mm

"/ give theft Books
for'Me.foundiiig ef a. College in, i/rif Colon

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

OBIGINES ECCLESIASTICAL

THE ANTIQUITIES

THE CHRISTIAN CfiURGE

WITH TWO SERMONS AND TWO LETTERS
ON THE NATURE AND NECESSITY OF ABSOLUTION.

BY JOSEPH BINGHAM,

RECTOE OF HAVAUT.

EEPEINTED FBOM THE ORIGINAL EDITION,
MDCCVIII.-MDCCXXII.
WITH AN ENLARGED ANALYTICAL INDEX.

VOL. I.
LONDON :
HENRY G. BOHN, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN.
MDCCCLXVII.

JOHN CHILDS ANI/ SON, PBINTEES.

THE AUTHOR'S DEDICATIONS.

TO THE KIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,

JONATHAN, LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER,
and prelate of the most noble order of the garter.
[published with vol. i. of the original edition.]
My Loed,
Having once determined with myself to make these collections public, I needed no long time to consider
to whom I should first address and present them. They are, my Lord, the first-fruits of my labour under
your Lordship's government and inspection ; and I was willing to think, and do presume I did not think
amiss, that your Lordship had a sort of title to the first-fruits of any of your clergy's labour ; especially if
the subject, on which they were employed, was suitable to their calling, and had any direct tendency to
promote Christian knowledge in the world.. The subject of the present discourse, being an essay upon
the ancient usages and customs of the primitive church, and a particular account of the state of her
clergy, is such as, being considered barely in its own nature, I know cannot but be approved by a person
of your Lordship's character ; whose care is concerned not only in preserving the purity of the primitive
faith, but also in reviving the spirit of the ancient discipline and primitive practice : and were the man
agement any ways answerable to the greatness of the subject, that would doubly recommend it to your
Lordship's favour ; since apples of gold are something the more beautiful for being set in pictures of silver.
But I am sensible the subject is too sublime and copious, too nice and difficult, to have justice done it from
any single hand, much less from mine : all, therefore, I can pretend to hope for from your Lordship is, that
your candour and goodness will make just allowances for the failings, which your sagacity and quickness
will easily perceive to be in this performance. I am not, I confess, without hopes, that as well the ab-
struseness and difficulty of the subject itself, as my own difficult circumstances, under which I was forced
to labour, for want of proper assistance of abundance of books, may be some apology for the defects of the
work : and if I can but so far obtain your Lordship's good opinion, as to be thought to have designed well j
as I am already conscious of my own good intentions to consecrate all my labours to the public service of
the church ; that will inspire me with fresh vigour, notwithstanding these difficulties, to proceed with
cheerfulness and alacrity in the remaining parts of this work, which are yet behind, and which I shall be
the more willing to set about, if I can perceive that it has your Lordship's approbation. The countenance
and encouragement of such a judge may perhaps have a more universal influence, to excite the zeal of
many others, who have greater abilities to serve the church : and I know not how better to congratulate
your Lordship upon your happy accession to the episcopal throne of this diocese, than by wishing you the
blessing and satisfaction of such a clergy ; whose learning and industry, and piety and religion, influenced
by the wisdom of your conduct, and animated by the example of your zeal and perseverance, even to im
prisonment in times of greatest difficulty, may so qualify them to discharge every office of their function,
as may make your diocese one of the shining glories of the present church, and a provoking example to the
future : which is the hearty prayer and desire of, My Lord,
, Your Lordship's faithful and obedient Servant,
\ J. BINGHAM.
i \ i

THE AUTHOR'S DEDICATIONS.

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE AND RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,
JONATHAN, LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER,
AND PRELATE OF THE MOST NOBLE ORDER OF THE GARTER.

[published with vol. ii. of the original edition.]
My Loed,
As the kind entertainment which your Lordship and the world have been pleased to give to the first part
of this work, has encouraged me to go on in hopes of doing public service to the church; so the nature of
the subject contained in this second volume, being but a continuation of the former account of the primi
tive clergy, obliges me again with all submission to present this second part to your Lordship, in hopes
of no less kind acceptance and approbation. The matters here treated of are many of them things of the
greatest importance, which when plainly set in order and presented to public view, may perhaps excite
the zeal of many in the present age, to copy out those necessary duties, by the practice of which the pri
mitive church attained to great perfection and glory ; and, as I may say, still provokes and calls us to the
same attainments by so many excellent rules and noble examples. In the fourth and sixth of these Books
I have endeavoured to draw up something of the general character of the primitive clergy, by showing
what qualifications were required in them before their ordination, and what sort of laws they were to be
governed by afterwards, respecting both their lives and labours, in the continual exercise of the duties of
their function. Many of them, I must own, have been very affecting to myself in the consideration of
them ; and I was willing to hope they might prove so to such others as would be at the pains to read
them. For here are both directions and provocations of the best sort, to excite our industry, and inflame
our zeal, and to make us eager and restless in copying out the pattern set before us. If any shall think
I have collected these things together to reflect upon any persons in the present age, I shall only say,
with one of the ancients in a like case,* they mistake my design ; which was not to reproach any man's
person, who bears the sacred character of a priest, but to write what might be for the public benefit of
the church. For as when orators and philosophers describe the qualities, which are required to make a
complete orator or philosopher, they do no injury to Demosthenes or Plato, but only describe things
nakedly in themselves without any personal applications ; so in the description of a bishop or priest, and
explication of ancient rules, nothing more is intended but to propose a mirror of the priesthood, in
which it will be in every man's power and conscience to take a view of himself, so as either to grieve at
the sight of his own deformity, or rejoice when he beholds his own beauty in the glass.
Nothing is here proposed but rules and examples of the noblest virtues ; probity and integrity of life •
studies and labours becoming the clerical function; piety and devotion in our constant addresses to God •
fidelity, diligence, and prudence in preaching his word to men ; carefulness and exactness, joined with
discretion and charity, in the administration of public and private discipline ; candour and ingenuity in
composing needless disputes among good men ; and zeal in opposing and confronting the powerful and
wily designs of heretics and wicked men ; together with resolution and patience in suffering persecutions,
calumnies, and reproaches, both from professed enemies and pretended friends ; with many other instances
of the like commendable virtues, which shined in the lives and adorned the profession of the primitive
clergy ; whose rules and actions, I almost promise myself, your Lordship and all good men will read with
pleasure, because they will but see their own beauty represented in the glass ; and they that fall short
* Hieron. Ep. 83. ad Ocean, t. 2. p. 323. Ne quis me in sugillationem istius temporis sacerdotum scripsisse, quae
scrips], existimet, sed in ecclesiae utilitatem. Ut enim oratores et philosophi, describentes qualem velint esse perfectum
oratoremet philosophum, non faciunt injuriam Demostheni et Platoni, sed res ipsas absque personis definiunt. Sic »'
descriptione episcopi, et in eorum expositione qua? scripta sunt, quasi speculum sacerdotii proponitur. Jam in potes'lte
et conscientia singulorum est, quales se ibi aspieiant : ut vel dolere ad deformitatem, vol gaudera ad piilchritud;'eai
possint.

THE AUTHOR'S DEDICATIONS. v
of the character here given, will find it a gentle admonition and spur to set in order the things that are
wanting in their conduct, and to labour with more zeal to bring themselves a little nearer to the primitive
standard. Your Lordship is enabled, by your high station and calling, to revive the exercise of ancient discipline
among your clergy in a more powerful way ; and you have given us already some convincing proofs, that
it is your settled resolution and intention so to do : as the thoughts of this is a real pleasure to the diligent
and virtuous, so it is to be hoped it will prove a just terror to those of the contrary character; and, by
introducing a strict discipline among the clergy, make way for the easier introduction of it among the
laity also ; the revival of which has long been desired, though but slow steps are made toward the restora
tion of it. In the mean time it becomes every man, according to his ability, though in a lower station, to
contribute his endeavours toward the promoting these good ends : to which purpose I have collected and
digested these observations upon the laws and discipline of the ancient clergy, that such as are willing to
be influenced by their practice, may have great and good examples set before them ; whilst they whom
examples cannot move, may be influenced another way, by the authority which your Lordship, and others
in the same station, are invested with, for the benefit and edification of the church : the promoting of
which is, and ever will be, the hearty endeavour of him, who is,
My Lord,
Your Lordship's most dutiful and obedient Servant,
JOSEPH BINGHAM.

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE AND RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,
JONATHAN, LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER,
AND PRELATE OF THE MOST NOBLE ORDER OF THE GARTER,
THIS THIRD VOLUME OF
THE ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH,
Is humbly submitted and inscribed by the Author,
His Lordship's Most dutiful and obedient Servant,
JOSEPH BINGHAM.
[PUBLISHED WITH VOL. III. OF THE ORIGINAL EDITION.]

HIS MOST SACRED MAJESTY, GEORGE,
BY THE GRACE OF GOD KING OF GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND IRELAND, DEFENDER
OF THE FAITH, &C.
[PUBLISHED WITH VOLS. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. OF THE ORIOINAL EDITION.]
Most Gracious Soveeeign,
I humbly beg leave to lay at your Majesty's feet a part of a larger work, which was at first designed to
promote those great and worthy ends, which your Majesty, in your princely wisdom, by your royal de
clarations has lately thought fit to recommend to your universities and clergy : that is, the promotion of

vi THE AUTHOR'S DEDICATIONS.
Christian piety and knowledge, and such useful learning as may instil good principles into the minds of
younger students ; upon which the prosperity of church and state will in this, and all succeeding ages, so
much depend. The practice of the primitive ages of the church, when reduced into one view, seems to
be one of the most proper means to effect these honourable designs; and with that consideration I have
hitherto proceeded in this laborious work, not without the countenance and approbation of many worthy
men, and now hope to finish it under your Majesty's favour and protection: humbly beseeching Almighty
God to bless your Majesty's great designs for the good of this church and nation, and the protestant in
terest abroad : which is, and ever shall be, the hearty prayer of
Your Majesty's Most loyal and obedient Subject,
JOSEPH BINGHAM.

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE AND RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,
CHARLES, LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER,
AND PRELATE OF THE MOST NOBLE ORDER OF THE GARTER.
[PUBLISHED WITH THE CONCLUDING TWO VOLUMES.]
My Lord,
It was one of those ancient rules, many of which I have had occasion to speak of in this work, That
presbyters should do nothing dvtv yviifing tov lirto-Koirov, or sine conscientia episcopi, without the consent or
knowledge of the bishop : which though it extend not to all private, domestical, and secular affairs, yet
doubtless it was intended to keep a good harmony and subordination between them, in all matters of a
public nature relating to the affairs and welfare of the church. And therefore, with a view to this rule,
as I first presented the beginning of this work to your predecessor, my then diocesan, so now I lay this
last and finishing part of it at your Lordship's feet ; not doubting but that your Lordship, who is an
encourager of good literature and ancient learning, will give it your favourable acceptance and approba
tion. I have the more reason to hope for this, because, out of your great good nature and condescension,
your Lordship has always been an encourager of the undertaking, as I have been made sensible by
happy experiment, in many years' distant correspondence with you. The work, I hope, is of general use,
and will meet with a general acceptance among all those who are, without prejudice, true lovers of ancient
learning. A noble lord was once pleased to tell me, he had sent it into Scotland by the hands of a
great man of the assembly : though what appprobation it meets with there, I cannot say. But I can
speak it with more satisfaction, that our worthy primate was once pleased to acquaint me in private
conversation, that he himself had sent it to the professors of Geneva, who returned him their thanks
together with their approbation. And if it be well accepted there, there is some reason to hope it may be
accepted in most other protestant churches, and be a little means to bring them to a nearer union to the
church of England in some points, for which some parts of the work are particularly designed. A late
author has thought fit to epitomise some part of it, for the service (as he says) of his poor brethren of the
clergy : though I fear, for the reasons I have been forced to give against his undertaking, it will prove
of no service, but rather hurtful to them. But if he, or any other person of ability, would undertake to
translate the whole into Latin, now that it is finished and completed, that might perhaps be of more
general use to all the protestant churches. And in the mean time our poor brethren, if it please God to
bless me with health, shall not want such an epitome, it it be needful, as is proper for their information
And now, my Lord, that I have made mention of my own health, I cannot but with hearty prayers to
God most sincerely wish yours, for the good things you have already done to this diocese, and more that
may be expected, if it shall please God to confirm your health in such a state, as may enable you to eo
through the great work you want no will to perform. The reducing the exorbitant fees of this diocese

THE AUTHOR'S DEDICATIONS. vii
to a proper standard, is a thing that will never be forgotten by your poor brethren, who will always feel
the sweet effect of it. Your encouragement given to the meanest clergymen to write to yourself in person,
and not to any officers, upon business relating to the church, is a singular instance of your good nature
and condescension ; and also a sure method to prevent corruption. Your care to inform yourself of the
character and worth of your clergy, with a view to the promotion of such as have long laboured diligently
in great cures, or small livings, is a method that cannot fail of giving a new life and spirit to all such, as
may reasonably hope that their merits and labours will not always be overlooked and despised ; but that
they may in due time find their reward, both in ease and advancement, from so kind an inspector.
That you may have health and long hfe to proceed in such good acts, and all other offices of your
function, I believe is the wish of all your clergy : I am sure it is the hearty prayer of him who is,
My Lord,
Your most dutiful and obedient servant,
JOSEPH BINGHAM.

THE PREFACE.

[PUBLISHED WITH VOL. L OF THE ORIGINAL EDITION.]

This volume, which is now published, being only a part of a larger work, the reader, I presume, will ex
pect I should give him some little account of the whole design, and the reasons which engaged me upon
this undertaking. The design which I have formed to myself, is to give such a methodical account of the
Antiquities of the Christian Church, as others have done of the Greek, and Roman, and Jewish antiqui
ties ; not by writing an historical or continued chronological account of all transactions as they happened
in the church, (of which kind of books there is no great want,) but by reducing the ancient customs, usages,
and practices of the church under certain proper heads, whereby the reader may take a view at once of
any particular usage or custom of Christians, for four or five of the first centuries, to which I have gener
ally confined my inquiries in this discourse. I cannot but own, I was moved with a sort of emulation
(not an unholy one, I hope) to see so many learned men with so much zeal employed in collecting and
publishing the antiquities of Greece and Rome ; whilst in the mean time wc had nothing (so far as I was
able to learn) that could be called a complete collection of the antiquities of the church, in the method that
is now proposed. The compilers of church history indeed have taken notice of many things of this kind,
as they pass along in the course of their history, as Baronius, and the Centuriators, and several others :
but then the things lie scattered in so many places in large volumes, that there are few readers of those
few that enter upon reading those books, that will be at the pains to collect their accounts of things into
one view, or digest and methodise their scattered observations. There are a great many other authors,
who have written several excellent discourses upon particular subjects of church antiquity, out of which,
perhaps, a Gronovius or a Graevius might make a more noble collection of antiquities than any yet extant
in the world : but as no one has yet attempted such a work, so neither, when it was effected, would it be
for the purchase or perusal of every ordinary reader, for whose use chiefly my own collections are intended.
There are a third sort of writers, who have also done very good service, in explaining and illustrating
several parts of church antiquity in their occasional notes and observations upon many of the ancient
writers ; of which kind are the curious observations of Albaspiny, Justellus, Petavius, Valesius, Cotele
rius, Baluzius, Sirmondus, Gothofred, Fabrotus, Bishop Beveridge, and many others, who have published
the works of the ancient fathers and canons of the councils, with very excellent and judicious remarks
upon them. But these, again, lie scattered in so many and so large volumes, without any other order, than
as the authors on whom they commented would admit of, that they are not to be reckoned upon, or used
as any methodised or digested collection of church antiquities, even by those who have ability to purchase
or opportunity to read them. Besides these, there are another sort of writers, who have purposely under
taken to give an account of the ancient usages of the church, in treatises written particularly upon that
subject, such as Gavantus, Casalius, Durantus, and several others of the Roman communion • but these
writers do by no means satisfy a judicious and inquisitive reader, for several reasons : 1. Because their
accounts are very imperfect, being confined chiefly to the liturgical part of church antiquity, beside which
there are a great many other things necessary to be explained, which they do not so much as touch
upon, or once mention. .2. Because, in treating of that part, they build much upon the collections of Gra
tian, and such modern writers, and use the authority of the spurious epistles of the ancient popes, which
have been exploded long ago, as having no pretence to antiquity in the judgment of all candid and
judicious writers. But chiefly their accounts are unsatisfactory, because, 3. Their whole design is to

THE PREFACE. ix
varnish over the novel practices of the Romish church, and put a face of antiquity upon them : to
which purpose, they many times represent ancient customs in disguise, to make them look like the prac
tices of the present age, and offer them to the reader's view, not in their own native dress, but in the
similitude and resemblance of modern customs. Cardinal Bona himself could not forbear making this
reflection upon some such writers as these, whom he justly censures, as deserving very ill * of the sacred
rites of the church, and their venerable antiquity ; who measure all ancient customs by the practice of
the present times, and judge of the primitive discipline only by the rule and customs of the age they live
in; being deceived by a false persuasion, that the practice of the church never differed in any point from
the customs which they learned from their forefathers and teachers, and which they have been inured to
from their tender years : whereas we retain many words in common with the ancient fathers, but in a
sense as different from theirs, as our times are remote from the first ages after Christ ; as will appear (says
he) when we come to discourse of the oblation, communion, and other parts of Divine service. This is
an ingenuous confession, and withal a just reflection upon the partiality of the writers of his own church ;
and a good reason, in my opinion, why we are not to expect any exact accounts of antiquity from any
writers of that communion ; though some are less tainted with her errors than others, and can allow them
selves to be a little more liberal and free upon some occasions than the rest of their brethren : yet even
Bona himself, after the reflection he has made upon others, runs into the very same error, and falls under
his own censure ; and Habertus, though otherwise a very learned and ingenuous person, who has written
about the Greek liturgies, as Bona has of the Latin, is often through prejudice carried away with the
common failing of the writers of that side, whose talents are chiefly employed in palliating the faults of
the communion and cause they are engaged in. So that if we are to expect any exact accounts of church
antiquities, it must be from some protestant authors, who can write with greater freedom and less prejudice
concerning the usages and customs of the primitive church. But among these there are very few that have
travelled very far in this way ; the generality of our writers contenting themselves to collect and explain
so much of church antiquity, as was necessary to show the errors and novelties of popery ; but not de
scending to any more minute and particular consideration of things, which did not come within the com
pass of the controversy they had with the Romish church. Hospinian indeed, in the beginning of the
Reformation, wrote several large volumes of the origin of temples, festivals, monachism, with the history
of the eucharist; but as these take in but a very few subjects, so they are too full of modern relations ;
which make them something tedious to an ordinary reader, and no complete account of primitive customs
neither. Spalatensis, in his books.de Republica Ecclesiastica, has gone a little further ; yet he generally
confines himself to the popish controversy, and has much out of Gratian and the canon law ; which in
deed served him as good arguments ad hominem against those whom he had to deal with, but it will not
pass for authentic history in other cases. Suicerus's Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus is abundantly more
particular, and indeed the best treasure of this sort of learning that has yet been published : but his col
lections are chiefly out of the Greek fathers ; and only in the method of a Vocabulary or Lexicon, ex
plaining words and things precisely in the order of the alphabet. The most methodical account of things
of this kind that I have yet seen, is that of our learned countryman Dr. Cave, in his excellent book of
Primitive Christianity ; wherein he has given a succinct, but clear account of many ancient customs and
practices, not ordinarily to be met with elsewhere. But his design being chiefly to recommend the moral
part of primitive Christianity to the observation and practice of men, he was not obliged to be very parti
cular in explaining many other things, which, though useful in themselves, yet might be looked upon as
foreign to his design ; and for that reason, I presume, he industriously omitted them. There are some
other books, which I have not yet seen, but only guess by the titles that they may be of this kind ; such
as Bebelius's Antiquitates Ecclesiasticee, Martinay de Ritibus Ecclesiae, Hendecius de Antiquitatibus
Ecclesiasticis, Quenstedt Antiquitates Biblicae et Ecclesiasticae : but I presume, whatever they are, they
will not forestall my design, which is chiefly to gratify the English reader with an entire collection of
church antiquities in our own language, of which this volume is published as a specimen. And if this
proves useful to the public, and finds a favourable acceptance, it will be followed with the remaining parts
of the work, (as my time and occasions will give me leave,) according to the scheme here laid down, or
with as little variation as may be. I shall next treat of the inferior orders of the clergy, as I have done
here of the superior : then of the elections and ordinations of the clergy, and the several qualifications of
those that were to be ordained : of the privileges, immunities, and revenues of the clergy, and the several
* Bona, Rerum Liturgie. lib. 1. c. 18. n. 1.
b 2

x 1HE PREFACE.
laws and rules which particularly respected their function. To which I shall subjoin an account of the
ancient ascetics, monks, virgins, and widows, who were a sort of retainers to the church. After this shall
follow an account of the ancient churches, and their several parts, utensils, consecrations, immunities,
together with a Notitia of the ancient division of-the church into provinces, dioceses, parishes, and the
original of these. After which I shall speak of the service of the church, beginning with the institution
or instruction of the catechumens, and describing their several stages before baptism ; then speak of bap
tism itself, and its ordinary concomitant, confirmation. Then proceed to the other solemn services ot
psalmody, reading of the Scripture, and preaching, which were the first part of the ancient church service.
Then speak of their prayers, and the several rites and customs observed therein ; where of the use of litur
gies and the Lord's prayer ; and of the prayers of catechumens, energumens, and penitents ; all which part
of the service thus far was commonly called by the name of the missa catechumenorum : then of the missa
fidelium, or communion service ; where of the manner of their oblations and celebration of the eucharist,
which was always the close of the ordinary church service. After this I shall proceed to give a par
ticular account of their fasts and festivals, their marriage rites and funeral rites, and the exercise of
ancient church discipline ; their manner of holding councils and synods, provincial, patriarchal, oecumeni
cal; the power of Christian princes in councils and out of them; the manner and use of their hterce for
mates, and the several sorts of them ; their different ways of computation of time : to which I shall add an
account of their schools, libraries, and methods of educating and training up persons for the ministry, and
say something of the several translations of the Bible in use among them, and several other miscellaneous
rites and things, which would properly come under none of the foremen tioned heads ; such as their man
ner of taking oaths, their abstinence from blood, their frequent use of the sign of the cross, their several
sorts of public charities, the honours which they paid to their martyrs, together with an account of their
sufferings, and the several instruments of cruelty used by the heathen to harass and torment them. In
treating of all which, or any other such like matters as shall offer themselves, I shall observe the same
method that I have done in this volume, illustrating the ancient customs from the original records of an
tiquity, and joining the opinions of the best modern authors that I can have opportunity to peruse, for
unfolding points of greatest difficulty. I confess, indeed, this work will suffer something in my hands,
for want of several books, which I have no opportunity to see, nor ability to purchase ; but that perhaps
may tempt some others, who are at the fountains of learning, and have all manner of books at command,
to add to my labours, and improve this essay to a much greater perfection, since it is a subject that will
never be exhausted, but still be capable of additions and improvement. The chief assistance I have
hitherto had is from the noble benefaction of one, who, " being dead, yet speaketh;" I mean the renowned
Bishop Morley, whose memory will for ever remain fresh in the hearts of the learned and the good ; who,
among many other eminent works of charity and generosity, becoming his great soul and high station in
the church, such as the augmentation of several small benefices, and provision of a decent habitation and
maintenance for the widows of poor clergymen in his diocese, &c, has also bequeathed a very valuable
collection of books to the church of Winchester, for the advancement of learning among the parochial
clergy ; and I reckon it none of the least part of my happiness, that Providence, removing me early from
the university, (where the best supplies of learning are to be had,) placed me by the hands of a generous
benefactor,* without any importunity or seeking of my. own, in such a station, as gives me liberty and
opportunity to make use of so good a library, though not so perfect as I could wish. But the very men
tioning this, as it is but a just debt to the memory of that great prelate, so perhaps it may provoke some
other generous spirit, of like abilities and fortune with him, to add new supplies of modern books published
since his death, to augment and complete his benefaction : which would be an addition of new succours
and auxiliaries to myself, and others in my circumstances, and better enable us to serve the public. In
the mean time, the reader may with ease enjoy, what with no small pains and industry I have collected
and put together ; and he may make additions from his own reading and observation, as I have done upon
several authors, whom I have had occasion to peruse and mention : from some of which, and those of
great fame and learning, I have sometimes thought myself obliged to dissent, upon some nice and peculiar
questions ; but I have never done it without giving my reasons, and treating them with that decency and
respect which is due to their great learning and character. If in any thing I have made mistakes of mv
own, (as I cannot be so vain as to think I have made none,) every intelligent reader may make himself
judge, and correct them with ingenuity and candour. All I can say is, that I have been as careful to
* Dr. Radcliffe.

THE PREFACE. xi
avoid mistakes as I could in so critical and curious a subject ; and I hope there will not be found so many,
but that this essay may prove useful both to the learned and unlearned, to instruct the one, who cannot
read these things in their originals, and refresh the memories of the other, who may know many things
that they cannot always readily have recourse to. Or, if it be- of no use to greater proficients, it may at
least be some help to young students and new" beginners, and both provoke them to the study of ancient
learning, and a little prepare them for their entrance upon it. Besides, I considered there were some who
might have a good inclination toward the study of these things, who yet have neither ability to purchase,
nor time and opportunity to read over many ancient fathers and councils ; and to such, a work of this
nature, composed ready to their hands, might be of considerable use, to acquaint them with the state and
practice of the primitive church, when they have no better opportunities to be informed about it. If, in
any of these respects, these collections (which were designed for the honour of the ancient church, and the
benefit of the present) may prove serviceable toward those ends, I shall not think my time and pains ill
bestowed.

THE PREFACE.

[PUBLISHED WITH VOLS. IX. X. OF THE ORIGINAL EDITION.]
When I had finished these two volumes, and completed the whole work that I intended, and sent it to the
press, hoping to give myself a little rest and vacation from hard labour ; I was immediately called to a
new work by a book that was sent me, bearing the title of Ecclesiae Primitivae Notitia, or a Summary of
Christian Antiquities. To which is prefixed, an Index Haereticus, containing a short account of all the
principal heresies since the rise of Christianity ; and subjoined, A Brief Account of the Eight first General
Councils, dedicated to the venerable Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts, by A. Black-
amore, in two volumes, 8vo. Lond. 1722. I confess, I was very much surprised at first with the title and
epistle dedicatory, thinking it to be some new work, that had done some mighty thing, either in correct
ing my mistakes, or supplying my deficiencies, after twenty years' hard labour in compiling my Origines
for the use of the church. But as soon as I looked into the preface, and a little into the book itself, I
found it to be only a transcript of some part of my Origines, under the notion of an epitome, though no
such thing is said in the title-page. This seems to be an art of the gentleman, and the ten booksellers
that are in combination with him, to render my books un useful, and his own more valuable, as contain
ing all I have said and something more at a less price ; which, he says, will be of use to those poor cler
gymen and others whose genius and inclination lies towards antiquity, but are not able to purchase my
books for the dearness of them. But the gentleman imposes very much upon poor readers in saying this,
upon two accounts : first, In pretending that he gives them an epitome of my whole work, when yet there
were two volumes still behind, which he could have no opportunity to epitomize, because they were not
printed. He says indeed in his preface, that I had happily completed my whole work in eight volumes,
and gives it a higher commendation and elogium, than perhaps it really deserves : but where he learned
that I had finished my work in eight volumes, I cannot understand : I am sure I had advertised the
readers, and him among the rest, that I intended two volumes more, which now I give them to complete
my design. So that this gentleman deceives his poor brethren, when he pretends to give them an epitome
of the whole, when it is only in part; and he must put them to the charge of another volume to make
even his epitome complete. But secondly, If this gentleman was so concerned for his poor brethren, why
did he make his epitome so large ? The substance of my books for the use of such men might be brought
into much less compass : there needed no authorities to have been cited for their use, who have no books
to examine and compare them ; but they might have rested upon the authority of the compiler ; whose
authority they may more decently and honestly use upon any occasion, than the authority of fathers and

xii THE PREFACE.
councils, which our author, with me, very well supposes they have no opportunity to see. And further,
if our author meant to gratify his poor brethren at an easy rate, why did he clog his epitome, both betoie
and behind, with two long discourses of his own ? Sure this was not to make it cheaper, but to put them
to more expense, in being obliged to buy his discourses, if they were minded to read any thing of mine.
The fair way of epitomizing, had been to have given an abstract of my books by themselves, and printed
his own separate from them : this had been more for the interest of his indigent readers, and I believe he
will find it would have been more for the interest of his booksellers. I know not what authority he or his
booksellers had to reprint my books in effect, which are my property by law. But I argue not with him
at present upon that point. If he had done it in a genteel way, by asking leave, and under direction, he
should have had my leave and encouragement also. Or if he had done it usefully, so as truly to answer
the end he pretends, even without leave, he should have had my pardon. But now he has defeated his
own design, both by unnecessary and hurtful additions of his own, which will not only incommode and
encumber his books, but render them dangerous and pernicious to unwary readers, unless timely antidoted
and corrected by some more skilful hand. For which reason, since they are sent into the world together
with an abstract of my Antiquities, I have thought it just both to the world and myself to make some
proper animadversions on them. I freely own, that a just and authentic account of ancient and modern
sects and heresies, done by a learned and judicious hand, would be a very useful work : and it is what has
been long wanted, and long desired by many learned men, who observe the failings of the common heresi-
ologists on all sides : but I cannot see what an account of modern heresies has to do with the antiquities
of the church, or how the knowledge of modern sectaries can help to explain the ancient usages and prac
tices of the catholics in former ages. For which reason, our author might have dropped that part of his
work without any detriment, to have made his book the cheaper. But whether it was proper or improper
to clog his work with any account of heresies ancient or modern, what had been done in either kind,
should have been done with care and judgment, and something of exactness, which, after all the compli
ments he passes on my work, I cannot say of his, and I am heartily sorry that injustice to the world I
cannot do it. For some of his accounts are very trifling and jejune, and such as give no light or information
to a reader: others are very false and injurious to great men, whom he makes heretics, when they were
really the great defenders of the catholic faith : and his whole account is very imperfect, omitting some of
the most considerable sects and errors, whilst his title-page pretends to be an account of all the principal
heresies since the rise of Christianity. I love not to censure any man without reason, and therefore I will
give some evident proof of each particular I lay to his charge ; only premising one thing, which I believe
will make the grammarians smile : the running title of his treatise is, Index Haereticus, which in English
is not what he calls it, An Account of Heresies ; but, An heretical Index : which, I believe, he did not
intend should be its character. But if we soften the meaning of the word heretical, and take it only for
erroneous; however ominous it be, it is a very just character indeed. For, besides its other faults, it is
very erroneous in the characters he gives of very great, and orthodox, and eminent saints of God, who in
his account are some of the worst of heretics. I will make good in order the several charges I bring
against him.
1 . Some of his accounts are very trifling and jejune, and such as give no light or information to a reader.
In speaking of the Hypsistarians, all that he says of them is only this, " That they were maintainers of
a heresy in the fourth century, made up of Judaism and paganism.'' Now, what is a reader the wiser for
all this ? This character, being in such general terms only, would serve at least twenty heresies, and a
reader would not know how to distinguish them, seeing no particular opinions or practices of Jews or
Gentiles are here ascribed to the Hypsistarians, whereby to discern them from other heretics that mixed
Judaism and paganism in one common religion. He says in his preface, one of the chief reasons for
drawing up his Index Haereticus was, because in my books I had only touched lightly and in transitu upon
heresies, as they made for my purpose, without giving any perfect description of them. Which is very
true. But why then did not he give a perfect description of those Hypsistarians, or at least a more perfect
one than I had done ? He could not be ignorant, whilst he was epitomizing my books, that I had given a
pretty good description of them, Book XVI. chap. 6. sect. 2. p. 306. vol. vii., where I say, They called
themselves Hypsistarians, that is, worshippers of the most high God, whom they worshipped, as the Jews
did, only in one person ; and they observed their sabbaths, and used distinction of meats, clean and un
clean, though they did not regard circumcision, as Gregory Nazianzen, whose father was once of this sect
gives the account of them. This is some account of them, if it be not a perfect one. Why then did he
not give the same or a better account of them, or at least refer his reader to my book, or his own epitome

THE PREFACE. xiii
p. 335, where he transcribes my account of them ? The gentleman was in haste when he wrote his In
dex, and could not stand to do justice neither to me nor his readers. I could add something more con
cerning these Hypsistarians out of Gregory Nyssen, Hesychius, and Suidas ; but it will be time enough to
do that, if I live to give the reader an epitome of my own with some additions. I only remark here, that
there is no notice taken of these Hypsistarians in Epiphanius, Theodoret, Philastrius, or St. Austin, or any
other of the common heresiologists ; and that they who speak of them say nothing of their paganism,
however our author came to blunder upon it.
His account of the Ccelicola is much such another as the former : " Ccelicola, or worshippers of heaven,
an heretical sect in the fifth century ; at which time they were condemned by the Rescripts of Honorius
the emperor." It is hard, again, that he could not have referred his readers to the same place of my book,
or his own epitome, where they might have found a much better account of them. But this gentleman
was to magnify his own Index, and make his readers believe, that he had done great feats and wonders in
discovering the tenets of ancient heretics, where I had been silent, or but lightly touched upon them ;
though by these instances the reader will now be able to judge of the perfection and excellency of his
performance. I will give but one instance more of this kind out of many that might be added. In speaking of the
Ethnophrones, he says, " They were heretics of the seventh century, who taught that some pagan super
stitions were to be retained together with Christianity." But why did he not inform his reader what these
pagan superstitions were ? Is there no author that speaks particularly of them ? The learned reader may
please to take this account from me in the words of Damascen. de Heeresibus, p. 585. Ethnophrones cum
gentium instituta sequantur, in cceteris sunt Christiani. Hi natales dies,fortunam,fatum, omnem astronomiam,
et astrologiam, omnemque divinationem et auspicia probant : auguria, expiationes, et placationes, sortes, pro-
digiorum et portentorum inspectiones, veneficia, aliasque ejusdem generis impiasfabulas adhibent : iisdemque
quibus gentes, utuntur institutis. Dies etiam festos quosdam Grmcorum probant ; dies denique, et menses, et
annos, et tempora observant et notant. In short, they were the same with those superstitious Christians,
who followed the forbidden heathen arts of divination, magic, and enchantment, judicial astrology, calcu
lation of nativities, augury, soothsaying, divination by lots, observation of days and accidents, and the ob
servation of heathen festivals, of whom I have so largely and particularly treated in two whole chapters,
Book XVI. chap. 4 and 5, where I speak of the discipline and laws of the church made against them.
And yet this gentleman will bear his readers in hand, that he has given a perfect account of those ancient
sects and heresies, which I only occasionally and lightly touch upon.
2. The second charge I have against his Index is more weighty, that many of his accounts of heresies
and heretics are very false, and highly injurious to the character and memory of great, and good, and ex
cellent men, whom he makes heretics, when they were really noble confessors and brave defenders of the
catholic faith. For proof of this I will not insist upon the characters he gives of Melito, bishop of Sardes,
or of Nicholas the deacon ; but only observe, that a prudent writer might have softened his character of
each. For though Valesius * bears hard upon Melito, and says, with our author, That he asserted God to
be corporeal, in a book which he wrote, irspl GeoS tvaajiarov, which Valesius translates, De Deo corporeo :
yet other learned persons f think this to be a mistake ; since 0:6s ei/uw^iaroc does not signify a corporeal
God, but God incarnate, or made flesh, or dwelling in the body ; which is a quite different thing from God's
being corporeal in his Divine nature. And therefore, since thus much might justly have been said, by
way of apology, for Melito, our author should not have been so severe upon him, as to style him a heretic
of the first ages, who held, that God was corporeal ; but have alleged in his favour what so many learned
men have said in justification of him ; especially considering what both Polycrates J in Eusebius, and Ter
tullian § in St. Jerom, say of him, That he was a man filled with the Holy Ghost, and generally believed
to be a prophet among Christians.
The same apology might have been made, and in justice should have been made, for Nicholas, one of the
seven deacons. For though some of the ancients lay the doctrine of the Nicolaitans to his charge ; yet,
as I show in one of the preceding Books,|| a great many others, particularly Clemens Alexandrinus, Euse
bius, Theodoret, and St. Austin, excuse him, and say, The doctrine was none of his, but only taken up
by those who pretended to be his followers, grounded upon some mistaken words of his, which had no
such meaning.
* Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 26.
f Cave, Histor. Literar. vol. 1. p. 43. Du Pin, in the Life of Melito. Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce 'Ei/o-w^aTtuo-is.
I Ap. Euseb. lib. 5. cap, 24. § Tertul. ap. Hieron. de Scriptor. cap. 24. || Book XXII. chap. 1. sect. 2.

xiv THE PREFACE.
But I pass over this to our author's account of the Acephah ; " Who," he says, " were a headless kind of
heretics, who owned neither bishop, priest, nor sacrament, like our modern Quakers." I know not what
grounds our author had for this, for he never cites any particular writer throughout his whole Index ;
but I know Alexander Rosse said the same before him, and he is one of this gentleman's learned authors.
I know also that some popish writers * object it to the Lutherans, that they are like the old Acephali,
because they have no bishops for their leaders ; and I am apt to think Alexander Rosse took it, right or
wrong, from some of those popish writers. But Alexander has the misfortune to contradict himself; for
he says in the very same breath, That Severus, bishop of Alexandria, (he meant Antioch,) was author of
this sect of Acephali, under Anastasius the emperor, anno 462. And that they were called also Theodo-
sians, from Theodosius their chief patron, and bishop of Alexandria. Strange indeed ! that they should
have bishops for their authors and patrons, and yet be without bishop, priest, or sacrament among them !
Our author was aware of this rock, and had the wit to avoid it ; and therefore here he fairly and wisely
dropped his guide, and left him to shift for himself with his contradictions ; telling us the first part of the
story, but not the latter, which would have spoiled his parallel between the Acephali and the Quakers.
But how would he make out, if he was pressed hard to it, that the Acephali had no bishops, or were
named Headless, from the want of such heads among them ? For my part, I never met with any ancient
writer that gave this account of them. Liberatus says,f They were called Acephali, because they would
not receive the doctrine of Cyril of Alexandria, nor follow him as their head, nor yet any other. But
these were bishops, who would neither take Cyril patriarch of Alexandria, nor John patriarch of Antioch,
for their head, and were therefore called Acephali, because they would follow neither patriarch as their
leader. For as those bishops were called Autocephali, who had no patriarch above them, but were a sort
of patriarchs themselves, and independent of any other ; so those bishops who were subject to patriarchs,
and withdrew their obedience from them, were called Acephali, because they were no heads or patriarchs
themselves, and yet refused to be subject to any other. Patriarchs were then heads of the bishops, as
bishops were heads of the people ; and these are quite different things ; for bishops to be called Acephali,
because they rejected their patriarch, and people to be called Acephali, because they had neither bishop,
nor priest, nor sacrament among them. I am not fond of defending ancient heretics, but I think all men
ought to have justice done them, and not be charged with more heresies than they were really guilty of.
It is allowed on all sides, that these Acephali were Eut.ychians, and enemies of the council of Chalcedon ; and
as such, Leontius \ also writes against them ; but he says not a word of their being without bishops,
priests, or sacraments ; and therefore it lies upon our author to produce some ancient voucher, better than
Alexander Rosse, for the charge he brings against them.
I insist not on his little grammatical error in his account of the Saccophori, " Who," he says, " were a
branch of the Encratites, so called because they carried a long bag, to make the people believe they led a
penitent life." They were indeed a particular sect of the Manichees, who are condemned under that
name in several laws of the Theodosian Code,§ where the several branches of the Manichees are proscribed
under the distinguishing names of Solitarii, Encratitce, Apotactitce, Hydroparastatce, and Saccophori, which
names they assumed to shelter themselves against the severity of former laws made against the Manichees
under the name of Manichees only. But now these Manichean Saccophori were not so called from car
rying a long bag, but from wearing sackcloth, and affecting to appear with it in public. Saceus indeed will
signify a sack or a bag, as well as sackcloth ; but what has a long bag to do with a penitent life ? It is fitter
to describe a philosopher than a penitent : but sackcloth and a penitent life will consist very well together
However, the church did not allow any to affect this garb, though some monks, like the Manichees were
very fond of it, and loved to appear publicly with chains or crosses about their necks, and walked bare
foot, and wore sackcloth out of mere singularity and affectation : who are therefore often severely cen
sured for these things by the ancients, Epiphanius, St. Austin, St. Jerom, Palladius, and Cassian as I
have showed more fully in another place : || but I never heard of any, either monks or heretics, censured
for carrying a long bag, as an indication of a penitent life ; and I am of opinion, this gentleman when
he considers it again, will reckon this such another slip as Index Hcereticus ; which are but small failing's
in comparison of what I have now further to object against his Index, which turns catholics into
heretics in several instances both of former and later ages.
* See Mason's Defence of the Ordination of Ministers beyond Seas, p. 129. Oxon. 1641.
f Liberat. Breviar. cap. 9. Hos esse puto authores Acephalorum, qui neque Cyrillum habent caput, neque quem <*p
quantur ostendunt. J Leont. de Sectis. Action. 7. Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 1. p. 522
§ Cod. Theod. Lib. 16. Tit. 5. de Hasreticis, Leg. 7, 9, 11. || Book VII. chap. 3. sect. 6.

THE PREFACE. xv;
Among the ancients, he does great injustice to Eustathius, the famous bishop of Antioch. For in giving
an account of the Eustathian heretics, he says, " The Eustathians were the spawn of the Sabellian heresy,
and had their name from Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, who was deposed in a council held in his own
city, about the middle of the fourth century, for holding those principles." I take no notice of his para
chronism, in saying that he was deposed in the council of Antioch about the middle of the fourth century;
for though we cannot well call the year 327, or 329, when that council was held, the middle of the fourth
century; yet this is but a small mistake, into which he might easily be led by Baronius, or the corrupt copies
of Athanasius and St. Jerom, which place that council in the reign of Constantius, instead of Constantine,
as the best critics, Valesius,* Gothofred,f Pagi,{ and Dr. Cave,§ are fully agreed ; and as appears plainly
from all the historians, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, and Philostorgius. But the thing I complain of
is this, that he makes this Eustathius a Sabellian, and his followers a spawn of the Sabellian heresy.
Whereas, in truth, he was the great defender of the catholic faith against the Arian heresy in the council
of Nice : the council itself translated him from Beraea to Antioch ; and he was the first man that opened
the council, with a panegyrical oration to Constantine : as this author, forgetting himself, fairly owns in
his Account of the Eight General Councils, p. 476. Athanasius gives him this character, That he was
a noble confessor, and orthodox in the faith, rrjv manv ivatfiriQ, and exceeding zealous for the truth.||
How then could he be a Sabellian, unless Sabellianism was the true faith, and Athanasius a Sabellian
also ? To open this matter a little further, and undeceive this gentleman, and his readers also : this
Eustathius was only abused in his character out of spite and malice by the Arians, who were his im
placable enemies, because he was a resolute defender of the Nicene faith against them. They therefore
endeavoured to make him odious, by falsely charging him with Sabellianism, and several other crimes,
upon the strength of which calumnies they deposed him in one of their own councils at Antioch.
Socrates 5f and Sozomen** say expressly, that this council of Antioch was an Arian council that deposed
Eustathius, upon a pretence, that he was more a defender of the Sabellian doctrine than of the Nicene
faith : which was a usual trick of the Arians, whereby they endeavoured to undermine Athanasius also.
Now, this being only a mere calumny and slander of so gi'eat a man, imposed upon him by his professed
enemies, the Arians, it does not become any one, who takes upon him to give unlearned readers an account
of the ancient heresies, to fix this character upon him, without giving some authority, or at least an
intimation, that he was deposed only in an Arian council. I do not suppose this gentleman had any
ill design in what he wrote about this matter ; but he was either imposed upon by some modern historian,
or did not sufficiently consider what he found delivered by ancient writers : which should make him the
more cautious for the future what guides he follows, and learn to wiite with judgment, when he takes
upon him the office of an historian for such as cannot contradict him.
He commits the same fault in giving an account of the Essenes, " Who," he says, " were a sect of Chris
tian heretics at Alexandria, in the time of St. Mark." Now, there seems to be a little more of wilful
mistake in this ; for he could not be ignorant, whilst he was transcribing my Origines, that I had alleged
the authority of Epiphanius, Eusebius, and St. Jerom, to show that they believed them to be the orthodox
church, and not a sect of Christian heretics, at Alexandria, in the time of St. Mark ; and he himself, in
his epitome, refers his readers to these authorities also. I said, further, (which he leaves out,) that some
learned modern writers, such as Valesius, Scaliger, and Dalleeus, question whether they were Christians ;
whilst Bishop Beveridge and others maintain the common opinion. But all agree that they were not a
sect of Christian heretics ; however this author came to despise all authority, both ancient and modern,
in fixing that character upon them ; for if they were heretics, they belonged to the Jews, and not to the
Christians. In his accounts of modern heretics (which he might have spared in a book of Ecclesiastical Antiquities)
he is much more injurious to the reader, as well as to the pious memory of great numbers of many excel
lent men, and to the protestant cause in general, when he puts the Albigenses, the Hussites or Bohemians,
the Lollards, the Waldenses, and the Wicklevites, all into his black list of heretics ; ascribing to them
such monstrous opinions as they were certainly never guilty of, but only stood falsely charged with them
by the implacable malice of their Romish adversaries, who treated them just as the Arians did Athanasius
and Eustathius in former ages. It might have become a protestant heresiologist and historian, either to
have omitted these names, or at least to have told his readers what excellent vindications and apologies
* Vales. Annot. ad Euseb. de Vit. Const, lib. 3. cap. 59. f Gothofred. Dissert, in Philostorg. lib. 2. cap. 7.
% Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 327. n. 3. et .340. u. 18. § Cave, Histor. Literar. vol. i. p. 139.
|| Athanas. Epist. ad Solitarios, t. 1. p. 812. IT Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 24. ** Sozom. lib. 2. cap. 19.

xvi THE PREFACE.
have been written by the most learned protestant authors of the two last ages, to clear their character of
those black and odious imputations, which their adversaries falsely and industriously threw upon them.
If he knew nothing of these vindications, he was very ill qualified to act the part of an historian m this
case : if he did know them, he was more unpardonable still, in concealing from his readers what in all
justice both to them, and the church, and the memory of the saints, who were so traduced, he ought care
fully to have laid before them. If he had thought fit to have looked into my Scholastical History of Baptism,
as carefully as he has done into the Origines, he might there have found the venerable names of some of
those worthy men, who have done justice to the protestant cause, in vindicating those witnesses of the
truth from the false aspersions that are cast upon them. For his and the truth's sake, I will once more
transcribe them, with a little addition, and more particular reference to the books and places containing
those vindications.
Crankanthorp, Defensio Ecclesiae Anglicanae contra Spalatensem, cap. 18. p. 100.
Usserius de Christianarum Ecclesiarum Successione et Statu, cap. 10. quae est de Albigensium et
aliorum qui Ecclesiae Pontificiae adversati sunt, Historia.
Albertinus de Eucharistia, lib. 3. p. 976. ubi agit de Wicklevistis, Waldensibus, Lollardis, Taboritis
sive Bohemis.
Sir Samuel Morland, History of the Evangelical Churches of the Valleys of Piedmont. Lond. 1658. Fol.
Dr. Allix, History of the Albigenses. Lond. 1692. 4to. 2 vols.
Joachim Hesterberg de Ecclesia Waldensium. Argent. 1668. 4to.
Paul Perrin, History of the Albigeois and Vaudois. Lond. 1624. 4to.
Balthasar Lydius, Waldensia, sive Conservatio Verse Ecclesiae demonstrata ex Confessionibus Tabori-
tarum et Bohemorum, 2 vols. Roterod. 1616. 8vo.
Cave, Historia Literaria. In Conspectu saeculi Waldensis sive Duodecimi.
Dr. Tho. James's Apology for John Wickliffe, showing his Conformity with the now Church of Eng
land. Oxon. 1608. 4to.
Dr. Henry Maurice's Vindication of the Prim. Church, p. 374.
Ratio Disciplinae Fratrum Bohemorum. Hagae. 1660.
Hen. Wharton, Appendix ad Cave Hist. Literar. p. 50. in Vita Joan. Wicklef. p. 50.
The Life of Wickliffe, by a late author. Lond. 8vo.
Comenii Historia Persecutionum Ecclesiae Bohemicse. Lug. Bat. 1647. 8vo.
It. Historia Ecclesiae Slavonic. &c.
Anton. Leger, Histoire Vaudois des Eglises des Valines de Piedmont. Lug. Bat. 1669. Fol.
Waldensium Confessio contra claudicantes Hussitas. Basil. 1566. 8vo. See also in the Fasciculus
Rerum, &c. tom. 1.
Conrad. Danhauerus, Ecclesia Waldensium Orthodoxies Lutherans Testis et Socia. Argent. 1659. 4to.
Sam. Maresius, Dissertatio Historico-Theologica de Waldensibus. Groning. 1660. 4to.
^Egid. Stauchius, Historico-Theologica Disquisitio de Waldensibus. Witenberg. 1675. 4to.
Pet. Wesenbeccius, De Waldensibus et Principum Protestantium Epistolis hue pertinentibus. 1603. 4to.
Joan. Lasicius, Verae Religionis Apologia. Spirse. 1582.
Now, is it possible, among such a number of fine discourses and elaborate pieces upon this subject, a per
son who writes the account of heresies, should never have met with or heard of any apologies that were made
in the behalf of these men ; but he must needs take his accounts crudely, as delivered by their professed
enemies ? If the account of Rainerius, their adversary, but. an ingenuous popish writer, be taken, it does
them abundantly more justice than this author. For though he calls them a sect, yet he says, it was an
ancient sect ; for some said, it had continued from the time of Pope Sylvester ; and others, from the time of
the apostles : and whereas all other sects were accompanied with horrible blasphemies against God, which
would make a man tremble ; this of the Leonists had a great show of piety ; they lived uprightly before
men, and believed all things aright of God, and all the articles contained in the creed : only they blasphemed
and hated the church of Rome. Were these the Waldenses, " That rejected episcopacy, and the Apostles'
Creed, and all holy orders, and the power of the magistrate, and approved of adulterous embraces, and
practised promiscuous copulation," as our author represents them, styling them, by way of contempt, " the
religion-mongers, and pious reformers of the twelfth century ?" If our author were put to apologize for
himself, he would lay all the blame upon Alexander Rosse : for he is his learned author from whom he

THE PREFACE. xvii
transcribed. And Alexander tells us ingenuously, he had his accounts from Baronius, Genebrard, San
ders, Gualterus, Bellarmine, Viegas, Florimundus Raimundus, Prateolus, Gregoiy de Valentia, and such
other writers, who were noted papists, and inveterate enemies of the Waldensian and protestant religion.
And should an author, who writes about heresies, have given his accounts, designed for the use of pro
testant readers, out of such authors, when he might have had recourse to one or more of such a number
of excellent protestant writers, who have cleared up the character of the Waldenses, and vindicated their
memory out of their own writings and confessions of faith, which are the most certain evidences of their
religion ? It is amazing to think how any ingenuous writer, who pretends to the least knowledge of books
and learning, should give such a black character of those excellent confessors and witnesses of the truth,
without suggesting the least tittle of what so many learned men have said, or what may be said, in their
vindication. I will not suspect our author of any sinister designs of advancing popery ; but I will be
bold to say, he could hardly have taken a more effectual way, had he designed to do it, than by instilling
into the minds of those who can look no further than his accounts, such an odious character of those men,
of whom so many thousands laid down their lives for the cause of true religion, in those very points where
in protestants stand distinguished from papists at this day. I had once an occasion to make this same
reflection in a former book * on another writer, who is much superior to our author in learning and in
genuity ; and I never heard that he took it unkindly at my hands for so doing ; for an historian's business
is only to find out truth as well as he can, and then deliver it to others fairly without disguise, or any
false colours put upon it. And therefore I hope our author will take occasion to amend this grand error,
whenever he has opportunity to write any thing further upon this subject. His time would be much
better employed in reading and considering the books of some of those excellent writers I have referred
him to, than in collecting a heap of rubbish from Alexander Rosse or any other such injudicious writers.
3. But there is one thing more I must put this author and his readers in mind of : That whilst he bears
so hard upon the poor Waldenses, and Albigenses, and Wicklevists, and Hussites, and Lollards, he has
not one syllable in all his Index of the grand errors of the Romanists or papists, under any title or deno
mination whatsoever. He cannot pretend they fell not directly in his way ; for he treats of modern sects
and heterodoxies as well as ancient. Neither did he want his guide here ; for Alexander Rosse has a
whole section of fifty pages in his book upon the subject. Or if he had said nothing upon it, yet it might
have become a new heresiologist to have taken notice of the errors of the Romanists upon some title or
other. Their errors are as considerable and dangerous as most other modern sects ; why then have they
no place in the Index ? Is transubstantiation no error ? Is idolatry, in its various species of worshipping
saints, angels, images, relics, the host, and the cross, no crime ? Is not the Hildebrandine heresy, as our
writers style it, that is, the doctrine of deposing kings, an error worth mentioning ? nor the pope's pre
tence to infallibility and universal power over the church, worthy of a protestant's censure ? Is it no
crime to exempt the clergy from the power of the civil magistrate ? nor any wrong done them to impose
celibacy upon them ? Have the people no injury done them in keeping the Scriptures locked up in an
unknown tongue ? or being obliged to have Divine service in a language they do not understand ? or
in being deprived sacrilegiously of one half of the communion ? or in having the absolute necessity of
auricular confession imposed upon them ? Is there no harm in the use of interdicts and indulgences ?
Are private and solitary masses, and the doctrine of purgatory, with many other errors, such innocent
things, that it was not worth an historian's while to give his readers any notice of them, or caution against
them ? Our author knows, I have fairly combated most of these things, and showed them to be novelties
and great corruptions, in the several parts of my Origines, as I had occasion to meet with them. There
fore the least he could have done, had been to refer his readers to those parts of his own epitome, or my
Origines, where these things are treated, if he was not minded to give them in one view in his own col
lections. But he is as favourable to the anti-episcopal men, or presbyterians, as he is to the papists ; for he gives
them no place in his catalogue neither. I suppose he was in haste for the press, and considered not that
he had made such an omission. But he should now consider, that he who falsely objects it to the Wal
denses, that they rejected episcopacy, (which they always carefully maintained,) should not have passed
over in silence those men who oppose episcopacy, when he might with justice and truth have charged
them with it as their proper heterodoxy, from which their denomination of anti-episcopal, or presbyterian,
is taken. But this is not all the defect of his Index.
* Scholiast. Hist, of Baptism, Part I. chap. 1. p. 97.

xviii THE PREFACE.
If this author would have given a perfect catalogue of all the original heresies from the first ages of
Christianity, together with the more remarkable heterodoxies which appeared in these later times, he
should have inserted many other names, both ancient and modern, which are now omitted in his catalogue.
In the first century, the Thebulians, Cleobians, Dositheans, Gorthaeans, Merinthians ; not to mention
Demas, Hermogenes, Hymenaeus and Philetus, Alexander the coppersmith, Diotrephes, and the doctrine
of Jezebel, which are noted in Scripture. In the second century, Bassus, a new disciple of Valentmus.
In the third century, the Discalceati, Apocaritee, Dicartitce, and Solitarii, which were new branches of the
Manichees. In the fourth century, the Mincei, Adelphians, Psathyrians, and Lucianists, two new
branches of the Arians, Adelophagi, Theoponitce, Triscilidce or Triformiani, Hydrotheitce, Cyrthiani, and
Pythecian., new sects of Arians, Gyrovagi, Homuncionitce, Ametritce, Psychopneumones, Adecerddce,
Sarabaitce or Pemboth, Passionistce, Nyctages, Theophronians, Metagenetce, Sabbatians or Protopaschites.
In the fifth century, the Vigilantians and Massilienses. In the sixth century, the Marcianists, or followers
of Marcianus Trapezita, the Tetraditce, and Severians, with the several branches that sprung from them,
the Contobabditce, Paulians, Theodosians, Damianists, Petrites, Cononites, Corrupticolm ; together with the
errors of Peter Moggus and Peter Gnapheus or Fullo, which made a great noise in the history of this age ;
as did also the practices of Zeno with his Henoticon, and Anastasius against the council of Chalcedon.
In the seventh century, Joannes Philoponus and Ethicoproscoptce. The eighth century was famous for
the disputes between the Iconoclasts and the Iconolatrce, image-worshippers and image-breakers : and
the errors of the second council of Nice might have been set forth in a much more advantageous view,
had our author been pleased to have acquainted his reader with the brave opposition that was made
against it by the council of Frankfort, and other councils and writers of that and the following ages, in
his History of the General Councils. The ninth and the tenth ages, Prateolus is pleased to say, was a
perfect interregnum of heretics, a cessation and rest of the church for two hundred years and more from
all heretical infestation. Others more properly call these the dark and ignorant ages, when the enemy
sowed his tares, whilst men were asleep. And Baronius himself cannot forbear upon some accounts to
call them infelicissima Romance ecclesice tempora et omnium luctuosissima, the most unhappy and deplorable
times of the Roman church, when weak men were in danger of being scandalized by seeing the abomina
tion of desolation set in the temple. If our author had been as inquisitive as it became him, he might
have found the great idol of transubstantiation begun to be formed in the errors of Paschasius Rathbertus
in these ages, though not fully completed till some ages after in the council of Lateran ; and the seeds of
the Hildebrandine heresy springing up in the bold attempts of the popes of these ages against the power
of princes, till it came to its full maturity under Hildebrand himself, called Gregory VII. ; to mention no
more of the popish errors, which our author thought fit wholly to pass over. In the twelfth century he
might have found the errors of Durandus de Waldach, and Petrus Abaelardus, and Gilbertus Porretanus,
and the Coterelli, and the Populicans, to have added to his Index. But above all, the thirteenth and four
teenth centuries would have furnished him with great abundance of more remarkable errors to have filled
up his catalogue, instead of the Wicklevites and Hussites, and Waldenses and Albigenses. For now ap
peared in the thirteenth century the errors of Abbot Joachim, and Petrus Joannes de Oliva, and John de
Parma, the author of the infamous book, called Evangelium iEternum, The Everlasting Gospel, which was
to supersede and set aside the gospel of Christ, under pretence of introducing the more spiritual gospel
of the Holy Ghost. Eimericus has noted seven and twenty errors and blasphemies contained in this
book, which the Mendicant friars in those days highly magnified. But our author needed not to have
gone so high as Eimericus for them; for Bishop S tillingfleet gives an ample account of them in his
Fanaticism of the Church of Rome. As he does also of the errors of Gerardus Segarelli, and the Dulcin-
ists, and Herman of Ferraria, and the book called The Flowers of St. Francis, and another, The Confor
mities of St. Francis and Christ. To which may be added the errors of Raymundus Lullius, and David
Dinantius, and Bugaurius de Monte Falcone, together with the errors of Joannes Guion, and Joannes de
Mercuria, and Nicolas de Ultricuria, and Dionysius Soulechat, a Franciscan, and Joannes de Calore and
one Ludovicus, and Guido, an Austin hermit, with some others that were condemned in these ages bv
Gulielmus Parisiensis and Stephanus Parisiensis, with the concurrence of the university of Paris and
are to be found at the end of some editions of Peter Lombard, with the errors of Peter Lombard himself
under this title, Articuli in quibus Magister Sententiarum communiter non tenetur. Lombard. Sentent
Lugd. 1594. 8vo. Spondanus adds to these, the Condormicntes, and PastorelU, and Guido de Lacha and
the Humiliati, and the Ordo Apostolorum ; all which appeared within the compass of the thirteenth
century ; besides the famous disputes between the Guelphs and Gibelines, which continued in the follow-

THE PREFACE. xix
ing ages. In the fourteenth century, there are the errors of Arnaldus Montanerius, and Arnaldus de
Villa Nova, Bertoldus de Roback, Martinus Gonsalvus Conchensis, Nicolaus Calaber, Bartholomaeus
Janovesius, the Bizochi, and Fratres de Paupere Vita, the Pseudapostoli, Joannes de Latone, Joannes Hato,
the sect of the Impuri, Raimundus de Terraga, Amadeus Lusitanus ; the Albati, who travelled with great
admiration for their sanctity over all parts of Europe ; the Templars, whose order was extinguished in the
touncil of Vienna ; the New Sabellians of Spain, who maintained upon the hypothesis of transubstan-
liation, that the eucharist was both Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ; the errors of Franciscus Ceccus, an
Italian astrologer ; the wild disputes between the Palamites and Joannes Cantacuzenus on the one side,
and Barlaam and Acyndinus on the other, concerning the light of Mount Tabor; the revelations of St.
Bridget and St. Catherine for and against the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary ; the disputes
about the same matter between the Dominicans and the Franciscans ; and the more fierce disputes of
those orders concerning the poverty of Jesus Christ ; of which Bishop Stillingfleet gives an ample account
in his Fanaticism of the Church of Rome, and the author of The Mystery of Jesuitism an account no less
entertaining: add to these, the errors of Pope John XXII., ninety of which are laid to his charge by our
countryman Gulielmus Ockam, for which he himself, with his friends Joannes Parisiensis, Joannes de
Poliaco, Petrus de Vineis, Joannes de Janduno, and Marsilius de Padua, with many others, are charged
with heresy, being in reality firm to the defence of the imperial power against the papal. A collection of
whose tracts may be found together in Goldastus Monarchia Imperii Romani, seu de Jurisdietione et
Potestate Imperatoris et Papae, per varios Auctores. 3 vol. Hanov. 1612. Fol.
In the fifteenth century there are the famous disputes between the councils of Constance and Basil on
the one side, and the council of Florence on the other, concerning the infallibility and supremacy of the
pope above general councils ; the error of the council of Constance in taking away the cup from the peo
ple ; the error of the council of Basil in determining for the immaculate conception. There are also the
errors of Augustinus de Roma, Joannes Parvi, Franciscus Georgius Venetus, Laurentius Valla, a reviver
of Sabellianism, Nicholas Machiavel, Mattheeus Palmerius, Petrus de Aranda, Fanatici Suevenses, Mat
thias Tiburtinus a Franciscan enthusiast, Tympanista Germanus, and a sect called Opinionists ; not to
mention Henricus Harphius, whose errors, because they are censured and expurged only by the order of
the Roman Index, are of a more doubtful nature. There was also in the beginning of this age, one Vin
centius Ferrerius, a Catalonian preacher, who is now cried up as a great saint by Spondanus and Baronius,
and other writers of the Roman church : but there was a time when he was condemned as a heretic by
Eimericus the inquisitor, for asserting, among other things, that Judas repented unto salvation. To which
may be added the errors of Quadrigarius and Munerius, censured by the Sorbonne, anno 1442, and 1470.
The sixteenth century had but a little time before the Reformation was begun by Zuinglius and Luther:
yet in this short interval our author might have noted Hermannus Rissuick, and the Fossarii in Bohemia,
and Petrus Pomponatius in Italy, who read public lectures against the immortality of the soul. And if he
had added, Thomas de Vio, commonly called Cardinal Cajetan, he would have had the authority of Prate
olus and Ambrosius Catharin also, who wrote a book particularly against Cajetan, wherein he objects to
him above two hundred errors, an extract of which may be found in Flaccius Illyricus de Controversiis
Religionis Papisticae, p. 138. Basil. 1565. 4to.
We are now come to the age of the Reformation, where our author has noted many sects and hetero
doxies, but omitted abundance more, that were very considerable. Catharin, who condemned Cajetan,
had also his errors noted by others. Sotomajor, in his Index, prohibits some of his books to be read, and
orders others to be expurged : but one may question whether that was done for his real errors, or only for
his opinions inclining to the protestant side. But his opinion of an intermediate state after the end of this
world, in a new earth between heaven and hell, for those who are neither so good as to be admitted into
heaven, nor so bad as to be condemned to hell, is an error that might have been worthy our author's ob
servation. He speaks of the Anabaptists, but with a great deal of confusion, whereas others distinguish
them into at least fourteen sects, according to their peculiar tenets : the Muncerians, the Apostolici, the
Separati, the Cathari, the Silentes, the Enthusiasts, the Liberi, the Adamites, the Hutitce, the Augustinians,
Beuckeldians, the Melchiorites, the Georgians, and the Mennonists. Some add to these the Pastoricidcc,
the Nudipedes, the Manifestarii, the Clancularii, the Baculares, the Batemburgici, the Pacifici, the Sangui-
narii. Our author mentions some of these under their proper titles, but he omits the greatest part of them.
And he ought to have distinguished our English Anabaptists from those of other countries, because they
abhor many of their opinions. In giving an account of the Anti-trinitarians, he says, they are the spawn
of the old Arians and Samosatenians, grafted upon their stock by Michael Servetus. Whereas Servetus

xx THE PREFACE.
was no Arian, nor Samosatenian, but a reviver of Sabellianism, in which he was followed by Keckerman
and many others, who never met with so severe a censure. The authors of modern Arianism were Valen-
tinus Gentilis, and Georgius Blandrata, and Gregorius Pauli, and Matthseus Gribaldus, and Franciscus
David, and. Joannes Paulus Alciat, and Joannes Campanus, and Laelius Socinus, uncle to Faustus Socmus,
of whom our author should have given a particular account under their several titles. He should also have
given some account of the errors of Julius Caesar Vaninus, and Andreas Caesalpinus, and Hobbes, who
were in the same class with Spinosa. It had also been worth his while to have told his reader what were
the singular opinions or heterodoxies of Archer, who, among other blasphemies, maintained publicly in
print, That God was the author of sin ; for which he was censured by the assembly of divines, and his book
burnt by the common hangman, anno 1645. He should also have noted the errors of Jacob Behmen, and
Antonietta Bourignon, (against whom Dr. Cockburn wrote,) and Hieronymus Cardanus, and Curcelleeus,
and Episcopius, and Arminius ; and the errors of Grotius, after he fell into his designs of comprehension,
and favourable interpretations both of the popish and Socinian tenets, which plainly appear in his later
writings : the errors also of the Lord Herbert of Cherbury ; the new heresy of the Jesuits, as the Jansen-
ists themselves call it, which asserts the pope to be infallible, not only in matters of faith, but matters of
fact ; and gives him power to dethrone princes, and absolve subjects from their oaths of allegiance to them:
which doctrine every where occurs in the writings of Bellarmine against Barclay and Widdrinton, under
the name of Sculkenius, and in Becanus, and Mariana, and Suarez, and Lessius, and Azorius, and Emanuel
Sa, and hundreds of others, some of whose books together with Baronius have been publicly burnt at
Paris and Madrid by the hands of the common hangman. To these might' have been added the new doc
trine of the Jesuits in morality, largely set forth in the books .called, Provincial Letters, and the Jesuits'
Morals ; cbiefly taken out of Escobar, Filliucius, and such other writers. As also the doctrine of proba
bility, taught by Caramuel, which opens a way to licentiousness ; for which he stands condemned and
branded, even in the Roman Index, under this title, Joannis Caramuelis Apologema pro Antiquissima et
Universalissima Doctrina de Probabilitate, prorsus prohibetur. There are also no less than forty-five pro
positions of the Jesuits' casuistical divinity, whereof this doctrine of probability is one, condemned by two
bulls of Alexander VII. at the end of the Roman Index, which would have appeared well in our author's
collection. As also the censures of the parliament of Paris and the Sorbonne, upon the Propositions of
Santarellus, anno 1626, wherein he asserted the pope's deposing power; the censure of the Sorbonne upon
the Jesuits, anno 1661, for asserting, That the pope has the same infallibility as Jesus Christ in matters
of fact, as well as right; and the censure of the Sorbonne, anno 1561, upon another author, for asserting,
That the pope has power to dispose of the dominions of heretical princes, and absolve their subjects from
their oath of allegiance and fidelity. All which may be found in the book called The pernicious Conse
quences of the New Heresy of the Jesuits. Richerius also gives us the censures of the Sorbonne, upon one
Ludovicus Coubont, for asserting, That bishops have not their authority immediately from Jesus Christ,
but from the pope ; and another upon Ludovicus Cellotius, for maintaining, That general councils have
their authority only from the pope; and another upon Francis Guillou, and a fourth upon Jacobus
Vernant, for the same assertions ; besides the censure of Sanctarellus the Jesuit, which is also there re
lated. Richer. Vindic. Doctrines Scholcs. Paris. In another book of Richerius, De Potestatee Papee in
Temporalibus, we have the arrests of the parliament of Paris against Tanquerel, and Cardinal Perron and
Bernardinus Castorius, for publishing the infamous bull De Coena Domini ; and against Joannes Castellus
and Florentinus Jacob, and Ravaillac, who murdered Henry IV. of France, upon the deposing principles •
as also the arrests against Bellarmine, and Martin Becanus, and Sculkenius, that is, Bellarmine himself
again, and Suarez, for their several pernicious books upon the same subject. An account of which would
have been a grace to our author's catalogue of modern heterodoxies. Further yet ; if he had looked into
Bishop Stillingfleet's book of the Divisions of the Roman Clergy, he might there have found, besides the
schisms of the popes in former ages, and their contentions with the emperors for temporal power and the
feuds of the monastic orders one with another, a particular account of the Jesuits' opposition to episcopal
power and jurisdiction, in the books of Nicholas Smith and Thomas a Jesu ; which books were censured
first, by the archbishop of Paris, then by the Sorbonne, and at last by the bishops of France in an assemblv
of them at Paris. To these he might have added the books which the Jesuits pubhshed under the feisned
names of Hermannus Loemelius, and Edmundus Ursulanus, and the Jesuits' Censure of the Apostolic 1
Creed, to ridicule the censures of Paris ; and how these again were answered by Hallier, and Le Maisf
and Petrus Aurelius, who showed that these doctrines were maintained by the Jesuits : " That the episco'
pal order was not necessary to the being of a particular church ; that episcopacy was not by Divine right •

