue, which Maimonides gives us, and the Author of Ceseph Misna would reconcile.  
§. iv (b) Lampridius de Alex. Severo. Vbi aliquos voluisset vel Rectores Provinciis dare, vel Praepositos facere, vel Procuratores ordinare, Nomina eorum proponebat hortans populum ut siquis quid haberet criminis probaret: dicebatque grave esse, cum id Christiani & Judaei facerent in Praedicandis Sacerdotibus qui ordinandi sunt, non fieri in Provinciarum Rectoribue, quibue & Fortun● hominum committerentur & Capita.    

CHAP. VII.  
§. I. Several Particulars practised in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, by the Primitive Christians, which varied from those of the Paschal Supper.  
§. II. These speak Our Lord's Supper to have succeeded the Paschal in its general nature, as a Memorial of Thanks.  
§. III. The Description of a Jewish Offering of Praise and Thanks, with the Feasting upon it.  
§. iv The Christian Eucharist answered to it: and in what manner.  
§. V A Tradition of the Jews, That in the days of the Messiah, only the Eucharistical Sacrifice should remain.  
§. I. THE Sacrament of the Lord's Supper has plainly appeared 
(a) Ch. 3.  to be raised by our Saviour from a Paschal Supper; and from that Original it might have been expected, that it should have been afterwards celebrated at that time of the year only, and in a Night-meal, and with Unleavened Bread: and if the First Christians shall be found to have varied in these particulars, it may perhaps seem a harder task to reconcile such a different practice with the Usage of the Jews.  
Now such a Difference there was in the Practice of the succeeding Christians.  
In the Scripture itself 
(b) Act. 2.42.  the Breaking of Bread in the Apostle's Fellowship, and with Prayers, daily repeated, is supposed to be done as an Office of that Sacramental Communion. Neither is it necessary that I should bring any Proofs from the next 〈◊〉, for such a frequent celebration of it.  
And that it was not administered with Unleavened Bread, would 〈◊〉 from its continual administration ou● 〈◊〉 the Paschal Season, and through ●●●rest of the year: But it is besides known, that the Greek Church has always used Leavened Bread on that occasion: and the Latins too are confessed, by the ingenious Jesuit Sirmondus 
(c) 〈…〉 Az●●● 〈◊〉 Op●●●●. , to have so done in the beginning; tho' their Variation since to the contrary Usage has much contributed to the widening of the Schism between those two Churches.  
This Sacrament of our Lord's Supper was known too in a little time by another Name, and was styled the Eucharist. That is the common Name of it in Tertullian (d): so it is called by Irenaeus (e): and before him, about the year 140, Justin Martyr speaking of the Sacramental Bread and Wine, says (f), And this Food is called by us the Eucharist: and in the same fence is the Word frequently used by Ignatius (g), in the very beginning of this Age.  
And as it had this Name very early, so it also changed the Hour of its Celebration very early, as I presume. Tertullian remarks the Change in these words; The Sacrament, says he (d), of the Eucharist, which our Lord ordered at the time of Meals, and to all Persons indifferently, we receive even in our Assemblies before Day, and from the hands of none but the Precedents. Likewise in Justin Martyr's Description, (in the place above-cited,) this Sacrament appears to have been then celebrated at Morning Prayer.  
And then, when the Sacramental part of the Lord's Supper was taken in the Morning, it was divided from the other Refectory part; for the same Disorders, I suppose, which the Apostle St. Paul had blamed in the Corinthians 
(h) 1 Cor. 11.20. : and this remained in its place, and continued to be a Supper, at which the Assembly met again, and feasted together with great sobriety, as before God. These Suppers, where all Christians, the Poor as well as the Rich, were admitted and entertained, were called Love-Feasts. They are expressly owned in Tertullian's Apology (i); are distinctly mentioned in Ignatius (k); and probably so to be understood in St. Judas 
(l) Judas 12. verse. . And these for some time continued in the Church; but were afterwards not so frequent; and at last, for the Disorders before spoke of, were not only disused, but forbidden.  
The Sacramental Action, as hath been said, was celebrated after the Morning Prayer, beginning with the Oblation of Bread and Wine: (and the Wine, we may observe by the by, was ordinarily mixed with Water). For those Creatures they blessed God the Father through Jesus Christ; and then, after some Prayers and Hymns, He is invoked to send down his Holy Spirit on the offered Bread and Wine, to sanctify it, and that it may become to the Worthy Receivers the Body and Blood of his Son (m): after which it was distributed by the Deacons to the People, and sent also to the Absent (f).  
§. II. This was the Christian Practice undoubtedly in the Primitive Church: nor does it want a Jewish Pattern.  
Our Saviour, as it hath been premised 
(a) 〈…〉 , took occasion from the Paschal Memorial of the Redemption of Israel out of their Egyptian Slavery, to institute a commemoration of a new and far greater Deliverance of all Mankind from the enteral Bondage of Satan and ●lell.  
And whereas it has been observed 
(b) 〈…〉  that the first Paschal Lamb of the 〈◊〉 was a Sacrifice of a mixed extraordinary nature, being in part Propitiatory, in part Federal, and partly eucharistical: It is likewise manifest, that the Sacrifice of our Saviour was also of an eminent extraordinary kind. It was a Sacrifice for Sin, taken in the most strict acception, being perfectly Expiatory: It was also Federal, for in that Blood the New Testament or Covenant was made; and in that same respect it was in some sort an Offering of Peace; obtaining not only Pardon, but Favour for Men.  
And further, as the succeeding Paschal Sacrifices, tho' commemoratory of the First, yet varied something from it; being chief of an Eucharistical nature, and not performed with the same Ceremony; (for neither was the Blood sprinkled upon the Doors of the Offerers; neither was the Lamb eaten with their Staves in their Hand, and in a travelling posture 
(c) Maim. de Sacrif. Pasch. cap. & sect. ult. :) so it is not to be wondered if the succeeding Commemorations of our Lord's Sacrifice, tho' it was chief Expiatory, were Eucharistical, and differing also from the manner in which the first was celebrated by our Lord himself.  
Now such a Change in the nature of the Commemoration, from that of the Original Sacrifice, tho' not expressed in the words of the Institution, may yet be the better admitted, if we find cause to suppose it; because our Saviour, instituting the Memorial of the Action, before it was done by himself, or so much as understood by the Apostles, may therefore be presumed, neither to have held his Supper exactly and altogether in the same manner in which that Sacrament was afterwards to be, nor clearly to have expressed its Nature; but to have left the more particular Directions for it, and Explanation of it, to the supervening Instructions of the Holy Spirit.  
Tho' therefore the Lord's Supper was erected out of a Paschal Supper; yet the Apostles, as it has appeared, did not understand it to be confined to that time of the year only, or to the use of Unleavened Bread; neither did they think their Duty discharged by an Annual Celebration of it. And so, in the judgement of their Disciples, the Christians of the next Generation, it is still more manifest, that the one Supper succeeded the other, not in its strict, but in its general nature, and as it was of the Eucharistical kind; a solemn Festival kept in Thanks for a great Deliverance, and for a most beneficial and gracious Covenant: that as our Deliverance was not Temporary, belonging to the present Age only, and from an Enemy once slain, but was to extend to each Person of all Generations to come, and to be perpetually afforded against our continual spiritual Enemies; so neither should its Recognition be restrained to one Season, but offered unto our God throughout the whole Year, as the Sacrifices of Praise and Thanks were used to be offered by the Jews with very frequent and solemn Devotion.  
This therefore seems to have been the Construction of the Primitive Christians, That the Sacrament of our Lord's Body and Blood answered to the Jewish Sacrifices of Thanks: and that this Correspondence may the better appear, we shall do well to recollect a little the nature and manner of such Oblations.  
§. III. THE nature of a Peace-Offering in general is well known. It was the Oblation of a Sacrifice, some certain parts of which were burnt on the Altar, others belonged to the Priests, and the rest was returned to be eaten by the Offerer. To this Sacrifice a Meat-offering and Drink-offering were joined: and by it the Offerer prayed for future Prosperity, or thanked for that he enjoyed 
(a) Abarban. Exordium Come in Levit. Edente de Viel. p. 330 332. . In the more solemn kind of Peace-offerings, that of Thanks, the Bread of the Meat-offering is expressly required and particularised 
(b) Leu. 7.13. Maim. de Cult. Diu. Tr. 5. cap. 9 §. 17, 18. ; and it consisted half of Unleavened and half of leavened Bread; (tho' Leaven 
(c) Leu. 2.11. Maim. de Cult. Diu. 4.5.1.  was not so grateful to the Altar, as ever to be offered for a Meat-offering upon it). The Unleavened half was made into thirty Cakes, each ten dressed a several way, and the leavened half into ten: The tenth of all, that is, four Cakes of the several sorts, together with the Breast and Shoulder and Inwards, were waved by the Priest in the Hands of the Offerer before the Lord. Of that Bread so waved some was burnt on the Altar with the Inwards; and the rest, with the Breast and Shoulder, (all which together was called Muram the Separated or Elevated 
(c2) Maim. ut supra §. 12. Rab. Sal. in Exod. 29.27.  Portion) remained to be eat by the Priest, and his Domestics, who joined his Thanks to God with the Offerers; while He likewise and his Family, and Friends, feasted before God on the other Nine parts with the Flesh of the Sacrifice remaining to him; Portions of which he sent too abroad, to his Acquaintance, and to the Poor.  
Now, this Bread so offered being very singular for a Sacrifice, by reason part of it was Leavened, was particularly called the Bread of Thanksgiving (d), and in one case, recorded in Scripture (e), the Bread is supposed by the Jews to have stood for the Living Sacrifice, and to have supplied its place. And besides, it is there conceived, that leavened Bread alone was used, as being the principal part of the Eucharistical Offering, and fittest to represent the whole.  
Now the great Entertainments, as was now said, of the Jews were made of their Peace-offerings: on those they feasted together with their Friends at home, and of those they made Presents to the absent. The Invitation the False Woman makes to the Youngman in the Proverbs 
(f) Prov. 7.14.  is, That she has a Peace-offering at home. And with his Sacrifice Jethro entertained Aaron and the Elders of Israel, who eat Bread with him before God 
(g) R. S●●. & Aben Ezra, ●n Ex. 28. ●●. . And so Solomon, at the dedication of the Temple, feasted the whole People with those many thousands of Sheep and Oxen which he offered to the Lord 
(h) 1 Kin. 8.63. .  
These Feasts, after the building of the Temple, were necessarily held at Jerusalem, and not elsewhere. But it may be rationally supposed, and I propose it conjecturally (as I before have offered a like guess concerning the Passover 
(i) Ch. 3. §. 1. ), that the Jews of remote dispersions, standing the Temple, (for under its destruction they are not to rejoice) did heretofore, upon glad occasions, tho' they would not pretend to the formality of an Eucharistical Supper, yet make-some such Festival Entertainments, to which they called their Friends, to rejoice with them before God; giving him Thanks, not only for what they then eat and drank, but mentioning at the same time his other gracious Favours, which had been the cause of their present meeting, and which they recognised in proper Benedictions and Hymns over the Bread and Wine. And Bread and Wine I therefore suppose to have been used in this Case, for the expression of their Thanks, not only because we find that the leavened Eucharistical Bread did in the above-alledged case stand for the whole Sacrifice, or that some part of the Unleavened Paschal Bread does now represent the Flesh of the Lamb (k), or that in Jethroes Sacrificial Feast the eating of Bread is particularly mentioned, or lastly, that Bread and Wine were given in the High Priest Melchisedeck's entertainment of Abraham, which in probability was Eucharistical for his Victory; but because those Creatures of God are still taken by the Jews in all their Repasts for a special occasion of his Honour and Worship, as we might have observed before, and shall strait see further.  
Such Entertainments of which we have been speaking, especially those of Jerusalem, were, we doubt not, very solemn, being dedicated to the honour of God: and tho' the particular Ceremonies are not told us, yet how those Feasts were kept we may well enough conjecture, from the description we have already 
(l) The same §. as afore.  given of a Paschal, compared with this that follows of an Ordinary Supper.  
At an ordinary Meal, where there are more than three, the Priest, or Rabbin, or Chief Person, takes the Bread, half cuts it, and blesses it, lifting it up at the Name of God; then eats a piece of it himself, giving likewise to the rest who eat also. After he takes the Cup, and the rest having their Cups likewise, he elevating the Wine, says the Benediction over it, and they all drink: And so, when he has said the 23d Psalms, they proceed to eat and drink as they please. And when they have done, the principal person, and the others, take again their Cups in their Hands; and after he has given Thanks and prayed, they all drink and conclude 
(m) Buxt. Syn. Jud. ●●p. 12. . The Jews have too a more solemn Meal, the Supper of the Sabbath Eve, but little differing from the other; only here, because they then begin the Sabbath; and such separations of Initiatory Dedications, as well as Conclusional Separations, are made with Wine; they therefore invert the Order, and the Master or Rabbin first taketh the Cup, repeating the first Verses of the second Chapter of Genesis, and saying over it a Benediction Proper for the Sabbath, which then gins; and after that uncovering the Bread, (which was covered as if it had not been there when the Cup was taken first, and which consists of two Loaves) he blesses it in the ordinary form, etc. 
(n) Ibid. cap. 15. .  
Now hence, as we may by comparing discover what the additional Ceremonies were in the Paschal Supper, above those of any more ordinary Meal; so something between those we may judge to have been used in the other Peace-offering Feasts, and particularly the Eucharistical. As for instance we may presume, that the Bread and Wine of a Thanksgiving were taken and elevated by the Priest, or Rabbin if present, or by the Master of the Family, with some peculiar Benediction; to which might be subjoined a proper Hymn: that when they eat, they both began the Meal with the Flesh and Bread of the Sacrifice; or at other times with a piece of the Bread, representing the Sacrifice; and also ended it: and that then, with some of that Wine, they gave Thanks, recontinuing their Eucharistical Hymn, and so concluding.  
At such Feasts some particular Ceremony they certainly had, and something like this in probability it was. It appears also, by the Divine Worship they pay at their less-solemn Repasts, that at these extraordinary ones their Devotion to God must have been as great as their Hospitality to Men. And if their common Tables are always esteemed by them as Altars, particularly when after Meals they return Thanks, for than they remove their Knives from off them on that Consideration 
(m) Buxt. Syn. Jud. c. 12. ; we cannot think but that those Tables, then when they were furnished from the Altar, or imitated one so furnished, were judged more especially to represent it.  
§. iv SUCH were the Sacrifices and Feasts of Thanksgiving: and to these I suppose our Saviour had respect in the institution of his Feast, and was so understood by the Apostles, and by the Christians that immediately succeeded them. That it was so understood, and How, I am now going further to explain.  
And first, That the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper came into the place of a Sacrifice of Thanks; this may seem probable from several Considerations, to be suggested from what has been premised.  
For, 1st, the Name which the Ancients gave this Sacrament seems to speak them of the same opinion. For they not only speak of it as of a Sacrifice and Oblation, at large; but call it determinately and expressly the Eucharist, that is, the Thanks or Praise-offeri●g, as by its proper Name: the Sacramental Bread and Wine, being as much known by that stile with Christians, as the Bread of the Eucharist or Praise was with the Jews 
(a) 〈…〉 .  
2dly, The leavened Bread they always chose to use, as it evidently declares, that there was no further regard to the Paschal Sacrifice; so it seems to import a just correspondence with those of the Eucharistical kind, in which leavened Bread was singularly required.  
And lastly, the Bread, which was to represent, and in some manner to become, the Body of our Lord, did not unfitly succeed in the place of that Bread of Thanks which had been made use of before to stand for the Flesh of an Eucharistical Sacrifice, and to make up the whole, even in Jerusalem itself; if it did not sometimes, in places more remote, according to the Conjecture now mentioned.  
Now, as this Feast of our Lord was Eucharistical, so we suppose it was celebrated in a suitable manner.  
The Bread and Wine chief designed for the Holy Entertainment, being fitly provided and brought on the Table, some part of the Bread (and so of the Wine) was, I suppose, taken up by the Precedent, or Chief of the company, (were he Apostle, Bishop, or Presbyter) and blessed in an extraordinary form, expressing the reason of the Thanks then offered, together with a Prayer, that the Holy Ghost would sanctify the Offering, (as Gifts brought to the Altar were esteemed to be;) and sanctify it particularly to that purpose for which it was prepared, that the Bread might effectually represent the Flesh, or Body, for which it stood. This Bread and Wine, so offered and blessed by the officiating Precedent, (as if it had been waved at the Altar) was the more Holy and Sacramental Part, of which they communicated, as of the Body and Blood of the Lord; while the rest of the Oblation, which was less holy, as being consecrated only by virtue of the other, (like the remaining nine parts of the Bread of a Thanks-Offering) served, together with other Provisions, for the furnishing of the Supper at which they then fed.  
And so, when afterwards the Sacrament and Supper were divided, (about the time, I presume, when the Legal Sacrifices were going to cease) the Christian Eucharistical Oblation, as the Primitive Church speaks, began then more distinctly to appear, and was made after Morning-Prayer, just as extraordinary Sacrifices with the Jews were offered after the Morning daily Sacrifice. And then, as under the Law, what of the Eucharistical Sacrifice was offered at the Altar, the Muram, belonged to the Priest: so that part which had been offered by the Christian Priest, being more especially sacred, and his Portion, was eaten in the Morning Sacramentally from his Hands; the Congregation being, as it were, his Family; while the other Residual Part was kept for the provision of the Love-Feast, to be held in the Evening, its accustomed time.  
Now as these solemn Suppers, called by the name of Love or Charity, were in imitation of those Sacrificial Feasts held by the Jews, so were they of a like Name. For, if those of the Jews were not styled Love-Feasts, as possibly they might be, yet they were plainly Peace-Feasts, being made of Peace-Offerings of the most perfect kind, and being Symbols and Pledges of Peace, both in Heaven and Earth; the Offerer and his Guests partaking in some degree of the Table of God, and rejoicing together in mutual  and Amity.  
So did the Present partake of both parts of the Oblation in the Ancient Church, agreeably to the practice of the Jews. And when they sent Portions to the Absent, they acted likewise according to their Custom. We know that the Lay-Jews sent of their part 
(b) Neh. 8.10. ; and I know not whether the Priests might not so do of their share; neither is it much material. For, tho' the Christian's Eucharist was an imitation of the Jewish, yet it was not necessary that it should be bound to the niceness of all the Mosaic Rules.  
Tho' therefore a Sacrifice, by Moses' Law, was not to be offered by night, as all legal Acts were to be done by the Jews in the day; and so the general practice of Christians was to celebrate the Eucharist in it: yet they might think themselves at liberty to solemnize it before day, whensoever any particular reason should require them so to do; for to their Lord the Day and Night were both alike.  
Likewise tho' the Eucharistical Bread was no more to be kept till next day, than the Flesh, by the Jewish Rituals, as being not to be niggardly saved, but all of it spent that night in a cheerful liberality; and in this it was like their Manna: yet the Christians might not think it unlawful in some cases to suffer some part of their Eucharist to be left unto another day. For they had already invited all to their Feast who were capable of it; and they had not been sparing in their distribution, as far as was meet. However, even in this particular, they observed something of the Levitical Precept; burning still, what should remain at last unspent. And those of Jerusalem, if we understand their Hesychius 
(c) Comm. in Levit. 8.3.  with some, kept very precisely to the Eucharistical Ordinance, burning all that was left of each day's Communion: as it is too ordered by our Church, to be immediately divided among the Communicants; a Rubric intended to prevent the Papal Superstition, but answerable withal to the nature of the Sacrament.  
Now to all this I have nothing to add, but only to take notice, that the mixture of Water with the Sacramental Wine, of which the Ancients speak, was done too after the manner of the Jews; and, in their opinion, did not make it less proper for a Cup of Thanksgiving. For they likewise do not think 
(c) Maim. de Solenn. Pasch. c. 7 §. 9  they celebrate their Paschal Supper duly with pure Wine, but mix it with Water; that they may the more freely drink the four Cups, and also for the better Taste, and their greater Pleasure.  
§ V IT sufficiently appears, I presume, that the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Lord was understood by the ancient Christians to be in the nature of an Eucharistical (not of a Propitiatory) Sacrifice with the Jews. But further, That this kind of Sacrifice only should remain, when all the rest should cease; this also is consonant to the Tradition of the Jews, as Kimchi tells us. For, upon this Saying of the Prophet 
(a) Jer. 33.11. , That there should be heard again in Jerusalem the Voice of Joy, and the Voice of Gladness, the Voice of the Bridegroom, and the Voice of the Bride, the Voice of them that shall say, Praise the Lord of Hosts, for the Lord is good, and his Mercy endureth for ever, [and] of them that shall bring [the Sacrifice of] Praise [or Thanks] into the House of the Lord: he comments on the last words in this manner; The Prophet says not that they shall bring Sin-Offerings, or Trespass-Offerings; because in that day there would be no Wicked nor Sinners among them: for (as he before (b) told them) they should all know the Lord. 
(c) Jer. 31.34.  And so have our Masters of blessed memory told us, That in the time to come all Sacrifices should cease, except the Sacrifice of Thanksgiving.  
This Saying of the Masters of Israel is a great Truth, and better understood by Christians, who know the Lord and themselves so well, as to know, that the Sacrifices for Sin are not ceased by the ceasing of Sin, but superseded by the Sacrifice made for them by their Lord and Highpriest; and that the Sacrifice of Thanksgiving they are thenceforth to make, is the Commemoration their Lord has instituted, for that their most gracious Redemption. This is the Sacrifice of that New Covenant of which the Prophet there speaks, and which the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews from him alleges 
(c) Hebr. 8.8. . And to this Sacrifice the same Author, I suppose, refers; when he says 
(d) Hebr. 13.10, 11, etc. , We have an Altar, whereof they have no right to eat, who serve the Tabernacle; for they eat not of the Oblation made for their Sins, as we do of our Blessed Saviour; by whom [by whose Body, and in whose Name] we offer the Sacrifice of Praise [Thanksgiving] to God continually, that is the Fruit [or Oblation] of our Lips [or which our Lips have Vowed to return, as well as what we do return with our Li] ceasing not to do Good, and to Distribute [both out of our Oblations, and the rest of our Substance,] for with such Sacrifices [such Offerings of our Praise and Goods in the general, and at the Eucharist in particular,] God is well pleased.  