THE PREFACE. xxi
that confirmation might be given without bishops ; that the monastical order was more perfect than the
episcopal; and that regulars were exempt from the jurisdiction of bishops. And all that was done at
Rome against these doctrines, was only to suppress the books on both sides ; which the Parisian doctors
highly complained of, that such scandalous and seditious books as those of the Jesuits should meet with
the same favour at Rome, as the censure of the bishops of France ; that their profane and" atheistical
censure of the Apostles' Creed must have no mark of disgrace put upon it, nor such sayings of theirs,
wherein they call the bishops and divines of France by most contumelious names, and say they are the
enemies of truth and piety." If our author had looked a httle further into Bishop Stillingfleet, he might
have found how barbarously they used Don Arnando Guerrero, bishop of the Philippine Islands, because
he condemned them in a synod for acting independent of his jurisdiction ; and the like usage of the bishop
of Angelopolis in America, for the very same reason ; and what horrible things are contained in their cate
chisms which they gave to their new converts in China, which the congregation de Propaganda Fide
condemned in seventeen decrees at Rome, anno 1645. The short of their instructions was this : " To
speak httle of Christ crucified, but to conceal that small and inconsiderable circumstance of the Christian
doctrine as much as may be ; to use all the same customs that idolaters did, only directing all their worship
to Christ and the saints ; not to trouble themselves about fasting, penance, confession, and participation
of the eucharist, or the severity of repentance and mortification." Are not these as pernicious errors as
any that have appeared in these later ages, and were they not fit to be mentioned in an account of modern
heterodoxies ? Alphonsus de Vargas, a Spaniard, has four books under these titles against them : Re-
latio ad Principes Christianos de Stratagematis et Sophismis Politicis Societatis Jesu ad Monarchiam
Orbis terrarum sibi conficiendam. — Sedis Apostolicae Censura adversus Novam, Falsam, Impiam, et
Hsereticam Societatis Jesu Doctrinam nuper in Hispania publicata. — Jesuitarum Fidei Symbolum velut
Canticum novum. — Actio Hseresis in Societatem Jesu.
But our author has passed over many other modern heterodoxies worthy of a reader's information : such
as the errors of Dr. John Dee and Kelley concerning conversation with angels, published by Meric
Casaubon. Lond. 1659. The errors of Thomas Monetarius and Christophorus Schaplerus ; the Nico-
demitse, written against by Calvin; Nicholas Drabicius, a German enthusiast ;' James Brocard, an
apocalyptical prophet censured in the protestant synod of Rochelle, 1581 ; Paul Grebner, a Swedish
prophet; Joannes Franciscus Borri; Bernardinus Ochin, Theophilus Aletheus, and the book called
Polygamia Triumphatrix, John Milton, Cornelius Vythagius, and other defenders of polygamy and
divorces; Paionism, censured by Spanheim in his Elenchus; the errors of Gulielmus Postellus, Pere
Simon, the Suenckfeldians, Vincentius Viviani, an Italian fatalist, Conradus Vorstius, and the Weigelians
and Paracelsians, called the new prophets of Germany, an account of whose blasphemies may be found
in Wendelin's Epistle Dedicatory to his Theology, and in Hoornbeck, Thummius, and Beckman, who
have written particular books against them.
To these might have been added very properly an account of our late new prophets in England, who
made such a stir not many years ago ; and the Masonites, a little before them ; together with the Ration
alists, Latitudinarians, Freethinkers ; and Unionists, who pretend that the doctrine of papists and pro-
testants rightly represented are in a manner all one : such were Father Davenport, otherwise called Sancta
Clara, and Mr. de Meaux, bishop of Condome, and such other reconcilers and expositors of the faith. The
errors also of Toland and Asgil, and the book called The Rights of the Christian Church, might justly enough
have found a place in our author's Index. So might also several sects of fanatics in the late confusions
between 1640 and 1660: the Vanists, or disciples of Sir Henry Vane; the new Bemenists, headed by
Dr. Pordage ; the followers of Dr. Gell, Parker, and Gibbon ; Lewis du Moulin, the Levellers, and many
others who are described in Edward's Gangraena, and Reliquiae Baxterianae, and other the like accounts
of those times.
Our author, perhaps, will now begin to think himself a little short and deficient in his short account of
all the principal heresies since the rise of Christianity ; there being so many, both ancient and modern,
of which he has given no account, nor so much as named or mentioned. If he says, it was needless ; I say so
too, with respect to the work he was about : but when he had undertaken it, he should have made good
his pretence, and taken care that the book should have answered his title. But perhaps this could not
have been done without writing a large volume upon the subject. Then he should have let it all
alone, and his epitome would have been both the cheaper and the better for it. His indigent readers
might have known what ancient heresies were from St. Austin de Haeresibus more authentically, and
also at an easier rate; for it is but a sixpenny book printed by itself at Oxford; and for modern

xxii THE PREFACE.
sects, they are nothing to the purpose of antiquity, and therefore might have been omitted upon this
occasion. As to his History of the Eight first General Councils, which runs to a great length, I think that as need
less as the other; for the late worthy author of the Clergyman's Vade Mecum, in his second volume, has
given all such readers a perfect account of the canons both of the Universal Code, and the Roman Code,
and the African Code, down to the year 787; which I dare say is in the hands of most poor clergymen,
before our author in his great compassion thought fit to take pity on them. If he would have done any
thing to the purpose, it should not have been actum agere, but to have given them a short account of those
Latin councils which the foresaid author does not concern himself with, but are frequently used in my
Origines. For which reason I have given an alphabetical and chronological index of them, being about
a hundred and twenty in all, together with the number of canons contained in them ; which is enough to
answer the end of my undertaking.
I have supplied the whole also with a general index of matter, referring distinctly to every particular
volume, book, chapter, section, and page, throughout the whole ; and added a catalogue of such authors
as I have made use of in compiling the work from first to last. I had also some thoughts of adding an
other index of such authors as I have had no opportunity to see or use, which yet may be of great use
to those who are minded to improve this study of church antiquities further ; but because this gentleman
calls me to a repetition of my labours, and obliges me to be my own epitomiser, (donatum rude reposcit,
Atque iterum antiquo tentat me includere ludoj I will reserve this for a more proper occasion ; wishing
the reader in the mean time as much pleasure, satisfaction, and advantage in reading without labour, as I
have had with a mixture of great labour in compiling and digesting, these collections.

POSTSCRIPT.
For the further improvement of ecclesiastical antiquity, if any vigorous young men, of learning, applica
tion, and good j udgment, are minded to employ themselves that way, these following works may be pro
per to be undertaken by such as have opportunity of books and leisure, especially in the universities.
1. A supplement to my Origines, in a book of miscellaneous rites : which, if God should be pleased
to give me better health, I should be glad to pursue myself, though I think it now the least part of what
is wanting.
2. A catholic comment upon the Scriptures, which is already begun, and carried on by a learned and
diligent writer.
; 3. A body of catholic divinity in the words of the ancient writers ; such as the Theologica Dogmata of
Petavius the Jesuit, and Thomasin the oratorian among the Romanists.
4. A body of practical or moral and casuistical divinity : of which I have had occasion to do a little, so
far as relates to the great crimes against the ten commandments, which fell under the discipline of
the church. But a complete work in this kind, extending to all virtues and vices, and practical cases
of all sorts, would be much more diffusive, and of excellent use for direction of preachers and casuists
upon all moral questions.
5. An authentic edition of the Canons of the Councils, Greek and Latin, in their originals. For
translations and epitomes, though they are of some use to the unlearned, are not satisfactory to men of
true learning and judgment, who will always have recourse to originals. Dr. Allix once undertook this
work, and had very particular favour showed him by the parliament, in granting him foreign paper with
out duty, as I have been informed, and yet the design by some means or other proved abortive. The Acts
of the Councils, which are different from the Canons, are much too long to be inserted in such an edition •
but the Canons themselves may be comprised, in the original Greek and Latin, in two moderate volumes
in quarto. Which would be exceeding useful to scholars of a moderate fortune, to have the valuable part
of the voluminous tomes of the Councils, twenty or thirty in number, brought to their hand in an au
thentic manner, and at a very easy rate : whereas, now, such editions of the Councils as Labbe's, are scarce
to be found throughout a whole diocese, except in the cathedral libraries, or some collegiate church
where few, that have inclination, can have access to them without both labour and expense, except such
as are placed conveniently in the next neighbourhood, as it pleased Providence to place me ; without which

THE PREFACE. xxiii
happiness I had never had ability to have gone through any part of the work which now, by the blessing
of God, I have lived to finish.
6. The history of the persecutions and sufferings of the primitive martyrs, extracted out of their au
thentic Acts and approved historians, without the spurious additions of nauseous legendary writers, and
the uncertain martyrologists of later ages. I once made some attempt toward this myself, and read many
parts of it for a year or two, as useful afternoon exhortations to zeal and constancy in rehgion, in my
parish church. But other employments made me lay it aside, and leave it imperfect. Mr. Ruinart's
Acta Martyrum sincera, and Pagi's Critic upon Baronius, will be of particular use to any one who is
minded to set about such a work afresh, and bring it to perfection. So will also the book of Meisner,
Kortholt, and Gallonius, which Dr. Cave (in his Prolegomena, p. 27- vol. i. Hist. Liter.) recommends to
men's use upon this subject. Mr. Dodwell's twelfth Dissertation upon St. Cyprian, is an excellent dis
course to set forth the courage of the primitive martyrs : but the eleventh Dissertation, de Paucitate
Martyrum, serves for no other end, but only to show what a great man can say upon a bad cause, and
argue plausibly upon a very slender and false foundation, which the undertaker of this work is to beware
of, and consider well what Ruinart has said against it.
7. The history of heresies, heterodoxies, and schisms ; which, after all the attempts that have been
made upon it, has never been done to any tolerable satisfaction or perfection. Dr. Cave tells his reader
the names of the common authors that have written upon it : but he concludes, after all, in these remark
able words : His tamen aliisque plurimis, qui addi poterard, non obstantibus, opus accuratum de hcereticis,
prcecipue antiquis, deque eorum ortu, progressu, ajjinitate, dogmatibus, duratione, merito adhuc inter desiderata
habendum est. And I believe the remarks I have now made upon one of the last authors of this kind, is
a pretty good evidence of the truth of his observation. I could say a great deal more upon this subject,
but what I have already hinted is sufficient to a wise undertaker.
8. And lastly, A supplement to those two great and incomparable writers, Dr. Cave and Du Pin, who
have given the world such an excellent account of ecclesiastical writers. Nothing, hardly, can be so
perfectly done in this kind, but that still considerable additions may be made to it. The world has ex
pected for some time a third volume of Dr. Cave's, and that, perhaps, might supersede all other men's
labours : but till that appears, I can be bold to say, there are many authors lie hid from ordinary view ;
and that is enough to hint this as a subject capable of further improvement : but there would be another
use also in it, to bring to light the knowledge of several historians and other writers, whose testimony
would give confirmation to the protestant cause, against the corruptions of the Romish church in
later ages.
And now that I have mentioned this, I will add two or three things more, that would be of great ad
vantage to the church, if they were done by persons of care and judgment, though they have no relation
to antiquity.
1. An account of the Roman Indexes of prohibited and expurged books, showing the reasons for which
the inquisitors so carefully prohibit or expurge them. I am sure by this means a good collection or
catalogue of witnesses for the truth against the manifest corruptions of the Romish church might be ex
tracted out of the confessions of our own writers.
2. A new work of short marginal annotations on the Bible, explaining only the most obvious difficul
ties, that seem to puzzle ordinary readers. The learned have annotations abundantly enough to serve
their turn ; but there seems still to be something wanting of this kind for ordinary readers. I have
sometimes put learned friends upon this work, who perhaps were otherwise usefully employed : and if I
myself had not had the same plea, I would have attempted something of this nature for the benefit of in^
ferior people, who are allowed to read the Scriptures, and yet many times want proper helps to under
stand them ; which would be remedied very often, either by giving a little turn and light to the translation,
or explaining some obscure phrase, or some ancient custom, upon which the understanding of the text
many times depends, with other such ways of accommodating the Scripture to the capacities of the vulgar.
3. Till this were effected, a short exposition of those chapters only which are read as proper lessons
out of the Old Testament, might be a proper help to vulgar capacities and ordinary readers, to employ
their meditations upon those parts of Scripture, which the church has chosen for their edification and in
struction, and seem most to want some light and guide, to make them answer that end to them. If I am
(not mistaken, I have seen such a work of Bishop Cooper's in former times ; but be it his or any other's,
J I believe a thing of this kind, judiciously done, would generally be allowed to be a useful work, for the
| end it is proposed and intended. We abound indeed with posthils, or expositions on the Epistles and

xxiv THE PREFACE.
Gospels, and large annotations on the Old and New Testament : but these short expositions I have men
tioned are much more needed ; and that is enough to recommend the work to a pious undertaker.
The great objection against all these things is, that each of them is too great an undertaking for any
single man. I remember to have heard of the same objection made by some against me and my Origines,
upon publishing the first volume of them. I bless God, I have lived to confute the objection, and give
the world a proof that great and laborious works are not always so frightful as sometimes they are imagined.
I have given a little specimen of what the industry of a single person may do, in whom there is neither
the greatest capacity nor the strongest constitution. And having made the experiment myself, I can
with more decency and freedom recommend these things to others, who are qualified to undertake them.
But in saying this, I would not encourage every bold empiric in divinity or history, to set about such
works, which they are not any ways qualified for, either for want of knowledge or want of judgment.
To all such the poet's direction is much more proper : Sumite materiam vestris, qui scribitis, esquam Viribus,
et versate diu quidferre recusent, Quid valeant humeri. The want of observing which rule does abundantly
more harm than good. For such men's writings only serve to confound learning, and leave things in a
much worse state than they found them. The world has daily experiment of this, to the prejudice both
of good literature and religion. Therefore what I have said by way of encouragement is not to these,
but to the truly judicious, the inquisitive, the modest, and the learned, who want nothing but courage
proportionable to their understanding, to make them become great instruments of God's glory in doing
useful things for the service of his church. This church has never wanted such brave spirits, and I hope
never will, to set forth truth with all the advantages of learning, and confound the opposition that is
made to it by all the enemies of religion, whether they be the more professed attackers, or the secret un-
derminers of its foundation. The blessing of God be upon all those, who have ability and will to under
take great and useful works for the promotion of piety and religion, and to stand in the gap against all
the enemies of truth.

CONTENTS.

BOOK I. - I

.l/

OF THE SEVERAL NAMES AND ORDERS OF MEN IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of those titles and appellations which Christians own
ed, and distinguished themselves by.
Sect. 1. Christians at first called Jesseans, Therapeulee,
Electi, &c — 2. Christ called by a technical name,
IX8YE ; and Christians, Pisciculi, from that. — 3.
Christians, why called Gnostici by some authors. — 4.
Theophori, and Christophori. — 5. Sometimes, but very
rarely, Christi. — 6. Christians great enemies to all
party names and human appellations. Christian, the
name they chiefly gloried in. — 7. Of the name catholic,
and its antiquity. — 8. In what sense the name ecclesi
astics given to all Christians. — 9. The Christian religion
called Aoyfia, and Christians o\ tou Aoy/xaTos. — 10.
Christians called Jews by the heathen. — II. Christ
commonly called Chrestus by the heathen ; and Chris
tians, Chrestians  1
CHAPTER II.
Of those names of reproach, which Jews, infidels, and
heretics cast upon the Christians.
Sect. 1. Christians commonly called Nazarens by Jews
and heathens. — 2. And Galileans. — 3. And atheists. —
4. Greeks and impostors. — 5. Magicians. — 6. The new
superstition  7. Sibyllists. — 8. Biothanati. — 9. Para-
bolarii, and Desperati. — 10. Sarmentitii, and Semaxii.
— 11. Lueifugax natio. — 12. Plautina prosapia. — 13.
Christians called Capitolins, Synedrians, and Aposta-
tics, by the Novatians. — 14. Psychici, by the Montan
ists and Valentinians. — 15. Allegorists, by the Mille
naries. — 16. Chronitm, by the Aetians ; Simplices, by
the Manichees ; Anthropolatrm, by the Apollinarians. —
17. Philosarcie, and PilosioteB* by the Origenians. —
18. The synagogue of Satan and antichrist, by the
Luciferians  5

CHAPTER III.
Of the several orders of men in the Christian church.
Sect. 1. Three sorts of members of the Christian church,
' the tiyoitfiB-voi, iciarot, and KaTtiyovntvoi ; rulers, be

lievers, and catechumens. — 2. The name believers
strictly taken for the baptized laity, in opposition to
the catechumens. — 3. Catechumens owned as imper
fect members of the church  4. Heretics not reputed
Christians. — 5. Penitents and energumens ranked in
the same class with catechumens  9

CHAPTER IV.
A more particular account of the mo-rot, or believers,
and their several titles of honour, and privileges
above the catechumens.
Sect. 1. Believers otherwise called <j>wti%6hevoi, the
illuminate. — 2. And ol fiefivrjfisvoi, the initiated. — 3.
And t£\ewl, the perfect. — 4. Chart Dei, Hyioi, &c. —
5. The privileges of believers. First, To partake of
the eucharist. — 6. Secondly, To stay and join in all
the prayers of the church. — 7. Thirdly, Their sole
prerogative to use the Lord's prayer. Whence that
prayer was called eixfi mm-wi/, the prayer of believers.
— 8. Fourthly, They were admitted to hear discourses
upon the most profound mysteries of religion. All
which privileges were denied to the catechumens. . 1 1

CHAPTER V.
Of the distinction of believers from the rulers. Where,
qf the distinction observed in the names and offices
of laity and clergy ; and of the antiquity of these
distinctions.
Sect. 1. Believers otherwise called laid, laymen, to dis
tinguish them from the clergy. — 2. The antiquity of
this distinction in the names proved against Rigaltius,
Salmasius, and Selden. — 3. The objection from 1 Pet.
v. 3, answered. — 4. A distinction in the offices of laity
and clergy always observed  5. Laymen otherwise
called /3koti/co1, seculars. — 6. Also ISiHrai, private
men. — 7. What persons properly called clerici.— -8.
The name clerici sometimes appropriated to the in
ferior orders. — 9. The reason of the name clerici —
10. All the clergy anciently called canonici ; and the
reason of it. — 1 1 . Also t<z£is too /3ii,uaTos, the order
of the sanctuary  '13

See a note on this word at the end of the Contents.

c 2

svi CONTENTS.
BOOK II.
OF THE SEVERAL SUPERIOR ORDERS OF THE CLERGY IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the original of bishops ; and that they were a dis
tinct order from presbyters in the primitive church.
Sect. 1. What the ancients mean by different orders of
bishops and presbyters. — 2. The order of bishops al
ways owned to be superior to that of presbyters. — 3.
The order of bishops reckoned by all ancient writers
to be of apostolical and Divine institution. — 4. A list
or catalogue of bishops ordained by the apostles. 17
CHAPTER II.
Of the several titles of honour given to bishops in the
primitive church.
Sect. 1. All bishops at first called apostles. — 2. After
that, successors of the apostles. — 3. Whence every
bishop's see called sedes apostolica. — 4. Bishops called
princes of the people. — 5. Prcepositi, 7rpo£=raJTes, -n-po-
tSpoL, Zfpopoi. — 6. Principes sacerdotum, summi sacer-
dotes, pontif ccs maximi, &c. — 7. Every bishop an
ciently called papa, father, or pope. — 8. Pater patrum,
and episcopus episcoporum, a title given to others be
side the bishop of Rome. — 9. Bishops sometimes call
ed patriarchs— 10. All bishops styled vicars of Christ.
— 11. And angels of the churches  21

CHAPTER III.
Of the offices of bishops, as distinct from presbyters.
Sect. 1. A threefold difference between bishops and
presbyters, in the discharge of their office and function.
— 2. First, In the common offices that might be per
formed by both ; the bishop acted by an independent
power, but presbyters in dependence upon, and subor
dination to him. — 3. This specified in the offices of
baptism and the Lord's supper. — 4. And in the office
of preaching. — 5. Secondly, Some offices never in
trusted in the hands of presbyters ; such as the office
and power of ordination. — 6. Instances of ordinations
by presbyters disannulled by the church.— 7. Some
allegations to the contrary examined. Where, of the
difference made between the ordinations of schismati
cal. bishops, and those of mere presbyters. — 8. A third
difference between bishops and presbyters was, that
presbyters were always accountable to their bishops,
not bishops to their presbyters. — 9. Yet bishops'
power not arbitrary, but limited by canon in various
respects  25
CHAPTER IV.
Of the power of bishops over the laity, monks, subor
dinate magistrates, and all persons within their dio
cese ; and of their office in disposing of the revenues
of the church.
Sect. 1. No exemption from the jurisdiction of the bi
shop in the primitive church. — 2. All monks subject
to the bishop of the diocese where they lived. — 3. As
also all subordinate magistrates in matters of spiritual
jurisdiction. — 4. Of the distinction between temporal
and spiritual jurisdiction. Bishops' power wholly con
fined to the latter. — 5. The bishop's prerogative in
granting the Uteres formates to all persons. — 6. Of
the bishop's power in disposing of the revenues of the
church  30

CHAPTER V.
Of the office of bishops, in relation to the whole catholic
church.
Sect. 1. In what sense every bishop supposed to be bi
shop of the whole catholic church.— 2. In what re
spect the whole world but one diocese, and but one
bishopric in the church. — 3. Some particular instances
of private bishops acting as bishops of the whole uni
versal church  33
CHAPTER VI.
Of the independency of bishops ; especially in the
Cyprianic age, and in the African churches.
Sect. 1. What meant by the independency of bishops
one of another, and their absolute power in their own.
church. — 2. All bishops had liberty to form their own
liturgies. — 3. And to express the same catholic creed in
different forms, as to what concerned method or ex
pression. — 4. And to appoint particular days of fast
ing in their own churches. — 5. The independency of
bishops most conspicuous in the African churches ;
proved by several instances out of Cyprian. . . 35
CHAPTER VII.
Of the power of bishops in hearing and determining
secular causes.
Sect. 1. Bishops commonly chosen arbitrators of men's
differences in the primitive church. — 2. The original
of this custom. Where, of the true meaning of those
words in St. Paul, to!>i E^udivrtfiivni iv Ty tK/cAijo-i'a,
1 Cor. vi. 4. — 3. This power of bishops confirmed by
the imperial laws. — 4. Yet not allowed in capital or
criminal causes ; nor in any causes, but when the
litigants both agreed to take them for arbitrators. — 5.
Bishops sometimes made their presbyters and dea
cons, and sometimes laymen, their substitutes in this
affair. A conjecture about the original of lay chan
cellors  37
CHAPTER VIII.
Of the privilege of bishops to intercede for criminals.
Sect. 1. Several instances of bishops interceding for
criminals to the secular magistrate. — 2. The reasons
why they interceded for some criminals, and not
others. — 3. That they never interceded in civil mat
ters, and pecuniary cases.  39
CHAPTER IX.
Of some particular honours and instances of respect
showed to bishops by all persons in general.
Sect. 1. Of the ancient custom of bowing the head to-
receive the benediction of bishops  2. Of kissing
their hand. — 3. The custom of singing hosannas to
them sometimes used, but not approved.  4. What
meant by the corona sacerdotalis, and the form of sa
luting bishops per coronam.—b. Whether bishops an
ciently wore a mitre ?— 6. Of the titles ayi&n-aToi
beatissimi, &c, most holy and most blessed fathers' '
common to all bishops.— 7. Bishops distinguished by
their throne in the church  ^q

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER X.
Of the age, and some other particular qualifications
required in such as were to be ordained bishops.
Sect. 1. Bishops not to be ordained under thirty years
of age, except they were men of extraordinary worth.
— 2. To be chosen out of the clergy of the same
church, or diocese, to which they were to be ordained.
— 3. Some exceptions to this rule, in three special
cases. — 4. Bishops ordinarily to be such as had re
gularly gone through the inferior orders of the church.
— 5. This to be understood of the orders below that
of deacon ; for deacons were qualified to be ordained
bishops, without being made presbyters. — 6. In cases
of necessity, bishops chosen out of the inferior or
ders. — 7. And in some extraordinary cases, ordain
ed immediately from laymen. The custom of going
through all the orders of the church in five or six
days' time, a novel practice never used in the primi
tive ages  43
CHAPTER XI.
Of some particular laics and customs observed about
the ordination of bishops.
Sect. 1. Bishoprics not to remain void above three
months. — 2. In some places, a new bishop was al
ways chosen before the old was interred.— 3. Some
instances of longer vacancies, in times of difficulty
and persecution. — 4. Three bishops ordinarily required
to a canonical ordination of a bishop. — 5. Yet ordi
nations by one bishop allowed to be valid, though not
canonical. — 6. The bishop of Rome not privileged to
ordain alone, any more than any other single bishop.
—7. Every bishop to be ordained in his own church.
— 8. The ancient maimer of ordaining bishops. — 9.
One of the forms of prayer used at their consecration.
— 10. Of their enthronement ; their homilies enthro-
nisticce, and Uteres enthronisticee, otherwise called sy-
nodicee, and communicatoriee  46
CHAPTER XII.
Of the rule which prohibits bishops to be ordained in
small cities.
Sect. 1. The reason of the law against placing bishops
in small cities. — 2. Some exceptions to this rule in
Egypt, Libya, Cyprus, Arabia, and especially in the
provinces of Asia Minor. — 3. Reasons which engaged
the ancients sometimes to erect bishoprics in small
places  51
CHAPTER XIII.
Of the rule which forbids two bishops to be ordained
in one city.
Sect. 1. The general rule and practice of the church to
have but one bishop in any city. — 2. Yet two bishops
sometimes allowed by compromise to end a dispute,
or cure an inveterate schism. Where of the famous
offer made by the catholic bishops to the Donatists in
the collation of Carthage. — 3. The opinions of learned
men concerning two bishops in a city in the apostoli
cal age, one of the Jews, and the other of the Gentiles.
— 4. The case of coadjutors  52

CHAPTER XIV.
Of the chorepiscopi, irepioStvTai, and suffragan bishops :
and how these differed from one another.
Sect. 1. Of the reason of the name chorepiscopi, and
the mistake of some about it. — 2. Three different
opinions about the nature of this order. The first

opinion, that they were mere presbyters. — 3. The
second opinion, that some of them were presbyters,
and some bishops. — 4. The third opinion most pro
bable, that they were all bishops. — 5. Some objec
tions against this answered. — 6. Of the offices of the
chorepiscopi. First, they were allowed to ordain the
inferior clergy, subdeacons, readers, &c, but not pres
byters or deacons, without special licence from the
city bishop. — 7. Secondly, they had power to minis
ter confirmation. — 8. Thirdly, power to grant letters
dimissory to the country clergy. — 9. Fourthly, they
might officiate in the presence of the city bishop.
— 10. Fifthly, they might sit as bishops and vote in
councils. — 11. The power of the chorepiscopi not the
same in all times and places. — 12. Their power first
struck at by the council of Laodicea, which set up
TrepLoStui-al, or visiting presbyters, in their room.
Their power wholly taken away in the Western church
in the ninth century. — 13. Of the attempt made in
England to restore this order under the name of suf
fragan bishops. — 14. That suffragan bishops in the
primitive church were not the chorepiscopi, but all
the bishops in any province under a metropolitan.
— 15. Why the suffragan bishops of the Roman pro
vince were particularly called by the technical name,
libra  56

CHAPTER XV.
Of the intercessores and interventores in the African
churches.
Sect. 1. The reason why some bishops were called by
these names in the African church, and what their
office was. — 2. Their office not to last above one year.
¦ — 3. No intercessor to he made bishop of the place
where he was constituted intercessor  59

CHAPTER XVI.
Of primates or metropolitans.
Sect. 1. The original of metropolitans, by some derived
from apostolical constitution. — 2. By others, from
the age next after the apostles. — 3. Confessed by all
to have been long before the council of Nice. — 4.
Proofs of metropolitans in the second century. — 5.
By what names metropolitans were anciently called.
¦ — ¦ 6. In Africa they were commonly called senes,
because the oldest bishop of the province (excepting
the province where Carthage stood) was always the
metropolitan by virtue of his seniority. — 7. How the
African bishops might forfeit their title to the primacy,
and lose their right of seniority. — 8. A register of or
dinations to be kept in the primate's church, and all
bishops to take place by seniority, that there might be
no disputes about the primacy.' — 9. Three sorts of
honorary metropolitans beside the metropolitans in
power. First, the primates ccvo. — 10. Secondly, titu
lar metropolitans. — 11. Thirdly, the bishops of some
mother churches, which were honoured by ancient
custom. — 12. The offices of metropolitans. First, to
ordain their suffragan bishops. — 13. This power con
tinued to them after the setting up of patriarchs in
all places, except in the patriarchate of Alexandria.
— 14. The power of metropolitans not arbitrary in this
respect, but to be concluded by the major vote of a
provincial council. — 15. Metropolitans themselves to
be chosen and ordained by their own provincial synod,
and not obliged to go to Rome for ordination. — 10.
The second office "of metropolitans, to decide con
troversies arising among their provincial bishops, and
to take appeals from them. — 17. Their third office
was to call provincial synods, which all their suf
fragans were obliged to attend. — 18. Fourthly, they
were to publish such imperial laws as concerned the
church, together with the canons that were made in
councils, and to see them executed ; for which end

CONTENTS.

they were to visit any dioceses, and correct abuses, as
occasion required. — 19. Fifthly, All bishops were
obliged to have recourse to the metropolitan, and take
his formates, or letters of commendation, whenever
they travelled into a foreign country. — 20. Sixthly, It
belonged to metropolitans to take care of vacant sees
within their province. — 21. Lastly, They were to cal
culate the time of Easter, and give notice of it to the
whole province. — 22. How the power of metropolitans
grew in after ages. — 23. The metropolitan of Alex
andria had the greatest power of any other in the
world. — 24. All metropolitans called apostolici, and
their sees sedes apostolico!  60
CHAPTER XVII.
Of patriarchs.
Sect. 1. Patriarchs anciently called archbishops. — 2.
And exarchs of the diocese. — 3. Salmasius's mistake
about the first use of the name patriarch.- — 4. Of the
Jewish patriarchs, their first rise, duration, and ex
tinction. — 5. Of the patriarchs among the Montanists.
— 6. The name patriarch first used in the proper sense
by Socrates and the council of Chalcedon. — 7. Four
different opinions concerning the first rise of patri
archal power. — 8. The opinion of Spalatensis and St.
Jerom preferred. Some probable proofs of patriarchal
power before the council of Nice, offered to consider
ation. — 9. Patriarchal power confirmed in three ge
neral councils successively after the council of Nice. —
10. The power of patriarchs not exactly the same in
all churches. The patriarch of Constantinople had
some peculiar privileges. — 11. As also the patriarch
of Alexandria had his ; wherein they both exceeded
the bishop of Rome. — 12. The powers and privileges
of patriarchs. First, they were to ordain all the me
tropolitans of the whole diocese, and to receive their
own ordination from a diocesan synod. — 13. Secondly,
They were to call diocesan synods, and preside in
them. — 14. Thirdly, They might receive appeals from
metropolitans and provincial synods. — 15. Fourthly,
They might censure metropolitans, and their suffragan
bishops, if metropolitans were remiss in censuring
them. — 16. Fifthly, They had power to delegate me
tropolitans, as their commissioners, to hear ecclesias
tical causes in any part of the diocese. — 17. Sixthly,
They were to be consulted by their metropolitans in
all matters of moment. A remarkable instance in
the Egyptian bishops. — 18. Seventhly, They were to
notify and communicate to their metropolitans such
imperial laws as concerned the church, in like manner
as the metropolitans were to notify to the provincial
bishops. — 19. Lastly, The absolution of greater crimi
nals was reserved to them. — 20. The number of
patriarchs throughout the world reckoned to be about
fourteen, answerable to the number of capital cities in
the several dioceses of the Roman empire ; all which
at first were absolute and independent of one another,
till Rome by usurpation, and Constantinople by law, got
some of their neighbours to be subject to them. — 21.
The patriarch of Constantinople commonly dignified
with the title of oecumenical, and his church called the
head of all churches ; and that he was equal in all re
spects to the bishop of Rome. — 22. What figure the
subordinate patriarchs of Ephesus and Caesarea made
in the church ; and that they were not mere titular
patriarchs, as some in after ages  67
CHAPTER XVIII.
Of the avroictyaXot, or independent bishops.
Sect. 1. All metropolitans anciently styled aiiTOKiepaXot.
— 2. Some metropolitans independent after the setting
up of patriarchal power, as those of Cyprus, Iberia,
Armenia, and the Britannic church. — 3. A third sort
of airroict<pa\oi, such bishops as were subject to no

metropolitan, but only to the patriarch of the diocese.
These in the Greek Notitias dignified with the title,
though they had not the power of archbishops ana
metropolitans— 4. Valesius's mistake corrected. /4
CHAPTER XIX.
Of presbyters.
Sect. 1. The meaning of the name presbyter.— 2 Apos
tles and bishops sometimes called presbyters.— 3. The
original of presbyters, as taken more strictly for the
second order in the church. — 4. The powers and
privileges of presbyters.— 5. Presbyters allowed to sit
with the bishop on thrones in the church. Whence
6 Ik too SevtIpov Srpovov, denotes a presbyter, one that
sits on the second throne— 6. The form of their sit
ting in a semicircle, whence they were called, corona
presbyterii. — 7. Presbyters esteemed a sort of eccle
siastical senate, or council of the church, whom the
bishop consulted and advised with upon all occasions.
— 8. Evidences of this prerogative, out of Ignatius,
Cyprian, and others. — 9. The power of presbyters
thought by some to be a little restrained in the fourth
century, and not so great in some places as in the
second. — 10. Yet still they were admitted to join with
the bishop in the imposition of hands upon those that
were ordained to their own order. — 11. And allowed
to sit in consistory with their bishops. — 12. As also in
provincial councils. — 13. And in general councils like
wise. — 14. An account of the titles of honour given
to presbyters, and how they differed from the same
titles as applied to bishops. — 15. In what sense bi
shops,- presbyters, and deacons called priests. — 16.
Why priests called mediators between God and men.
¦ — 17. The ancient form and manner of ordaining
presbyters. — 18. Of the archipresbyteri. That these
were more ancient than the cardinales presbyteri,
which some erroneously confound with them. — 19.
Of the seniores ecclesiee. That these were not lay
elders in the modern acceptation  76
CHAPTER XX.
Of deacons.
Sect. 1. Deacons always reckoned one of the sacred
orders of the church. — 2. Yet not generally called
priests, but ministers and Lcvites.— 3. And for this
reason the bishop was not tied to have the assistance
of any presbyters to ordain them. — 4. The first office
of deacons, to take care of the vessels and utensils of
the altar. — 5. Secondly, To receive the oblations of
the people, and present them to the priest, and recite
publicly the names of those that offered. — 6. Thirdly,
To read the Gospel in some churches. — ^-Fourthly,
To minister the cup to the people. — 8. Bufflr>M*> con
secrate the elements at the altar. — 9. Fifthly, Deacons
allowed to baptize in some places by the bishop's
authority. — 10. Sixthly, Deacons to bid prayer in the
congregation. — 1 1 . Seventhly, Allowed to preach upon
some occasions. — 12. Eighthly, And to reconcile peni
tents in cases of extreme necessity. — 13. Ninthly, To
attend their bishops in councils, and sometimes repre
sent them as their proxies. — 14. Tenthly, Deacons
empowered to correct men that behaved themselves
irregularly in the church. — 15. Eleventhly, Deacons
anciently performed the offices of all the inferior orders
. of the church.— 16. Twelfthly, Deacons the bishop's
sub-almoners.— 17. Deacons to inform the bishop of
the misdemeanors of the people. — 18. Hence deacons
commonly called the bishop's eyes and ears, his mouth
his angels and prophets — 19. Deacons to be multil
plied according to the necessities of the church. The
Roman church precise to the number of seven.  20.
Of the age at which deacons might be ordained.  21 '.
Of the respect which deacons paid to presbyter's and
received from the inferior orders  '85

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XXI.
Of archdeacons.
Sect. 1. Archdeacons anciently of the same order with
deacons. — 2. Elected by the bishop, and not made by
seniority. — 3. Commonly persons of such interest in
the church, that they were often chosen the bishops'
successors. — 4. The archdeacon's offices : first, To as
sist the bishop at the altar, and order the other deacons
and inferior clergy to their several stations and ser
vices in the church. — 5. Secondly, To assist the bishop
in managing the church's revenues. — 6. Thirdly, To
assist him in preaching. — 7. Fourthly, In ordaining
the inferior clergy. — 8. Fifthly, The archdeacon had
power to censure the other deacons, but not presby
ters, much less the archpresbyter of the church, as
some mistake. — 9. What meant by the name apan-
tita, and whether it denotes the archdeacon's power
over the whole diocese. — 10. Why the archdeacon
called cor-episcopi. — 11. The opinions of learned men
concerning the first institution of this offioe and dignity
in the church  94

CHAPTER XXII.
Of deaconesses.
Sect. 1. The ancient names of deaconesses, Sl&kovoi,
irpEcr^uTijEs, viduee, ministrce. — 2. Deaconesses by
some laws required to be widows. — 3. And such
widows as had children. — 4. To be sixty years of age.
— 5. And such as had been only the wives of one man.
— 6. Deaconesses always ordained by imposition of
hands. — 7. Yet not consecrated to any office of the
priesthood. — 8. Their offices : 1. To assist at the bap
tism of women. — 9. 2. To be a sort of private cate-
cbists to the women-catechumens. — 10. 3. To visit
and attend women in sickness and distress. — 11. 4. To
minister to the martyrs in prison. — 12. 5. To keep
the women's gate in the church. — 13. Lastly, To pre
side over the widows, &c. — 14. How long this order
continued both in the Eastern and Western church. —
15. Another notion of the name diaconissa, in the
middle ages of the church, in which it signifies a dea
con's wife, as presbytera does a presbyter's wife, and
episcopa a bishop's wife. The contrary errors of Gen-
tilletus and Baronius about these corrected. . 99

BOOK III.

_ ><

OF THE INFERIOR ORDERS OF THE CLERGY IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the first original qf the inferior orders, and the
number and use of them : and how they differed
from the superior orders of bishops, presbyters, and
deacons.
Sect. 1. The inferior orders not of apostolical, but only
ecclesiastical institution, proved against Baronius and
the council of Trent. — 2. No certain number of them
in the primitive church. — 3. Not instituted in all
churches -at the same time.— 4. The principal use of
them in the primitive church, to be a sort of nursery
for the hierarchy. — 5. None of these allowed to for
sake their service, and return to a mere secular life
again. — 6. How they differed from the superior orders
in name, in office, and manner of ordination. . 105
CHAPTER II.
Of subdeacons.
Sect. 1. No mention of subdeacons till the third cen
tury. — 2. Their ordination performed without imposi
tion of hands in the Latin church. — 3. A brief account
of their offices. — 4. What offices they might not perform.
— 5. The singularity of the church of Rome in keep
ing to the precise number of seven subdeacons. 108
CHAPTER III.
Of acolythists.
Sect. 1. Acolythists, an order peculiar to the Latin
church, and never mentioned by any Greek writer for
four centuries. — 2. Their ordination and office. — -3.
The origination of the name. — 4. Whether acolythists
be the same with the deputati and ceroferarii of later
ages?  109
CHAPTER IV.
Of exorcists.
Sect. 1. Exorcists at first no peculiar order of the
clergy. — 2. Bishops' and presbyters, for the three first

centuries, the usual exorcists of the church. — 3. In
what sense every man his own exorcist. — 4. Exorcists
constituted into an order in the latter end of the third
century. — 5. Their ordination and office  6. A short
account of the energumens, their names, and station
in the church. — 7. The exorcists chiefly concerned
in the care of them. — 8. The duty of exorcists in
reference to the catechumens  110
CHAPTER V.
Of lectors or readers.
Sect. 1. The order of readers not instituted till the
third century. — 2. By whom the Scriptures were read
in the church before the institution of that order. — 3.
The manner of ordaining readers. — 4. Their station
and office in the church. — 5. The age at which they
might be ordained  113
CHAPTER VI.
Of the ostiarii or door-keepers.
Sect. 1. No mention of this order till the third or fourth
century. — 2. The manner of their ordination in the
Latin church. — 3. Their office and function. . 115
CHAPTER VII.
Of the psalmistce or singers.
Sect. 1. The singers a distinct order from readers in
the primitive church. — 2. Their institution and office.
— 3. Why called inropoXsis. — 4. What sort of ordin
ation they had  116
CHAPTER VIII.
Of the copiatce or fossarii.
Sect. 1. The copiatat or fossarii reckoned among the
clerici of the primitive church. — 2. First instituted in
the time of Constantine. — 3. Why called decani and
collcgiati.—l. Their office and privileges. . . 117

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER IX.
Of the parabolani.
Sect. 1. The parabolani ranked by some among the
clerici. — 2. Their institution and office. — 3. The rea
son of the name parabolani. — 4. Some laws and rules
relating to then- behaviour  118
CHAPTER X.
Of the catechists.
Sect. 1. Catechists no distinct order of the clergy, but
chosen out of any other order. — 2. Readers some
times made catechists. — 3. Why called vavroXoyoi
by some Greek writers. — 4. Whether all catechists
taught publicly in the church ? — 5. Of the succession
in the catechetic school at Alexandria. . . . 120
CHAPTER XI.
Of the defensores or syndics of the church.
Sect. 1. Five sorts of defensores noted, whereof two
only belonged to the church. — 2. Of the defensores
pauperum  3. Of the defensores eoclesim, their office
and function. — 4. Of their quality. Whether they
were clergymen or laymen. — 5. The skSlkoi a.nd ekkXij-
o-UkSikoi among the Greeks the same with the defen

sores of the Latin church.— 6. Chancellors and defen
sors not the same in the primitive church.— 7. Whe
ther the defensor's office was the same with that of
our modern chancellors ? 

CHAPTER XII.
Of the ceconomi, or steivards and guardians qf the
church.
Sect. 1. The ceconomi instituted in the fourth century.
The reasons of their institution.— 2. These always to
be chosen out of the clergy.— 3. Their office to take
care of the revenues of the church, especially ui the
vacancy of the bishopric. — 4. The consent of the
clergy required in the choice of them. ... 1 25
CHAPTER XIII.
A brief account of some other inferior officers in
the church.
Sect. 1. Of the irapapovapwi or mansionarii. — 2. Of
the custodes ecclesiarum, and custodes locorum sancto
rum : and how these differed from each other. — 3. Of
the sceuophylaces or ceimeliarchce. — 4. Of the herme-
neutee or interpreters. — 5. Of the notarii. — 6. Of the
apocrisarii or responsales  126

BOOK IV.
OF THE ELECTIONS AND ORDINATIONS OF THE CLERGY, AND THE PARTICULAR QUALI
FICATIONS OF SUCH AS WERE TO BE ORDAINED.

CHAPTER I.
Of the several ways of designing persons to the minis
try, in the apostolical and primitive ages qf the
church.
Sect. 1. Four several ways of designing persons to the
ministry. Of the first way, by casting lots  2. The
second way, by making choice of the first-fruits of the
Gentile converts. — 3. The third way, by particular di
rection of the Holy Ghost.— 4. The fourth way, by
common suffrage and election  129
CHAPTER II.
A more particular account qf the ancient manner and
method of elections of the clergy.
Sect. 1. The different opinions of learned men concern
ing the people's power anciently in elections. — 2. The
power of the people equal to that of inferior clergy in
the election of a bishop. — 3. This power not barely
testimonial, but elective. — 4. Evidences of this power
from some ancient rules and customs of the church.
As, first, that no bishop was ordinarily to be obtruded
on an orthodox people without their consent. — 5. Se
condly, This further confirmed from examples of the
bishops complying with the voice of the people against
their own inclination. — 6. Thirdly, From the manner
of the people's voting at elections. — 7. Fourthly, From
the use and office of interventors. — 8. Fifthly, From
the custom of the people's taking persons and having
them ordained hy force. — 9. Sixthly, From the title
of fathers, which some bishops upon this account by
way of compliment gave to their people. — 10. What
power the people had in the designation of presby
ters. — 11. Whether the council of Nice made any
alteration in these matters. — 12. Some exceptions to
the general rule. First, In case the greatest part of

the church were heretics or schismatics. — 13. Se
condly, In case of ordaining bishops to far distant
churches, or barbarous nations. — 14. Thirdly, In case
an interventor or any other bishop intruded himself
into any see without the consent of a provincial sy
nod. — 15. Fourthly, In case of factions and divisions
among the people. — 16. Fifthly, The emperors some
times interposed their authority, to prevent tumults in
the like cases. — 17. Sixthly, The people sometimes
restrained to the choice of one out of three, that were
nominated by the bishops. — 18. Lastly, By Justinian's
laws, the power of electing was confined to the opti-
mates, and the inferior people wholly excluded. — 19.
How and when princes and patrons came to have the
chief power of elections.  . 132
CHAPTER III.
Of the examination and qualifications qf persons to be
ordained in the primitive church. And first, qf their
faith and morals.
Sect. I. Three inquiries made about persons to be or
dained, respecting, 1. Their faith and learning. 2.
Their morals. 3. Their outward quality and condi
tion in the world. — 2. The rule and method of ex
amining their faith and learning. — 3. The irregular
ordination of Synesius considered. — 4. A strict in
quiry made into the morals of such as were to be or
dained. — b. For which reason no stranger to be or
dained in a foreign church. — 6. Nor any one who had
done public penance in the church. — 7. No murderer
nor adulterer, nor one that had lapsed in time of per
secution. — 8. No usurer or seditious person.  9. Nor
one who had voluntarily dismembered his own body.
— 10. Men only accountable for crimes committed
after baptism, as to what concerned their ordination
—11. Except any great irregularity happened in their

CONTENTS.

XXXI

baptism itself. As in clinic baptism. — 12. And here
tical baptism ; both which unqualified men for ordina
tion. — 13. No man to be ordained who had not first
made all his family catholic Christians. — 14. What
methods were anciently taken to prevent simoniacal
promotions  140

CHAPTER IV.
Of the qualifications qf persons to be ordained, re
specting their outward state and condition in the
world.
Sect. 1 . No soldier to be ordained presbyter or deacon.
— 2. Nor any slave or freed-man without the consent
of his patron. — 3. Nor any member of a civil society,
or company of tradesmen, who were tied to the ser
vice of the commonwealth. — 4. Nor any of the curiales
or decuriones of the Roman government. — 5. Nor any
proctor or guardian, till his office was expired. — 6.
Pleaders at law denied ordination in the Roman
church. — 7. And energumens, actors, and stage-play
ers' in all churches  146

CHAPTER V.
Of the state of digamy and celibacy in particular : and
of the laws qf the church about these, in reference to
the ancient clergy.
Sect. 1. No digamist to be ordained, by the rule of the
apostle. — 2. Three different opinions among the an
cients about digamy. First, That all persons were to be
refused orders as digamists, who were twice married
after baptism. — 3. Secondly, Others extended the
rule to all persons twice married before baptism. — 4.
Thirdly, The most probable opinion of those, who
thought the apostle by digamists meant polygamists,
and such as married after divorce. — 5. No vow of
celibacy required of the clergy, as a condition of their
ordination, for the three first ages . — 6. The vanity of
the contrary pretences. — 7. The clergy left to their

liberty by the Nicene council. — 8. And other coun
cils of that age  1 49
CHAPTER VI.
Of the ordinations of the primitive clergy, and the laws
and customs generally observed therein.
Sect. 1. The canons of the church to be read to the
clerk, before the bishop ordained him. The reason
of making this law. — 2. No clerk to be ordained
AiroX^Xvpivuis, without being fixed to some church. —
3. Exceptions to this rule very rare. — 4. No bishop
to ordain another man's clerk without his consent. — ¦
5. No bishop to ordain in another man's diocese. — 6.
The original of the four solemn times of ordination. —
7. Ordinations indifferently given on any day of the
week for the three first centuries. — 8. Usually per
formed in the time of the oblation at morning service.
— 9. The church the only regular place of ordination.
— 10. Ordinations received kneeling at the altar. — 11.
Given hy imposition of hands and prayer  12. The
sign of the cross used in ordination. — 13. But no unc
tion, nor the ceremony of delivering vessels into the
hands of presbyters and deacons. — 14. Ordinations
concluded with the kiss of peace — 15. The anniver
sary day of a bishop's ordination kept a festival. 153
CHAPTER VII.
The case of forced ordinations and re-ordinations
considered.
Sect. 1. Forced ordinations very frequent in the pri
mitive church. — 2. No excuse admitted in that case,
except a man protested upon oath that he would not
be ordained. — 3. This practice afterward prohibited
by the imperial laws and canons of the church. — 4.
Yet a bishop ordained against his will had not the
privilege to relinquish. — 5. Re-ordinations generally
condemned. — 6. The proposal made by Cecilian, bishop
of Carthage, to the Donatists, examined. — 7. Schis
matics sometimes re-ordained  8. And heretics also
upon their return to the church, in some places. 159

BOOK V.
OF THE PRIVILEGES, IMMUNITIES, AND REVENUES OF THE CLERGY IN THE
PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Some instances of respect which the clergy paid mu
tually to one another.
Sect. 1. The clergy obliged to give entertainment to
their brethren, travelling upon necessary occasions. —
2. And to give them the honorary privilege of con
secrating the eucharist in the church. — 3. The use of
the Uteres formats, or commendatory letters, upon this
occasion. — 4. The clergy obliged to end all their own
controversies among themselves. — 5. What care was
taken in receiving accusations against the bishops and
clergy of the church  163
CHAPTER II.
Instances of respect showed to the clergy by the civil
government. Where particularly of their exemption
from the cognizance of the secular courts in ecclesi
astical causes.
Sect. 1. Bishops not to be called into any secular court
to give their testimony. — 2. Nor obliged to give their
testimony upon oath, by the laws of Justinian. — 3.

Whether the single evidence of one bishop was good
in law against the testimony of many others. — 4. Pres
byters privileged against being questioned by torture,
as other witnesses were. — 5. The clergy exempt from
the ordinary cognizance of the secular courts in all
ecclesiastical causes.— 6. This evidenced from the laws
of Constantius. — 7. And those of Valentinian and Gra
tian. — 8. And Theodosius the Great. — 9. And Arca-
dius and Honorius. — 10. And Valentinian III. and
Justinian. — 11. The clergy also exempt in lesser cri
minal causes. — 12. But not in greater criminal causes.
— 13. Nor in pecuniary causes with laymen. — 14. Of
the necessary distinction between the supreme and
subordinate magistrates in this business of exemp
tions  166
CHAPTER III.
Of the immunities of the clergy in reference to taxes,
and civil offices, and other burdensome employments
in the Roman empire.
Sect. 1 . No Divine right pleaded by the ancient clergy
to exempt themselves from taxes. — 2. Yet generally

CONTENTS.

excused from personal taxes, or head-money. — 3. But
not excused for their lands and possessions.— 4. Of
the tribute called aurum tyronicum, equi canonici, &c,
and the clergy's exemption from it. — 5. The church
obliged to such burdens as lands were tied to before
their donation. — 6. Of the chrysargyrum or lustral
tax, and the clergy's exemption from it. — 7. Of the
metatum. What meant thereby, and of the clergy's
exemption from it. — 8. Of the superindicta and ex-
traordinaria. The clergy exempt from them. — 9. The
clergy sometimes exempt from contributing to the
reparation of highways and bridges. — 10. Also from
the duty called angaries and parangarice, &c. — 11. Of
the tribute called denarismus, unciee, and descriptio
lucrativorum : and* the church's exemption from it. —
12. The clergy exempt from all civil personal offices.
— 13. And from sordid offices both predial and per
sonal. — 14. Also from curial or municipal offices. — 15.
This last privilege confined to such of the clergy as
had no estates but what belonged to the church, by
the laws of Constantine. — 16. Constantine's laws a
little altered by the succeeding emperors in favour of
the church  171
CHAPTER IV.
Of the revenues of the ancient clergy.
Sect. 1. Several ways of providing a fund for the main
tenance of the clergy. First, By oblations ; some of
which were weekly. — 2. And others monthly. — 3.
Whence came the custom of a monthly division among
the clergy. — 4. Secondly, Other revenues arising from
the lands and possessions of the church. — 5. These
very much augmented by the laws of Constantine. — 6.
Whose laws were confirmed, and not revoked, by the
succeeding emperors, as some mistake. — 7. Thirdly,
Another part of church revenues raised by allowances
out of the emperor's exchequer. — 8. Fourthly, The
estates of martyrs and confessors, dying without heirs,
settled upon the church by Constantine. — 9. Fifthly,

and their revenues sometimes given to the church.—
n As also seventhly, Heretical conventicles and then
r^venues'.-'irLas/y, The estates of clerks ; deserhng
the church to be forfeited to the church.-13. No dis
reputable ways of augmenting church revenues en
couraged. Fathers not to disinherit their children to
make the church their heirs.-14. Nothing ; to , be de-
manded for administering the sacraments of the church,
nor for confirmation, nor for consecrating of churches
nor for interment of the dead.-15 The oblations of
the people anciently esteemed one of the most valuable
parts of church revenues  ia*
CHAPTER V.
Of tithes and first-fruits in particidar.
Sect 1. Tithes anciently reckoned to be due by Divine
right —2 Why not exacted, then, in the apostolical age
and those that followed.— 3. In what age they were
first generally settled upon the church. — 4. The origin
al of first-fruits, and manner of offering them. 189
CHAPTER VI.
Of the management and distribution of the revenues
qf the ancient clergy.
Sect. 1. The revenues of the whole diocese anciently
in the hands of the bishop.— 2. And by his care dis
tributed among the clergy.— 3. Rules about the divi
sion of church revenues. — 4. In some churches the
clergy lived all in common. — 5. Alterations made in
these matters by the endowment of parochial churches.
— 6. No alienations to be made of the goods or revenues
of the church but upon extraordinary occasions. — 7.
And that by the joint consent of the bishop and his
clergy, with the approbation of the metropolitan or
some provincial bishops  191

BOOK VI. - 3

AN ACCOUNT OF SEVERAL LAWS AND RULES, RELATING TO THE EMPLOYMENT, LIFE,
AND CONVERSATION OF THE PRIMITIVE CLERGY.

CHAPTER I.
Of the excellency qf these rules in general, and the
exemplariness of the clergy in conforming to them.
Sect. 1. The excellency of the Christian rules attested
and envied by the heathens. — 2. The character of the
clergy, from Christian writers. — 3. Particular excep
tions no derogation to their general good character. —
4. An account of some ancient writers, which treat of
the duties of the clergy  195

CHAPTER II.

Of the laios

to the life and conversation of
the primitive clergy.

Sect. 1. Exemplary purity required in the clergy above
other men. Reasons for it. — 2. Church censures more
severe against them than any others. — 3. What crimes
punished with degradation, viz. theft, murder, perjury,
fraud, sacrilege, fornication, and adultery .^ — 4. Also
lapsing in time of persecution. — 5. And drinking and
gaming  6. And negociating upon usury. The nature
of this crime inquired into. — 7. Of the hospitality of

the clergy. — 8. Of their frugality, and contempt of the
world. — 9. Whether the clergy were anciently obliged
by any law to part with their temporal possessions. —
10. Of their great care to be inoffensive with their
tongues. — 11. Of their care to guard against suspicion
of evil. — 12. Laws relating to this matter. — 13. An
account of the agapetat and ervviiaaxToi, and the laws
of the church made against them. — 14. Malevolent
and unavoidable suspicions to be contemned. . 197
CHAPTER III.
Of laws more particularly relating to the exercise of
the duties and offices qf their function.
Sect. 1. The clergy obliged to lead a studious life. — 2.
No pleas allowed as just apologies for the contrary. —
3. Their chief studies to be the Holy Scriptures, and
the approved writers and canons of the church. — 4.
How far the study of heathen or heretical books al
lowed. — 5. Of their piety and devotion in their public
addresses to God. — 6. The censure of such as neglect
ed the daily service of the church. — 7. Their rules
about preaching to edification  8. Of their fidelity,
diligence, and prudence in their private addresses and

CONTENTS.

applications. — 9. Of their prudence and candour in
composing unnecessary controversies in the church. —
10. Of their zeal and courage in defending the truth.
— 11. Of their obligations to maintain the unity of the
church ; and of the censure of such as fell into heresy
or schism  208
CHAPTER IV.
An account qf some other laws and rules, which were
a sort of out-guards and fences to the former.
Sect. 1. No clergyman allowed to desert or relinquish
his station without just grounds and leave.— 2. Yet in
some cases a resignation was allowed of. — 3. And ca
nonical pensions sometimes granted upon such occa
sions. — 4. No clergyman to remove from one diocese
to another without the consent and letters dimissory
of his own bishop. — 5. Laws against the /3aicai/i-ij3oi,
or wandering clergy. — 6. Laws against the translations
of bishops from one see to another, how to be limited
and understood. — 7. Laws concerning the residence
of the clergy. — 8. Of pluralities, and the laws made
about them. — 9. Laws prohibiting the clergy to take
upon them secular business and civil offices. — 10. Laws
prohibiting the clergy to be tutors and guardians, how
far extended. — 11. Laws against their being sureties,
and pleading causes at the bar in behalf of themselves
or their churches. — 12. Laws against their following
secular trades and merchandise. — 13. What limit
ations and exceptions these laws admitted of. — 14.
Laws respecting their outward conversation. — 15.
Laws relating to their habit. — 16. The tonsure of

the ancients very different from that of the Romish
church. — 17. Of the corona clericalis, and why the
clergy called coronati. — 18. Whether the clergy were
distinguished in their apparel from laymen. — 19. A
particular account of the birrus and pallium. — 20. Of
the collobium, dalmatica, caracalla, hemiphorium, and
linea  219

CHAPTER V.
Some reflections on the foregoing discourse, concluding
with an address to the clergy of the present church.
Sect. 1. Reflect. 1. All laws and rules of the ancient
church not necessary to be observed by the present
church and clergy. — 2. Reflect. 2. Some ancient rules
would be of excellent use, if revived by just authority.
— 3. Reflect. 3. Some ancient laws may be complied
with, though not laws of the present church.— 4. Re
flect. 4. Of the influence of great examples, and laws
of perpetual obligation. — 5. Some particular rules re
commended to observation : first, Relating to the an
cient method of training up persons for the ministry.
— 6. Secondly, Their rules for examining the qualifi
cations of candidates for the ministry. — 7. Thirdly,
Their rules about private address, and the exercise of
private discipline. — 8. Lastly, Their rules for exercising
public discipline upon delinquent clergymen, who were
convict of scandalous offences. — 9. Julian's design to
reform the heathen priests by the rules of the primi
tive clergy, an argument to provoke our zeal in the
present age. — 10. The conclusion, by way of address
to the clergy of the present church. . . . 232

BOOK VII.
OF THE ASCETICS IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the difference between the first ascetics and monks ;
and of the first original of the monastic life.
Sect. 1. Ascetics always in the church ; monks not so.
— 2. This difference acknowledged by some ingenuous
writers in the Romish church.— 3. What the primitive
ascetics were. — 4. When the monastic life first began.
— 5. In what the ancient ascetics differ from monks.
— 6. What other names they were called by. . 239
CHAPTER II.
Of the several sorts of monks, and their different ways
of living in the church.
Sect. 1. Several sorts of monks distinguished by their
different ways of living. — 2. Some called ' Avaxupwral,
Anchorets. — 3. Others, Camobites or Synodites. — 4.
Others, Saraibaitee and Remboth. — 5. A fourth sort,
Stylites, or Pillarists.- — 6. Of secular monks. — 7. All
monks originally no more than laymen. — 8. In what
cases the clerical and monastic life might be conjoined
together. — 9. The original of canons regular. — 10. Of
the monks called Aceemetes, or Watchers. — 11. Of those
called Boo-koI, or Grazers. — 12. Of the Benedictines
and Gyrovagi in Italy. — 13. Of the Apostolics in Bri
tain and Ireland. — 14. Of some uncommon names of
monks in the ancient church, Hesychastce, Continentes,
Silentiarii, Renunciantes, Philothei, Therapeutes, C'el-
lulani, and such like  242

CHAPTER III.
An account of such ancient laws and rules, as relate
to the monastic life, and chiefly that of the Coenobites.
Sect. 1. The curiales not allowed to turn monks. — 2.
Nor servants without their master's consent. — 3. Nor
husbands and wives without mutual consent of each
other. — 4. Nor children without the consent of their
parents. — 5. Children, though offered by their parents,
not to be retained against their own consent.' — 6. Of
the tonsure and habit of monks. — 7. No solemn vow
or profession required of them. — 8. What meant by
their renunciation of the world. — 9. Of the difference
between the renunciative and the communicative life.
10. All monks anciently maintained by their own la
bour. — 11. Proper officers appointed in monasteries
for this purpose, viz. decani, centenarii, patres, &c. —
12. The power of the abbots or fathers very great in
point of discipline over the rest. — 13. Allowed also
some peculiar privileges in the church. — 14. Yet al
ways subordinate to the power of bishops. — 15. The
spiritual exercises of monks : first, Perpetual repent
ance. — 16. Secondly, Extraordinary fasting. — 17.
Thirdly, Extraordinary devotions. — 18. Of laws ex
cluding monks from offices both ecclesiastical and
civ;i. — 19. No monks anciently encroaching on the
duties or rights of the secular clergy. — 20. Not al
lowed at first to dwell in cities, but confined to the
wilderness. — 21. What exceptions that rule admitted
0f. — 22. Whether monks might betake themselves to
a secular life again? — 23. Marriage of monks an
ciently not annulled. — 24. What punishments ordi
narily inflicted on deserters  219

XXXIV

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER IV.

The case and state of virgins and widows in the an
cient church.
Sect. 1. Of the distinction between ecclesiastical and
monastical virgins. — 2. Whether they were under any
profession of perpetual virginity. — 3. When first made
liable to the censures of the church for marrying

against their profession. — 4. The marriage of pro
fessed virgins never declared null.— 5. Liberty grant
ed by some laws to marry, if they were consecrated
before the age of forty.— 6. Of their habit, and form,
and manner of consecration.— 7. Of some privileges
bestowed on them by the imperial laws and custom of
the church. — 8. Of the name vovis, and nonnee, and
its signification.— 9. Some particular observations re
lating to the widows of the church  264

BOOK VIII.

1

AN ACCOUNT OF THE ANCIENT CHURCHES, THEIR ORIGINAL, NAMES, PARTS, UTENSILS
CONSECRATIONS, IMMUNITIES, &c.

CHAPTER I.
Of the several names and first original of churches
among Christians.
Sect. 1. Of the names ecclesia and iKKX^ma^npiov,
and the difference between them. — 2. Of the names
dominicum, whence comes dohm ; and Kvpiaiedv, whence
kirk and church ; and domus columba:. — 3. Of the
distinction between domus Dei, domus Divina, and
domus ecclesice. — 4. Churches called oratories and
houses of prayer. — '5. Why called basilica and &vuk-
Topa. — 6. When first called temples. — 7. Sometimes
called synodi, concilia, conciliabula, and conventicula. —
8. Why some churches called martyria, memories, apos-
tolcea, and propheteia. — 9. Why called ccemiteria, men-
S03, and arees. — 10. Why cases, trophesa, and tituli. — 11.
Of tabernacles and minsters, and some other less usual
names of churches. — 12. Of the distinction between
ecclesia matrix and diocesana. — 13. Proofs of churches
in the first century, collected by Mr. Mede. — 14. Proofs
in the second century. — 15. Proofs in the third cen-
. tury. — 16. The objection from Arnobius and Lactan
tius answered. — 17. Some additional collections on
this head, out of Lactantius de Mortibus Perseeuto-
rum, and others. .  269
CHAPTER II.
Of the difference between churches in the first ages
and those that followed ; and of heathen temples
and Jewish synagogues turned into Christian
churches.
Sect. 1. The first churches very simple and plain. — 2.
Reasons for altering the state of ecclesiastical struc
tures. — 3. The munificence particularly of Christian
emperors contributed much toward this. — 4. As also
their orders for converting heathen temples and pub
lic halls into churches  282
CHAPTER III.
Of the different forms and parts of the ancient
churches ; and first, of the exterior narthex, or out
ward ante-temple.
Sect. 1. Churches anciently of different forms. — 2. And
different situation from one another. — 3. Commonly
divided into three parts, and sometimes four or five
in a large acceptation. — 4. Each of these subdivided
into other parts. The exterior narthex, or ante-temple,
included, first, The irpoTrvXov, or vestibulum magnum,
the high porch. — 5. Secondly, The ptvuvXwv, atrium
or area, the court before the church surrounded with
porticos or cloisters. — 6. Thirdly, The cantharus or

phiala, the fountain in the middle of this court, foi
washing as they went into the church. — 7. Whether
the superstitious use of holy water be not a corruption
of this ancient custom. — 8. The atrium and porticos
in the ante-temple made use of for burying the dead,
before they were admitted into churches. . . 285
CHAPTER IV.
Of the interior narthex, and the parts and uses of it.
Sect. 1. Of the lesser nrpoirvXa, or porches before the
doors of the church. — 2. Of the narthex, pronaos,
or ferula. — 3. The use of it for the catechumens,
energumens, and penitents of the second order. — 4.
Also for Jews, heathens, heretics, and schismatics to
hear in — 5. This not the place of the font or baptist
ery, as in our modern churches. • — 6. Why it was
called narthex, and of the different sorts of nartheces
in several churches  290

CHAPTER V.
Of the naos, or nave and body of the church, and its
parts and uses.
Sect. 1. Of the beautiful and royal gates: why so
called. — 2. The nave of the church usually a square
building, called by some the oratory of laymen.— 3.
In the lowest part of this stood the substrati, or peni
tents of the third order. — 4. And the ambo, or reading
desk.— 5. Above these t~he fideles, or communicants, and
the fourth order of penitents, called consistentes, had
their places. — 6. The places of men and women
usually separate from each other.— 7. Why the places
of the women called KaTvx&ptva and inrtpma. — 8.
Private cells for meditation, reading, and prayer on the
back of these. — 9. The place of the virgins and wi
dows distinguished from others. — 10. The solea or
amXiiov, the magistrate's throne in this part of the
church. What meant by the senatorium in some mo
dern churches  292
CHAPTER VI.
Of the bema, or third part of the temple, called the
altar part, or sanctuary, and the parts and uses
of it.
Sect. 1. The ^chancel, anciently called bema, or tribunal.
— 2. Also ayiov, UpaTtiov, and sacrarium, the holy'
or the sanctuary. — 3. And Srvtria^npiov, the altar part
— 4. Andpresbyterium and eliaconum. — 5. Also chorus'
or quire.— 6. This place separated from the rest by1 "i
rails, called eancelli, whence comes chancel.— 7 And!
kept inacessible to the multitude, whence called adyta \

CONTENTS.

¦ — 8. The holy gates, and veils or hangings dividing
the chancel from the rest of the church. — 9. The up
per end of the chancel called apsis, exedra, and con-
chula bematis. The reason of these names. — 10. This
anciently the place of the thrones of the bishops and
presbyters — 11. And of the altar, or communion table,
encompassed with the thrones in a semicircle. — 12.
The names altar and table indifferently used in the
primitive church. — 13. In what sense the ancients
say, they had no altars. — 14. Of the names, holy table,
mystical table, &c. — 15. Altars generally made of
wood till the time of Constantine. — 16. But one altar
anciently in a church. — 17. And sometimes but one
in a city, though several churches, according to some
authors. — 18. Of the dborium, or canopy of the altar.
— 19. Of the first use of the peristerion, or silver doves
over the altar. — 20. When first the figure of the cross
set upon the altar. — 21. Of the coverings and vessels
of the altar. The first original of lamps and tapers
burning by day at the altar. The original of incense and
censers. The altare poriatile and antimensia, modern
inventions of later ages. The pnrib'ia, or flabella, as
old as the author of the Constitutions. — 22. Of the ob-
lationarium, paratorium, or prothesis. — 23. Of the
sceuophyladum, or diaconieum bematis. . . . 296
CHAPTER VII.
Of the baptisteries, and other outer buildings, called
the exedree of the church.
Sect. 1. Baptisteries anciently buildings distinct from
the church. — 2. These very capacious, and the reasons
of it. — 3. Why called (pm-rio-xiipia, places of illumina
tion. — 1. Of the difference between a baptistery and
a font. And why the font called piscina and leoXvp.-
pijOpa. — 5. How fonts and baptisteries anciently
adorned. — 6. Baptisteries anciently more peculiar to
the mother church. — 7. Of the secretarium, or diaconi
eum magnum, the vestry of the church. — 8. Why this
otherwise called receptorium and salutatorium, the
greeting-house. — 9. Of the decanica, or prisons of the
church. — 10. Of the mitatorium, or mesatorium. — 11.
Of the gazophylacium and pastophoria. — 12. Of the
schools and libraries of the church. — 13. In what sense
dwelling-houses, gardens, and baths, reckoned to be
parts of the church. — 14. Of the original of organs,
and when they first came to be used in the church. —
15. Of the original of bells, and how church assem
blies were called before their invention. . . . 308

CHAPTER VIII.
Of the donaria and anathemata, and other ornaments
of the ancient churches.
Sect. 1. What the ancients meant by their anathemata
in churches. — 2. Why one particular kind of these
called iKTvirmpara, and when' brought first info
churches. — 3. Churches anciently adorned with por
tions of Scripture written upon the walls. — 4. And
with other inscriptions of human composition. — 5.
Gilding and Mosaic work used in the ancient churches.
— 6. No pictures or images allowed in churches for
the first 300 years.— 7. First brought in by Paulinus
and his contemporaries, privately and by degrees, in
the latter end of the fourth century.— 8. The pictures
of kings and bishops brought into the church about
the same time. — 9. But neither the pictures of the
living nor the dead designed for worship. — 10. No
images of God, or the Trinity, allowed in churches till-
after the second Nicene council. — 11. Nor usually
statues or massy images, but only paintings and pic
tures, and those rather symbolical, than any other.
— 12. Of adorning the churches with flowers and
branches  317

CHAPTER IX.
Of the consecration of churches.
Sect. 1. What the ancients meant by consecration of
churches. — 2. The first authentic accounts of this to
be fetched from the fourth century. — 3. The bishop
of every diocese the ordinary minister of these conse
crations. — 4. No church to be built without the
bishop's leave. — 5. Nor till the bishop had first made
a solemn prayer, and fixed the sign of the cross in the
place where it was to be built, by the laws of Justini
an. — 6. No bishop to consecrate a church in another
man's diocese, except necessity required it. — 7. No
necessity of a licence from the bishop of Rome in
former ages, for a bishop to consecrate churches in his
own diocese. — 8. Churches always dedicated to God,
and not to saints, though sometimes distinguished by
their names for a memorial of them. — 9. Churches
sometimes named from their founders, or other cir
cumstances in their building. — 10. When altars first
began to have a particular consecration with new cere
monies distinct from churches. — 11. No church to be
built or consecrated before it was endowed. — 12. Yet
bishops not to demand any thing for consecration. —
13. Consecrations performed indifferently upon any
day  14. The day of consecration usually celebrated
among their anniversary festivals  324
CHAPTER X.
Of the respect and reverence which the primitive
Christians paid to their churches.
Sect. 1. Churches never put to any profane use, but
only sacred and religious service. — 2. The like caution
observed about the sacred vessels and utensils of the
church. — 3. What difference made between churches
and private houses. — 4. How some chose rather to
die than deliver up churches to be profaned by here
tics. — 5. The ceremony of washing their hands when
they went into the church. — 6. The ceremony of put
ting off their shoes, used by some, but this no general
custom. — 7. Whether the ancients used the ceremony
of bowing toward the altar at their entrance into the
church. — 8. Kings laid aside their crowns, and arms,
and guards, when they went into the house of the
King of kings. — 9. The doors and pillars of the
church and altar often kissed and embraced in token
of love and respect to them. — 10. Churches used for
private meditation and prayer, as well as public. — 11.
Their public behaviour in the church expressive of
great reverence. — 12. Churches the safest repository
for things of any value, and the securest retreat for
men in times of great distress  330
CHAPTER XI.
Of the first original of asylums, or places of sanctuary
and refuge, with the laws relating to them, in Chris
tian churches.
Sect. 1. The original of this privilege to be deduced
from the time of Constantine, but not from his laws. —
2. At first only the altar and inner fabric of the church
the place of refuge ; but afterwards any outer build
ings or precincts of the church invested with the same
privilege. — 3. What persons allowed to take sanc
tuary. — 4. What persons and criminals denied this
privilege. First, Public debtors. — 5. Secondly, Jews
that pretended to turn Christians only to avoid paying
their debts, or suffering legal punishment for their
crimes.- — 6. Thirdly, Heretics and apostates. — 7.
Fourthly, Slaves that fled from their masters. — 8.
Fifthly, Robbers, murderers, conspirators, ravishers of
virgins, adulterers, and other criminals of the like
nature. — 9. A just reflection upon the great abuse of
modern sanctuaries, in exempting men from legal

XXXVI

CONTENTS.

punishment, and enervating the force of civil laws.
— 10. Conditions anciently to be observed by such as
fled for sanctuary to the church, otherwise they were
not to have the benefit of it. First, No one to fly with
arms into the church. — 1 1 . Secondly, No one to raise

a seditious clamour or tumult as he fled thither.— 12.
Thirdly, No one to eat or sleep in the church, because
of the sacredness of the place, but to have his enter
tainment in some outward budding  Mb

BOOK IX.
A GEOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE DISTRICTS OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH, OR AN
ACCOUNT OF ITS DIVISION INTO PROVINCES, DIOCESES, AND PARISHES : AND OF THE
FIRST ORIGINAL OF THESE.

CHAPTER I.
Of the state and division of the Roman empire, and of
the church's conformity to that in modelling her own
external polity and government.
Sect. 1. The state of the Roman empire in the days of
the apostles. — 2. The state of the church made con
formable to it. — 3. The division of the Roman empire
into provinces and dioceses. — 4. The same model fol
lowed by the church. — 5. This evidenced by the civil
Notitia of the empire. — 6. Compared with the most
ancient accounts of the division of provinces in the
church. — 7. This evidenced further from the rules and
canons of the church. — 8. Yet the church not tied
precisely to use this model, but used her liberty some
times in varying from it. — 9. An account of the eccle-
sies suburbicariee in the districts of the Roman church.
—10. This most probably the true ancient limits of
the bishop of Rome's both metropolitical and patri
archal jurisdiction — 11. Some evident proofs of this,
showing the churches of Milan, Africa, Spain, France,
and Britain, to be independent of the pope's patriarchal
power. — 12. The contrary exceptions of Schelstrate,
relating particularly to the Britannic church, examined
and refuted.  341
CHAPTER II.
A more particular account of the number, nature, and
extent of dioceses, or episcopal churches, in Africa,
Egypt, Arabia, Palestine, Syria, Phoenicia, and
other eastern provinces.
Sect. 1. Dioceses anciently called wapoi.idai, pareechia.
— 2. When the name diocese began first to be used. —
3. What meant by the TrpoatrTztu, or suburbs of a city,
which were reckoned part of the city diocese  4.
Dioceses not generally so large in nations of the first
ages conversion, as in those converted in the middle
ages of the church. — 5. A particular account of the
extent of dioceses in the African provinces. — 6. Of
the dioceses of Libya, Pentapolis, and jEgyptus. — 7.
Of the dioceses of Arabia. And why these more fre
quently in villages than in other places. — 8. Of the
dioceses in Palestine, or the patriarchate of Jerusa
lem. — 9. A catalogue of the provinces and dioceses
under the patriarch of Antioch. — 10. Observations on
the dioceses of Cyprus. — 11. Of the dioceses of Syria
Prima and Secunda. — 12. Of the province of Phoenicia
Prima and Secunda. — 13. Of the province of Theodo-
rias. — 14. Of Euphratesia or Comagene. — 15. Of Os-
rhoena and Mesopotamia, or Armenia Quarta. — 16. Of
Armenia Persica, otherwise called Magna. — 17. Of
Assyria, Adiabene, and Chaldsea. — 18. Of the Imme-
rini in Persia, and the Homeritse in Arabia Felix. —
19. Of bishops among the Saracens in Arabia. — 20. Of
bishops of the Axumites, or Indians beyond Egypt.
No particular account of dioceses in Iberia, Parthia,

or India Orientalis, to be had out of the monuments
of the ancient church  • • 352
CHAPTER III.
A continuation qf this account of dioceses in the pro
vinces of Asia Minor.
Sect. 1. Of the extent of Asia Minor, and the number
of dioceses contained therein. — 2. Of Cappadocia and
Armenia Minor. — 3. Of Pontus Polemoniacus. — 4. Of
Helenopontus. — 5. Of Paphlagonia and Galatia. — 6.
Of Honorias.— 7. Of Bithynia.— 8. Of Hellespontus.
— 9. Of Asia and Lydia Proconsularis. — 10. Of Caria.
— 11. Of Lycia. — 12. Of Pamphylia Prima and Se
cunda.— 13. Of Lyeaonia — 14. Of Pisidia.— 15. Of
Phrygia Pacatiana and Salutaris. — 16. Of Isauria and
Cilicia. — 17. Of Lazica, or Colchis. — 18. Of the isle
of Lesbos and the Cyclades  371
CHAPTER IV.
A continuation qf the former account in the European
provinces of Thracia, Macedonia, Greece, Illyri
cum, ifc.
Sect. 1. Of the six provinces of Thrace. First, of Scy-
thia. — 2. Of Europa. Where particularly of the dio
cese of Constantinople in this province. — 3. Of Thracia,
properly so called. — 4. Of Hasmimontis. — 5. Of Rho-
dope.- — 6. Of Moesia Secunda. — 7. Of the seven pro
vinces of Macedonia and Greece. Of Macedonia
Prima and Secunda. — 8. Of Thessalia. — 9. Of Achaia,
or Attica, Peloponnesus, and the isle of Euboea. — 10.
Of Epirus Vetus and Epirus Nova. — 11. Of the isle
of Crete. — -12. Of the five provinces in the diocese of
Dacia. Of Prevalitana. — 13. Of Mcesia Superior 
14. Of Dacia Mediterranea and Dacia Ripensis. — 15.
Of Dardania and Gothia. — 16. Of the six provinces in
the diocese of Illyricum Occidentale. Of Dalmatia. —
17. Of Savia. — 18. Of Pannonia Superior and Inferior.
— 19. Of Noricum Mediterraneum and Noricum Ri-
pense  3S0
CHAPTER V.
A particular account of the seventeen provinces qf the
Roman and Italic dioceses, and of the episcopal dio
ceses contained in them.
Sect. 1. Of the extent of the diocese of the bishop of
Rome. — 2. Of dioceses in Tuscia and Umbria. — 3. Of
the province of Valeria.— 4. Of Picenum Suburbica-
rium. — 5. Of Latium and Campania. — 6. Of Sam-
nium. — 7. Of Apulia and Calabria. — 8. Of Lucania
and Brutia — 9. Of the isles of Sicily, Melita, and Li- "'
para. — 10. Of Sardinia and Corsica. — 11. Of Picenum III]]'
Annonarium and Flaminia. — 12. Of ^mylia.  13 Of
Alpes Cottiaj.— 14. Of Liguria.— 15. Of Rhoetia Prima
and Secunda. — 16. Of Venetia and Histria. . 385

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER VI.
Of the dioceses in France, Spain, and the British isles.
Sect. 1. Of the ancient bounds and division of Gallia
into seventeen provinces. Of Gallia and Septem Pro
vincial. — 2. Of the dioceses in the province of Alpes
Maritimse. — 3. Of Alpes- Graiae, or Penninae. — 1. Of
Viennensis Prima and Secunda. — 5. Of Narbonensis
Prima and Secunda. — 6. Of Novempopulania. — 7. Of
Aquitania Prima and Secunda. — 8. Of Lugdunensis
Prima, Secunda, Tertia, Quarta, and Maxima Sequa-
norum. — 9. Of Belgica Prima and Secunda. — 10. Of
Germanica Prima and Secunda. — 11. The ancient di
vision of the Spanish provinces. — 12. Of Tarraconen-
sis— 13. Of Carthaginensis.— 14. Of Bcetica.— 15. Of
Lusitania. — 16. Of Gallecia. — 17. Of the islands of
Majorica, Minorica, &c. — 18. The state of the Spanish
church evidenced from some of her most ancient coun
cils.— 19. Of Ireland and Scotland.— 20. Of the Brit
ish church in England and Wales. — 21. This whole
account confirmed from some ancient canons of the
church. — 22. And from the bishop's obligation to visit
their dioceses once a year, and confirm children in the
country region  396
CHAPTER VII.'
The Notitia, or geographical description of the bishoprics
qf the ancient church, as first made by the order of
Leo Sapiens in the ninth century, compared with
some others  408

CHAPTER VIII.
Of the division of the dioceses into parishes, and the
first original of them.
Sect. 1. Of the ancient names of parish churches, pa-
rochics, dioceses, ecclesiee dicecesanee, tituli, &c. — 2. The
original of parish churches owing to necessity, and
founded upon the apostolical rules of Christian com
munion. — 3. Some of them probably as ancient as
the times of the apostles, in the greater cities of
the Roman empire. — 4. Lesser cities had country
parishes even in times of persecution. The original
of country parishes in England. — 5. The city parishes
not always assigned to particular presbyters, but served
in common by the clergy of the bishop's church. This
otherwise in country parishes which had fixed pres
byters from their first institution. — 6. Settled reve
nues not immediately fixed upon parishes at their
first division, but paid into the common stock of the
bishop's church. When first appropriated revenues
began to be settled upon parish churches in the East, in
Spain, France, Germany, and the English church. 416
THE CONCLUSION.
Wherein is proposed an easy and honourable method
for establishing a primitive diocesan episcopacy, con
formable to the model of the smaller sort of ancient
dioceses, in all the protestant churches. . . . 420

Appendix.

422

BOOK x. i-y
OF THE INSTITUTION OF THE CATECHUMENS, AND THE FIRST USE OF THE CREEDS IN
THE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the several names of the catechumens, and the so
lemnity that was used in admitting them to that
state in the church. Also of catechising, and the
time of their continuance in that exercise.
Sect. 1. The reason of the names, Karrixovptvoi, novi-
tioli, tyrones, &c. — 2. Imposition of hands and prayer
used in the first admission of catechumens. — 3. And
consignation with the sign of the cross. — 4. At what
age persons were admitted to be catechumens. — 5.
How long they continued in that state. — 6. The sub
stance of the ancient catechisms, and method of in
struction. — 7. The catechumens allowed to read the
Scriptures  435
CHAPTER II.
Of the several classes or degrees of catechumens, and
the gradual exercises and discipline of every order.
Sect. 1. Four orders or degrees of catechumens among
the ancients. — 2. First, The l^wdovptooi, or catechu
mens privately instructed without the church. — 3.
Secondly, The &Kpowp.ivot, audientes, or hearers. — 4.
Thirdly, The yovv-nXivovTts, or genu-flectentes and sub-
strati, the kneelers. — 5. Fourthly, the competentes or
electi, the immediate candidates of baptism. — 6. How*
' this last order were particularly disciplined and pre- i
pared for baptism. — 7. Partly by frequent examin- \
atioris, from which such as approved themselves had
the name of electi, the chosen. — 8. Partly by exorcism,
accompanied with imposition of hands and the sign of
I the cross, and insufflation. — 9. Partly by the exercises
of fasting and abstinence, and confession and repent

ance, &c. — 10. Partly by learning the words of the
creed and Lord's prayer. — -11. And the form of re
nunciation of the devil, and covenanting with Christ,
with other responses relating to their baptism. — 12.
What meant by the competentes going veiled before
baptism. — 13. Of the ceremony called Ephphata, or
opening of the ears of the catechumens. — 14. Of put
ting clay upon their eyes. What meant by it. — 15.
Whether the catechumens held a lighted taper in
their hands in the time of exorcism. — 16. What meant
by the sacrament of the catechumens. — 17. How the
catechumens were punished, if they fell into gross
sins. — 18. How they were treated by the church, if
they died without baptism. — 19. What opinion the
ancients had of the necessity of baptism. — 20. The
want of baptism supplied by martyrdom. — 21. And by
faith and repentance, in such catechumens as were
piously preparing for baptism. — 22. The case of here
tics returning to the unity of the church : how far
charity in that case was thought to supply the want
of baptism. — 23. The case of persons communicating
for a long time without baptism : how far that was
thought to supply the want of baptism. — 24. The case
of infants dying unbaptized : the opinion of the an
cients concerning it  443
CHAPTER III.
Of the original, nature, and names of the ancient
creeds of the church.
Sect. 1. Why the creed called symbolum. — 2. Why
called canon and regida fidei. — 3. Why called mathema.
¦ — 4. Why called ypacpfj and ypippa. — 5. Whether
that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, was

CONTENTS.

composed by the apostles in the present form of words.
— 6. That probably the apostles used several creeds,
differing in form, not in substance. — -7. What articles
were contained in the apostolical creeds. 458
CHAPTER IV.
A collection of several ancient forms of the creed out
qf tlie primitive records of the church.
Sect. 1. The fragments of the creed in Irenaeus. — 2.
The creed of Origen. — 3. The fragments of the creed
in Tertullian. — 4. The fragments of the creed in Cy
prian. — 5. The creed of Gregory Thaumaturgus. — 6.
The creed of Lucian the martyr. — 7. The creed of the
Apostolical Constitutions. — 8. The creed of Jerusa
lem. — 9. The creed of Cassarea in Palestine. — 10. The
creed of Alexandria. — 11. The creed of Antioch. —
12. The Roman creed, commonly called the Apostles'
Creed. — 13. The creed of Aquileia. — 14. The Nicene
creed, as first published by the council of Nice. — 15.
The creeds in Epiphanius, completing the Nicene
creed. — 16. The Nicene creed was completed by the
council of Constantinople, anno 381. — 17. Of the use
of the Nicene creed in the ancient service of the
church : and when it was first taken in to be a part of
the liturgy in the communion office  18. Of the Atha
nasian creed  464

CHAPTER V.
Of the original, nature, and reasons qf that ancient
discipline of concealing the sacred mysteries qf the
church from the sight and knowledge qf the cate
chumens.
Sect. 1. The errors and pretences of the Romanists
upon this point.— 2. This discipline not strictly ob
served in the very first ages of the church. — 3. But
introduced about the time of Tertullian, for other rea
sons than what the Romanists pretend.— 4. This proved
from a particular account of the things which they
concealed from the catechumens. Which were, First,
The manner of administering baptism. — 5. Secondly,
The manner of administering the holy unction, or con
firmation.— 6. Thirdly, The ordination of priests.— 7.
Fourthly, The liturgy, or public prayers of the church,
such as the prayers for the energumens, penitents, and
the faithful. — 8. Fifthly, The manner of celebrating the
eucharist. — 9. Sixthly, The mystery of the Trinity, the
creed, and the Lord's prayer, from the first sort of
catechumens. — 10. Reasons for concealing these things
from the catechumens. First, That the plainness and
simplicity of them might not be contemned. — 11.
Secondly, To conciliate a reverence for them. — 12.
Thirdly, To make the catechumens more desirous to
know them  477

BOOK XI.

Lf~~t(

OF THE RITES AND CUSTOMS OBSERVED IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF BAPTISM
IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the several names and appellations of baptism in
the primitive church.
Sect. 1. The names of baptism most commonly taken
from the spiritual effects of it. — 2. Hence baptism
called indulgentia, indulgence or absolution. — 3. And
¦KaXiyytvtala, regeneration ; and xP'o-jua, the unction.
¦ — 4. And <pu>Ti<rp.6s, illumination. — 5. And sahis, sal
vation. — 6. From the nature and substance of it, it
was called mysterium, sacramentum, and cr<ppayis. — 7.
And character Dominions, the mark or character of the
Lord. — 8. Why called the sacrament of faith and re
pentance. — 9. The notation of the names, baptism,
tinction, laver. That they do not universally denote
immersion. — 10. Of some other names given to bap
tism. The great circumcision, 85>pov and xaP"rpa, the
gift of the Lord. Viaticum, and phylacterium, TiXii-
<oo-i9, /iujjo-is, and symbola  483

CHAPTER II.
Of the matter of baptism ; with an account of such
heretics as rejected or corrupted baptism by ivater.
Sect. 1. Baptism wholly rejected by the heretics called
Ascodrutcs, and Marcosians, and Valentinians, and
Quintillians. — 2. And by the Archontiti. — 3. And the
Seleucians and Hermians. — 4. And Manichees and
Paulicians. — 5. What opinion the Messalians, or Eu
chites, had of baptism. . .  488
CHAPTER III.
Of the ancient form of baptism ; and of such heretics
as altered or corrupted it.
Sect. 1. The usual form of baptizing in the name of
\ the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.— 2. This form of

words generally thought necessary to be used in bap
tism. — 3. Whether baptism in the name of Christ alone
was ever allowed in the church. — 4. Of alterations
made in the form of baptism. First, By the Tritheists
and Priscillianists. — 5. Secondly, By the Menandrians.
6. Thirdly, By the Elceseans. — 7. Fourthly, By the
Sabellians and Montanists. — 8. Fifthly, By the Mar
cosians. — 9. Sixthly, By the Paulianists. — 10. Se
venthly, By the Eunomians, and others who baptized
into the death of Christ. — 11. Whether all the Arians
were guilty of the same innovation  12. Whether
any additions were made to the form of baptism in the
catholic church  491
CHAPTER IV.
Of the subjects qf baptism, or an account of what per
sons were anciently allowed to be baptized. Where
particularly of infant baptism.
Sect. 1. Why the question about the administrators of
baptism is here omitted. — 2. Who were anciently
reckoned the proper subjects of baptism. Where of
the corrupt custom of baptizing inanimate things, as
bells, in the Roman church.— 3. Baptism not to be
given to the dead.— 4. Nor to the living for the dead.
Where of the apostle's meaning, of being " baptized
for the dead," 1 Cor. xv. 29.-5. Proofs of infant
baptism from the ancient records of the church. — 6.
From Clemens Romanus and Hermes Pastor. — 7.
From Justin Martyr.— 8. And the author of the Re
cognitions, contemporary with Justin Martyr.  9. From
Irenseus.— 10. And Tertullian. — 11. And Origen 
12. And Cyprian, with the council of Carthage under
him. — 13. Infant baptism not to be delayed to the
eighth day, after the example of circumcision. Nor
till three years, as Gregory Nazianzen would have had
it. — 14. Yet in some churches it was deferred to the
tune of an approaching festival.— 15. A resolution of

CONTENTS.

some questions concerning infant baptism. Whether
children might be baptized when only one parent was
Christian ? — 16. Whether the children of excommu-
. nicated parents might be baptized ? — 17. Whether ex
posed children, whose parents were unknown, might
be baptized ? — 18. Whether the children of Jews or
heathens might be baptized in any case whatsoever ? —
19. Whether children bom while their parents were
heathen might be baptized ?  498
CHAPTER V.
Of the baptism qf adult persons.
Sect. 1. No adult persons to be baptized without pre
vious instruction, to qualify them to answer for them
selves. — 2. Yet dumb persons allowed to be baptized
in some certain cases. — 3. And energumens in cases
of extremity. — 4. No slave to be baptized without the
testimony of his master. — 5. Yet baptism to be a
voluntary act, and no one to be compelled to receive
it by force. — 6. What persons were rejected from bap
tism ; with a particular account of some certain trades
and vocations, which kept men from it. Such were
image-making and stage-playing. — 7. Gladiators, cha
rioteers, and other gamesters. — 8. Astrologers and
practisers 'of such other curious arts. — 9. Frequenters
of the public games and theatre. — 10. In what case
the military life might unqualify men for baptism. —
11. Whether persons might be baptized who lived
in the state of concubinage. — 12. The peculiar error
of the Marcionites in rejecting all married persons from
baptism  509
CHAPTER VI.
Of the time and place of baptism.
Sect. 1. Why adult persons sometimes delayed baptism
by order of the church. — 2. Private reasons for de
ferring baptism against the rules of the church. First,
Supinity and negligence of salvation. — 3. Secondly,
An unwillingness to renounce the world, and submit
to the severities of religion. — 4. Thirdly, A fear of fall
ing after baptism. — 5. Fourthly, Superstitious fancies
in reference to the time, and place, and ministers of
baptism. — 6. Fifthly, A pretence of following the ex
ample of Christ, who was baptized at thirty years of
age. — 7. The solemn times appointed for baptism by
the church, were Easter, Pentecost, and Epiphany. —
8. And in some places the festivals of the apostles and
martyrs, and the anniversary days of the dedication of
churches prevailed also. — 9. No such stated times in
the days of the apostles. — 10. How far these rules
obliging in future ages. — 11. Baptism not confined to
any place in the apostolical ages. — 12. But in after ages
confined to the baptisteries of the church. — 13. Except
in the case of sickness, or with the bishop's licence
to the contrary, upon some special occasions. . 517
CHAPTER VII.
Of the renunciations and professions made by all per
sons immediately before their baptism.
Sect. 1. Three things required of all persons at their
baptism. First, to renounce the devil. — 2. The form
of this renunciation, and the import of it. — 3. The
antiquity of this renunciation. By some derived from
the apostles. — 4. This renunciation made by persons
standing with their face toward the west. The reason
of this practice, with some other ceremonies. — 5. Why
this renunciation made three times. — 6. The second
thing required of men at their baptism, was a vow or
covenant of obedience to Christ. — 7. This vow of obe
dience made by turning to the east. And why. — 8.
The third thing required of the party to be baptized,

was a profession of faith in the usual words of the
creed. — 9. This confession made in the most solemn
and public manner. — 10. With hands and eyes lifted up
to heaven. — 11. Repeated three times. — 12. And sub
scribed with their own hands in the books of the church,
as some think. — 13. The use of all these ceremonies and
engagements, to make men sensible of their obligation,
and stedfast to their profession. — 14. Whether public
and particular confession of sins was required of men
at their baptism  525
CHAPTER VIII.
Of the use of sponsors or sureties in baptism.
Sect. 1. Three sorts of sponsors in the primitive church.
First, for children. — 2. Parents commonly sponsors for
their own children. — 3. Other sureties not bound to
maintain the children for whom they were sponsors. —
4. But only to answer for them to the several interro
gatories in baptism. — 5. And to be guardians of their
spiritual life for the future. — 6. The second sort of
sponsors, for such adult persons as could not answer
for themselves. — 7. The third sort of sponsors, for all
adult persons in general. — 8. Whose duty was, not to
answer in their names, but only to admonish and in
struct them before and after baptism. — 9. This office
chiefly imposed upon deacons and deaconesses. — 10.
What persons prohibited from being sponsors.— 11.
But one sponsor required, and that a man for a man,
and a woman for a woman. — 12. When first it be
came a law that sponsors might not marry a spiritual
relation.— 13. Why the names of the sponsors ordered
to be registered in the books of the church. . 533
CHAPTER IX.
Of the unction and the sign qf the cross in baptism.
Sect. 1. Of the first original of unction in baptism.— 2.
Of the difference between this and chrism in confirm
ation. — 3. The design of this unction, and the reason
of it. — 4. The sign of the cross frequently used in the
ceremonies of baptism. First, in the admission of
catechumens ; and, secondly, in the time of exorcism.
— 5. Thirdly, in this unction before baptism. — 6.
Fourthly, in the unction of confirmation. . . 539
CHAPTER X.
Of the consecration qf the water in baptism.
Sect. 1. The consecration of the water made by prayer.
— 2. An ancient form of this prayer in the Constitu
tions. — 3. The sign of the cross used in this consecra
tion. — 4. The effects and change wrought by this con
secration, the same as in the bread and wine in the
eucharist. — 5. How far these prayers of consecration
reckoned necessary in the church  542
CHAPTER XI.
Of the different ways qf baptizing, by immersion,
trine immersion, and aspersion in the case of clinic
baptism.
Sect. 1. All persons anciently divested in order to be
baptized. — 2. No exception in this case, either with
respect to women or children. — 3. Yet matters were
so ordered, as that no indecency might be committed.
— 4. Baptism usually performed by immersion. — 5.
Yet aspersion allowed in some extraordinary cases. —
— 6. Trine immersion the general practice for several
ages. The reasons of this. — 7. The original of this
practice. — 8. When first the church allowed of any
alteration in it  546

xl

CONTENTS.

BOOK XII. \^u.

OF CONFIRMATION, AND OTHER CEREMONIES FOLLOWING BAPTISM, BEFORE MEN
WERE MADE PARTAKERS OF THE EUCHARIST.

CHAPTER I.
Of the time when, and the persons to whom, con
firmation was administered.
Sect. 1. Confirmation anciently given immediately after
baptism, if the bishop were present. — 2. And this as
well to infants as adult persons. Which is evidenced,
first, from some plain testimonies. — 3. And, secondly,
from the custom of giving the eucharist to infants for
many ages. — 4. Whence it appears that confirmation
was not esteemed a proper sacrament distinct from
baptism. — 5. No, not when it was separate from bap
tism, as in the case of heretics who were baptized out
of the church. — 6. No necessity of giving confirmation
to infants now, any more than the eucharist, from the
example of the primitive church  553
CHAPTER II.
Of the minister of confirmation.
Sect. 1. The consecration of chrism reserved only to
the office of bishops by the canons. — 2. The use of the
chrism divided between the office of bishops and pres
byters. — 3. The other ceremony of imposition of hands
reserved more strictly to the office of bishops.- — 4. Yet
in some special cases presbyters by commission al
lowed to minister it also. As, first, when bishops
particularly required their presbyters to do it to such
as were baptized in the church. — 5. Secondly, presby
ters might administer it to the energumens who were
baptized at a distance from the bishop's church. — 6.
And, thirdly, to such as were baptized in heresy or
schism, in case they were in danger of death. . 557
CHAPTER III.
Of the manner of administering confirmation, and the
ceremonies used in the celebration of it.
Sect. 1. The first ceremony of confirmation was the
unction of chrism  2. The original of this unction. —
3. The form and manner of administering it, together
with the effects of it. — 4. The second ceremony of

confirmation was the sign of the cross. — 5. The third
and most noted ceremony of confirmation, was im
position of hands ; and the fourth, prayer joined
therewith. — 6. The original of the ceremony of im
position of hands.— 7. What opinion the ancients had
of the necessity of confirmation.— 8. How they pun
ished those that neglected it  562
CHAPTER IV.
Of the remaining ceremonies of baptism following
\confirmation.
Sect. 1. Persons newly baptized, clothed in white gar
ments. — 2. These sometimes delivered to them with a
solemn form of words. — 3. Worn eight days, and then
laid up in the church. — 4. The ceremony of lights and
tapers. What intended by it. And at whose charge
both these were provided. — 5. The kiss of peace given
to persons newly baptized. — 6. And a taste of honey
and milk, in token of their new birth. — 7. Then they
were required to repeat the Lord's prayer — 8. And
received into the church with psalmody. — 9. And ad
mitted immediately to the communion of the altar. —
10. Of the ceremony of washing the feet, retained in
some churches. — 11. A general reflection upon the
whole preceding discourse, with relation to the prac
tice of the present church  567

CHAPTER V.
Of the laws against rebaptization both in church
and state.
Sect. 1. But one baptism, properly so called, allowed
by the church. . — 2. Only the Marcionites allowed
baptism to be thrice repeated. — 3. What the church
did in doubtful cases, not reckoned a rebaptization. —
4. Nor when she baptized those who had been unduly
baptized before in heresy or schism. — 5. Apostates
never rebaptized in the catholic church. — 6. What
heretics rebaptized the catholics. — 7. What punish
ments were inflicted on rebaptizers by the laws of
church and state  573

BOOK XIII.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS RELATING TO DIVINE WORSHIP IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Some necessary remarks upon the ancient names of
Divine service, which modern corruptions have ren
dered ambiguous.
Sect. 1. The partition of this work. — 2. Of the missa
catechumenorum, or ante-communion service, to which
all orders of men were admitted. — 3. Of the missa
fidelium, or communion service, peculiar to communi
cants only. — 4. The true original and meaning of the
ancient name missa, the mass, which in its primitive

use denotes every part of Divine service • but no
where an expiatory sacrifice for the quick and the
dead.— 5. In what sense Divine service anciently call
ed sacrifice, sacrificium.—6. And sacramenta —7 And
cursus ecclesiasticus. — 8. The names Xzt-rovpyia,
Lspoupym, itpa, and pverTayvyla, most usual in the
Greek church.-9. Liturgies sometimes taken for set
forms of prayer.-lO. Of litanies. This at first a
general name of prayers. How and when it came to
be appropriated to certain particular forms of worshin i
called rogations -11. Of the distinction between S1
er and lesser l.tanies.-12. Of their processions.^ 577 :

CONTENTS.

xii

CHAPTER II.
That the devotions of the ancient church were paid to
every person of the blessed Trinity.
Sect. 1. Proofs of the worship of Christ, as the Son of
God, or second person of the blessed Trinity, in the
first century  2. Proofs of the same in the second
century, from the testimony of Pliny, Ignatius, Poly
carp, and the Acts of Polycarp, the epistle of the church
of Smyrna, Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Lucian, Ire
nseus, Theophilus Antiochenus, Clemens of Alexan
dria, Athenogenes, the Acts of Andronicus, Tertullian.
— 3. Proofs of the worship of Christ in the third cen
tury, out of Caius Romanus, the council of Antioch,
Dionysius of Alexandria, Origen, Novatian, Cyprian,
Arnobius, Lactantius, the Acts of the Martyrs in Euse
bius, the Acts of Felix, Thelica, Emeritus, Glycerius,
Olympius, and many others. The force of this argu
ment to prove the Divinity of Christ upon this Chris
tian principle, That Divine honour was to be given to
none but God only. — 4. The proofs of the worship of
the Holy Ghost, from the testimony of Polycarp, Jus
tin Martyr, Lucian, Theophilus, Clemens of Alexan
dria, Athenogenes, Origen, the author of the Recog
nitions, under the name of Clemens Romanus. The
ancients charged with tritheism by Praxeas and the
Sabellians, upon the account of their worshipping the
Holy Trinity. The worship of the Holy Ghost proved
further from the testimony of Cyprian, Firmilian, and
Gregory Thaumaturgus  5. In what sense all prayers
are ordered to be directed to the Father. . . 586
CHAPTER III.
That in the ancient church religious worship ivas given
to no creature, saint or angel, cross, image, or relic,
but to God alone.
Sect. 1. This position proved, first, from their general
declarations against giving religious worship to any
creature. — 2. Secondly, from their denying the wor
ship of saints and angels in particular, and condemn
ing it as idolatry. — 3. Thirdly, from their charging the
practice of it upon heretics and heathens only . 599
CHATTER IV.
That anciently Divine service was always performed
in the vulgar tongue, understood by the people.
Sect. 1. This proved, first, From plain testimonies of
the ancients asserting it. — 2. Secondly, From the
people's joining in psalmody and prayer, and making
their proper responses in the liturgy. — 3. Thirdly,
From the frequent exhortations of the fathers to the
people, to hear, and read, and pray with understand
ing. — 4. Fourthly, From the references made by the
fathers in their sermons to the prayers and lessons in
the service of the church. — 5. Fifthly, From the
Scriptures being translated into all languages from the
first foundation of churches. — 6. Sixthly, From the
use of the order of interpreters in the church — 7.
Seventhly, From the custom of having Bibles laid in
churches, for the people to read in private. — 8.
Eighthly, From the general allowance granted to all
men to have, and read the Scriptures in their mother
tongue. Which privilege was never infringed by any
but the heathen ' persecutors. — 9. From the liberty
granted to children and catechumens to join in the
public prayers and read the Scriptures. — 10. From the
form and tenor of the ordination of readers in the
church. .  605
CHAPTER V.
Of the original and use of liturgies, in stated and set
forms of prayer, in the primitive church.
Sect. I. Every bishop at liberty in the first ages to or-
d 2

der the form of Divine service in his own church. — 2.
In after ages the churches of a whole province by con
sent conformed to the liturgy of the metropolitical
church. — 3. Why none of the ancient liturgies are
now remaining perfect and entire as they were in their
first original.— 4. What forms were used in the apos
tles' days. Where of .the ancient forms used by the
Jews in their temple worship and synagogue service.
How our Saviour and his apostles complied with the
use of them. What new forms were introduced by
the apostles into the Christian service. — 5. What evi
dence there is of the use of set forms in the secon*
century, from the testimony of Pliny, Ignatius, Lu
cian, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clemens of Alexandria,
Tertullian, and the Acts of St. Perpetua and Felicitas
— 6. Evidence of set forms in the third century, from
the testimony of Hippolytus, Origen, Cyprian, Fir
milian, Gregory Thaumaturgus, the council of An
tioch, Caius Romanus, Nepos, Dionysius of Alexan
dria, Athenogenes, and Cornelius bishop of Rome. — 7.
Evidences of set forms in the fourth century, from the
testimony of Arnobius, Lactantius, Eusebius, the
forms of Licinius, and Constantine, Athanasius, Ju-
veneus, Pachomius, Flavian bishop of Antioch, Cyril
of Jerusalem, Hilary of Poictiers, the council of Lao
dicea, Epiphanius, Optatus, Basil, Ephrem Syrus, the
practice of Arius and Eunomius, St. Ambrose, St.
Jerom and St. Austin, the council of Carthage and
Milevis  612
CHAPTER VI.
An extract of the several parts qf the ancient liturgy
out of the genuine writings of St. Chrysostom, fol
lowing the order of his works.
Sect. 1. Parts of the liturgy in the first tome. — 2. Parts
of the liturgy in the second tome of St. Chrysostom's
works. — 3. Part of the ancient liturgy in the third
tome. — 4. Parts of the ancient liturgy in the fourth
tome of St. Chrysostom's works. — 5. In the fifth tome.
— 6. In the sixth tome. — 7. In the seventh tome of
his Homilies on St. Matthew. — 8. In the eighth tome
on St. John and the Acts of the Apostles. — 9. In the
ninth tome on Romans, on the First and Second to the
Corinthians. — 10. In the tenth tome  638
CHAPTER VII.
Of the use of the Lord's prayer in the liturgy of the
ancient church.
Sect. 1. The Lord's prayer esteemed by all the ancients
a form given by Christ to be used by all his disciples.
— 2. Accordingly it was used by the primitive church
in all her public offices : particularly in the adminis
tration of baptism. — 3. And in the celebration of the
eucharist. — 4. And in their morning and evening pray
ers. — 5. And in their private devotions. — 6. Whence
it had the name of oratio quotidiana, the Christian's
daily prayer. — 7. And was used by all heretics and
schismatics as well as catholics. — 8. That it was es
teemed a Divine and spiritual form of prayer. — 9. And
the use of it esteemed a peculiar privilege, allowed
only to communicants and perfect Christians. . 649
CHAPTER VIII.
Of the use of habits, and gesture, and other rites and
ceremonies in the ancient church.
Sect. 1. No certain evidences for the use of distinct
habits in the apostolical age, or the two following ages.
— 2. What evidence there is for them in the fourth
century. — 3. Four postures of devotion spoken of by
the ancients. First, Standing, which was particularly
enjoined on the Lord's day, and all the time between
Easter and Pentecost.— 4. Secondly, Kneeling at all

xiii

CONTENTS.

other times, especially on the stationary days, and
other times of devotion. — 5. Thirdly, Bowing down
the head, or inclination of the body. — 6. Fourthly,
Prostration. — 7. Sitting not an allowed posture of
devotion. — 8. Some superstitious practices in devo
tion noted by Tertullian, as bathing the body, and
putting off their cloaks when they went to prayer. — 9.
That the ancients always prayed uncovered. — 10. And
lifted up their hands toward heaven, sometimes in the
form of a cross. — 11. But yet were great enemies to
all theatrical gestures. — 12. What ceremonies they
used at their entrance into the church. — 13. That the
bishop saluted the people with the form, Pax vobis, at
his entrance into the church. — 14. And the people
gave alms to the poor, who stood before the gates of
the church for this purpose. — 15. That they worship
ped toward the east, with the reasons for this prac
tice  655
CHAPTER IX.
Of the times qf their religious assemblies, and the se
veral parts of Divine service performed in them.
Sect. 1. No certain rule for meeting in public, except
upon the Lord's day, in times of persecution, for the
two first ages. — 2. The original of the stationary days,
or church assemblies on Wednesdays and Fridays, and
what Divine service was performed on those days. — 3.
Saturday or the sabbath anciently observed with great
solemnity, as a day of public devotion. — 4. How they
observed the vigils of the sabbath and Lord's day, and
other incidental festivals of martyrs. — 5. Of the festi
vals of martyrs, their original, and what Divine ser
vice was performed on those days. — 6. Solemn assem
blies for preaching and other acts of Divine worship,
held every day during the whole forty days of Lent,
and the fifty days between Easter and Pentecost — 7.
Public prayer morning and evening every day in the
third century. — 8. The original of the canonical hours
of prayer. No notice of them for public prayer, but
only for private, in the three first ages. — 9. What ser
vice was allotted to these canonical hours by the
church in the fourth century. — 10. Of the matutina,
or prima, called the new morning service. — 11. Of
the tertia, or third hour of prayer. — 12. Of the sixth
hour, or noon-day service. — 13. Of the ninth hour, or
three in the afternoon  664

CHAPTER X.
The order of their daily morning service.
Sect. 1. The order of morning service, as described in
the Constitutions. This began with the 63rd Psalm.
—2. What notice there is of this morning psalm m
other writers. — 3. Next to the psalm followed the
prayers for the catechumens, energumens, competents,
and penitents.— 4. Then the prayers for the faithful,
the peace of the world, and the whole state of Christ's
church.— 5. What notice we have of these prayers in
other writers. — 6. After the general prayer for the
whole state of the church, followed a short bidding
prayer for preservation in the ensuing day.- — 7. Then
the bishop's commendation or thanksgiving. — 8. And
his imposition of hands or benediction, with the dea
con's dismission of the assembly. — 9. Whether the
morning hymn was part of the public service every
day.— 10. Whether the psalms and lessons were read
at the daily morning service. — 11 . The original of the
ante-lucan or night assemblies in time of persecution.
— 12. These continued when the persecutions were
over. — 13. The order of Divine service, which was
performed in them, as described by St. Basil. — 14.
The account of them out of Cassian. — 15. This morn
ing service much frequented by the laity as well as
the clergy  675

CHAPTER XI.
The order of their daily evening service.
Sect. 1. The evening service in most things conformed
to that of the morning. — 2. But they differed, first, in
that a proper psalm (the 141st) was appointed for the
evening service. This psalm called the evening
psalm by the author of the Constitutions. — 3. This
psalm mentioned by Chrysostom and other writers
under the same denomination. — 4. Secondly, they had
proper prayers for the evening service. — 5. The
evening hymn. — 6. Whether there were any hymns,
. or psalms, or lessons read in the evening service, be
side the 141st Psalm. — 7. The Lord's prayer used in
many churches, as the conclusion of the daily morn
ing and evening service  682

BOOK XIV.
OF THAT PART OF DIVINE SERVICE WHICH THE ANCIENTS COMPRISED UNDER THE
GENERAL NAME OF MISSA CATECHUMENORUM, THE SERVICE OF THE CATECHUMENS,
OR ANTE-COMMUNION SERVICE ON THE LORD'S DAY.

CHAPTER I.
Of the psalmody of the ancient church.
Sect. 1. That the service of the ancient church on the
Lord's day usually began with psalmody. — 2. The
psalms intermixed with lessons and prayers in some
churches. — 3. These psalms called by a peculiar
name, psalmi responsorii. — 4. Some psalms appropri
ated to particular services. — 5. Others sung in the
ordinary course as they lay in order, without being
appropriated to any time or day. — 6. And some ap
pointed occasionally, at the discretion of the bishop or
precentor. — 7. Prayers in some places between every
psalm instead of a lesson. — 8. The Gloria Patri added
at the end of every psalm in the Western church, but
not in the Greek or Oriental church. — 9. The psalms
sometimes sung by one person only. — 10. Sometimes

by the whole assembly joining all together. — 11. Some
times alternately by the congregation divided into two
parts, and answering verse for verse to one another.—
12. Sometimes by a single precentor, repeating the
first part of the verse, and the people all joining with
him in the close. This was called inrtjxBiv, and iira-
Koiuv. What meant by diapsalms, acroteleutics, and
acrostics in psalmody.— 13. An answer to a popish
objection against the people's bearing a part in psalm
ody.— 14. Psalmody always performed in the standing
posture.— 15. Of the use of plain song, and its com
mendation among the ancients  16. Artificial and
melodious tuning of the voice allowed in singing when
managed with sobriety and discretion  17. No ob- M*<
jection made against psalms or hymns of human com- *
position, barely as such.— 18. But two corruptions !!H
severely inveighed against. First, Over-great nice

CONTENTS.

xliii

ness and curiosity in singing, in imitation of the modes
and music of the theatre. — 19. And secondly, Pleas
ing the ear without raising the affections of the
soul  687
CHAPTER II.
A particular account of some of the most noted hymns
used in the service of the ancient church.
Sect. 1. Of the lesser doxology, or hymn, "Glory be to
the Father," &c — 2. Of the great doxology, " Glory
be to God on high," &c. — 3. Of the Trisagion, or
cherubical hymn, " Holy, holy, holy," &c. — 4. Of the
Hallelujah, and Halleluiatic psalms. — 5. Of the Ho
sanna, and Evenmg Hymn, and Nunc Dimittis, or the
Song of Simeon  6. Of the Benedidte, or Song of the
three Children. — 7. Of the Magnificat, or Song of the
Holy Virgin. — 8. When first the creed began to be
sung as a hymn in the church. — 9. Of the author
and original of the hymn, Te Deum. — 10. Of the
hymns of St. Ambrose. — 11. Of the hymns of St.
Hilary, Claudianus Mamercus, and others. . . 695
CHAPTER III.
Of the manner of reading the Scriptures in the public
service of the church.
Sect. 1. Lessons of the Scripture sometimes mixed
with psalms and hymns, and sometimes read after
them. — 2. Lessons read both out of the Old and New
Testament, except in the church of Rome, where only
Epistle and Gospel were read. — 3. Proper lessons for
certain times and festivals. — 4. By whom the Scrip
tures were anciently read in the church. — 5. Whether
the Epistle and Gospel were read twice, first to the
catechumens, and then to the faithful at the altar. — 6.
The solemnity and ceremony of reading the lessons.
Where first of the salutation, Pax vobis, before read
ing. — 7. This salutation sometimes used by the bishop
immediately before the reader began to read. — 8. The
deacon enjoined silence before the reader began, and
required attention : as the reader also did before every
lesson, saying, " Thus saith the Lord." — 9. At the
naming of the Prophet or Epistle the people in some
places said, Deo Gratias, and Amen at the end of it. —
10. At the reading of the Gospel, all stood up, and
said, " Glory be to Thee, 0 Lord." — 11. Lights car
ried before the Gospel in the Eastern churches. — 12.
Three or four lessons read out of the Gospels some
times on the same day. — 13. Of longer and shorter
lessons, and therr distinct use, according to Durantus.
— 14. What might or might not be read by way of
lessons in the church. — 15. Those which we now call
apocryphal books, were anciently read in some
churches, but not in all. — 16. And in some churches
under the title of canonical Scripture, taking that word
in a larger sense.— 17. A short account of the trans
lations of Scripture used in the ancient church. 703
CHAPTER IV.
Of preaching, and the usages relating to it in the an
cient church.
Sect. 1. All sermons anciently called homilies, disputa
tions, allocutions, tractatus, &c. — 2. Preaching the
proper office of bishops and presbyters in ordinary
cases, and not of deacons. — 3. The singular practice of
the church of Rome, in having no sermons for several
ages, noted out of Sozomen, and Cassiodore, and Va
lesius. — 4. Whether laymen were ever allowed to
preach in the ancient church. — 5. Women never al
lowed to preach. — 6. Two or three sermons sometimes

in the same assembly. — 7. Sermons every day in some
times and places. — 8. Sermons twice a day in many
places. — 9. Not so frequent in country villages. — 10.
Of their different ways of preaching. A character of
St. Chrysostom and some other preachers. — 11. Ex
tempore discourses frequent among the ancients. — 12.
What meant by preaching by the Spirit. — 13. What
sort of prayers they used before, and in, and after
sermons. — 14. The salutation, Pax vobis, The Lord
be with you, commonly used before sermons. — 15. But
the use of Ave Marias before sermons unknown to the
ancients. — 16. Sometimes their sermons were prefaced
with a benediction. — 17. Sometimes preached without
any text, and sometimes upon more texts than one. —
18. Their sermons always upon important subjects.
Compared with some of those in the church of Rome.
— 19. Delivered in a way most affecting and suitable
to the capacities of their hearers, with perspicuity,
pleasure, and force of argument. This is largely de
monstrated out of St. Austin's rules about preaching.
— 20. That it was no part of the ancient oratory to
move the passions by gesticulations and vain images
of things, so common in the church of Rome. — 21. Of
the length of their sermons. — 22. Whether every man
was obliged to preach his own compositions, or might
preach homilies and sermons composed by others. — 23
Their sermons commonly concluded with a doxology
to the holy Trinity. — 24. Their sermons for the most
part delivered by the preacher sitting. — 25. And heard
by the auditors standing in most churches, but not in
all. — 26. A peculiar custom in the African church,
that when the preacher cited any remarkable text, the
people repeated it with him, to show that they were
attentive, and read and remembered the Scriptures. —
27. How the people were used to give public ap
plauses and acclamations to the preacher in the church.
— 28. And, more Christian-like, express their appro
bation by tears, and groans, and compunction, and
obedience. Which is the best commendation of a
preacher and his sermon. — 29. Sermons anciently pen
ned by the hearers. — 30. Two reflections made by the
ancients upon some of their corrupt hearers. First,
upon the negligent and profane. — 31. And secondly,
the intemperate zealots, who placed all religion in a
sermon. — 32. With what candour they treated those
who thought their serniODS too long. . . . 715

CHAPTER V.
Of the prayers for the catechumens, energumens,
competentes, or candidates of baptism, and the
penitents.
Sect. 1 . That prayers in the ancient church were not
before, but after the sermon. — 2. Who might, or might
not, be present at these prayers. Infidels and mere
hearers obliged to withdraw. — 3. Of the prayers for
the catechumens. The genuine forms of them out of
St. Chrysostom and the Constitutions. — 4. What meant
by their praying for the angel of peace in this form of
prayer. — 5. Children in some churches appointed to
say this prayer with the rest of the people. — 6. What
notice we have of this prayer in other ancient writings.
— 7. Of the prayers for the energumens, or persons
possessed by evil spirits. The forms of these prayers
out of the Constitutions. — 8. An account of them out
of St. Chrysostom and other writers. — 9. Of the
prayers for the competentes, or candidates of baptism.
¦ — 10. Of the prayers for the penitents. — 11. What
notice we have of these prayers in St.'Chrysostom and
other writers. — 12. In what part of the church these
prayers were made. — 13. Whether there were any such
distinct prayers for the catechumens and penitents in
the Latin church  746

xliv

CONTENTS.

BOOK XV.
OF THE MISSA FIDELIUM, OR COMMUNION SERVICE.

CHAPTER I.
Of the prayers preceding the oblation.
Sect. 1. Of the prayer called Sia o-iunrijs, or silent prayer.
— 2. Of the prayers called iii irpoerepmvnatus, or bid
ding prayers. — 3. The form of this sort of bidding
prayers in the Constitutions, compared with the frag
ments that occur in Chrysostom, and other writers. —
4. Of the invocation, or collect, following the common
prayers of the people  754
CHAPTER II.
Of the oblations of the people, and other things intro
ductory to the consecration of the eucharist.
Sect. 1. Of the customary oblations which the people
made at the altar. — 2. What persons were allowed to
make them, and what not. — 3. What oblations might
be received at the altar, and what not. — 4. The names
of such as made oblations of any considerable value
rehearsed at the altar. — 5. The eucharistical elements
usually taken out of the people's oblations : and, con
sequently, no use of wafers or unleavened bread. — 6.
The use of wafers instead of bread condemned in their
first original. — 7. Wine mixed with water commonly
used in the ancient church. — 8. Of some heretics who
made alterations or additions to the elements in the
eucharist. — 9. And of others who rejected the use of
the sacrament altogether. . .  762
CHAPTER III.
Of the oblation or consecration prayers, and the
several parts of them.
Sect. 1. The form of thanksgiving and consecration
prayers described out of the Constitutions. — 2. This
account compared with what is said in other authors.
First, as to the form of salutation, " Peace be with
you," &c. — 3. Of the kiss of peace. — 4. Washing the
hands before consecration. — 5. The deacon's admoni
tion to all non-communicants to withdraw ; and to all
communicants to come with charity and sincerity. — 6.
Of the pnriSia, or fans to drive away insects. — 7. Of
the use of the sign of the cross at the Lord's table. —
8. Of the usual preface, called Sursum corda, Lift up
your hearts, or preparation to the great thanksgiving.
— 9. Of the ivxapicrTia, or great thanksgiving, pro
perly so called. — 10. Of the use of the hymn Trisagion,
or seraphical hymn, " Holy, holy, holy," in this thanks
giving. — 1 1 . A particular thanksgiving for the mercies
of God in the redemption of mankind by Christ. — 12.
The form of consecration always composed of a re
petition of the words of institution, and prayer to God
to sanctify the gifts by his Holy Spirit. — 13. After
this followed prayer for the whole catholic church. —
14. More particularly for the bishops and clergy. — 15.
For kings and magistrates  16. For the dead in gene
ral. — 17. Upon what grounds the ancient church
prayed for the dead, saints, martyrs, confessors, as well
as all others. — 18. A short account of the diptychs,
and their use in the ancient church. — 19. Next to the
dead, prayer made for the living members of that par
ticular church, and every order in it. — 20. For those
that were in sickness, slavery, banishment, proscrip
tion, and all that travelled by sea or land. — 21. For
enemies and persecutors, heretics and unbelievers. —
22. For the catechumens, energumens, and penitents.

—23. For healthful and fruitful seasons.— 24. For all
their absent brethren.— 25. Concluding with a doxo
logy to the whole Trinity.— 26. To which the people
with one voice answered, Amen.— 27. Then followed
the creed in such churches as had made it a part of
their liturgy.— 28. And the Lord's prayer.— 29. Ab
solution of penitents immediately before the Lord's
prayer, with occasional benedictions. — 30. Benedic
tion after the Lord's prayer.— 31. The deacon's bid
ding prayer after the consecration. — 32. Of the form,
Sancta Sanctis, and the hymn, Glory be to God on
high, hosanna, &c— 33. Of the invitatory psalm sung
before the communion. — 34. That the consecration
anciently was always performed with an audible voice.
— 35. And with the ceremony of breaking of bread to
represent our Saviour's passion  771
CHAPTER IV.
Of communicants, or persons who were alloiced to
receive this sacrament, and the manner qf receiv
ing it.
Sect. 1. All persons, except catechumens and penitents,
obliged to receive the eucharist. — 2. When and how
this discipline began first to relax. — 3. When first the
use of eulogies came in, instead of the eucharist, for
such as would not communicate. — 4. The corruption
of private and solitary miss unknown to former ages.
— 5. Other corruptions countenanced in the Roman
church, such as the missa sicca, and nautica, and those
called bifaciata and trifaciata, &c. — 6. The commu
nion not given to heretics and schismatics, without
confession and reconciliation. — 7. Yet given to infants
and children for several ages. — 8. And sent to the
absent members of their own and other churches. — 9.
And to those that were sick, or in prison, or under
any confinement, or in penance at the point of death.
— 10. The eucharist sometimes consecrated in private
houses for these purposes. — 11. And commonly re
served in the church for the same uses. — 12. And also
for public use upon some days, when they made no
new consecration. This called missa prcssanctificato-
rum. Its use and original. — 13. The eucharist some
times reserved in private by private men, for daily
participation. — 14. Yet this never allowed in the pub
lic service. — 15. A novel custom noted, of reserving
the eucharist for forty days, and the inconveniencies
attending it— 16. The eucharist sometimes given to
the energumens in the interval of their distemper. — 17.
All men debarred from it that were, guilty of any
great or notorious crime, of what rank or degree soever.
— 18. The question of digamy or second marriage
stated. Whether it debarred men at any time from
the communion. — 19. The corrupt custom of some,
who gave the eucharist to the dead, censured by the
ancients. — 20. ParaUel to which is the abuse of
burying the eucharist with the dead. — 21. The order
of communicating.— 22. Some rules observed for dis
tinction of places in communicating  801
CHAPTER V.
A resolution of several questions relating further to
the manner of communicating in the ancient church.
Sect. 1. That the people were always admitted to re
ceive the communion in both kinds. — 2. That in re
ceiving in both kinds they always received the elements
distinctly, and not the one dipped in the other.  3

CONTENTS.

xlv

That the ancients received sometimes standing, some
times kneeling, but never sitting. — 4. No elevation of
the host for Divine adoration in the. ancient church for
many ages, till the rise of transubstantiation. — 5. No
adoration of the hostbefore the twelfth or thirteenth cen
tury. — 6. The people allowed to receive the eucharist
into their own hands. — 7. The same custom observed
in delivering it to women and children. — 8. The eu
charist usually delivered to the people with a certain
form of words, to which they answered, Amen. — 9.
How Novatian and others abused the communion to
wicked purposes. — 10. Proper psalms for the oc
casion usually sung while the people were communi
cating  818
CHAPTER VI.
Of their post-communion service.
Sect. I. The communion service closed with several
sorts of thanksgiving. The deacon's bidding prayer
or thanksgiving. — 2. The bishop's thanksgiving, or
commendation of the people to God. — 3. The bishop's
benediction. — 4. The deacon's form of dismissing the
people with the short prayer, Go in peace. — 5. What
account we have of these prayers in other writers be
sides the Constitutions. — 6. These thanksgivings al
ways made in the plural number by and for the whole
body of communicants. And so they are still remain
ing in the Roman mass-book, to the reproach of the
great abuse of private and solitary mass. . . 836
CHAPTER VII.
How the remains of the eucharist were disposed of:
and of their common entertainment, called agape,
or feast qf charity.
Sect. 1. Part of the eucharist anciently reserved for
particular uses. — 2. The rest divided among the com
municants. — 3. This division of the consecrated ele
ments a distinct thing from the division of the other
oblations. — 4. The remains of the eucharist some
times given to innocent children. — 5. And sometimes
burnt in the fire. — 6. Some part of the other oblations
disposed of in a feast of charity, which all the ancients
reckon an apostolical rite accompanying the commu
nion. — 7. Whether this feast was before or after the
communion in the apostles' days. — 8. How observed
in the following ages ; when the eucharist was com
monly received fasting, and before this feast, except
upon some particular occasions. — 9. These love-feasts
at first held in the church ; but afterward forbidden
to be kept in the church by orders of councils. — 10.
How the Christians were at first abused and calumni
ated by some of the heathen, but admired and envied
by others, upon the account of these feasts of cha
rity. .  839

CHAPTER VIII.
Of the preparation which the ancients required as
necessary in communicants, to qualify them for a
worthy reception.
Sect. 1. A general answer to this'question, by referring
to the professions of repentance, faith, and holy obe
dience, made by every Christian in baptism ; in the
observation of which professions every one was pre
sumed to be qualified for the communion. — 2. What
failings were deemed consistent with these professions,
and a state of grace, and a continual preparation for
the communion. — 3. What repentance required for
such failings. — 4. What crimes unqualified men ab
solutely for the communion, and what sort of repent
ance was required for them. — 5. Ministers not to ad
mit scandalous and notorious sinners to the communion,
without satisfactory evidences of their repentance, in
such cases as subjected them to the public discipline ;
in other cases, where the public discipline was not
concerned, they were only to admonish them to abstain
from communion, but not obliged absolutely to repel
them from it. — 6. Auricular confession of private sins
not necessary to be made to the priest, as an indis
pensable qualification for the communion. — 7. That
preparation consists not in coming to communion at
certain holy seasons, Easter, Christmas, &c, but in
sanctity and purity at all times. — 8. What faith they
required in communicants. — 9. What purity of soul
by repentance and obedience. How far fasting useful
or necessary to this purpose. — 10. The necessity of
justice and restitution in a worthy communicant. — 11.
The necessity of peace and unity. — 12. The necessity
of charity to the poor. — 13. The necessity of forgiving
enemies, and pardoning offences. — 14. What behaviour
required in the act of communicating ; and what de
portment afterwards  845
CHAPTER IX.
Of frequent communion, and the times of celebrating
it in the ancient church.
Sect. 1. All persons, except penitents under censure,
obliged anciently to receive the communion every
Lord's day, by the canons of the church. — 2. This
showed to be the constant practice for the three first
ages. — 3. The eucharist celebrated on other days be
side the Lord's day in many churches. — 4. And in
some places every day. — 5. When first it came to be
settled to three times a year. — 6. And afterwards to
once a year by the council of Lateran. — 7. What at
tempt was made to restore frequent and full commu
nions at the Reformation. — 8. Wherein this is still
deficient ; and what seems yet necessary to be done
in order to reduce communion to the primitive
standard  859

BOOK XVI.