§. I. (d) Of this I needed not have given an Instance; but there is one that will likewise serve to another purpose; De Coron. Cap. 3. Eucharistiae Sacramentum, & in tempore Victus, & Omnibus, mandatum à Domino, etiam Antelucanis coetibus, nec de aliorum manu quam Praesidentium, sumimus.  
(e) The word is often used even in one Chapter, the 34th of his Fourth Book Adversus Haeres. and I shall give but one Instance in that famed Passage: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
(f) Just. Mart. Apol. secunda (uti vulgo numeratur) prope finem. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the Oblation (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉): as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 likewise do.  
(g) Examples will appeat in those Passages to be produced in the next Chap▪ §. 2.  
(i) Tertullian Apolog. Cap. 39 Coena nostra de nomine rationem sui oftendit. Id vocatur quod Dilectio penes Graecos.  
(k) Epist. ad Smyrnaeos. After a general prohibition against the doing any thing in the Church without the Bishop, and after a particular mention of the Eucharist; there follows further, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(m) This Order of Oblation, and Invocation, is not only to be seen in the Ancient Liturgies; but is plainly expressed by that Ancient and Venerable Author Irenaeus, in the Chapter above-cited (e).  
§. III (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Maim. de Cult. Divino Tract. 5.9.5.  
(e) Nehem. 12.31. Then I brought up the Princes of Judah upon the Wall, and appointed two great [Companies of them that gave] Thanks, [Whereof one] went upon the right hand of the Wall, etc. By this Procession the Jews suppose the Bounds of the Holy City to have been determined; and that the Bread of Thanksgiving, which was not to be carried out of Jerusalem, was therefore carried about now to mark its utmost Limits. And accordingly by two great Thanks, as it is in the Text, [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] they understand two great oblations of Bread of Thanks: making the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies the whole Sacrifice of Thanks, to stand here for the Bread only, and that only the leavened. So Rabbi Salome on the place: And Maim. in the Book above mentioned. Tract. 1. Cap. 6. §. 12.  
§. iv (a) I confess that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 'tis Case, where we translate it a Sacrifice of Thanksgiving, is rendered most commonly in the Greek, of the Septuagint so called, by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and never by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But it is notorious that the sense is the same. Neither do they always interpret that word by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but on the fame subject they once put 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [Levit. 22.29.] and in another place we shall meet in the next Section, [Jerem. 33.11.] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Name by which our Christian Sacrament is also known. The truth is, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is found in the Septuagint in no sense: but it is frequent in the Apocrypha and in the New Testament; and Aquila in his Translation [of Amos 4.5.] uses it for this very matter.    

CHAP. VIII.  
§. I. The Distinction of Clergy and Laiety, specified by Tertullian: That of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, by Him, (Irenaeus also being his Leader, for the Apostolical Authority of Bishops;)  
§. II. And by Ignatius; as the other at least, of the Laiety and Clergy, by St. Clemens of Rome.  
§. III. The First Distinction, derived from the Language of the Old Testament: The Offices of the Second, from those of the Jewish Sanhedrim, and likewise of the Temple; the Upper parts of our Churches, being also supposed to answer the Temple Courts, of the Priests, and the Altar.  
§. I. WE come next to the Officers of the Christian Church, expressed in the Scripture under general Names, and which answered sufficiently to those used by the Jews; but whose signification was not in some Cases so well distinguished, as to make out the Parallel exactly.  
Now the Writings of the Primitive Christians speak on these occasions more expressly, and clear up the Confusion caused by ambiguous words, determining their sense by such a distinction of Offices, as had all along obtained from the days of the Apostles.  
Certain it is from what we have already seen of Tertullian, that in his time, at the end of the Second Century, the Offices of Bishop and Presbyter, and Deacon, were the principal Offices of the Church, and notoriously Distinct. The Power, says he 
(a) Ch. 6. §. 1. (c) , of Conferring Baptism the High Priest hath, who is the Bishop; then the Priests, and Deacons, but not without the Authority of the Bishop, to keep up the Honour of the Church, without which Peace cannot be preserved: otherwise even the Laiety have a power to do it. Now, whatever becomes of the controversy of Baptism by Lay hands, it is manifest from our Author, that there was a Distinction of the Laiety, and the Clergy (b); and among the Clergy, between the Bishop, and the Priests, and Deacons; and that the Bishop had a singular supereminent Authority over the Presbyters, as well as the Deacons. And that he understood this separate Authority to have been derived from the hands of the Apostles, is as plain from his Treatise of Prescribing against Heretics 
(c) De Praeser. ●. 32. . There, to Bar some Heresies which were as old as the Apostles, from pleading that they were taught by the Apostles; he bids them, Show the Origine of their Churches, and deduce a series of their Bishops, with such a continued Succession from the beginning, as that the first Bishop of them may have some Apostle, or Apostolical Man who continued in the Communion of the Apostles, to vouch for his Author and Predecessor. For so the Apostolical Churches bring down their Pedigree: as the Church of Smyrna reckons Polycarp, placed there by St. John, and the Church of Rome, Clemens ordained by St. Peter; and as other Church's name those, who were made Bishops by the Apostles, and to whom the Seed of the Apostolical Doctrine was transmitted.  
This is Tertullian's Opinion: and, as it appears from his manner of delivering it, was the general acknowledged Opinion of that Time. But on the same Argument Irenaeus had before said the same thing 
(d) Iren. Lib. 3. Cap. 3. ; where he names the Succession of the Bishops of Rome, down to Eleutherius of his own time, the twelfth from the Apostles; presupposing the same succession of such single Persons, in all the Apostolic Churches; and giving it as a Truth in matter of Fact, on which he might found the Truth of the Catholic Doctrine, and which the Heretics themselves could not gainsay. This plain Testimony, of so Learned and Venerable a Person, at no longer a distance from the Apostles, seems unexceptionable: but for the Church of Smyrna it is absolutely Unquestionable. For there he speaks almost, from his own personal Knowledge; having himself been acquainted with Polycarp, who was immediately ordained by the Apostles. And as sure as this Polycarp was Bishop of Smyrna, so plain it is there that Anicetus was of Rome in his time: and from their very Conference together, reported by this Irenaeus, (as we have seen 
(e) Part 1. Ch. 1. §. 4.  it also evidently appears, that such Bishops had been always there presiding; of whom, we know, as many are mentioned in that place, on occasion of the Paschal Dispute, as reached up to the very beginning of the Second Century. Neither need I dissemble, that those Bishops are styled Presbyters in the place last mentioned; since they are known to be Presbyters of the more eminent Degree, and to be the same single Persons, with the same superior Character, the same distinction still remaining between them and the inferior Presbyters.  
§. II. I might well be content with the Evidence Tertullian and Irenaeus give for the Apostolical Distinction between the Bishop and the other Presbyters; and may therefore presume, that what I have further to say of the same nature from Ignatius, will not fail to be credited. For how unreasonable it is to suspect his Writings, for the peculiar Dignity he attributes to Bishops, (and that is the greatest Argument of Suspicion they have;) has already appeared from the little I have produced: as the Reader may find both that and all the lesser Cavils at large, and unanswerably refuted by our Bishop Pearson 
(a) Vind. Ignat. .  
This Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, being in his Journey through Asia the less to his Martyrdom at Rome, (about the year 116 at farthest 
(b) Dodw. Diss. in Ir. 1. sect. 17. ), wrote several Letters to the adjacent Cities, thanking the Churches there for their Christian Courtesy to him, which they had showed by their Messengers, and expressed by other Tokens of Fraternal Love; and taking at the same time occasion to make them some effectual return, and confirm them in the Faith and Discipline of Christ. These Letters (as all others, even the Apostolical) would be much better understood by us, if we distinctly knew the particular Circumstances of those Churches; to which, no doubt, he speaks very properly, tho' we now, out of the same words, can make but a general, and sometimes a very ordinary sense. But however something of the Circumstances of those Times, and of his Intention in those Letters, appears through them. And as his Design seems to be to fortify them against the Fears of the present Persecution, and to warn them of the dangerous Heresies sprung from Simon Magus, and then prevailing; so he manifests a particular care against Schism, and for the preserving the Government of the Church. Before this time, the Divisions of the Church of Corinth about their Governors, had occasioned a Letter from the Church of Rome, by Clemens' Hand: and now in Asia, when St. John himself, the surviving Apostle, was dead, and the supreme controlling Authority was extinct; it is very likely that the Orders before established were in some danger of being subverted, by the Ambition and Unruliness of such, whom the Spirit by St. Paul had expressly foretold to Timothy the Bishop of their capital City 
(c) 1 Tim. 4.1. . Now, that such Attempts were then made upon the Authority of Church-Officers, and to the confusion of their Distinction, may be gathered from this Ignatius: as it also appears from his manner of Expression, that such a Distinction was no novel thing, and of modern erection; nor was it of slight concern.  
In this view (as we may suppose) he tells the Ephesians, That they ought to glorify Jesus Christ, who had glorified them; to be of one mind, and to say the same thing; and to be subject to the Bishop and to the Presbytery, that they may be wholly sanctified. You ought, says he, to concur with your Bishop; as you do; for your Presbytery is as consonant to him, as strings to an Instrument. And let no Man be deceived: he that is not within the Altar, falls short of the Bread of God: and he that does not come to the Assembly, is Proud; and it is written, God resisteth the Proud (d): Let us not then resist the Bishop, that we may be subject to God. And the more modest [and condescending] your Bishop is, the more he is to be reverenced: for he is to be looked on, as the Lord himself. And lastly he speaks of their Concurrence with Christ; that they may obey the Bishop, and the Presbytery, with an undistracted Mind; breaking [that] one Bread, which is the Medicine for Immortality, the Antidote against Death.  
This, it seems, was necessary to be said on this subject to the Ephesians: amongst whom, as amongst the other Asiatic Churches to whom he writes, the Peace of the Church, which St. John's presence had hitherto secured, began to be disturbed. Whereas therefore, in his letter to the Roman Church, whose zeal in this case was so well known, he makes no mention of their obedience to spiritual Governors: in all his other letters to the asiatics, he enlarges much on the same Topick; and was, it seems, obliged to press that Duty even upon the Smyrneans, where Polycarp himself was Bishop. He does it after this manner. Fly Divisions, as the beginning [or cause] of Evils. All of you, follow the Bishop; as Christ Jesus, the Father: and follow the Presbytery, as the Apostles; and reverence the Deacons, as the Commandment [or Mandatories (e)] of God. Let no one do any thing appertaining to the Church, without the Bishop. Let that be esteemed a good Eucharist, which is under the Administration of the Bishop, or such as He shall appoint. Where the Bishop appears, there let the People be: as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the Bishop, neither to Baptise, nor keep the Love-Feast; but what He approves, that is it which is acceptable to God. So to the Philadelphians, after Exhortation to Unity under the Bishop, he adds: Take care therefore to use one Eucharist. For there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, one Cup wherein his Blood is united, one Altar: as there is one Bishop, with the Presbytery, and my Fellow Servants the Deacons. As also in that to the Magnesians he directs: Endeavour to do all things in the Unanimity of God; the Bishop Presiding in the place of God, and the Presbyters in the place of the Consistory [Synedrium] of the Apostles, and the Deacons being entrusted with the Ministry of Jesus Christ. And speaking of Deacons to the Trallians, he says expressly, they are not Ministers of Meats and Drinks; but Servants of the Church of God.  
I know well that these now Unusual expressions, and High Comparisons, have been construed into a prejudice against the Authority of these Letters. But it is not reasonable, to judge either Ancient Practice, or Phrase, by the Modern: for possibly those Primitive Christians would be at as great a loss to understand some later Divinity. The Passage that may appear the most strange, is that to the Smyrneans: Fellow your Bishop, as Christ Jesus [followed] the Father. But we are to remember that the Heretics, whom he warns them to avoid, were those who denied the reality of our Saviour's Flesh, saying, that He Suffered, and Rose again in Appearance only; themselves also dispensing with the Reality of their Duty, as he tells them, and being Christians only in Appearance,  and puffed up. These he Commands them to avoid: and, for the same intent, he cautions them to shun Divisions among themselves, as the beginning of those and most other evils; and to Fellow the Bishop (Polycarp, a Faithful Servant of Christ, Approved and entrusted with the Charge of them by the Blessed St. John); adding, as Christ Jesus, the Father; a comparison that no more equals the Bishop to the Father, than it does the other Christians of that Church to Jesus Christ. It imported only, that they should not be highminded and conceited, but should be subject to their Bishop; for Christ also himself was in reality found in the form of a Servant, and obedient unto the Father even unto the Death of the Cross: and that they should receive the Commandments from Polycarp; and act, as they saw him to act; for (as St. John lately departed from them had informed them) Christ also did or spoke 
(d) 8.28.12.49.  nothing from himself, and he both Taught and kept the Commandments of the Father 
(e) 15.10. . This seems to be the occasional Analogy of that Expression. And as for the others, that the Bishop presides in the place of God, or is to be looked on as our Lord; these speak him only as a Substitute and lower Representative of God and Christ, invested with some degree of Authority from them; as when St. Paul Commands Christian Servants to obey even Heathen Masters as Christ 
(f) Eph. 6.5. : neither were the Presbyters to be followed as the Apostles, for the Parity they held, but for the similitude they bore, being Assistants to the Bishop, as the Apostles were to our Saviour. For so was Moses heretofore put in the place of God 
(g) Exod. 7.1. : and as in Ignatius the Presbyters are said to preside in the place of the Consistory, or Sanhedrim of the Apostles; so the Apostles themselves may be supposed to succeed in the place of the Twelve Princes, the Chief Assistants to Moses. Neither has this Language of Ignatius to Christians any other meaning, than it might have had, if a Jew should have admonished his Brethren Jews, to have obeyed their Nasi or Patriarch as God (for so they were to have obeyed Moses their first Nasi;) and his Assessors, as they would have done the Assessors of Moses, (for to those in some manner they succeeded.)  
Thus Ignatius concerning Church Officers. And to go higher yet, up into the first Age; (for then St. Clemens of Rome undoubtedly wrote his Epistle, if not before the Destruction of the Temple (h);) there, if we have not an Authority for the Distinction of them by proper names one from another; yet we have a certain instance of the use of the word Lay before mentioned, whereby they were discriminated from the rest of the Congregation. The place, whether speaking of the Jewish, or of the Christian Church, (and of the Christian in likelihood it does) runs thus (i). To the Highpriest, proper Offices are given; and to the Priests, a proper Place is appointed; and on the Levites, proper Ministries are incumbent: The Layman, is bound to Lay Duty. Let every one of you, Brethren, in his own Station, give Thanks [or celebrate the Euchari to God, having a Good Conscience, and not transgressing the Rule of his own Office, [as he ought to do] in Holy Decency.  
§. III. This was the certain Distinction in the Ancient Church, betwixt the Laiety, and the Clergy; and among the Clergy, betwixt the Bishops, Priests and Deacons: and that it was derived from the Language and Polity of the Jews, we may have already discerned in part from the account above given 
(a) Ch. 4. .  
As to the Denomination of Laiety, as distinct from the Tribe of Levi, it must be directly understood to have been in use with the Jews, by those who will understand the passage from St. Clemens last cited, concerning the Jewish Priesthood. And those too who will have it taken of the Christian Priesthood must conclude, from the ordinary and current manner of using this Phrase in the beginning of Christianity, that it had been received before, and was as well known, as that of Priest and Levite.  
But besides, the Ground also of this Appellation is from the Old Testament. For there, as the Nation of the Israelites is contradistinguished to other Nations, and is separated for the Peculiar Propriety 
(a 2) Ex. 19.5. Deut. 14.2. , and Inheritance, 
(b) Deut. 4.20. , of God; (the signification of the Greek word Clerus;) and they might all therefore have been properly styled the Clergy of God, in respect of other People; (the meaning of the word Lay;) for in that regard they all are called Priests 
(c) Exod. 19.6.  So in this Holy Nation, one Tribe of it was more particularly Chosen, and Holy and separated from the rest; (God not only claiming them to be his Own yet more Peculiarly, and in the place of the First Born 
(d) Numb. 3.45. , but declaring Himself also to be their Peculiar and Inheritance 
(e) Num. 18.20. ;) and might well therefore have been appropriately styled the Clergy, even in respect of the rest of the Holy People, who were then, for distinction to be called the People. Neither was this term, the People, at all dishonourable to the other Tribes; for it appears; by the Phrase of St. Luke 
(f) Acts 26.17, 2●. , to have been the name whereby they chose to distinguish themselves from the Gentiles, [or Nations]: and the disparaging acception which the Pharisaical Rabbins give it, when they oppose it to the Disciples of the Learned, and make it to signify the Illiterate and Rude; seems to be raised by them for their own honour, since they have come in to the room of the Priests, and usurped their Privilege 
(g) See Ch. 4. §. 4. .  
Next I am come to compare the several Officers of the Christian Church, so distinguished as above, with the several Officers of the Jewish. But in this, as for the Synagogue-Discipline, and Worship, of the Jews, I am prevented by what has been said before: and the Parallel must have manifestly appeared betwixt the Bishop, Priest, and Deacon; and between the Chief of the Sanhedrim or Synagogue, the Elders, and their Ministerial Officers.  
For as every City had its Consistory in that manner Officered, with the Jews, so had it with the Christians; though with no Subordination to any other higher Court, as at Jerusalem; in as much as that Local Dependence was now abolished.  
The Chief of the Consistory with the Jews, was either the Prince; or his Deputy, the Father of the Assembly. Now the Title of Prince was, I suppose, in the Christian Church, every where appropriated to Christ: and the Bishop was as the Father, in whom the Principal Directive Power was lodged. The other Elders were his Councillors and Assistants, in the Governing and Teaching of the Assembly; and the Deacons had the management of Affairs, Execution of Orders, and Distribution of Alms, belonging to their part; as is notoriously known.  
Thus was a Christian Church governed conformably to the Synagogue, as a Society; it was likewise, as a Congregation. The Instruction and Exhortation belonged to the Bishop; or else, by his leave, to the Presbyters: or it was performed by such other proper Person, as the Bishop should appoint. Likewise Prayers were said, either by the Bishop, or Presbyters; or else by the Deacons. For these last, answering the Jewish Chazans, directed the People in their Devotions; either repeating the Prayers before them, or calling upon them to hearken to those repeated by others: and also either Read the holy Scriptures, or assisted those who were to Read them.  
Neither do the Elders of a Christian and a Jewish Church agree, only so far, but farther yet. For as the Jewish Elders, since the Destruction of Jerusalem, have thought fit to assume to themselves much of the Sacerdotal Honour and Privilege: so have the Christian succeeded into the like Dignity, nay are called by the same Name; as we have seen in Tertullian's expression, 
(h) See Ch. 6. §. 1.  The High Priest who is the Bishop; and as he phrases it, discoursing about those Heretics, who making little distinction between the People and the Church Officers, committed Sacerdotal Offices to the Laiety (i); and as we may in general have collected, even from the discretive Appellatives themselves of Laiety, and Clergy.  
But the Elders of the Christian Church derive not those their style and Privileges from the Calamities of Jerusalem, and the Usurpation of the Rabbins: nor are they esteemed Priests, in virtue of their Presbytery; though the English word Priest happens to come, by the French Prestre, from the Latin Presbyter. On the contrary, by Original appointment, a Christian Priest corresponds as directly to a Priest of the Jews, as a Presbyter does to their Elder: or rather, to speak more generally, the Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, of the Gospel, answer not more to the Officers of the Sanhedrim, or Synagogue; than they do to those of the Temple, to the High Priest, or (as we conceive) his Great Vicar, to the Priests, and to the Levites.  
For this is not only intimated by the Sacerdotal Titles the Governors of the Church immemorially had, as we learned from Tertullian; but plainly declared by their Office, and all along allowed and owned by more Ancient Authors: They having, as hath appeared, an Eucharistical Sacrifice still remaining to be celebrated by them; a Pure Offering, to be offered in every place; and every where Holy Tables, or Altars, erected for that Service. And this is what St. Jerom has said, much to our purpose, in that Letter of his, which has been often miscited to the Prejudice of Episcopacy 
(k) Ad E●●g●. . And, says he, that you may understand the Ecclesiastical Traditions to be derived from the Old Testament; we are to know, what Aaron, and his Sons, were in the Temple, that Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, are to challenge to themselves in the Church.  
This Remembrance of St. Jerome was, we see, well founded: and is, if I mistake not, attested by the structure of an Ancient Christian Church, such of which we have been speaking before 
(l) Ch. 6. §. 1, 3. . For, whereas the first four Partitions of it, wherein the Laiety were disposed; have been seen to answer to the four first Courts of the Temple, beyond which none but those of the Tribe of Levi ordinarily could go: there yet remain two other Partitions, the places heretofore of our Clergy; to answer to the two remaining Courts, of the Priests, and of the Altar.  
For so that part [E Fig. 2.] of a Christian Church, which is next beyond the Upper Place of the Faithful (now called the Choir) [D], and reaches to the Rails of the Altar space, styled by the Western Church Presbyterium, and by the Greek Solea (m) where the Readers are said to have had a place (n); corresponds aptly enough with the Court of the Temple, where the Priests stood who were not actually on Duty, and where the [Doukans] Desks of the Singers were likewise placed 
(o) Lightf. T. Service Ch. 23. .  
And then the Higher space [F Fig. 2.] enclosed with Rails or Lattice, where the Lord's Table, or Christian Altar [G] stands; apparently agrees to the Court of the Altar in the Temple [F. Fig. 1.], which was fenced in like manner. And possibly the raised Seat [T] behind the Altar, (as the Archiepiscopal Chair at Canterbury now is,) where the Bishop sat, with the Chief of the Clergy on either side; answer, not only to the Seats of the Elders in a Synagogue 
(p) Ch. 6. §. 3. , but to the Place, where the High Priest stood, compassed with his Brethren round about, as a young Cedar in Libanus by the Palm Trees 
(q) Eccles. 50.12.  either at the Altar itself; [G Fig. 1.] or in the Porch [H], which was as high, and from whence, after the Burning of the Incense, the Blessing was pronounced 
(r) I●●juf. Ib Ch. 36. Maim. de Cult. Di●● Tract. 6. C●p. 6. §. 4. .  
And this, concerning the Agreement of the upper part of a Church, with the upper Courts of the Temple, I have added on this Argument; not so much to confirm the Sacerdotal Title of Christian Priests, (for that seems to be otherwise sufficiently secured,) as to complete the Parallel, already begun in the sixth Chapter, and by which a new account is offered of the Modelling of these Christian Aedifices.  
I know, Architects derive the Design of our Churches from the Fabrics of the Heathen Basilicae, or Public Halls 
(s) Pallad. lib. 4. c. 5. lib. 3. c. 19 : the upper end of which was raised, and had a Semicircle, in which Governors and Judges sat for Audience, having before them a Table, as we may presume, and a space separated and Railed in; and beyond that, without the Bar, a place something lower, where those stood who attended the Court: the remaining and lowest part of the Hall, being open to All; as there was commonly before it, a Portico, and a Piazza. Such Rooms as these Private Men also built in Great Houses; and being Christians, might lend to the use of Christian Assemblies: whence (as they say) it afterwards came that Churches were built in the same fashion, retaining also the Name [Basilicae]. Now that those Halls might have sometimes, and somewhere, served to that use; and were very convenient for it; may be granted: but as one cannot think that the Form of such a Hall, gave occasion to the several Ranks and Offices of Christians; so neither to the Building, which was to be suited to them. I should rather suppose, that the Congruity of those two sorts of Aedifices was accidental, and that the name came from the similitude. (t)  
There are indeed others who take the Modules of our Churches from the Jews; but either from their Synagogues; or from the Temple- House, consisting of the [H Fig. 1.] Porch, the Holy [I], and the Holy of Holies [K]. Whereas the Synagogue goes but half way, and neither now has, nor ever pretended to, an Altar: and the Altar of Incense, and Table of Shewbread, which were in the House, were we know in the Outer Part, and not in the inmost, the Holy of Holies.  
It appears therefore, that the Temple, as it consisted of its several Courts, was rather the Pattern which the Christians followed for the Place of their Worship. For as for the House; as it might before have been an Imitation of the Heavens, the Holy of Holies, representing the Third Heaven: so now it might be supposed to be no longer on Earth, but changed into that not made with Hands, into which the High Priest was now entered with his own Blood, as the Author to the Hebrews observes 
(u) Hebr. 9.11, 12, 24. ; We all in the mean time waiting without, in expectation of his Return; and, until that his coming again, by his particular Command, continuing to celebrate the Joyful Memorial of that Sacrifice, with which he Appears now in the presence of God for us.  
But (to return to my Argument) whatever may become of the Conjecture concerning the Figure of our Churches, this is certain, by the express Declaration of the Scripture 
(x) See Repart. 2. Ch. 2. §. 2. , that our Saviour Christ is the High Priest of our Profession: and in the Opinion of the Primitive Church, all the several Bishops seem to have been as so many Sagans, or Vicars of that High Priest, officiating at their several Altars with equal, and among themselves independent, Authority (y). Under His Direction, the Presbyters, are as Priests, assisting that their Vice High Priest in their several Stations: and the Deacons as Levites, attend and administer unto them.  
So are our Bishop's Representatives of our Saviour, either as he is our Prince, or our Priest; his Deputies, both in the Synagogue, and in the Temple. And thus as the Fathers of the Consistories with the Jews, the Precedents under the Princes, might have been properly enough styled by the Title signifying a Bishop or Superintendent: So we actually know, that the Vice High Priest, whom now the Jews call Sagan, was heretofore in the Old Testament expressed by that very name 
(z) See Chap. 4. §. 3. .  