OF THE UNITY AND DISCIPLINE OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the union and communion observed among catho
lics in the ancient church.
Sect. 1. Of the fundamental unity of faith and obedi
ence to the laws of Christ — 2. Of the unity of love
and charity, as an essential part of Christian obedi
ence.— 3. Other sorts of unity necessary to the well-

being of the church. — 4. Among these was reckoned,
first, The necessary use of one baptism, ordinarily to
be administered by the hands ofka regular ministry.
—5. Secondly, Unity of worship, in joining with the
church in prayers, and administration of the word and
sacraments. — 6. Thirdly, The unity of subjection of
• presbyters and people to their bishop, and obedience
to all public orders of the church in matters of an in
different nature.— 7 . Fourthly, The unity of submis-

xlvi

CONTENTS.

sion to the discipline of the church. — 8. How different
churches maintained communion with one another.
First, In the common faith  9. Secondly, In mutual
. assistance of each other for defence of the common
faith. — 10. Thirdly, In joining in communion with
each other in all holy offices, as occasion required.—
1 1 . Fourthly, In mutual consent to ratify all legal acts
of discipline, regularly exercised in any church what
soever. — 12. Fifthly, In receiving unanimously the
customs of the universal church, and submitting to
the decrees of general councils. — 13. Sixthly, In sub
mitting to the decrees of national councils. — 14. No
necessity of a visible head to unite all parts of the
catholic church into one communion. — 15. Nor any
necessity that the whole church should agree in the
same rites and ceremonies, which were things of an
indifferent nature. — 16. What allowance was made
for men, who, out of simple ignorance, brake commu
nion with one another. — 17. Of different degrees of
unity ; and that no one was esteemed to be in the per
fect unity of the church, who was not in full com
munion with her  867
CHAPTER II.
Of the discipline of the church, and the various kinds
of it ; together with the various methods observed
in the administration qf it.
Sect. 1. That the discipline of the church did not con
sist in cancelling or disannulling any man's baptism.
— 2. But in excluding men from the common benefits
and privileges consequent to baptism. — 3. This power
originally a mere spiritual power, though in some
cases the secular arm was called in to give its assist
ance. — 4. This assistance never required to proceed so
far, as for mere error to take away life, or shed blood.
— 5. The discipline of the church deprived no man of
his natural or civil rights ; much less the magistrate
of his power, or allegiance due to him. — 6. But con
sisted, first, In admonition of the offender. — 7. Second
ly, In suspension from the communion, called the
lesser excommunication.' — 8. Thirdly, In expulsion
from the church, called the greater excommunica
tion, total separation, anathema, and the like. — 9.
This sort of excommunication commonly notified to
other churches. — 10. After which he that was excom
municated in one church, was held excommunicate in
all churches. — 11. And avoided also in civil commerce
and outward conversation ; and allowed no memorial
after death. — 12. The grounds and reasons of this
practice. — 13. No donations or oblations allowed to
be received from excommunicate persons. — 14. No
one to marry with excommunicate heretics, or receive
their eulogies, or read their books, but burn them. —
15. What meant by delivering unto Satan. — 16. What
by anathema maranatha. And whether any such
forms were in use in the ancient church. — 17. Whether
excommunication was ever pronounced with execra
tion, or devoting the sinner to temporal destruc
tion  8V)0
CHAPTER III.
Of the objects of ecclesiastical censures, or the persons
on whom they might be inflicted: with a general
account of the crimes for which they might be in-

Sect. 1. All members of the church, falling into great
and scandalous crimes, made liable to ecclesiastical
censures without exception. — 2. Women as well as
men. — 3. The rich as well as the poor. No com
mutation of penance allowed, nor friendship, nor
favour. — -4. What privilege some claimed upon the
intercession of the martyrs in prison for them ; and
how this was answered by Cyprian. — 5. Magistrates
and princes subject to ecclesiastical censures as well

as any others.— 6. In what cases the greater excom
munication was forborne for the good of the church.—
7. The innocent never involved among the guilty in
ecclesiastical censures. The original and novelty of
popish interdicts. — 8. The danger of excommunicatmg
innocent persons. — 9. No one to be excommunicated
without being first heard, and allowed to speak for
himself.— 10. Nor without legal conviction, either by
his own confession, or credible evidence of witnesses,
against whom there was no just exception ; or such
notoriety of the fact as made a man liable to excom
munication ipso facto, without any formal denuncia
tion. — 11. Excommunication not ordinarily inflicted
on minors, or children under age. — 12. How persons
were sometimes excommunicated after death. — 13.
The censures of the church not to be inflicted for
small offences. — 14. What the ancients meant by
small offences in this matter, and how they distin
guished them from the greater. — 15. Excommunica
tion not inflicted for temporal causes. — 16. No bishop
allowed to use it to avenge any private injury done to
himself. — 17. No man to be excommunicated for sins
only in design and intention. — 18. Nor for forced or
involuntary actions.  911
CHAPTER IV.
A particular account of those called great crimes. Of
transgressions of the first and second commandment.
Of the principal of these, viz. idolatry. Of the
several species of ithlatry, and degrees of punishment
allotted to them according to the proportion and
quality of the offences.
Sect. 1. The mistake of some about the number of great
crimes, in confining them to idolatry, adultery, and
murder. — 2. The account given of great crimes in the
civil law extended much further. — 3. In the ecclesi
astical law, the account of great crimes extended to
the whole decalogue. — 4. A particular enumeration of
the great crimes against the first and second com
mandments. Of idolatry, and the several species or
branches of it. — 5. Of the sacrificati and thurificati, or
such as fell into idolatry by offering incense to idols,
or partaking of the sacrifices.. — 6. Of the libellatid.
Wherein their idolatry consisted. — 7. Of those who
feigned themselves mad to avoid sacrificing. — 8. Of
contributors to idolatry. Of the famines, munerarii,
and coronati. What they were, and how guilty of
idolatry. — 9. How the office of the duumvirate made
men guilty of idolatry, and how it was punished. — 10.
How actors, and stage-players, and charioteers, and
other gamesters, and frequenters of the theatre and
the cirque, were charged with idolatry, and punished
for it. — 11. Idol-makers, their crime and punishment.
—12. The idolatry of building heathen temples and
altars. — 13. Of merchants selling frankincense to the
idol temples ; and the buyers and sellers of the pub
lie victims. — 14. Of eating things offered to idols.
How and when it stood chargeable with idolatry.— 15.
Whether a Christian out of curiosity might be present
at an idol sacrifice, not joining in the service. — 16.
Whether he might eat his own meat in an idol temple.
—17. Or feast with the heathen on their idol festivals.
—18. Of the idolatry of worshipping angels, saints, mar
tyrs, images, &c— 19. Of encouragers of idolatry and
connivers at it. And of the contrary extreme in demol
ishing idols without sufficient authority to do it. 934
CHAPTER V.
Of the practice of curious and forbidden arts, divina
tion, magic, and enchantment: and of the laws of
the church made for the punishment of them.
Sect. 1. Of several sorts of divination. Particularlv of
J11^.^™^--2- Of augury and soothsaying -
3. Of divination by lots.— 4. Of divination by expi ess

CONTENTS.

xlvii

compact with Satan. — 5. Of magical enchantment and
sorcery. — 6. Of amulets, charms, and spells, to cure
diseases. — 7. Of the presstigiee, or false miracles
wrought by the power of Satan. — -8. Of the observa
tion of days and accidents, and making presages and
omens upon them  948
CHAPTER VI.
Of apostacy to Judaism, and paganism ; of heresy and
schism ; and of sacrilege and simony.
Sect. 1. Of such as apostatized totally from Christianity
to Judaism. — 2. Of such as mingled the Jewish re
ligion and the Christian together. — 3. Of such as com
municated with the Jews in their unlawful rites and
practices. — 4. Of such as apostatized voluntarily into
heathenism. — 5. Of heretics and schismatics, and
their punishments both ecclesiastical and civil. — 6. A
particular account of the civil punishments inflicted on
them by the laws of the state. — 7. How heretics were
treated by the discipline of the church. First, they
were anathematized, and cast out of the church  8.
Secondly, Debarred from entering the church by some
canons, though not by all. — 9. Thirdly, No one to en
courage heretics and schismatics by frequenting their
assemblies. — 10. Fourthly, No one to eat or converse
with heretics, or receive their presents, or retain their
writings, or make marriages with them, &c. — II.
Fifthly, Heretics not allowed to be evidence in any
ecclesiastical cause against a catholic. — 12. Sixthly,
Heretics not allowed to succeed to any paternal in
heritance. — 13. No heretic to have promotion among
the clergy after his return to the church. — 14. No one
to be ordained, who kept any in his family that were
not of the catholic faith. — 15. No one to bring his
cause before an heretical judge under pain of excom
munication. — 16. What term of penance imposed upon
relenting heretics. — 17. How this varied according to
the age, and state, and condition of several sorts of
heretics. — 18. Heresiarchs more severely treated than
their followers. — 19. And voluntary deserters more
severely than they who complied only out of fear. — 20.
A difference made between such heretics as retained
the form of baptism, and such as rejected or corrupted
it. — 21. No one to be reputed a formal heretic, before
he contumaciously resisted the admonition of the
church. — 22. The like distinctions observed in inflict
ing the censures of the church upon schismatics, ac
cording to the different nature and various degrees of
their schism. — 23. Of sacrilege. Particularly of di
verting things appropriated to sacred uses, to other
purposes. — 24. Of sacrilege committed in robbing
graves. — 25. The sacrilege of the ancient traditors,
who delivered up their Bibles and sacred utensils to
the heathen to be burnt. — 26. The sacrilege of pro
faning the sacraments, and churches, and altars, and
the Holy Scriptures, &c— 27. The sacrilege of de
priving men of the use of the Scripture, and the word
of God, and the sacraments, particularly the cup in the
Lord's supper. — 28. Of simony in buying and selling
spiritual gifts. — 29. Of simony in purchasing spiritual
preferments. — 30. Of simony in ambitious usurpation
of holy offices, and intrusion into other men's places
and preferments  959
CHAPTER VII.
Of sins against the third commandment, blasphemy,
profane swearing, perjury, and breach of vows.
Sect. 1. The blasphemy of apostates. — 2. The blas
phemy of heretics and profane Christians. — 3. The
blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Where is par
ticularly inquired, What notion the ancients had of it ;
in what sense they believed it unpardonable ; and what
censures they inflicted on it. — 4. Of profane swearing.
All oaths not forbidden.— 5. But only the custom of

vain and common swearing. — 6. And swearing by the
creatures. — 7. And by the emperor's genius, and
saints, and angels, &c. — 8. Of perjury, and its punish
ment. — 9. Of breach of vows  978
CHAPTER VIII.
Of sins against the fourth commandment, or violations
qf the law enjoining the religious observation of the
Lord's day.
Sect. 1. Absenting from religious assemblies on the
Lord's day, how punished by the laws of the church.
—2. Of frequenting some part of the Lord's day ser
vice, and neglecting the rest. — 3. Fasting on the Lord's
day prohibited under pain of excommunication. — 4.
Frequenting the theatres and other shows and pastimes
on this day, how punished  991
CHAPTER IX.
Of great transgressions against the fifth command
ment, viz. disobedience to parents and masters ;
treason and rebellion against princes ; and contempt
of the laws of the church.
Sect. 1. Children not to desert their parents under pre
tence of religion. The censure of such as taught
otherwise. — 2. Children not to marry without the con
sent of their parents. — 3. Nor slaves without the con
sent of their masters. — 4. The punishment of treason,
and disrespect to princes. — 5. Contemners of the laws
of the church, how censured  993
CHAPTER X.
Of great transgressions against the sixth command
ment ; of murder and manslaughter, parricide, self-
murder, dismembering the body; exposing of infants,
causing of abortion, fyc.
Sect. 1. Murder ever reckoned a capital and unpardon
able crime by the laws of the state. — 2. How pun
ished by the laws of the church. — 3. The heinousness
of murder when joined with other crimes, as idolatry,
adultery, and magical practices. — i. Causing of abor
tion condemned and punished as murder. — 5. The
punishment of parricide. — 6. Of self-murder. — 7. Of
dismembering the body. — 8. Of involuntary murder
by chance, or manslaughter. — 9. False witness against
any man's life reputed murder. — 10. Informers against
the brethren in time of persecution, treated as mur
derers. — 11. Exposing of infants reputed murder. — 12.
If a virgin defloured by a rape kills herself for grief,
the corrupter is reputed guilty of the murder. — 13.
The lanistcs, or fencing-masters, reputed accessaries to
murder, and their calling condemned. — 14. Spectators
of the murders committed on the stage, accounted ac
cessaries to murder also. — 15. Famishers of the poor
and indigent reputed guilty of murder. — 16. And all
they by whose authority murder was committed. — 17.
Enmity, and strife, and quarrelling, punished as lower
degrees of murder  997
CHAPTER XI.
Of great transgressions against the seventh command
ment ; fornication, adultery, incest, polygamy, fyc.
Sect. 1. The punishment of fornication. — 2. Of adul
tery. — 3. Of incest. — ¦ 4. Whether the marriage of
cousin-germans was reckoned incest. — 5. Of polygamy
and concubinage. — 6. Of marrying after unlawful
divorce. — 7. Of second, third, and fourth marriages.
— 8. Of ravishment. — 9. Of unnatural impurities. —
10. Of maintaining and allowing harlots. — 11. Of
writing and reading lascivious books. — 12. Frequent
ing the theatre and stage-plays forbidden upon this

xlviii

CONTENTS.

account. — 13. As also all excess of riot and intemper
ance for the same reason. — 14. And promiscuous
bathing of men and women together. — 15. And pro
miscuous and lascivious dancing, wanton songs, &c.
— 16. As also promiscuous clothing, or men and wo
men interchanging apparel.— 17. And suspected vigils,
or pcrnoctations of women in churches under pretence
of devotion  1004

CHAPTER XII.
Of great transgressions of the eighth commandment,
theft, oppression, fraud, Src.
Sect. 1. The censure of those heretics who taught the
doctrine of renunciation, or necessity of having all
things common. — 2. Of plagiary or man-stealing. — 3.
Of malicious injustice. — 4. Of simple theft. — 5. Of de
taining lost goods from the true owner. — 6. Of refusing
to pay just debts. — 7. And what men are bound to by
the obligation of promise and contract. — 8. Of remov
ing bounds and landmarks. — 9. Of oppression. — 10.
Of the exactions and bribery of judges. — 11. Of the
exactions of publicans, and collectors of the public re
venues, and other officers of the Roman empire. — 12.
Of the exactions of advocates and lawyers, and appa
ritors of judges. — 13. Of griping usury and extortion.
— 14. Of forgery. — 15. Of calumny with regard to

men's estates and fortunes : and the reverse of it, the
fraud of adulation and flattery.— 16. Of deceitfulness
in trust.— 17. Of deceitfulness in traffic— 18. Of abet
ting and concealing of robbers ; buying stolen goods,
&c— 19. Idleness censured as the mother of robbery.
— 20. And gaming as an occasion of fraud, and ruin of
many poor families, who by this means were reduced
to the greatest exigence  1018
CHAPTER XIII.
Of great transgressions against the ninth command
ment, false accusation, libelling, informing, calumny
and slander, railing and reviling.
Sect. 1. Of false witness.— 2. Of libelling.— 3. Of de
traction, whispering, and backbiting. — 4. Of railing
and reviling, or scurrilous and abusive language, and
of revealing secrets. — 5. Of lying. How far it brought
men under the discipline of the church. . . . 1032
CHAPTER XIV.
Of great transgressions against the tenth command
ment, envy, covetousness, 8fC.
Sect. 1. Whether envy brought men under the disci
pline of the church. — 2. Of pride, ambition, and vain
glory. — 3. Of covetousness. — 4. Of carnal lusts. 1036

BOOK XVII.
OF THE EXERCISE OF DISCIPLINE UPON THE CLERGY IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the difference of ecclesiastical censures inflicted
on clergymen and laymen.
Sect. 1. The peculiar notion of communion ecclesiasti
cal, and excommunication ecclesiastical, as applied
to the clergy. — 2. The clergy usually punished by a
removal from their office, but not always subjected to
public penance, as men wholly cast out of the com
munion of the church. — 3. Yet in some special cases
both penalties inflicted.— 4. Of suspension from their
revenues. — 5. Of suspension from their office. — 6. Of
deposition or degradation  1038
CHAPTER II.
Of reducing the clergg to the state and communion of
laymen, as a punishment for great offences.
Sect. 1. Lay communion not the same as communion
in one kind only. — 2. Neither does it signify barely
communicating among laymen without the rails of the
chancel. — 3. But a total degradation, or deprivation
of orders, and reduction to the state and condition of
laymen.-— 4. Clergymen thus reduced, seldom allowed
to recover their ancient station. — 5. Notwithstanding
the indelible character of ordination. — 6. But some
times excommunicated, as well as deposed, and denied
the communion of laymen. — 7. Sometimes removed
and corrected by the assistance and authority of the
secular power. — 8. What meant by the punishment
called curies tradi, or delivering up to the secular
court  1040
CHAPTER III.
Of the punishment called percgrina communio, or re
ducing clergymen to the communion of strangers.
Sect. 1. The several canons wherein this punishment is

mentioned. — 2. The communion of strangers not the
same as lay communion. — 3. Nor communion in one
kind.— 4. Nor communion at the hour of death. — 5.
Nor the communion of such as were enjoined to go on
pilgrimage on earth, which was a piece of discipline
unknown to the ancients. — 6. Nor any private and pe
culiar oblation for strangers. — 7. But communicating
only as strangers travelling without commendatory let
ters, who might partake of the church's charity, but
not of the communion of the altar. — 8. This notion con
firmed from several parts of ancient history.' — 9. What
sort of penance was necessary to restore such delin
quent clergymen to their office and station again. 1044
CHAPTER IV.
Of some other special and peculiar ways of inflicting
punishment on the clergy.
Sect. 1. Sometimes the clergy perpetually suspended
from their office, yet allowed to retain their title and
dignity. — 2. Sometimes degraded not totally, but par
tially, from one order to another.— 3. Sometimes de
prived of a part of their office, but allowed to exercise
the rest. — 4. Sometimes deprived of their power over
a part of their flock, but allowed it over the rest.— 5.
Bishops in Africa punished by depriving them of their
semority, and right of succeeding to the primacy, or
metropolitical power.— 6. Also by confining them to
the communion of their own church. — 7. Or by re
moving them from a greater diocese to a lesser —8.
The clergy in general punished by a loss of their
seniority among those of their own order  9 The
inferior clergy punished by rendering them 'incapable
ot being promoted to any higher order. — 10 The
clergy sometimes punished by denying them the public
exercise of their office, whilst they were allowed to
officiate in private.— 11. Of intrusion of offenders into

CONTENTS.

xlix

a monastery to do penance in private. — 12. Of corporal
punishment. How far used as a piece of discipline
upon the inferior clergy  1048
CHAPTER V.
A particular account of the crimes for which clergy
men were liable to be punished with any of the fore-
mentioned kinds of censure.
Sect. 1. All crimes that were punished with excommu
nication in a layman, punished with suspension or de
privation in the clergy. — 2. Some crimes rendered an
ordination originally void : and for such crimes the
clergy were immediately liable to be degraded, from
the very moment of their ordination. As, first, for
ignorance or heterodoxy in religion. — 3. Secondly, for
great immorality before their ordination : and for being
ordained agamst any of the known rules of ordination.
As, if he were a digamist, or married to a widow, or to
one that had been divorced from another man. If he
were ordained iiroXeXvpivws, without being fixed to
some particular diocese. If he were ordained without
letters dimissory against the consent of his own bishop ;
or without the consent of any of the parties that had
a right to vote in his election. If any bishop was or
dained, who had before been degraded from his orders.
Or if he was ordained into a full see, where another
was regularly ordained before him. If any was an
energumen, or under the agitation of an evil spirit,
when he was ordained. If any had voluntarily mangled
his own body. If any one was ordained, who had never
been baptized, or not baptized in due form, or was
baptized by heretics, or rebaptized by them. If any
made use of the secular powers to gain a promotion in
ihe church. If a bishop ordained any of his own un
worthy kindred. If a bishop clandestinely ordained his
own successor without the consent of the metropolitan
or a provincial council ; or if two bishops clandestinely
ordained a bishop without the consent of their fellow
bishops and the metropolitan : in all these cases the
clergy so ordained were liable to be deposed for trans
gressing the rules of ordination. — 4. No remedy al
lowed in this case by doing public penance for offences.
For all public penitents were for ever incapable of
ordination. And if any such were ordained, they were
immediately liable to be deposed and degraded. — 5.
Some impediments of ordination arising from men's out
ward state and condition in the world, were also some
times occasions of deprivation. As if any soldier was

ordained ; or any slave or vassal, without the consent of
his master ; or any member of a civil corporation, or
any of the curiales in the Roman government. — 6. What
crimes might occasion the deprivation of the clergy,
or other censures to befall them, in the performance
of their office, or rather non-performance of it after
ordination. Clergymen to be censured for contempt
of the canons in general. — 7. More particularly for
negligence in their duty. — 8. For neglecting to use the
public liturgy, Lord's prayer, hymns, &c. — 9. For
making any alteration in the form of baptism. — 10. For
not frequenting Divine service daily. — 1 1 . For meddling
with secular offices. — 12. For deserting their own
church without licence, to go to another  13. For
officiating after the condemnation of a synod. — 14. For
appealing from the censure of a provincial synod to
any foreign churches. — 15. For refusing to end contro
versies before bishops, and flying to a secular tribunal.
— 16. For suffering themselves to be rebaptized, or
reordained. — 17. For denying themselves to be clergy
men. — 18. For publishing apocryphal books. — 19. For
superstitious abstinence from flesh, wine, &c. — 20. For
eating of blood. — 21. For contemning the fasts or fes
tivals of the church. — 22. For not observing the rule
about Easter. — 23. For wearing an indecent habit. —
24. For keeping hawks or hounds, and following any
unlawful diversions. — 25. For suspicious cohabitation
with strange women. — 26. For marrying after ordina
tion. — 27. For retaining an adulterous wife. — 28. For
non-residence. — 29. For attempting to hold preferment
in two dioceses. — 30. For needless frequenting of pub
lic inns and taverns. — 31. For conversing familiarly
with Jews, heretics, or Gentile philosophers. — 32. For
using over-rigorous severity toward lapsers. — 33. For
want of charity to indigent clergymen in their necessity.
— 34. Forjudging in cases of blood  35. Crimes for
which bishops in particular might be suspended or de
graded. For giving ordinations contrary to the canons.
' — 36. For neglecting to put the laws of discipline in
execution. — 37. For dividing their diocese, and erect
ing new bishoprics without leave : or for extending
their claim to other men's rights beyond their own
limits and jurisdiction. — 38. For not attending pro
vincial councils  39. For oppressing the people with
unjust exactions  40. For harbouring such as fled from
another diocese without leave  41. Chorepiscopi might
be censured for acting beyond their commission. — 42.
And presbyters for usurping upon the episcopal office.
— 43. And deacons for assuming offices and privileges
above their order and station  1053

BOOK XVIII.
OF THE SEVERAL ORDERS OF PENITENTS, AND THE METHOD OF PERFORMING PUBLIC
PENANCE IN THE CHURCH, BY GOING THROUGH THE SEVERAL STAGES OF RE
PENTANCE.

CHAPTER I.
A particular account of the several orders of peni
tents in the church.
Sect. 1. Penitents divided into four distinct orders, or
stations. — 2. The first original of this distinction. — 3.
Of the first order, called fientes, or mourners. — 4. Of
the second order, called audientes, or hearers. — 5. Of
the third order, called prostrators, or kneelers, and
penitents in the strictest sense. — 6. Of the fourth or
der, called consistentes, or co-standers. . . . 1068

CHAPTER II.
Of the ceremonies used in admitting penitents to do
public penance, and the manner of performing pub
lic penance in the church.
Sect. 1. Penitents first admitted to penance by imposi
tion of hands. — 2. At which time they were obliged
to appear before the bishop with sackcloth and ashes
upon their head. This ceremony anciently not con
fined to Ash- Wednesday, or the beginning of Lent, but
persons were admitted to penance at any time, as the
bishop judged most proper in his own discretion. — 3.
Penitents obliged to cut off their hair, or go veiled, as

CONTENTS.

another token of sorrow and mourning. — 4. Penitents
to abstain from bathing and feasting, and other inno
cent diversions of life. — 5. Penitents to observe all
the public fasts of the church. — 6. Penitents to re
strain themselves in the use of the conjugal state. — 7.
For which reason no married persons were admitted
to penance, but by consent of both parties. — 8. Peni
tents not allowed to marry in the time of their penance.
¦ — 9. Penitents obliged to pray kneeling, whilst others
prayed standing, on all festivals and days of relaxation.
— 10. Penitents obliged to show great liberality to the
poor. — 1 1 . And to minister and serve the church in
burying the dead  1071
CHAPTER III.
A particular account of the exomologesis, or peniten
tial confession of the ancient church ; showing it to
be a different thing from the private or auricular
confession introduced by the church of Rome.
Sect. 1. The gross mistake of those, who make the
exomologesis of the ancient church to signify auricular
confession. — 2. No necessity of auricular confession
ever urged by the ancient church. — 3. This proved
further from the practice of the ancients in denying
all manner of absolution to some relapsing sinners,
without excluding them from the mercy and pardon of
God, upon confession to him alone. — -4. And from
above twenty considerations of the lkie nature. — 5.
Yet private confession allowed and encouraged in
some cases. As, first, For lesser sins, men were ad
vised mutually to confess to one another, to have each
other's prayers and assistance. — 6. Secondly, In case of
injuries done to private persons, men were obliged to
confess and ask pardon of the injured party. — 7.
Thirdly, When they were under any troubles of con
science, they were advised to make private confession
to a minister, to have his counsel and direction. — 8.

Fourthly, To take his advice also, whether it was
proper to do public penance for private offences.— 9.
Fifthly, When there was any danger of death arising
from the laws of the state against certain onences.—
10. Sixthly, Private confession was also required m
case of private admonition for offences.— 11. The of
fice of the penitentiary priest set up in many churches
to receive and regulate such private confessions.— 12.
This office was afterwards abrogated in the East by
Nectarius, and men were left to their liberty as to what
concerned private confession  1074
CHAPTER IV.
Of the great rigour, strictness, and severity of the
discipline and penance of the ancient church.
Sect. 1. Public penance ordinarily allowed but once to
any sort of sinners. — 2. Some sinners held under a
strict penance all their lives to the very hour of death.
• — 3. Such as were absolved upon a death-bed, were
obliged to perform their ordinary penance, if they re
covered. — 4. Some sinners were denied communion
at their last hour. — 5. How this may be vindicated
and cleared from the charge of Novatianism. — 6. This
rigour abated in after ages, without any reflection on
the preceding practice. — 7. What liberty was allowed
to bishops in imposing of penance, and exacting pro
per satisfaction of sinners. Some sinners allowed to
do penance twice. — 8. Bishops had also power to
moderate the term of penance upon just occasion.—
9. And this was the true ancient notion of an indul
gence. — 10. Which was sometimes granted at the in
tercession of the martyrs, or the instance of the civil
magistrate. — 11. Bishops had also a power to alter
the nature of the penalty in some measure, as well as
the term of it. — 12. What the ancients mean by the
term, legitima pcenitentia. — 13. What meant by the
phrase, inter hyemantes orare  1084

BOOK XIX.

OF ABSOLUTION, OR THE MANNER OF READMITTING PENITENTS INTO THE COMMUNION
OF THE CHURCH AGAIN.

CHAPTER I.
Of the nature qf absolution, and the several sorts of it ;
more particularly of such as relate to the penitential
discipline of the church.
Sect. 1. All church absolution only ministerial, not ab
solute. — 2. Of the grand absolution of baptism. That
this was of no use in penitential discipline to persons
once baptized. — 3. Of the absolution granted by the
eucharist. — 4. Of absolution declaratory and effective
by the administration of the word and doctrine. — 5.
Of the precatory absolution given by imposition of
hands and prayer. — 6. Of the judicial absolution of
penitents, by restoring them to the peace and full com
munion of the church  1095

CHAPTER II.

Of the circumstances, rites, and customs anciently ob
served in the public absolution of sinners.
Sect. 1. No sinners anciently absolved, till they had
performed their regular penance, except in case of im
minent death. — 2. Penitents publicly reconciled in
sackcloth at the altar. — 3. Sometimes more publicly
before the apsis or reading-desk. — 4. Absolution at

the altar always given in a supplicatory form by im
position of hands and prayer. — 5. Absolution in the
indicative form, Ego te absolve, not used till the twelfth
century. — 6. In what sense that form may be allowed.
— 7. Why chrism or unction was sometimes added to
imposition of hands in the reconciliation of certain
heretics and schismatics to the church. — 8. Why some
heretics could be reconciled no other way but by a
new baptism. — 9. What conditions were required of
those, who fell from the church into any heresy oi
schism, when they were reconciled to the church
again.— 10. Of the time of absolution. — 11. How the
church absolved some penitents, and received them
into communion after death  ,1101
CHAPTER III.
Of the minister of ecclesiastical discipline, and par-
ticularly of the minister of absolution.
Sect. 1. All the power of discipline primarily lodged in
the hands of the bishop.— 2. This in many cases com
mitted to presbyters, either by a general or particular
commission. — 3. And to deacons also.— 4. How far <
and in what sense, absolution might be said to be (riven
by a layman. ...  1 108

.

CONTENTS.

APPENDIX.

Containing two Sermons and two Letters to the Right
Reverend the Lord Bishop of Winchester, concern
ing the nature and necessity of the several sorts of

absolution ; showing how far that necessity extends,
and where it ceases.
Sermon 1  1112
Sermon II  J118
Letter 1  1125
Letter II  1128

BOOK XX.

OF THE FESTIVALS OBSERVED IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the distinction to be made between civil and
ecclesiastical festivals.
Sect. 1. What meant by the civil festivals. — 2. Of the
ferice eestivce, or thirty days of vacation in the harvest
month, and the f erics autumnahs. — 3. Of the calends
of January. — 4. Of the emperors' birthdays. — 5. Of
the natales urbium, or the two ferice in memory of
the foundation of Rome and Constantinople. . 1132
CHAPTER II.
Of the original and observation of the Lord's day
among Christians.
Sect. 1. The Lord's day of continued observation in
the church from the days of the apostles, under the
names of Sunday, the Lord's day, the first day of the
week, and the day of breaking bread, &c. — 2. All
proceedings at law forbidden and suspended on this
day, except such as were of absolute necessity or
great charity ; as manumission of slaves, &c. — 3. All
secular business forbidden, except such as necessity
or charity compelled men to, as gathering of their
fruits in harvest, by some laws. — 4. No public games,
or shows, or ludicrous recreations on this day. — 5. All
fasting prohibited on this day, even in the time of
Lent. — 6. And all prayers offered in the standing
posture on the Lord's day, in memory of our Saviour's
resurrection. — 7. The great care and concern of the
primitive Christians in the religious observation of the
Lord's day. This demonstrated, first, From their
constant attendance upon all the solemnities of public
worship. — 8. Secondly, From their zeal in frequenting
religious assemblies even in times of persecution. — 9.
Thirdly, From their studious observation of the vigils
or nocturnal assemblies preceding the Lord's day. —
10. Fourthly, From their attendance upon sermons in
many places twice on this day. — 11. Fifthly, From
their attendance on evening prayers where there was
no sermon. — 12. Sixthly, From the censures inflicted
on those who violated the laws concerning the re
ligious observation of the Lord's day. . . . 1135
CHAPTER III.
Of the observation of the sabbath, or Saturday, as a
weekly festival.
Sect. 1 . The Saturday, or sabbath, always observed in
the Eastern church as a festival. —2. Observed with
the same religious solemnities as the Lord's day. — 3.
But in some other respects the preference was given
to the Lord's day.— 4. Why the ancient church con
tinued the observation of the Jewish sabbath. — 5.
Why it was kept as a festival in the Oriental church.
— 6. And why a fast in the Roman, and some other of
the Latin churches  1147

CHAPTER IV.
Of the festival of Christ's Nativity and Epiphany.
Sect. 1. The nativity of Christ anciently by some said
to be in May. — 2. By others, fixed to the day of
Epiphany, or sixth of January. — 3. In the Latin
church always observed on the twenty-fifth of Decem
ber. — 4. The original of this festival derived from the
apostolical age by some ancient writers. — 5. This
festival observed with the same religious veneration as
the Lord's day. — 6. Of Epiphany as a distinct festi
val, — 7. Why this day called by some the second
Epiphany, and dies luminum, the day of lights. — 8.
Celebrated as all other great festivals, and in one
respect more noted, as being in the Greek church one
of the three solemn times of baptism. — 9. Notice
usually given on Epiphany concerning the time of
Easter in the ensuing year  1151
CHAPTER V.
Of Easter, or the Paschal festival.
Sect. 1. The Paschal solemnity anciently reckoned
fifteen days, the whole week before and the week
after Easter Sunday. — 2. Great disputes in the church
concerning this festival, some observing it on a fixed
day every year. — 3. Others observing it, with the
Jews, on the fourteenth day of the moon, whatever
day of the week that happened upon. — 4. They who
kept it on the Lord's day did not always agree to fix
it on the same Lord's day, by reason of their different
calculations. — 5. But they all agreed to pay a great
respect and honour to it, as to the day of our Lord's
resurrection. — 6. On this day the emperors granted
a general release to the prisons, and pardoned all
criminals, except some few that were guilty of crimes
of a more unpardonable nature. — 7. At this time also
it was usual more than ordinary for men to show their
charity to slaves by granting them their freedom. — 8.
And to the poor by liberal donations.- — 9. The whole
week after Easter-day celebrated with sermons, com
munions, &c, as part of the same festival. — 10. All
public games prohibited during this whole season. —
11. And all proceedings at law, except in some
special and extraordinary cases. — 12. The Sunday
after Easter, commonly called Dominica nova, and
Dominica in albis, observed with great solemnity as
the conclusion of the Paschal festival. . . . 1157

CHAPTER VI.
Of Pentecost, or Whitsuntide.
Sect. 1. Pentecost taken in a double sense among the
ancients. First, For the fifty days between Easter
and Whitsuntide ; and, secondly, For the single day
of Pentecost. — 2. During which time the church
chiefly exercised herself in reading and meditating
upon the Acts of the Apostles, as the great confirma-

-Iii

CONTENTS.

tion of our Lord's resurrection. — 3. All fasting and
kneeling at prayers prohibited at this season, as on
the Lord's day. — 4. And all public games and stage-
plays ; but not pleading at law forbidden, or bodily
labour.— 5. Of Ascension-day, its antiquity and ob
servation. — 6. Of Pentecost in the stricter sense, as
denoting the festival of the descent of the Holy Ghost
upon the apostles. ...  1167
CHAPTER VII.
Of the festivals of the apostles and martyrs.
Sect. 1  The original of the festivals of martyrs — 2.
Why called their natalitia or birthdays. — 3. These
festivals usually kept at the graves of the martyrs. — 4.
And mostly confined to those particular churches
where the martyrs suffered and lay buried. — 5. Usual
to read the acts or passions of the martyrs on their
proper festivals. — 6. And to make panegyrical orations
upon them. — 7. The communion always administered
upon these days.— 8. And herein a particular com
memoration of the martyrs was made, called the obla
tion or sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving to God for

them, and prayer for a general consummation and
happy resurrection— 9. The night preceding any of
these festivals commonly observed as a vigil, with
psalmody and prayers.— 10. Common entertainments
made by the rich for the use of the poor upon these
festivals at the graves of the martyrs, till abuses caused
them to be laid aside.— 11. What festivals observed
in memory of the apostles.— 12. The festival of the
Holy Innocents.— 13. The festival of the Maccabees.—
14. Of the general festival of all the martyrs. . 1171
CHAPTER VIII.
Of some other festivals of a later date and lesser ob
servation.
Sect. 1. — Of the encesnia;, or feasts of dedications of
churches. — 2. Of the anniversary festivals of bishops'
ordinations. — 3. Of festivals kept in memory of any
great deliverances or signal mercies vouchsafed by God
to his church. — 4. Of the feast of the Annunciation.
— 5. Of the festival called Hypapants, afterward Puri
fication, and Candlemas-day. — 6. The original of festi
vals in honour of confessors and other holy men. 1179

BOOK XXI.
OF THE FASTS IN USE IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of the quadragesimal or Lent fast.
Sect. 1. What this fast was originally, forty days or
forty hours. — 2. Some probability that at first it was
only a fast of forty hours, or the two days from the
passion to the resurrection. — 3. Great variety in point
of time observable in the celebration of this fast in
many churches. — 4. Lent consisted not of above thirty-
six fasting days in any church till the time of Gregory
the Great, because all Sundays were universally ex
cepted out of the fast, and all Saturdays except one in
all the Eastern churches. — 5. Who first added Ash
Wednesday and the other three days in the Roman
church to the beginning of Lent.' — 6. Whether the
ancients reputed Lent to be an apostolical institution.
— 7. In what sense some of them say it is a Divine
institution. — 8. How far allowed to be a tradition or
canon apostolical. — 9. What were the causes or rea
sons of instituting the Lent fast. First, The apostles'
sorrow for the loss of their Master. — 10. Secondly,
The declension of Christian piety from its first and
primitive fervour. — 11. Thirdly, That men might pre
pare themselves for a worthy participation of the com
munion at Easter. — 12. Fourthly, That catechumens
might prepare themselves for baptism. — 13. And peni
tents for absolution at Easter. — 14. Lent generally
observed by all Christians, though with a great liberty
and just allowance to men's infirmities, being in a
great measure left to their own discretion. — 15. How
the Montanists differed from the church about the im
position of fasts. — 16. The Lent fast kept with a per
fect abstinence from all food every day till evening. —
17. Change of diet not accounted a proper fast for
Lent, without perfect abstinence till evening. — 18.
What they spared in a dinner, not spent in evening
luxury, but bestowed on the poor — 19. All corporeal
punishments forbidden by the imperial laws in Lent. —
20. Religious assemblies and sermons every day in
Lent. — 21. And frequent communions, especially on
the sabbath and the Lord's day. — 22. All public games
and stage-plays prohibited at this season. — 23. As also

the celebration of all festivals, birthdays, and mar
riages, as unsuitable to the present occasion. — 24. The
great week before Easter observed with greater strict
ness and solemnity. — 25. What meant by the fasts,
called vTrepditreL?, and superpositiones, superpository or
additional fasts in this week. — 26. Christians more
liberal in their alms and charity this week above
others. — 27. This week a week of rest and liberty for
servants. — 28. A general release granted at this time
by the emperors to all prisoners, both debtors and
criminals, some particular cases of criminals only ex
cepted. — 29. All processes at law, as well civil as cri
minal, suspended this whole week before Easter.— 30.
The Thursday in this week, how observed. — 31. Of the
Passion day, or the Fasch of our Lord's crucifixion. — 32.
Of the Saturday, or great sabbath, before Easter. 1183
CHAPTER II.
Of the fasts of the four seasons ; of monthly fasts, and
the original of Ember weeks and Rogation days.
Sect. 1 . The fast of March, or the first month, the same
with the Lent fast. — 2. The fast of Pentecost.— 3. The
fast of the seventh month, or the autumnal fast. — i.
The Advent or Nativity fast, called the fast of Decem
ber, or the tenth month. — 5. The fast at Epiphany. .
—6. Of monthly fasts. — 7. The original of the four
Ember weeks, or ordination fasts. — 8. The original of
the Rogation fast  1200
CHAPTER III.
Of the weekly fasts of Wednesdays and Fridays, or
the stationary days of the ancient church.
Sect. 1. The original of these fasts— 2. The reasons of
therr institution.— 3. How they differed from the Lent
fasts and all others in point of duration.  4. With
what solemnity they were observed. — 5. How the ca
tholics and Montanists disputed about the observations.
of them.— 6. How the Wednesday fast came to be
changed to Saturday in the Western churches 1203

CONTENTS.

liii

BOOK XXII.
OF THE MARRIAGE RITES OBSERVED IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
A short account of the heretics who condemned or
vilified marriage anciently, under pretence of greater
purity and perfection ; and of such also as gave
licence to community of wives and fornication.
Sect. 1. Community of wives first taught by Simon
Magus. — 2. Afterward by Saturnilus, and the Nico-
laitans, and many others. — 3. Hence arose the ca
lumny of the Gentiles against the Christians in general,
that they practised impurity in their religious assem
blies. — 4. These doctrines being fetched from the
very dregs of Gentilism, and scandalous in the eyes of
sober heathens. — 5. Marriage condemned as unlawful
by Tatian and the Encratites  6. Also by the Apos-
tolid or Apotactici. — 7. By the Manichees, Severians,
and Archontici. — 8. By the Hieracians, and Eusta
thians. — 9. Who were condemned in the council of
Gangra, and those called the Apostolical Canons. — 10.
The error of the Montanists about second marriages ;
and of the Novatians also  1207

CHAPTER II.
Of the just impediments of marriage in particular
eases, showing, what persons might or might not be
lawfully joined together ; and of the times and sea
sons when the celebration of marriage was for-

Sect. 1. Christians not to marry with infidels, or Jews,
or heretics, or any of a different religion. — 2. All
Christians obliged to acquaint the church with their
designs of marriage before they completed it. — 3. Not
to marry with persons of near alliance, either by con
sanguinity or affinity, to avoid suspicion of incest. —
4. Children under age not to marry without the consent
of their parents, or guardians, or next relations. — 5.
Slaves not to many without consent of their masters.
— 6. Persons of superior rank not to marry slaves. —
7. Judges of provinces not to marry any provincial
woman, during the year of their administration. — 8.
Widows not to marry again till twelve months after
their husband's death. — 9. Women not to marry in the
absence of their husbands, till they were certified of
their death. — 10. Guardians not to marry orphans in
their minority, till their guardianship was ended. — 11.
When first the prohibition of spiritual relations marry
ing one with another came in. — 12. Whether a man
might marry after a lawful divorce. — 13. Whether an
adulterer might marry an adulteress, whom he had de
filed, after the death of her husband.— 14. The cele
bration of marriage forbidden in Lent. . . . 1211

CHAPTER III.
Of the manner of making espousals preceding mar
riage in the ancient church.
Sect. I. How the sponsalia or espousals differed from
marriage — 2. Free consent of parties necessary in
espousals. — 3. The contract of espousals usually testi
fied by gifts, called arree, or donationes sponsalitice,
which were sometimes mutually given and received
both by the man and woman. — 4. These donations to
be entered into public acts, and set upon record. — 5.
The contract further testified by giving and receiving
of a ring. — 6. And by a solemn kiss, and joining of
hands. — 7. And by settling of a dowry in writing. — 8.
And by transacting the whole affair before a compe
tent number of witnesses. — 9. How far the obligation
of espousals extended. — 10. Whether they were simply
and absolutely necessary to precede a just and legal
marriage  1223
CHAPTER IV.
Of the manner of celebrating marriage in the ancient
church.
Sect. 1. The solemnities of marriage between Chris
tians usually celebrated by the ministers of the church
from the beginning. — 2. In what cases it might happen
to be otherwise. — 3. How the primitive practice was
revived when it came to be neglected. — 4. Other cere
monies used in marriage, as joining of hands and veil
ing. — 5. Untying the woman's hair. — 6. Crowning the
new-married couple with crowns or garlands. — 7. Car
rying the bride home to the bridegroom's house ; how
far necessary in some cases of law. — 8. How far the
marriage pomp was allowed or disallowed by the an
cient fathers  1229
CHAPTER V.
Of divorces : how far they were allowed or disallowed
by the ancient Christians.
Sect. 1. The ancients divided about the sense of forni
cation. Some taking it only for carnal fornication,
and making it the only just cause of divorce. — 2.
Others took it to imply spiritual fornication, that is,
idolatry and apostacy from God, and other crimes of
the like nature. — 3. This later opinion from the time
of Constantine much countenanced by the laws of the
state. First, By Constantine himself. — 4. Then by
Honorius. — 5. And Theodosius junior. — 6. And
Valentinian III. — 7. And Anastasius. — 8. And Jus
tinian  1235

BOOK XXIII.
OF FUNERAL RITES, OR THE CUSTOM AND MANNER OF BURYING THE DEAD, OBSERVED
IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
Of cemeteries, or burying-places ; with an inquiry,
how and when the custom of burying in churches
first came in.

Sect. 1. A cemetery a common name for a burying-
place and a church. How this came to pass — 2. No
burying-places in cities or churches for the first three
hundred years. — 3. But either in monuments erected
by the public ways, or in vaults and catacombs in the

liv

CONTENTS.

fields under-ground. — 4. Burying in cities and churches
prohibited by Christian emperors for several ages after.
— 5. The first step made toward burying in churches,
was the building of churches over the graves of the
martyrs in the country, or else translating their relics
into the city churches. — 6. The next was, allowing
kings and emperors to be buried in the atrium, or
porch, or outer buildings of the church. — 7. Then the
people in the sixth century began to be admitted into
the church-yards, but not into the church. — 8. And in
this period of time, kings, bishops, founders of churches,
and other eminent persons were by some laws allowed
to be buried in churches. — 9. The matter at last left
to the discretion of bishops and presbyters, who should
or should not be buried in churches. Hereditary
sepulchres not allowed in the ninth century, but
brought in by the pope's decretals. The complaints
of the learned against this new custom of burying in
churches  1240

CHAPTER II.
Some further observations concerning the place, and
manner, and time of burial.
Sect. 1. Consecration of cemeteries not veiy ancient. —
2. The sacredness of them arising from another reason,
and not from their formal consecration. — 3. The way of
adorning graves different among heathens and Chris
tians. — 4. They differed also in the manner of burying :
the heathens commonly burning the body, and put
ting the bones and ashes in urns ; but the Christians
buried the body whole in the earth, abhorring the hea
then custom. — 5. Anointing and embalming of bodies
much used by Christians : and why more by them
than by the heathens. — 6. The Christians usually
buried by day, the heathens by night. . . . 1247

CHAPTER III.
How theg prepared the body for the funeral, and
with what religious ceremonies and solemnities they
interred it.
Sect. 1. Christians always careful to bury the dead,
even with the hazard of their lives. — 2. How they
prepared the body for burial. First, Closing its eyes
¦ and mouth : a decent circumstance observed by all
nations. — 3. Then washing the body in water. — 4.
Dressing it in funeral robes, and these sometimes rich
and splendid. — 5. Watching and attending it in its
coffin till the time of the funeral. — 6. The exportation
of the body performed by near relations, or persons of
dignity, or any charitable persons, as the case and
circumstances of the party required. — 7. Particular
orders of men appointed in some great churches, un
der the names of copiatee and parabolani, to take care
of the sick, and perform all these offices for the dead.
— 8. Psalmody the great ceremony used in all pro

cessions of funerals among Christians, in opposition to
the heathen piping and funeral song.— 9. Crowning
the coffin with garlands not allowed among Chris
tians, though they scrupled not to carry lights before
them —10. Funeral orations made in the praise of
eminent persons.— 11. Together with psalmpdy and
the usual service of the church.— 12. And sometimes
the oblation of the eucharist.— 13. With particular
prayers for the dead.— 14. A corrupt custom of giv-
ing the kiss of peace and the eucharist to the dead,
corrected by the ancient canons. — 15. Almsdeeds com-
monly added to prayers for the dead.— 16. And re
peated yearly upon the anniversary days of comme
moration of the dead.— 17. But this often degenerated.
into great excesses and abuses, which are complained
of as no better than the parentalia of the Gentiles.—
18. Decent expressions of moderate sorrow at funer
als not disallowed ; but the heathenish custom of hir
ing preeficcs, or mourning women, sharply reproved hy
the ancients. — 19. The novendial of the heathen re
jected as a superstitious practice. — 20. The custom of
strewing flowers upon the graves of the dead retained
without offence. — 21. As also wearing a mourning
habit for some time, though thought more commend
able to omit it altogether. — 22. Some other rites not
allowed by the church, as pouring oil upon the dead,
and offering a sacrifice of oil and wax as a burnt-offer
ing to God. — 23. What sort of persons were denied
the privilege of being buried with these solemnities ;
viz. catechumens dying in neglect or contempt of bap
tism ; self-murderers ; criminals executed for their
villanies ; excommunicated -persons, heretics, schis
matics, &c  1253
CHAPTER IV.
An account of the laws made to secure the bodies and
graves of the dead from the violence of robbers and
sacrilegious invaders, andbuyers and sellers qf relics,
and their worshippers.
Sect. 1. The old Roman laws very severe against rob
bers of graves, and all abuses and injuries done to the
bodies of the dead. — 2. This severity continued for
the most part under the Christian emperors, with some
additional circumstances. — 3. No indulgence allowed
to robbers of graves by the emperors at the Easter
festival. — 4. For this crime a woman was allowed by
the laws to give a bill of divorce to her husband. — 5.
One reason tempting men to commit this crime, was
the rich adorning of the heathen sepulchres. — 6. A
more plausible pretence was taken up from the laws,
that ordered all heathen altars and images to be de
stroyed. — 7. A third reason was, to get the relics of
martyrs to sell and make gain of them. — 8. A peculiar
custom in Egypt of keeping the bodies embalmed and
unburied in their houses above-ground, much reproved
by St. Anthony. — 9. No religious worship allowed to
be given to relics in the ancient church, till after the
time of St. Austin  1266

After these collections were printed off, I had occasion to make one remark upon a word used in the first Book
chap. 2. sect. 17, which because I have no opportunity to mention elsewhere, the reader may please to take it in
this place. The name pilosiotm, which I say the Origenians used as a term of reproach for the catholics ought
rather to be read pelusiotcs, from irnXos, lutum ; in which sense it signifies earthly, sensual, carnally-minded men,
which were the names the Origenians bestowed upon the orthodox, because they had not the same apprehensions of
spiritual and heavenly bodies as they had. St. Jerom gives this explication in express terms, in a passage which
has lately occurred to my observation, where he uses * the Greek word Tn)Xovai6,Tai, which explains his meaning
in other places, and puts the matter beyond all dispute. So that though Baronius from some copies reads it pilo-
siotce, yet the true reading is pelusiotcs, as the passage cited in the margin does evince.
* Hieron. Com. in Jerem. xxix. p. 407. Qute cum audiunt discipuli ejus (Orig-enis) et Grunnianm familiaj stercora nnHr,t «D Tiiv;m
audire mysteria : nosque qnod ista contemnimus, quasi pro brutis habent animantibus, et vocant 7r>i\oi«r.,iT<Jc, eo duod'in lutn i«n„. „.
peris couslituti, non possimus sontire ccelestia. ^ i&uus cor.

THE

ANTIQUITIES

THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

BOOK I.
OF THE SEVERAL NAMES AND ORDERS OF MEN IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.

OF THE SEVERAL TITLES AND APPELLATIONS OF CHRISTIANS, WHICH THET OWNED, ANE
DISTINGUISHED THEMSELTES BY.

When Christianity was first planted
Christiana at Bret in the world, they who embraced it
called Jesseans, and '
iherapeuta, „,&¦ were commonly known among them-
Tot, enXeKroi, &c. ' °
selves by the names of disciples, be
lievers, elect, saints, and brethren, before they
assumed the title and appellation of Christians.
Epiphanius1 says they were also called 'Ieo-o-aToi,
Jesseans ; either from Jesse the father of David, or,
which is more probable, from the name of the Lord
Jesus. He adds, that Philo speaks of them under
this appellation, in his book Uepl 'Uaaaiwv, which
he affirms to be no other but Christians, who went
by that name in Egypt, whilst St. Mark preached
the gospel at Alexandria. This hook of Philo's is
now extant under another title, ITtpi Biov Ompnracav,
Of the Contemplative Life ; and so it is cited by
Eusebius,2 who is also of opinion that it is nothing
but a description of the Christians in Egypt, whom
he calls Therapeutee, which signifies either worship
pers of the true God, or spiritual physicians, who
undertook to cure men's minds of all vicious and
corrupt affections. But whether this name was in
vented by Philo, as most proper to express their
way of hving, or was then the common name of
believers in Egypt, before the name Christian was

1 Epiphan. Hasr. 39. u. 4. 2 Euseb. Hist. lib. 2. 1. 17.
* Hieron. de Scriptor. c. 11.
* Scaliger et Valesius in Euseb. lib. 2. u. 17. Dallaeus
B

spread over all the world, Eusebius does not under
take to determine : however, he concludes it was a
name given to the Christians; and St. Jerom3 is
so positive in it, that for this reason he gives Philo
a place in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers,
telling us that he wrote a book concerning the first
church of St. Mark at Alexandria.
Some learned critics of the last age call this
whole matter4 into question : but their arguments
are answered by others s as learned ; and therefore
I shall enter no further into this dispute, but refer
the reader, that is curious, thither for satisfaction.
That which I here take notice of further, is only
this ; that these names, Therapeutee and Jesseei, were
scarce ever used in after ages ; but the other names,
Syioi, marbi, ixXtKroi, saints, believers, elect, &c,
occur frequently in ecclesiastical writers ; and sig
nify not any select number of Christians, (as now
the words, saints and elect, are often used to signify
only the predestinate,) but all Christians in general,
who were entered into the communion of the church
by the waters of baptism. For so Theodoret" and
others explain the word liyioi, saints, to be such
as were vouchsafed the honour and privilege of
baptism.

de Jejun. et Quadrages. lib. 2. c. 4.
6 Bevereg. Cod. Can. Vind. lib. 3. u. 5. n. 4.
6 Theodor. Com. in Philip, i. 1.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book I.

Sect. 3.
Christians why
CaUed Gnostici.

And upon this account, because the
Sect. 2. r . ,
or tiie technical Christian hfe took its original from
names, IX6Y2 and "
pisccuii. tne waters 0f baptism, and depended
upon the observance of the covenant made there
in, the Christians were wont to please themselves
with the artificial name pisciculi, fishes ; to de— ,
note, as Tertullian' words it, that they were re/
generate, or born again into Christ's rehgion by
water, and could not be saved but by continuing
therein. And this name was the rather chosen by
them, because the initial letters of our Saviour's
names and titles in Greek, 'Iijo-oiic Xpioroc, Qtoii
'Yioc, 2wri)p, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, our
Saviour, technically put together, make up the
name IX6YS, which signifies a fish, and is alluded
to both by Tertullian and Optatus.8
Sometimes Christians also style
themselves by the name of Gnostics,
TvuiaTiKoi, men of understanding and
knowledge ; because the Christian religion was the
. truest wisdom, and the knowledge of the most Divine
and heavenly things. This name was aped and
abused by a perverse sort of heretics, who are com
monly known and distinguished by the name of
Gnostics, because of their great pretences to know
ledge and science, falsely so called. Yet this did not
hinder, but that the Christians sometimes laid claim
to it, as having indeed the only just and proper right
to make use of it. For which reason Clemens Alex-
andrinus,9 in all his writings, gives the Christian phi
losopher the appellation of rVwo-T/Kog. Athanasius 10
calls the ascetics of Egypt, who wrere of the con
templative life, by the same name, Tvuiarmfa. And
Socrates tells us, Evagrius Ponticus wrote a book for
the use of these ascetics, which he entitled, The
Gnostic, i. e., Rules for the Contemplative Life; some
fragments of which are yet extant in Socrates," and
some others published by Cotelerius, in his Monu
ments of the Greek Church. In one of these frag
ments there is mention made of a monk, who is styled
Mova^oc r^jc napt^jSoXi/c, r&v TvuaTiK&v 6 SoKipbtrarog ;
which the first translators of Socrates, not under
standing, render, A monk of great renown, of the
sect of the Gnostics, as if he had been one of the
Gnostic heretics ; whereas, it means no more than a
monk of the contemplative life, who inhabited in a
village called the Parembole, not far from Alexan
dria ; being one of those ascetics, whom Evagrius
and all the rest call by the then known name of

' Tertul. de Bapt. c. 1. Nos pisciculi secundum ix"""
nostrum Jesum Christum in aqua nascimur ; nee aliter
quam in aqua permanendo salvi sumus.
B Optat. cont. Parmen. lib. 3. p. 62. Hie est piscis qui in
baptismate per invocationem fontalibus undis inseritur, ut
quae aqua fuerat, a pisce etiam piscina vocitetur. Cujus piscis
nomen, secundum appellationem Graecam, in uno nomine
per siugulas literas turbam sanctorum noininum continet
i^Bus, quod est latine, Jesus Christus, Dei Filius, Salvator.

Christian Gnostics. See Valesius's note upon So
crates. Another name, which frequently s„t 4.
occurs in the writings of the ancients, Theopiu>n and '
is that of eto^dpoi; which signifies,
temples of God, and is as old as Ignatius, who
usually gave himself this title; as appears, both
from the inscriptions of his epistles, each of which
begins, 'Iyvanogo ko\i Qto<p6pog., as also from the an
cient acts of his martyrdom, where " the reason of
the name is explained in his dialogue with Trajan ;
who, hearing him style himself Theophorus, asked
what that name meant ? To which Ignatius replied,
that it meant one that carried Christ in his heart.
Dost thou, then, said Trajan, carry him that was
crucified in thy heart? Ignatius answered, Yes:
for it is written, " I will dwell in them, and walk in
them." Anastasius Bibliothecarius indeed gives an
other reason why Ignatius was called Theophorus ;
because he was the child whom our Saviour took
and set in the midst of his disciples, laying his hands
upon him ; and therefore the apostles would never
presume to ordain him again by imposition of hands ¦
after Christ. But, as Bishop Pearson13 and others
have observed, this was a mere invention of the
modern Greeks, from whom Anastasius took it with
out further inquiry. Much more ridiculous and ab- .
surd is the reason which is assigned by Vincentius"
Bellovacensis, and some others ; that Ignatius was
so called, because the name of Jesus Christ was
found written in golden letters in his heart. Both
these fancies are sufficiently refelled by the genuine
acts of his martyrdom ; which give a more rational
account of the name, and such as plainly intimates
that it was no peculiar title of Ignatius, but com
mon to him with all other Christians : as, indeed,
Bishop Pearson does abundantly prove from several
passages of Clemens Alexandrinus, Gregory Na
zianzen, Palladius, Eulogius, Theodoret, Cyril of
Alexandria, Photius, Maximus, and others. Par
ticularly, Clemens15 assigns the same reason of the
name as Ignatius does ; that the Christian is there
fore called Qtoipoptiv and Bio<popovp.tvoc., because, as
the apostle says, he is " the temple of God." We
sometimes also meet with the name Chriitophon
in the same sense ; as in the Epistle of Phileas,
bishop of Thmuis, recorded by Eusebius; where,
speaking of the martyrs of his own time, he
gives them the title of Xpiorociopoi /idprvptcr" because

9 Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. p. 294. Strom. 2. p. 383. Strom,
6. p. 665. Strom. 7. p. 748.
10 Athan. ap. Socrat. Hist. Eccl. lib. 4. c. 23.
11 Socrat. ibid.
12 Acta Ignat. ap. Grabe Spicil. t. 2. p. 10.
» Pearson Vind. Ignat. par. 2. c. 12. p. 397. Cave's Lift
of Ignatius. Grabe Spicil. t. 2. p. 2.
14 Vincent. Specul. lib. 10. c. 7.
>s Clem. Strom, lib. 7. p. 748. » Euseb. lib. 8. ,

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

they were temples of Christ, and acted by his Holy
Spirit. sect. 5. St. Ambrose, in one place, gives them
butve^Sre!™"3' the name of CnrM, in a qualified sense ;
alluding to the signification of the word
Christus in Scripture, where it sometimes signifies
any one that is anointed with oil, or receives any
commission from God by a spiritual unction; in
which sense every Christian is the Lord's anointed.
And therefore he says, it is no injury" for the serv
ant to bear the character of his lord, nor for the
soldier to be called by the name of his general;
forasmuch as God himself hath said, " Touch not
mine anointed," or my Christs, Christos meos, as now
the Vulgar translation reads it, Psal. cv. 15. And
St. Jerom also, who, in his notes upon the place,18
observes, that all men are called Christs who are
anointed with the Holy Ghost; as the ancient
. patriarchs before the law, who had no other unction.
Yet we do not find that the Christians generally
took this name upon them, but rather reserved it to
their Lord, as his peculiar name and title.
Yet it is very observable, that in
\chnstuns great all the names they chose, there was
enemies to aU party .• .
names, and human still some peculiar relation to Christ
appellations. Jr
and God, from whom they would be
named, and not from any mortal man, how great
or eminent soever. Party names, and human ap
pellations, they ever professed to abhor. "We take
not our denomination from men, says Chrysos
tom;1'' we have no leaders, as the followers of
Marcion, or Manichaeus, or Arius. No, says Epi
phanius,20 the church was never called so much
as by the name of any apostle : we never heard
of Petrians, or Paulians, or Bartholomeeans, or
Thaddeeans; but only of Christians, from Christ.
I honour Peter, says another father,21 but I am not
called a Petrian ; I honour Paul, but I am not called
a Paulian : I cannot bear to be named from any man,
who am the creature of God. They observe, that
this was only the property of sects and heresies, to
take party names, and denominate themselves from
their leaders. The great and venerable name of
Christians was neglected by them, whilst they pro
fanely divided themselves into human appellations ;
as Gregory Nyssen a and Nazianzen complain. Thus
Basil observes23 how the Marcionites and Valentini-
ans rejected the name of Christians, to be called after

the names of Marcion and Valentinus, their leaders.
Optatus24 and St. Austin25 bring the same charge
against the Donatists. Optatus says, it was the
usual question of Donatus to all foreigners, Quid
apud vos agitur de parte mea? How go the affairs
of my party among you? And the bishops who
were his followers, were used to subscribe themselves,
Ex parte Donati. Epiphanius observes the same of
the Audians,2s Colluthians, and Arians : and he tells
us more particularly of Meletius and his followers,2'
that having formed a schism, they left the old name
of the cathohc church, and styled themselves by a
distinguishing character, The church of the martyrs,
with an invidious design, to cast a reproach upon all
others that were not of their party: in like manner,
as the Arians style themselves Lucianists28 and Con-
lucianists, pretending to follow the doctrine of Lu
cian the martyr.
But the church of Christ still kept to the name
of Christian. This was the name they gloried in as
most expressive of their unity and relation to Christ.
Eusebius '" records a memorable story out of the
Epistle of the Churches of Lyons and Vienna, in
France, concerning one Sanctus, a deacon of the
church of Vienna, who suffered in the persecution
under Antonine ; that being put to the rack, and
examined by the magistrates concerning his name,
his country, his city, his quality, w-hether he were
bond or free, his answer to all their questions was,
I am a Christian : this, he said, was to him both
name, and city, and kindred, and every thing. Nor
could the heathen, with all their skill, extort any
other answer from him. St. Chrysostom30 gives the
Hke account of the behaviour of Lucian the martyr
before his persecutors ; and there are some other in
stances of the same nature, by which we may judge
how great a veneration they had for the name
Christian. The importunity of heretics made
them add another name to this, viz. or the name cathc-
that of catholic; which was as it 'c,lm
were their surname, or characteristic, to distinguish
them from all sects, who, though they had party
names, yet sometimes sheltered themselves under
the common name of Christians. This we learn
from Pacian's Epistle31 to Sempronian the Novatian
heretic, who demanding of him the reason why
Christians called themselves catholics, he answers,

17 Ambros. de Obrt. Valentin, t. 3. p. 12. Nee injuriam
putes, charaeteri domini inscribuntur et servuli, et nomine
imperatoris signantur milites. Denique et ipse Dominus
dixit, Nolite tangere Christos rneos.
18 Hieron. Com. in Psal. civ. Ecce ante legem patriarchal
non uncti regali unguento, Christi dicuntur. Christi autem
sunt, qui Spiritu Sancto unguntur
19 Chrysost. Horn. 23. in Act.
20 Epiphan. Haer. 42. Marcionit. Item Haer. 10.
I" Greg. Naz. Orat. 31. p. 506. See also Athan. Orat. 2.
contra Arian. Greg. Nyss. de Perfect. Christ, t. 3. p. 276.
B 2

22 Nyss. contra Apollin. t. 3. p. 261. Naz. Orat. ad
Episcop. 23 Basil Com. in Psal. xlviii. p. 245.
24 Optat. lib. 3. p. 68. M Aug. Ep. 68. ad Januar.
26 Epiph. Hzer. 70. Audianor. Id. Haer 69. Arian.
27 Epiphan. Haer. 68. Meletian.
28 Theodor. Hist. Eccl. lib. 1. u. 4. Epiphau. Heer.
69. Arian.
29 Euseb. lib, 5, c. 1.
80 Chrysost. Homil. 46. in Lucian. t. 1. p. 602.
31 Pacian. Ep. 1. ad Sempronian. Christianus mihi nomen

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book I.

that it was to. discern them from heretics, who went
by the name of Christians. Christian is my name,
says he, and cathohc my surname ; the one is my
title, the other my character or mark of distinction.
Heretics commonly confined religion, either to a
particular region, or some select party of men,
and therefore had no pretence to style themselves
catholics : but the church of Christ had a just title
to this name, being called catholic (as Optatus32 ob
serves) because it was universally diffused over all
the world. And in this sense the name is as ancient
almost as the church itself. For we meet with it
in the Passion of Polycarp33 in Eusebius, in Cle
mens Alexandrinus,34 and Ignatius.35 And so great
a regard had they for this name, that they would
own none to be Christians, who did not profess
themselves to be of the cathohc church. As we
may see in the Acts of Pionius the martyr,38 who
being asked by Polemo the judge, of what church
he was ? answered, I am of the catholic church :
for Christ has no other.
I must here observe further, that
in what sense the the name of ecclesiastics was some-
niime, ecclesiastics, .
gven to aii chris- times attributed to all Christians in
tians. general. For though this was a pecu
liar name of the clergy, as contradistinct from the
laity in the Christian church, yet when Christians
in general are spoken of in opposition to Jews, in
fidels, and heretics, then they have all the name of
ecclesiastics, or men of the church ; as being neither
of the Jewish synagogues, nor of the heathen tem
ples, nor heretical conventicles, but members of the
church of Christ. In this sense avfipie. la-a-Aijo-iao-rotoi
is often used by Eusebius37 and Cyril of Jerusalem.38
And Valesius39 observes the same in Origen, Epi
phanius, St. Jerom, and others.
Sometimes also we find the word
The christian reii- Aoyua put absolutely to signify the
gion called AAyua, ' . .. ,. . „, \
and christians Christian religion ; as Chrysostom °
oi Toy A07U.CITO?. and Theodoret41 say St. Paul himself
uses the word in his Epistle to the Ephesians, ii. 15.
And Estius42 assures us it was the common interpret
ation of all ancient expositors, both Greek and Latin,
upon that place. And hence it was that Christians

were called sometimes 0! rov Aoyparog, men of the <
faith; meaning the faith of Christ. As in the re
script of Aurelian the emperor against Paulus
Samosatensis, recorded by Eusebius,43 the bishops of
Italy and Rome are styled imoKO-iroi rov Soyiiarog,
bishops of the faith, that is, the Christian faith.
The heathens also were used to con-
.. -r t .~n • Sect* 10"
found the names of Jews and Chris- christians caw
. Jews by the heathen. .
tians together; whence, in heathen
authors, the name of Jews by mistake is often given
to the Christians. Thus Dio, in the Life of Domi
tian,44 speaking of Acilius Glabrio, a man of consular
dignity, says he was accused of atheism, and put to
death for turning to the Jews' religion ; which, as
Baronius45 and others observe, must mean the Chris
tian religion, for which he was a martyr. So when
Suetonius46 says, that Claudius expelled the Jews
from Rome, because they grew tumultuous by the
instigations of Chrestus ; it is generally concluded
by learned men,47 that under the name of Jews, he
also comprehends the Christians. In hke manner
when Spartian43 says of Caracalla's play-fellow, that
he was of the Jewish religion, he doubtless means
the Christian; forasmuch as Tertullian49 tells us
that Caracalla himself was nursed by a Christian.
The heathens committed another SecL „
mistake in the pronunciation of our thS^ctrnmoniy'1'
Saviour's name, whom they generally chrisduan"cKnd'
called Chrestus, instead of Christus;
and his followers, Chrestians, for Christians : which
is taken notice of by Justin Martyr,50 Tertullian,"
Lactantius,52 and some others ; who correct their
mistake, though they have no great quarrel with
them upon this account ; for both names are of good
signification. Christus is the same with the He
brew Messias, and signifies a person anointed to be
a priest or king ; and Chrestus being the same with
the Greek Xpijo-j-oc, imphes sweetness and goodness;
Whence Tertullian53 tells them, that they were un
pardonable for prosecuting Christians merely fol
their name, because both names were innocent, and
of excellent signification.
The Christians therefore did not wholly reject
this name, though it was none of their own im-

est, eatholicus cognomen. Illud me nuncupat, istud os
tendit. 82 Optat. lib. 2. p. 46. Cum inde dicta sit catholica,
quod sit rationalis et ubique diffusa.
33 Euseb. lib. 4. c. 15. 34 Clem. Alex. Strom, lib. 7.
35 Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. n. 8.
33 Act. Pionii ap. Baron, an. 251. n. 9. Cujiis, inquit Po
lemo, es ecclesiae ? Respondit Pionius, Catholicae : nulla
enim est alia apud Christum.
37 Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 7. lib. 5. cap. 27.
33 Cyril Catech. 15. 11. 4.
33 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 25.
40 Chrys. Horn. 5. in Ephes.
41 Theod. Com. in Ephes. ii. 15.
42 Est. Com. in Ephes. ii. 14. « Euseb. lib. 7. t. 30.