§. 1. (b) One Part of the Distinction the Laici, are specified in the place last cited: and the other the Clerus, containing the Ordines Ecclesiastici, i● as expressly and familiarly mentioned in his Book de Monog. cap. 12. occurring very often in the compass of a few lines.  
§. 2. (d) St. Peter argues in the same manner 1. 5. 5.  
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mandatum, it may be, in the sense of the Civil Law; and the Deacons here to be understood, as Mandataries, or Agents: for such they were to the Bishops, (Const. Apost. 2.28.); and such Proctors the High Priest had, whom the Jews call Entelers, or Antalars, from the Greek, as may be seen at large in Seld. de Synedr. 2.10.7.  
(h) According to Mr. Dodwell, Dissert. 2. Cap. 6. §. 24. Libr. Posth. Cestriens. Episc. Pearsonii.  
(i) Clem. Rom. Ep. ad Cor. §. 40, 41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
§. 3. (i) Tertull. De Praeser. Haer. Cap. 41.— hodie Presbyter, qui cras Laicus: nam & Laicis munera Sacerdotalia injungunt.  
(m) The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. was the Place where the Communion was distributed to the Laiety; and from the Lord's Body being there on that occasion, Goar would have it called Solium; as others, from the Seat of the Emperor: but Du Fresne seems to have given a more probable Original of the word, Constant. Chr. libr. 3. cap. 73. Solea, says he, à Solo, Pavimento Editiori: quip apud Italos quicquid supra Pavimentum tantisper eminet, Soglia dicitur, uti apud Francos Sevil. But Solea itself, in Latin, may possibly answer the signification; and that place, which is a little higher than the Choir, may be reputed the Basis of the Bema, its Solea or Crepida; as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is expounded by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and Solea in Festus, by Materia Roborea, supra quam Paries Cratitius extruitur: not to mention, that this place might be called Solea; as that in the Amphitheatres, next the Arena, was called Podium.  
(n) This Solea is said, by Sim. Thessaly. to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gore, Euch. pag. 18.  
(t) The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tribunal, by which the Altar-space is called; and the Cancelli, and Vails or Curtains, by which it was separated from the rest of the Church; and also the Candles, and Book upon the Table; may indeed concur, to strengthen the Opinion I have opposed. But it may be considered, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 itself in that fence, may well come from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and that therefore the Jews may be supposed to have used their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more willingly, and that the Christians took it from them. And so we know that, though the Cancelli and Veils were used to enclose the Apartment of Secular Governors; yet Veils were used in the House of God, and that these Cancelli divided the Court of the Altar from that of the Priests. And lastly, whereas it is true, that the Furniture of the Table of the Praefecti Praetorio was a Book of his Office, standing up between Candles on each side, (as it is designed in the Notitia Imp. of Pancirollus): it is also to be observed, that this Civil State was derived from sacred Eastern Usage; that Candles were burnt before God in one part of the House, and the Law lodged in the other; and accordingly in the Jewish Synagogues their Repository of the Law has those Can●les before it, and when the Law is brought out to be read, it is placed on a Table, that has a Cloth over it (Buxt. Syn. Cap. 14.); and that therefore our Christian Altar, instead of Fire which it needed not, might have those Lights continually burning; and might withal be the sacred Table, on which the Word of God should be placed, that Lamp unto our Feet and Light unto our Paths.  
(y) The Excellently Learned Mr. Dodwell (in his Book of One Priest and One Altar) differs not from what is here said. He puts indeed our Bishops in the place of the Jewish High Priests (Ch. 9) but than he supposes those High Priests to have been the Representatives of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the High-High Priest (Ch. 8.) As therefore Bishops now are the Substitutes of our Lord; so they answer the old High Priest are such in some sense High Priests themselves: but as He has now been pleased openly to own, and to Execute, that Office; so they are thenceforth, in propriety of Speech, to forbear that title, and to own themselves for his Vicegerents and Sagans.    

CHAP. IX.  
§. I. The Sentence and Effects of Excommunication with Christians, as with Jews: and the Relaxation of it alike.  
§. II. Their Agreement, in the estimate of the Gild of Sins; and the appointments of Penance.  
§. I. EXcommunication, as we have seen 
(a) Ch. 5. , was with the Jews a Punishment with which their Presbyterial Authority was armed; and which besides, if it was not also decreed, was certainly Executed, by the Sacerdotal: and that Sentence, we must think, was then most valid and most effectual, when it was passed by both those Powers. Such an Excommunication we have seen too Directed, in the New Testament, and Executed, and afterwards Released. And the same Jurisdiction, how it continued to be Exercised in the Church, we are now to consider.  
This Discipline than is well known to have been Executed in the Primitive Church, by the Bishops and Priests, with great severity; and to have been much dreaded by the Guilty. And the account of it we may take from Tertullian, as he describes it in his Apology 
(b) Ch. 39 . Being to justify the Christian Assemblies from the Imputation, put upon them, by the Imperial Officers, and common Opinion, of their being Unlawful Associations, and dangerous Conventicles, He says: We are indeed a Corporation, embodied by our Agreement in the same Religion, and Obedience to the same Discipline; and are Confederate, by the same Hope. We Meet together; but it is before God. Him we surround with our Prayers, and as it were with our Numbers Force; but this is such a violence, as is acceptable unto Him. And then our Prayers are, for our Emperors, for their Officers, and such as are put in Authority. We meet; but it is to refresh our memory by Reading the Word of God— There too (c) is the place for Exhortation, and for Reproof; and there our Manners are Inspected and Censured, as it were by God himself. For Causes are there judged with great deliberation; as it is fit to be done by those who know, that they Judge in the Presence and sight of God: and if any one shall be found so Criminal, as to be Excluded from the Communion of our Prayers and Assemblies, and from the rest of our Holy Commerce; this Judgement so passed upon him, is taken for the Highest Presumption, that can be, of a like Judgement to come. Elders [or Governors] the best approved, Preside over us; such as have purchased the Honour, not by Money, but by their Deserts: for nothing belonging to God, is to be bought with Money.  
By those who Preside over us, we are chief to understand the Bishop, and then the Presbyters, who are said above 
(d) Ch. 8. §. 2.  in the language of Ignatius (to the Magnesians) to preside also. And likewise it appears manifestly, that the Authority by which they act, is not looked on as founded, upon any voluntary agreement of the Fraternity, but upon the Law of God. Neither is it necessary that I should trouble the Reader with any further Proof from the Ancients, either for the Immemorial Practice of Excommunication, or for the constant Presumption of its Authority from God.  
Fig. I.  
Fig. II.  
Fig. III.  
place this after P●.  
And, agreeably to this, we have already seen, that Excommunication with the Jews was Lighter, or Heavier, and differently Aggravated, as the Cause deserved 
(f) Ch. 5. §. 1. . It has likewise appeared probable, that the several Excommunicates may have lain under several Prohibitions, as to their Approach in the Synagogues or Temple 
(g) Sect. 3. . And since it has been shown, that the Jewish Proselytes entered into their Religion by the same Degrees, by which the Christians did 
(h) Ch. 6. : we cannot doubt, but those of them who had been solemnly excluded the Temple, ordinarily Re-entered it after the same manner, advancing successively through the several Courts, (as those did who had been under corporal Pollution,) according to the measure of their supposed Purification.  
We have yet spoken only of the spiritual effect of Excommunication, and Tertullian mentions the Exclusion from all Sacred Commerce only: and this, no doubt, is the proper jurisdiction of that Presbyterial Authority, which pretends not to govern the Commerce or Negotiations of this World. But there can be no question, but that the Faithful always avoided any great Familiarity, or intimate Conversation, with the Excommunicates; other than to Reform and Reconvert them. And this the Scripture itself seems to direct 
(i) 1 Cor. 5.11. : and necessary it was, to the Humiliation and Mortification of the Criminal, and for the danger of others being corrupted by him: though the other common Intercourse, the Christians were to have with their Neighbours of all sorts, was to be regulated by the Policy of that Temporal Government, to which they belonged. But, when the Government became Christian, as it thought fit to enlarge the proper Presbyterial Power with some new Jurisdiction, in things confining upon that Office; as in Causes Testamentary and Matrimonial: so it backed their Excommunication, with civil Restraints and Penalties. And thence those who were under the Greater Excommunication, have been forbidden all common Conversation, rendered uncapable of several Legal Benefits, and sometimes Imprisoned, or otherwise punished in Body or Estate: in all which proceed the Patterns of the Jews, as is evident, has been much followed; as it seems to be, in the Three Admonitions before the Sentence, the consideration of the contempt of the Court on which it is founded, the pronouncing it by Bell and Candle, and Executing it even upon the Dead 
(k) See Ch. 5. §. 1. .  
§. II. AND thus much may suffice at present for the correspondence of the Sentence and Effect of Excommunication. with the Jews; and with the Christians; but they also agree further, about the Crimes that are to be the Cause of it, and about the means of its Absolution.  
The most Grievous Crimes in the judgement of the Ancient Church, were Idolatry, Adultery, and Murder; as Morinus has demonstrated 
(a) Mor. de Poen. lib. 5. cap. 1. . And that they are so estimated by the Jews, he has also sufficiently proved 
(b) Ibid Cap. 3. .  
And concerning Repentance and Expiation, or Abolition, of Sins; this is the Doctrine of the Rabbins, according to Maimonides. The Gild of the Transgression of an Affirmative Precept, or of a Sin of Omission, if it does not deserve Excommunication by their Law, (for Death it never does;) is Expiated by Repentance alone. The Gild of the Transgression of a Negative Precept, or of a sin of Commission, if it deserves neither Death, nor Excommunication; is suspended by Repentance at present, and Expiated by the Day of Propitiation. And the Gild of a Sin of Commission, to which Death or Excommunication is due, is suspended by Repentance, and by the Day of Expiation; and not Expiated, but by Afflictions. But the Gild of the Profanation of the Name of God, is suspended by Repentance, the Day of Expiation, and Afflictions; and Expiated only by Death 
(c) Ma●m. de Poenit. Cap. 1. §. 7, 8, 9 . Now Repentance is described to consist of these Acts: (1.) Forsaking the Sin in Deed, and in Thought; and Resolving within ourselves, never again to commit it: (2.) Grieving for it: (3.) Vowing to God against it: and (4thly) the Profession of all this with our Mouths; 
(d) Cap. 2. §. 3.  with Confession, of sins against Men, before Men, satisfaction being made also 
(e) Sect. 11. ; and of Sins done in private against God, before God alone 
(f) Sect. 7. . And therefore, as he adds 
(g) Sect. 5. , a Penitent is to cry day and night before God; to strive with Him, by Tears and Supplications; to Give Alms; to Avoid the Occasions or Opportunities of Sin; to change his Name, and his whole course of Life, and to go into Voluntary Banishment. And further he tells us 
(h) Sect. 8. , that that all times are fit for Repentance, and Crying to God; but the most proper and acceptable Season, is the Propitiation Day, with the nine days before it.  
This we have in general out of Maimonides. In the Penitential Exscripts at the end of Morinus de Poenit. 
(i) Pag. 151.  there are further Directions for particular Cases; and some things thence it may be for our Use to observe.  
A Murderer, is to go into Banishment, or on Pilgrimage for three Years; to bear Forty stripes save one in every City to which he comes, and to say I am a Murderer: neither to eat Flesh, nor to drink Wine, except on Sabbaths and holidays: Not to shave his Head, or Beard; or to wash his , or Body; nor so much as to comb his Hair above once a Month, or twice at most: To tie the Hand and Arm that did the Murder, in an Iron Chain to his Neck; and to go barefoot, and mourning for the Fact; if any one Reproaches him, to be silent; and those three Years, not to walk for Pleasure, nor to use any Recreation; and during his Pilgrimage to lay himself at the door of the Synagogue, that they who go in and out may pass over him; (but they are not to tread upon him).  
The Adulterer is to undergo Afflictions, as bitter as Death; (for he is, by the Law, Guilty of Death): for a Year not to eat Flesh, nor drink Wine, except, etc. every day, in the Winter, to sit in Snow or Ice for an hour, and in the Summer amidst Bees or Wasps; or (as it is in the other Penitential 
(k) Page 157. ) every day, that he suffers not from the Cold or Heat, to Fast, and to take nothing but Bread and Water in the Evening: every day to confess his Sins with Tears and Sighs; and to be beat with the 39 stripes; and to lie upon the Ground, or a Plank without straw, etc. except on holidays; to wear Sackcloth also, and to lead a mournful Life, and to keep from all Conversation with Women. He also that is guilty of some other sorts of Uncleanness, is to Fast Forty Days continued (l); in them to use neither Flesh nor Wine, nor to take any thing warm, except on, Sabbaths, etc.  
An Idolater, as soon as he Returns and Reputes, is to wash himself, and to endure Afflictions and Tribulations, in proportion to his Crime. He is to put on Mourning; to weep and to afflict himself all the Days of his Life, making his Confession thrice every day; not to wash, etc. or to eat Flesh, etc. to be present at no Feast.  
These are the most Criminal Cases: and I shall only observe, of the other there mentioned, what we saw in one instance above, that Forty Days are commonly specified for a more solemn Penitence, and enjoined in almost all of them; as also in general, that the Penitent is supposed to be as a Mourner.  
Now no one that reads these Penitential Injunctions, and knows any thing of the Practice of the Ancient Church, but will easily discern the Correspondence. He will presently call to mind the severity of old, that was used especially to Adulterers, Murderers, and Relapsed Idolaters; the Difficulty they found to be Restored, and the Long and Rigorous Penances they underwent: How they Lamented, and Mourned, and Prostrated themselves before the Doors of the Churches, at the feet of the Brethren; some of them not readmitted till after many years; others not Reconciled till the Point of Death; and some not at all, though left to the Mercy of God; passing their time in Fasting, and other Hardships, for the Humiliation of their Body and Spirit, and a testification of their sorrow both before God and Men. So like in very many points, was the behaviour of Penitents, both in the Synagogue, and in the Church: not to mention Change, of Name, or course of Life; Pilgrimaging, Voluntary Banishment or Abjuration, especially of Murderers; The tying up of their Arms in an Iron Chain; and such kind of Practices, which were frequent in after Ages, and might have been sometimes used before, though not then recorded.  
But, for a general view of this Correspondence of Practice in the Primitive Church, we need only to compare Tertullian's Tract of Penitence; or but only to look back upon those two Passages, already cited thence in the second Chapter of the First Part. And, as for the Virtue assigned to all kind of Afflictions, we may find a suitable Opinion of them in Hermas the Ancient Christian Writer. He is told by the Angel, that he is Afflicted, to the end his Family may suffer and Repent: and when he answers, that behold they already Repent from the bottom of their Hearts; the Angel replies, I know they do. But dost thou think (m) that the Sins of those who Repent, are presently blotted out? No not so quickly. But he that is a Penitent, must Afflict his Soul; and behave himself Humbly, in all he has to do; and endure many, and grievous Vexations; and when he has suffered much, than God may have mercy on him.  

§. I. (c) Ibidem etiam Exhortationes, Castigationes, & Censura Divina. Name & Judicatur magno cum Pondere, ut apud certos de Dei conspectu; summumque Futuri Judicii Praejudicium est, siquis ita deliquerit, ut à Communicatione Orationis, & Conventus, & omnis Sancti Commercii, relegetur. President probati quique Seniores, Honorem istum non Pretio, sed Testimonio adepti; neque enim pretio ulla res Dei constar.  
§. II. (l) Morinus his Translation agrees with the Printed Text, and makes the Forty Days to be discontinued. But it should seem, that they were intended to be continued, by the Prohibition that follows of not washing the while above Twice or Thrice; and that for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. However there is no need of this place, for an instance of such a Fast of Forty Days together; such a Penance being afterwards thrice enjoined, in the same short Paragraph.  
(m) Herm. Part. lib. 3. Sim. 7. Numquid ergo, ait, protinus putas aboleri delicta illorum qui agunt Poenitentiam? Now proinde continuò. Sed oporter eum qui agit Poenitentiam, Affligere animam suam, & Humilem animo se proestare in omni negotio, & Vexationes multas variasque perferre. Cumque perpessus fuerit omnia quae illi instituta sunt; tunc forsitan, qui eum creauít, & qui formavit Vniversa, commovebitur erga eum clementiâ suâ.    

CHAP. X.  
§. I. A. Parallel of Christian Rites mentioned by Tertullian: and  
§. II. Of those Usages mentioned by Origen, particularly about Prayer: (1.) Disposition of Mind. (2.) Posture of Body. (3.) Direction of the Face.  
§. III (4.) Times of Daily Prayer.  
§. iv (5.) Matter and Method.  
§. V The Ancient Order of Christian Prayer,  
§. VI And the Order of the Jewish,  
§. VII. Compared.  
§. VIII. A. Parallel of some few other Usages.  
THE many Christian Ordinances which have already appeared to be derived from the Jews, may be more than were necessary to prepare the Reader for a like account of Lent. I shall therefore take leave to add only so much, as may be comprehended in this one Chapter more.  
§. I. It is known from Ter●ullian, that the Ancient Christians made frequent use of the sign of the Cross: His words (a) are these: When ever we Move and set forward on any action; when we Come in, and when we Go out; when we put on our Shoes, or Wash, or are at Table; when Candles are lighted; when we lie down, when we sit; whatsoever it be that we are doing; we still, as it were, wear away our Forehead by signing it with the Cross. And we have already seen 
(b) Ch. 6. §. 5. , that when this sign of the Cross was first made on the Forehead of a Christian Confirmed, it might be well taken from a like Practice used in all Probability at the Confirmation of a Proselyte Jew, when the Priest marked him on the Forehead to God, and first put on that Frontlet [or Tephillim] between his Eyes; a Sacred dress, memorial to himself, and distinctive to others; which he was after to wear (when free from Impurity) before God, and Men; he being supposed by it to own God and his Law, and to be Armed and Warned against all Sin 
(c) Buxt. Syn. 9 . Now the Christians, tho' they did not dress themselves with their badge of the Cross, yet upon all proper occasions, they repeated the Sign of it, for a Profession of their Faith and Remembrance of their Duty; a Sign which they continued perpetually to make and write on themselves, when they sat in the house, and when they walked by the way, when they lay down, and when they risen up 
(d) Deut. 6, 7, 8, 9 . This too they might use more particularly at those Actions Tertullian mentions: they being such as are always begun by the Jews with their Proper Benedictions 
(e) Buxt. S. Jud. Cap. 10. ; and were not, I suppose, undertook by those Primitive Christians without their peculiar Blessings; in a literal and explicit conformity to that reinforcement of the Jewish Usage by St. Paul 
(f) 1 Cor. 10.31. , whether ye Eat or Drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the Glory of God. And when such Acts of Devotion attended those ordinary actions, they did not only, in common form (of the Jews), require a Sign to accompany them; but they wanted the Christian Sign more especially, to show in whose name they were offered; that another Direction 
(g) Col. 3.17.  of the same Apostle might also be formally observed, whatever ye do in Word or in Deed, do all in the Name of the Lord Jesus, giving Thanks to God, and the Father; by Him; as has been long ago remarked on another occasion.  
2. The same Tertullian reckous up (g 2) another celebrated Christian Rite, for a Practice immemorial in his time; that they thought it a Fault to Fast, or to pray Kneeling on any Sunday, or on the Fifty days between Easter and Whitsuntide, all of them formerly Festival, as sacred to the Resurrection of our Lord, and the Promise of the Holy Ghost.  
Now as the Sabbath of the Jews is changed into our Lord's Day, so was this Observation of it transferred too; for they think it by no means lawful to Fast on their Seventh Day; as it is absurd to Fast upon any Festival. For the same reason they kneel not neither at their Prayers on Sabbaths, and holiday 
(h) Maim. Libello de Prec. Cap. 5. §. 15. : standing with Them being the proper Posture of ordinary Prayers; and Kneeling or Falling down, of Afflictive Humiliation.  
3. Whereas too the same Author mentions there (i) an Observation then Ancient, concerning the Bread and Wine of their Ordinary Food; that they were very careful, that none of it should fall upon the Ground: this has also been formerly suggested to be Jewish, for the Bread at least. For though the Jews, when they conclude the Sabbath, and separate it from the following Week, pour some of their Wine upon the Ground: yet to their Bread they preserve always a particular Respect; supposing an Angel deputed to watch the Negligence of those that let it fall to the ground, and foreboding Poverty to themselves from such an unhappy Accident 
(k) Buxt. S. Jud. 〈◊〉. 16. .  
4. Our Author in another place, in his Treatise of Prayer 
(l) Cap. 11. , makes mention of some Customs then observed at that Duty, which were apparently from the Jews. It was the usage of some he tells us, though he disapproves it, (〈◊〉) to wash their hands before Prayer: and so, it is known, the Jews are required to do 
(m) Maim. Ibid. Cap. 4. §. 2, 3. . 5. Others were used, when they had done Prayers, to sit down for a while (n): and for this they cited Hermes his Pastor, where he is said 
(o) Hermae Past. Lib. 2. in Proem. , when he Prayed, to have sat down on the Bed. The Argument Tertullian derides, and the Practice he takes to be Ethnic; but it seems rather to come from the Jews. For they are directed to sit a while after Prayers in Meditation and Devotion: and the Godly Men of old are remembered to have passed one hour before Prayers, and another after, in that Posture 
(p) Maim. ut supra. Cap. 4. §. 16. . 6. So the custom, he taxes (q), of publishing their Fasting by their declining the fraternal Kiss, seems to speak them to have thought the time of Fasting to be a time of Mourning, and in which they were not to salute nor be saluted. 7. But where he finds fault with those that prayed too loud, and advises to use a low Voice (r), he agrees with the Masters of the Jews; who order the Prayers to be said by each, but with a Voice audible only to his own Ears 
(s) Maim. Ibid. Cap. 5. §. 9 . 8. And when, speaking of the Christian manner of Lifting up their Hands at Prayer, he reproaches the Jews with the contrary Posture; as not daring to lift them up, embrued as they were with the blood of our Lord (t); he truly reports the present Jewish Custom, used (I suppose) since the Desolation of their Holy City, of holding their Hands down as well as their Eyes, and crossing them over their Breast 
(u) Maim. Cap. codem §. 3. : but it still remains undenyed, that their Gesture was different before, and the same which the first Christians continued.  
9 Lastly, What Tertullian in another place informs concerning the Devotion of Wednesdays and Fridays, we have already seen 
(x) Part. I. Ch. 4. §. 3.  that it succeeded that of Mundays and Thursdays. 10. But what he intimates of Praying towards the East (y), we are now going to consider; as it is, with other Rites, more expressly delivered in Origen.  
§. II. This most Learned Christian Writer Origen, as he was very knowing in the Affairs of the Jews, to which others were great Strangers; so he seems to have some Respect to their Practice, though he would not vouch it for Authority, when he discourses in his Treatise of Prayer, concerning that Christian Office. There he proposes 
(a) Orig. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oxon. pag. 127.  to speak of the Requisites to it; the due Disposition of Mind, and Posture of Body, the Place, the Direction of the Face, and the Time; to which he afterwards adds the Method and Parts of it: such things as are used all of them to be considered on the same subject by the Masters of the Jews.  
And first for their solemn Prayer, they strictly require a right Preparation and Disposition of Mind; that their Heart be free from the Thoughts and Cares of the World; and wholly Directed towards God: to which end they are ordered to sit some time before, (as has been now remarked). And Buxtorf adds 
(b) Syn. Jud. Cap. 10. , that they are to enter into the Synagogue with Fear and Reverence, which they express in some words of the Psalms: and when they rise from their Seats, they Bowing towards the Ark, reinforce their Attention with a preparatory Prayer, and then begin.  
Secondly, As to the ordinary Figure and Posture of the Body, the Jews now also prescribe standing 
(c) Maim; de Prec. 5.2. ; and heretofore used (what Origen commends) the Erection of their Hands and Eyes, as we have now observed upon Tertullian.  
Thirdly, As Origen advises (d) that, even in a Private House, the Room chose for that Duty, should be none of those that serve for the less Honourable uses of the Family; such a Caution do the Jews likewise observe 
(e) Maim. Ibid. ●. 9. .  
Fourthly, When He directs 
(e 2) Orig. ut supra, p. 133.  the Face, of the Person that Prays, towards the East, even though there should be no Window in the Room on that side; according to the ancient Custom mentioned before him by his Master Clemens Alexandrinus 
(f) Clem. Strom. 7. Edit. Paris. p. 724. , and by Tertullian, and which had obtained I presume from the Beginning of Christianity; being in their judgement countenanced by those Expressions of Scripture, that our Saviour was the East, (for so they understood what we render the Branch (g)); that He was the Dayspring from on high that visited us 
(h) Luke 1.78. ; and that hereafter he shall come as the Lightning from the East 
(i) Matth. 24.27. : in this also the Christians will be found to correspond with their Predecessors the Jews.  
For that they turned themselves to some one certain Point, was according to the Custom of the Jews: who are supposed 
(k) Maim. de Prec. 1.12. , ever since the Erection of the Sanctuary by Moses, to have turned themselves towards it at their Prayers; and ever since the Building of the Temple at Jerusalem, have been obliged both to look towards that place, and if they are within Walls to open a Window on that side 
(l) Maim. Ibid. Cap. 5. §. 3, 6. .  
The Line too in which the Christians placed themselves, that between the East and the West, though it continued not to be the standing line of Direction to the Jews in their Devotion, yet however it has been always esteemed Sacred with them, and in that Position some things therefore are not to be done by them 
(m) Maim. de Cult. Diu. Tract. 1. Cap. 7. §. 9 Buxt. S. Jud. Cap. 8. : a Respect they give, as they say, by reason of the like situation of the Temple; if it was not rather for a much more ancient reason.  
Now in that Line it is not to be wondered, if we consider not the worship of the Sun, that the place of his Rising was always held the chiefest Point; and should in the Primitive Languages be styled the Part of the World before us, as most regarded; and that the Northern should thence be called the Left, and the Southward the Right (n). But besides this Natural consideration, there seems also to have been some ancient Religious Respect had to that Point, and that afterward the Face of the Temple was therefore turned that way. For the Jews themselves suppose, by Tradition, that Adam was form by his Creator in that situation; and that his Eyes were first opened towards the East (o). And as to the Temple, although the Worshippers, who stood before it, looked towards the West, as those who yet were to see the Dayspring from on High by Reflection only from that Building; yet the Temple itself faced the East; as directly looking for Him, who was to come thence: and that way therefore might the Christians turn, as being themselves Temples of God 
(p) 1 Cor. 3.16, 17. , and professing immediately to expect his Second Coming.  
§. III. Fifthly, The Times of Daily Prayer our Author had determined, in the former part of his Treatise 
(a) Page 36. , to be the Morning and Evening; and between them, Midday, and Midnight. In the Morning also the (so called) Apostolical Constitutions direct to assemble in the Church, before they go about any Business; and likewise to return in the Evening 
(b) Lib. 2. Cap. 36, 59, 62. .  
Now the Jews also have their Daily Prayers, in the Place of their Daily Sacrifices 
(c) Maim de Pr. 1, 5, 6, 7. . Their Morning Prayers take place from the time when the Sun is going to Rise, (for then they began their Morning Sacrifice 
(d) M. De Cult. Dio. Tract. 6. c. 1. §. 2. ), to Ten of the Clock 
(e) De Prec. 3.1. : and at those they all assist in the Synagogue, if they are not extraordinarily hindered, before they do any other Business. Their Evening Prayer may be said any time from half an hour past one; but ordinarily from half an hour past Three till Sunset 
(f) Ibid. §. 2, 3, 4. : in any of which hours the Daily Evening Sacrifice might have been offered 
(g) Cult. 6.1.3. . Besides these two Daily Duties of Prayer Commanded them, they have taken upon themselves to perform another in the Night, and in any hour of it 
(h) Prec. 3.6, 7. ; after the example of those Parts of the Sacrifices which were usually then Burning. And possibly because those Parts were not to be put on the Altar after Midnight 
(i) C. Diu. 6.1.5.  though they might continue afterwards to Burn, it might thence seem most fit, in strictness, at least to begin the Night Prayers at that time; as it was also the fittest hour, being at equal distance from the Last of the Evening Office, and First of the Morning; an hour too the far greater part of the Christian World would therefore also be more likely to observe, because it had been with them the Beginning of their Sacred and Civil Day, as we have learned heretofore from Pliny 
(k) See Part 1. Ch. 2. lit. k. . Such are the constant Prayers of the whole People of Israel Thrice every day. On their Sabbaths and other holidays, as they had Additional Sacrifices to be offered between those of the Morning and the Evening, so in their place there are Additional Prayers to be said, after the Morning, and before the Evening Prayer; but regularly not after One in the Afternoon 
(l) Maim. de Prec. 3.5. . Now this Duty, though it obliged the Generality only on those Peculiar Days, yet it was every day repeated by the Representatives of the whole People the Stationary 
(m) See Part 1. Ch. 2. lit. g.  Men, both in the Temple, and Distant Synagogues; and was attended with a solemn Blessing 
(n) Maim. de Cultu Diu. 2.6.4. . And if we suppose it to be done by them at a Fixed time, no hour could be more proper for it than that of the Midday; a Cardinal time and equidistant from those two of the Sunrising and Sunset, about which times the same Blessing was likewise pronounced 
(o) Maim. de Prec. 14.1. . And lastly to all this, said on the occasion of Origen's assignation of time, I may add in reference to the Ancient Christian Prayers, made when they began to Light Candles, and called thence Lucernary; that there was such an office with the Jews likewise, called the Close, from the shutting up of the Day and its Service; a kind of Completory, used by all of them on their Propitiation Day, and by the Stationary Men on every day (but the Sabbath Eve), at what time the Priests gave the Blessing also, as has been but now observed.  
§. iv The Matter, and Method, of Prayer is the Last thing this Ancient Writer considers: and he directs it, to consist first of Doxology, or Giving Glory and Praise; Secondly, Of Returning Thanks; Thirdly, Of Confession of Sins, with Supplication for Grace and Pardon; Fourthly, Of Intercession for greater Favours: and lastly to conclude with a Doxology again 
(a) Orig. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 134. . It is too observable that, where St. Paul exhorts that Supplications, Prayers, Intercessions, and Thanksgiving, be made for all men 
(b) 1 Tim. 2.1. ; our Author distinguishes the three first sorts of Prayers in this manner: a Supplication he understands to be an Humbler Petition, begging the Relief of our Necessities; Prayer, strictly so called to be an Address to God, speaking his Glory, and without Dejection of Mind, Desiring his Favour; and Intercession to be that, which is made with yet a greater Degree of Assurance and Holy Confidence (c). Now, as this latter Explication may interpret what he means in the third and fourth Member of the matter of Prayer: so it gives a sense to the Apostles words, which may make those four sorts of Prayer, made for ourselves and others, to agree with the four sorts of Sacrifices, used to be offered for that purpose. For so Supplication answers a Sacrifice for Sins or Trespasses, by the Remission of which Relief was to be procured: Prayer, the Burnt-Offerings, which were chief meant to God's Honour, and also besought his Favour: Intercession, the Peace-Offerings, which were joined with Requests, put up with some kind of Communication and Familiarity: and lastly, Thanksgivings agree plainly with the Sacrifices of that Name.  
The Constituent Parts of Prayer are no doubt very rightly assigned by Origen: but as for the Order and Method of them, it seems, by his expression, to be rather what he thought fit for private Composure; than what was observed in the service of the Church, or even in our Lord's Prayer, upon which he there Comments. For our surer information therefore on this subject, it may be best to have recourse to other Authors.  
§. V NOW the Offices of Public Devotion for the Lord's Day Morning, are summarily represented by Justin Martyr (a), as performed in this Order: that first they Read [the Scriptures of both Testaments] the Writings of the Apostles and Prophets; that then there was an Exhortation made; that after they Risen up and Prayed; and lastly, that they made the Oblation, and Received the Eucharist. This is that Apologists short account to the Emperor, that the Heathens might know in general how Innocently the Christian Assemblies were employed. Tertullian (b) from another Occasion accidentally falls upon a very cursory mention of the former of the same Offices, interposing another: remembering the Reading of the Scriptures, the Singing of Psalms, the making of a Discourse, and the Putting up of Prayers. And this Office of Psalmody, though for brevity omitted by Justin, yet questionless was as ancient as the other: and is too recounted by the Author of the Apostolic Constitutions, in the same method, after the Lections, and before the Sermon 
(c) Lib. 2. Cap. 54. . He also in a following Chapter 
(d) Cap. 57  gives a larger description of the whole Service, after this manner. A Reader first is directed, standing in the Ambo, or Desk, to read some Lessons out of the Old Testament: Another than chants the Psalms of David, the People also chanting in their Turns: after Lessons follow, out of the Acts, and Epistles: then the Gospel is read by a Priest or a Deacon, all standing: and afterwards the Exhortation is made by the Priests and the Bishop. This being done, and the Catechumen, etc. dismissed, the Faithful turning towards the East, join in Prayer: and then, after that, the Oblation began, and other Prayers were made; and lastly, the Eucharist was celebrated. So do these Constitutions, giving a true account of Ancient Practice, though under supposed names, represent the Psalmody to be performed most of it together; as it stood, until in the Fourth Century it was ordered by the Council of Laodicea 
(e) Can. 17.  to be more intermixed with Lessons, that the Attention of the Congregation might be the better refreshed and secured by that variety.  
This was the Primitive Order of the Christian Liturgy, according to the General Descriptions we have of it: for as to the lesser particulars, many, no doubt, there were; and some of them, such as we find in the Liturgies, going under the names of St. James, St. Chrysostom, etc.  
§. VI NOW the Jews have their Liturgy too: and their Morning Devotions consist of several Offices 
(a) Maim. De Prec. Cap. 7.— 17. . And here first I may mention those occasional Benedictions they are supposed to have made daily upon their Waking, Hearing the Cock Crow, Putting on their , etc. such as we intimated above, and three and twenty of which they are directed to pronounce constantly every day, and which run in this form; Blessed art [or be] thou, O Lord our God; the King of the World, who clothest the naked, if they are putting on their ; or if they are covering their Heads, who crownest Israel with Honour; or if they are tying their Girdle, who Girdest Israel with Strength. But besides these Benediction, which are to be said apart, and on their proper occasions only 
(b) Ibid. §. 7. , though some Synagogues are used to repeat them together as an Office; the next stated Duty is that of Reading some part of the Law, Written or Oral, to which every one is every day obliged: and this Duty, as all others, is still to be prefaced and concluded with its proper Prayers or Benedictions; of which Prefatory Benedictions the first for Example is this, Blessed is the Lord, etc. who hath sanctified us with his Precepts, and hath commanded us to study the Law. This office is not only Private, but publicly also discharged in the Synagogue, and read there. Next to it is the Duty of Repeating the Psalms: which has to it Benedictions, with which it gins and ends. And this Duty is so acceptable, that the Practice of some is recommended, who have daily repeated the whole Book: however the Synagogue every day say over some Psalms, and especially on their Sabbaths and other Great Days, to which also they generally add some Verses of the Bible, that are chief Laudatory; as in some places the custom is to conclude with the Song at the Red Sea, or with that of the 32d Chapter of Deuteronomy 
(c) Sect. 12, 13. . For it is in general to be noted, that in several places the usages are various, as to the choice of the Sections, and Psalms, and Hymns. After this Duty there follows another, of Repeating the Verses of the Law, they call Shema from the first word of the first of them, which is as it were their Creed, and gins thus, Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God. This Repetition they are obliged to every Morning and Night, wherever they are: and it has too its proper Benedictions before and after, and makes up also an Office in the Synagogue.  
These forementioned Offices may be differently performed in different Countries, according to their particular Customs; but that which follows, and to which the others are but Introductory, is constant and stated, and uniformly observed by all the People of Israel; being a Formulary of short Prayers, now 19 in Number, 18 of which were dictated by Esra, as they say: These Collects are regularly to be said by each of them, at home, or in Public, thrice every day: and this Office in the Synagogue is always to be said, for the Greater Solemnity, by the Precentor, or Deputy of the Congregation, himself; whereas the Foregoing might have been read by a Private Person. Of those Prayers, or Collects, the Three First, and Three Last are most remarkable; those speaking the Glory of God, and these returning Thanks 
(d) Maim. de Prec. Cap. 1. §. 4. ; the other Intermediate one's being Petitionary, for Understanding, Repentance, Pardon, Relief from their Distresses, Healing their Infirmities, Giving of seasonable Plenty, Return from their Captivity, Restoration of their Government, Protection of Good Men, Reinhabiting of Jerusalem, the Coming of the Messiah, etc. the Requests gradually rising up, according to origen's abovementioned distinction of Supplications, Prayers, and Intercessions. It is also further to be remarked, that though the three first Collects are noted to be wholly Doxological, yet the rest are not to be thought to want that Duty; all of them beginning, or ending, with a Benediction of God; and the whole Formulary being accordingly called the 18 (or 19) Benedictions; as it is also prefaced with this Versicle, Lord open thou our Lips, and our Mouth shall show forth thy Praise. But the Third of those Prayers is more signally Glorificatory: when it is said in Private, referring to the Hymn of the Cherubins, 
(e) Is. 6. Ezek. 3.12.  Holy, Holy, Holy, &c.; and when in Public, expressing it. And there is also a solemn Hymn of Glory, which they call the Kadish, pronounced particularly by the Deputy of the Assembly, before and after every Service 
(f) Ord. Precum Subjunct. Libr. 2●o Libri Jad. Chaz. Titulo de Benedictionum Formulis. .  
Thus far goes an Ordinary Morning Service. But on Mundays, and Thursdays, there still follows a Litany: and such Prayers are particularly ordered to be pronounced from a Low Place 
(g) Buxt. Syn. J. c. 10. .  
After the Litany on Those Days 
(h) Buxt. Ibid. c. 14. , or after the Offices before described when there is no Litany, as on the Sabbath 
(i) C. 16. ; the Law is brought from the Ark to the Desk in great Pomp, and peculiar Portions of it are read there by several, with Praevious and subsequent Benediction of God: and then in the same manner it is carried back: the People all the while Standing; and, as the Book comes and goes, Chanting out some Versicles, and pressing to Kiss it.  
Lastly on Sabbaths, and other Great Days, there follows Another Office, the Additional Service, peculiar to the Festival; consisting now chief of the Commemoration of the Peculiar Sacrifices, on that day heretofore offered. And this Service of Prayers, though having some the same, is separate and distinct from that of the Daily Morning Prayers: as the Daily and the Additional Sacrifices, however some things in both might be of the same nature, were never intermixed and dispatched together for greater speed and convenience; but always separately offered, and each Office kept entire to itself 
(k) Maim. de Cult. Diu. Tract. 6. Cap. 7. .  
§. VII. NOW to this last described Jewish Order of Morning Prayers, so far did the Ancient Christian agree, as to begin likewise with Lections and Psalmody: and from the Jewish Custom of sitting at the Repeating of those Psalms it is, that such Portions of the Psaltery as are now read by the Greeks, without any interposition, are called by them sit (a): as also the Laudatory Hymns in the Greek Church, used at Morning Prayer, which is thence called the laud's by the Latin, seem to have been placed there after the same Example. As to the Lections, the Christians have the variety of the Jews: for as these read in the Morning out of their Misna, and Doctors, and the Prophets, and the Law; so had we our Lessons also out of unscriptural Authors, and the Old Testament, and the Epistles, and the Gospels. And herein the Gospel with us, answered plainly to their Law. For though we read the Gospel before the solemn Prayers, and they the Law after, (and in this order only we differ,) yet the Lection was made with us in the like Solemnity; the People standing up, and before and after Blessing, and Praising God; as the Book is also in the Greek Church, even at Morning Prayer, carried about with great Solemnity, and Kissed by the People. After this Lection and Psalmody (or Psalmody and Lection, for they were always somewhat intermixed,) with the Exhortation, if any was made; and after the Hearers and Catechumen were dismissed by the Christians; (and at the same time, I suppose, they were dismissed by the Jews, when they had any;) our Creed, and their Shema, come together: and then, in either Church, the Prayers properly so called. And lastly these, on certain days of the Week, are closed with the Litany, by both.  
Thus the ordinary Morning Services answer one another: and so also does our Communion Service, strictly taken, answer their Additional; coming at the end of all, in a distinct Office. For in a Greek Liturgy (for Example) both the Psalmody, and Lections, and Creed, and the first Prayers, are known to be nothing else but an abbreviated repetition of the Morning Office; (as the Jews too shorten theirs on their Festivals:) and then after that, (as with us of England after the Prayer for Christ's Church) the Office of the Eucharist gins, the Celebration of the Additional Christian Sacrifice.  
§. VIII. THUS much concerning the Agreement, in the Method and Order of Prayers: other particular correspondences may be observed, of which I shall note but a few, leaving such as are more obvious to the Readers own reflections. And first it may be remarked in the Greek Liturgy, that when any new Action is entered upon in any part of the Service; it is begun with a Benediction of God (a): in like manner as the Jews use to do. And secondly, in the preparation to the more solemn Prayers, at the putting on of the Habits in which the Priest is to Officiate, appropriate Benedictions are said; and one of them, as at the putting on of the Girdle, much the same with that the Jews use (b). Thirdly, As our Collects conclude generally with the Laud and Honour of God, so do Theirs. Fourthly, The Triumphal Hymn, as it is called in the Greek Church (c), Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God, &c.; is always solemnly said by their Chazan, with the third Collect of their Daily Prayers. Fifthly, And whereas, when those words are pronounced, the Jews, with an Exulting Gesture, are used to Lift up, not their Eyes only, but their whole Bodies; and to Leap up thrice 
(d) B. Syn. Jud. 10.  at that Trine Hallowing, for so they call it, of God; the same Custom appears to have obtained among the Primitive Christians at a like Prayer: at the latter end of which they are all reported (e) to have joined in with their Voices, lifting up their Heads and Hands to Heaven, and together raising their Feet; as if they would have followed their Prayers towards the Spiritual Essence, and ascended up in Body as well as in Mind. Sixthly, Further, that ancient form of our Thanksgiving (which follows these words in the Communion Service, Let us give thanks to our Lord God) with its special Causes sometimes assigned; seems to be conceived after the Pattern of the Jews Eucharistical Collect, the First of the last three. Seventhly and lastly, Their Kadish, or larger Hymn of Glory, may answer to our Angelic one, at the end of our English Communion; Glory to be to God on High, on Earth, etc.  
Many such Correspondencies may be found between the solemn Devotions of the Synagogue, and of the Church of Christ: and had we any sufficient account of the Prayers, that were daily said in the Temple, by the Priests and Levites; (as we have now notice of little more than what is performed in the Synagogue, by the People, and one of them their Deputy;) I question not, but that our Ancient Liturgies would be found to come much nearer to their Rites. IT is known, that the Orarium 
(f) Gear ad Chrys. Missam numero 9 no.  of the Deacons in the Ancient Church, was but the same with the Sudarium, with which the Sign was given in the Temple 
(g) Maim. de Cult. Diu. Tract▪ 6. Cap. 6. §. 7.  and it may be observed that, as a Priest in the Greek Church gins many Actions from the Admonition of the Deacon (b); so did the Priests heretofore from the like Remembrances of some lower Assistant (i). In the Temple also only it was that the Proper name of God, Jehova, might be pronounced 
(k) Maim. de Prec. 14.10. : and when they tell us, that it was ten times pronounced by the High Priest on the Day of Expiation; they let us also know 
(l) Maim. De Cult. Diu. 8.2.7. , that the Priests and People in their several Courts, every time they heard it spoke out, fell down upon their knees with their Faces to the ground, and cried out, Blessed be the Name of the Glory of his Kingdom for Ever and Ever. And from that Custom the Reverence used to the name of Jesus may have come: it being the Appropriate name of our Blessed Lord; a Name, as the Apostle says 
(m) Phil. 2.9, 10.  above every Name, even above the name Jehova so much glorified under the Old Covenant, and by which the Father would be hereafter Honoured. So the Christians might bow at the mention of that Name, in imitation of the like practice of the Jews: and to that Practice the Apostle may be well thought to allude, when he says, that at the Name of Jesus every knee, of every Place, henceforth should bow; every Tongue also Confessing, (for in the Obeisance of the Temple the Tongue also had its part;) that Jesus is the Lord, and King; and all this still to the Glory of God the Father.  
And thus have I at last concluded this incidental Discourse, concerning the Derivation of Christian Ordinances from the Jews; much indeed too prolix, in regard to my first design; though possibly not too long, in respect to the importance of the subject itself; and which might easily have been enlarged yet further. But although the Answer to one Objection has increased so enormously, yet the other Two may have a quicker Dispatch, and shall take up only one Chapter more.  