44 Dio in Domit. « Baron, an. 91. n. 1.
43 Sueton. Claud, c. 26. Judaeos impulsore Chresto as-
sidue tumultuantes Roma expulit.
47 Hotting. Hist. Eccl. t. 1. p. 37. Basnag. Exevc. in
Baron, p. 139. Selden. de Synedr. lib. 1. c. 8. who cites
Lipsius, Petavius, and many others.
48 Spartian. in Caracal, c. 1.
49 Tertul. ad Scapul. t. 4. Lacte Christiano educates.
50 Just. M. Apol. 2. " Tertul. Apol. t. 3.
52 Lact. lib. 4. c. 7.
53 Tertul. ibid. Christianus quantum interpretatio est, di
unctione deducitur. Sed et cum perperam Chrestianus pro-
nunciatur a vobis (nam nee nominis certa est notitia penM
vos) de suavitate vel beniguitate compositum est. Oditnl
ergo in hominibus innocuis etiam nomen innocuum '
'V i

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

posing. As neither did they refuse to be called
Jews, in that sense as the Scripture uses the word,
to distinguish the people of God from " the syna
gogue of Satan," Rev. ii. 9. Though, to avoid the
subtleties of the Ebionites and Nazarens, who were
for blending the ceremonies of the law with the
faith of the gospel, they rather chose to avoid that
. name, and stuck to the name of Christians.

CHAPTER II.

OF THE NAMES OP REPROACH WHICH THE JEWS,
INFIDELS, AND HERETICS, CAST UPON THE CHRIS
TIANS.

Sect 1.
Christians called
Nazarens by the
Jews and heathens.

Besides the names already spoken of,
there were some other reproachful
names cast upon them by their adver
saries, which it will not be improper here to men
tion. The first of these was Nazarens, a name of
reproach given them first by the Jews, by whom
they are styled the sect of the Nazarens, Acts xxiv.
5. There was, indeed, a particular heresy, who
called themselves Najupaloi: and Epiphafnus1 thinks
the Jews had a more especial spite at them, because
they were a sort of Jewish-apostates, who kept cir
cumcision and the Mosaical rites together with the
Christian rehgion : and therefore, he says, they were
used to curse and anathematize them three times a
day, morning, noon, and evening, when they met in
their synagogues to pray, in this direful form of
execration, 'E7ri/caT-apao-ai 6 Qtbg rovg NaS«jpdiov£, Send
thy curse, O God, upon the Nazarens. But St.
Jerom* says this was levelled at Christians in
general, who they thus anathematized under the
name of Nazarens. And this seems most probable,
because, as both St. Jerom3 and Epiphanius him
self4 observes, the Jews termed all Christians, by
way of reproach, Nazarens. And the Gentiles took
it from the Jews, as appears from that of Datianus
the prsetor in Prudentius,5 where, speaking to the
Christians, he gives them the name of Nazarens.

Sect. 2.
And Galikeans.

Some8 think the Christians at first were very free
to own this name, and esteemed it no reproach, till
such time as the heresy of the Nazarens broke out,
and then, in detestation of that heresy, they forsook
that name, and called themselves Christians, Acts
xi. 26. But whether this be said according to the
exact rules of chronology, I leave those that are
better skilled to determine.
Another name of reproach was that
of Galilreans, which was Julian's ordi
nary style, whenever he spake of Christ or Chris
tians. Thus in his dialogue with old Maris, a blind
Christian bishop, mentioned by Sozomen,7 he told
him by way of scoff, Thy Galilaean God will not
cure thee. And again, in his epistle8 to Arsacius,
high priest of Galatia, The Galileans maintain their
own poor, and ours also. The like may be observed
in Socrates,9 Theodoret,10 Chrysostom," and Gregory
Nazianzen,12 who adds, that he not only called them
Galilaeans himself, but made a law that no one
should call them by any other name, thinking
thereby to abolish the name of Christians.
They also called them atheists, and SMl 3
their religion, the atheism or impiety, AUo Mhci't"-
because they derided the worship of the heathen
gods. Dio 13 says, Acilius Glabrio was put to death
for atheism, meaning the Christian religion. And
the Christian apologists, Athenagoras,14 Justin Mar
tyr,15 Arnobius,16 and others, reckon this among the
crimes which the heathens usually lay to their
charge. Eusebius says,1' the name was become so
common, that when the persecuting magistrates
would oblige a Christian to renounce his religion,
they bade him abjure it in this form, by saying,
among other things, AZpe roig aQiovg, Confusion to
the atheists, Away with the impious, meaning the
Christians. To this they added the name of
_ . .... -. Sect. 4.
Greeks and impostors, which is noted An° oi-™ks and
impostors.
by St. Jerom,18 who says, wheresoever
they saw a Christian, they would presently cry out,
'O ypuucbg iirib'tT^g, Behold a Grecian impostor !
This was the character which the Jews gave our
Saviour, 6 wXaioc., that deceiver, Matt, xxvii. 63. And
Justin Martyr says,19 they endeavoured to propagate
it to posterity, sending their apostles or emissaries

1 Epiphan. Haer. 29. u. 9.
2 Hieron. Com. in Esa. xlix. t. 5. p. 178. Ter per sin-
gulos dies sub nomine Nazarenorum maledicunt in syna-
gogis suis.
' Id. de Loc. Hebr. t. 3. p. 289. Nos apud vetei-es, quasi
opprobrio Nazaraei dicebamur, quos nunc Christianos vocant,
4 Epiphan. ibid.
5 Prudent, wapl pTsepavaiv. Carm. 5. de S. Vincent.
Vos Nazareni assistite,
Iiudemque ritum spernite. Id. Hymno 9. de Rom. Mart.
8 Junius Parallel, lib. 1. c. 8. Goodwyn Jew. Rites,
lib. 1. c. 8.

' Sozom. lib. 5. c. 4. 8 Ap. Sozom. lib. 5. u. 16.
3 Socrat. lib. 3. c. 12.
"> Theodor. lib. 3. c. 7 et 21.
11 Chrys. Horn. 63. t. 5. 12 Naz. 1. Invectiv.
13 Dio in Domitian.
14 Athen. Legat. pro Christ.
15 Just. Apol. 1. p. 47. ls Arnob. lib. 1.
17 Euseb. lib. 4. c. 15.
18 Hieron. Ep. 10. ad Furiam. Ubicunque viderint Chris-
tianum, statim illud de Trivio, 'O ypatKos £7rt8t*Tr|s, vocunt
impostorem. 19 Justin Dial. c. Tryph. p. 335.

1
ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book I.

from Jerusalem to all the synagogues in the world,
to bid them beware of a certain impious, lawless
sect, lately risen up under one Jesus, a Galileean
impostor. Hence Lucian20 took occasion in his
blasphemous raillery to style him the crucified so-
phister. And Celsus 21 commonly gives him and his
followers the name of yonrai, deceivers. So Ascle
piades, the judge in Prudentius,22 compliments them
with the appellation of sophisters; and Ulpian23
proscribes them in a law by the name of impostors.
The reason why they added the name of Greeks
to that of impostors, was (as learned men24 conjec
ture) because many of the Christian philosophers
took upon them the Grecian or philosophic habit,
which was the nspi(36\awv, or pallium: whence the
Greeks were called palliati, as the Romans were
called togati, or gens togata, from their proper
habit, which was the toga. Now, it being some
offence to the Romans, to see the Christians quit
the Roman gown to wear the Grecian cloak, they
thence took occasion to mock and deride them with
the scurrilous names of Greeks, and Grecian impos
tors. Tertullian's book de Pallio was written to
show the spiteful malice of this foolish objection.
sect. 5 But the heathens went one step
Mag'cia™. further in their malice ; and because
our Saviour and his followers did many miracles,
which they imputed to evil arts and the power of
magic, they therefore generally declaimed against
them as magicians, and under that character ex
posed them to the fury of the vulgar. Celsus25 and
others pretended that our Saviour studied magic in
Egypt: and St. Austin20 says, it was generally be
lieved among the heathen, that he wrote some books
about magic too, which he delivered to Peter and
Paul for the use of his disciples. Hence it was that
Suetonius,27 speaking in the language of his party,
calls the Christians, genus hominum superstitionis
maleficcs, the men of the magical superstition. As
Asclepiades, the judge in Prudentius,28 styles St. Ro
manus the martyr, arch-magician. And St. Am
brose observes, in the passion of St. Agnes,29 how the
people cried out against her, Away with the sor
ceress ! away with the enchanter ! Nothing being

more common than to term all Christians, especially :
such as wrought miracles,30 by the odious name of
sorcerers and magicians.
The new superstition was another The f,%^ s°jper.
name of reproach for the Christian -«~
rehgion. Suetonius gives it that title,31 and Phny
and Tacitus add to it32 the opprobrious terms of
wicked and unreasonable superstition. By which
name also Nero triumphed over it, in his trophies
which he set up at Rome, when he had harassed
the Christians with a most severe persecution. He
gloried that he had purged the country of robbers,
and those that obtruded and inculcated the new
superstition 33 upon mankind. By this, there can be
no doubt, he meant the Christians, whose religionis
called the superstition in other inscriptions of the
like nature. See that of Diocletian cited in Baronius,
anno 304, from Occo. Superstitione Christianorum
ubique deleta, SfC.
Not much unlike this was that other name which
Porphyry34 and some others give it, when they call
it the barbarous, new, and strange religion. In the
acts of the famous martyrs of Lyons, who suffered
under Antoninus Pius, the heathens scornfully in
sult it with this character. For having burnt the
martyrs to ashes, and scattered their remains into
the river Rhone, they said they did it to cut off their
hopes of a resurrection, upon the strength of which
they sought to obtrude *" the new and strange re
ligion upon mankind. But now let lis see whether
they will rise again, and whether their God can
help and deliver them out of our hands.
Celsus gives them the name of Si- v sect i.
° . Christians why
byllists,36 because the Christians in called sibyiusta.
their disputes with the heathens sometimes made
use of the authority of Sibylla, their own prophetess,
against them; whose writings they urged with so
much advantage to the Christian cause, and preju
dice to the heathen, that Justin Martyr37 says, the
Roman governors made it death for any one to read
them, or Hystaspes, or the writings of the prophets.
They also reproached them with the Sect. a.
appellation of /3ia9aWot, self-murder- 2Kat*<»""i-
ers, because they readily offered themselves up to

20 Lucian. Peregrin.
21 Cels. ap. Orig. lib. 1. p. 20.
22 Prudent, irspi o-rec/>. Carm. 10. de Romano Mart.
Quis hos sophistas error invexit novus, &c.
23 Digest, lib. 50. tit. 1 3. c. 1. Si incantavit, si imprecatus
est, si (ut vulgari verbo impostorum utar) si exorcizavit.
21 Kortholt de Morib. Christian, c. 3. p. 23. Baron, an.
56. n. 11.
25 Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 1. Arnobius, lib. 1. p. 36.
28 Aug. de Consensu Evang. lib. 1. c. 9.
27 Sueton. Neron. u. 16.
28 Prudent, iripl o-xecp. Hymn. 10. de S. Romano. Quo-
usque tandem summus hie nobis magus illudit.
38 Ambr. Serm. 90. in S. Agnen. Tolle magam ! Tolle
maleficam !

30 See Kortholt de Morib. Christ, c. 4.
31 Sueton. Nero. c. 16.
32 Plin. lib. 10. Ep. 97. Nihil aliud inveni, quam super-
stitionem pravam et immodicam. Tacit. Annal. 15. c. 44.
Exitiabilis superstitio.
83 Inscript. Antiq. ad Calcem Sueton. Oxon. NERONI.
CLAUD. CAIS. AUG. PONT. MAX. OB. PROVINC.
LATRONIB. ET. HIS. QUI. NOVAM. GENERI.
HUM. SUPERSTITION. INCULCAB. PURGAT.
84 Ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. 6. c. 19. TAapfiafOi
r6Xp.r)p.a. 35 Act. Mart. Lugd. ap. Euseb. lib. 5. c. 1. Gpt)o-Kii«
fcivriv Kal Katvjjv.
36 Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 5. p. 272.
87 Just. Apol. 2. p. 82.

Chap. I;.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

martja-djam, and cheerfully underwent any violent
death, v<Mch the heathens could inflict upon them.
With what eagerness they courted death, we learn
not only from the Christian writers ™ themselves,
but from the testimonies of the heathens39 concern
ing thf m. Lucian 40 says, they not only despised
death, 1 ¦..! many of them voluntarily offered them
selves t ... it, out of a persuasion that they should be
made immortal and hve for ever. This he reckons
folly, anti therefore gives them the name of koko-
fai'/uov(c>ttSK miserable wretches that threw away
their lives. In which sense Porphyry41 also styles
the Chris\ian religion, /3a'p(3apov roX/u;/iar the barbar
ous boldttpssV As Arrius Antoninus42 terms the
professors pf it, (J &iAt)i, the stupid wretches, that
had such a mind to die ; and the heathen in Mi
nucius,43 he -lines dephratce ac desperates factionis,
the men of the forlorn and desperate faction. All
which agrees with the name biothanati, or bieso-
thanati, as Btammius " understands it. Though it
may signify ne*, only selfimurderers, but (as a learn
ed critic 45 no;»- *) men that expect to live after death.
• In which sens the heathens probably might use it
likeiffise, to ril'-cule the Christian doctrine of the
resuHection; o s which, they knew, all their fearless
and undaunted courage was founded. For so the
same heathen :-.« Minucius endeavours to expose
at once both t| ir resolution and their belief : O
strange folly. an#i'ncredi!<3e madness ! says he ; they
despis^ all present torments, and yet fear those that
are future and ^(Certain -. they are afraid of dying
after d§g$U, ;<ut rt the mean time do not fear to die.1
Sp vTai'my do they flatter themselves, and allay their
feats, with the 'hopes of some reviving comforts
after death. Far one of these reasons, then, they
gave them' the name of biothanati, which word ex
pressly occurs in some of the Acts of the ancient
Martyrs. Baronius observes,46 out of Bede's Mar
tyrology, that when the seven sons of Symphorosa
were martyred under Hadrian, their bodies were all
cast into one pit together, which the temple-priests
named from them, Ad septem biothanatos, The grave
of the seven biothanati.
sect. 9. For the same reasons they gave
j Parabolarii, and . . . 7 , ..
ietperati. them the names of parabolani and
desperati, the bold and desperate men. The para-
bolarii ox parabolani among the Romans, were those
bold, adventurous men, who hired out themselves to

fight with wild beasts upon the stage or amphi
theatre, whence they had also the name of bestiarii,
and confectores. Now, because the Christians were
put to fight for their lives in the same manner, and
they rather chose to do it than deny their religion,
they therefore got the name of paraboli, and para
bolani ; which, though it was intended as a name of
reproach and mockery, yet the Christians were not
unwilling to take it to themselves, being one of the
truest characters that the heathens ever gave them.
And therefore they sometimes gave themselves this
name, by way of allusion to the Roman paraboli.
As in the passion4' of Abdo and Senne in the time
of Valerian, the martyrs who were exposed to be
devoured by wild beasts in the amphitheatre, are
said to enter, ut audacissimi parabolani, as most
resolute champions, that despised their own hves
for their religion's sake. But the other name of
desperati they rejected as a calumny, retorting it
back upon their adversaries, who more justly de
served it. Those, says Lactantius,43 who set a value
upon their faith, and will not deny their God, they -
first torment and butcher them with all their might,
and then call them desperados, because they will not
spare their own bodies ; as if any thing could be
more desperate, than to torture and tear in pieces
those whom you cannot but know to be innocent.
Tertullian mentions another name,
which was likewise occasioned by their saymmtim,' and
• m, , mnaxii.
sufferings. The martyrs which were
burnt alive, were usually tied to a board, or stake,
of about six foot long, which the Romans called
semaxis ; and then they were surrounded or covered
with faggots of small wood, which they called
sarmenta. From this their punishment, the hea
then, who turned every thing into mockery, gave
all Christians the despiteful name of sarmentitii and
semaxii?* The heathen in Minucius50 takes Secl „
occasion also to reproach them under x"<*"»<"' """''»¦
the name of the skulking generation, or the men
that loved to prate in corners and the dark. The
ground of which scurrilous reflection was only
this, that they were forced to hold their religious
assemblies in the night to avoid the fury of the per
secutions.. Which Celsus51 himself owns, though
otherwise prone enough to load them with hard
names and odious reflections;

98 See these collected in Pearson, Vind. Ignat. par. 2. c. 9.
p. 384.
89 Arrius Antonin. ap. Tertul. ad Scap. u. 4. Tiberian. in
Joh. Malela Chronic.
40 Lucian. de Mort. Peregrin.
41 Porphyr. ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. 6. c. 19.
42 Tertul. ibid.
43 Minuc. Octav. p. 25.
44 Baron, an. 138. n. 5.
".fSuicer. Thesaur. Ecclesiast. 1. 1 . p. 690.
i

48 Baron, an. 138. n. 5.
47 Acta Abdon. et Sennes ap. Suicer.
48 Lact. Instit. lib. 5. u. 9. Desperatos vocant, quia cor-
pori suo minime parcunt, &c.
49 Tertul. Apol. c. 50. 'Licet nunc sarmentitios et semax-
ios appelletis, quia ad stipitem dimidii axis revincti, sar-
mentorum ambitu exurimur.
50 Minuc. Octav. p. 25. Latebrosa et lucifugax natio, in
publicum muta, in angulis garrula.
31 Origen. cont. Cel. lib. 1. p. 5

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

•Book I.

The same heathen iri Minucius gives
Tiautmiiprompia, them one scurrilous name more, which
and ptstc/res. ,
it is not very easy to guess the meaning
of. He calls them Plautinians,52 homines plautince
prosapice. Rigaltius53 takes it for a ridicule upon
the poverty and simplicity of the Christians, whom
the heathens commonly represented as a company
of poor ignorant mechanics, bakers, tailors, and the
like ; men of the same quality with Plautus, who,
as St. Jerom54 observes, was so poor, that in a time
of famine he was forced to hire out himself to a
baker to grind at his mill, during which time he
wrote three of his plays in the intervals of his la
bour. Such sort of men Caecilius says the Chris
tians were ; and therefore he styles Octavius in the
dialogue, homo Plautince prosapice, et pislorum prce-
cipuus, a Plautinian, a chief man among the illiterate
bakers, but no philosopher. The same reflection
is often made by Celsus. You shall see, says he,55
weavers, tailors, fullers, and the most illiterate and
rustic fellows, who dare not speak a word before
wise men, when they can get a company of chil
dren and silly women together, set up to teach
strange paradoxes amongst them. This is one of
their rules, says he again,56 Let no man that is learn
ed, wise, or prudent come among us ; but if any be
unlearned, or a child, or an idiot, let him freely
come. So they openly declare, that none but fools,
and sots, and such as want sense, slaves, women,
and children, are fit disciples for the God they
worship. Nor was it only the heathens that
with what names thus reviled them, but commonly every
the heretics re- ' J J
So°acnriuansortho" Perverse sect among the Christians
had some reproachful name to cast
upon them. The Novatian party called them Corne
lians,57 because they communicated with Cornehus,
bishop of Rome, rather than with Novatianus, his
antagonist. They also termed them apostatics, capi-
tolins, synedrians, because58 they charitably decreed
in then- synods to receive apostates, and such as went
to the capitol to sacrifice, into their communion
again upon their sincere repentance. The Nestori
ans59 termed the orthodox Cyrillians ; and the Ari
ans60 called them Eustathians and Paulinians, from
Eustathius and Paulinus, bishops of Antioch. As
also homoousians, because they kept to the doctrine
of the bpoaimov, which declared the Son of God to

52 Minuc. p. 37. Quid ad hiec audet Octavius homo Plau-
tinae prosapia;, ut pistorum prsecipuus ita postremus philo-
sophorum ?
53 Rigalt. in loc.
64 Hieron. Chronic, an. 1. Olymp. 145.
55 Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 3. p. 144. 33 Ibid. p. 137
57 Eulog. ap. Phot. Cod. 280.
58 Pacian. Ep. 2. ad Sympronian.
™ Ep. Legat. Schismat. ad suos in Epheso in Act. Con.
Ephes. Con. t. 3. p. 746.
60 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 21. « Opus Imperf. Horn. 48-

X

be of 'the same substance with the Fathe\. The
author of the Opus Imperfectum on St. Matthew,
under the name of Chrysostom,61 styles them ex
pressly, Hceresis homoousianorum, The heifesy of
the homoousians. And so Serapion in his (jonflict
with Arnobius62 calls them homou&ianates; which
the printed copy reads corruptly homuncXonates,
which was a name for the Nestorians.
The Cataphrygians, or Montanists, ?1 „
commonly called the orthodox, <//«- -^ft™ b™he
, ,. « a -i Montaiusts.
Xiicovg, carnal; because they rejected
the prophecies and pretended inspirations jof Mon
tanus, and would not receive his rigid la/ivs about
fasting, nor abstain from second marriage^, and ob
serve four lents in a year, &c. This wis Tertul
lian's ordinary compliment to the Christians in all
his books63 written after he was fallen feito the
errors of Montanus. He calls his own party the
spiritual, and the orthodox, the carnall And some
of his books64 are expressly entitled, Adversus
Psychicos. Clemens AlexanJrinus61 observes, the
same reproach was also used %y other heretics he-
side the Montanists. And it Spears from Irenaeus,
that this was an ancient calumny of the Valen-
tihians, who styled themselves the spiritual and the
perfect, and the orthodox, the secular and carnal,63
who had need of abstinence find good works, which
were not necessary for ther . that were perfect.
The Millenaries styled 'Jsaia "-Ue-
gorists, because they p-spi.'-.nicft '
prophecy of the saints ivi»rn.-.j »-*'
thousand years with Ch ;.;>.'. )¦ >v. xx. 4, to a mys
tical and allegorical sense. 'W^f.aee Eusebius "ob
serves of Nepos the Egyptian bisuop, who wrote
for the millennium, that he entitlerflfeis book,
"EXtyxog ' AXXnyopiesrwv, A Confutation of the Alte- ^
gorists. ^M
Aetius the Arian gives them the „ ¦
. *-* Sect. IS.
abusive name of Xoovirat ; by which AeS'(i5;„jficSe ¦
he seems to intimate, that their re- M^K^
ligion was but temporary, and would the Apom°,1''il™- ; i>
shortly have an end; whenas the character was
much more applicable to the Arians themselves,
whose faith was so lately sprung up in the world;
as the author of the dialogues de Trinitate, under
the name of Athanasius, who confutes Aetius,63 justly
retorts upon him.
The Manichees, as they gave themsehgs the

Sect IS.
^'AUegorists by the

ConHict. Arnob. et Serap. ad calcem Irensi, p. 519.
lertul. adv. Prax. c. 1. Nos quidem agnitio Paracleti
disjunxit a psychicis. Id. de Monogam. c. 1. Hsretici
nuptias auferunt, psychici ingerunt. See also c. 11 and 16.
De Jejumis adv. Psychicos. De Pudicitia, &c.
65 Clem. Alex. Strom, lib. 4. p. 511.
66 Iren. lib. 1. u. p. 29. ' Nobis quidem, tjuos psychicos
voeant et de soeculo esse dieunt, necessarian! contineE-
t 111 111, etc.
67 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 24.
68 Athan. Dial. 2. de Trinit. t. 2. p. 19a

\

Chap. III. ANTIQUITIES OF THE
most glorious names of electi, macarii, catharistm,
mentioned by St. Austin;69 so th'/ reproached the
catholics with the most contemptible name of sim-
plices, idiots ; which is the term that Manichaeus
himself used in his dispute™ with Archelaus the
Mesopotamian bishop, styling the Christian teachers,
simpliciorum magistros, guides of the simple, be
cause they could not relish his execrable doctrine
concerning two principles of good and evil.
The Apollinarians were no less injurious to the
catholics, in fixing on them the odious name of
anthrqpolatrce, man- worshippers ; because they main
tained that Christ was a perfect man, and had a
reasonable soul and body, of the same nature with
ours ; which ApoUinarius denied. Gregory Nazi
anzen71 takes notice of this abuse, and sharply re
plies to it; telling the Apollinarians, that they
themselves much better deserved the name of sar-
colatree, flesh-worshippers ; for if Christ had no
human soul, they must be concluded to worship his
flesh only.
se^ l7. The Origenians, who denied the
pih,*!!S°lt b?d truth of the resurrection, and asserted
° that men should have only aerial and
spiritual bodies in the nesaNrorld, made jests upon
the catholics, because th% maintained the con
trary, that our bodies shouM be the same individual
bodies, and of the same riftfcure that they are now,
with flesh and bones, ancjj. all the members in the
same form and structure,' only altered in quality,
not- in substance. For Khis they gave them the
opprobrious names of siniflices a.n&philosarccs,1'2 idiots
and lovers of the flesh j'- carnei, animates, jumenta,
carnal, sensual, mam&i%% lutei, earthy ; pilosiotes,''1
which Erasmus's sdilW* reads corruptly pelusiotcs,
instead ot pOasi&t-f ; which seems to be a name
formed from pili; hair ; because the catholics as
serted, final; th? bo€y would rise perfect in all its
parts, even with the hair itself to beautify and
adorn it.
sect is. But jbf all others, the Luciferians
antichrtst'afSfe ' gave fljfe church the rudest language
feriana. W styling her the
synagoj

styling her the brothel-house, and
e of antichrist and Satan ; because she al-

CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 9
lowed those bishops to retain their honour and places,
who were cajoled by the Arians to subscribe the
fraudulent confession of the council of Ariminum.
The Luciferian in St. Jerom runs out in this man
ner against the church; and St. Jerom says, he
spake but the sense of the whole party, for this was
the ordinary style74 and language of all the rest.
These are some of those reproachful names, which
heretics, concurring with Jews and infidels, endea
voured to fasten upon the Christian church ; which
I should not so much as have mentioned, but that
they serve to give some light to antiquity, and there
fore were not wholly to be passed over in a treatise
of this nature.

CHAPTER III.
OF THE SEVERAL ORDERS OP MEN IN THE
CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
Having given an account of the se- „ secti.
Three sorts of
veral names of Christians, I proceed "embers of the
' * Christian church,
now to speak of the persons, and se- a° tyotuenot,
* * wto-TOo and KaT£-
veral orders of men, in the Christian xo»imkk.
church. Some divide them into three ranks, others -
into four, others into five ; which yet come much to
the same account, when they are compared together.
Eusebius reckons but three orders, viz. the r/yoi/icvot,
jrf?6i,andKar»/xot»fjfj'oi; rulers, believers, and catechu- V"
mens. There are in every church, says he, three
orders of men,1 one of the rulers or guides, and two
of those that are subject to them; for the people
are divided into two classes, the iri-zrbi, believers,
and the unbaptized, by whom he means the cate
chumens. St. Jerom2 makes five orders ; but then,
he divides the clergy into three orders, to make up
the number; reckoning them thus, bishops, pres
byters, deacons, believers, and catechumens. In
which account he follows Origen,3 who makes five
degrees subordinate to one another in the church ;

69 Aijg. de Ha:r.rSr46.
™ Aifchel. Disp. adv. Manichaeum ad calcem Sozomen.
Ed. Vafes. p. 197.
71 Naz. Ep. 1. ad.Cledon.
72 Hieron. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. t. 2. p. 171. Nos sim-
plice* et philosarcas dicere, quod eadem ossa, et sanguis, et
caroji^d est, vtiltu* et membra, totiusque compago corporis
respgat in jiovissfmaldie.
™ Id. M%, 65. ad Pam. et Ocean, de Error. Orig. p. 192.
Pelusiotafi^leg. pilosiotas) nos appellant, et luteos, anima-
leuque, gj^karneos, qjp.od non recipiamus ea quae Spiritus
sunt. 1
74 Hitroi: Dial. adv. Lucifer, t. 2. p. 135.' Asserebat
universe™ jundum esse diaboli: et, ut jam familiare est
jeit dicefe, mctum.de ecclesia lupanar.  Quod anti-

christi magis synagoga, quam ecclesia Christi debeat nun-
cupari. 1 Euseb. Demonst. Evang. lib. 7. c. 2. p. 323. Tpia
lead' iKa^nv kuKXvifsiav -raypaTa, tv p£v to tow r}yovp.£vtuv,
iiio ik tA twv vTro^etvKOToiu.
2 Hieron. Com. in Esai. xix. p. 64. Quinque ecclesiae or
dines, episcopos, presbyteros, diaconos, fideles, catechu-
menos. 3 Origen. Horn. 5. in Ezek. Pro modo graduum unus-
quisque torquebitur. Majorem pcenam habet, qui ecclesiae
praesidet et delinquit. Annon magis misericordiam pro-
meretur ad comparationem fidelis, catechumenus ? Nou
magis venia dignus est laicus, si ad^diaeonum conferatur?
Et rursus comparatione presbyteri diaconus veniam plus
meretur.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTf&N CHURCH.

Book I.

10
saying, Every one shall be punished according to
the difference of his degree. If a bishop or presi
dent of the church sins, he shall have the greater
punishment. A catechumen will deserve mercy,
in comparison of a believer ; and a layman, in com
parison of a deacon ; and a deacon, in comparison of
a presbyter. Here are plainly St. Jerom's five orders ;
first bishops, under the name of presidents of the
church, then presbyters, after them deacons, then
believers or laymen, and last of all the catechumens.
In all which accounts, these four
M?e«rs\erc things are proper to be remarked : 1.
g^WSt*" That the name, believers, mori. and
we baptued. ^&^ .g ^ ^^ ^ & mQK ^
sense only for one order of Christians, the believing
or baptized laity, in contradistinction to the clergy
and the catechumens, the two other orders of men
in the church. And in this sense the words vunbt
and fideks are commonly used in the ancient litur
gies4 and canons, to distinguish those that were
baptized, and allowed to partake of the holy mys
teries, from the catechumens. Whence came that
ancient distinction of the service of the church, in
to the missa catechumenorum, and missa fidelium ;5
of which more in its proper place.
2. We may hence observe, that
catechnm3™, the catechumens, though but imper-
f,5ernembeTof feet Christians, were in some measure
owned to be within the pale of the
church. Forasmuch as Eusebius, Origen, and St. Je
rom reckon them one of the three orders of the church.
And the councils of Eliberis6and Constantinople7
give them expressly the name of Christians. Though,
as St. Austin8 says, they were not yet sons, but
. servants : they belonged to the house of God, but
were not yet admitted to all the privileges of it ; be
ing only Christians at large, and not in the most
strict and proper acceptation.
And vet this is more than can be
Sect. 4. J
rccko"edSam„'ng saili of heretics properly so called.
christian.. ' -por we may 0t,serve, 3. That in the
forementioned division, heretics come into no ac
count among Christians. They were not esteemed
of, either as catechumens, or believers, but as mere

Jews, or pagans ; neither having the true faith, nor
being willing to V?arn it. Tertullian9 says in general,
If they be heretics, hc-v cannot be Christians. And
St. Jerom,10 disputing with a Luciferian, says the
same in express terms, that heretics are no Chris-
tians ; nor to be spoken of, but as we would do of
heathens. Lactantius ' ' specifies in the Montanists,
Novatians, Valentinians, Marcionites, Anthropians,
Arians, saying, that they are no Christians, who, for
saking the name of Christ, call themselves by other
denominations. Athanasius12 and Hilary13 say the
same of the Arians, that they are not Christians.
Constantine14 therefore enacted it into a law, that
they should not be called Christians, but Porphyrias;
from Porphyry, that infamous heathen, whose prac
tice they so much resembled in their impious blas
phemies and reproaches of Christ and the Christian
religion. And in imitation of this, Theodosius ju
nior15 made another law to the same effect, against
Nestorius and his followers ; that they should not
abuse the name of Christians, but be called Simoni-
ans, from Simon Magus, the arch-heretic. To which
we may add that decree of the general council of
Sardica, in their synodical epistle 16againstthe Arians;
where they require all catholics, not only to deny the
Arian bishops the title of bishops, but even that of
Christians. All which evidently proves, that the
ancients put a manifest; difference betwixt those
who were apostates frorri the faith, and those who
as yet had never made any;«olemn profession of their
faith in baptism : they allowed the catechumens* the
name of Christians, becausethey were candidates of
heaven ; but they judged heretics unworthy of that
name, because they corrupted the common faith of
Christians, and denied the Lord, by whose name
they were called.
4. We may observe in the last place,
„,...,-. Sects.
that there were no Christians, but Penitents and
energumens ranked
what might be reduced to some one ^"g^^
or other of the three forementioned
orders : for the penitents, and energumens, as they
called those that were possessed with evtd spirits,
may be ranked among the catechumens, breing com
monly treated and disciplined by the chiirah in the

4 See Con.'Nic. Can. 11. Con. Eliber. c. 12, 46, 51.
Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 34. Cyril. Hierosol. Praef. Ca-
tech. n. 2.
5 Con. Carth. 4. c. 84. Cou. Valent. Hispan. c. 1.
« Con. Elib. Can. 39. 7 Con. Const. 1. Can. 7.
s Aug. Tract. 11. in Joh. t. 9. p. 41. Quod signum crucis
in fronte habent catechumeni, jam de domo magna sunt,
6ed fiant ex servis filii. Non enim nihil sunt, quia ad mag-
nam domum pertinent.
8 Tertul. de Prescript, u. 37. Si hasretici sunt, Chris
tiani esse non possunt.
10 Hieron. Dial. c. Lueif. t. 2. p. 135. Hseretici Chris
tiani non sunt.  Igitur praefixum inter nos habemus, de
haeretico sic loquendum sicut de Gentili.
11 Lact. Instit. lib. 4. c. 30.

12 Athan. Orat. 2. adv. Arian. t. 1. p. 316. ^pnavii
oi/tes, &k slo-t xpto-Tiat'oi.
18 Hilar, ad Const. Lib. 1. p. 98. Christianus sum, non
Arianus. 14 Const. Imp. Ep. ad Episc. ap. Socrat. lib. 1. cf 9. '..-
15 Cod. TheOd. lib. 16. Tit. 5. de Haeret. c. 66., Damhato
portentosae superstitiouis auctore Nestorib, ntiita congrui
nominis ejus inuratur gregalibus, ne Christiandrum appel-
latione abutantur: sed quemadmoduin Ariani lege divas
memoriae Constantini ob similitudinem impieta^is Porphy-t
riani a Porphyrio nuncupantur ; sic ubique participes ne-
fariae sectae Nestorii Simoniani vocentur. See tJhe same in
the Acts of the General Council of Ephesus, part 3. c. 45.
Con. t. 3. p. 1209. ' |
18 Con. Sardic. Ep. Synod, ap. Theod. lib. 2. cl 6.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

11

same manner as they were, and placed in the same
class with them ; and the monks and other ascetics
may be ranked under the common head of believers,
though they had some peculiar marks of distinc
tion in the church. Yet I shall not confine myself
to speak of all those precisely in this order, and
under these heads, but give each a distinct and pro
per place in this discourse ; speaking here only of
believers in general, as they stood distinguished
from the catechumens and the clergy of the church,
and treating of the rest as occasion-shall require in
the following parts of this discourse.

CHAPTER IV.

A MORE PARTICULAR ACCOUNT OF THE IIISTOI, OR
BELIEVERS ; THEIR TITLES OF HONOUR AND PRI
VILEGES ABOVE THE CATECHUMENS.
The 7tit6i, or fideles, being such as
Beuevers other- were baptized, and thereby made corn-
wise called tpi^Ti- , n ~, .
touevoi, the uiu- plete and perfect Christians, were
minate. * upon that account dignified with
several titles of honour and marks of distinction
above the catechumens. They were hence called
ftanZ,6ptvoi, the illumiualp. So the council of Lao
dicea1 terms those that were newly baptized, Trpoo--
0arwc <pwTio2rivTag. And Jobius z in Photius, ol <pwri-
?6fievoi. As St. Paul himself in the Epistle to the
Hebrews twice uses the word illuminate, for bap
tized, in the opinion of most interpreters.3 The
reason of the name is given by Justin Martyr, who
says4 they were so called, because their under
standings were enlightened by the knowledge that
was consequent to baptism. For all the mysteries
of religion were unveiled to the baptized, which
were kept-secret from the catechumens. And some
times also baptism was attended with extraordinary
illuminations of the Holy Ghost, as in those whom
St. Paul caused to be baptized at Ephesus : Acts xix.
6, " They spake with tongues, and prophesied."
2. They were hence also styled,
Ando'mcuuiml- ol nipivnpivot, which the Latins call
VOL the initiated  ... -, • . .
mitiati, the mit.ia.terl. that is, admitted
to the use of the sacred offices, and knowledge of
the sacred mysteries of the Christian rehgion.
Hence came that form of speaking, so frequently

Sect. 3.
And -re^eioi,
the perfect.

Sect. 3.
Chari Dei, filii
Dei, a-ttot, &c.

used by St. Chrysostom and other ancient writers,'
when they touched upon any doctrines or mys
teries which the' catechumens understood not,
laaaiv oi ptpvnphoi, the initiated know what is
spoken. St. Ambrose writes a book to these miti
ati.' Isidore of Pelusium' and Hesychius 8 call them
/ivzch, and others /tv^aydynToi : whence the catechu
mens have the contrary names, dpvroi, apvijroi, and
apv^ayiiynroi, the uninitiated, or unbaptized.
3. Believers were otherwise called
tIXeioi, and riktiovpivoi, thajjerfect ;
because they were consummate Chris
tians, who had a right to participate of the holy
eucharist ; the j-6 rkXuov, as it is frequently called
in the canons9 of the ancient councils; where htri
to reXfiov iX&iiv, and rov tsXiih pirkxuv, always sig
nify participation of the holy eucharist, that sacred
mystery that unites us to Christ, and gives us the
most consummate perfection that we are capable of
in this world.
4. Tertullian adds to these the name
oichariDei, the fayjniriles oXJHgaxen ;
because their prayers and interces
sions were powerful with God, to obtain pardon for
others, that should address Heaven by them. There
fore, in his instructions to the penitents, he bids
them, charis Dei adgeniculari, fall down at the feet
of those favourites, and commend their suit to all
the brethren, desiring them to intercede with God
for them. — Tertul. de Pcenit. c. 9.
All these names (and many others that might be
added, which are obvious to every reader, such as
saints, and sons of God, &c.) were peculiar titles of
honour and respect given only to those who were
ottoi, or believers.
And hence it was, that, correspond
ent to these names, the fideles had The privileges of
... ,. ... . li i t_ theories. 1. To
their peculiar privileges in the church, partake of the eu-
r r t> ' charist.
above the catechumens. For, first, it
was their sole prerogative to partake of the Lord's
table, and communicate with one another in the
symbols of Christ's body and blood at the altar.
Hither none came, but such as were first initiated
by baptism. Whence the custom was, before they
went to celebrate the eucharist, for a deacon to pro
claim "A yta ayioig, Holy things for holy men : Ye cate
chumens, go forth,10 as the author of the Constitu
tions, and St. Chrysostom and some others, word it.
2. Another of their prerogatives Sect 6i
above catechumens, was, to stay and p,I,0ersTftnea1uh°
join with theministerin all the prayers

1 Con. Laodic. Can. 3.
2 Phot. Cod. 222. p. 595 et 598.
8 See Grot. Hamond. Estius in Heb. vi. 4. et x. 32.
4 Justin. Apol. 2. p.- 94.
5 Casaubon, Exerd. 16. in Baron, p. 399, observes this
phrase to occur no less than fifty times in St. Chrysostom
and St. Austin.

6 Ambros. De his qui initiantur mysteriis.
7 Isidor. lib. 4. Ep. 162. io-acnv ol pvai-ii -rd Xcyopsvov.
8 Hesych. voce /ii/o-tcVi.
9 Con. Ancyran. Can. 4, 5, 6, &c.
10 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 8 et 12. Chrysost. Horn.
in Parab. de Filio Prodig. t. 6. pn rii tuiv Ka-r>ixoiW-
vtov, &c.

12

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book I.

of the church; which the catechumens were not
allowed to do. For in the ancient service of the
church, there were no prayers preceding the com
munion office ; but only such as particularly related,
either to the several classes of penitents, or the
energumeni, that is, persons possessed with evil
spirits, or the catechumens themselves. When
these prayers were ended, the catechumens and all
others were commanded to withdraw, and then be
gan the communion service at the altar ; where
none were admitted so much as to be spectators,
save those who were to communicate in the eucha
rist. For to join in prayers and participation of the
eucharist were then privileges of the same persons ;
and no one was qualified for the prayers of the
church, that was not qualified for the communion.
Sect 7 3. More particularly, the use of the
Lo'rd^Vraye0!0"!18 Lord's prayer was the sole preroga-
the'",oTo!?whence tive of the 7riToi, or beUevers. For
it was called evxM ,i ., . i „
mo-™i.. the piJyer then it was no crime, or argument oi
weakness, or want of the Spirit, to use
it ; but an honour and privilege of the most con
summate and perfect Christians. The catechumens
were not allowed to say, " Our Father," till they
had first made themselves sons by regeneration in
the waters of baptism. This is expressly said by St.
Chrysostom, " St. Austin,12 Theodoret,13 and several
others. And for this reason, Chrysostom 14 calls it
tvxfi rn^dv; and St. Austin,15 oratio fidelium, the
prayer of the regenerate, or believers ; because it was
their privilege and birthright : it was given to them
as their property, he says,16 and therefore they made
use of it ; having a right to say, " Our Father, which
art in heaven," who were born again to such a Fa
ther, by water and the Holy Ghost.
Sec[ 4. Lastly, they were admitted to be
m?ttedhtoyh""<dis- auditors 0f all discourses made in the
ZsTpXnd'mjs- church, even those that treated of
fries of religion. ^ mogt abstmse points and profour, &
mysteries of the Christian religion; which the
catechumens were strictly prohibited from hearing.

The catechumens were allowed to hear the Scrip
tures, and the ordinary popular discourses that were
made upon them ; which was no more than what
some councils " allow even to Jews and Gentiles ;
for in those discourses they never treated plainly
of their mysteries, but in such a covert way, as the
catechumens could not understand them. But
when the catechumens were dismissed, then they
discoursed more openly of their mysteries before the
fideles, whose privilege it was to be the sole audi
tors of such discourses. This we learn from St.-
Ambrose ; " who says, his common discourses to the
unbaptized were only upon points of morality ; but
when they were baptized, then was the time to open
to them the mysteries and sacraments of religion : to
have discoursed to them of those things before, had
been more like exposing mysteries than explaining
them. St. Austin speaks to the same purpose, in one
of his sermons 19 to the newly baptized : Having now
dismissed the catechumens, says he, we have retained
you only to be our hearers, because, beside those
things which belong to all Christians in common,
we are now to discourse more particularly of the ¦*
heavenly mysteries, or sacraments ; which none are
qualified to hear, but such as by God's gift are made
partakers of them. And therefore ye ought to hear
them with the greater reverence, by how much
more sublime those doctrines are, which are com
mitted only to the baptized and believing auditors,
than those which the catechumens also are wont
to hear. Theodoret20 takes notice of the same dis
tinction made in their discourses, according to the
difference of their auditors ; saying, We discourse
obscurely of Divine mysteries before the unbaptized, .
but when they are departed, we speak plainly to
the baptized. From all which it is evident, that
the: fideles were singled out, as the only proper au
ditors fit to hear discourses upon the sublime doc
trines and mysteries of religion. And in these and
the hke privileges, consisted their prerogative above
the catechumens.

11 Chrysost. Horn. 2. in 2 Cor. p. 740.
12 Aug. Horn. 29. de Verb. Apost.
13 Theodor. Epit. Div. Dogm. u. 28.
14 Chrysost. Horn. 10. in Colos. p. 1385.
15 Aug. Enchirid. c. 71.
18 Aug. Com. in Psal. cxlii. Orabant utique jam fideles,
jam apostoli. Nam ista oratio Dominica magis fldelibus
datur. Id. Enchirid. ad Laurent, c. 71. De quotidianis, brevi-
bus, levibusque peccatis  quotidiana oratio fidelium
satisfacit. Eorum est enim dicere, Pater noster, qui es in
coalis ; qui jam Patri tali regenerati sunt, ex aqua et Spi
ritu Sancto.
17 Con. Carthag. 4. Can. 84. Ut episcopus nullum pro-
hibeat ingredi ecclesiam, et audire verbum Dei, sive Gen-
tilem, sive haereticum, sive Judaeum, usque ad missam
catechumenorum.

18 Ambros. de his qui mysteriis initiantur, u. 1. De mo-
ralibus quotidianum sermonem habuimus.  Nunc de
mysteriis dicere tempus admonet, atque ipsam sacrameuto-
rum rationern edere, quam ante baptismum si putassemus
insinuandam nondum initiatis, prodidisse potius quam edi-
disse aestimaremur.
19 Aug. Serm. I. ad Neophytos in Append, t. 10. p. 845.
Dimissis jam cateehumenis, vos tantum ad audiendum re-
tinuimus: quia praeter ilia, quae omnes Christianos conve-
nit in commune servare, specialiter de coelestibus mysteriis
locuturi stimus, quae audire non possuut, nisi qui eadonante
jam Domino perceperunt. Tanto ergo majore reverentia
debetis audire quae dicimus, quanto majora ista sunt, qu«
solis baptizatis et fidelibus auditoribus committuntur ¦ quain
ilia quae etiam catechumeni audire consueverunt.
20 Theod. Quaest. 15. in Num.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

13

CHAPTER V.
OF THE DISTINCTION BETWIXT THE LAITY AND
CLERGY ; AND OF THE ANTIQUITY OF THAT DIS
TINCTION. We have hitherto considered the great
The fiMti other- body of the Christian church, the
wise called [aid, to
fromThederhem .fideles, as opposed to the catechu
mens : we are now to view them in
another relation, as contradistinct to the clergy:
in which relation they went by other names, such
as those of laici, laymen ; j3itoTucbi, seculars ; ISiSrai,
private men. The most common and ancient name
was that of laici, which every where occurs in the
writings of Origen, Cyprian, and Tertullian, and
others of the third centuiy: which is a thing so
evident, that the greatest enemies of this distinc
tion, Rigaltius,1 Salmasius, and Selden, do not pre
tend to dispute it, but only say, there was originally
no such distinction in the church, but that it is a
novelty, and owing to the ambition of the clergy
of the third century, in which Cyprian and Tertul
lian lived.
Seot 2 This accusation reflects highly upon
.hfad'SYiS'0' St. Cyprian, and other holy martyrs
proved aejainat . • -, ,,
Sigaiiius. saima- his contemporaries, who were as far
from the ambition that is charged
upon them, as the authors are from truth that bring
the charge. For indeed the distinction was none
of their inventing; but derived from the Jewish
church, and adopted into the Christian by the apos
tles themselves. Clemens Alexandrinus,2 speaking
of St. John, says, that, after his return from banish
ment in the isle of Patmos, he settled at Ephesus ;
whence being often invited to visit the neighbour
ing regions, he ordained them bishops, and set apart
such men for the clergy, as were signified to him by
the Holy Ghost. Whence it appears, that the name
icXjjpoc, clergy, was always a peculiar title of those
that were set apart for the ministry and service of
God. And that this distinction came from the
Jewish church, is evident from what Clemens Ro
manus3 says of the Jewish economy; that as the
high priest had his office assigned him, and the
priests also their proper station, and the Levites
their pecuhar service ; so laymen in hke manner
were under the obligation of precepts proper for
laymen. These instances evidently prove, that a
distinction was always observed in these names,
laity and clergy, from the first foundation of the
Christian church.

There is but one objection of any
i • , • , . , Scct- 3-
moment against this, which is taken An objection fmm
° 1 Pet. v, 3 answered.
from the words of St. Peter, where he
bids the elders of the chm-ch not lord it over God's
heritage. The original is, p.nS' i>g KaraicvpuvovTeg tQv
icXriptov; which (as some learned critics4 observe)
may as well signify the possessions of the church,
as the people. But admit that it means the people ;
this is no more than is said of the people of Israel,
who are called God's KXijpog, and Xabg EyxXvpog, his
inheritance, or his clergy, Deut. iv. 20; ix. 29; as
both the Jews and Christians were, in opposition to
the heathen : notwithstanding which,' God had his
peculiar icXrjpog among his own people, who were
his lot or inheritance, and distinguished by that
name from the laici, or remaining body of the peo
ple. As we have observed before in the name
mo-rot, fideles, or believers ; all persons within the
pale of the church were called believers, in opposi
tion to infidels and pagans ; but when they would
distinguish one order of men in the church from
another, then the name believers was given pecu
liarly to such as were baptized, and the rest were
called catechumens : so here, all Christian people
are God's nXrjpog, his lot, his inheritance, or his
clergy ; but when his ministers are to be distin
guished from the rest of the people in the church,
then the name clerici, or clergy, was their appropri
ate title, and the name of the other, laymen.
And this observation will help to
set another sort of persons right, who a distinction in
_ ., , , , , the offices of laity
confound not only the names, but the a"d «t"gr »i»njs
' observed.
offices of laity and clergy together;
and plead, that originally there was no distinction
between them. The name of priesthood, indeed, is
sometimes given in common to the whole body of
Christian people, 1 Pet. ii. 9 ; Rev. i. 6 ; but so it
was to the Jewish people, Exod. xix. 6, " Ye shall
be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy na
tion." Yet every one knows, that the offices of the
priests and Levites among the Jews were very dis
tinct from those of the common people, not by
usurpation, but by God's appointment. And so it
was among Christians, from the first foundation of
the church. Wherever any number of converts
were made, as soon as they were capable of being
formed into an organical church, a bishop, or a
presbyter, with a deacon, was ordained to minister
to them, as Epiphanius5 delivers from the ancient
histories of the church. The same may be observed
in the forementioned passage of Clemens Alexan
drinus, where he says St. John ordained bishops
and other clergy, in the churches which he regu
lated, by the direction of the Holy Ghost. Hence

1 Rigalt. Not. in Cypr. Ep. 3.
2 Clem. Alexand. Quis Dives salvetur, ap. Combefis.
Auctar. Noviss. p. 185. et ap. Euseb. lib. 3. c. 23. KAtjptp
iva ya Tlva Kkiipwcruw Tutv vito irvsvpaTos (Xripaivoptvoiif.

3 Clem. Rom. Ep. 1. ad Corinth, n. 40. 6 Xa'Uds avdpw
ttos TOtff Xa'i/eoTs irpoaTetypaenv iiitTat.
4 Dodwel. Dissert. 1. in Cyprian.
5 Epiphan. Haer. 75. Aerian. n. 5.

14

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book I.

it is that Ignatius so frequently in all his epistles
charges the people to do nothing without the
bishops,6 presbyters, and deacons. Tertullian7 says
it was customary among heretics to confound the
offices of clergy and laity together : they made one
a bishop to-day, and another to-morrow ; to-day a
deacon, and to-morrow a reader ; to-day a presby
ter, and to-morrow a layman. For laymen among
them performed the offices of the priesthood. But
this was not the custom of the catholic church.
For, as St. Jerom8 observes, they reckoned that to
be no church which had no priests. They were of
no esteem with them, who were both laymen and
bishops together. And by this we may judge how
ingenuously they deal with St. Jerom and Tertul
lian, who allege their authorities to prove that every
Christian is as much a priest as another. St. Je
rom indeed says,9 there is a laical priesthood ; but
then he explains himself to mean no more by that
than Christian baptism, whereby we are made kings
and priests to God. And TertuUian10 grants no
other priesthood to laymen, save that they may bap
tize in case of absolute necessity, when none of the
ecclesiastical order can be had ; which was accord
ing to the principles and practice of the primitive
church ; but does by no means confound the offices
of laity and clergy together, unless any one can
think cases ordinary and extraordinary all one.
The ancient historians, Socrates and Ruffin,11 tell
us, that Frumentius and iEdesius, two young men,
who had no external call or commission to preach
the gospel, being carried captive into India, con
verted the nation, and settled several churches
among them. And the same Socrates12 and The
odoret say, that the Iberians were first converted by
a captive woman, who made the king and queen of
the nation preachers of the gospel to their people.
Yet a man would argue very weakly, that should
hence conclude, that therefore there was no dis
tinction betwixt clergy and laity in the primitive
church, or that laymen might preach without a
call, and women ordain ministers of the gospel.
The author of the Comments upon St. Paul's Epis-

6 Ignat. Ep. ad Magnes. u. 6 et 7. Ep. ad Trail. n.'2.
Ep. ad Philad. n. 7.
7 Tertul. de Prescript, c. 41. Alius hodie episcopus,
eras alius: hodie diaconus, qui eras lector: hodie presby
ter, qui eras laicus. Nam et laicis sacerdotalia munera in-
jungunt. 8 Hieron. Dial. c. Lucifer, t. 2. p. 145. Ecclesia non
est quae non habet sacerdotes. Ibid. Omissis paucis ho-
munculis, qui ipsi sibi et laici sunt et episcopi.
9 Hieron. ibid. p. 136. Sacerdotium laici, id est, bap-
tisma. Scriptum est enim, Regnum et sacerdotes nos fe
cit, &c.
10 Tertul. Exhort, ad Cast. c. 7. Nonne et laici sacer
dotes sumus ? Scriptum est, Regnum quoque nos et sacer
dotes Deo et Patri suo fecit.  Ubi ecclesiastici ordinis
est consessus, et offert et tinguit sacerdos, qui est ibi, solus.

ties, under the name of St. Ambrose,13 seems to say
indeed, that at first all Christ's disciples were clergy,
and had all a general commission to preach the
gospel and baptize : but that was in order to con
vert the world, and before any multitude of people
were gathered, or churches founded, wherein to
make a distinction. But as soon as the church be
gan to spread itself over the world, and sufficient
numbers were converted to form themselves into a
regular society ; then rulers and other ecclesiastical
officers were appointed among them, and a dis
tinction made, that no one, no, not of the clergy
themselves, might presume to meddle with any
office not committed to him, and to which he knew
himself not ordained. So that, for aught that ap
pears to the contrary, we may conclude, that the
names and offices of laymen and clergy were always
distinct from one another from the first foundation
of Christian churches.
The laymen were distinguished also Sa.L ,
by the name of Pumicbt, seculars, caiw^lto,,
P „, i • -i • .j, i seculars.
from /3ioc, which signifies a secular
hfe. And by this title they are discerned not only
from the clergy, but also from the ascetics, and
those of a more retired hfe, who bid adieu to the
world, and disburdened themselves of all secular
cares and business. Thus St. Chrysostom,14 exhort
ing all men to read the Scriptures, says, Let no man
think to excuse himself by saying, I am a secular,
avyp ptwTucog, it belongs not to me to read the
Scriptures, but to those that have retired from the
world, and have taken up their abode in the tops
of the mountains. And in another place, com
menting on those words of St. Paul, "Let every
soul be subject to the higher powers," he says, This
command is given to the clergy, and to the monks,
and not to the seculars only.15 And so they are
styled in the author18 who goes under the name of
Justin Martyr, and others.
In some writers they are termed
idi&Tai, private men, as being only in
a private capacity, and not acting as
pubhc ministers. So it was another name to dis

sect. 6.
And tiiwrai,
private men.

Sed ubi tres, ecclesia est ; licet laici.
11 Ruffin. lib. 1. c. 9. Socrat. lib. ]. c. 19.
socrat. lib. 1. c. 20. ' Apepornpoi /cripu/cts too Xpiarov,
&c. Theodor. lib. 1. c. 23.
13 Ambros. sive Hilar. Diacon. Com. in Eph. iv. p. 948.
Ut cresceret plebs et multiplicaretur, omnibus inter initia
eoncessum est et evangelizare, etbaptizare, et Scripturas in
ecclesia explanare. At ubi autem omnia loco circumplexa est
ecclesia, conventicula constituta sunt, et rectores et caetera. '
officia in ecclesiis sunt ordmata, ut nullus de clero auderet,
qui ordinatus non esset, praesumere officium quod sciret non
sibi creditum.
14 Chrys. Horn. 3. in Laz. t. 5.
15 Chrys. Horn. 23. in Rom. -raoTcc o,aT«TT£TfU ;„fDffl>
kul povuxois, ouxi -rots /3it»TiicoIe MdW
10 Just. M. Resp. ad. Quest. 19. ™ Ptvruaf 4l^p(Sx(d| &c.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

15

tinguish them from the clergy, who were in the
public office and employment of the church. St.
Chrysostom17 and Theodoret18 say the word ioW»jc
is so used by St. Paul himself, 1 Cor. xiv. 16, which
we translate "unlearned;" but they say it signifies
no more than a layman, or one in a private capacity,
whether learned or unlearned, who is not a pubhc
minister of the church. And so Origen also uses
the name idiCbrai, not for persons unlearned, but for
laymen, who had power, as well as other Christians,
to cast out devils in the name of Christ.19 And
Synesius opposes the names iSiHrai and Uptig to one
another, making20 the one to denote those who
ministered in the sacred service of the church, and
the other, those who had no such office, but served
God only in a private capacity, as laymen. Whence
also, speaking of some clergymen who deserved to
be degraded, he says21 they were to be treated pub
hcly by all, <ic dvriicpvg LSuurai, as mere private men,
that is, no longer as clergymen, but laymen. Whence
we may collect, that this was a common name for
all such as had no public office or ministry in the
church. On the other hand, all persons who
Sect. 7. .. . , . ,
what persons pro- had any public employment in the
perly called clerici. church were called by the common
name of clerici ; which name at first was given only
to the three superior orders of bishops, priests, and
deacons, because there were then no other orders in
the church. But in the third century many in
ferior orders were appointed, as subservient to the
deacon's office, such as sub-deacons, acolythists,
readers, &c. And then those also had the common
name of clerici too, having no further concern with
secular affairs, but wholly attending the service of
the church. St. Cyprian always gives these the
name of clerici ;a as, where he speaks of Optatus a
sub-deacon, and Saturus a reader, he styles them
both clerici. The ordinations of such he23 calls or-
dinationes clericce. And hence the letters which he
had occasion to send to foreign parts by their hands
had the name of Uteres clerical Lucian the martyr,
and Cyprian's contemporary, speaks in the same
style concerning exorcists and readers.23

The council of Nice itself w gives the appellation
of KXijpoc to others besides bishops, presbyters, and
deacons. And the third council of Carthage made
a canon " on purpose to confirm the title to them.
Yea, the same council28 seems rather
to appropriate the name clerici to the The name 'cieria
. j. ... sometimes appro-
mferior orders, by way of distinction priate to the inferior
¦' . orders.
from the superior,first naming bishops,
presbyters, and deacons, and then the clerici, or
clerks ; that is, the inferior orders. And the same
is done by St. Ambrose,29 and Hilary30 under his
name, more expressly, who speak of the clerici as
distinct from the deacons. As also Epiphanius,31
who, speaking of those that lapsed in Egypt in the
Diocletian persecution, he says, some of them were
soldiers, some clerks of divers orders, some pres
byters, and some deacons. Where the clerici are
spoken of as distinct from presbyters and deacons.
And so in the council of Laodicea,32 and many other
places. As to the reason of the name clerici
and clerus, St. Jerom33 rightly ob- The reason of the
. name clerici.
serves, that it comes from the Greek
icXrjpog, which signifies, a lot ; and thence, he says,
God's ministers were called clerici, either because
they are the lot and portion of the Lord, or because
the Lord is their lot, that is, their inheritance.
Others34 think some regard was had to the ancient
custom of choosing persons into sacred offices by
lot, both among Jews and Gentiles ; which is not
improbable, though that custom never generally
prevailed among Christians, as shall be showed
hereafter. There is another name for the cler
gy, very commonly to be met with in
the ancient councils, which is that of
canonici, a name derived from the Greek word mvAiv,
which signifies, among other things, the roll or cata
logue of every church, wherein the names of all the
ecclesiastics were written, and which was as it were
the rule of knowing to what church they belonged.
In this sense the word Kavwv is often used by the
council of Nice.35 The council of Antioch36 calls it
llyiog kovuiv, the sacred roll ; the Apostolical Canons,

Sect. 10.
AU the clergy
called canonici.