§ I. (a) Tert. de Coron. Cap. 3. Ad omnem Progressum atque Promotum, ad omnem Aditum atque Exitum, ad Calceatum, ad Lavacra, ad Mensas, ad Lumina, ad Cubilia, ad Sedilia, quaecunque nos Conversatio exercet, Frontem Crucis signaculo terimus.  
(g 2) Ibid. Die Dominico Jejuni●m nefas ducimus, vel de Geniculis adorare. Eadem immunitate à aie Paschae in Pentecosten usque gaudemus.  
(i) Ibid. Calicis aut Panis etiam nostri aliquid decuti in terram, anxiè patimur.  
(n) Tert. de Orat. Cap. 12. Quòd assignatâ Oratione Assidendi mos est quibusdam, rationem non video: nisi si Hermas ille—  
(q) Ibid. Cap. 14. Alia jam Consuetudo invaluit. Jejunantes, ●abitâ Oratione cum Fratribus, subtrabunt Osculum Pacis.— Jam enim de Abstinentia Osculi, etc. Vide literam (s) ad operis hujus Partis prioris Cap. 4.  
(r) Cap. 13. Sonos etiam vecis subjectos esse oportet: aut quantis arteriis opus est, si pro sono audiamur?  
(t) Cap. II. Certè [Israelis] manus semper immundae, sanguine Prophetarum & ipsius Domini cruentatae in aeternum. Et ideo conscientid Patrum haereditarii Rei nec attollere eas, ad Dominum audent— Nos vero non attollimus tantum, sed etiam expandimus—  
(y) Tertull. Apolog. Cap. 16. Alii—  credunt Deum nostrum.— Denique inde suspicio, quod innotuerit nos ad Orient●● regionem precari.  
§. II. (d) Orig. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Edit. Oxon. p. 130. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(g) See Gregory 's Works: Ch. 18. on Zach 3.8. & 6.12.  
(n) This, in part, is exemplified by Mr. Gregory.  
(o) This too is mentioned by Mr. Greogory in the same place: and by Mr. Selden, De Syned. 3.16.2.  
§. iv (c) Orig. Ibid. pag. 44. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—.  
§. V (a) Justin. Apol. 2. sub sivem. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—.  
(b) Tertull de Animâ Cap. 9 Est hodiè soror apud nos: Revelationum charismata sortita, quas in Ecclesia inter Dominica solennia per E●stasin in spiritu patitur—. Jam vero prout Scripturae leguntur, aut Psalmi cant●●tur, aut Adlocutiones proferuntur, aut Petitiones del●gantur, i●● indè materiae Visionibus subministrantur.  
§. VII. (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
§. VII. It is thus: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, When the Priest pronounces this, he is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and it is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Vide Goar. ad Euchol. Grac. pag. 56.  
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Vide Chrysost. Liturgiam.  
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de quo consuli poterit Goar, ad Chryst. Liturgiam, Observatione 125.  
(e) Clem. Alexandr. Strom. lib. 7 more Edit. Paris. pag. 722. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,—.  
(b) Such Admonitions as these: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Vide Liturg. Chryf. (i) An Instance may be seen in the Admonitions given to the High Priest, by those next him, at the putting on of the Two Lots on the Two Goats; Domine Pontifex tolle Manum Dextram, or Tolle manum sinistram. Maim. de Cult. Diu. 8.3.3.    

CHAP. XI.  
§. I. The Second Prejudice against a Jewish Origination of Lent, from want of Authority in the Talmudical Writings;  
§. II. Answered: by showing (1.) That those Traditional Accounts were not without some Ancient Foundation of their own;  
§. III (Secondly,) That they are Confirmed in many points by Collateral Evidence;  
§. IU. And (Thirdly), That they were not borrowed by the Jews from Foreign Authors.  
§. V The Third Prejudice against such an Origination, from the Novelty of it; Answered.  
§. I. THE Second Objection against the Jewish Original of Lent, as we apprehended 
(a) Part 2. Chap. 1. , might be this; that the Traditional Writings we have of the Jews, were not sufficient Authority for the Knowledge of their Ancient Customs: and this is a Prejudice, that has been entertained by many very learned Men, and has been much confirmed by Morinus his Exercitations.  
Neither is it to be denied, but that the Jews have deserved this Disgrace: having brought their Traditions under a suspicion, by the foolish way they took to advance the Credit of them. For they thought it not enough, to have their Customs very Ancient, and some of them as Old as Moses: but he must also have learned them in Mount Sina, from the Mouth of God himself. Neither was it sufficient, to have had them preserved by Writing, if the people had so thought fit: but they must be necessarily transmitted by the sole force of Oral Tradition. And when they come at last to be reduced into Writing, by their Rabbi Judah, about the Year of our Lord 209; his Collection must be immediately as Authentic, as if wrote by Moses, or by the Finger of God. And then the Commentaries on this Book, the two Talmuds, the First of them they will needs have compiled in our Fourth Century; and the Last, the Babylonian, to have been completed in the Beginning of the Sixth 
(b) Vide Po●ock Portam Mosis Morin-Exerc. 6. Li● 2 di. .  
We shall not therefore wonder, if such confident Pretences, as these, have provoked the World to inquire, and examine; and, as is usual, extremely to Under value and Depress, what others have more unreasonably enhanced. And thus both that Famed Book, and its Commentaries, are bid to go down three or four hundred years lower, than they were placed by their too Devoted Admirers 
(c) Morin. Exerc. modò dictá. : the Text itself, is esteemed an uncertain Rhapsody; and the Expository Additions to it, a Heap of Impertinencies and Idle Tales. And if there are any Ancient Facts or Customs, agreeable to what we know by better hands; the notice of them is supposed, not to have come originally from their Own Memoirs, but to have been borrowed afterwards from our Greek or Latin Authors.  
Now as to my own part, my acquaintance with these Jews has not been so great, as that I should think myself bound to engage in their Quarrel, and to justify the pretended Age and Authority of their Writings. That their Accounts were more Full in many material Cases, I have often had occasion to wish: and that they are certainly true, I must confess I am never entirely satisfied, until I find them confirmed by the Concurrence of some better Testimony; such a prejudice has that pretence of Oral Tradition given me. I shall not therefore undertake to offer more in their favour, than these two Considerations: First, that such Traditional Memoirs are no Novel things; but that such Misnaioths were certainly very old, more early and better Recorded, even than the Rabbins give out: and Secondly, that it is not likely, that their Accounts of their Customs were suggested by our Writers, or formed from the Observation of Christian Practice.  
§. II. AND first as for what concerns the Misnaioth, or Digest of Traditions, composed by their Great Rabbi, and who is now their Oracle; it is allowed by Morinus himself 
(a) Ex●●●. 6. Cap.—  to have been Read in their Synagogues in Justinian's time, together with the Law and the Prophets; and to be meant by him in his Edict (b) dated in the year of our Lord 548. And if it had then that Authority with the Jews, it must be supposed, to have risen up to it after some considerable Tract of Time, and not to have been compiled in the Memory of Man; unless we too will fall into the Rabbinical Fable, and make it to have been held so highly Sacred at its first appearance. It might therefore well have seen the Light an hundred or two hundred years before; and yet not have been particularly mentioned, either by Epiphanius, or St. Jerom; as not being of that singular Repute in their time, above other Collections of the same Nature. For, that this was the First Book of the Kind that was ever written, the Jews indeed tell us: but this Tale, we may easily guess, was devised only to do it greater Honour; and He that Believes them not in all, will have no Reason to believe them in This. The word Tradition is known to signify only the Delivery of a Doctrine or Ordinance; as Misnah is a Secundary Law; neither of them excluding the help of Writing. Neither is Tradition or Secondary Law, if styled Oral, therefore to be accounted absolutely Unwritten, but only Originally; not as if it were never after to be reduced into Writing, but as not given out in it at the first delivery. And although St. Augustin 
(c) Contra Advers. Leg. & Proph. 2.1.  says, that the Jews of that time had not their Traditions in Writing, but retained them by Memory, and delivered them Orally: yet we may well suppose the Good Father to be deceived in this by the Jews; who were shy, it may be, of publishing the Books of this nature to the Knowledge of Christians; and because they were wont in their Schools to deliver their Lessons to their Scholars without Writing (as many other Professors in many places still do) might therefore pretend they never used any. For that such Traditions had been written long before, even in the Apostolic Times, we are competently assured, from the Epistle attributed to Barnabas: where some of the Customs, which Rabbi Judas Misnah gives, are expressly mentioned; and as delivered in Writing (d).  
From this Testimony of St. Barnabas it seems to be plain against the Assertion of St. August in, and the Modern Opinion of the Jews, that there was some kind of written Misnah, in the first Age of Christianity: as it is very probable also, that this present Misnah of Rabbi Jehudah's might be extant at the latter end of the Fourth Age, the time of that now mentioned Father, and of Epiphanius and St. Jerom. But besides, though these two last Authors do not mention this very Book; yet, as they both understood the Jewish Learning well, so they let us understand that this Traditional Part of it was then in high Esteem with them, cited for Unquestionable Authority, and reputed of very great Antiquity. St. Jerom, speaking of Jewish Traditions in St. Paul's time, says (e) that a great number of such they continued to have in his, (He for his part supposing them to be the same,) under the name of Secondary (f) Ordinances: and adds, that if they were asked, for Example, how they came to take the Liberty of a Sabbath Journey, when their Law commanded them to sit in their House; they were ready to justify themselves by that other, their Traditional, Authority, and to answer that Rab Akiba, and Simeon and Hillel (Names famous in the Present (g) Collection) had allowed them to walk Two Thousand Feet on that Day (two thousand Cubits saith (h) the Talmud). Such Traditions as these, he says, their Doctors read of, certain days of the Week; and the Phrase for it was, The Wisemen (i) read the Secondary Law. So much does St. Jerom bear Witness of some Misnaical Memoirs, then held very Sacred; and of their Doctors Commenting upon them. Epiphanius is more particular concerning the Age of those Traditions: and, to refute Martion, who supposed the Old Testament itself, to be the Traditions the Pharisees retained, while they passed by Mercy and Judgement; He (k) bids him inquire whence they came, and he shall find, that they were otherwise descended; from David, or Adda, after the Return from Babylon; and from Akiba, who lived before that Captivity; as well as from the Sons of Asamoneus, who were 190. years before our Saviour. Writing also against Ptolemy the Valentinian, who supposes the same Traditions our Saviour reproves (that particularly whereby a Parent was unrelieved under the pretence of a Corban) to be found in the five Books of Moses; and affirms the Pentateuch to consist of the Law of God, the Ordinances of Moses, and the Traditions of the Elders: he tells him, that for what relates to the Elders, he is not able to justify it by the Scripture (for the Traditions of the Elders are not where extant in the Law); and that this his strange conceit proceeds from his Ignorance in those matters. For, says he, the Traditions of the Elders, are by the Jews called Secondary Instructions; and they are four: the First, bears the Name of Moses; (as some of their Traditions do now); the Second is of Rabbi Akiba, as they call him; the third, of Adda, or Juda; and the fourth, of the Sons of Asamoneus. But where in the five Books of the Pentateuch is that of the Corban, mentioned by our Saviour, to be found? you cannot show it. Your Assertion therefore falls to the ground: that saying of the Corban, no where appearing in the Pentateuch. Now hence we see first, that the Traditions, which the Jews had in Epiphanius his time, were the same, in his Judgement, which were in our Saviour's time: Secondly, that those Traditions in probability were not then kept unwritten: for otherwise our. Author would have taken another course with Ptolomy's Ignorance; and have told him, that those Traditions were so far from being writ down in the Pentateuch, that they were not yet written at all. And thirdly we may conjecture from his manner of Expression, that the Jews had four Misnah's distinct then; and that the Compilation, or Digest, of them, and of some later added, is the Misnaioth we now have.  
Such an Account do these Fathers give us of the reputed Authority of the Jewish Traditions, about the year of our Lord 400. But further, that some of them were not unwritten in the Apostolical Age, we have before seen from Barnabas his Epistle: and that they were in great vogue in our Saviour's time, is apparent from the Gospels; as also from Josephus (m), that there were such Customs which had obtained a long while in Johannes Hyrcanus his Days, above a 100 Years before our Saviour, and which they of that time had received from their Fathers, not written in the Laws of Moses; (for neither does he say, that they were not where written).  
It is manifest therefore, from what has been premised; That such like Traditions, as the Jews now give us, pretended even in our Saviour's time to great Antiquity, and were then much Celebrated and Regarded, and some of them in that Age reduced into Writing; That those Traditions, whatever they were, were supposed by St. Jerom, and Epiphanius, to have been carefully transmitted by the Jews, down to their days; and that therefore the Author of the present Misna, if he were indeed as late as those two Christian Doctors, must however be allowed to have had the opportunity of those Memorials, for the Basis of his Collection; and must be also judged to have used that opportunity, if only by the credit his Work obtained with those of his own Nation. So that if we do not receive the Jewish Traditions, with the same implicit Faith the Jews do; yet neither should we peremptorily reject them, as Arbitrary, and Groundless, and of Modern Invention; but rather give them such a fair equitable Entertainment, as to think, that though something of them may be false, yet much also may be true; being ready to admit them to be true, upon the concurrence of any New unsuspected Testimony, the only favour that I have to desire in their behalf.  
§ III. SUCH a mean degree of Credibility the Talmudical Accounts might reasonably demand of us, in their own right; had they not yet been able to produce to us any particular Specimens of their Veracity: but many such there are to be collected for them, out of Authors of other Languages. We have seen that what the Present Traditions say of the Expiation Goats; that both of them were to be like in shape, and stature, and price 
(a) Misn. Titulo Joma Cap. 6. §. 1. ; that a piece of Scarlet was to be put on the Horns of the one, and part of it to be taken off when he was brought into the Wilderness 
(b) §. 6. ; and that he was contumeliously used in the way 
(c) §. 4. : is much the same with that which is related in Barnabas his Epistle 
(d) See the last Section. , and from him, as is guessed, expressed by Tertullian (e). And so the Sabbath day Journey of 200 paces, mentioned by St. Jerom, has appeared to be the same space which the Jews now assign: as their other Traditional Observations, he occasionally reports, are not found to differ from those the Modern Rabbins give us. But for such an Attestation, we need go no further than to the New Testament; many of whose Passages, and say, are found to agree so well with some of the Jewish Records, as to borrow thence their best and clearest light: as manifestly appears from those Commentators, and others, of this and the former Age, who have not neglected to consult the Talmudical Learning. Thence it is manifest, that the Masters of the Jews have been brought to contribute very much to the Explication of the Gospel: neither could they have been denied this Certificate, but because it was thought, to be too great an honour for them, by such, who seem resolved to be as obstinate against them, as they are against the Faith.  
§. iv From no better a reason, when such a consent between the New Testament and the Jewish Traditions appears, is that other surmise thrown in; that this Agreement is by fraud, and that the Later Rabbins transcribed their Customs out of our sacred Writings: a surmise absolutely as ground-less, as any Jewish Tradition can be; and no less Improbable.  
For first, when we certainly know, that the Jews of old had such Traditional Memoirs of their own current amongst them; it cannot but seem much more reasonable and natural, to suppose their Present Traditions derived thence, than from our Testament: especially since we find, that this conceit itself is Novel, and that the Elder Christians Jerom, and Epiphanius, who knew the Jews and their Learning best, never entered into it, but presumed the contrary.  
Neither is it at all likely, that the Talmudists ever increased the knowledge of their Customs by the help of our Writings: not only because that Nation has all along affected to be strangers to our Learning, partly out of Superstition, and partly out of Contempt: but because it actually appears, by their Gross mistakes in many points of History, (mistakes with which they are much reproached by those 
(a) Mor. lib. 2. Exer●. 5.  whom we have now opposed) that they never indeed looked into our Authors; no not so much as into their own Josephus, from whom they might have had much better information, if they would have vouchsafed to have been instructed in any other Language than their own.  
But we need not go so far about, to refute this suspicion of Jewish Forgery: it being evident only from the ba●e view of such Traditional Particulars, and of the Texts of the Gospel, to which they relate. For whereas many Circumstances of those Traditions give so natural, and apposite, and full, a sense to their several Texts, that they justify at the same time their own Truth: they are also, we see, so obscurely expressed, and covertly hinted in those Texts; that they themselves could never have been suggested, and raised thence. This evidently appears, to give no other Examples, in the Parallels of Baptism, or of the Lord's Supper 
(b) Ch. 2, & 3. of this Repart. : in either of which, the Jewish Customs afford a clear Explanation to many a Passage of our Scripture; but receive none. And that they could not be raised, and explained thence; is very plain in fact. For these Traditions, which as soon as we have learned them from the Jews, every one in these latter Ages, easily and immediately applies to the Exposition of the Holy Text; were never in the least thought of by those many Ancient Commentators of ours, who wanted indeed the help of the Jewish Learning, but wanted not the Application nor Discernment, which the best Jewish Master could be supposed to bring.  
§. V The Third and last Prejudice, we feared might be raised against a Jewish Derivation of Lent, was from its Novelty; that it cannot be true, because not mentioned by any Authors before.  
But this is an Objection, which may have been already removed, by the appearing Probability of some like Originations, which we have now offered at, if the Reader has been so favourable as to admit them. However, as he cannot, I presume, reject those very many Explications of the Text of the New Testament, which Modern Commentators have given us from the Accounts of Jewish Customs; so he will reflect, that most of them were lately very New, and such as are not at all remembered by the Ancient Expositors.  
Neither is it to be wondered at, that the Ancients left many such Derivations and Allusions unmentioned; or any Imputation upon them, if they are supposed to have been more ignorant of the Jewish Customs, than we now are.  
It is well known, that in the Beginning there was very frequent Communication betwixt the Jews, and the Christians; and that most of the first Converts to our Church came from the Synagogue. Yet in a little time there grew, we know, not only a strangeness between those of the two Religions; but, on the Jews part, a great and a fierce Hatred: then when the Proselytes from the Gentiles had filled our Churches, and most of the Bishops and Doctors began to be of that Number. Of that rank were the greatest Men, remembered to us, of the second Century: and among them are those eminent Writers, still preserved, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Tertullian; Men admirably skilled in the Heathen Learning, but in the Jewish no further, than the Scriptures had informed them, and that too by a Greek Translation. And although, amongst those who followed them in the next Ages, some one or two, as Origen in the third, and Jerom in the fourth, were better seen in that Knowledge: yet they chose to use it, rather to compare and rectify the Translations, then extant, of the Old Testament, by the help of the Language; than to bring any Traditional Rites, or Phrase, thence, for a Correspondence with the Doctrines, and Usages, of the New. Whether it was then thought, in the height of that Animosity, that such a comparison would do the Jews too much honour: or whether it happened by the Allegorical humour, which Origen affected, and the other imitated; they endeavouring so much to spiritualise the plain Facts and Ordinances of the Hebrew Text, that much literal account of Unscriptural Ordinances could not be expected from them.  
From what therefore concerns the Exposition of the New Testament in general; there being but little use made of the Jewish Learning, by those few that chanced to know it; the other Commentators as (for example) S. Ambrose, St. Augustin, Chrysostom, and Theodoret, bestowed their pains in the use of what helps they had: and they gathered thence a Plain, and True, and Useful, sense of the Text; though, in some places, not so Elegant, and Full, as that the words would have expressed. Neither is it any disreputation to their Comments, that they reached not the Height of the Original; no more than it is, to the best Translations. Neither were they under a much greater Disadvantage, in not understanding here and there a Criticism, understood now by us; than we now are, if any thing of that kind, unobserved by us, shall happen to be remarked by those that come after. In all Ages of Christianity, there has still been more of the Holy Scriptures understood, than was necessary for their great design, the Salvation of Believers: and possibly the Providence of God has so ordered the Dispensations of Knowledge, that there might be some equality between us, and those nearer the Apostles; and that, in recompense of those many advantages we have lost, this new Information should be given.  
And in particular as for Rites and Usages, this may be remembered; that as we have, in the few Writings of the first Ages that remain, but an occasional accidental mention of such Usages; (for such things were then too well known, to be studiously and circumstantially described;) so we have less notice of their Original, to expect. For that likewise was in the very beginning, too obvious to be discoursed of; and after, when it came to be less understood, was not much enquired into: those primitive Christians wanting no originary Derivations, to reconcile them to such Customs, as they knew practised by the Apostles, and Apostolical Men; and not being so curious about the Reason, as observant of the Example. This seems to be the case of the Christians of Tertullian's time: for neither does he himself appear to have been very curious in that matter. 
Sec Ch● 10. §. 1●   
Thus have I endeavoured, though too operosely, to give some fatisfaction to the General Prejudices against a Jewish Derivation of Christian Rites. And thus much I may have gained, that the Reader will be hence induced to give a fair hearing, to such a Derivation of Lent; (the Argument to which I am at length returning;) if I am not to hope, that he may be brought so far over, as now to be prepossessed in its favour.  

§. II. (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Novel. 146.  
(d) Barn. Epis. Cap. 7. de Capro Emissario. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉;  
Hieron. Ep. ad Algas. Quaest. 10. Quantae Traditiones Pharisaeorum sint, quas bodie vocant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (f), & quam Aniles Fabulae, evo●vere nequeo.— Praeteret, quia Jussum est, ut diebus Sabbatorum sedeat unusquisque in Demosu●, & von egrediatur, neque ambulet de loco in quo habitat: siquando eos ju●●●s literam coeperimus artare, ut non jaceant, non ambulent, non stint, se●●●●tum sedeant, si Praecept● velint servare: Solent respondere & dicere, Rab Akiba, & Simeon, & Hillel (g), Magistri nostri, tradiderunt nobis ut bis Mille Pedes am●ulen●● in Sabbato (h): & coetera istiusmodi, Doctrinas hominum p●aes●rentes Doctrinae Dei.— Videntur igitur Observationes Judaicae apud imperitos, & vilem Plebeculam, imaginem habere rationis, humanaeque sapientiae. Vnde & Doctores eorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hoc est sapientes (i) vocantur. Et si quando certis diebus Traditiones suas expon●●● Discipulis suis, solent dicere, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; id est, sapientes docent Traditiones.  
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(g) Vide Maimonidis Praefatationem in Seder Zeraim, edita●●● Pocockio nostro, sub finem.  
(h) Videri poterit hâc de re Maim. Tractat. de Sabbato, Cap. 27, quique ad eum è margine commentatur.  
(i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(k) Epiph. Haer. 42. Refut. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(l) Haer. 33. §. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(m) Joseph. Archaiol. 13.18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Haec a●tem Johannes ille Hyr●anus obseroari amplius vetuerat, sadduceorum in gratiam.  
§. III (e) Tert. advers. Judaeos', cap. 14. Sic enim & duorum Hircorum, qui Jejunio offerebantur, faciam interpretationem. Nun & Illi utrumque ordinem nominis Christi, qui jam venit, oftendunt? Pares quidem atque Consimiles, propter eundem Domini conspectum, qui non alid venturus est forma, ut qui agnosci habet à quibus & laesus est. Vnus a●tem eorum circundatus Coccino, Maledictus, & Consputatus, & Convulsus, & Compunctus, à populo extra Civitatem abjiciebatur in Perditionem: manifestis notatus Insignibus Christi Passionis; qui coccinea circundatus veste, & consputatus, & omnibus contumeliis afftictus, extra Civitatem Crucifixu● est.     

PART II. REPART. II. A Conjecture concerning the Original of Lent.   

PART II. REPART. II. A Conjecture concerning the Original of Lent.  

CHAP. I.  
§. I. Our Easter, kept for some time with the Jewish Passover.  
§. II. The Notification of Easter by Paschal Letters, agrees with the Practice of the Jews.  
§. III. The Ante-Paschal Preparation of Christians, answers to a like Preparation of the Jews before their Day of Expiation.  
§. I. THE Festival which puts an end to Lent, the Solemnity of Easter, is known by all to be an Imitation of the Jewish Passover; and the Resurrection-Sunday, to have come in the place of that Great Day on which the Children of Israel were released from their Egyptian Bondage. And it is known likewise 
(a) Vide Bucher. de Pasch. Jud. Cyclo. Cap. 1.  that, in the appointing of this Paschal season, the Christians followed for some time the Designation of the Jews; and that afterwards, when they found reason to regulate this matter by themselves, they still kept to the same Mosaic Rule.  
§. II. Now when the Christians began to use a common Calculation of their own, it was generally the work of the Bishop of Alexandria, (a place famed for Astronomical Learning) to consider aforehand on what day of the common Solar year, the first month of the Lunar year, would happen to be the next Spring; and accordingly to ascertain the Easter Sunday, which was to be the First Sunday after the fourteenth day of that First month. This the Great Bishops of several parts learned usually from him of Alexandria; and timely notified to those of their Provinces, that they might know when to begin their preparatory Devotions, which attended that movable Festival.  
And this also was done, as I conceive, after the Example of the Jews. For, tho' when they were in their own Country, the Lunar year was with them of common use; yet they were still to learn, when it should begin: for the first New Moon was to be so placed in the Spring season, that on the sixteenth day of it a Sheaf of the First-fruits of the Harvest might be presented before the Lord 
(b) Levit. 23.10.  etc. 
(c) Maim. de Conse●r. Calend. Cap. 4. Seld. de An. Civ. Vet. Jud. Cap. 5.  Such things therefore the Priests, (as in other Nations); or the Sanhedrim, (as the Talmudists will have it;) were to consider: and if the ordinary year of twelve Lunar Periods fell short, they were to lengthen it out with the Addition of a thirteenth: and whether they would make such an Intercalation or no, it was fit they should signify to the People 
(d) Maim. Ibid. Seld. Libriejnsd. Cap. 9  some convenient time before; that a suitable Preparation might be made against that solemn Feast, to which every Israelite was bound to repair.  
Notice the Jews wanted, that lived at any distance from Jerusalem, to order their affairs so, that their absence for some Weeks at that time from home, might be less incommodious: however to make ready any residue of Holy things, that might be in their hands, and were to be spent at Jerusalem; to take care to have all their Family circumcised; to Purify themselves, if not to take up the Lamb; to discharge the Vow of a Nazarite, if they had any such upon them; to provide, and to offer, any Eucharistical Sacrifice, that might be due. And for some of these reasons, they commonly came up to the Temple before the Feast; and the precedent Week had its peculiar Celebrity: and probably all the fourteen days of that First Month were half Festival, as hath been intimated above 
(e) Part 1. Ch. 5. §. 3. .  
Now such a notice was likewise necessary for the Ante-Paschal Preparation, the Christians used, though in a contrary manner. For they, as we have seen 
(f) Part 1. Ch. 3. , spent some time before in Fasting; all of them, both the asiatics, and those who differed from them: and though some fasted only one day, yet others fasted two, others more, says Irenaeus; and of them, some Forty. This indeed is the account Irenaeus gives of his own, and Victor's side: but, in all probability, the Asiatic manner of Fasting, differed not from theirs in length of time. For from that Apostolical Constitution, cited by the Audaeans, in Epiphanius, it has appeared not unlikely (e), that those also of the Asiatic manner, opposing their Fasts to the Festivity of the Jews, began therefore their Fasting at least a Week, if not a Fortnight before the 14th day: as the same Opposition might have directed them, to have kept the 50 days after with great Joy.  
§. III. But in this contrary manner of observing the Antepaschal Season, Opposition to the Jews was not primarily designed: neither was it further prosecuted by the Christians, than they were lead to it by contrary Causes. For what ever reason the Jews might have for their Pentecostal Sadness, the Resurrection of Christ gave his Followers a greater, for Joy: and if the Jews did exult in the Death of their Messiah, the Christians were certainly to lament it. This Lamentation also of our Saviour's Death, as it was not made in consideration of any loss by them sustained; so neither did it arise out of Indignation, against his Mortal Persecutors.  
On his Passion-Day they Fasted, and Grieved for the Sin of the Jews, by which he was put to Death: but they bemoaned also their other Sins, and the Sins of the whole World, and more especially their own; those for which he suffered, and which were all the more guilty, and more hateful causes of his Crucifixion. In this Abhorrence of all Sin, and Penitential Grief, they spent the day of their Lord's Death: and for the better performing this Duty then, they prepared themselves, by the Abstinence and Devotions of the Season before.  
This was the Intention, as well as Practice, of the whole Church; and this was their Antepaschal Preparation, concurring at least in time with that of the Jews. But the Christians, agreed yet nearer with the Jews in this whole Action; passing their time, not indeed as the Jews than did in that very Season, but as they did in another as solemn, and in an occasion wholly alike to the present circumstances of the Christians: that is the Church of Christ kept the Day of the Passion, as the Jews did the Day of Expiation; and prepared for the one, just after the same manner as They did for the other.  
For this is the Conjecture I now offer, that as many Jewish Ordinancies were patterns to the Christians, and as their Sabbath, and Monday, and Thursday, were removed to our Sunday, and Wednesday, and Friday; so their Expiation Day, was transferred to our Passion Day; accompanied, as it used to be attended, with all its Praevious Offices. And this Parallel, Tertullian, we may remember, in the name of the Catholics, has already suggested to us 
(g) Part 1. Ch. 4. § 2. , though he did not speak it out, when he tells us; that the Fast of the tenth day of the Seventh Month is abolished; and at the same time, that the Days on which our Saviour was taken away, were now determined to that Duty.  
This Conjecture I shall endeavour to approve; by showing, first the Correspondence between the Expiation ●●●y of the Jews, and that of our Lord's P●●sion; and Secondly between the Seasons that Precede, both the one, and the other, of those Radical Fasts.   

CHAP. II.  
§. I. The Sacrificial Performance on the Jewish Expiation Day,  
§. II. Compared with that of our Saviour on His Passion Day.  
§. I. THE Day of Expiation, or Atonement, is with the Jews a very Great Day; enjoined by God under a very severe Sanction, and observed by them always with a suitable Care. It was appointed on the Tenth Day of their Seventh Month; just six Months after the day of the Caption of the Paschal Lamb, or Kid of the Goats: and the Duties of it were Peculiar, partly Sacrificial, to be performed by the High Priest; partly Devotional, incumbent on the People.  
The Sacrificial Office proper to the Day, was proper to the High Priest 
(a) For this and the whole Section, see Levit. 16. : and he only, and on that day only, was allowed to enter within the Veil into the Holy of Holies. Besides the Propitiation he was then to make for himself, and his House; He was to make an atonement for the People of the Congregation: and that was done by two Kids of the Goats, for a Sin-Offering. These two Goats, were to be alike; according to the Tradition, both by the Jews 
(b) Maim. de Cult. Diu. Tract. 8. Cap. 5. §. 14.  and by Barnabas 
(c) For this, and what follows from Barnabas, see Repart. 1. Ch. 11. §. 2. lit. d. : and to be presented before the Lord, at the Door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation. There the High Priest cast Lots upon them: one Lot for the Lord, and the other Lot for the Escape Goat, [for Azazel, supposed by some to be Satan (d)]: and the heads of both of them he bond about with two narrow pieces of Scarlet 
(e) Maim. Ibid. 8.3.4. . With the blood of that which was offered to the Lord, he entered into the House, and within the Veil; to sprinkle it before the Mercy Seat: and while he was in the House, no one else was to be there; [no not in the space between the Altar, and the House; as the Rabbins say 
(f) Maim. Ibid. 6.3.3. ]. On the other Goat, he laid both his hands; and confessed over him all the Iniquities of the Children of Israel, and all their Transgressions in all their Sins; [in a Form, the Misnah pretends to give 
(g) Codex Joma Sheringhami, c. 6.2. ;] putting them on the Head of the Goat: and then he delivered him, bearing all those Iniquities, and Accursed, as the Traditions of Barnabas call him, into the hand of a Fit Man; [Ready and Bold, I suppose (h); or an Executioner; who was to be a Stranger, not an Israelite, says Maimonides 
(i) 〈◊〉 p. 8●. 7. ;] to be carried into the Wilderness: [The People therefore spitting upon him, and Goading him on, as Barnabas tells us they were bid to do; and the Misnah says 
(k) Joma 6.4. , there were those who were ready to pluck him by the hair and cry Away, be gone; though they were kept off from so doing by the contrivance of a narrow passage.] In this manner he was lead into the land not inhabited, [to a Rock called Zuk (l); where his Leader they say (i) dividing the Piece of Scarlet, put half of it on some point of the Rock; [on a Thorn (m), says Barnabas,] and tied again the other half between the Horns of the Goat, and so pushed him down headlong, to be broke to pieces by the Fall.]  
§. II. Such an Annual Expiation Day was appointed for the Jews: and its Sacrifice, whereby the Atonement was made for the Sins of that Year, was so Performed. There was in like manner a certain Day appointed, to come in its due time, when an Atonement should be made for the Sins of the whole World; not of one Nation only, or of one Year, or Age; by a Priest, supereminently High; and with a Sacrifice, truly singular and extraordinary, and of itself deserving to be accepted.  
The Day of our Saviour's Passion, every good Christian believes to have been the Day of the Expiation of Mankind. And that he in that Sacrificial Action, was both the Priest, and the Sacrifice, the whole Tenor of the Epistle to the Hebrews positively avows. He is there said to be a merciful and faithful High Priest, making Reconciliation for the Sins of the People 
(a) Hebr. 2.17. : the High Priest of our Profession 
(b) 3.1. : our Great High Priest, who is passed into the Heavens 
(c) 4.14. : Called of God as was Aaron: after the Order of Melchisedech 
(d) 5.4, 10. : invested with an Unchangeable Priesthood 
(e) 7.24. : a Highpriest, who is set on the right hand of the Throne of the Majesty, in the Heavens 
(f) 8.1. .  
And this High Priest was of necessity to have something to offer, says the Apostle 
(g) 8.3. . He therefore entered once into the Holy Place, not by the Blood of Goats, and of Calves, but by his own Blood, having obtained eternal Redemption for us 
(h) 12. :— and through the Eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God 
(i) 14. . For Christ is not entered into the Holy Places made with hands, which are the Figures of the True; but into Heaven itself; now to appear in the Presence of God for us. Nor yet was He to offer himself often; as the High Priest entereth into the Holy Place every year, with the blood of others—: but now, once in the end of the World, hath he appeared to put away Sin, by the Sacrifice of Himself—: being once offered, to bear the Sins of many 
(k) 9.24. . So are we sanctified, through the Offering of the Body of Jesus Christ once for all 
(l) 10.10. :— who after he had once offered one Sacrifice for Sins, for ever sat down on the right hand of God 
(m) 12. —. For by one Offering He hath perfected for ever them that are Sanctified 
(n) 14. .  
Thus exactly adequate is the Correspondence between the Propitiations of the Old and New Covenant, as it stands proposed to us by the Divine Writer to the Hebrews. Our Saviour is asserted to have been the High Priest, and on his Passion Day to have officiated for us; to have offered the Sacrifice of Himself; to have bore our Sins in his own Body; and with his own Blood to have entered into the Holy Place, not made with hands; and to have appeared, (as before the Mercy Seat,) in the Presence of God. Thus much of the Analogy the Apostle has expressly laid down: and it may very naturally be carried further. The Author therefore of the Epistle ascribed to Barnabas 
(o) Barn. Ep. Cap. 7. , and Tertullian after him 
(p) See Repartit. 1. Chap. 11. §. 3. lit. e. , have both took notice, that the two Kids of the Goats were chosen alike, in as much as both of them were equal representatives of our Blessed Lord: and that he was as that clean unspotted one, which was offered to God, and whose Blood was carried into the Holy Place; and also as that other, laden with the Sins of the People, and so sent away; that he likewise wore the Scarlet; he was, as it were, Accursed; was reviled, spit upon, and buffeted; gave his Back to the Smiters, and his Cheek to them that pulled off the Hair. And to this, after their Example, I may add from the same Traditions, that He was sent away, by the hands of a Fit Man, Pontius Pilate a Stranger; Goaded to his Execution; lead to Mount Calvary, the Place Abrupt and Cut off; Himself there cut off from the Land of the Living, and as it were delivered up to the Prince of this World (who came though he had 
(q) Joh. 14.30.  nothing in Him) and into the seeming Power of the Devil, to suffer Death in appearance, but indeed to destroy him who had the Power of Death 
(r) Hebr. 21.4. .  
Thus did our Faithful and Merciful High Priest both Act, and Suffer, for us, in that Great Day of Atonement; answerably to the Sacrificial Part of a like Days office with the Jews: it remains that we now see what was the Devotional part, to be performed by the People.  