17 Chrys. Horn. 35. in 1 Cor. xiv. liiirrr\v Si Xa'ixov Xiya.
18 Theod. Com. in 1 Cor. xiv. 16. liidjTi^v KaXci tot iv
too Xa'iKvo TaypaTi TZTaypivov.
19 Orig'. cont. Cels. lib. 7. p. 334.
20 Synes. Ep. 54. ad. Theoph. p. 144.
21 Synes. Ep. 67. p. 259.
22 Cypr. Ep. 24. al. 29. ed. Ox. Quoniam oportuit me per
clericos scribere, &c, fecisse me sciatis lectorem Saturum,
et hypodiaconum Optatum.
23 Id. Ep. 33. al. 38. u See Eell. Not. in Cypr. Ep. 23.
25 Lucian. Ep. 17. al. 23. ap. Cypr. Praesente de clero,
et exorcista, et lectore, Lucianus scripsit.
28 Con. Nic. can. 3.
27 Con. Carth. 3. can. 21. Clericorum nomen etiam lec-
tores, etpsalmistse, et ostiarii retineant.

28 Con. Carth. 3. c. 15. Placuit ut episcopi, et presbyteri,
et diaeoni, vel clerici non sint conductores.
29 Ambr. de Dignit. Sacerd. c. 3. Aliud est quod ab
episcopo requirit Deus, aliud quod a presbytero, et aliud
quod a diacono, et aliud quod a clerico, et aliud quod a laico.
30 Pseud. -Ambr. in Eph. iv. Nunc neque diaeoni in po-
pulo praedicant, neque clerici vel laici baptizant.
81 Epiphan. Haer. 68. Melet.
82 Con. Laodic. can. 20.
33 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepot. Cleros graece, sors latini
appellatur: propterea vocantur clerici, vel quia de sorte
sunt Domini, vel quia ipse Dominus sors, id est, pars cleri
corum est.
34 Dodwel. Dissert. 1. in Cypr. § 15.
35 Con. Nic. can. 16, 17, 19. M Con. Antioch. a 1.

16

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book 1,

KardXoyog Uparutbg,'" the catalogue of the clergy.
Which is the same that Sidonius Apollinaris38 calls
albus ; and the council of Agde,39 by the name of
matricula ; and St. Austin,40 tabula clericorum.
Now because the names of all the clergy were en
rolled in this catalogue, or canon, they were hence
called canonici. As in St. Cyril,41 leavovucGiv iraps-
aia signifies the presence of the clergy. And navovi-
1-01 ipaXrai, in the council of Laodicea,42 signifies such
of the clergy as were ordered to sing in the church.
And so generally in the councils of Nice43 and
Antioch, oi iv rip xavovi, is put to denote the clergy
of the church. And upon the same account all
others, whose names were set down in the church's
books, to entitle them to receive maintenance from
the church, were called by the same name, canonici,
such as the monks, virgins, widows, &c. whom St.
Basil44 speaks of under this name, as Balsamon
and Zonaras understand him.

I pass over many other names of S(,cL llp
the clergy, which are obvious to every fl^f0i%7Z„
reader; such as that of ecclesiastics, °' ' clu"J-
and UpariKbi, or TaZig ieparon), the holy order, &c. ;
and shall but take notice of one more, which rarely
occurs any where bufin Gregory Nazianzen, who
gives the clergy, especially the superior clergy, the
name of rdlig rov /3»;/iaroc, the order of the sane- *
tuary.45 Which name was given them from their
privilege of entering into that part of the church
where the altar stood, which (as we shall see when
we come to speak of churches) was called (Sijyua or
Upariiov, the sanctuary. Hither none might come
but the clergy, who were therefore called the order
of the sanctuary. Whence, in the same author,"1
r<f piipan Tepoadyuv, signifies to give a man ordina
tion, or make him a clergyman. And 6 two £%a-
rog, is one of the sacred order,47 or one of the
clergy.

37 Can. Apostol. c. 13, 14, 15, 50, &c.
38 Sidon. lib. 6. Ep. 8. Nomen lectorum albus nuper
excepit. 30 Con. Agathens. can. 2. Rescriptiin matricula gradum
suum dignitatemque suscipiant.
40 Aug. Horn. 50. de Diversis, t. 10. p. 525. Delebo
eum de tabula clericorum.

41 Cyril. Praef. Catech. u. 3.
42 Con. Laodic. can. 15.
43 Con. Antioch. can. 2 et 6. Con. Nic. can. 16 et 17.
44 Basil. Ep. Canonic, c. 6.
45 Naz. Orat. 20. in Laud. Basil, p. 336.
46 Id. Orat. 19. de Fun. Patr.
17 Naz. Orat. 19. p. 310 et 311. Orat. 20. p. 351.

BOOK II.
OF THE SEVERAL ORDERS OF THE CLERGY IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
OF THE OKIGINAX OF BISHOPS; AND THAT THET WEEE A DISTINCT OKDEE FEOM
PEESBTTERS IN THE PEIMITIVE CHTJECH.

We have hitherto considered the cler-
whattheancienta gy in general, as distinct from the
mean by different ... .
orders of bishops laity, and come now to examine by
and presbyters. ' .
what names or offices they were dis
tinguished from one another. And here the most
ancient distinction that occurs, is that of the superior
clergy into the three distinct orders of bishops, pres
byters, and deacons. That there were no other orders
in the church but these three at first, will be evi
denced in its proper place, when I come to give an
account of the first rise and original of the in
ferior orders ; and that deacons were always a sacred
and standing order, will be proved likewise when I
speak particularly of them. Here then it remains,
that our inquiry be made only into the distinction
betwixt the orders of bishops and presbyters. And
this, so far as concerns matter of fact and the prac
tice of the church, (which is the thing I have under
taken to give an account of,) will be most fairly and
fully resolved, by considering only these three things :
1. That the ancient writers. of the church always
speak of these as distinct orders. 2. That they de
rive the original of bishops from Divine authority and
apostolical constitution. 3. That they give us par
ticular accounts and catalogues of such bishops as
were first settled and consecrated, in the new-founded
churches, by the hands of the apostles.
But before I proceed to the proof of these things, I
must premise one particular, to avoid all ambiguity ;
that I take the word order in that sense as the an
cients use it, and not as many of the schoolmen do,
who, for reasons of their own, distinguish between
order and jurisdiction, and make bishops and pres

byters to be one and the same order, only differing
in power and jurisdiction. This distinction was un
known to the ancients; among whom the words,
order, degree, office, power, and jurisdiction, when
they speak of the superiority of bishops above pres
byters, mean but one and the same thing, viz. the
power of the supreme governors of the church, con
ferred upon them in their ordination, over presbyters,
who are to do nothing but in subordination to them.
St. Jerom, who will be allowed to speak the sense of
the ancients, makes no difference in these words,
ordo, gradus, officium, but uses them promiscuously,
to signify the power and jurisdiction of bishops above
presbyters and the whole church, which is, properly
speaking, the very essence of their order. There
fore sometimes he calls them different orders, as in
his book against Jovinian,1 where he says, that both
in the Old and New Testament the high priests are
one order, the priests another, and the Levites ano
ther. So in his Epistles to Rusticus,2 and Fabiola,3
where he joins ordo and gradus together. In other
places he uses the word gradus only. As in his
Epistle to Eustochium,4 he calls presbyters priests of
the inferior degree ; and in his Epistle to Heliodore,5
deacons the third degree ; and in his Comment upon
Micah,6 bishops, priests, and deacons, the degrees in
the church. At other times he expresses his mean
ing by the word offices. As where he says,7 that
bishop, presbyter, and deacon, are not names of
men's merits, but of their offices. So that it is all
one, according to St. Jerom, whether we say the
order, or the degree, or the office, or the power and
jurisdiction of a bishop: for all these are intended

1 Hieron. cont. Jovin. lib. 2. p. 89. In Veteri Testamento
et in Novo alium ordinem pontifex tenet, alium sacerdotes,
alium Levitae.
2 Id. Ep. ad Rustic, t. 1. p. 46. Singuli ecclesiarum
'episcopi, singuli archipresbyteri, singuli archidiaconi, et
omnis ordo ecclesiasticus suis rectoribus nititur.
3 Id. ad Fabiol. de 42. Mansion. Israel, t. 3. p. 44. Ip-
sos secundi ordinis intelligimus praeceptores, Luca evan-
gelista testante, duodecim fuisse apostolos, et septuaginta
discipulos minoris gradus.
' 4 Ep. 27. ad Eustoch. Aderant Hierosolymarum et ali-
C

arum urbium episcopi, et sacerdotum inferioris gradus, et
Levitarum iunumerabilis multitudo.
5 Ep. 1. ad Heliodor. Non minorem in tertio gradu ad-
hibuit diligent iam, &c.
6 Com. in Mic. vii. p. 162. Non hoc dico, quod istiusmodi
gradibus in ecclesia non debeatis esse subjecti.
7 Cont. Jovin. lib. 1. p. 41. Episcopus, presbyter, et dia-
conus non sunt meritorum nomina, sed officiorum. 
Si diaconus sanctior episcopo suo fuerit, non ex eo (ruodJllT^
ferior gradu est, apud Christum deterior es^-y^/f^ \ T

13

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

to express the same thing, viz. the authority of
bishops over their presbyters and the whole church.
And in this sense I use the word order, in this dis
course, to express the opinion of the ancients, con
cerning the different powers of bishops and pres
byters in the church. Now that there was such a distinc-
Therader2ofbi- tion always observed in the church,
toT su™e'™"wtoe is evident, 1st, From the testimony of
that of presbyters. . ,
the most ancient writers, who speak
of bishops, presbyters, and deacons, as distinct de
grees in the church, and the two latter as subordinate
to the first. The testimonies of Ignatius to this
purpose8 are so full and evident, that nothing was
ever pretended to be said against them, save only
that they are not the genuine remains of that ancient
author ; which has been so often considered and re
plied to by learned men,8 that there is no pretence
left to favour such an imagination. The citations
are too numerous to be here inserted at large, and
therefore I shall only give the reader a specimen in
one single testimony, by which he may judge of all
the rest. In his Epistle to the Magnesians, he ex
horts them10 to do all things in unity, under the
bishop presiding in the place of God, and the pres
byters in the place of the apostolical senate, and the
deacons to whom is committed the ministry and
service of Jesus Christ.
The author of the Acts of the Martyrdom of
Ignatius," lately published from an ancient Greek
copy, speaks exactly in the same manner of these
three orders, when he says, that as Ignatius was
on his journey to Rome, all the cities and churches
of Asia sent to salute him by their bishops, presby
ters, and deacons. Not long after these authors
lived Pius, bishop of Rome, whose authority I cite,
because Blondel12 allows it to be genuine. This
author^ in his epistle to Justus of Vienna, gives
him the title of bishop,13 and speaks of presbyters
and deacons under him. In the beginning of the
next age we have the testimonies of Clemens Alex-
andrinus, Origen, and Tertullian, all agreeing in the
same thing, that there were then in their own times
the different orders of bishops and presbyters in the

church. There are here, in the church, says Cle
mens,14 the different degrees or progressions of
bishops, presbyters, and deacons, in imitation of the
angelical glory. Origen takes notice of this dis
tinction above ten times15 in his works, which those
that please may read at large in Bishop Pearson. I
shall only recite two passages, one out of his Homi
lies upon St. Luke, written whilst he was a layman,
where he says,18 that digamy excludes men from all
ecclesiastical dignities ; for one that is twice married
can neither be made bishop, presbyter, nor deacon.
Here he calls them different dignities ; in the other
place 17 he calls them different degrees, saying, Every
one shall be punished according to his degree : if
the supreme governor of the church offends, he
shall have the greater punishment. A layman will
deserve mercy in comparison of a deacon, and a
deacon in comparison of a presbyter. So that
bishops, in his opinion, were then a degree above
presbyters and deacons. Tertullian frequently" men
tions the same distinction, but more especially in
his book de Baptismo, where he says,19 The right of
baptizing belongs to the chief priest, who is the
bishop ; and after him, to presbyters and deacons,
yet not without the authority of the bishop, for the
honour of the church, in the preservation of which
consists the church's peace.
These allegations are sufficient evidences, as to
matter of fact, and the practice of the church in the
three first ages, that there was then an order of
chief priests, or bishops, superior to presbyters,
settled and allowed in the Christian church.
If we proceed a httle further into SECt 3,
this inquiry, and examine from what bishops of"postoii-
. . .... . , . i_ cat institution.
original this appointment came, whe
ther from ecclesiastical or apostolical institution;
which is another question concerning matter of
fact, that will in some measure determine the right
also ; the same authors, with the unanimous con
sent of all others, declare, that it was no human
invention, but an original settlement of the apostles
themselves, which they made by Divine appoint
ment. The order of bishops, says TertuUian,20 when
it is traced up to its original, will be found to have

9 Ignat. Ep. ad Ephes. n. 2, 3, 4. Ep. ad Philad. n. 4,
7, 10. Ep. ad Smyrn. u. 8 et 12. Ep. ad Trail, n. 2, 7,
12, 13. Ep. ad Polycarp. n. 6.
9 Pearson, Vind. Ignat. Usser. de Epist. Ignat. Voss.
Epist. ad Rivet. Coteler. Prasf. et Not. in Ignat. Bull, De-
fens. Fid. Nic. sect. 3. u. 6. p. 290, &c.
10 [gnat. Ep. ad Magnes. n. 6.
11 Martyr. Ignat. ap. Grabe Spicil. Saecul. 2. t. 1. p. 12.
12 Blondel. Apol. p. 18.
13 Pius. Ep. 2. ad Just. Vien. Tu vero apud senatoriam
Viennam.  Colobio episcoporum vestitus, &c. Pres
byteri et diaeoni te observent.
14 Clem. Alex. Strom, lib. 6. p. 667. 'EvTavda KaTa
t\\v iKtcXrjeriav irpoKonral ileus kottwv, irpna-fsvTipwu, dia-
kovwv. &c. Id. Paadag. lib. 3. c. 12. p. 264.
15 Origen. Hom.2.inNum. Hom.2.inCantic. Hom.6.in

Esai. Horn. 5 et 16. in Ezek. Com. in Matt. xix. et xxi.
De Orat. ap. Pearson. Vindic. Ignat. par. 1. c. 11. p. 320.
16 Orig. Horn. 17. in Luc. Ab ecclesiasticis dignitatibus
non solum fornicatio sed et nuptiae repellunt. Neque enim
episcopus, nee presbyter, nee diaconus, nee vidua possunt
esse digami.
17 Orig. Horn. 5. in Ezek. Pro modo graduum unusquis-
que torquebitur, &c.
18 Tertul. deMonogam. c. 11. De Fiiga, c. 11. De Pre
script, c. 41.
19 Tertul. de Bapt. t. 17. Dandi quidem jus habet sum.
mus sacerdos, qui est episcopus : dehinc presbyteri et dia
eoni, non tameu sine episcopi auctoritate, propter ecclesii)
honorem ; quo salvo salva pax est.
» Tertul. adv. Marcion. lib. 4. t. 5. Ordo episcoporum
ad onginem recensus, in Joannem stabit auctorein.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

19

St. John for one of its authors. This agrees ex
actly with what Clemens Alexandrinus21 has re
corded of him, that when he was settled at Ephesus,
he went about the neighbouring regions, ordaining
bishops, and setting apart such men for the clergy
as were signified to him by the Holy Ghost. These
were those Asiatic bishops that St. Jerom22 speaks
of, who says, that at their request St. John wrote
his Gospel against the heresies of Ebion and Cerin
thus. Whence it follows, that, according to this
account, the order of bishops was settled before the
canon of Scripture was concluded. Whence Clemens
of Alexandria23 further observes, that there are
many precepts in Scripture appertaining to parti
cular sorts of persons, some to presbyters, some to
deacons, and some to bishops also. Ireneeus de
clares himself of the same opinion, that there were
bishops as well as presbyters in the apostles' days.
For the assembly of Miletus, he says,24 was com
posed of bishops and presbyters, that were of Ephe
sus and the neighbouring cities of Asia. And
therefore, agreeably to that hypothesis, he always
derives the succession of bishops and their original
from the apostles. As where he says,25 that Hyginus,
bishop of Rome, was the ninth in order of episco
pal succession from the apostles.28 And in another
place,37 giving an exact catalogue of the twelve
bishops of Rome that governed successively in that
see to his own time, he says of Linus, the first of
them, that he was ordained bishop immediately by
the apostles, upon the first foundation of the church;
and of Eleutherius, the last of them, that he was
the twelfth bishop from the apostles. Tertullian28
insists much upon the same argument, and makes
a challenge to all sorts of heretics upon it : Let
them show us the original of their churches, and
give us a catalogue of their bishops in an exact suc
cession from first to last, whereby it may appear, that
their first bishop had either some apostle, or some
apostolical man, hving in the time of the apostles, for
his author or immediate predecessor. For thus it

is that apostolical churches make their reckoning.
The church of Smyrna counts up to Polycarp, or
dained by St. John ; the church of Rome, to Cle
mens, ordained by S t. Peter ; and so all other churches
in like manner exhibit their first bishops ordained
by the apostles, by whom the apostolical seed was
propagated and conveyed to others. This imphes
that the apostles, as they founded churches, settled
bishops in them ; and that this might be proved
from the records and archives of every church, the
most of which were probably then remaining, when
Tertullian made this challenge to all heretics, and
appealed to these original records in behalf of the
cathohc church.
An exact and authentic catalogue
of these first foundations, would be a a list or catalogue
, of such bishops as
very useful and entertaining thing: »ere «r»t ordained
J . b ° by the aposues.
but at this distance of time, it is im
possible to gratify the world with any such curiosity,
whatever pains should be taken about it. Yet
there are some scattered remains and fragments to
be collected out of the ancient writers, which will
sufficiently answer our present design ; which is,
to evidence that the apostles settled bishops in all
churches upon their first plantation.
To begin with the chm-ch of Rome : we have
already heard Irenaeus and Tertullian declaring,
that the apostles ordained a bishop there. And the
same is asserted by St. Chrysostom,28 and Eusebius,30
and Ruffin,31 and St. Jerom,32 and Optatus,33 and
Epiphanius,84 and St. Austin ; who says,35 If the or
der of the bishops succeeding one another be of any
consideration, we take the surest and soundest way,
who begin to number from St. Peter : for Linus
succeeded Peter; and Clemens, Linus; and Ana
cletus, Clemens, &c.
It is true, there is a little difference in the account
which these authors give of the succession ; for some
reckon Linus first, then Anacletus, then Clemens :
others begin with Clemens, and reckon him the first
in order from St. Peter. But this is easily recon-

21 Clem. Alex. Quis dives salvetur. ap. Combefis. Auctar.
Novissim. p. 185. et ap. Euseb. lib. 3. c. 23.
22 Hieron. Catal. Scriptor. Eccles. in Joanne. Novissimus
omnium seripsit evangelium, rogatus ab Asiae episcopis.
23 Clem. Alex. Paedag. lib. 3. c. 12. p. 264.
24 Iren. lib. 3. u. 14. In Mileto convocatis episcopis et
presbyteris, qui erant ab Epheso et a reliquis proximis ci-
vitatibus. 25 Id. lib. 1. t. 28. Hyginus nonum locum episcopatus
per successionem ab apostolis habuit.
20 Euseb. lib. 4. c. 11, cites the same out of Ireneeus.
27 Iren. lib. 3. c."3. Fundantes et instruentes beati apos-
toli ecclesiam, Lino episcopatum administrandae ecclesiae
tradideruut. Cited also by Euseb. lib. 5. e. 6.
28 Tertul. de Praescript. c. 32. Edant origines ecclesiarum
suarum ; evolvant ordinem episcoporum suorum, ita per suc
cessions ab initio decurrentem, ut primus ille episcopus
aliquem ex apostolis, vel apostolicis viris, qui tamen cum
apostolis perseveraverint, habuerit auctorem et antecessorem.
C 2

Hoc enim modo ecclesiae apostolicae census suos deferunt :
sicut Smyrnaeorum ecclesia Polycarpum ab Joanne eonlo-
catum rel'ert : sicut Romanorum Clementem a Petro ordi-
natum edit: proinde utique et caeterae exhibent, quos ab
apostolis in episcopatum constitutos, apostolici seminis tra
duces habent. See also c. 36. ibid. Polycrat. Epist. ap.
Euseb. lib. 5. c. 24. Cyprian. Ep. 52. al. 55. ad Antonian.
p. 104. Cum Fabiani locus, id est, locus Petri, et gradus
cathedrae sacerdotalis vacaret. Id. Ep. 27. al. 33. ed. Oxon.
28 Chrys. Horn. 10. in 2 Tim.
30 Euseb. lib. 3. c. 4.
31 Ruffin. ap. Hieron. Apol. 2. p. 219.
32 Hieron. Catal. Script, in Clemen.
33 Optat. lib. 2. p. 48.
34 Epiph. Haer. 27.
35 Aug. Ep. 165. Si ordo episcoporum sibi succedentium
considerandus est ; quanto certius et vere salubriter ab ipso
Petro numeramus ?  Petro enim successit Linus, Lino
Clemens, Clementi Anacletus, &c.

20

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

ciled by learned men,38 who make it appear that
Linus and Anacletus died whilst St. Peter lived,
and that Clemens was ordained their successor by
St. Peter also. So that we have two or three per
sons, by this account, ordained successively bishops
of Rome by the hands of the apostles.
Next, for the church of Jerusalem : it is unani
mously delivered by all ancient writers, that James,
the Lord's brother, was the first bishop thereof.
St. Jerom37 says, he was ordained by the apostles
immediately after our Lord's crucifixion. Epipha
nius38 calls him, therefore, the first bishop ; the first
who had an episcopal chair, the first to whom Christ
committed his own throne upon earth. Chrysos
tom39 says, he was made bishop by Christ himself:
the author40 of the Apostolical Constitutions, both
by Christ and the apostles. In hke manner, Eu
sebius41 always speaks of him under that character,
as first bishop of Jerusalem, ordained by the apos
tles. So Hegesippus,42 Clemens Alexandrinus,43 and
Dionysius,44 bishop of Corinth, all cited by Eusebius.
To whom we may add St. Austin,45 who styles John,
bishop of Jerusalem, St. James's successor, and pos
sessor of the chair wherein he sat as first bishop of
the place. And it is remarkable, what Clemens, one
of the ancientest of these writers, says, that this
was designed as a peculiar honour to St. James, in
regard that he was the brother of Christ : for though
our Saviour usually gave the preference to Peter and
John, and James his brother, yet none of those con
tended about this honour, but chose this James, sur-
named Justus, to be bishop of the place ; where he
lived a saint, and died a martyr.
Some time after his death, as Eusebius48 relates
from ancient tradition, the apostles and disciples of
our Lord, as many as were yet in being, met to
gether with our Saviour's kinsmen (several of which
were then alive) to consult about choosing a suc
cessor in St. James's room ; and they unanimously
agreed upon Simeon, son of Cleopas, our Saviour's
cousin according to the flesh; thinking him the

most fit and worthy person to sit upon the episcopal
throne. The same is asserted by Eusebius in other
places,47 and the author48 of the Constitutions under
the name of Clemens Romanus.
From Jerusalem, if we pass to Antioch, there
again we find Euodius first, and after him Ignatius,
ordained bishops by the hands of the apostles.
Baronius49 and some others fancy, that they sat both
at the same time, the one as bishop of the Jews,
and the other of the Gentiles ; but Eusebius50 says
expressly, that Euodius was the first, and Ignatius
the second, after Euodius was dead. And it is agreed
by all ancient writers, that they were both conse
crated before St. Peter's death. Of Euodius there
can be no question made, if it appears that Ignatius
was ordained by the apostles in his room. Now this
is most expressly said by Theodoret,51 that he received
the gift of the high priesthood, <jpx<«pwtrui/zjc x^f",
from the hand of the great Peter. In like manner,
Chrysostom, in his encomium52 upon him, says, he
does not only admire him, because he was thought
worthy of so high a degree ; but that he was ordained
to it by those holy men, and had the hands of the
blessed apostles laid upon his sacred head. The same
is said in effect by Athanasius,53 when he calls him
the first bishop of Antioch after the apostles ; and
Origen,54 who calls him the second after St. Peter;
and Jerom,55 the third: for though they count
differently, yet they mean the same thing ; that Ig
natius was ordained successor to Euodius while
the apostles lived, and so might be called either
second or third after the apostles, according as St.
Peter and Euodius were included, or excluded out of
the number.
From Antioch let us go to Smyrna; where we shall
find Polycarp, another apostolical bishop, ordained
by the apostles. St. Jerom ascribes his ordination sa
to St. John, whose disciple he was. Irenaeus says,
he himself knew him; and therefore could not
mistake in what he relates of him ; which is, that
he was ordained bishop by the apostles.57 TertuI-

38 Cotel. Not. in Const. Apost. lib. 7. c. 46. Pearson, de
Success. Rom. Pontif. Dissert. 2. c. 2. Cave, Hist. Lit. vol.
1. in Clem.
37 Hieron. Catal. Script, c. 3. Post passionem Domini,
statim ab apostolis Hierosolymorum episcopus ordinatus.
Id. Com. in Gal. i. p. 165. Hie Jacobus primus Hierosoly
morum episcopus fuit,
39 Epiphan. Haer. 78. Antidicomar. n. 7. Id. Haer. 29.
Nazor. u. 3. Haer. 66. Manich. u. 19.
39 Chrys. Horn. 38. in 1 Cor. xv.
40 Const. Apost. lib. 8. c. 35.
41 Euseb. lib. 2. c. 23. lib. 3. c. 5 et7. lib. 7. c. 19.
42 Hegesip. ap. Euseb. lib. 2. c. 23.
43 Clem. Hypotypos. lib. 6. ap. Euseb. lib. 2. c. 1.
14 Dionys. ap. ad Atheniens. ap. Euseb. lib. 4. c. 23.
45 Aug. contra Crescon. lib. 2. c. 37. Hierosolymitanam
ecclesiam primus apostolus Jacobus episcopatu suo rexit.
Id. cont. Liter. Petil. lib. 2. c. 51. Cathedra ecclesiae
Hierosolymitanas, in qua Jacobus sedit, et in qua hodie

Johannes sedet. See also Cyril. Catechism. 4. n. 17. Ca-
tech. 14. n. 13.
48 Euseb. lib. 3. e. 11. " Idem Chronic.
48 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 46.
49 Baron, an. 45. u. 14. an. 71. n. 11. Halloix Vit. Ignat.
u. 2. p. 394.
59 Euseb. lib. 3. c. 22. 3' Theod. Dial. 1. t. 4. p. 33.
52 Chrysost. Horn. 42. in Ignat. t. 1. p. 501. Ed. Front.
Due. 53 Athan. de Synod. Arim. t. 1. p. 922.
54 Orig. Horn. 6. in Luc. Ignatium dico episcopum An-
tiochiae post Petrum secundum.
55 Hieron. Catal. Scriptor. in Ignat. Tertins post Pe
trum apostolum episcopus.
50 Hieron. Catal. Script, u. 17. Polycarpus Joannis
apostoli discipulus, ab eo Smyrnae episcopus ordinatus.
57 Iren. lib. 3. c. 3. Ab apostolis in Asia, in ea quae est
Smyrnis ecclesia, constitutus episcopus, quem et nos vidi
mus in prima nostra aetate.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

21

lian58 and Eusebius 5D witness the same ; the one say
ing, that he was ordained by St. John; and the
other, by those that had seen the Lord.
Papias was another disciple of St. John,60 as both
Irenfeus and St. Jerom witness ; and he was con
temporary with Ignatius and Polycarp, and bishop
of Hierapolis about the same time ; that is, in the
beginning of the second century. So that it is pro
bable, he was another of those bishops which St.
John ordained in Asia, though we have no express
testimony to prove it.
But it is asserted by all ancient writers, that
Timothy was ordained bishop of Ephesus by St.
Paul. Eusebius,61 Chrysostom,82 Epiphanius,63 Je
rom,64 Hilary the deacon,65 and the author of the
Passion of Timothy in Photius,68 unanimously attest
it. And Theodoret67 affirms, moreover, that he was
bishop, under the title of an apostle.
Most of the same authors agree in the same evi
dence for Titus,63 that he was made bishop of Crete
by St. Paul also. And Chrysostom,69 with Euse
bius, seems to give both him and Timothy the power
of metropolitans ; of which more hereafter.
Others say, that Dionysius the Areopagite was
made first bishop of Athens. Eusebius ™ more than
once mentions an epistle of Dionysius bishop of
Corinth, a very ancient writer of the second century,
wherein this is expressly asserted. So that he must
be ordained, either by St. Paul himself, as Suidas
and others'1 think, or by some other apostle. It is
generally agreed, that this Dionysius died some
time before St. John, and was succeeded in his
bishopric by Publius, and he by Quadratus, whom
St. Jerom72 calls a disciple of the apostles ; which,
in all probabihty, refers to his being tutored by St.
John. Now, if Quadratus himself was St. John's
disciple, (as he might be, who was bishop in the
time of the emperor Hadrian, to whom he present
ed his apology,) then there might be three bishops
successively at Athens, all trained up by the apos
tles, and two of them consecrated by their hands, or
at least with their consent and approbation.
I shall end this catalogue of primitive bishops
with what Theodoret73 says of Epaphroditus, that
as Timothy and Titus were bishops of Ephesus and
Crete under the name of apostles, so Epaphroditus
was bishop of Philippi under the same title, which

was then the common name of all that were properly
bishops : of which I say no more in this place,
because I give a more particular account of it in
the following chapter.

CHAPTER II.
OP THE SEVERAL TITLES OF HONOUR GIVEN TO
BISHOPS IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.
For further confirmation of what has
been asserted in the foregoing chap- aii bishops at first
.... , . , calledapost.es.
ter, it will not be amiss here to sub
join next a short account of the several titles of
honour which were given to bishops in the primi
tive church. The most ancient of these, is the
title of apostles, which, in a large and secondary
sense, is thought by many to have been the original
name for bishops, before the name bishop was ap
propriated to their order. For at first they suppose
the names bishop and presbyter to have been com
mon names for all of the first and second order ;
during which time, the appropriate name for bi
shops, to distinguish them from mere presbyters,
was that of apostles. Thus Theodoret1 says ex
pressly, The same persons were anciently called
promiscuously both bishops and presbyters, whilst
those who are now called bishops were called apos
tles. But shortly after, the name of apostles was
appropriated to such only as were apostles indeed ;
and then the name bishop was given to those who
before were called apostles. Thus, he says, Epa
phroditus was the apostle of the Philippians, and
Titus the apostle of the Cretians, and Timothy the
apostle of the Asiatics. And this he repeats2 in
several other places of his writings.
The author under the name of St. Ambrose3 as
serts the same thing, that all bishops were called
apostles at first. And therefore, he says,4 that St.
Paul, to distinguish himself from such apostles,
calls himself an apostle, not of man, nor sent by
man to preach, as those others were, who were
chosen and sent by the apostles to confirm the

58 Tertul. de Praescrip. c. 32.
59 Euseb. lib. 3. c. 36. et lib. 4. e. 14.
60 Iren. lib. 5. c. 33. Papias Joannis auditor, Polycarpi
contubernalis. Hieron. Ep. 29. ad Theodor. It. de
Scriptor. 61 Euseb. lib. 3. c. 4. «* Chrys. Horn. 1. in Philip.
69 Epiph. Haer. 75. Aerian.
64 Hieron. Catal. Scriptor. in Timotheo.
65 Pseudo-Ambros. Praef. in Tim. It.vCom. in I Tim. iii.
66 Phot. Cod. 254. " Theodor. Com. in 1 Tim. iii. 1.
68 Euseb. et Chrysost. loc. cit. Hieron. de Scriptor. in
Tito. Pseudo-Ambros. Praef. in Tit. Theodor. loc. cit.

69 Chrys. Horn. 1. in Tit. It. Horn. 15. in 1 Tim.
™ Euseb. lib. 3. c. 4. It. lib. 4. c. 23.
71 Suidas in Voce Dionys. Maxim. Prolog, ad Oper.
Dionysii. 72 Hieron. de Scriptor. c. 19. Quadratus apostolorum
discipulus, Publio Athenarum episcopo ob Christi fidem
martyrio coronato, in locum ejus substituitur.
73 Theodor. Com. in 1 Tim. iii. 1.
¦Theodor. Ibid.
2 Theodor. Com. in Phil. i. 1. It. in Phil. ii. 25.
3 Ambros. Com. in Eph. iv. Apostoli episcopi sunt.
4 Id. Com. in Gal. i. 1.

22

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

churches. Amalarius8 cites another passage out of
this same author, which speaks more fully to the
purpose : They, says he, who are now called bi
shops, were originally called apostles : but the holy
apostles being dead, they who were ordained after
them to govern the churches, could not arrive to the
excellency of those first ; nor had they the testimony
of miracles, but were in many other respects inferior to
them : therefore they thought it not decent to assume
to themselves the name of apostles; but, dividing the
names, they left to presbyters the name of the pres
bytery, and they themselves were called bishops.
This is what those authors infer from the identity
of the names, bishop and presbyter, in the first age.
They do not thence argue, (as some who abuse their
authority have done since,) that therefore bishops
and presbyters were all one ; but they think that
bishops were then distinguished by a more appro
priate name, and more expressive of their superiority,
which was that of secondary apostles.
Afterward bishops thought it hon
our enough for them to be styled the
apostles' successors. As Cyprian,8 and
Firmilian,7 and the bishops in the council of Car
thage8 call themselves and others. And St. Jerom8
speaks of them in the same style, saying, Whereso
ever a bishop is, whether at Rome, or Eugubium
at Constantinople, or at Rhegium ; at Alexandria,
or at Tanis ; they are all of equal merit, their priest
hood is the same ; they are all successors to the
apostles. And both he and St. Austin10 draw that
of the psalmist to this sense ; " Instead of thy fa
thers thou shalt have children, whom thou mayest
make princes in all lands :" they say, bishops are the
sons of the apostles, and princes and fathers in the
church. Sect. 3. And hence it was that anciently
bishop'TserSied every bishop's see was dignified with
the title of sedes apostolica, an apostoli
cal see ; which in those days was no peculiar title

Sect. 2.
After that,
euci essors of the
apostles.

of the bishop of Rome, but given to all bishops in
general, as deriving their original and counting
their succession from the apostles. The catholic
church, says St. Austin," is propagated and diffused
over all the world by the apostolical sees, and the
succession of bishops in them. It is plain, this is
not spoken only of the bishop of Rome, but of all
other bishops whatsoever. Sidonius Apollinaris12
uses the same expression, in speaking of a private
French bishop, who sat-five and forty years, he says,
in his apostolical see. And Paulinus13 makes no
more but the usual compliment to Alypius, when he
tells him, that God had deservedly placed him in
an apostolical see with the princes of his people.
Where we must also note, that Pau- g„c( 4
linus speaks in the usual phrase and pnWsTf theed
style of those ancient times, when he pe°ple'
calls bishops princes of the people. For that was
another usual title that was given them ; as appears
from Optatus,14 and several passages in St. Jerom;'"
who, to distinguish them from secular princes,
usually styles them principes ecclesies," princes of
the church ; applying to them that prophecy of
Isa. Ix. 17, which, according to his translation, is,
" I will make thy princes peace, and thy bishops
righteousness." Upon which he has this note;17
That the majesty of the Holy Scripture is to be ad
mired, in that it calls those who were to be bishops
in future ages, by the name of princes. .In the
Greek writers they are styled dpxovrtg Uk\i)<tiui',
governors and princes likewise ; as frequently in
Eusebius,18 Origen,19 Chrysostom,20 and many others.
In the same sense Cyprian21 and Sret 5
Tertullian22 commonly call them pre- p™p°«'<.."p°e-
J r o"roiTec.7rpoeopo(!
sidents, or provosts of the church; "^"p"'-
which Eusebius23 and Justin Martyr24 call irpoiaruing,
and sometimes irposSpoi,25 and others efopoi,2" inspect
ors; all which are proper characters of bishops,
who have the care, presidency, and inspection of
the church.

° Amalar. de Offic. Eecles. lib. 2. c. 13. Qui nunc epis
copi nominantur, illi tunc apostoli dicebantnr, &c.
0 Cypr. Ep. 69. al. 66. ad Florent. Qui apostolis vicaria
ordinatione succedunt. Id. Ep. 42. al. 45. ad Cornel.
Laborare debemus, ut. unitatem a Domino, et per apostolos
nobis successoribus traditam, obtinere curemus.
7 Firmil. Ep. 55. ap. Cypr. p. 225.
8 Con. Carthag. ap. Cypr. in Suffragio Clari a Mascula.
9 Hieron. Epist. 85. ad Evagr. It. in Psal. xliv. 16.
19 Aug. Com. in Psal. xliv. 16. p. 169. Pro apostolis nati
sunt filii tibi, constituti sunt episcopi,  Ipsa ecclesia
patres illos appellat.
11 Aug. Ep. 42. ad Fratres Madaurens. Christiana so-
cietas per sedes apostolorum et successiones episcoporum
certa per orbem propagatione diffunditur.
12 Sidon. lib. 6. Ep. 1. ad Lup. Tricassin. In apostolica
sede novem jam decursa quinquennia.
13 Paulin. Ep. 45. ad Alypium. Cum principibus populi
sui sede apostolica merito collocavit Dominus. See also
Tertul. de Praescrip. c. 36. Ipsae adhuc cathedrae apos
tolorum suis locis praesidentur  . Habes Corinthum. — —

Habes Philippos, &c.
14 Optat. lib. 1. p. 39. Ipsi apices et principes omnium
episcopi. 15 Hieron. Com. in Esa. iii.
19 Hieron. Com. in Psal. xliv. Principes ecclesiae, id est,
episcopi. Id. Com. in Esa. v et Tit. i.
17 Hieron. Com. in Esa. Ix. Scripturae S. admiranda
majestas, quod principes futuros ecclesiae episcopos nomi-
navit. '9 Euseb. Hist. lib. 6. ,. 28. lib. 8. c. 1 et 3. It. tie
Martyr. Palajst. c. 1.
19 Origen. Horn. 11. in Jerem. Cont. Cels. lib. 3. p. 129.
29 Chrys. de Sacerdot. lib. 3. c. 15. Id. Horn. 3. ad Pop.
Antioch. t. 1. p. 48.
2' Cypr. Ep. 3, 9, 13, 27, 81. Ed. Oxon. Praepositi.
22 Tertul. Apol. c. 39. Ad Uxor. lib. 1. c 7 De Cor.
Mil. c. 3.
23 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 3, 8, 10. lib. 7. c. 13. lib. 8. c. 6.
24 Just. Apol. 2. Chrysost. Horn. 3. in Cobs'
25 Euseb. lib. 8. c. 2. It. de Martyr. Palaest c 2
26 Philostorg. Hist. lib. 3. c. 6.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

23

And because this presidency was
Principes incur- not only over the people, but also over
d linn, pontifices the clergy, they were dignified upon
that account with the distinguishing
characters of summi sacerdotes, pontifices maximi,
and principes sacerdotum, chief priests, and princes
of the clergy. The author under the name of St.
Ambrqse,27 gives the bishop expressly the title of
chief priest, and prince of the priests. And so,
frequently, the name summus sacerdos is used by St.
Jerom : as, where speaking of himself, he says,
In the opinion of all men he was thought worthy
of the high priesthood; he explains28 himself to
mean a bishopric. And in another place,29 the pros
perity of the church depends upon the honour of
the chief priest. The same title is given to all
bishops, by the author30 of the Questions upon the
Old and New Testament under the name of St.
Austin. Sidonius31 calls them summi pontifices ;
where he speaks only of the bishops of France.
And therefore, when Tertullian32 gives the title of
pontifex maximus to the bishop of Rome, he does him
no greater honour than, in those days, was done to
every bishop in the world ; and some think he meant
not the bishop of Rome in particular, but compre
hended all others under that title. As it is certain the
council of Agde does, when it orders33 every metro
politan to call his suffragans, ad ordinationem summi
pontifieis ; which means not, to the ordination of the
pope of Rome, but to the ordination of any French
bishop within the metropolitan's province or jurisdic
tion. For then, as we have seen, summus pontif ex was
the ordinary title of every bishop whatsoever.
sect, r And so was the name papa, though
ciSi7cK0P«ij£," now it is become the pretended pre-
father, or pope. .. . . • -i . ,,
rogative and sole privilege of the
bishop of Rome. Some historians34 indeed are so
vain as to assert confidently, that Cyril of Alexan
dria was the first bishop in those parts who had the
honour of being called papa, and that because he
was Pope Celestine's legate in the council of Ephe
sus. The Arabic writers, Homaidius, and Abubacrus

Habasides, cited by Echellensis and Bishop Pear
son,35 deliver a quite contrary story, that the name
was first given to the patriarch of Alexandria, and
thence earned to Rome : which seems to be said in
answer to the Romish pretences. But the truth of
the matter is, that it was no peculiar privilege of one
patriarch or other, but the common title of all
bishops, who were called fathers36 of the church,
and fathers37 of the clergy; and papa means no
more. Therefore Tertullian, in his book de Pudici-
tia, c. 13, speaking indefinitely of any Christian
bishop who absolves penitents, gives him the name
of Benedictus papa. Or if we suppose, as some do,
that he speaks particularly of the bishop of Rome,
yet there is nothing singular in it ; for, at the same
time, Dionysius, presbyter of Alexandria, speaking
of Heraclas his bishop, gives him the very same
title,38 The blessed pope Heraclas. And Arius him
self,39 in one of his Epistles, speaks of his bishop
Alexander in the same style. St. Jerom gives the
title49 to Athanasius, Epiphanius, and Paulinus ; and
writing often to St. Austin, he always inscribes*1 his
Epistles Beatissimo papce Augustino. So among Cy
prian's Epistles, those that are written to him are
usually inscribed42 in the same manner, Cypriano
papce. And the clergy of Rome themselves43 give
him the title of Benedictus papa, and Beatissimus
and Gloriossimus papa Cyprianus. It were easy to
add many other testimonies out of Epiphanius, and
Constantine's Epistles, and the Theodosian Code,
and especially Sidonius Apollinaris,44 who always
gives the French bishops the style of Dominus papa.
But in so plain a case I need not insist any longer,
especially since a learned Romanist45 has undertaken
to prove, out of authors as late as Photius and Gre
gory of Tours, that papa was the common name of
all bishops for several ages : who also notes out of
Balsamon, that this name was sometimes given to
the inferior clergy ; who were called papce pisinni,
little fathers ; and their tonsure, or crown, thence
called irairaki\Tpa, the tonsure of the fathers. In
comparison of whom, Balsamon16 calls presbyters

27 Ambros. Com. in Ephes. iv. In episcopo omnes ordines
sunt, quia primus sacerdos est, hoc est, princeps sacerdotum.
28 Hieron. Ep. 99. ad Asellam. Omnium pene judicio
dignus summo sacerdotio decernebar.
29 Id. Dial. o. Lucifer, p. 139. Ecclesiae salus in summi
sacerdotis dignitate pendet.
89 Aug. Quaest. Vet. et N. Test. c. 101. Quid est episco
pus nisi primus presbyter, id est, summus sacerdos ?
31 Sidon. lib. 4. Ep. II. lib. 7. Ep. 5.
32 Tertul. de Pudicit. c. 1.
93 Con. Agathens. c. 35.
34 Nicephorus is cited and chastised by Savaro for this.
Vid. Savaro, Not. in Sidon. lib. 6. Ep. 1.
35 Pearson, Vind. Iguat. part 1. c. 11. p. 330.
86 Aug. Com. in Psal. xliv. p. 169. Ipsa ecclesia patres
illiu appellat. Chrysost. Horn. 3. ad Popul. Antioch. 1. 1.
p. 43.
87 Hieron. Ep. 62. ad Theoph. Episcopi contenti sint

honore suo: patres se sciant esse, non dominos. Id. Ep.
2 et 3. ad Nepotian. Com. in Psal. xliv. &c.
38 Dionys. Ep. ad Philemon, ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 7.
JJapi tov paieapiov 'ira-wa iipwlt 'Hpa/cXa.
39 Arius Ep. ad. Euseb. Nicom. ap. Theod. lib. 1. c. 5.
et ap. Epiphan. Haer. 69. Arian.
49 Hieron. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. p. 163.
41 Id. Ep. 17, 18, 25, 30. inter Epist. Augustini.
42 Cypr. Ep. 31, 31, 36. Edit. Oxon.
43 Ep. 8. Cleri Rom. ad Cler. Carthag. ibid. Didicimus
secessisse Benedictum papam Cyprianum. Ep. 30. Cler.
Rom. ad Cypr. Beatissime ac gloriosissime papa.
44 Sidon. lib. 6. Epi-t. 1. Domino papae Lupo. Lib. 6.
Ep. 2. Papae pragmatio. Lib. 6. Ep. 3. Domino papae
Leontio. And so for twelve Epistles together.
49 Savaro, Comment, in Sidon. lib. 6. Ep. 1. p. 379.
46 Balsam. Com. in Can. Apost. u 59. It. in Con. An
tioch. can. 10.

24

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

and the chorepiscopi, protqpapee, and protopapades,
chief fathers ; speaking in the language of his own
times, when the chorepiscopi and presbyters were
become all one.
Sect 9 But bishops had still a more hon-
Z"'eplPe^?pu- ourable title than that of papa; for
coporum. ^gy were commonly called patres pa
trum, and episcopi episcoporum, fathers of fathers,
and bishops of bishops. The first that had this title
was James, bishop of Jerusalem ; which made the
counterfeit author under the name of Clemens Ro
manus,47 inscribe an epistle (as directed to him) with
this title, Clemens Jacobo domino, episcopo episcopo
rum, Sec. To which Sidonius Apollinaris48 alludes
plainly, when, writing to Lupus, an eminent French
bishop, he tells him, he was father of fathers, and
bishop of bishops, and another James of his age.
By this we understand what Tertullian49 means,
when, speaking ironically of the catholic bishops,
who admitted adulterers into communion again
upon their repentance, he says, I hear there is a
decree published, and that a peremptory one ; the
chief pontiff, the bishop of bishops, saith, I forgive
the sins of adultery and fornication to all those that
repent of them. Some59 take this for a peculiar
character of the bishop of Rome, and I will not
deny, but that Tertullian might intend more espe
cially to reflect upon him : but yet there is nothing
singular in the title, which did not belong to other
bishops as well as him ; as appears from what has
been already cited out of Sidonius. To which we
may add the testimony of Athanasius,51 who styles
Hosius, The father of bishops. And Gregory Na
zianzen52 gives the same title to his own father, as
St. Jerom53 does to Epiphanius, styling him the
father of all bishops. Cotelerius54 observes, that
Gregory Nyssen is called varr/p naripuiv, father of
fathers, by the second council of Nice ; and others55
say, Theodosius the emperor gave Chrysostom the
same honourable title after death. As to the reason
of these names, it is probable some bishops might
have them upon the account of personal merit ; and
others, from the eminency of their sees ; as the
bishop of Alexandria, to whom Balsamon56 gives the

47 Pseudo-Clem. Ep. 1. ad Jacob.
48 Sidon. lib. 6. Ep. 1. Tu pater patrum, et episcopus
episcoporum, et alter saeculi tui Jacobus.
49 Tertul. de Pudicit. c. 1. Audio etiam edictum esse
propositum, et quidem peremptorium, pontifex scilicet
maximus, episcopus episcoporum dicit, ego et mechiae et
fornicationis delicta pcenitentia defunctis dimitto.
60 Baron, an. 142. n. 4. an. 216. n. 4. Georg. Ambianas
Observ. in Tertul. t. 3. p. 633.
51 Athan. Epist. ad solit. vit. agentes, t. I. p. 837.
62 Naz. Orat. 19. de Fun. Patr. p. 314.
53 Hieron. Ep. 61. p. 167.
54 Coteler. Not. in Ep. Clem. p. 605.
65 Nicephor. lib. 14. c. 43.
56 Balsam. Resp. ad Interrogat. Marci ap. Leunclav. Jus

title of pater patrum, many ages after. But there
was a more general reason why all bishops should
be called so, as may be collected from Epiphanius;5'
who says, that the order of bishops was an order
that begat fathers to the church ; that is, bishops
made bishops by ordination ; whereas presbyters
could only beget sons, by the power which they had
of baptizing. And therefore, though we sometimes
find presbyters called fathers, yet we no where find
the title oi pater patrum given to any of their order.
Yet I must here also observe, that several of these
titles were never kindly received among the African
fathers ; because the bishops of Rome began to
abuse them, to establish a usurped authority over
their neighbours. Therefore, in two African coun
cils held at Carthage, the one68 under Cyprian, the
other59 in St. Austin's time, these titles, episcopus
episcoporum, princeps sacerdotum, and summus sacer
dos, were discountenanced and forbid, insomuch
that the primates themselves were not allowed to
use them. But of this more hereafter, when we
come to speak of metropolitans.
Gregory Nazianzen in his rhetorical
way usually gives bishops the title of Bishnpslomeiimes
, , . , - called patriardls.
patriarchs ; by which he means not
patriarchs in the proper sense, as the word came
afterward to be used in the church, to signify bishops
of the larger sees, who had primates and metropoli
tans under them ; but any bishops whatsoever, that
were heads of their own family, that is, the church
subject to them. Thus he styles his own father
patriarch,60 though he was but bishop of Nazianzum,
a very small city in Cappadocia, under Coesarea the
metropolis. And in his oration61 before the council
of Constantinople, he gives the same title to all
other bishops, complaining of the Arian cruelties
against them. Have we not had, says he, our an
cient bishops, or, to speak more properly, our patri
archs, pubhcly murdered by them ? In another
place, complaining of the corrupt promotions and
practices of some bishops of his age, he thus takes
his leave of them,62 Valete ; insolentes estote : patri-
archatus per sortes inter vos distribuite. Farewell:
go on in your insolence : divide the patriarchal dig-

Gr. Rom. t. 1. lib. 5. p. 362. Kilptos Mapicos ira-ripM
iraTijp irn-apxuiU, &c.
57 Epiphan. Haer. 75. Aerian. TlaTipav ytwmiKi\ Ta£is.
llaripai yip yevva Tp EKKXtjcria.
58 Con. Carthag. ap'. Cypr. p.' 229. Neque enim quis-
quam nostrum episcopum se episcoporum constituit, aut
tyranmco terrore ad obsequendi necessitates coliegas suoa
adigit. 59 Con. Carth. 3. c. 26. Ut primaa sedis episcopus non
appelletur princeps sacerdotum, aut summus sacerdos, aut
aliquid hujusmodi, sed tantum primae sedis episcopus.
69 Naz. Orat. 19. p. 312. Orat. 20. de Laud. Basil, p. 312.
Orat. 41. p. 675.
61 Orat. 22. p. 525.
62 Naz. Cygn. Carm. de Episcopis, t. 2. p. 308

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

25

nities among you : translate yourselves from see to
see : set up some, pull down others. Where it is
evident, he speaks not of patriarchs properly so call
ed, but only of some ambitious spirits among the
bishops, who turned all things into confusion, and
did what they pleased with the preferments of the
church. Gregory Nyssen uses the same term for
bishops, in his funeral oration upon Meletius, which
he made in the council of Constantinople, where he
gives all the bishops then in council the title of
patriarchs. Behold63 these patriarchs : all these are
the sons of our Jacob ; meaning Meletius, whom he
calls Jacob for his age, and the rest patriarchs, in
allusion to the twelve patriarchs who were Jacob's
children. Thus bishops were commonly styled, till
such times as the name patriarch became the appro
priate title of the most eminent bishops, such as
Rome, Constantinople, &c. And even some ages
after that, De Marca64 observes, that Athalaricus
and the rest of the Gothish kings in Italy gave the
name of patriarchs to all bishops within their do
minions. It must not here be forgotten, that
all bishops anciently were styled also
vicars of Christ, and had as much in
terest in that name as he that has since laid so
much claim to the title. The author of the Ques
tions65 under the name of St. Austin, says expressly,
that every bishop is the vicar of God. Cyprian
says the same in several of his Epistles,66 that every
bishop is vice Christi, Christ's vicar, or vicegerent.
And this is his meaning in ¦ that noted passage to
Cornehus, where he says,67 All heresies and schisms
take their original from hence, that men do not sub
mit to God's priest, and consider that there ought to
be but one bishop in a church at a time, and one
judge as the vicar of Christ. This is spoken of
every individual bishop throughout the world, as
Rigaltius68 freely owns; and they grossly mistake
Cyprian's meaning, and abuse his authority, who
apply it only to the bishop of Rome. St. Basil69
extends the title to all bishops; and so does the
author under the name of St. Ambrose,70 who is sup
posed to be Hilary, a deacon of the church of

Sect 10.
And vicars of
Christ

Rome; which would have been an unpardonable
oversight in him, had it not been then the custom
of the world to give all others this title as well as
the bishop of Rome.
I shall but take notice of one title
... .... , Sect 11.
more given to bishops, which is that And angeis of the
° ¦*¦ churches.
of angels of the churches; a name
which some authors71 suppose to be used by St.
Paul, 1 Cor. xi. 10, where he says, women ought
to be covered in the church because of the angels ;
that is, bishops, says Hilary the deacon, in the
place last mentioned. And so the same author un
derstands that of St. John, Rev. i. 20, " the seven
stars are the angels ,2 of the seven churches." Which
is also the interpretation of St. Austin73 and Epipha
nius,74 who say, that by angels we are not there to
understand the celestial angels, (as Origen thought,
who assigns a guardian angel75 to every church,)
but the bishops or governors of those seven churches.
Hence, in after ages, bishops were called angels of
the churches : as Socrates'8 terms Serapion, who
was bishop of Thmuis, the angel of the church of
Thmuis : and the author of the Short Notes'7 upon
Timothy, under the name of St. Jerom, says of
every bishop, that he is the angel of God Almighty.
In this sense Dr. Hammond78 observes out of a
Saxon MS., that in our own language anciently
bishops were called God's bydels, that is, messengers
or officers, as he explains it from Sir Henry Spel-
man's Glossary, in the word bedellus. And thus
much of those ancient titles of honour, which were
given to all bishops indifferently in the primitive
church.

CHAPTER III.
OF THE OFFICES OF BISHOPS AS DISTINCT FROM
PRESBYTERS.

I come now to consider the episco- sect. 1.
r A threefold dif-
pal office and function itself: where, ference between

63 Greg. Nyss. Orat. de Fun. Melet. t. 3. p. 589.
64 Marca Dissert, de Primatib. n. 20. p. 112.
65 Aug. Quaest. Vet. et Nov. Test. c. 127. Antistitem
Dei puriorem caeteris esse oportet.  Est enim vicarius
ejus. 68 Cypr. Ep. 63. ad Caecil. Ille sacerdos vice Christi
vere fungitur, qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur.
67 Ep. 55. al. 59. ad Cornel, p. 129. Neque enim aliunde
haareses obortae sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam inde
quod sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur, nee unus in ecclesia
ad tempus sacerdos, et ad tempus judex vice Christi cogi-
tatur. 68 Rigalt. in loc. Ecce autem episcopos aevo jam Cypriani
vicarios Christi.
69 Basil. Constit. Monach. c. 22. t. 2. p. 792.

70 Ambr. Com. in 1 Cor. xi. 10. Episcopus personam
habet Christi.  Vicarius Domini est, &c. The author
of the Constitutions, lib. 2. c. 26, styles the bishop Qeoo
iiriysiov. 71 Ambrosiaster, ibid. Angelos episcopos dicit, sicut do-
cetur in Apocalypsi Joannis.
72 Pseudo-Ambros. in 1 Cor. xi. 10.
73 Aug. Ep. 162. Divina voce laudatur sub angeli no
mine praepositus ecclesiae.
74 Epiph. Haer. 25. Nicolait.
75 Orig. Horn. 20. in Num. t. 1. p. 251. So also Andreas
Caasariens, "AyyaAoi epvXaKas. Com. in Apoc. 1. 20.
76 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 23.
77 Hieron. Com. in 1 Tim. iii.
78 Ham. Annot. on Rev. i. 20.

2G

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

to do justice to antiquity, it is neces-
bishops and pres- ** ¦"¦
c'SorthdJofflc. salT for me t0 observe a threefold
and ?onct«m. distinction between bishops and pres
byters in the discharge of ecclesiastical offices.
For, 1st, In the common offices, which were ordi
narily intrusted in the hands of presbyters, such as
preaching, baptizing, administering the eucharist,
&c, there was this obvious difference betwixt a
bishop and a presbyter, that the one. acted by an
absolute and independent power ; the other, in de
pendence upon, and subordination to his bishop, by
whose authority and directions, under God, he was
to be governed, and do nothing without his consent,
or against it : so that though there was no differ
ence in the things that were done, yet there was an
essential difference in the power of doing them.
This is an observation not commonly made, but it
is of very great use, both for establishing the just
bounds of episcopal and presbyterial power, and
clearing the practice of the primitive church. 2dly,
Some offices were never intrusted in the hands of
presbyters, nor allowed, if performed by them, such
as the ordination of bishops, presbyters, &c. 3dly,
Bishops always retained the power of calling their
presbyters to an account, and censuring them for
their misdemeanours in the discharge of their office ;
which presbyters could not do by their bishop, being
always subject and subordinate to him as their
superior. These things cleared and set in a fair
light, will give us a just account of the office of
a bishop, as distinct from that of a presbyter, in the
primitive church. First, then, we are to observe, that
h" in such ordinary and common offices
SIX ihTbiTnoJ as might be performed by both, bishops
pendent power, bat and presbyters acted by a different
presbyters in de- r J J ~*»*
wbordni„at"on"toa"d P°wer ; the bishop was the absolute,
him- independent minister of the church,
and did whatever he did by his own authority,
solely inherent in himself; but the presbyters were
only his assistants, authorized to perform such offices
as he intrusted them with, or gave them commission
and directions to perform, which they still did by
his authority, and in dependence upon, and subor
dination to him as their superior, and might do
nothing against his will, or independent of him.
This is clear from many passages in Ignatius, Cy-

Sect. 2
1. In the common
offices which mif
be performed by

1 Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. n. 8. Miosis x«>pts tov t-irio--
K-07TOU Tt 7rpao-o-ETW twv ivT\K0VTiav th tt)i/ iKKXtjcriav.
2 Id. Ep. ad Polycarp. n. 4. M-niio ai>au yvmpni aov
yivtaSto. 3 Con. Laodic. can. 56. " Avcv yvuip-ns tov i-irinKoirou.
4 Con. Arelat. 1. can. 19. Ut presbyteri sine conscientia
episcoporum nihil faciant.
5 Con. Tolet. 1. can. 20. Sine conscientia episcopi nihil
penitus presbyteri agere praesumant.
6 Can Apost. c. 39.
7 Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. n. 8.
' Tertul. de Bapt. c. 17. Dandi jus quidem habet sum-

prian, and the canons of the ancient councils, which
all agree in this, that nothing is to be done without
the bishop ; that is, without his knowledge, without
his consent, directions, or approbation. Thus Ig
natius,1 in his Epistle to the church of Smyrna ; Let
no one perform any ecclesiastical office without the
bishop. Which he explains both there and else
where 2 to mean, without his authority and permis
sion. So in the council of Laodicea8 it is expressed
the same way; The presbyters shall do nothing
without the consent of the bishop. The councils
of Aries4 and Toledo" say, without his privity or
knowledge. And the Apostolical Canons6 give a
reason for all this ; Because the bishop is the man to
whom the Lord's people are committed, and he
must give an account of their souls.
This rule they particularly apply to
the offices of baptism and the Lord's This spVciried in
. . . .. .-, the officeB of bap-
SUpper. A presbyter might ordinarily tism and theLonn
administer both these sacraments ; but
not against the will of his bishop, or in opposition and
contradiction to him, but by his consent and author
ity, in a due subordination to him as his superior. It
is not lawful, says Ignatius,7 either to baptize or
celebrate the eucharist without the bishop ; but that
which he allows, is well-pleasing to God. He does
not say, that none but a bishop might administer
these sacraments, but that none was to do it with
out his allowance and approbation. And that is
plainly the meaning of Tertullian 8 and St. Jerom,9
when they say, that presbyters and deacons have
no power to baptize, "without the command and
authority of the bishop or chief priest ; and that
this is for the honour of the church, and the pre
servation of peace and unity. St. Ambrose '" asserts
the same, that though presbyters do baptize, yet
they derive their authority from their superior.
The hke observation may be made
upon the office of preaching. This "
was in the first place the bishops'
office, which they commonly discharged themselves,
especially in the African churches. Which is the
reason we so often meet with the phrase, tractante
episcopo, the bishops preaching, in the writings 12 of
St. Cyprian : for then it was so much the office and
custom of bishops to preach, that no presbyter was
permitted to preach in their presence, till the time

Sect 4.
And in the office
of preaching.

mus sacerdos, qui est episcopus: dehinc presbyteri et dia.
com; non tamen sine episcopi auctoritate, propter ecclesias
honorem, quo salvo salva pax est.
9 Hieron. Dial. cont. Lucifer, p. 139. Inde venit, ut sine
jussione episcopi, neque presbyter neque diaconus jus
habeant baptizandi.
» Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 3. c. I. Licet presbyteri ft-
cerint, tamen exordium ministerii a summo est sacer-
dote. " Vid. Can. Apost. c. 58.
12 Cypr. Ep. 52, 56, 83, Ed. Oxon. It. Pontius Vit. Cypr.
ibid. "

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

27

of St. Austin, who whilst he was a presbyter was au
thorized by Valerius his bishop to preach before him:
but that, as Possidius,13 the writer of his Life, ob
serves, was so contrary to the use and custom of the
African churches, that many bishops were highly
offended at it, and spake against it ; till the conse
quence proved, that such a permission was of good
use and service to the church; and then several
other bishops granted their presbyters power and
privilege to preach before them. So that it was
then a favour for presbyters to preach in the pre
sence of their bishops, and wholly at the bishops'
discretion whether they would permit them or not ;
and when they did preach, it was potestate accepta,
by the power and authority of the bishops that ap
pointed them. In the Eastern churches presbyters
were more commonly employed to preach, as Pos
sidius 14 observes, when he says Valerius brought
the custom into Africa from their example. And
St. Jerom intimates as much, when he complains15
of it as an ill custom only in some churches to for
bid presbyters to preach. Chrysostom preached
several of his elaborate discourses at Antioch whilst
he was but a presbyter, and so did Atticus 16 at Con
stantinople. And the same is observed to have
been granted to the presbyters 17 of Alexandria, and
Caesarea, in Cappadocia,18 and Cyprus, and other
places. But still it was but a grant of the bishops,
and presbyters did it by their authority and com
mission. And whenever bishops saw just reason to
forbid them, they had power to limit or withdraw
their commission again ; as both Socrates 19 and So
zomen 2° testify, who say, that at Alexandria presby
ters were forbidden to preach, from the time that
Arius raised a disturbance in the church. Thus we
see what power bishops anciently challenged and
exercised over presbyters in the common and ordi
nary offices of the church ; particularly for preach
ing, bishops always esteemed it their office, as much
as any other. Such a vast difference was there be
tween the practice of the primitive church and
the bishops of Rome in after ages; when, as
Blondel observes out of Surius, there was a time
when the bishops of Rome were not known to
preach for five hundred years together ! Insomuch,
that when Pius Quintus made a sermon, it was
looked upon as a prodigy, and was indeed a greater
rarity than the Seeculares Ludi were in old Rome.

See Blondel, Apolog. p. 58, and Surius, Comment.
Rer. in Orbe gestar.
But to return to the bishops of the Scct
primitive church. There were other p0^Jh/fSnat]on
offices, which they very rarely intrust- ?hrJarldw>S.
ed in the hands of presbyters ; and if bjtm'
ever they granted them commission to perform
them, it was only in cases of great necessity : such
were the offices of reconciling penitents, confirma
tion of neophites, consecration of churches, virgins
and widows, with some others of the like nature ;
of which I shall speak nothing more particularly
here now, because they will come more properly
under consideration in other places. But there was
one office which they never intrusted in the hands
of presbyters, nor ever gave them any commission to
perform ; which was the office of ordaining the su
perior clergy, bishops, presbyters, and deacons. The
utmost that presbyters could pretend to in this mat
ter, was to lay on their hands together with the bishop
in the ordination of a presbyter, whilst the bishop
by his prayer performed the office of consecration.
Thus much is allowed them by one of the councils
of Carthage,21 which yet expressly reserves the bene
diction or ordination prayer to the bishop only. In
the ordination of bishops they had no concern at all;
which was always performed by a synod of bishops,
as shall be showed more particularly when we come
to speak of the rites and customs observed in their
ordinations. Here in this place it will be sufficient
to prove in general, that the power of ordinations
was the prerogative of bishops, and that they never
communicated this privilege to any presbyters. St.
Jerom's22 testimony is irrefragable evidence in this
case. For in the same place where he sets off the
office of presbyters to the best advantage, he still ex
cepts the power of ordination. What is it, says he,
that a bishop does more than a presbyter, setting
aside the business of ordination ? St. Chrysostom23
speaks much after the same manner, where he ad
vances the power of presbyters to the highest. Bishops
and presbyters, says he, differ not much from one an
other. For presbyters are admitted to preach and
govern the church ; and the same qualifications that
the apostle requires in bishops, are required in pres
byters also. For bishops are superior to them only
in the power of ordination, and have that one thing
more than they. In another place24 he proves that

13 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 5. Eidem presbytero potestatem
dedit coram se in ecclesia evangelium praedicandi, ac fre-
quentissime tractandi, contra usum quidem ac consuetudi-
nem Africanarum ecclesiarum. TJnde etiam ei nonnulli
episcopi detrahebant.  Postea bono praecedente ex-
emplo, accepta ab episcopis potestate, presbyteri nonnulli
coram episcopis populo tractare cceperunt verbum Dei.
14 Me in Orientalibus ecclesiis id ex more fieri sciens,
ohtrectantium non curabat linguas, &c. Possid. ibid.
15 Pessimee consuetudinis est in quibusdam ecclesiis tacere
Drebyteros, et praasentibus episcopis non loqui, &c.