(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken by the Scholiasts, Solomon, and Abenezra, to be a Hill; so called from its Hard Ground: and to be compounded of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, [in Arabic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Terra Dura]; and of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the Auxctick sense.  
Some of the Greek Interpreters, whom our Translation has followed, have included the Goat in the signification of the Word; and have rendered it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: in which case it is presumed to be compounded of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Caper; (for this word by the Septuagint is sometimes taken Masculinely;) and of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abiit, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remotus est.  
Both those ways are disliked by Bochart, who therefore supposes the word to signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: taking it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from the root just now cited: and understanding the Text concerning the Lots in this manner, that One was for the Lord, [or his Altar]; and the other for the Separation, or Removing away; and in this manner the Septuagints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) may be taken.  
But still it seems to others more proper to understand some Person for the other Lot, and who may be opposed to the Lord. And so Origen takes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Septuagint, to be Satan: not as if he were like one of the Dii Averruncii, (which is indeed the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a word though, it may be, regarded here by those Translators; who content themselves often with any signification of the Original, be it suitable to the place or no;) but that he was Averruncandus, and Depellendus, whose place therefore is in the Wilderness. And Azazel in this sense, may also be dervi●d from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Removere, Abdicare.  
And it may be observed that, though the Jewish Scholiasts take no notice here of any Evil Spirit, yet their Traditions mention one Samael, particularly for the Expiation Day; [Buxtorf. Syn. Jud. Cap. 26.] to whom a Present, they say, was then to be given, that he might not hinder their Reconciliation. This Samael they take to be the chief of the Evil Spirits; and the Prince of this World [Lightf. in Joh. 12.31.] that is Satan himself, [Maimon. More N. 2.30.]: And so the Egyptian Typhon, who was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; was called Seth, and Bebon, and also Smu [Plut. de Isid. & Os.] Thus the Jews seem to have retained a Memory of something done to the Devil on that Day; though they conceive it under a false Notion: and still, when the Service of the Day is over, they sound their Horn; for joy, they tell us, of the Victory they have then obtained over Satan [Buxt. Syn. Jud. Cap. eod.]  
Dr. Spencer therefore understands Satan here; but make; the name to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fortis Abiens, or Fugiens; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: [if the abovementioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would not have served better, one of whose significations is Descivit.] And the Goat, which he says was used for the Depelling of Evil, as the other was for procuring Favour, he supposes to be sent to Satan: not for an Offering to him; but to show the Merit, and End of Sin; to reproach him of his own Wickedness, by what was so sent to him; and to make it appear, that not he, but God to whom the other Lot fell, was the Averter of Evil.  
This account has been suspected by some, and much opposed: but still the same Evil Spirit may be allowed to be meant; in another more convenient, and very safe, sense. For, as Wicked Men, are said sometimes to be delivered to Satan; so might that Goat also, in the place of those Men, whose Sins be boar: and by that delivery the Accuser, and Tormentor, might be made to know, that God's People were now discharged of their Transgressions; and that only that Beast, on whom they were all laid, was to answer his Accusations, and to be exposed to his Vengeance. This reason of the Action seems to be agreeable to the Circumstances of it, reported both by the Scripture and the Talmudists; and may stand with any of the foremention'd Derivations: though it may too have one of its own. For from the Arabic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies Reprehendit, Culpavit, Azazel may be likewise sormed; either by doubling the second Radical, or by Preposing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and signify, one who finds fault much and vehemently, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendered Fi●, in a large sense. But it may I suppose, mean one that was more particularly fit for that business; and would not spare to strike in the way, or to kill in the end; from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ic●us inslixit, Noxam intulit.  
(l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is M●ns altus & praruptus: and so is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Arabic; from the Fissures of it, I conceive. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may also signify a piece of Ground, so Broken and Cut, (for so R. Salom. seems to understand it;) as well as Land separated, and otherwise cut of, an Island, or a Desert.  
(m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in signifies not only Spin●, (as Barnabas understands ' it, c●jus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Edules) but also R●pes excurrens in mare, Mons, littus, & Recessus Maris: and therefore appears to answer to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and to express all the significations of the words of that Family; in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Mons, & Difficillimus & Al●issimus in ●olocus; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same, as also Ripa, L●tus stuminis; and lastly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Spina. And it may likewise be observed, of the words relating to the abovementioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has under it the signification not only of Insula, but also of Recessus, seu Decrementum, aquae, vel Maris: and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifies a Hedge now, and might the Thorns heretofore; and withal expresses the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Buds, which are mentioned by Barnabas.    

CHAP. III.  
§. I. The Devotional Duty of the Jews an their Expiation Day,  
§. II. Practised by Christians, on the Passion Day.  
§. III. Some Circumstances of the Eves of those Days, compared.  
WHile this Reconciliation was making in the Temple at Jerusalem; the People, even those who were not present at it, had their parts to perform; and were to join with it, wheresoever they resided; Fasting that whole Day, and afflicting their Souls from Evening to Evening 
(a) Leu. 23.32. . For whatsoever Soul it was, that was not afflicted in that same Day, he should be cut off from among his People 
(b) 29. .  
Now that they might be sure not to be defective in so necessary a Duty; they took care to begin the Office of that Day, earlier than the Sunset of the first Evening; and to conclude it later than that of the second. The Affliction also of their Souls they showed, not by Fasting only; but by all other Demonstrations of Penitence, and Grief for Sin.  
And therefore for the better performing that Duty; as they prepare themselves some considerable time before, (of which we are to speak in the following Chapter;) so more particularly on the Ninth Day, the day immediately preceding. For then, they repair to their Synagogues before day, and continue long at their Devotion there, going afterward to their Burying places, for their greater Humiliation: and in the Afternoon they wash themselves, Confessing their Sins; make ready their Candles, which they are presently to use; and particularly take care, to Ask Pardon of those they have injured, and to make satisfaction. Then in the Synagogue, with other Prayers, they make a solemn Confession of their Sins; and sometimes receive from one another their Forty stripes save one: and afterwards they return home, and eat a Formal Supper, thereby to distinguish that day from the following, in which they are neither to Eat nor Drink 
(c) For this and what follows see Buxt. Syn. Jud. c. 25. .  
And now before the Night, beginning that Great Day, is come; they return to the Synagogue; set up and light their Candles, for each one; (and sometimes two, as both for their Soul and their Body:) and after Proclamation is made of leave for the Excommunicate to join with them, they begin their solemn Prayers of the Day, which they continue towards Midnight; some spending the whole Night, and repeating the whole Psalter. However before Sunrising they come thither again, and stay there all the rest of the Day; Reading out of the Scriptures, and Praying: in which Prayers they take care that their second Service, the Sacrificial Service for the Day, be said before Noon. After Noon they begin the Service of the Evening, continuing their Devotions till the Sun is ready to set; when they subjoin another Office, for the Close of the Day, and peculiar to that day: and then when the Night of the next day is come; they have the solemn Blessing pronounced by the Priests that are present, and so are dismissed:  
After this manner, while the Temple stood, the Jews heretofore are presumed to have employed the Day of Expiation; and not otherwise to have expected any benefit from the Sacrifice, which was then offered, and by which all their Sins were to be entirely Remitted.  
And since the Destruction of their Temple, and ceasing of their Sacrifices, this their own Office the Jews still continue; and impute so much to their due performance of it, as to think 
(d) Rep. 1. Ch. 9 §. 2. , that the Punishment of many offences is entirely Forgiven, and of the rest at least suspended, by that alone, and without the help of the Expiatory Goats which are now wanting.  
§. II. NOW as it is certain, what was laid down in the Chapter foregoing, that the Day of our Saviour's Passion, was the Great and Last Day of Expiation; when that one Propitiatory Sacrifice was made for the Sins of the whole World, and of all Ages, by that our Great and Catholic High Priest 
(e) Tert. adv. Marc. 49. : so is it not to be questioned, but that the whole World, had it then known what Propitiation our Blessed Lord was making for them, would have joined the Affliction of their own Souls, with that his bitter Passion; and would, in their several Habitations, have accompanied his Oblation for their Sins, with their own Confession of them; with bitter grief for their Commission, and strong and earnest Supplication for their Pardon.  
This All Mankind could not have failed to have done on that Day; had they but known, what our Saviour was then doing for them. But that then was hid, from the Eyes of the Apostles themselves.  
When therefore the Mystery of his Death came to be revealed, and the Propitiation of that day was made known; if his Disciples thought fit to keep an annual Memorial of it, (and that duty the Paschal Season of the Jews, so solemnly kept, could not but suggest to Christians;) they could not neither fail of Solemnising the return of that Day, with that Profound Veneration of our Suffering Lord, and that Penitential Supplicatory Devotion to the Father, which the Original Day itself would have required from them.  
Now that such a Day was kept yearly, in memory of the Passion of our Lord, in the first and Apostolical Age; is a truth, which the former Part of this Discourse may have cleared to us 
(f) Part 1. Chap. 3. : and that it was all along observed, with as great a strictness of Fasting and Humiliation, as the Jews themselves used on their day of Propitiation; is likewise manifest: as it is also most certain, that the Grief, and Affliction, they then were under, was not for the Death and Loss of their Lord, and Master; but for the Gild of their Sins, and the Sins of the World, for which their Lord and Master had that day suffered. So much correspondence there was, most evidently, between the Practice of the Jews, and of the Christians, on their two Great Fast Days.  
Thus should our Saviour's Expiatory Sacrifice, which completed and superseded the Jewish, have been attended answerably: and thus actually was the Annually Memory of it, afterwards celebrated with a suitable Devotion. And this, though not done by the Primitive Church, in virtue of any such strict Injunction, as that under the Old Covenant; might yet be well taken up, upon the cogent reason of so just a Congruity. And as the Jews continue their Devotional Office, now when by the Judgement of God an end is put to the Sacrificial: so might the Christians think fit to keep up a yearly memory of that their Sacrifice, whose offering was once made, and never to be reiterated, but its efficacy is to endure for ever: they likewise observing this Solemnity, not with any Ritual Form, but with such eternal Duties of Penitence and Supplication, as are always incumbent upon us miserable Sinners, which the Justice of God will perpetually require, and his Goodness in our Saviour accept.  
§. III. THERE seems therefore to be reason enough, from the nature of the Thing: from that Mysterious Suffering of our Lord, and the consequent Practice of his Primitive Servants; to found the continued Solemnity of the Passion Day, upon its correspondence with the Levitical Day of Propitiation. Neither is it to be expected that I should justify the Parallel, by producing any like Opinion of the first Christians, to that we have seen of the Jews, concerning the Necessity and Merit of the Observation of the Day: when the one was observed only as Proper, and Expedient, (though in the judgement probably of those who had the Spirit of God); and the other as Positively commanded by God Himself. And yet so far did the first Christians seem to regard the virtue of a Jewish Expiation Day, in their Practice about their own, that they still determined the ordinary stated Period of the Penances of ejected Brethren, with the Penitence of Good Friday, and the following Saturday, (both which were the Days of our Lord's Passion;) as if by that their Conversion was consummated, and the Pardon of the Church entirely gained.  
And when they readmitted Penitents on Maundy Thursday; as was the Ancient Usage of the Church of Rome, and it may be of all others; they did not therefore departed from this their Parallel with the Expiation Day, but rather confirmed it. For the Jews, as we have seen 
(g) Rep. 1. Ch. 5. §. 3. , on the Eve of their Expiation relax their Sentences of Excommunication, and admit all to the Office of the next Day: and for the same reason the Christians might admit their Excommunicates, to the Offices of both Passion Days; and even those, whom they did not afterwards suffer to continue in their Communion. The office of the Passion Day, or Days, I mean; which consisted in Confession, and Supplication: for it is very probable, that in the earlier times the Reconciled Penitents were not admitted to the Sacrament of our Lord's Body and Blood, until Easter-Day.  
The Supper likewise, which was used to be held solemnly on that Thursday, though it is said to be in Imitation only of our Lord's Supper; yet it may also have proceeded from the Practice of the Jews on their Expiation Eve, which we mentioned above. For they, in the Conclusion of their Penitential Preparation towards the Propitiation Day, do always make a Solemn Supper: and think it as much their Duty to eat well on that Evening, as on the Sabbath: that being, in their Opinion, a Duty of the Afternoon; as strict Fasting, is the Duty of the following Day.  
So agreeable was the Supper of Passion Thursday, to the Supper of the Jews on the Eve of their Expiation: and more agreeable, than to the last Supper of our Blessed Lord; which, (if we go by Jewish Custom,) was held after Night; and, in their reckoning therefore, rather on the Friday, than on the Thursday: Agreeable I say as to the time; for as to the Freedom of Eating, I suppose it differed much from that Jewish Meal.  
But those asiatics 
(h) Part 1. Ch. 1. §. 3. , who differed from the other Churches; both in their observing the 14th day with the Jews, whatever day of the Week it should be; and also in breaking off their Fast that day; might possibly in this point have as much followed the Custom of the Jews for one Season, as they did their Calculation for the other. For those of Asia seem to be of the Opinion, of which their Followers in Epiphanius 
(i) Part 1. Ch. 5. §. 3. lit. m.  certainly were, and which many other Churches have also embraced, that our Saviour suffered on the 15th day of Nisan: neither is it likely, that they did not Fast on that day; notwithstanding they are said to have broke it off before: for such a neglect, no doubt, could not have been passed over unobserved by their Adversaries, and would have drawn upon them the censure of Victor, more than either of the other differences; and besides, we know, their now mentioned Followers did actually so fast (i). I suppose therefore that their Breaking off the Fast, was not a Determination of it, but an Interruption by such a Supper; and that this their Meal was Formal, and Full; and in the nature of a Feast, and so reputed: whereas the Supper, if any, of the rest of the Christians was a sparing refreshment; and such as, in comparison with the other Meal, did not seem to Discontinue the Abstinence of the Season; as since it has not been thought to do.  
To these lesser particulars, by which some indications of a Propitiation Day may appear; I shall lastly add another Custom, to be read in the Ordo Romanus; their custom of striking of Fire, and lighting up their Candles very solemnly, in the Evening of the same Passion Thursday. For, whatever other reason it may have had for its institution, it does also very well correspond with the Usage of the Jews; who take, as we have observed, very particular care to have their Candles ready against their Propitiation Eve, with which that night their Synagogues are more than ordinarily enlightened.  
And thus I have offered to show the Resemblance, our Passion-Day bears to the Jew's Expiation Day; both in itself, and some Rites of the Day immediately preceding it. I am now to go higher, and to consider at large the whole Previous Season, called commonly Lent; how well it agrees with the like Preparatory Season of the Jews, before their Day of Expiation.   

CHAP. IU.  
§. I. A Penitential Season with the Jews, Preparatory to their Expiation Day: some certain Days next before it, kept Vniformly by All; More also, generally, though in various numbers; and Forty, by many; but the First of the Forty, universally observed.  
§. II. Forty Days, a solemn space of Penitence in the Jewish Discipline.  
§. III. The Christian Lent, compared with the Jewish.  
§. I. THAT the Jews had an Antepaschal Season, if not of a Fortnight, yet of a Week; and particularly, that the Sabbath of that Week, was called the Great Sabbath; we have observed before 
(a) P. 1. Ch. 5. §. 3. : whence appeared a Conformity between them, and the Christians, (those especially who reckoned by the days of the Month, and not of the Week) in point of Holy Time; though the Devotions of the one were generally Festival, and of the others altogether Penitential. But when we once suppose the Day of our Lord's Passion, to have been the Day of Expiation; and come to consider the Preparatory time, that ushered in this solemn Day: we then begin to find a fuller, and a higher, correspondence; not only in a Weekly, but in a Forty Season; and that likewise of Penitential Duty.  
For first, the Jews prepare themselves for the Day of Propitiation, more particularly the Week before it. They rise before Light, assist at Public Prayers, confess their Sins thrice every day, Fast, and give Alms 
(b) ●or this whole Section, See Buxt. S. J. Cap. 26. . And as the People fit themselves in a more especial manner, by the Devotions of those seven days, for the solemn Act of Humiliation commanded them by Moses: so, they tell us, the High Priest heretofore employed the same Week, in a continual Exercise of his Office; that he might be the better able to discharge the Difficult Duty of the Great Day 
(c) Jom● Cap. 1.  The Sabbath also of that Week, they distinguish by a peculiar Title; and call it the Sabbath of Repentance.  
Thus the Jews pass the seven preceding days: and so Leo de Modena 
(d) C●r. des Juif. P. 3. C. 6.  distinguishes them from the rest. For though all the ten of that seventh Month, are called the Ten Days of Repentance, reckoning the Day of Expiation for one: yet the two first are in some manner Festival, being the first of their Political Year, and on them they abstain not from Dinner and Supper; for which reason they may not be esteemed as Penitential, as the seven that follow.  
These Ten Days are constantly so observed by all Jews: the last, the Tenth, by Scriptural Precept; and the others, by Universal Custom. And further, to these are added, out of the foregoing Month, ordinarily a Week at least, says Leo de Modena. For even the Germane Jews begin their Humiliation as early; according to a particular Rule they have 
(e) Morin. de Poen. 10.34.3.  But other Nations generally take more time to that solemn Office: and frequently Devout Persons begin from the First Day, even of this preceding Month, to Fast, to make Prayers and Confessions, to repeat the Penitential Psalms, and to Give Alms; continuing so to do the whole Forty days. However all Jews begin their Penitential Devotion, the First day of that Month, the Fortieth day before the Expiation; though they may afterwards discontinue, in the intermediate time. On that day also they begin to blow the Horn in their Synagogues, which they do every day that Month: for an Alarm, they say; that they may Repent, and be ready to meet the Judgement of God; who, according to their Tradition, sits in Judgement the Ten days of the Next Month.  
§. II. I have mentioned their Opinion, of God's Judging the World, in the Beginning of their Seventh Month: and it may seem thence, that their Custom of giving notice by the sound of the Horn, may rather respect the Beginning of the Month Tisri, than the Tenth Day of it; and be rather the Warning of Thirty, than of Forty days. But this suspicion, if it should arise, will receive easy satisfaction, from another concurrent Tradition of the Jews, universally received by them; that Moses went up upon the Mount, the Last time, on the First day of their Sixth Month, and returned again to them, with the second Copy of the Law, on the Fortieth after, the Tenth of the Seventh, their Expiation day 
(f) Rab. Salom. in Locum Deuter. proximè ●itand. . Now when he went up, he commanded a Horn, as they say, to be sounded through the Camp; to give notice to the People, on what Errand he was going; that they might not again commit the like Abominations; in memory of which, they now still sound it: and we besides know, from better Authority 
(g) Deut. 9.18.  that Moses spent these forty days, and forty nights, in Fasting, and Supplication, for the Sins of the Children of Israel. So that we are rather to think, that they have since in some measure followed his pious Example; and that on the day of his Ascent, they begin to prepare for that of his Descent: which in their Opinion is the tenth of Tisri; and on which they have been since commanded, always to Afflict themselves before the Lord, at least, one Day and Night.  
The Forty days therefore here, are not to be looked upon as an accidental number, and the bare Aggregate of Thirty, and Ten: but as they make up directly a full Penitential Season. And indeed that Number, seems to have been very anciently, appropriated to Penance, and Humiliation. For, not to reckon up the Forty Days, by which God drowned the World 
(h) Gen. 7.4. ; or the Forty Years, in which the Children of Israel did Penance in the Wilderness 
(i) Numb. 14.34. ; or the Forty Stripes 
(k) Deut. 25.3. , by which Malefactors were to be corrected; though these Instances may concur to strengthen the Opinion: whoever considers, that Moses did, not once only, fast this Number of Days 
(l) Deut. 9.9, 18, 25. ; that Elias Fasted also in that Wilderness, by the same space 
(m) King 1.19.8. ; that the Ninevites had precisely as many Days, allowed for their Repentance 
(n) Jon. 3.4. ; and that lastly our Blessed Saviour, when he was pleased to Fast, observed the same Length of time 
(o) Matth. 4.2. ; whoever, I say, considers these Facts, cannot but think, that this number of Days was used by them all, as the common solemn number, belonging to Extraordinary Humiliation; and that those were accustomed to afflict themselves Forty days, who would deprecate any great and heavy judgement; though the Scripture does not specify the number: as those, we know (p) who had a Nazaritical Vow upon them, were used to observe thirty days, though the Scripture had not neither determined that space.  
And this is no more, than what St. Jerom, a Father much versed in the Jewish Knowledge, has expressly averred, in his Comment on Ionas; where he says, that Forty, is the number proper for Penitents, and Fasting, and Prayer, &c.; and that for this reason, Moses fasted forty days; and so Elias; and likewise our blessed Lord, etc. as may be seen at large, in the Passage already exscribed above 
(q) Part 1. Ch. 8. §. 2. . This is there positively, and in good earnest, said by St. Jerom; as the Reason of those Examples: though Mr. Daille puts it off (r), as if the Good Father had Played upon them; while H● himself rather plays with the Father.  
And, according to this, the Penance of Forty days is very frequent in the Modern Penitentials of the Jews; as we have also seen before 
(s) Rep. 1. Ch. 9 §. 2. ; being there generally enjoined, upon any of the Greater Transgressions.  
And, to go yet a little further in this matter; I cannot tell, whether the Forty Days, which our Blessed Saviour himself fasted in the Wilderness, were not so passed by him in the nature of a Penitential Fast. For the Baptism of John, is known to be a Baptism of Repentance 
(t) Acts 19.4. , preparing for the Messiah to come: and it may not be unreasonable to suppose, that by it the Baptised were, upon the Confession of their Sins, admitted and obliged to a course of Repentance for them; as now the Jews very carefully Wash and Baptism themselves, on the Eve of their Propitiation Day. And thus our Saviour, as he fulfilled all Righteousness, in submitting to that Baptism; so he might likewise, in complying with the Ceremony consequent to it, and undertaking the Form of Humiliation for Sin: He entering upon a solemn Fast, as the Rest were to do; though performing it in an extraordinary manner.  
But, to return to my subject; whatever the fortune of this last Conjecture may be; the Reader, I hope, will not be unwilling to allow, that Forty days might have been always with the Jews a Penitential space of time; that it is so looked upon by them now, and has been time out of Mind; and that the Forty Days, ending in the Day of Expiation, are of the same nature.  
§. III. AND now I come to trace the Parallel: which yet the Reader must have been drawing to himself before. For if we do but consider their Propitiation Day, as the Great commanded Fast, determined by Moses; and the Seven, or nine before it, as days sometime after generally agreed on, to prepare and predispose for That; and also some other Days, afterwards added to those, for the same purpose, by the Devotion of succeeding times, but in a various number, at the Discretion of several Persons and Places; and all these severally added out of the Forty, which are to be reckoned backwards from the Radical Fast, and which comprehended a solemn space of Penitential Time; This, I say, if we do but recollect; we cannot at the same time but think, that we have here an exact Pattern of our Christian Lent.  
For when the Passion Day was once put for our Expiation Day; as indeed such it was, and I presume in the beginning was so esteemed universally; some Few days before it were then judged fit to be taken in for a Preparation 
(a) Part 1. Ch. 3. : and those were most naturally taken, which make up the Holy Week, and which also in a little while absolutely Obtained 
(b)— Ch. 5. . At the same time, to these Others were also added, but discretionally, as several Persons thought fit, and several Churches directed; and so many added by some, as to make up the number Forty: a number of Days, that was always looked upon as the most solemn for a Fast; which those therefore reckoned, who did not altogether keep them; and which gave Denomination consequently, even to the Lesser Spaces, that were fasted within them 
(c)— Ch. 10. .  
That is, I suppose the Holy Week, as soon as it came to be observed Universally, to have answered the Seven, or Ten Days of the Jews. For it was not necessary, that the Days should be precisely of the same Number, though they were of the same Nature: for that the Particular considerations of Christianity might otherwise determine; as when they resolved to keep the Passion Day, not upon the day of the Month, but of the Week. That Passion Week therefore was kept with more than ordinary strictness of Penitential Devotion: and if the Sunday of it was exempted from Fasting, it was because it had with us the privilege of a Sabbath; for the Jews fast not their Sabbath of Penitence. As there was too another apparent Conformity between the Jews, and Eastern Christians, in the observation of the Holy Saturday: for whereas those Christians never fasted on any Saturday or Sabbath, no more than the Jews; yet on the Passion Saturday they always fasted; as the Jews do likewise on that single Sabbath, upon which their Expiation Day may fall.  
Now this Holy Week, which, with the following Festival one, was a time of Vacation in Courts of Justice, by the Imperial Law 
(d) Part 1. Ch. 5. §. 3. , under the Christian Emperors; and might have had the same immunity before, by Private Custom of the Church; was in this too not unlike to that Penitential time of the Jews, in which they Hear no Causes, nor administer any Oaths 
(e) Buxt. S. J. Cap. 25. . And it is observable that when a Larger Lent came to be formally kept; as that of Forty days was; at least, after the Council of Nice, either by the Determination or Agreement of the Catholic Church: that then in a little time the same Vacation was enlarged too; and it became unlawful to give any Oaths, during the whole Quadragesimal Season; A Privilege that was after extended to other times of Public Fasting, as also of Festivity.  
Such is the Correspondence between the Antepaschal Fast of the Christians, and the Ant Propitiation Fast of the Jews: and by that, if I mistake not, a good and rational Account is given of the Practice of the Ancient Church: why they first chose to keep such a Fast in general, and yet notwithstanding differed in the Particular of its length; every Church, if not Person, being left to their liberty therein: why one Portion of its time, the Passion Week, came in a little while to be commonly observed, and reputed more Holy: as also, why all the while there was such a Regard to Forty Days; as that some fasted them in the Beginning; others afterwards used their Name; and all in some time endeavoured to come as near the Number on either hand, as the repetition of Weekly Periods would allow them.  