17 Theodor. lib. i. u. 2.
19 Socrat. ibid.

13 Socrat. lib. 7. c 2.
'» Socrat. lib. 5. c. 22.
20 Sozom. lib. 7. k. 17.
21 Con. Carth. 4. can. 3. Presbyter cum ordinatur, epis-
copo eum benedicente, et manum super caput ejus tenente,
etiam omnes presbyteri, qui praesentes sunt, manus suas
juxta manum episcopi super caput illius teneant.
22 Hieron. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. Quid enim facit, excepta
ordinatione, episcopus, quod presbyter non facit ?
23 Chrys. Horn. 11. in 1 Tim. iii. 8.
24 Id. Horn. 1. in Philip, i.

23

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

Timothy was a bishop, because the apostle speaks of
his power to ordain, bidding him lay hands sud
denly on no man. And he adds both there and else
where,25 that the presbytery which ordained Timothy
was a synod of bishops, because mere presbyters had
no power to ordain a bishop. I might here produce
all those canons of the ancient councils, which speak
of bishops ordaining,26 but never of presbyters ; which
rule was so precisely observed in the primitive church,
that Novatian himself would not presume to break
it, but sent for three bishops27 from the farthest cor
ners of Italy, rather than want a canonical number
of bishops to ordain him. I only add that observa
tion of Epiphanius,28 grounded upon the general
practice of the church, that the order of bishops
begets fathers to the church, which the order of
presbyters cannot do, but only beget sons by the
regeneration of baptism.
I know some urge the authority of St. Jerom,28
to prove that the presbyters of Alexandria ordain
ed their own bishop, from the days of St. Mark to
the time of Heraclas and Dionysius; and others
think the same words prove that he had no new
ordination at all : but they both mistake St. Je-
rom's meaning, who speaks not of the ordination
of the bishop, but of his election ; who was chosen
by the presbyters out of their own body, and by
them placed upon the bishop's throne; which in
those days was no more than a token of his election,
and was sometimes done by the people ; but the or
dination came after that, and was always reserved
for the provincial bishops to perform, as shall be
showed hereafter. But it may be inquired, what was
ordination's by the practice of the church in case any
presbyters disan-
nuiied by the presbyters took upon them to ordain?
church. ± * t ^
Were their ordinations allowed to
stand good, or not ? I answer, they were commonly
reversed and disannulled. As in the known case of
Ischyras,80 who was deposed by the synod of Alex
andria, because CoUuthus, who ordained him, was
no more than a presbyter, though pretending to be
a bishop : and in the case of those presbyters who
were reduced to the quality of laymen by the coun

cil of Sardica,81 because Eutychianus and Musa;us,
who ordained them, were only pretended bishops,
The council of Seville in Spain82 went a httle fur
ther; they deposed a presbyter and two deacons,
because the bishop only laid his hands upon them,
whilst a presbyter pronounced the blessing or con
secration prayer over them. And some other in
stances might be added of the hke nature, which
show that then they did not allow bishops so much
as to delegate or commission presbyters to ordain in
their name, but reserved this entirely to the episco
pal function.
The common pleas which some urge Sect 7
to the contrary, derogate nothing from to^^S,1^
the truth of this observation. For lm"led'
whereas it is said, 1. That the chorepiscopi were
only presbyters, and yet had power to ordain ; that
seems to be a plain mistake ; for all the chorepis
copi of the ancient chm-ch were real bishops, though
subordinate to other bishops ; as I shall show more
particularly hereafter, when I come to speak of
their order. 2. It is said, that the city presbyters
had power to ordain by the bishop's licence ; and
that this was estabhshed by canon in the council of
Ancyra.83 But this is grounded only upon a very
ambiguous sense, if not a corrupt reading of that
canon. For all the old translators render it much
otherwise, that the city presbyters shall do nothing11
without the licence and authority of the bishop, in
any part of the parish or diocese belonging to his
jurisdiction. Which agrees with what I have cited
before out of the council of Laodicea; and, several
other canons, which make presbyters dependent
upon their bishops in the ordinary exercise of their
function. (See before, Sect. 2. of this chapter.) And
some Greek copies " read it, iv iripej. vapoiieia, which
seems to signify that presbyters shall not officiate
in another diocese without letters dimissory from
their own bishop.
3. It is urged further, that Novatus, a presbyter
of Carthage, ordained Felicissimus a deacon. But
this seems to be no more than procuring him to be
ordained by some bishop. For Cyprian says he
made Novatian36 bishop of Rome after the same

25 Horn. 13. in 1 Tim. iv. 14. oil yip cirj irpKr^uTipoi.
liriaKOTrov ixtipoTovovv.
26 See Con. Nic. c. 19. Con. Antioch. u. 9. Con. Chal-
ced. c. 2et 6. Con. Carth. 3. c. 45. Can. Apost. c. 1.
27 Cornel. Ep. ad Fabium, ap. Euseb. lib. 6. u. 43.
28 Epiph. Hear. 75. Aerian.
29 Hienm. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. Alexandriae a Marco evan-
gelista usque ad Heraclam et Dionysium episcopos, pres
byteri semper unum ex se electum, in excelsiori gradu col-
locatum episcopum nominabant; quomodo si exercitus
imperatorem faciat.
30 Athan. Apol. 2. p. 732. Epist. Cler. Mareot. ibid. p.
784. 31 Con. Sard. can. 20.
32 Con. Hispal. 2. can. 5. Relatum est nobis de quibus-
dam clericis, quorum dum unus ad presbyterum, duo ad

Levitarum ministerium sacrarentur, episcopus oculorum
dolore detentus fertur manum suam super eos tantum im-
posuisse, et presbyter quidam illis contra ecclesiasticum or-
dinem benedictionem dedisse, &c. Hi gradum sacerdotii
vel Levitici ordinis, quem perverse adepti sunt, amittunt.
33 Con. Ancyr. can. 13.
34 Id. ex versione Dionysii exigui : Sed nee presbyteris
civitatis, sine praacepto episcopi, amplius aliquid imperare,
nee sine authoritate literarum ejus in unaquaque parochia
aliquid agere.
35 Cod. Can. edit. Ehinger.
36 Cypr. Ep. 49. al. 52. ad Cornel, p. 97. ed. Oxon. Quo.
niam pro magnitudine sua debeat Carthaginem Roma pra-
cedere, illic majora et graviora commisit. Qui istic ad
versus ecclesiam diaconum fecerat, illic episcopum fecit.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

29

manner as he had done Felicissimus, deacon at
Carthage. But now it is certain he did not ordain
Novatian, but only was instrumental in procuring
three obscure Italian bishops to come and ordain
him. And in that sense he might ordain Felicissi
mus too. But admit it were otherwise, it was only
a schismatical act, condemned by Cyprian and the
whole church.
4. It is pleaded out of Cassian, that Paphnutius, an
Egyptian abbot, ordained one Daniel a presbyter.
But if Cassian's words be rightly considered, he
says no such thing, but only37 that Paphnutius first
promoted him to be made a deacon before several of
his seniors, and then, intending to make him his
successor, he also preferred him to the dignity of a
presbyter. Which preference, or promotion, does
not at all exclude the bishop's ordination. It may
reasonably signify the abbot's choice, which he had
power to make ; but it cannot so reasonably be in
terpreted that he ordained him, since this was con
trary to the rules and practice of the church. And
considering where and when Paphnutius lived, in
the midst of Egypt, among a hundred bishops, in
the fifth century, it is not likely he would transgress
the canons in so plain a case. Therefore I cannot
subscribe to a learned man,38 who says, Nothing is
more plain and evident, than that here a presbyter
ordained a presbyter, which we no where read was
pronounced null by Theophilus, then bishop of
Alexandria, nor any others at that time. I con
ceive, the contrary was rather evident to them, and
therefore they had no reason to pronounce it null,
knowing it to be a just and regular ordination.
5. I remember but one instance more in ancient
church history (for modern instances I wholly pass
by) that seems to make any thing for the ordination
of presbyters ; and that is in the answer given by
Pope Leo to a question put to him by Rusticus Nar-
bonensis, whether the ordination of certain persons
might stand good, who were only ordained by some
pseudo-episcopi, false bishops, who had no legal and
canonical right to their places ? To this he answers,39
that if the lawful bishops of those churches gave
their consent to their ordination, it might be esteem
ed vahd and allowed ; otherwise to be disannulled.
But here it is to be considered, that these pseudo-
episcopi were in some sense bishops, as being or
dained, though illegally, to their places : for they
seem to be such as had schismatically intruded

themselves into other men's sees, or at least obtain
ed them by some corrupt and irregular practices.
Now, the church did not always rescind and cancel
the acts of such bishops, but used a liberty either to
reverse and disannul the ordinations made by them,
or otherwise to confirm and ratify them, as she saw
occasion. Therefore, though the general council40
of Constantinople deposed all such as were ordain
ed by Maximus, who had simoniacally intruded
himself into Gregory Nazianzen's see at Constan
tinople; yet the Novatian clergy were admitted by
the council of Nice,41 though ordained by schis
matical bishops ; and the African councils42 allowed
the ordinations of the Donatist bishops, though they
had long continued in schism, and given schis
matical orders to others also. Which shows that
the primitive church made some difference between
orders conferred by schismatical bishops, and those
conferred by mere presbyters. I inquire not now
into the grounds and reasons of this, but only relate
the church's practice. From which upon the whole
matter it appears, that this was another difference
betwixt bishops and presbyters, that the one had
power to ordain, but the other were never authorized
or commissioned to do it.
Besides this, there was a third Sect 8
difference between bishops and pres- bet4"rdb?s*'pTce
byters in point of jurisdiction : bi- ^£ac™-t-
shops always retained to themselves SJp>%o?bishor»
.. r> ,i< ... to fheir presbyters.
the power of calling presbyters to an
account, and censuring them for their miscarriages
in the discharge of their office ; but presbyters had
no power to censure their bishops, or set up an in
dependent power in opposition to their authority
and jurisdiction. When Felicissimus and Augen-
dus set up a separate communion at Carthage against
Cyprian, threatening toexcommunicate all that com
municated with him, Cyprian gave orders to his de
puties (being himself then in banishment) to execute
first their own sentence upon them, and let them,
for their contempt of him and the church,43 feel the
power of excommunication ; which was accordingly
done by his delegates, as appears from their an
swer to him.44 In another place, writing to Roga-
tian, a bishop who made complaint to Cyprian and
the synod, of an unruly deacon, he tells him, it
was his singular modesty to refer the case to them,
when he might by virtue of his own episcopal au
thority himself have punished the delinquent;45

87 Cassian. Collat. 4. c. 1. A beato Paphnutio solitudinis
ejusdem presbytero, et quidem cum multis junior esset
eatate, ad diaconii est praelatus officium.  Optansque
sibimet successorem dignissimum providere, superstes eum
presbyterii honore provexit.
38 Stilling. Ireuic. par. 2. u. 7. n. 8. p. 380.
39 Leo, Ep. 92. ad Rustic, c. 1. Si qui autem clerici ab istis
pseudo-episcopisineisecclesiisordinatisunt,quaeadproprios episcopos pertinebant, et ordinatio eorum cum consensu et
judicio praesidentium facta est, potest rata haberi, &c.

40 Con. Constant, can. 4. 41 Con. Nic. c. 8.
42 Collat. Carthag. 1. Die, c. 16.
43 Cypr. Ep. 38. al. 41. p. 80. Cum Felicissimus commi-
natus sit, non communicaturos in monte (al. morte) secum,
qui nobis communicarent : accipiat sententiam quam prior
dixit ; ut absentum a se nobis sciat.
44 Ep. 39. al. 42. ad Cypr. Abstinuimus communicatione
Felicissimum et Augendum, &o.
45 Cypr. Ep. 65. al. 3. ad Rogatian. Tu quidem pro solita
tua humilitate feeisti, ut malles de eo nobis conqueri, cum pro

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

30
against whom, if he persisted in his contempt, he
should use the power which belonged to his order,
and either depose or suspend him. Nothing can
be more plain and evident, than that in Cyprian's
time all bishops were invested with this power of
censuring delinquents among the clergy. And any
one that looks into the councils of the following
age, will find nothing more common, than canons
which both suppose and confirm this power. As
when the Apostolical Canons say,46 That no presby
ter, or deacon, excommunicated by his own bishop,
should be received by any other ; that supposes all
bishops to have power ta inflict ecclesiastical cen
sures upon their clergy. The like may be seen in
the canons of the council of Nice,47 which allows an
appeal in such a case to a provincial synod ; and
the council of Sardica,48 which orders the metropoli
tan to hear and redress the grievance : so also in the
councils of Antioch,49 Chalcedon,50 and many others.
Yet it must be owned, that accord-
vet bishoPs; ing to the disciphne and custom of
power not arbitrary, . ... 11 v 1
tut limited bycinoi. those times, bishops seldom did any
in various respects. x
thing of this nature, without the ad
vice and consent of their presbyters, who were their
assessors, and (as it were) the ecclesiastical senate
and council of the church : of which I shall give
a more particular account, when I come to speak of
the honour and privileges of the order of presbyters.
And here it is to be further noted out of the pre
ceding canons, That if any clergyman thought him
self injured by his bishop, he had hberty to appeal51
either to the metropolitan, or a provincial synod :
and in some places, the better to avoid arbitrary
power, the canons provided, That no bishop should
proceed to censure a presbyter, or deacon, without
the concurrence of some neighbouring bishops to
join with him in the sentence. The first council of
Carthage52 requires three to censure a deacon, and
six to censure a presbyter. The second council of
Carthage53 requires the same number, according to
all correct editions of it : for Crab's edition is pal
pably false ; and yet Blondel54 lays hold of that cor
ruption, to prove that presbyters and deacons were
to be judges of their own bishop ; which makes the
canon speak mere nonsense, and appoints the bi-

Book II.

shop to judge himself also. The true reading of
the canon is this: The criminal cause of a bishop
shall be heard by twelve bishops ; the cause of a
presbyter, by six ; the cause of a deacon, by three
joined with his own bishop. This obhges every
bishop to take other bishops into commission with
him in criminal causes, but does not authorize pres
byters and deacons to sit as judges upon their own
bishop. Which may be further evidenced from
another canon55 of the next council of Carthage;
which speaks of a legal number of bishops to judge
a presbyter, or deacon ; and assigns six for a pres
byter, and three for a deacon, as the former canons
appointed. But for the inferior clergy, there was
no such restraint laid upon the bishop, that I can
find ; but he alone, by the same canon,86 is allowed
to hear their causes, and end them. Only they had
hberty to appeal, as all others, in case of injury done
them, to the metropolitan, or a provincial synod;
which the Nicene council,57 and many others, ap
point to be held once or twice a year for that very
purpose ; That if any clergyman chanced to he un
justly censured by the passion of his bishop, he
might have recourse to a superior court, and there
have justice done him. This is the true state and
account, of the power of bishops over their clergy,
as near as I can collect it out of the genuine records
of the ancient church.

CHAPTER IV.
OF THE POWER OP BISHOPS OVER THE LAITY,
MONKS, SUBORDINATE MAGISTRATES, AND ALL
PERSONS WITHIN THEIR DIOCESE: AND OF THEIR
OFFICE IN DISPOSING OP THE REVENUES OF THE
CHURCH.
The next thing to be considered is,
the power of bishops over the people ; No exemption'.
... . . .,, „ , from thejurisdictos
which, upon inquiry, will be found to of the bishop miti
* ^- J 7 primitive church.
extend itself over all persons, of what
rank or quality soever, within their diocese, or the

episcopatus vigore et cathedrae auctoritate haberes potesta
tem, qua posses de illo stalim vindicari.  Quod si ultra
te contumeliis suis provocaverit, fungeris circa eum potestate
honoris tui, ut eum vel deponas vel abstineas. See also
Cypr. Ep. 10. al. 16. ed. Oxon.
48 Canon. Apost. u. 31. 4I Con. Nic. can. 5.
43 Con. Sard. can. 13, 14.
« Con. Antioc. can. 3 et 4. "> Chalced. can. 9.
54 See for the liberty of appeals : Con. Carthag. 2. c. 8.
Carthag. 4. c. 29 et 66. Antioch. t. 12. Vasion. c. 5.
Venetic. can. 9.
52 Con. Carthag. 1. can. 11. Si quis aliquam causam
hahuerit, a tribus vicinis episcopis, si diaconus est, arguutur :
presbyter a sex.

53 Con. Carth. 2. can. 10. Placet ut causa criminalis
episcopi a duodeciin episcopis audiatur; causa presbyteri a
sex ; causa vero diaeoni a tribus cum proprio episcopo.
54 Blondel, Apol. p. 137. And Crab thus reads it cor
ruptly : Episcopus a duodecim episcopis audiatur, et a sex
presbyteris, et a tribus diaconibus cum proprio suo episcopo,
55 Con. Carth. 3. c. 8. Si presbyteri vel diaeoni fuerint
accusati, adjuncto sibi ex vicinis locis legitimo numero col-
iegarum  in presbyteri nomine sex, in diaeoni tribus,"ip-
sorum causas discutiant.
66 Ibid. c. 8. Reliquorum clericorum causas solus episco*
pus loci agnoscat et finiat.
67 Con. Nic. can. 5.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

31

bounds and limits of their jurisdiction. The extent
of dioceses themselves, and the reasons why some
were much greater than others, I do not here con
sider ; but reserve that for a more proper place, to
be treated of when we come to speak of churches.
What I observe in this place is, that all orders of
men within the diocese were subject to the bishop ;
for privileges to exempt men from the jurisdiction
of their diocesan, were things unknown to former
ages. Ignatius makes bold to say,1 that as he that
honours his bishop is honoured of God ; so he that
does any thing covertly in opposition to him, is the
servant of Satan. And Cyprian defines the church2
to be a people united to its bishop, a flock adhering
to its pastor. Whence the church may be said to be
in the bishop, and the bishop in the church ; and
if any are not with their bishop, they are not in the
church. Particularly, we may observe of all
ah monks 'suwcct ascetics, and monks, and hermits ;
diocese whoe "the;* that the laws, both ecclesiastical and
civil, subjected them to the bishop of
the place where they lived. For ecclesiastical laws,
we have two canons in the council of Chalcedon8 to
this purpose ; the first of which prescribes, that all
monks, whether in city or country, shall be subject
to the bishop, and concern themselves in no business
(sacred or civil) out of their own monastery ; except
they have his licence and permission, upon urgent
occasion, so to do. And if any withdraw themselves
from his obedience, the other canon pronounces ex
communication against them. The same injunctions
may be read in the councils of Orleans,4 Agde,5 Le-
rida,6 and others ; which subject the abbots as well
as monks to the bishop's care and correction. Jus
tinian confirms all this by a law in the Code ; which
says,7 all monasteries are to be reckoned under the
jurisdiction of the bishop of the territories where
they are ; and that the abbots themselves are part of
their care. In one of his Novels,8 the election of
abbots is put into the bishop's hands. And by other
laws,9 no new cells, or monasteries, were to be erected,
but by the consent and licence of the bishop, to
whose jurisdiction they belonged. It is therefore a
very just reflection, which Bede, and some others1"
from him, make upon the state of the Scottish

church; that things were in a very unusual and
preposterous order, when, instead of abbots being
subject to the bishops, the bishops were subject to a
single abbot. This was ordine inusitato, as Bede11
rightly observes ; for there was no such practice al
lowed in the primitive church.
In those days, the authority of
bishops was so highly esteemed, and Asaisoaii'snivr-
. . . . „ dinate magistrates
venerable in the eyes of all men, that m matte™ or sPi-
, ritual jurisdiction.
even the subordinate magistrates them
selves were subject to their spiritual discipline and
correction. The prefects and governors of cities and
provinces were obliged to take their communicatory
letters along with them to the bishop of the place,
whither the government sent them ; and whilst they
continued in their office there, they were to be under
the bish ^p's care ; who, if they transgressed against
the public discipline of the church, was authorized
by the imperial laws to punish them with excom
munication. This we learn from a canon of the first
council of Aries ; 12 which was called by Constantine
himself, who ratified its canons, and gave them, as it
were, the force of imperial sanctions. 'And by virtue
of this power, they sometimes unsheathed the spiritual
sword against impious and profane magistrates, and
cut them off from all communion with the church.
Of which we have an instance in Synesius, bishop of
Ptolemais,13 excommunicating Andronicus the go
vernor, for his cruelties and blasphemies ; and many
other such examples, which will be mentioned when
we come to treat particularly of the discipline of the
church. As to what concerns the bishop's power to
inspect and examine the acts and decrees of subor
dinate magistrates; Socrates "assures us it was prac
tised by Cyril of Alexandria, in reference to Orestes,
the preefectus Augustalis of Egypt ; though, as he
intimates, it was some grievance to him to be under
his inspection.
But it must be owned and spoken to sect. 4.
.1_ . n ., .... , . i Of the distinction
tne glory ot those primitive bishops, bctwrm temporal
that they challenged no power, as of diction : bishops-
. . pmver wholly con-
right belonging to them, but only that fined to the latter.
which was spiritual. They did not as yet lay claim
to both swords, much less endeavour to wrest the
temporal sword out of the magistrate's hand, and
dethrone princes under pretence of excommunica-

1 Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. n. 9. b Xadpa iirio-Koirov t\
vpaacrwv, Tea StafsoXett XaTpEuEl.
2 Cypr. Epist. 69. al. 66. ad Papian. p. 168. Ecclesia
plebs sacerdoti unita, et pastori suo grex adhaerens. Unde
scire debes episcopum in ecclesia esse, et ecclesiam in
episcopo; et si qui cum episcopo non sint, in ecclesia non
esse, &c.
3 Con. Chalced. can. 4 et 8. ' Con. Aurel. 1. ... 19.
' Agathens. can. 38. 6 Ilerdens. c. 3.
7 Cod. Just. lib. 1. tit. 3. de Episcop. Leg. 40.
8 Justin. Novel. 5. c. 9.
' Con. Chalced. can. 4. Con. Agath. c. 58.
18 Pearson, Vind. Ignat. part 1. c. 11. p. 333.

11 Bed. Hist. Gent. Anglor. lib. 3. u. 4. Cujus juri et
omnis provincia, et ipsi etiam episcopi ordine inusitato de-
beant esse subjecti.
12 Con. Arelat. 2. c. 7. De praesidibus  ita placuit, ut
cum promoti fuerint, literas accipiant ecclesiasticas com-
municatorias : ita tameu ut in quibuscunque locis gesserint,
ab episcopo ejusdem loci cura de illis agatur; at cum coe-
perint contra disciplinam publicam agere, tunc demum a
communione excludantur. Similiter et de his fiat, qui rem-
publicam agere volunt.
13 Synes. Ep. 58. ad Episcopos, p. 198.
14 Socrat. lib. 7. c 13.

32

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

tion. The ancient bishops of Rome themselves
always professed obedience and subjection to the
emperor's laws; which I shall not stand here to
prove, since it has so frequently and so substantially
been done by several of our learned writers :15 and
it is confessed by the more ingenuous of the Romish
writers16 themselves, that Gregory VII. was the first
pope that pretended to depose Christian princes.
The ancient bishops of the church laid no claim to
a coercive power over the bodies or estates of men ;
but if ever they had occasion to make use of it, they
applied themselves to the secular magistrate, for his
assistance. As in the case of Paulus Samosatensis,
who kept possession of the bishop's house, after he
was deposed from his bishopric by the council of
Antioch. The fathers in that council having no
power to remove him, petitioned the emperor Aure
lian against him ;17 who, though a heathen, gave
judgment on their side, and ordered his officers to
see his sentence put in execution. And thus the
case stood, as to the power of bishops, for some ages
after under Christian emperors : insomuch that So
crates l" notes it as a very singular thing in Cyril,
bishop of Alexandria, that he undertook by his own
power to shut up the Novatian churches, seizing
upon their plate and sacred utensils, and depriving
their bishop Theopemptus of his substance. This
was done irctpa. rijg UpaTiKrjg ra&wc, beyond any ordi
nary power that bishops were then invested with ;
and though in after ages they attained to this power,
yet it was not by any inherent right pf their order,
but by the favour and indulgence of secular princes.
It must here also be further noted, that it was ever
esteemed dishonourable for bishops, so much as to
petition the secular power against the life of any
man, whom they had condemned by spiritual cen
sures. And therefore, when Ithacius and some other
Spanish bishops prevailed with Maximus to slay the
heretic Priscillian, St. Martin and many other pious
bishops petitioned against it, saying, It was enough
to expel heretics from the churches :18 and when they
could not prevail, they showed their resentments of
the fact against the author of it, refusing to admit
Ithacius, the sanguinary bishop, to their commu
nion. So great a concern had those holy men to keep
within the bounds of their spiritual jurisdiction !
sect. 5. And i(; may be observed, that the
B(vV«"fo™"S«[arS authority of bishops was never greater
rotative IK sraSing in the world, than when thev con-
fl...ra hn ..II r...r.r.... J
cerned themselves only in the exercise

them to all persons.

15 See Bishop Morton's Grand Impost, of the Church of
Rome, c. 11. Joh. Roffens. de Potest. Papae in Temporal
lib. 2. c. 2.
16 Otho Frisingens. Chron. lib. 6. c. 35. Greg. Tholosan.
de Repub. lib. 26. c 5.
" Euseb. lib. 7. c. 30. » Socrat. lib. 7. c. 7.
19 Sulp. Sever, lib. 2. p. 119. Maximum orare, ut san
guine infelicium abstineret : satis superque sufficere, ut epis-

of their own proper spiritual power. For then they
had a universal respect paid them by all sorts of
men ; insomuch that no Christian would pretend to
travel, without taking letters of credence with him
from his own bishop, if he meant to communicate
with the Christian church in a foreign country.
Such was the admirable unity of the church catho
hc in those days, and the blessed harmony and
consent of her bishops among one another ! These
letters were of divers sorts, according to the different
occasions or quality of the persons that carried them.
They are generally reduced to three kinds; the
epistolee commendatorics, communicatorice, and dimis-
sories. The first were such as were granted only to
persons of quality, or else persons whose reputation
had been called in question, or to the clergy who
had occasion to travel into foreign countries. The
second sort were granted to all who were in the
peace and communion of the church ; whence they
were also called pacificee, and ecclesiasticcs, and some
times canonical. The third sort were such as were
only given to the clergy, when they were to remove
from their own diocese, and settle in another ; and
they were to testify that they had their bishop's
leave to depart; whence they were called dimissoria,
and sometimes pacificce likewise. All these went
under the general name of formates ; because they
were written in a pecuhar form, with some particu
lar marks and characters, which served as special
signatures to distinguish them from counterfeits. I
shall not stand now to give any further account of
them here, but only observe, that it was the bishop's
sole prerogative to grant them; and none might
presume to do it, at least, without his authority and
commission. The council of Antioch2" allows coun
try bishops to write them; but expressly forbids
presbyters the privilege. And whereas, in times of
persecution, some confessors, who were of great
esteem in the church, would take upon them to grant
such letters by their own authority, and in their own
names ; the councils of Aries21 and Eliberis22 for
bade them to do it ; and ordered all persons who had
such letters, to take new communicatory letters from
the bishop. Baronius,23 and the common editors of
the councils who follow him, mistake these letters
for the libels which the confessors were used to grant
to the lapsi, to have them admitted into the com
munion of the church again : but Albaspiny21 cor
rects this mistake ; and rightly observes, that those
councils speak not of such libels as were given to

copali scntentia haeretici judicati ecclesiis pellerentur.
20 Con. Antioch. can." 8.
21 Con. Arelat. 1. c. 9. De his, qui confessorum literal!
offerant, placuit, ut sublatis eis Uteris, alias accipiant com-
municatorias. 22 Con. Elib. c. 25.
23 Baron, an. 142. Loaysa Not. in Con. Elib v. 25.
24 Albasp. Not. in Con. Elib. c. 25.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

33

the lapsi, but of such as were given to all Christians
who had occasion to travel into foreign countries ;
which it belonged to the bishops to grant, and not
to the confessors, whatever authority they might
otherwise have obtained by their honourable con
fession of Christ in time of persecution. The council
of Eliberis25 takes notice of another abuse of this
nature, and corrects it ; which was, that some wo
men of famous renown in the church, clergymen's
wives, as Albaspiny thinks, or rather the wives of
bishops, would presume both to grant and receive
such letters by their own authority ; all which the
council orders to be sunk, as being dangerous to
the disciphne and communion of the chm-ch, and
an encroachment upon the bishop's power, to whom
alone it belonged to grant them. For by all ancient
canons, this privilege is reserved entirely to bishops,
and this set their authority very high in the church,
for no one, either clergy or laity, could communi
cate in any church beside his own without these
testimonials from his bishop ; as may be seen in the
councils of Carthage,28 and Agde,27 and many others.
I have but one thing more to ob-
s«* *¦ „ .
of the bishop's serve concerning the power of bishops
power m disposing *¦
the'chS"""6 over t*le ch^ch, and that is, their
authority and concern in disposing of
the revenues of the church. I intend not here to
enter upon the discourse of ecclesiastical revenues,
(which has its proper plaoe in this work hereafter,)
but only to suggest now, that it was part of the
bishop's office and care to see them managed and
disposed of to the best advantage. The councils of
Antioch28 and Gangra29 have several canons to this
purpose, that all the incomes and oblations of the
church shall be dispensed at the will and discretion
of the bishop, to whom the people, and the souls of
men, are committed. Those called the Apostolical ™
Canons, and Constitutions sl speak of the same power.
And Cyprian32 notes, that all who received main
tenance from the church had it episcopo dispensante,
by the order and appointment of the bishop. He
did not indeed always dispense with his own hands,
but by proper assistants, such as his archdeacon,
and the ceconomus, which some canons33 order to be
one of the clergy of every church ; but these officers
were only stewards under him, both of his appoint
ing, as St. Jerom84 observes, and also accountable
to him as the supreme governor of the church.
Whence Possidius takes notice of the practice of

St. Austin; that though neither seal nor key was
ever seen in his hand, but some of his clergy were
always his administrators, yet he had his certain
times to audit their accounts ; so that all was still
his act, though administered and dispensed by the
hands of others. And this was agreeable to the
primitive rule and practice of the apostles, to whose
care and custody the peoples' oblations, and things
consecrated to God, were committed : they chose
deacons to be their assistants, as bishops did after
wards, still retaining power in their own hands to
direct and regulate them in the disposal of the
pubhc charity, as prime stewards of God's revenue,
and chief masters of his household.

CHAPTER V.
OF THE OFFICE OF BISHOPS, IN RELATION TO THE
WHOLE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
We have hitherto considered the of- SecL ,
fice and power of bishops over the everyWbishop™p-
, -, . ,» . -i posed to be bishop
clergy and people of their own par- y tw whole ca-
ticular churches : but there is yet
a more eminent branch of their pastoral office and
care behind, which is, their superintendency over
the whole cathohc church ; in which every bishop
was supposed to have an equal share, not as to what
concerned external polity and government, but the
prime, essential part of religion, the preservation of
the Christian faith. Whenever the faith was in
danger of being subverted by heresy, or destroyed
by persecution, then every bishop thought it part of
his duty and office to put to his helping hand, and
labour as much for any other diocese as his ovt n.
Dioceses were but limits of convenience, for the
preservation of order in times of peace; but the
faith was a more universal thing, and when war
was made upon that, then the whole world was but
one diocese, and the whole church but one flock,
and every pastor thought himself obhged to feed his
great Master's sheep according to his power, what
ever part of the- world they were scattered in. In
this sense, every bishop was a universal pastor and
bishop of the whole world, as having a common
care and concern for the whole church of Christ.
This is what St. Austin told Boniface,1 bishop of

25 Con. Elib. c. 81.
26 Con. Carth. 1. can. 7. Clericus vel laicus non com-
municet in aliena plebe sine Uteris episcopi sui.
27 Agath. can. 52. Epaun. c. 6. Laodic. c. 41. Milevit.
u. 20. Con. Antioch. c. 7.
28 Con. Antioch. c. 24 et 25. 2S Con. Gangr. c. 7 et 8.
30 Canon. Apost. e. 31 et 31.
31 Constit. Apostol. lib. 2. c. 25.
32 Cypr. Ep. 38. al. 41. Just. Mart. Apol. 2.

33 Con. Chalced. c. 26.
34 Hieron. Ep. 1. ad Nepotian. Sciat episcopus, cul
commissa est ecclesia, quem dispensation! pauperum, cu-
raeque praeficiat.
1 Aug. cont. Epist. Pelag. in Praafat. ad Bonifac. Com
munis est nobis omnibus, qui fungimur episcopatus officio
(quamvis ipse in eo celsiore fastigio praemineas) specula
pastoralis.

34

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

Rome, that the pastoral care was common to all
those who had the office of bishop ; and though he
was a little higher advanced toward the top of
Christ's watch-tower, yet all others had an equal
concern in it. St. Cyprian testifies,2 for the prac
tice of his own time, that all bishops were so united
in one body, that if any of the body broached any
heresy, or began to lay waste and tear the flock of
Christ, all the rest immediately came in to its
rescue ; for though they were many pastors, yet
they had but one flock to feed, and every one was
obliged to take care of all the sheep of Christ,
which he had purchased with his blood. In this
sense Gregory Nazianzen3 says of Cyprian, that he
was a universal bishop, that he presided not only
over the church of Carthage and Africa, but over all
the regions of the west, and over the east, and south,
and northern parts of the world also. He says the
same of Athanasius ;4 that in being made bishop of
Alexandria, he was made bishop of the whole world.
Which agrees with St. Basil's observation5 con
cerning him ; that he had the care of all churches,
as much as that which was peculiarly committed to
him. Chrysostom6 in like manner styles Timothy,
bishop of the universe: and in compliance with
this customary character, the author under the
name of Clemens Romanus,7 gives St. James bishop
of Jerusalem the title of governor of all churches,
as well as that of Jerusalem. Chrysostom8 says, St.
Paul had the whole world committed to his care,
and every city under the sun ; that he was the
teacher" of the universe, and presided1" over all
churches : which he repeats in many places of his
writings. Nor was this prerogative so pecuhar to
the apostles, but that every bishop (in some measure)
had a right and title to the same character.
Sccl 2 Hence came that current notion, so
thlVrlo'rEfbut frequently to be met with in Cyprian,
™edbTshopSdto' of but one bishopric in the church;
the church. . . -, . . , . -, . .
wherein every single bishop had his
share in such a manner, as to have an equal concern
in the whole : Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in
solidum pars tenetur:" There is but one bishopric
in the church, and every bishop has an undivided

portion in it. He does not say, it was a monarchy,
in the hands of any single bishop ; but a diffusive
power, that lay in the whole college of bishops,"
every one of which had a title to feed the whole
church of God, and drive away heresy out of any
part of it. In this sense, the bishop of Eugubium's
power extended as far as the bishop of Rome's ; the
bishop of Rhegium was as much bishop of the whole
church, as Constantinople ; and Tanis equal to Alex
andria : for in St. Jerom's language,13 they were all
ejusdem meriti, and ejusdem sacerdotii; of the same
merit, and equal in their priesthood, which was but
one. In things that did not appertain to the faith,
they were not to meddle with other men's dioceses,
but only to mind the business of their own : but when
the faith or welfare of the church lay at stake, and
religion was manifestly invaded ; then, by this rule
of there being but one episcopacy, every other
bishopric was as much their diocese as their own .
and no human laws or canons could tie up their
hands from performing such acts of their episcopal
office in any part of the world, as they thought neces
sary for the preservation of religion.
For the better understanding the

Sect 3.

church's practice in this point, I shall ^l^^
illustrate it in two or three particular bishop of Si
T , • , , ¦ universal church.
instances. It was a rule in the primi
tive church, that no bishop should ordain in another's
diocese, without his leave : and though this was a
sort of confinement of the episcopal power to a single
diocese, yet for order's sake it was generally observed.
But then it might happen, that in some cases there
might be a necessity to do otherwise : as in case the
bishop of any diocese was turned heretic, and would
ordain none but heretical clergy, and persecute and
drive away the orthodox ; in that case, any catholic
bishop, as being a bishop of the universal church,
was authorized to ordain orthodox men in such a
diocese, though contrary to the common rule ; be
cause this was evidently for the preservation of the
faith, which is the supreme rule of all, and therefore
that other rule must give way to this superior obli
gation. Upon this account, when the church was
in danger of being overrun with Arianism, the great

2 Cypr. Ep. 68. al. 67. ad Steph. p. 178. Idcirco copi-
osum corpus est sacerdotum, concordioe mutuae glutino atque
unitatis vinculo copulatum, ut si quis ex collegio nostro
haaresin facere, et gregem Christi lacerare et vastare tenta-
vefit, subveniant caeteri.  Nam etsi pastores multi sumus,
unum tamen gregem pascimus, et oves universas, quas
Christus sanguine suo et passione quaesivit, colligere et
fovere debemus.
3 Greg. Naz. Orat. 18. in Laud. Cypr.
4 Naz. in Laud. Athan. Or. 21 . p. 377. tjjs oiieovpivr]<i
orao-ijs iiriaTacriav iricTTEViTal.
5 Basil. Ep. 52. ad Athanas.
6 Chrys. Horn. 6. adv. Jud. t. 1. p. 542. tiju -rfis oIkov-
ut'ptjs irpactTacriav iyKEXEipierpivos.
7 Pseudo-Clem. Ep. ad Jacob, ap. Coteler. Patr. Apost.

t. 1. p. 611. Clemens Jacobo — Regenti Hebraeorum sanc
tam ecclesiam in Hierosolymis; sed et omnes ecclesias,
quae ubique Dei providentia fundatae sunt.
9 Chrys. Horn. 17. in illud, Salutate Priscillam. t. 5. p.
241. Ti)if olieovpiirnv diracrau e-y/CE^Etpto-iiEl/os, &c.
9 Id. Horn. 6. in Terraemotum et Lazar. t. 5. p. 107.
X77S oiKouirtVijs ftLdaericaXos.
10 Id. Horn. 17. in Priscillam. p. 248.
11 Cypr. de Unit. Eccl. p. 108.
12 Id. Ep. 52. al. 55. ad Antonian. p. 112. Episcopate
unus, episcoporum multorum concordi numerositate dif-
fusus, &c. In the same Epistle he often mentions the col
legium sacerdotale. It. Epist. 59 et 68.
13 Hieron. Ep. 85. ad Evagr.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

35

Athanasius, as he returned from his exile, made no
scruple to ordain in several cities 14 as he went along,
though they were not in his own diocese. And the
famous Eusebius of Samosata, did the like in the
times of the Arian persecution under Valens. Theo
doret15 says, he went about all Syria, Phoenicia, and
Palestine, in a soldier's habit ; ordaining presbyters
and deacons, and setting in order whatever he found
wanting in the churches. He ordained bishops also
in Syria and Cilicia, and other places ; whose names
Theodoret16 has recorded. Now all this was contrary
to the common rules, but the necessities of the church
required it ; and that gave them authority in such a
case to exert their power, and act as bishops of the
whole cathohc church. Epiphanius made use of
the same power and privilege in a hke case ; ordain
ing Paulinianus, St. Jerom's brother, first deacon,
and then presbyter, in a monastery out of his own
diocese in Palestine ; against which, when some of
his adversaries objected, that it was done contrary
to canon, he vindicated17 his practice upon the
strength of this principle ; that in cases of pressing
necessity, such as this was, where the interest of God
was to be served, every bishop had power to act in
any part of the church : for though all bishops had
their particular churches to officiate in, and were
not ordinarily to exceed their own bounds ; yet the
love of Christ was a rule above all : and therefore
men were not barely to consider the thing that was
done, but the circumstances of the action, the time,
the manner, the persons for whose sake, and the end
for which it was done. Thus Epiphanius apologizes
for the exercise of his episcopal power in the diocese
of another man. Now, from all this it appears, that
every bishop was as much a universal bishop, and
had as much the care of the whole church, as the
bishop of Rome himself; there being no acts of the
episcopal office, which they could not perform in
any part of the world, when need required, without
a dispensation, as well as he. All that he enjoyed
above others, was only the rights of a metropolitan,
or a patriarch, and those confined by the canons to
a certain district ; of which more hereafter in their
proper place.

14 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 24.
15 Theod. lib. 4. c. 13.
16 Theod. lib. 5. ... 4.
17 Epiphan. Ep. ad Joan. Hierosol. Ob Dei timorem
hoc sumus facere compulsi : maxime cum nulla sit diver-
sitas in sacerdotio Dei, et ubi utilitati Dei providetur.
Nam etsi singuli ecclesiarum episcopi habent sub se eccle
sias, quibus curam videntur impendere, et nemo super
D 2

CHAPTER VI.
OF THE INDEPENDENCY OF BISHOPS, ESPECIALLY
IN THE CYPRIANIC AGE, AND IN THE AFRICAN
CHURCHES.
There is one thing more must be
taken notice of, whilst we are con- what'meant by
... . . ™. r> . • i the independency ol
siaermg the proper otnce of bishops, bishops one of an-
..-,.,.. „ other, and their ab-
which is, the absolute power of every »olute p<™erintheir
, , x - own church.
bishop in his own church, independent
of all others. For the right understanding the
just limits of this power, we are to distinguish be
tween the substantial and the ritual part of rehgion.
For it was in the latter chiefly that bishops had an
absolute power in their own church, being at liberty
to use what indifferent rites they thought fit in their
own church, without being accountable for their
practice to any other. In matters of faith, indeed,
when they corrupted the truth by heretical doc
trines, or introduced any rituals that were destruc
tive of it, there they were obnoxious to the censure
of all other bishops ; and every individual of the
whole catholic college of bishops (as has been noted
in the last chapter) was authorized to oppose them :
but in such indifferent rites as were lawful to be
used in the church, every bishop was allowed to
choose for himself, and his own church, such as he
thought fit and expedient in his own wisdom and
discretion. Thus, for instance, though there s
was but one form of worship through- Ubtriyb£h&hthdeu
out the whole church, as to what con- owa "'"se
cerned the substance of Christian worship ; yet every
bishop was at hberty to form his own liturgy in
what method and words he thought proper, only
keeping to the analogy of faith and sound doctrine.
Thus Gregory Nazianzen observes of St. Basil, that
among other good services which he did for the
church of Caesarea, whilst he was but a presbyter
in it, one was ] the composing of forms of prayer,
which by the consent and authority of his bishop
Eusebius were used by the church. And this is
thought not improbably by some2 to be the first
draught of that liturgy, which bears his name to
this day. The church of Neo-Ctesarea in Pontus,
where St. Basil was born, had a liturgy peculiar to
themselves, which St. Basil3 speaks of in one of his
Epistles. Chrysostom's liturgy, which he composed

alienam mensuram extenditur; tamen praeponitur omnibus
eharitas Christi, in qua nulla simulatio est : nee consideran-
dum quid factum sit, sed quo tempore, et quo modo, et in
quibus, et quare factum sit.
1 Naz. Orat. 20. in Laud. Basil, p. 340. i'i>xu>v cWxo:£e«,
Kal EVKoa-pias tS jSrJjUaTos.
2 Billius, Not. in loc. Cave, Hist. Liter, vol ' d. 194.
3 Basil, Ep.-63. ad Neocaesar.

36

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

for the church of Constantinople, differed from
these. The Ambrosian form differed from the Ro
man, and the Roman from others. The Africans
had peculiar forms of their own, differing from the
Roman, as appears from some passages cited by
Victorious Afer and Fulgentius, out of the African
liturgies, which Cardinal Bona4 owns are not to be
found in the Roman. The like observation may be made
And express the UDOn f^g creeds usedin divers churches.
same creed in an- "-^
ferent forms. There was but one rule of faith, as
TertuUian5 calls it, and that fixed and unalterable,
as to the substance, throughout the whole church.
Yet there were different ways of expressing it, as
appears from the several forms still extant, which
differ something from one another. Those in Ire
neeus,6 in Cyprian,7 and Tertullian,8 are not exactly
in the same method nor form of words. The creed
of Eusebius 9 and his church of Ctesarea differed from
that of Jerusalem, upon which Cyril 18 comments ;
and that of Cyril's, from that in St. James's " liturgy.
And to omit abundance more that might here be
mentioned, the creed of Aquileia recited by Ruffin12
differs from the Roman creed, which is that we
commonly call the Apostles' creed. Now, the reason
of all this difference could be no other but this, that
all bishops had power to frame the creeds of their
own churches, and express them in such terms as
suited best, their own convenience, and to meet with
the heresies they were most in danger from : as
Ruffin observes that the words, invisible and im
passible, were added to the first article in the creed
of Aquileia, in opposition to the Patripassian or
Sabellian heretics, who asserted that the Father was
visible and passible in human flesh, as well as the
Son. And it is evident the bishops of other churches
used the same hberty, as they saw occasion.
It were easy to confirm this observ

Sect. 4.
id appoir
ticular days of fast-

And appoint par- ation by many other instances of the
- fas-

like nature; but I shall only name
one more, which is the power every
bishop had to appoint particular days of fasting in
his own church. This we learn from St. Austin's
answer to Casulanus about the Saturday fast. Ca-
sulanus was very much troubled and perplexed about

it, because he observed in Africa some churches
keep it a fast, and others a festival; nay, sometimes
in the same church men were divided in their prac
tice, and one part dined on that day, whilst another
fasted. Now, to remove Casulanus his scruple, St.
Austin gives him this answer :18 That the best way
in this case was, to follow those who were the rulers
of every church. Therefore, if he would take his
advice, he should never resist his bishop in this
matter, but do as he did without doubt or scrapie.
Which plainly imphes, that it was then in every
bishop's power to order or not order this fast in
his own church, as he saw most convenient.
And indeed these privileges of bi
shops, and their absolute and inde- Theind.pendcnej
r ' of bishops most
pendent power in all such matters, "SdScbet'
were no where more fully reserved to
them, than in the African churches, from the time
of Cyprian, who frequently makes mention of this
independent power; which extended not only to
mere rituals, but to several momentous points of
discipline ; such as the case of rebaptizing heretics,
admitting adulterers to the communion of the chm-ch
again, and the question about the validity of clinic
baptism. In these points Cyprian's opinion and
practice differed from others of his fellow bishops :
but yet he assumed no power of censuring those
that acted differently from what he did, nor separ
ated from their communion upon it; but left every
one to give an account of his own practice to God
the Judge of all. For the case of rebaptizing such
as were baptized by heretics, he was entirely for it,
as is sufficiently known to all ; but he was not so
zealous for it, as to exercise any judicial power of
deposing or excommunicating those who practised
otherwise ; but declares he left every bishop to his
hberty, to act according to his judgment, and an
swer for what he did to God alone. To this pur
pose he expresses himself in his letter to Pope
Stephen,14 and that to Jubaianus,15 but most fully in
his speech delivered at the opening of the great
council of Carthage, which met to consider this
very question. Let us every one now, says he,
give our opinion of this matter ; 16 judging no man,
nor repelling any from our communion, that shall

4 Bona, Rer. Liturgie. lib. 1. c. 7. n. 3.
5 Tertul. de veland. Virg. c. 1. Regula fidei una omnino
est, sola immobilis et irreformabilis, Sec.
6 Iren. lib. 1. c. 2.
» Cypr. Ep. 70. ad Episc. Numid. p. 190. It. Ep. 76. al.
69. ad Magnum, p. 183. ed. Oxon.
6 Tertul. ibid.
3 Euseb. Ep. ad Caesariens. ap. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 8.
10 Cyril. Hierosol. Catech. 4.
" Liturg. Jacobi. Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 2. p. 7.
12 Ruffin. in Symbol. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipo-
tentem, invisibilem, et impassibilem.
13 Aug. Ep. 86. ad Casulan. Mos eorum mihi sequendus
videtur, quibus eorum populorum congregatio regenda com-
missa est. Quapropter si consilio meo acquiescis : episcopo

tuo in hac re noli resistere, et quod facit ipse, sine ullu scru-
pulo vel disceptatione sectare.
14 Cypr. Ep. 72. adSteph. p. 197. Qua in re necnosvim
cuiquam facimus, aut legem damus, cum habeat in ecclesia!
administratione voluntatis suae arbitrium liberum unusquis-
que propositus, rationem actus sui Domino redditurus.
15 Ep. 73. ad Jubaian. p. 210.
16 Con. Carth. ap. Cypr. p. 229. Superest ut de hac ipsa
re singuli quid sentiamus, proferaraus ; neminem judican-
tes, aut a jure communionis aliquem, si diversum senserit, .
amoventes. Neque enim quisquam nostrum episcopum se
episcoporum constituit, aut tyrannicoterrore ad obsequendi
necessitatem collegas suos adigit ; quando habeat omnis
episcopus pro licentia libertatis et potestatis suae, arbitrium
proprium; tamque judicari ab alio non possit, quam nee

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

37

think otherwise. For no one of us makes himself
bishop of bishops, or compels his colleagues by
tyrannical terror to a necessity of complying ; for
asmuch as every bishop, according to the liberty
and power that is granted him, is free to act as he
sees fit ; and can no more be judged by others, than
he can judge them. But let us all expect the judg
ment of our Lord Jesus Christ, who only hath
power both to invest us with the government of his
church, and to pass sentence upon our actions.
Thus far Cyprian, in full and open council, declares
for the independent power of every bishop, tacitly
reflecting upon the bishop of Rome, who pretended
to excommunicate those who differed in opinion and
practice from him, which Cyprian condemns as a
tyrannical way of proceeding.
For the next point, that is, the case of admitting
adulterers to communion again, Cyprian says his
predecessors in Africa were divided upon the ques
tion ; but they did not divide communion upon it :
for though some bishops admitted adulterers to
penance, and others refused to do it, yet they did
not censure each other's practice, but preserved
peace and concord among themselves,17 leaving
every one to answer to God for his actions. I know
indeed some learned persons IS interpret this liberty
of the African bishops so, as to make it mean no
more than a hberty to follow their own judgment,
till such times as the church should determine the
matter in dispute, by making some pubhc decree
about it. But I must own, I cannot but think
Cyprian meant something more, because he pleads
for the same liberty even after the decrees of a
plenary council ; as we have seen in his preface to
the council of Carthage.
As to the third question, about the validity of
clinic baptism, that is, whether persons who were
only sprinkled with water in their beds in time of
sickness, and not immersed or washed all over the
body in baptism, were to be looked upon as com
plete Christians ; Cyprian for his own part resolves
it in the affirmative. But yet, if any bishops were
otherwise persuaded, that it was not lawful baptism,
and upon that ground gave such persons a new
immersion, he professes 19 that he prescribes to none,
but leaves every one to act according to his own
judgment and discretion. This was that ancient
liberty of the Cyprianic age, of which I have dis
coursed a httle more particularly in this place, be-

ipse potest judicare. Sed exspectemus universi judicium
Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui unus et solus habet potesta
tem et praeponendi nos in ecclesiae suae gubernatione, et de
actu nostro judicandi.
17 Cypr. Ep. 52. al. 55. ad Antonian. p. 110.
18 Bishop Fell, Not. in loc. citat.
19 Cypr. Ep. 76. al. 69. ad Magnum, p. 186. Qua in parte
nemini verecundia et modestia nostra praejudicat, quo
minus unusquisque quod putat, sentiat, et quod senserit,

cause it shows us what was then the uncontested
power and privilege of every bishop in the African
church, which is not so commonly understood in
these latter ages.

CHAPTER VII.
OF THE POWER OP BISHOPS IN HEARING AND DE
TERMINING SECULAR CAUSES.

Sect. I.
common-
arbitrators

We have hitherto considered such
offices of the episcopal function, as lySX
belonged to all bishops by the laws of £" ac^iST"
God and the canons of the church. church-
Besides these there was one office more, imposed
upon them by custom, and the laws of the state ;
which was the hearing and determining secular
causes, upon the continual applications and ad
dresses that people made to them. For such was
the singular character and repute of bishops, and
such the entire confidence men generally reposed
in them for their integrity and justice, that they
were commonly appealed to, as the best arbitrators
of men's differences, and the most impartial judges
of the common disputes that happened among them.
Sidonius Apollinaris ¦ often refers to this custom :
and Synesius calls it2 part of his own episcopal
office and function. St. Ambrose testifies for him
self3 that he was used to be appealed to upon such
occasions ; and St. Austin4 says of him, that he was
often so much employed in hearing causes, that he
had scarce time for other business. And this was
St. Austin's case also, who frequently complains of
the burden5 that lay upon him in this respect. For
not only Christians, but men of all sects applied to
him : insomuch that, as Possidius 6 notes in his Life,
he often spent all the morning, and sometimes the
jvhole day, fasting and hearing their causes ; which,
though it was a great fatigue to him, yet he was
willing to bear it, because it gave him frequent op
portunities of instilling the principles of truth and
virtue into the minds of the parties that applied
themselves to him.
And it is to be observed, that though
there be no express text in the New thhhcustornnalwfhat
Testament, that commands bishops to fc""} by th.e ",''
be judges in secular causes, yet St. st.Paui,icor.v,.4.

faciat. It. p. 188. Nemini praoscribentes, quo minus
statuat quod putat unusquisque praepositus : actus sui ratio-
nem Domino redditurus.
' Sidon. lib. 3. Ep. 12. lib. 6. Ep. 2 et 4.
2 Synes. Ep. 105. p. 399.
8 Ambros. Ep. 24. ad Marcellum.
4 Aug, Confess, lib. 6. c. 3.
5 Aug. Ep. 110 et 147. It. de Opere Monach. c. 29.
6 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 19.

38

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II,

Austin was of opinion, that St. Paul, in prohibiting
men to go to law before the unbelievers, did virtu
ally lay this obligation upon them. For he says
once and again,7 that it was the apostle that insti
tuted ecclesiastical judges, and laid the burden of
secular causes upon them. By which he means,
that the apostle gave a general direction to Chris
tians to choose arbitrators among themselves ; and
that custom determined this office particularly to the
bishops, as the best qualified by their wisdom and
probity to discharge it. And this is very agreeable
to St. Paul's meaning, 1 Cor. vi. 4, as some very
learned and judicious critics8 understand him. For
though all the common translations render the
words, i£,ov$tvr)p.kvovg iv ry iidcXijaia, persons that
are least esteemed in the chm-ch ; yet Dr. Lightfoot
observes, that they may as well signify persons of
the greatest esteem. For the original word, tSot/3-t-
vnpivoi, signifies only private judges, or arbitrators
of men's own choosing ; such as were in use among
the Jews, who called them iSuurai, and non-authentici,
not because they were of the meanest and most con
temptible of the people, but because they were the
lowest rank of judges, and not settled as a standing
court by the sanhedrim, but chosen by the litigants
themselves to arbitrate their causes. Such private
judges the apostle directs the Christians to choose
in the church, and refer their controversies to them :
which is not any injunction to choose judges out of
the poorest, and meanest, and most ignorant of the
people, but rather the contrary, persons that were
well qualified by their wisdom and authority to take
upon them to be judges, and end controversies among
their brethren. Now because none were thought
better qualified in these respects than bishops, the
office of judging upon that account was commonly
imposed upon them, and they in decency and charity
could not well refuse it. This seems to be the true ori
ginal of this part of the episcopal office and function.
sect. 3. Put what was thus begun by cus-
shSs8cSnta„ed by torn, while the civil governors were
the imperial ia™. neatherlS) was afterward confirmed
and estabhshed by law, when the emperors became
Christians. Eusebius9 says, Constantine made a
law to confirm all such decisions of bishops in their
consistories, and that no secular judges should have
any power to reverse or disannul them ; forasmuch

as the priests of God were to be preferred before any
other judge. And Sozomen16 adds, that he gave
leave to all litigants to refer their causes to the de
termination of bishops, whose sentence should stand
good, and be as authentic as if it had been the de
cision of the emperor himself : and that the govern
ors of every province and their officers should be
obliged to put their decrees in execution. There is
a law now added at the end of the Theodosian Code,
which sometake forthis very lawof Constantine men
tioned by these authors. Selden himself reckons11
it a genuine piece ; but I think Gothofred's argu
ments are stronger to prove it spurious. For it
grants bishops such a power, as neither Eusebius
nor Sozomen mention, and all other laws contradict :
viz. That if either of the contending parties, the
possessor,12 or the plaintiff, was minded to bring the
cause before a bishop, either when it was before a
secular court, or when it was determined, he might
do it, though the other party was against it. Whereas
all laws and history are against this practice : for
no cause was to be brought before a bishop, except
both parties agreed by way of compromise to take
him for their arbitrator. In this case the bishop's
sentence was vahd, and to be executed by the secu
lar power, but not otherwise. So that either this
was not the genuine law of Constantine, to which
Eusebius and Sozomen refer, or else it was revoked
and contradicted by all others. Gothofred produces
a great many contrary laws. I shall content myself
with a single instance.
In the Justinian Code " we have Sect 4
two laws of the emperors Arcadius ^J'/Sii
and Honorius about the same matter, bTtvXXTiS
which may serve to explain the law i? "ake thcifffor
of Constantine. For there any bi
shops are allowed to judge, and their judgment is
ordered to be final, so as no appeal should be made
from it ; and the officers of the secular judges are
appointed to execute the bishop's sentence. But
then there are these two Umitations expressly put
in : first, that they shall only have power to judge,
when both parties agree by consent to refer their
causes to their arbitration. And, secondly, where
the causes are purely civil, and not criminal causes,
where perhaps life and death might be concerned.
For in such causes, the clergy were prohibited by

7 Aug. Ser. 24. in Psal. cxviii. Constituit talibus causis
ecclesiasticos apostolus cognitores, in foro prohibens jurgare
Christianos. Id. de Oper. Monach. c. 29. Quibus nos mo-
lestiis affixit apostolus, &c.
8 Lightfoot, et Lud. de Dieu, in 1-Cor. vi. 4.
0 Euseb. de Vit. Constant, lib. 4. c. 27.
10 Sozom. lib. 1. c. 9.
11 Selden, Uxor Hebr. lib. 3. c. 28. p. 564.
12 Extravag. de Elect. Judicii Episcop. ad Calcem Cod.
Theod. t. 4. p. 303. Quicunque litem habens, sive posses
sor, sive petitor erit, inter initia litis, vel decursis temporum
curriculis, sive cum negotium peroratur, sive cum jam coe-

perit promi seutentia, judicium eligit sacrosanctae legis an-
tistitis, ilico sine aliqua dubitatione, etiamsi alia pars re-
fragatur, ad episcopum cum sermone litigantium dirigatur.
Vid. Gothofred. Comment, in loc.
13 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 4. Leg. 7. Si qui ex consensu
apud sacraa legis antistitem litigare voluerint, non vetabun-
tur. Sed experientur illius in civili duntaxat negotio, more
arbitri sponte residentis judicium. Ibid. Leg. 8. Episco-
pale judicium ratum sit omnibus, qui se audiri a sacerdoti-
bus elegerint ; eamque eorum judicationi adhibendam esse
reverentiam jubemus, quam vestris deferri necesse est po-
testatibus, a quibus non licet provocare, &c.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

39

the canons of the church,14 as well as the laws of
the state, from being concerned as judges. There
fore bishops never suffered any criminal causes to
come before them, except such as were to be pun
ished with ecclesiastical censures.
SreL 6 But they had commonly civil causes
mSheTpS" more than enough flowing in upon
la^eMhSsubs'tl them. So that they were forced some-
tutes in this afiair. .¦ iii L j, .1 ¦ -, ,
times to let part of this care devolve
upon some other person, whose integrity and pru
dence they could confide in. This was commonly
one of their clergy, a presbyter or a principal dea
con. St. Austin, when he found the burden of this
affair begin to press too hard upon him, substituted
Eradius his presbyter15 in his room. And the coun
cil of Taragone speaks not only of presbyters, but
deacons also,16 who were deputed to hear secular
causes. And Socrates says,17 Sylvanus, bishop of
Troas, took the power wholly out of the hands of
his clergy, because he had found some of them faulty
in making an unlawful gain of the causes that were
brought before them; for which reason he never
deputed any one of them to be judge, but made
some layman his delegate, whom he knew to be a
man of integrity, and strict lover of justice. I leave
the learned to inquire, whether lay chancellors in
the church had not their first rise and original from
some such occasion as this, whilst bishops deputed
laymen to hear secular causes in their name, still
reserving the proper spiritual and ecclesiastical
power entirely to themselves.

CHAPTER VIII.

OF THE PRIVILEGE OF BISHOPS TO INTERCEDE FOR
CRIMINALS.
Srcl , I have observed in the foregoing
™d'1int«eatof0wer chapter, that bishops were never al-
Sgha'[„e'.e"cSd" lowed to be judges in capital or cri
minal causes, because they were not
to be concerned in blood : they were to be so far
from having any thing to do in the death of any
man, that custom made it almost a piece of their
office and duty to save men from death, by inter
ceding to the secular magistrates for criminals that
were condemned to die. St. Ambrose often made

use of this privilege, as the author of his Life ob
serves ; frequently addressing himself to Macedo-
nius,1 and Stilico,2 and other great ministers of the
age, in behalf of poor delinquents, to obtain pardon
for them. St. Austin did the same for the Circum
cellions, when they were convicted and condemned
for murdering some of the catholic clergy : he wrote
two pathetic letters3 to the African magistrates,
Marcellinus Comes, and Apringius, desiring that
their hves might be spared, and that they might
only be punished with close custody and confine
ment, where they might be set to work, and have
time allowed them for repentance. The council of
Sardica* seems to speak of it as the duty of all
bishops, to intercede for such as implored the mercy
of the church, when they were condemned to be
transported or banished, or any the like punish
ment. And the custom was become so general, that
it began to be considered as a condition in the elec
tion of a bishop, whether he were qualified to dis
charge this part of his office as well as others. Si
donius Apollinaris5 instances in such a case, where
it was made an objection by the people against the
election of a certain bishop, that being a man of a
monkish and retired life, he was fitter to be an ab
bot than a bishop : he might intercede, they said,
indeed with the heavenly Judge for their souls, but
he was not qualified to intercede with the earthly
judges for their bodies. He was not a man of ad
dress, which they then thought necessary to dis
charge this part of the office of a bishop. They
might perhaps judge wrong, as those in St. Jerom"
did, who pretended that clergymen ought to give
splendid entertainments to the secular judges, that
they might gain an interest in them ; whom St. Je
rom justly reproves, telling them, that any judge
would pay a greater reverence to a pious and sober
clergyman, than to a wealthy one, and would re
spect him more for his holiness than his riches.
However, this shows what was then the common
custom, and how great an interest bishops generally
had in the secular magistrate, who seldom rejected
any petitions of this nature. Socrates notes, that
even some of the Novatian bishops enjoyed this
privilege, as Paulus' of Constantinople, and Leon
tius8 of Rome, at whose intercession Theodosius
the emperor pardoned Symmachus, who had been
guilty of treason, in making a panegyric upon
Maximus the tyrant, but was, after his death, fled
for sanctuary to a Christian church.

14 Concil. Tarracon. can. 4. Habeant licentiam judi-
candi, exceptis criminalibus negotiis.
15 Aug. Ep. 110.
16 Con. Tarracon. c. 4. Nullus episcoporum, presbyter-
orum, vel clericorum, die Dominico propositum cujus-
cuuque, causae negotium audeat judicare.
17 Socrat. lib. 7. c. 37.
' Paulin. Vit. Ambros. p. 8. 2 Ibid. p. 12.
3 Aug. Ep. 159 et 160. 4 Con. Sardic. can. 7.

6 Sidon. lib. 7. Ep. 9. p. 443. Hie qui nominatur, inqui-
unt, non episcopi, sed potius abbatis complet officium: et
intercedere magis pro animabus apud coelestem, quam pro
corporibus apud terrenum judicem potest.
6 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Novatian. p. 15. Quod si obtenderis
te facere haec, ut roges pro miseris atque subjectis : judex
saeculi pins deferet clerico continents, quam diviti, et magis
sanctitatem tuam venerabitur quam opes.
7 Socrat. lib. 7. •.-.. 17. 8 Id. lib. 5. cap. 14.

40

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

We may here observe, that crimes
TherSon2sv,hy in themselves of a very heinous na-
for5,lornc'"rimiS ture, such as treason and murder,
were sometimes pardoned at their re
quest. But we are not to imagine that bishops at
any time turned patrons for criminals, to the obstruc
tion of pubhc justice, (which would have been to
have cut the sinews of government,) but only in
such cases, where pardon would manifestly be for the
benefit and honour both of the church and com
monwealth ; or else where the crimes themselves
had some such alleviating circumstances, as might
incline a compassionate judge to grant a pardon.
As when St. Ambrose interceded with Stilico for
the pardon of some poor deluded wretches, whom
Stilico's own servant by forgery had drawn into an
error : their ignorance might reasonably be plead
ed in their behalf. And when St. Austin petitioned
for favour to be showed to the Ch-cumcellions, it
was, he thought, for the honour of the church, to
free her from the suspicion and charge of revenge
and cruelty, which the Donatists were so ready to
cast upon her. And therefore he desired Aprin-
gius " the proconsul to spare them for the sake of
Christ and his church, as well as to give them time
to see their error and repent of it.
It must further be noted from St.
They'ne'ver inter- Ambrose, that bishops, though they
ceded in civil mat- . ,
tcrs and pecuniary themselves were sometimes chosen
cases. judges in civil causes, yet never in
terceded for any man in such causes to the secular
judges. And he gives a very good reason 10 for it :
Because, in pecuniary causes, where two parties
are concerned, a bishop could not intercede for one
party, but the other would be injured, and have
reason to think he lost his cause by the interest
and favour of the intercessor inclining to the ad
verse party. For which reason, there are no ex
amples of their interceding in such cases.