(p) No one can be a Nazarite for less than Thirty Days: and when a Jew makes the Vow simply, and expresses not the Time; Thirty days are understood. So Maimon. Tractat. de Nazeriatu Cap. 3. §. 1—. And this was the Rule anciently: as appears by Josephus, speaking of Bernice; [De Bello Judaic. lib. 2. cap. 26.] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
(r) Daill. de Quadrag. lib. 3. cap. 16. Hi Sacri Patrum Lus●.    

CHAP. V.  
§. I. This Origination of Lent, very Probable: and its Observation, a Testimony to our Lord's Expiatory Sacrifice. However,  
§. II. The Consideration of that Expiatory Sacrifice, is a good reason for our observing the Passion Day; and likewise  
§. III. Some Preparatory time before it.  
§. I. A Very great Resemblance, if I mistake not, has appeared between the Christian Fast of Good-Friday, and the Jewish of their Propitiation Day; in the Ground, and Reason, of the Observation; in the Manner of the Abstinence; and in the other Penitential Duties. And likewise no less Similitude has been discovered between the respective Preparatory Seasons; in their Reason also, and Manner, and in the space of Time.  
And this so near a Resemblance might of itself have persuaded us, that it could not have arisen by chance; and that if both the Pieces were not Copies, the one was Drawn by the other: and it would have been as plain also in ordinary presumption, if one Observation must have been the Copy; that the Jewish was the Original. But all this grows more undeniable, when we come to reflect, that our Church itself was derived from Theirs; and most of its Offices, Discipline, and Ceremonies, borrowed thence. For why should not their Expiation Day, be imitated by our Passion Day; when our Sundays, and Wednesdays, and Fridays, and the old Stationary Days, our Easter, and our Pentecost, are all after the like Example? And if we have followed the Jews, in their Methods of Humiliation, and ways of Abstinence, and Penance; why not in the Solemnity of a Season for such Duties?  
And now if this Derivation I have proposed, might be taken for granted; I might then observe against the Followers of Socinus, that an Anniversary, and very Remarkable Testimony has been all along given, by the whole Church of God, to the Expiatory Sacrifice of our Blessed Lord: as possibly the Discontinuance of that ancient and laudable Practice, may have given too much way to the late Revival, and Modern Increase, of that Great Error in Belief. But I will not offer to found a Truth so Sacred, and which is otherwise so well grounded, upon any Conjecture, however Probable it may appear.  
§. II. But, though I do not after all affirm positively, that the first Christians had this Correspondence in their View, at the Institution of that Holy Time; for I shall leave it as Probable only, and to the Judgement of the Readers yet this, I think I may securely assert; that such a Respect, if they had it▪ was very Just, and Proper; and that the same Consideration is a very good reason for the Continuance of the Observation by all True and Orthodox Christians.  
For our Saviour's Passion, the Expiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of the whole World, and of all Ages; was indeed once offered in the fullness of time and by Him never to be Repeated; but eternally therefore to be Commemorated; by the Believing Redeemed part of Mankind, in all their Generations to come. And if the Resurrection of our Lord, was always thought fit to be recognised with a Weekly, and therefore certainly with an Annual Solemnity: his Death also, as surely as it was fixed in Time, and known to have come to pass the Friday before; so as necessarily did it demand its Anniversary also, if not Weekly, Memorial. For, though his Resurrection, indeed, was exceedingly Glorious and Triumphant; yet his Passion was, no doubt, much the more Mighty, and more Remarkable, Work: in as much, as the Death of the Eternal Son of God, was far more Wondrous than his Rising from it; and it was yet more Wonderful, that he should submit to the Ineffable Condescension for our sakes. For the cause of his Passion; it was, our Saviour tells us, that he came into the World 
(a) John 18.37. : as if all the Discourses, remembered in the Gospel, were but as Prefaces to it; and all the Miracles of his Life; served only to signalise it. In was ●he Basi● and Ground work of the Church, on which our Salvation stands; a mighty Foundation, and deeply laid.  
Had we therefore no constant Need of this Expiation of our Lord, for our repeated continual Transgressions; and had we been absolutely Innocent, ever since our first Regeneration by Baptism: yet the Death, in which we were Baptised, and by which we had been once Redeemed, could not have failed of a pious and grateful Commemoration, once at least in the Year; and this Day, if any other, would have had its place in the Christian Calendar.  
In that Case, indeed, the Day would have been kept E●charistically, and as the Sacrament of our Lord's Death is now to be Celebrated; in a sad and astonishing Remembrance of his bitter Passion, intermixed though and tempered with Joy and thanks for the Propitiation it made. But though our Intervening Offences have necessarily changed the manner of the Celebration, and turned our Joy into Mourning; yet the Commemoration itself is far from being superseded by them, and is rather enforced by greater reason; for we are now to be called to the Remembrance of our Sins, as well as of our Lord's Passion.  
And if we now countercharge the Supposition; and as before we regarded only the Death of our Lord, abstractly from our Sins after Baptism; so here we regard those only, and take no notice of any Anniversary of the Passion: yet even the separate consideration of those Sins, might well have challenged to them some One Day in the Year; wherein, after an extraordinary manner, we should confess and lament their guilt, humbly beseech their Pardon, and entreat the Benefit of that Expiation for them. For, though the Sacrifices for Sin have ceased, by that one Propitiation of Our Saviour; yet by deplorable Experience we know, that our Sins cease not: they are generally as numerous and frequent, as they were before the Covenant; and much more heinous, having now become exceeding Sinful, as committed against greater Light, and higher Obligations. If therefore we will understand ourselves aright, Confession of Sins, and Supplication for Forgiveness, continue to be the daily Duty of Christians, as well as of Jews; make a no less Proper, and Necessary, Part of our ordinary Public Devotions; and are still as fit to be the express Business, and peculiar Office, of some Extraordinary Time. And if such an Appointment should be made, by the Governors of the Church, that we should meet together for this Purpose annually on a solemn Day, to take the more public Shame to ourselves, and to give the greater Glory to God; no Good Christian, sure, would refuse to concur in so common, and necessary, a Work: but as he is ready to meet and celebrate any other Fast, indicted on the occasion of Temporary Calamities; so he would never decline to join in a Humiliation, assigned for much more weighty spiritual reasons, for the saving of Immortal Souls, and averting of Eternal Vengeance. He only that is without Sin, might seem unconcerned in such an Order: but he than would not not be without Charity; and would be, in this also; like our Saviour, that he would condescend to humble himself for the Sins of his Brethren.  
And were there now such a General, and Solemn, Christian Fast to be appointed; and were we to find it a proper Season: it could not undoubtedly be more congruously placed in the whole Circle of the Year, than on the Day of our Lord's Passion; were there any such day already observed. For, as all the Refuge of our Supplications, must be in that Expiation; and by it only, God can be entreated: so a lively Remembrance of that Death, would best give us the due sense of the Gild and Demerit of all Sins; but most bitterly reproach us with our own, those Bold and Ungrateful Transgressions of a most Gracious Covenant, that was sealed in such Precious Blood.  
So fitly, and naturally, do both those Duties, of Celebrating the Memory of our Lord's Death, and Mourning for our own Sins, concur on the same Day: the Recognition of that our Expiation, and the Affliction of our Souls, being as closely joined together by Eternal Reason; as ever they were by the Law of Moses: the Duties also heightening each other; our Humiliation increased, by the consideration of our Saviour's; and the Mercy of his Expiation more sensibly Adored, in the consideration of those Sins, whose Pardon we implore.  
For that Double Reason, and with this Double Duty, has Good Friday been always observed: Nor will the Devout Practice be blamed by any Regular Church, or Christian. Regular, I say; not speaking of those, who will not keep the Day, because the Papists do; for by the same reason they may refuse to keep Sunday: or because it is enjoined, to the Prejudice, they say, of their Christian Liberty; for so they may refuse to yield to an Argument, because it convinces them.  
§. III. NOW these two Great Duties, when they are once fixed upon their proper Day, which they will fully employ; will also require, that we should come in some measure Fit for so weighty an Office; and should be Prepared, in a more than Ordinary manner, for the Extraordinary Performance.  
For, (according to the Supposition I now used) were we to celebrate the Anniversary of our Lord's Passion only, and with no respect to our Sins since our Baptism: yet we should come upon the solemn Day too Rashly, and Unworthily, if we did not appoint some others to go before it, and usher it in; and should seem to have too low thoughts of the sacred Mystery, if we did not take care to rise up to the high Consideration, by the steps and ascents of some previous Meditations. To the keeping of the Great Memorial rightly, such Preparatory Remembrances would be wanting: that we may bring to it a fuller, and livelier Perception of the Mercies of God in Christ; may the better comprehend, with all Saints, the Dimensions of that surpassing, inestimable Love; may more profoundly Adore, more gratefully Thank, and more zealously Devote ourselves and our Service; having beforehand endeavoured to Confirm and Actuate our Faith, to Raise and Quicken our Hope, and to Oblige and Inflame our Charity.  
But such a Preparatory Season is still more needful for the other, the Penitential, part: that we should afore begin, to Recollect our past Transgressions, to Reflect upon their Gild, and to dispose our Minds to an Abhorrence of them; that we should beseech God humbly for his Grace, to promote this Holy Work; should review our Baptismal Covenant, bewail its Breaches, and Repair them, by Confession to God, and Restitution to Men; Renewing our Vows, and Mortifying our Lusts, and recovering and improving our virtuous Habits; against that Friday, when we are solemnly to appear in the Divine Presence, Contrite and truly sorrowful for our Sins, steadfastly resolved to Forsake them, and, as much as in us lies, Qualified for their Pardon.  
Thus would a Preparation have been Necessary, to either of those Two Offices Apart: but much more justly will they expect it, when joined together; when we are to be Provided, both fitly to Contemplate the Mystery, and effectually to be Benefited by its Expiation.  
For these Holy, and Important, purposes Lent is instituted: a solemn, and large, space of time; to be Religiously employed by each private Christian, at his Discretion; as the condition of his Soul shall require, and the circumstances of his Worldly Affairs permit. Accordingly the First Day of it gives Warning of the, then distant, Propitiation Day; and calls us early to our Duty: actually entering us on the Godly Work, by Reflection on our Sins, and Acknowledgement of Divine Justice; by Fasting, and Prayer: and engaging us to go on, and to make use of the following Intermediate Season; for the perfecting our Repentance; and for our Increase in the Knowledge of the Cross of Christ, that Wisdom and Power of God. A notice very necessary, to those who want a solemn Monitor; and which, by the Grace of God, may some time or other serve to Awaken, and Reclaim them: but always Acceptable, and Welcome, to the Good Christian; who, the more sensible he is of his own Offences, and of the Mercy of God in Christ, the more ready he will be to comply with the Advice, and the more glad of the occasion. Some days therefore, of those many that follow, are presumed to be set apart for such Preparatory Thoughts, and Actions; Wednesdays we may suppose, and Fridays, those Weekly Passion Days: when also, Opportunities of Public Devotion are every where presented; and, in our Great City, Exhortations likewise and Instructions are administered, by the Wife and Pious Order of the present Diocesan. But the last Week, is more particularly Dedicated to this Office: and then the Church expects its devout Members daily to appear before God together; to meditate on the Passion of their Lord, and with Penitent Hearts, and earnest Resolutions of Dying likewise unto Sin, to Attend thenceforth upon him to his Cross, and wait till his Resurrection: and also Directs us, to pass the time, not in such Rigorous Austerities, as unprofitably afflict the Body; but in such an Abstinence from divertive Pleasures, and even from common Liberties of Food, and Pursuits of Business, as may speak our Thoughts and Affections to be otherwise employed, and, freeing them from Avocation and Distraction, may Cherish and Improve them.  
By this Orderly and Natural Method, we are designed to be brought at last to the Memorial of our Expiation, with such a sense of our Sins, and of the Mercy of our Suffering Saviour; as may procure from God the Pardon of what is Past, and his Grace and Assistance for the Future: that the following, Years may have reason to bless those Forty Days: and still successively advancing, may every Lent find Fewer, and Lighter Sins to Confess; and be still more ready to Lament them.  
This is the Innocent, and Godly, Intention of that Time; which those of us who Understand, will certainly Commend; and those who Commend, should take care to Pursue.   
FINIS.   

Books Printed for Walter Kettilby, at the Bishop's-Head in St. Paul's Churchyard.  

1. INstitutiones Grammaticae Anglo-Saxonica, & Meso-Gothicae. A●ctore Georgio Hicksio, Ecclesiae Anglicanae Presbytero, 4 to.  
2. Christ. Wasit Senarius, five de Legibus &. Litentia veterum Poetarum, 4 to.  
3. Misna, Pars Ordims primi Jeraim titul. Septem. Latin vertit & Commentario illustravit Gulielmus Guist●●s: Accedit Mosis Maimonidis Praesatio, Edvardo Pocockio Interpret, 4 to.  
4. Joannis Antiocheni Cognomento Mallalae Hist. Chronica, è M.S. Bibliothecae Bodleianae. Praemittitur Dissertatio de Authore. Per Humph. Hodium, D. D. 8vo.  
5. Bishop Overal's Convocation-Book 1606. concerning the Government of God's Catholic Church, and the Kingdoms of the whole World, 4 to.  
6. True Conduct of Persons of Quality. Translated out of French. 8vo.  
7. A Treatise relating to the Worship of God, divided into Six Sections: Concerning, First, The Nature of Divine Worship. Secondly, The peculiar Object of Worship. Thirdly, The true Worshippers of God. Fourthly, Assistance requisite to Worship. Fifthly, The Place of Worship. Sixthly, The solemn. Time of Worship. By John Templer, D. D. 8vo.  
8. A Defence of revealed Religion, in six Sermons, upon Romans 1.16. wherein it is clearly and plainly shown, That no Man can possibly have any real Ground or Reason to be ashamed of Christianity, By Henry Halliwell, M.A. and Vicar of Cowfold in Sussex, 8vo.  
9 Miscellanies, in five Essays; 

1. Upon the Office of a Chaplain.  
2. Upon, P●●de.  
3. Upon .  
4. Upon Dealing.  
5. Upon General Kindness.   The four last by way of Dialogue, By Jeremy Collier, A. M. 8vo.  
10. Mysteries in Religion vindicated: Or, the Filiation, Duty and Satisfaction of our Saviour asserted, against So●ini●ns and others: With occasional Reflections on several late Pamphlets. By Luke Milbourn, a Presbyter of the Church of England, 8vo.  
11. A Discourse concerning the Nature of Man, both in his natural and political Capacity, both as he is a rational Creature and Member of a Civil Society: With an Examination of some of Mr. Hobb's Opinions relating thereunto. By James ●owde, Rector of Settrington in Yorkshire, sometime Fellow of Clare-Hall in Cambridge, 8vo.  
12. Apparatus ad Theologiam in us●●● Acad●mi●●●● 1. Generalis. 2. Specialie. Auctor● Stephano Penton, rectory de Glympton, Oxen, 8vo.  
13. Guardians Instruction. Or, the Gentleman's Romance. Written for the Diversion and Service of the Sentry. 120.  
14. New Instructions to the Guardian: Showing that the last Remedy to prevent the Ruin, advance the Interest, and recover the Honour of this Nation, is, 

1. A more serious and strict Education of the Nobility and Gentry.  
2. To breed up all their younger Sons to some Calling and Employment.  
3. More of them to Holy Orders: With a Method of Institution, from three Years of Age to twenty-one. 120.    
15. The Doctrine of the Glorious Trinity, not explained, but asserted by several Texts, as they are expounded by the ancient Fathers and later Divines. For the Satisfaction of such as doubt, the Conviction of such as deny, and the Confirmation of such as believe this Mysterious Article of the Christian Faith. By Francis Gregory, D. D. and Rector of Hambleden in the County of Bucks. 8vo.  
16. An Essay to revive the Necessity of the Ancient Charity and Piety. Wherein God's Right in our Estates, and our Obligations to maintain his Service, Religion, and Charity, is demonstrated and defended, against the Pretences of Covetousness and Appropriation. In Two Discourses. Written to a Person of Honour and Virtue. By George Burghope. Rector of Little Gaddesdon, Com. Hertford, and Chaplain to the Right Honourable John Earl of Bridg●ater.  
17. An Impartial Account of Mr. John Mason of Water-Stratford, and his Sentiments. By H. Maurice, Rector of Tyrringham, in the County of Bucks.  
18. Miscellanies upon Moral Subjects. By Jer●●y Collter A. M.  
19 The Principles of the Cyprian Age, with regard to Episcopal Power and Jurisdiction; Asserted and recommended from the Genuine Writings of St. Cyprian himself and his Contemporaries, by which it is made evident, that the Vindicator of the Kirk of Scotland, is obliged by his own Concessions to acknowledge that he and his Associates, are Schismatics. In a Letter to a Friend. By J. S.  
20. A Sermon Preached at the Funeral of the Reverend Dr. John Scot By Z. Ish●●n, Rector of St. Botolph's Bishop's-Gate, 4 to.  
21. Two Assize Sermons Preached at the Assizes at Winchester. By E. Young, Fellow of Winchester College, and Chaplain in Ordinary to his Majesty.  
22. Piety's Address to the Magistrate. Delivered 〈◊〉 a Sermon at the Assizes at Winchester, July 11. 1695. By E. Young, Fellow of Winchester College, and Chaplain in Ordinary to his Majesty.  
23. Six Sermons Preached before the late incomparable Princess Queen Mary, at Whitehall, with several Additions and large Annotations to the Discourse of 〈…〉 by Faith: By George Bright, D. D. 〈◊〉 of St. As●ph, and Chaplain in Ordinary 〈◊〉 his Majesty.   
The end of 〈…〉