CHAPTER IX.
OF SOME PARTICULAR HONOURS AND INSTANCES
OF RESPECT SHOWED TO BISHOPS BY ALL PER
SONS IN GENERAL.

sect. 1. There are several other privileses
Of the ancient , - . r b
custom or bowing belonging to bishops in common with

a Aug. Ep. 160. Illi impio ferro fuderunt sanguinem
Christianum: tu ab eorum sanguine etiam juridicum gladi-
um cohibe propter Christum.  Tu iiiimicis ecclesiae
viventibus relaxa spatium pcenitendi.
10 Ambros. de Offic. lib. 3. c. 9. In causis pecuniariis in-
ervenire non est sacerdotis, &c.
1 Hilar, adv. Constant, p. 95. Osculo sacerdotes excipis,

the rest of the clergy; such as their J^a^"
exemption from burdensome offices, ^ops.
and some sort of taxes, and the cognizance of the
secular courts in some cases ; of which I shall say
nothing particularly here, because they will be con
sidered when we treat of the privileges of the clergy
in general. But there are two or three customs,
which argued a particular respect paid to bishops,
and therefore I must not here wholly pass them
over. One of these was the ancient custom of bow
ing the head before them, to receive their blessing;
a custom so universally prevailing, that the em
perors themselves did not refuse to comply with it.
As may appear from that discourse of Hilary ' to
Constantius ; where he tells him, he entertained
the bishops with a kiss, with which Christ was be
trayed ; and bowed his head to receive their bene
diction, whilst he trampled on their faith. This
plainly refers to the custom we are speaking of.
And by it we may understand the meaning ofThe-
odoret, when he says,2 the emperor Valentinian
gave orders to the bishops, who were met to make
choice of a bishop of Milan, that they should
place such a one on the bishop's throne, of that
eminency for hfe and doctrine, that the emperors
themselves might not be ashamed to bow their
heads to him. The same custom is more plainly
hinted at by St. Chrysostom, in one of his Homi
lies " to the people of Antioch ; where speaking of
Flavian their bishop, who was gone to the emperor
to procure a pardon for them, he says, Flavian
was a prince, and a more honourable prince than
the other; forasmuch as the sacred laws made
the emperor submit his head to the hands of the
bishop. He speaks of no other submission, but
only this, in receiving the bishop's benediction :
for in other respects, the priests in those days were
always subject to the emperors. He that would see
more proofs of this custom, may consult Valesius,
who 4 has collected a great many passages out of
other authors relating to it. I shall only add here
that rescript of Honorius and Valentinian, which
says, Bishops were the persons to whom all the
world bowed the head ; Quibus omnis terra caput
inclinat. Such another customary respect
was paid them, by kissing their hand; of iiiine their
which seems to have accompanied
the former ceremony. For St. Ambrose joins
them both together,5 saying, that kings and princes
did not disdain to bend and bow their necks to the

quo et Christus est proditus : caput benedictioni summittis,
ut fidem calces.
I heod. lib. 4. c. 6. o-n-cos aiiTiS -rds 7jjU£T£rias uttokXI'
vtapzv KEtpaXcts.
8 Chrys. Horn. 3. ad Pop. Antioch. t. I. p. 48.
4 Vales. Not. in Theod. lib. 4. u. 6.
5 Ambros. de Dignit. Sacerd. c. 2. Quippe cum videas

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

41

knees of the priests, and kiss their hands ; think
ing themselves protected by their prayers. Pauli
nus says,6 the people paid this respect commonly to
St. Ambrose. And Chrysostom, speaking of Mele
tius, bishop of Antioch, says,7 At his first coming
to the city, the whole multitude went out to meet
him, and as many as could come near him, laid
hold on his feet, and kissed his hands. They
that please to see more of this custom, may con
sult Sidonius Apollinaris,8 and Savaro's learned
Notes 3 upon him ; who cites Ennodius, and several
other authors to the same purpose.
„ . „ St. Jerom16 mentions another cus-
Sect. a.
siSne hoaumas torn, which he condemns as doing too
u'sed'buSa^68 great an honour to mere mortal men ;
proved. which was, the people's singing hosan-
nas to their bishops, as the multitude did to our
Saviour at his entrance into Jerusalem. Valesius "
cites a passage out of Antoninus's Itinerary, to the
same purpose ; where the form of words is, Blessed
be ye of the Lord, and blessed be your coming;
hosanna in the highest. Some also understand
Hegesippus 12 in the same sense ; where, speaking
of the preaching of James, bishop of Jerusalem, he
says, The people that were converted by his dis
course cried out, " Hosanna to the Son of David."
Scaliger understands this as spoken to James him
self: but others 13 take it for a doxology, or acclama
tion to Christ, whom they glorified upon the testi
mony that James had given him : and this seems to
be the truer sense of that place ; however, in the
other acceptation, there is nothing contrary to cus
tom in it, as appears from what has been said. I do
not insist upon what St. Jerom, in another place,1'
says further of this bishop of Jerusalem; that he
was a man of such celebrated fame among the
people, for his great sanctity, that they ambitiously
strove to touch the hem of his garment: for this
honour was not paid him as a bishop, but as a most
holy man ; who was, indeed, according to the cha
racter given him by Hegesippus and Epiphanius, a

Sect. 4.
Anninfir What meant by
Anotner the cormm ,merj„.

man of singular abstinence and piety, and one of
the miracles of the age he lived in. So that this
was a singular honour done to him, for his singular
holiness and virtue.
But to proceed with the common
honours paid to bishops,
instance of respect may be observed jj' Si„S„ghbi,fho'ps
in the usual forms of addressing them : '*"' cormam-
for when men spake to them, they commonly pre
faced their discourse with some title of honour, such
as that of Precor coronam, and Per coronam vestram ;
which we may Enghsh, Your honour and dignity ;
literally, Your crown. This form often occurs in
Sidonius Apollinaris, Ennodius, St. Jerom,15 and
others. St. Austin says, both the catholics16 and
Donatists used it, when they spake to the bishops of
either party ; giving them very respectful titles, and
entreating, or rather adjuring, them, per coronam,
that they would hear and determine their secular
causes. The use of this form of speech then
is plain, but the reason of it is not so whether bishops
E anciently wore a
evident. Savaro,17 and some others, mitre, or any the
' ' like ornament r
fancy it respected the ancient figure
of the clerical tonsure ; by which the hair was cut
into a round from the crown of the head down
wards. Others think it came from the ornament
which bishops wore upon their head ; and that they
will needs have to be a crown or mitre. Whereas,
it does not appear that bishops had any such orna
ment in those days. I know, indeed, both Valesius 18
and Petavius19 are very confident that all bishops
(from the very first) had an appendant badge of
honour in their foreheads, which they say was the
same with the petalum, or golden plate, which the
Jewish high priests wore : and it cannot be denied,
but that as ancient an author as Polycrates,20 men
tioned both by Eusebius and St. Jerom, says, that
St. John was a priest, wearing & petalum : and Epi
phanius21 says the same of James, bishop of Jerusa
lem. But this was not spoken of them as Christian

regum colla et principum submitti genibus sacerdotum, et
exosculatis eorum dexteris, orationibus eorum credant se
communiri. ' Paulin. Vit. Ambros. p. 2 et 3.
' Chrys. Horn. 45. in Melet. t. 1. p. 593.
8 Sidon. lib. 8. Ep. 11. Sancti Gallicini manu osculata.
Id. lib. 7. Ep. 11.
• Savaro, Not. in Sidon. lib. 8. Epist. 11. p. 532.
10 Hieron. in Matt. xxi. t. 9. p. 62. Videant ergo epis
copi, et quantumlibet sancti homines, cum quanto periculo
dici ista sibi patiantur, &c.
» Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 2. c. 23.
12 Hegesip. ap. Euseb. lib. 2. c. 23. TLoXXuw ho^aXfvTeay
iirl Ty papTvpia tov laKwflov, Kal XzyovTtov, ehcravvi Tea
vitp Aafili.
18 Grabe, Spicileg. Saec. 2. p. 207, translates it thus : Multi
hoc Jacobi testimonio confirmati glorificabant (Jesum) di-
centes, Hosanna Filio David.
14 Hieron. Com. in Gal. i. Jacobus episcopus Hieroso-

lymorum primus fuit, cognomento Justus ; vir tantae sancti-
tatis et rumoris in populo, ut fimbriam vestimenti ejus
certatim cuperent attingere.
15 Sidon. lib. 6. Ep. 3. Auctoritas coronae tuae, &c. Id.
lib. 7. Ep. 8. ad Euphron. De minimis rebus coronam
tuam maximisque consulerem. Ennod. lib. 4. Ep. 29. ad
Symmac. Lib. 5. Ep. 17. ad Marcellinum. Lib. 9. Ep. 27.
ad Aurelian. Hieron. Ep. 26. ad August, inter Ep. Aug.
Precor coronam tuam.
18 Aug. Ep. 147. ad Proculeian. Episc. partis Donati.
Honorant nos vestri, honorant vos nostri. Per coronam
nostram nos adjurant vestri ; per coronam vestram vos ad-
jurant nostri.
17 Savaro, Not. in Sidon. lib. 6. Ep. 3. Baron, an. 58.
n. 134.
¦8 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 5. c. 24.
19 Petav. Not. in Epiph. Haer. 78. n. 14.
20 Polycrat. ap. Euseb. lib. 5. c. 24.
21 Epiphan. Hear. 29. ... i. It. Haer. 78. n. 14.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

42 bishops, but on presumption of their having been
Jewish priests, and of the family of Aaron. Valesius
himself cites a MS. Passion of St. Mark, which
sets the same ornament on his head, and gives this
very reason for it : It is reported, says he, that St.
Mark, according to the rites of the carnal sacrifice,
wore the chief priest's petalum among the Jews :
which gives us plainly to understand,22 says that
author, that he was one of the tribe of Levi, and of
the family of Aaron. So he did not take this for
the ornament of a Christian bishop, but a Jewish
priest ; and that opens the way for us to understand
what the other authors meant by it, however Vale
sius chanced not to observe it. Now, if it cannot
be proved, that bishops anciently wore any such
ornament as this.'it will much less follow that they
wore a royal crown, or mitre, as Spondanus23 asserts
they did, and thence deduces the custom of address
ing them Per coronam ; therein deserting his great
master Baronius, who assigns another reason for it.
After all, it seems most probable that it was no more
than a metaphorical expression, used to denote the
honour and dignity of the episcopal order : though
I do not deny that the clerical tonsure was some
times called corona ; but that was not pecuhar to
bishops, but common to all the clergy.
It will not be improper to add,
i titles a-,.- while we are upon this point, that it
mi, sc. was usuai in men's addresses to bi
shops, or in speaking of them, to mention their
names with some additional titles of respect, such
as 9io<piXioraToi, and ayiuiraroi, most dear to God,
and most holy fathers : which titles occur frequently
in the emperor's rescripts in the civil law,24 and
were of such common use in those times, that
Socrates (when he comes to the sixth book of his
history, which treats of his own times) thinks him
self obliged to make some apology25 for not giving
the bishops that were then living these titles.
Which I the rather note, because of the vanity of
some, who reckon the title, most holy father, the
pope's sole prerogative ; and to correct the malice
of others, who will not allow a protestant bishop to
receive that title, without the suspicion and im
putation of popery. As if St. Austin and St. Jerom
had been to blame, because the one wrote, and the
other received, epistles always thus inscribed, Do-

Sect. 6.
Of the titles t

mino vere sancto, et beatissimo papce Augustino. See
St. Austin's Epist. 11, 13, 14, 17, 48, 21, where St.
Jerom and others give him those honourable titles.
There is one thing more that must ^ ^
not be omitted, because it was the »¦£•<£¦;
common honour and privilege of all &™1-".
bishops, to be distmguished in the
church by a chair, or seat, which was commonly
called their throne. Thus Eusebius26 calls the
bishop of Jerusalem's seat, Bpovov dieoaroXucbv, the
apostolical throne, because St. James, bishop of
Jerusalem, first sat in it. And for the same reason
Gregory Nazianzen27 calls the bishop of Alex
andria's seat, the throne of St. Mark. It was other
wise called ffipa, and Gpovog iipnXbg, the high throne,
because it was exalted something higher than the
seats of the presbyters, which were on each side of
it, and were called the second thrones, as we shall
see hereafter, when we come to speak of presbyters,
All that I shall observe further here concerning
this throne of the bishops is, that though it be
sometimes called the high and lofty throne, espe
cially by those writers28 who speak in a rhetorical
strain, yet that is only meant comparatively in re
spect of the lower seats of presbyters ; for other
wise, it was a fault in any bishop to build himself
a pompous and splendid throne in imitation of the
state and grandeur of the secular magistrates. This
was one of the crimes which the council of An
tioch,29 in then- Synodical Epistle against Paulus
Samosatensis, laid to his charge, that he built him
self a high and stately tribunal, not as a disciple of
Christ, but as one of the rulers of the world, making
a secretum to it, in imitation of the secular magis
trates, whose tribunals had a place railed out from
the rest, and separated by a veil, which they called
the secretum, and the ambitious bishop gave his the
same name, by which, and some other such hke
practices, he raised the envy and hatred of the
heathens against the Christians, as they there com
plain of him. It was then the great care of the
Christian church, to observe a decorum in the
honours which she bestowed upon her bishops,
that they might be such as might set them above
contempt, but keep them below envy ; make them
venerable, but not minister to vanity, or the out
ward pomp and ostentation of secular greatness.

22 Auctor. MS. Passion. S. Marc, ap. Vales, ibid. B.
Marcum juxta ritum carnalis sacrificii, pontiflcalis ap'cis
petalum in populo gestasse Judaeorum, illustrium virorum
Syngraphae declarant : ex quo manifesto datur intelligi, de
stirpe eum Levitica, imo pontificis Aaron sacrae successionis,
originem habuisse.
23 Spondan. Epitom. Baron, an. 58. n. 54

24 Justin. Novel. 8, 40, 42, 67, 86, &c. Concil. Chalced.
Act. 10.
25 Socrat. Procem. ad lib. 6. " Euseb. lib. 7. c. 19 et 32.
27 Naz. Orat. 21. in Laud. Athanas. t. 1. p. 377.
28 Naz. Somnium de Eccl. Anastas. Sublimi throno in-
sidere mihi videbar. Id. Orat. 20. in Laud. Basil, p. 342
iirl tov vtyriXdv T77S iirurKOTrT}? Qpovov, &C.
28 Ap. Euseb. lib. 7. «;. 30.

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

43

.CHAPTER X.
OP the age, and some particular qualifica
tions required in such as were to be or
dained bishops.
sect. 1. Those qualifications of bishops, which
Bishops not to be . -.1*1
ordained under were common to them with the rest
thirty years of a^e,
except they vere of the clergy, shall be spoken ot here-
men of extraordi- °. x
nary worth. after: here I shall only take notice
of a few that were more pecuhar to them. Such as,
first, their age ; which, by the canons, was required
to be at least thirty years. The council of Neo-
cssarea1 requires thirty in presbyters, which is a
certain argument that the same age was requisite
in a bishop. The council of Agde2 more expressly
hmits their age to that time, requiring all metropoli
tans to insist upon it in their ordination. The
reasons given by these councils are, because our
Saviour himself did not begin to teach before he
was thirty years old, and because that is the perfect
age of man. Therefore, though a man was other
wise never so well qualified, the council of Neo-
csesarea says, he shall wait, and not be ordained so
much as presbyter before that time. But whether
this rule was always observed from the days of the
apostles may be questioned, for there is no such
rule given by the apostles in Scripture. That
which goes under their name in the Constitutions,3
requires a bishop to be fifty years old before he is
ordained, except he be a man of singular merit and
worth, which may compensate for the want of years.
This shows, that the custom of the church varied in
this matter, and that persons of extraordinary quali
fications were not always tied to be of such an age.
Timothy was ordained young, as may be collected
from what the apostle says to him, 1 Tim. iv. 12,
" Let no man despise thy youth." The history of
the church affords many other such instances.
Eusebius4 says, Gregory Thaumaturgus, and his
brother Athenodorus, were both ordained bishops
very young ; m viovg dp<po>. St. Ambrose5 says the
same of Acholius, bishop of Thessalonica ; that he
was young in years, but of mature age in respect of
his virtues. And Socrates6 gives the like account
of Paulus, bishop of Constantinople. Theodoret7
observes also of Athanasius, that he was but young
when he attended his bishop Alexander at the
council of Nice ; and yet within five months after,

he was chosen his successor at Alexandria. Which
probably was before he was thirty years old : for
the council of Nice was not above twenty years
after the persecution under Maximian ; and yet
Athanasius was so young, as not to remember the
beginning of that persecution, anno 303, but only
as he heard it from his fathers. For when he speaks
of it, he says,8 he learned of his parents, that the
persecution was raised by Maximian, grandfather
to Constantius. So that if we compute from that
time, we can hardly suppose him to be thirty years
old, when he was ordained bishop, anno 326. It is
agreed by all authors,9 that Remigius, bishop of
R hemes, was but twenty-two years old when he was
ordained, anno 471. And Cotelerius,10 after Nice-
phorus, says, St. Eleutherius, an Illyrican bishop,
was consecrated at twenty. Ignatius gives a plain
intimation, that Damas, bishop of the Magnesians,
was but a very young bishop ; though he does not
expressly mention his age. He calls his ordina
tion,11 viojTcpiicijv raXiv, a youthful ordination ; and
therefore cautions the people not to despise him for
his age, but to reverence and give place to him in
the Lord. Salmasius12 and Ludovicus Capellus
miserably pervert this passage, and force a sense
upon it, which the author never so much as dreamt
of: they will needs have it, that by the words
vwTtpiKriv Tttt\w, Ignatius means the novelty of
episcopacy in general, that it was but a new and
late institution : which is not only contrary to the
whole tenor and design of all Ignatius's epistles, but
to the plain sense of this passage in particular;
which speaks nothing of the institution of episco
pacy, but of the age of this bishop, who was but
young when he was ordained.
Now, from all this it appears, that though there
was a rule in the church, requiring bishops to be
thirty years old when they were ordained; yet it
was frequently dispensed with, either in cases of
necessity, or in order to promote persons of more
extraordinary worth and singular qualifications!
Yet such dispensations, as qualify boys of eleven
or twelve years old to be made bishops, are no
where to be met with in the primitive church ;
though the history of the papacy affords frequent
instances of such promotions ; as those that please
may see in a catalogue of them, collected by Dr.
Reynolds and Mr. Mason,13 two learned writers of
our church.

1 Con. Neocaas. can. 11.
2 Concil. Agathen. c. 17. Presbyterum vel episcopum
ante triginta annos, id est, antequam ad viri perfecti aeta-
tem perveniat, nullus metropolitanorum ordinare praesumat.
See also Con. Tolet. 4. c. 18 et 19.
3 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. I. 4 Euseb. lib. 6. „. 30.
5 Ambr. Ep. 60. ad Anysium. Benedictus processus ju-
ventutis ipsius, in qua ad summum electus est sacerdotiura,
maturo jam probatus virtutum stipendio.
6 Socrat. lib. 2. u. 6. "Avipa viov pkv ti)v riXiKiav, nrpo-

{itfiilKOTa Si Tats eppeariv.
7 Theod. lib. 1. c. 25. vio? piv wv ttjv riXtKiav.
8 Athan. Ep. ad Solitar. t. 1. p. 853.
9 Hincmar. Vit. Remig. Baron, an. 471. p. 298.
10 Coteler. Not. in Const. Apost. lib. 2. c. 1. Niceph.
lib. 3. u. 29.
11 Ignat. Ep. ad Magnes. n. 3.
12 Vid. Pearson, Vindic. Ignat. Praaf. ad Lector.
13 Vid. Rainoldi Apolog. Thes. u. 26. Mason of the Con-
secrat. of Bishops, lib. 1. c. 5.

44

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

Sect But to return to the bishops of the
chosen°out'S,bthe primitive church : another qualifica-
to-Sch £,™h tion in a bishop, anciently very much
ordamed. insisted on, was, that he should be
one of the clergy of the same church over which
he was to be made bishop. For strangers, who
were unknown to the people, were not reckoned
qualified by the canons. This is plainly imphed
by Cyprian,14 when he says, the bishop was to be
chosen in the presence of the people ; who had per
fect knowledge of every man's life and actions, by
their conversation among them. St. Jerom ob
serves, that this was the constant custom of Alex
andria,15 from St. Mark, to Dionysius and Heraclas,
for the presbyters of the church to choose a bi
shop out of their own body. And therefore Julius 18
makes it a strong objection against Gregory, whom
the Arians obtruded on the church of Alexandria in
the room of Athanasius ; that he was a perfect
stranger to the place ; neither baptized there, nor
known to any : whereas, the ordination of a bishop
ought not to be so uncanonical ; but he should be
ordained by the bishops of the province in his own
church, and be uir' avrov rov Upareiov, air' avrov tov
icXripov, one of the clergy of the church to which he
was ordained. The ancient bishops of Rome were
all of the same mind, so long as they thought them
selves obhged to walk by the laws of the church :
for Celestine,17 and Hilary,1" and Leo,18 insist upon
the same thing, as the common rule and canon of
the church. And we find a law as late as Charles
the Great, and Ludovicus Pius, to the same pur
pose. For in one of their Capitulars26 it is ordered,
that bishops shall be chosen out of their own dio
cese, by the election of the clergy and the people.
Though, as Baluzius21 notes, this law did not ex
tend to very many dioceses : for by this time, the
French kings had the disposal of all bishoprics in
their dominions, (except some few churches, which
by special privilege retained the old way of electing,)
and they did not bind themselves to nominate bi
shops always out of the clergy of that church which
was vacant, but used their liberty to choose them out
of any other; as now it is become the privilege and
custom of kings and princes almost in all nations :
which is the occasion of the difference betwixt the
ancient and modern practice in this particular. For
while the ancient way of elections continued, the
general rule was for every church to make choice

14 Cypr. Ep. 68. al. 67. ad Fratr. Hispan. p. 172. Epis
copus deligatur plebe praesente, quae singulorum vitam
plenissime novit, et uniuscuj usque actum de ejus conver-
satione perspexit.
15 Hieron. Epist. 85. ad Evagr. Alexandriae a Marco
evangelista usque ad Heraclam et Dionysium episcopos,
presbyteri semper unum ex se electum, in excelsiori gradu
collocatum episcopum nominahant.
16 Jul. Ep. ad Oriental, ap. Athan. Apol. 2. t. 1. p. 749.
17 Caelestin. Ep. 2. ad Episc. Narbon. c. 4 et 5.

of one of her own clergy to be her bishop, and not
a stranger. Yet in some extraordinary cases this
±j Sect. 3.
rule admitted of legal exceptions ; someciceptio™
° to this rule.
particularly in these three cases: 1.
When it was found for the benefit of the church to
translate bishops from one see to another. In this
case, though the bishop was a stranger, yet his trans
lation being canonical, was reckoned no violation of
this law. 2. When the church could not unani
mously agree upon one in their own body, then, to
pacify their heats and end their controversies, the
emperor or a council proposed one of another church
to their choice, or promoted him by their own au
thority. Upon this ground Nectarius, Chrysostom,
and Nestorius, all strangers, were made bishops of
Constantinople. It was to end the disputes that
arose in the church, which was divided in their
elections, as Socrates and Sozomen22 give an ac
count of them. 3. Sometimes men's extraordinary
merit gave them preference, though strangers, be
fore all the members of the church to which they
were chosen. As St. Ambrose23 observes of Eu
sebius Vercellensis, that he was chosen, posthabitis
civibus, before all that were citizens or bred in
the place, though none of the electors had ever
seen him before, but only heard of his fame and
character : and there are many other instances of
the like nature. But excepting some such cases
as these, the rule was generally observed, to choose
no one bishop of any place, who was not known
to the people, and a member of the same church
before. Another qualification required in a
bishop was, that he should arise gra- Bishops » go
-, n . . . . -, through the inferior
dually to his honour, and not come to orders of the
church.
the throne per saltum ; but first pass
through some, if not all, the inferior orders of
the church. The council of Sardica has a canon24
very full to this purpose : If any rich man, or pleader
at the law, desire to be made a bishop, he shall not
be ordained, till he' has first gone through the offices
of reader, deacon, and presbyter; that behaving
himself worthily in each of these offices, he may
ascend gradually to the height of the episcopal func
tion : and in every one of these degrees he shall
continue some considerable time, that his faith, and
good conversation, and constancy, and moderation
may be known. The same rule is prescribed by the

18 Hilar. Pap. Epist. 1. ad Ascan. Tarracon. u. 3.
18 Leo, Ep. 84. ad Anastas. c. 6.
20 Capitular. Karoli et Ludov. lib. i. c. 18. Episcopi per
electionem cleri et populi, secundum statuta canonum, de
propria dioacesi eligantur.
21 Baluz. Not. ad Concilia Gall. Narbon. p. 34. It. Not.
ad Gratian. Dist. 63. c. 34. p. 467.
22 Socrat. lib. 6. c. 2. lib. 7. c. 29. Sozom. lib. 8. c. 2.
23 Ambros. Ep. 82. ad Eccl. Vercel.
24 Concil. Sardic. can. 10.

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

45

council of Bracara25 and some others. And that it
was the ancient practice of the church, appears from
what Cyprian says26 of Cornehus, that he was not
made bishop of Rome all of a sudden, but went gra
dually through all the offices of the church, till his
merits advanced him to the episcopal throne. The
odoret27 commends Athanasius upon the same ac
count : and Gregory Nazianzen28 speaks it to the
honour of St. Basil, with some reflection on several
bishops of his age, that he did not as soon as he was
baptized leap into a bishopric, as some other ambi
tious persons did, but rise to his honour by degrees.
He adds, that in military affairs this rule was gener
ally observed; every great general is first a common
soldier, then a captain, then a commander : and it
would be happy for the church, says he, if matters
were always so ordered in it. By this time it seems
this rule was frequently transgressed, without any
reason or necessity ; but only by the ambition of
some who affected the office of bishop, yet were not
willing to undergo the inferior offices that were pre
parative to it. But I must observe, that it was not
Deacons might be always necessarily required that aman
ordained bishops, .... t • -i . (.
though never or- should be ordained presbyter first in
dained presbyters. x -^
order to be made a bishop : for dea
cons were as commonly made bishops as any other.
CcBcihanwas no more than archdeacon of Carthage,29
when he was ordained bishop, as we learn from Op
tatus. And both Theodoret30 and Epiphanius 31 say,
that Athanasius was but a deacon, when he was
made bishop of Alexandria. Liberatus observes the
same32 of Peter Moggus and Esaias, two other bi
shops of Alexandria : as also of Agapetus33 and Vi
gilius, bishops of Rome. Socrates 34 and.Theodoret35
relate the same of Felix, bishop of Rome, who was
ordained in the place of Liberius. Eusebius 3S takes
notice of one of his own name, a deacon of Alex
andria, who was made bishop of Laodicea. And
Socrates87 says, Chrysostom made Heraclides, one
of his own deacons, bishop of Ephesus, and Serapion
bishop of Heraclea. And that this was a general
praetice% and agreeable to canon, appears also from
a letter of Pope Leo, where, speaking of the election
of a metropolitan, he says38 he ought to be chosen

either out of the presbyters, or out of the deacons of
the church.
Sometimes in cases of necessity bi-
. , . • Sect- 6-
shoos were chosen out of the inferior Bishops in cases
¦r of necessity chosen
orders, subdeacons, readers, &c. Li- ™dte^the 'miam'
beratus says, Silverius, who was com
petitor with Vigilius for the bishopric of Rome,
was but a subdeacon.39 And St. Austin himself,
when he erected his new bishopric at Fussala, being
disappointed of the person whom he intended to
have had consecrated bishop, offered one Antonius a
reader to the primate to be ordained bishop in his
room ; and the primate without any scruple imme
diately ordained him ; though, as St. Austin40 testi
fies, he was but a young man, who had never showed
himself in any other office of the church beside that
of reader.
There want not also several in-
• Sect. 7.
stances of persons, who were ordained And in some e*-
1 traordinarycases or-
bishops immediately of laymen, when ^efaim™edutelT
God by his particular providence
seemed to point them out as the fittest men, in some
certain junctures, to be employed in his service.
Thus it was in the known case of St. Ambrose, who
was but newly baptized when he was ordained bi
shop, as both Paulinus41 and all the historians tes
tify. When the people of Milan were so divided
in the election of a bishop, that the whole city was
in an uproar, he, being prcetor of the place, came in
upon them to appease the tumult, as by virtue of his
office he thought himself obliged to do ; and making
an eloquent speech to them, it had a sort of mira
culous effect upon them ; for they all immediately
left off their dispute, and unanimously cried out,
they would have Ambrose to be their bishop.
Which the emperor understanding, and looking
upon it as a providential call, he ordered him to be
baptized, (for he was yet but a catechumen,) and
in a few days after to be ordained their bishop.
St. Cyprian was another instance of the like pro
vidential dispensation. For Pontius42 says in his
Life, that he was chosen bishop by the judgment of
God and the favour of the people, though he was
but a neophite, or newly baptized. Socrates43 and
and Sozomen44 say the same of Nectarius, Gregory

25 Concil. Bracar. 1. c. 39. Per singulos gradus eruditus,
ad sacerdotium veniat.
26 Cypr. Ep. 52. al. 55. ad Antonian. p. 103. Non iste
ad episcopatum subitfi pervenit, sed per omnia ecclesiastica
officia promotus, et in divinis administrationibus Dominum
saepe promeritus, ad sacerdotii sublime fastigium cunctis re
ligionis gradibus ascendit.
27 Theod. lib. 1. c. 25.
28 Naz. Orat. 20. in Laud. Basil, p. 335.
29 Optat. lib. 1. p. 41. » Theodor. lib. 1. c. 25.
31 Epiphan. Haer. 69. Arian.
82 Liberat. Breviar. c. 16 et 18.
88 Liberat. ibid. t. 21 et 22.
34 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 37.

33 Theod. lib. 2. c. 17.
33 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 11.
3' Socrat. lib. 6. c. 11. lib.
33 Leo, Ep. 84. c. 6. Ex presbyteris ejusdem ecclesiae,
vel ex diaconibus eligatur.
39 Liberat. Brev. c. 22. 40 Aug. Ep. 261. ad Caelestin.
41 Paulin. Vit. Ambros. p. 3. Ruffin. lib. 2. c. 11. Theod.
lib. 4. c. 6 et 7. Socrat. lib. 4. c. 30. Sozom. lib. 6. c. 24.
42 Pont. Vit. Cypr. p. 2. Judicio Dei et plebis favore ad
officium sacerdotii et episcopatus gradum adhuc neophytus,
et ut putabatur novellus electus est.
43 Socrat. lib. 5. c. 8.
44 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 8. tijv pv^iKi]v iaQiira eti 7//i<piccr-
pivos, &c.

46

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

Nazianzen's successor at Constantinople, that he
was chosen bishop by the second general council,
whilst he had his mystical garments on him, mean
ing those white garments, which the newly baptized
were used to wear. Eusebius, bishop of Ctesarea
in Pontus, St. Basil's predecessor, was not baptized,
but only a catechumen, when he was chosen bi
shop, as Nazianzen himself45 informs us. And Eu-
cherius was but a monk, that is, a layman, when
he was chosen and ordained bishop of Lyons, as
Baronius46 says, from Hilarius Arelatensis in the
Life of Honoratus. Chrysostom 47 seems to say the
same of Philogonius, bishop of Antioch, when he
reports of him, that he was taken from the court of
judicature, and carried from the judge's bench to
the bishop's throne, curb ,S>jiutroc SacaoTinov iiri /3rjpa
hpbv. In all these instances there seems to have
been the hand of God and the direction of Provi
dence, which supersedes all ordinary rules and ca
nons : and therefore these ordinations were never
censured as uncanonical or irregular, though con
trary to the letter of a common rule ; because the
rule itself was to be understood with this limitation
and exception, as one of the ancient canons45 ex
plains itself, and all others that relate to this matter ;
saying, One that is newly converted from Gentilism,
or a vicious hfe, ought not presently to be advanced
to a bishopric : for it is not fit, that he who has yet
given no proof of himself, should be made a teacher
of others ; unless it be so ordered by the grace and
appointment of God himself, u pij wov Kara Mav %dpiv
tovto ykvoiro. For in this case there could be no
dispute ; the will of God being superior to all hu
man canons whatsoever. And therefore, though
the same limitation be not expressed in other ca
nons, yet it is evident that they are always to be
understood with this exception. Upon which ac
count, it was not reckoned any breach of canon to
make a layman bishop, when Providence seemed first
to grant a dispensation, by directing the church to
be unanimous in the choice of such a person. They
did not in such cases make a layman receive one
order one day, and another the next, and so go
through the several orders in the compass of a
week, but made him bishop at once, when need
required, without any other ordination. The con
trary custom is a modern practice, scarce ever heard
of till the time of Photius, anno 858, who, to avoid
the imputation of not coming gradually to his bi
shopric, was on the first day made a monk, on the
second a reader, on the third a subdeacon, on the
fourth a deacon, on the fifth a presbyter, and on

45 Naz. Orat. 19. de Laud. Patr. t. 1. p. 308.
48 Baron, an. 441. p. 9.
47 Chrys. Horn. 31. de S. Philogon. t. 1. p. 397
48 Canon. Apost. c. 80.
49 Nicet. Vit. Ignat, Concil. t. 8. p. 1199.
50 Spalat. de Repub. lib. 3. u. 4. n. 19. p. 430.

the sixth a patriarch, as Nicetas David,49 a writer of
that age, informs us in the Life of Ignatius. Spala-
tensis50 observes the same practice to be continued
in the Romish church, under pretence of complying
with the ancient canons ; though nothing can be
more contrary to the true intent and meaning of
them ; which was, that men should continue some
years in every order, to give some proof of their be
haviour to the church, and not pass cursorily through
all orders in five or six days' time ; which practice
as it does not answer the end of the canons, so it is
altogether without precedent in the primitive church.

CHAPTER XI.

OF SOME PARTICULAR LAWS AND CUSTOMS OB
SERVED ABOUT THE ORDINATION OF BISHOPS.
When any bishopric became void „ .
, beet 1.
by the death or cession of its bishop, be^KSe™™
then, forasmuch as bishops were look- month8-
ed upon as a necessary constituent part of the
church, all imaginable care was taken to fill up the
vacancy with all convenient speed. In the African
churches a year was the utmost limits that was al
lowed for a vacancy ; for if within that time a new
election was not made, he that was appointed ad
ministrator of the church during the vacancy, whose
business it was to procure and hasten the election,
was to be turned out of his office, and a new one
put in his room, by a canon of the fifth council1 of
Carthage, which is also confirmed in the African
Code.2 But in other places this was limited to a
much shorter time. For by a canon of the ge
neral council of Chalcedon,3 every metropolitan is
obliged to ordain a new bishop in the vacant see
within the space of three months, under pain of
ecclesiastical censure, unless some unavoidable ne
cessity forced him to defer it longer.
At Alexandria the custom was to
proceed immediately to election as i.SJ™.
soon as the bishop was dead, and be- EentS
fore he was interred. Epiphanius' °ld on"™ ""^
hints at this custom, when he says, they were used
to make no delay after the decease of a bishop, but
chose one presently, to preserve peace among the
people, that they might not run into factions about
the choice of a successor. But Liberatus is a httle
more particular in describing the circumstances of
it. He says,5 it was customary for the successor to

1 Con. Carth. 5. can. 8.
2 Cod. Can. Eccl. Afric. can. 75.
8 Con. Chalced. can. 25.
4 Epiphan Haer. 69. Arian. u. 11. MT) xpovifyw ptri
Tl\EVTl]V TH HTrtO-Ko'lTB, &C
5 Liberal. Breviar. c. 20. Consuetude quidem est Ale*

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH

47

watch over the body of the deceased bishop, and to
lay his right hand upon his head, and to bury him
with his own hands, and then take the pall of St.
Mark, and put it upon himself, and so sit in his
throne. To these authorities we may add that of
Socrates, who says,6 that Cyril of Alexandria was
enthroned the third day after the death of Theo
philus : and he intimates, that the same thing was
practised in other places; for Proclus, bishop of
Constantinople,7 was enthroned before Maximian
his predecessor was interred, and after his enthrone
ment he performed the funeral office for him. And
this was done at the instance and command of the
emperor Theodosius, that there might be no dispute
or tumult raised in the church about the election of
a bishop. Yet, notwithstanding this care and
some instances of diligence of the church in filling up
longer vacancies in ,
times of difficulty vacant sees, it sometimes happened,
and persecution. jrjr >
that the election of bishops was de
ferred to a much longer season. For in Africa, at
the time of the collation of Carthage, there were no
less than threescore bishoprics void at once; which
was above an eighth part of the whole. For the
whole number of bishops was but four hundred and
sixty-six, whereof two hundred and eighty-six were
then present at the conference, and one hundred
and twenty were absent by reason of sickness or old
age ;, besides which, there were sixty vacant sees,
which were unprovided of bishops at that time, as
the catholics told the Donatists,8 who pretended to
vie numbers with them, though they were but two
hundred and seventy-nine. What was the particular
reason of so many vacancies at that juncture, is not
said ; but probably it might be the difficulty of the
times, that catholic bishops could not there be
placed, where the Donatists had gotten full posses
sion. Or, perhaps it might be the negligence of
the people, who contented themselves with ad
ministrators during the vacancy, and would not ad
mit of a new bishop. The council of Macriana,
mentioned by Fulgentius Ferrandus,9 takes notice
of this dilatory practice in some churches, and cen
sures it by a canon, which orders the administra
tors, who were always some neighbouring bishops,
to be removed; and condemns such churches to
continue without administrators, till they sought
for a bishop of their own. Another reason of long

vacancies in some times and places, was the diffi
cult circumstances the churches lay under in time
of persecution. For the bishops were the men
chiefly aimed at by the persecutors. And there
fore, when one bishop was martyred, the church
sometimes was forced to defer the ordination of
another, either because it was scarce possible to go
about it in such times of exigency, or because she
was unwilling to expose another bishop immedi
ately to the implacable fury of a raging adversary,
and bring upon herself a more violent storm of per
secution. The Roman clergy"1 give this for their
reason to Cyprian, why, after the martyrdom of
Fabian, they did not immediately proceed to a new
election. The state of affairs, and the difficulty of
the times, was such as would not permit it. Ba
ronius" reckons the time of this vacancy a year
and three months, but others,12 who are more exact
in the calculation, make it a year and five months ;
by either of which accounts, it was above a year
beyond the time hmited by the canons. But this
was nothing in comparison of that long vacancy of
the bishopric of Carthage, in the time of the Arian
persecution under Gensericus and Hunericus, two
heretical kings of the Vandals, which Victor Uti-
censis13 says was no less than twenty-four years,
during all which time the church of Carthage had
no bishop. But these were difficulties upon the
church, and matters of force, not her choice : for in
times of peace she always acted otherwise, and did
not think such extraordinary instances fit pre
cedents to be drawn into example ; much less to be
drawn into consequence and argued upon, as some ¦*
have done, that therefore the church may be with
out bishops, because she subsisted in some extraor
dinary vacancies without them, when she could not
have them : which argument would hold as well
against any other order as that of bishops, did but
they who urge this argument rightly consider it.
But to return to the ordination of Sect 4
bishops : at the time appointed for q,,™d™obthc°™dnr~
T j- .1 . t . j, ation of a bishop.
ordination, the metropolitan was used
to send forth his circular letters, and summon all
the bishops of the province to meet at the place
where the new bishop was to be ordained, and as
sist at his consecration. The presence of them all
was required, if they could conveniently attend ; if
not, they were to send their consent in writing : in

andriae, ilium, qui defuncto succedit, excubias super de-
fimcti corpus agere, manumque dexteram ejus capiti suo
imponere, et sepulto manibus suis, accipere collo suo beati
Marci pallium, et tunc legitime sedere.
6 Socrat. lib. 7. c. 7.
7 Id. lib. 7. c. 40.
8 Aug. Brevic. Collat. primae Diei. c. 14. Sane propter
cathedras, quas episcopis vacuas apud se esse dixerunt, re-
sponsum est a catholicis, sexaginta esse quibus successores
episcopi nondum fuerant ordinati.
9 Ferrand. Brev. Can. u. 23. ap. Justel. t. 1. p. 449. Ut

interventores episcopi conveniant plebis quae episcopum
non habent, ut episcopum accipiant; quod si accipere neg-
lexerint, remoto interventore sic remaneant, quam diu sibi
episcopum quaerant.
10 Ep. 31. al. 30. ap. Cyprian, p. 58. Post excessum no.
bilissimao memoriaa vivi Fabiani, nondum est episcopus prop
ter rerum et temporum difficultates constitutus.
" Baron, an. 253. n. 6 an. 254. n. 46.
12 Pearson, Annal. Cypr. an. 250. n. 3. et au. 251. n. 6.
13 Victor, de Persecut. Vandal, lib. 2.
14 Blondel. Apol.

48

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book 11.

which case three bishops, with the assistance or
consent of the metropohtan, were reckoned a suf
ficient canonical number to perform the ceremony
of consecration. St. Cyprian15 speaks of it as the
general practice of the church in his time, to have
all the bishops of the province present at any such
ordination. And Eusebius16 particularly takes no
tice of the ordination of Alexander, bishop of Jeru
salem, who succeeded Narcissus, that he was or
dained utTa KOivrjg tuv ImaKoiruiv yvwur\g, with the
common consent of the bishops of his province.
The council of Chalcedon17 calls this a canonical
ordination, when the metropolitan, with all or most
of his provincial bishops, ordain the bishops of their
own province, as the canons have appointed. And
the general council of Constantinople18 justified the
ordinations of Flavian bishop of Antioch, and Cyril
of Jerusalem, as canonical in this respect, because
they were ordained by the bishops of their pro
vinces synodically met together. This was the an
cient rule of the council of Nice, which requires the
assistance of all the bishops of the province, if they
could conveniently attend the ordination : 19 but
forasmuch as that, either through urgent necessity,
or by reason of their great distance, it might happen
that all of them could not be present, it is added,
that in that case three bishops should be sufficient
to ordain, provided the metropolitan and the rest
sent their consent in writing. But under three the
canons did not generally allow of. The first coun
cil of Aries20 and the third of Carthage21 require
three besides the metropohtan. And the second
council of Aries22 does not allow the metropohtan
to be one of the three, but saith expressly, that he
shall take the assistance of three provincial bishops
beside himself, and not presume to ordain a bishop
without them. It is true, those called the Apostoli
cal Canons23 and Constitutions24 allow the ordina
tion that is performed by two bishops only: but
this is contrary to all other canons ; which are so
far from allowing two bishops to ordain by them
selves, that the council of Orange25 orders both the
ordaining bishops and the ordained to be deposed :

and the council of Riez26 actually deposed Armen-
tarius for this very thing, because he had not three
bishops to ordain him. All churches indeed did
not punish such ordinations with the same severity,
but in all places they were reckoned uncanonical.
When Paulinus ordained Evagrius, bishop of An
tioch, Theodoret27 takes notice that this was done
against the laws of the church, because he was or
dained by a single person, and without the consent
of the provincial bishops. And Synesius x says the
same of the ordination of Siderius, bishop of Pa-
ltebisca, that it was irregular, because he neither
had the consent of the bishop of Alexandria, his
metropolitan, nor three bishops to ordain him. It
was to avoid this censure of irregularity, that Nova
tian, when he set himself up to be bishop of Rome
against Cornehus, sent for three bishops out of the
farthest corner of Italy to come and ordain him,2*
lest it should be objected against him, that he had
not a canonical ordination. And upon this account,
when Pelagius the First was to be ordained bishop
of Rome, because three bishops could not be pro
cured, a presbyter39 was taken in to make up the
number. In all which the general practice of the
church is very clearly seen and descried.
Yet it must be observed, that though Sect 5
this was the common rule and prac- byTonerdbisho™ai-
tice of the church, yet it was not Sth'nofVnoni
simply and absolutely of the essence
of ordination. For the church many times ad
mitted of the ordinations of bishops that were con
secrated only by one or two bishops. The council
of Orange,31 which orders both the ordaining bi
shops and the ordained to be deposed, in case two
bishops only ordained a bishop with his consent,
decrees notwithstanding, that if a bishop was or
dained by any sort of violence against his will,
though only by two bishops, in that case his or
dination should, stand good, because he was passive
in the thing, and not consenting to the breach of
the canons. And without this passivity there are
several instances of ordinations by two bishops only,
the validity of which we do not find disputed. Pe-

15 Cypr. Ep. 68. al. 67. ad Fratr. Hispan. p. 172. Quod
apud nos quoque et fere per provincias universas tenetur, ut
ad ordinationes rite celebrandas, ad earn plebem, cui prae-
positus ordinatur, episcopi ejusdem provinciae proximi quique
conveniant, et episcopus deligatur plebe praesente, &c.
16 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 11.
" Con. Chalced. Act. 16. C. t. 4. p. 817.
18 Ep. Synod, ap. Theodor. lib. 5. c. 9.
19 Con. Nic. can. 4. 'EwiGKoirov irpocrnKEi piXiTa piv
viro iruvTtav twv iv ti) iirapxia Kadi-^acrdai.
20 Con. Arelat. 1. c. 20. Si non potuerint septem, sine
tribus fratribus non praesumant ordinare.
21 Con. Carth. 3. can. 19. Forma antiqua servabitur, ut
non minus quam tres sufficiant, qui fuerint a metropolitano
directi ad ordinandum episcopum. See also Con. Carth.
6. c. 4.
22 Con. Arelat. 2. c. 5. Nee episcopus metropolitanus

sine tribus episcopis comprovincialibus pracsumat episco
pum ordinare.
23 Can. Apost. c. 1. 'EirierKOTros x*1Potovelo-6io vito iina-
kottcov Suo J) Tpewv.
24 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 27. * Con. Arausic. 1. can. 21.
26 Con. Reiens. can. 2. Ordinationem quam canones ir-
ritam definiunt, nos quoque vacuandam esse censuimus : in
qua praetermissa trium praesentia, nee expetitis compro-
vincialium Uteris, metropolitani quoque voluntate neglecta
prorsus nihil quod episcopum faceret ostensum est.
27 Theod. lib. 5. c. 23. » Synes. Ep. 67.
29 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43. ex Epist. Cornel.
30 Lib. Pontifical. Vit. Pelag. Dum non essent episcopi,
qui eum ordinarent, inventi sunt duo episcopi, Joannes de
Perusio, et Bonus de Ferentino, et Andreas presbyter tie
Ostia, et ordinaverunt eum.
31 Con. Arausic. 1. c. 21.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

49

lagius, bishop of Rome, was reckoned a true bishop,
though, as we have just now heard, he had but two
bishops and a presbyter to ordain him. Dioscorus
of Alexandria was consecrated likewise by two bi
shops only, and those under ecclesiastical censure ;
as we learn from an epistle of the bishops of Pontus "
at the end of the council of Chalcedon ; yet neither
that council, nor any others, ever questioned the
validity of his ordination, unless perhaps those
Pontic bishops did, who call it nefandam atque ima-
ginariam ordinationem. Siderius, bishop of Palae-
bisca, was ordained by one bishop ; yet Athanasius
not only allowed his ¦ ordination and confirmed it,
but finding him to be a useful man, he afterward
advanced him, as Synesius says,33 to the metro
political see of Ptolemais. Paulinus, bishop of An
tioch, ordained Evagrius his successor, without any
other bishop to assist him : which, though it was
done against canon, yet Theodoret assures us,34 that
both the bishops of Rome and Alexandria owned
Evagrius for a true bishop, and never in the least
questioned the validity of his ordination. And
though they afterwards consented to acknowledge
Flavian, at the instance of Theodosius, to put an
end to the schism ; yet they did it upon this con
dition, that the ordinations of such as had been
ordained by Evagrius, should be reputed valid also :
as we learn from the letters of Pope Innocent,35 who
lived not long after this matter was transacted.
sect. s. Hence it appears, that the ordina-
RiSenothpriv!ieged tion of a bishop made by any single
Sore E/an^ottTer bishop was valid, if the church thought
' '""" ""'' fit to allow it. Nor had the bishop
of Rome any peculiar privilege in this matter above
other men, though some pretend to make a distinc
tion. There is indeed an ancient canon alleged in
the collection of Fulgentius Ferrandus, out of the
council of Zella and the letters of Siricius, which
seems to make a reserve in behalf of the bishop of
Rome : for it says,36 One bishop shall not ordain a
bishop, the Roman church excepted. But Cote
lerius 37 ingenuously owns this to be a corruption in
the text of Ferrandus, foisted in by the ignorance
or fraud of some modern transcriber, who confound
ed two decrees of Siricius into one, and changed

the words sedes apostolica primatis into sedes apos
tolica Romana. For in the words of Siricius88 there
is no mention made at all of the Roman church,
but it is said, that no one shall ordain without
the consent of the apostolical see ; that is, the
primate or metropolitan of the province ; and that
one bishop alone shall not ordain a bishop, because
that is arrogant and assuming, and looks hke giving
an ordination by stealth, and is expressly forbidden
by the Nicene council. So that in these times the
bishops of Rome were under the direction of the
canons, and did not presume to think they had any
privilege of ordaining singly, above what was com
mon to the rest of their order.
The next thing to be taken notice Sect 7
of in this affair is, that every bishop, J^ed^hu
by the laws and custom of the church, °"n chureh-
was to be ordained in his own church, in the pre
sence of his own people. Which is plainly inti
mated by Cyprian,39 when he says, that to celebrate
ordinations aright, the neighbouring bishops of the
province were used to meet at the church where the
new bishop was to be ordained, and there proceed
to his election and ordination. And this was so
generally the practice of the whole church, that
Pope Julius46 made it an objection against Gregory
of Alexandria, who was obtruded on the church by
the Eusebian party in the room of Athanasius, that
he was ordained at Antioch, and not in his own
church, but sent thither with a band of soldiers ;
whereas, by the ecclesiastical canon, he ought to
have been ordained, iw' avTrjg rijg sKKXnoiag, in the
church of Alexandria itself, and that by the bishops
of his own province. This rule was very nicely
observed in the African churches, where it was the
constant custom for the primate (whose office it
was to ordain bishops) to go to the church where
the new bishop was to be settled, and ordain him
there. Of this we have several instances in St.
Austin, who himself was ordained in his own church
at Hippo41 by the primate of Numidia : and having
divided his diocese, and erected a new bishopric at
Fussala, and elected a bishop, he sent for the pri
mate, though living42 at a great distance, to come
to the place and ordain him there.

82 Concil. tom. 4. p. 960. Ordinationem suam a dam-
natis episcopis, et hoc duobus, accepit, cum regulae patrum
 vel tres episcopos corporaliter adesse in hujusmodi
dispensationibus omnino prospiciant.
38 Synes. Ep. 67. 34 Theod. lib. 5. c. 23.
35 Innoc. Ep. 14. ad Bonifac. Ecclesia Antiochena ita
pacem postulavit et meruit, ut et Evagrianos suis ordinibus
ac locis, intemerata ordinatione, quam acceperant a memo-
rato, susciperet.
86 Ferrand. Brev. Canon, c. 6. Ut unus episcopus epis
copum non ordinet, excepta ecclesia Romana. Concilio
Zellensi. Ex Epistola Papae Siricii.
37 Coteler. Not. in Coustit. Apost. lib. 3. c. 20.
38 Siric. Ep. 4. u. 1. Ut extra conscientiam sedis apos-
E

tolicae, hoc est, primatis, nemo audeat ordinare. It. c. 2.
Ne unus episcopus episcopum ordinare praesumat propter
arrogantiam, ne furtivum praestitum beneficium videatur.
Hoc enim et a synodo Nicaena constitutum est atque de-
finitum. 39 Cypr. Ep. 68. al. 67. ad Fratr. Hispan. p. 172. Ad
ordinationes rite celebrandas, ad earn plebem, cui praaposi-
tus ordinatur, episcopi ejusdem provinciae proximi quique
conveniant, &c.
40 Jul. Ep. ad Oriental, ap. Athanas. Apol. 2. 1. 1. p. 749.
41 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 8.
42 Aug. Ep. 261. Propter quem ordinandum, sanctum
senem, qui tunc primatum Numidice gerebat, de louginquo
ut veniret rogans, Uteris impetravi.

50

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Bo-.k II.

As to the manner and form of or-
Sect. S. .
ofTord.natioS'of°rm fining a bishop, it is thus briefly de-
bishops. scribed by one of the councils43 of
Carthage : when a bishop is ordained, two bishops
shall hold the book of the Gospels over his head,
and whilst one pronounces the blessing or conse
cration prayer, all the rest of the bishops that are
present shall lay their hands upon his head. The
ceremony of laying the Gospels upon his head, seems
to have been in use in all churches. For the au
thor of the Apostolical Constitutions44 (a Greek
writer, who is supposed to relate the customs of the
third century) makes mention of it, only with this
difference, that instead of two bishops, there two
deacons are appointed to hold the Gospels open over
his head, whilst the senior bishop, or primate, with
two other bishops assisting him, pronounces the
prayer of consecration. This ceremony of holding
the Gospels over his. head, is also mentioned by St.
Chrysostom,45 and the author of the Ecclesiastical
Hierarchy, under the name of Dionysius, who says
it was a peculiar ceremony, used only in the ordin
ation of a bishop.
„ . „ The author of the Constitutions
Sect. 9.
a form or prayer recites one of the ancient forms of
usfd at their conse
cration, prayer, the close of which is in these
words :46 " Grant to him, 0 Lord Almighty, by thy
Christ, the communication of the Holy Spirit ; that
he may have power to remit sins according to thy
commandment, and to confer orders according to
thy appointment, and to loose every bond according
to the power which thou gavest to the apostles ;
that he may please thee in meekness and a pure
heart, constantly, blameless, and without rebuke ;
and may offer unto thee that pure unbloody sacri
fice, which thou, by Christ, hast appointed to be
the mystery or sacrament of the new covenant, for
a sweet-smelling savour, through Jesus Christ thy
holy Son, our God and Saviour, by whom be glory,
honour, and worship to thee, in the Holy Spirit,
now and for ever. Amen.'' It is not to be imagined
that one and the same form was used in all churches :
for every bishop having liberty to frame his own
liturgy, as there were different liturgies in different
churches, so it is most reasonable to suppose the
priniates or metropolitans had different forms of
consecration, though there are now no remains of
them in being, to give us any further information.

The consecration being ended, the
bishops that were present conducted or their enthrone.
the new-ordained bishop to his chair thronMm, tt ««.
x ret entlironistica.
or throne, and there placing him, they
all saluted him with a holy kiss in the Lord,
Then the Scriptures being read, (according to cus
tom, as part of the daily service,) the new bishop
made a discourse or exposition upon them, which
was usually called sermo enthronisticus, from the
time and circumstances in which it was spoken.
Such was that famous homily of Meletius, bishop
of Antioch, mentioned by Epiphanius47 and Sozo
men, for which he was immediately sent into ban
ishment by Constantius. Socrates frequently takes
notice of such homilies made by bishops48 at their
instalment ; and Liberatus,49 speaking of Severus
of Antioch, mentions his exposition made upon
that occasion, calling it, expositio in enthronismo.
It was usual also for bishops, immediately after
their instalment, to send letters to foreign bishops
to give them an account of their faith and ortho
doxy, that they might receive letters of peace and
communion again from them ; which letters were
therefore called Uteres enthronistices, or avXkajiai
evSponTirai, as Evagrius59 terms them, speaking of
the circular letters which Severus, bishop of An
tioch, wrote to the rest of the patriarchs upon that
occasion. These were otherwise called communi
catory letters, noiviDvmd avyypdppara, as the council
of Antioch, that deposed Paulus Samosatensis,
terms them : for the fathers in that council having
ordained Domnus in the room of Paul, gave notice
thereof to all churches, telling them that they sig
nified it to them for this reason, that they might
write to Domnus, and receive noivtuvuid avyypdppaTa,il
communicatory letters from him : which, as Vale
sius52 rightly notes, do not mean there those letters
of communion which bishops were used to grant to
persons travelling into foreign countries ; but such
letters as they wrote to each other upon their own
ordination, to testify their communion mutually with
one another. These letters are also called synodica
by Liberatus,53 who says, this custom of every new
bishop's giving intimation of his own promotion to
those of his own order, was so necessary, that the
omission of it was interpreted a sort of refusal to
hold communion with the rest of the world, and a
virtual charge of heresy upon them.

43 Con. Carth. 4. c. 2. Episcopus cum ordinatur, duo
episcopi ponant et teneant evangeliorum codicem super
caput et verticem ejus, et uno super eum fundente benedic-
tionem, reliqui omnes episcopi qui adsunt, manibus suis
caput ejus tangant.
44 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 4.
43 Chrys. de Laudib. Evang. cited by Habertus, p. 79.
Dionys. Eccles. Hierarch. *;. 5. par. 3. sect. 1. p. 364.

46 Constit. lib. 8. c. 5.
47 Epiphan. Haer. 73. Sozom. lib. 4. c. 28.
43 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 43. lib. 7. c. 29.
49 Liberat. Breviar. c. 19.
56 Evagr. lib. 4. c 4.
51 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 30. 52 Vales. Not. in loc.
53 Liberat. Breviar. <.-. 17. Quia literas synodicas non
direxisset, &c.

Chap. XII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

51

CHAPTER XII.
OF THE RULE WHICH PROHIBITS BISHOPS TO BE
ORDAINED IN SMALL CITIES.
Before I end this discourse about
The reason of the bishops, I must give an account of
law against placing * °
ST "" BmaU *wo rU4es more respecting their ordin
ation. The first of which was, That
bishops should not be placed in small cities or vil
lages : which law was firs t made by the council of S ar-
dica, with a design to keep up the honour and dig
nity of the episcopal order ; as the reason is given in
the canon made about it ; which says, It shall not
be lawful to place a bishop in a village, or small
city,1 where a single presbyter will be sufficient :
for in such places, there is no need to set a bishop ;
lest the name and authority of bishops be brought
into contempt. Some add to this the fifty-seventh
canon of the council of Laodicea, which forbids
the placing of bishops in villages, and in the coun
try,2 appointing visitors to be constituted in their
room : but this canon speaks not of absolute bishops,
but of the chorepiscopi, who were subject to other
bishops, of which I shall treat particularly hereafter.
However, there is no dispute about the Sardican
canon ; for the reason annexed explains its mean
ing, that it prohibits universally the ordination of
bishops in small cities and country places.
sect 2 -But it may be observed, that this
toSth'£eruii'in'i°M rule did never generally obtain : for
pS? Arahi^Asia both before and after the council of
Sardica, there were bishops both in
small cities and villages. Nazianzum was but a
very small city; Socrates3 calls it mitac EvrtXrjg, a
httle one : and upon the same account Gregory
Nazianzen4 styles his own father, who was bishop
of it, piKpoTToXirng, a, httle bishop, and one of the
second order. Yet he was no chorepiscopus, but
as absolute a bishop in his own diocese, as the bi
shop of Rome or Alexandria. Gerae, near Pelusium,
was but a small city, as Sozomen 'notes ;5 yet it
was a bishop's see. Theodoret observes the same
of Dohcha, where Maris was bishop,6 that it was
but a very httle city, iroXUvn opixpa, he calls it:
and he says the like of Cucusus7 in Armenia, the
place whither Chrysostom was banished: yet as
small a city as it was, Chrysostom8 found a bishop
there, who treated him very civilly and respectfully
in his exile. Synesius makes mention of the bi

shop of Olbiae in one of his epistles,9 and at the
same time tells us the place was but a village ; for he
calls the people dijuog koj/ujjt-tjc, a country people. So
he says in another epistle,18 that Hydrax and Palte-
bisca had for some time each of them their own bi
shop ; though they were but villages of Pentapolis,
formerly belonging to the diocese of Erythra, to
which they were some time after annexed again.
In Sozomen's time, among the Arabians and Cypri
ans, it was a usual thing to ordain bishops not only
in cities but villages, as also among the Novatians
and Montanists in Phrygia, all which he affirms "
upon his own knowledge. Some think Dracontius
was such a bishop, because Athanasius 12 styles his
bishopric x&Pas immoierjv : but whether this means
that he was an absolute bishop, or only a chorepis
copus, as others think, is not very easy to determine.
As neither what kind of bishops those were which
the council of Antioch,13 in their Synodical Epistle
against Paulus Samosatensis, calls country bishops,
for perhaps they might be only chorepiscopi, or de
pendent bishops, as Valesius conjectures. But this
cannot be said of those mentioned by Sozomen, nor
of the other instances I have given out of Synesius,
and the rest of the forecited authors, from whose tes
timonies it plainly appears that there were bishops
in very small cities, and sometimes in villages, not
withstanding the contrary decree of the Sardican
council. It is also very observable, that in Asia Mi
nor, a tract of land not much larger than the isle of
Great Britain, (including but two dioceses of the
Roman empire,) there were almost four hundred
bishops, as appears from the ancient Notitia's of the
church. Whence it may be collected, that Cucusus
and Nazianzum were not the only small cities in
those parts, but that there were many other cities and
dioceses of no very great extent in such a number.
One thing that contributed much Sect 3
to the multiplication of bishoprics, ing t?ZP™si»ect"
and that caused them to be erected 8ma11 plilcl!B-
sometimes in small places, was, that in the primitive
church every bishop, with the consent of his me
tropohtan, or the approbation of a provincial coun
cil, had power to divide his own diocese, and ordain
a new bishop in some convenient part of it, for the
good of the church, whenever he found his diocese
too large, or the places to he at too great a distance,
or the multitude of converts to increase, and make
the care and encumbrance of his diocese become
too great a burden for him. This was the reason
why St. Austin14 erected a new bishopric at Fussala,

1 Con. Sardic. Can. 6. Mr; i^Eivai Si airXtSs KaSitav
iiri(TKcrn-ov Kiapn Tivl, I) tpaxEia ttoXel.
2 Concil. Laodic. c. 57. 3 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 11 et 26.
4 Naz. Orat. 19. de Laud. Patr. t. 1. p. 310.
6 Sozom. lib. 8. c. 19. iro'Xts piKpa. " Theod. lib. 5. c. 4.
7 Theod. lib. 2. c. 5. et lib. 5. c. 34.
8 Chrys. Ep. 125. ad Cyriacum. '9 Synes. Ep. 76.
10 Id. Ep. 67. Kui/iai Si avTal nrEVTairoXEios.
E 2

11 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 19. 'sZo-tlv oir-n Kal iv Keopaii iiritr-
K07T0L lepovvTai, ais nrapi 'A/oajQtots Kal TUvTrpiois 'iyvuiv, &c.
12 Athanas. Epist. ad Dracont. t. 1. p. 954.
18 Ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 30. ''EiriGKoirovs toiv bpopeov
iyputv te Kal ttoXecov.
14 Augustin. Epist. 261. ad Caelestin. Quod ab Hippone
memoratum castellum millibus quadraginta sejungitur, cum
in eis regendis, et eorum reliquiis licet exiguis colligendis

52

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

a town in his own diocese, about forty miles from
Hippo. It was a place where great numbers had
been converted from the schism of the Donatists, and
some remained to be converted still ; but the place
lying at so great a distance, he could not bestow that
care and diligence, either in ruling the one, or re
gaining the other, which he thought necessary; and
therefore he prevailed with the primate of Numidia,
to come and ordain one Antonius to be bishop there.
And this was consonant to the rules of the African
church, which allowed new bishoprics to be erect
ed15 in any diocese where there was need, if the bi
shop of the diocese and the primate gave their con
sent to it ; or, as Ferrandus 18 has it in his collection,
if the bishop, the primate, and a provincial council,
by their joint consent and authority, gave way to it.
By virtue of these canons, during the time of the
schism of the Donatists, many new bishoprics
were erected in very small towns in Africa ; as ap
pears from the Acts of the Collation of Carthage,
where the catholics and Donatists mutually charge
each other with this practice; that they divided
single bishoprics sometimes into three or four, and
made bishops in country towns and villages to
augment the numbers of their parties. Thus, in
one place, we find Petilian the Donatist17 com
plaining, that the catholics had made four bishops
in the diocese of Januarius, a Donatist bishop, to
outdo them with numbers. And in another place,
Alypius the catholic orders it to be entered18
upon record, that a great many Donatist bishops
there mentioned, were not ordained in cities, but
only in country towns, or villages. To which Pe
tilian19 replies, that the catholics did the same;
ordaining bishops in country towns, and some
times in such places where they had no people :
his meaning is, that in those places all the people
were turned Donatists, and for that very reason the
catholic bishops thought themselves obliged to di
vide their dioceses, and ordain new bishops in small
towns ; that they might outdo the Donatists, both in
number and zeal, and more effectually labour in re
ducing the straying people back again to their an
cient communion with the catholic church. This
was the practice of Africa, and this their reason for
erecting so many small bishoprics in those times of
exigency : they had always an eye to the benefit and
edification of the church.

 me viderem latius quam oportebat extendi, nee adhi-
bendae sufficerem diligentiaa, quam ceitissima ratione adhi-
beri debere cernebam, episcopum ibi ordinandum constitu-
endumque curavi.
15 Concil. Carth. 2. c. 5. Si accedente tempore, crescente
fide, Dei populus multiplicatus desideravit proprium ha
bere rectorem, ejus videlicet voluntate, in cujus potestate
est dioecesis constituta, habeat episcopum. It Con Carth
3. c. 42.
16 Ferrand. Breviar. Canon, c. 13. Ut episcopus non or-
dinetur in dicccesi, quae episcopum nunquam habuit, nisi
turn voluntate episcopi ad quem ipsa dioacesis pertinet, ex

Gregory Nazianzen highly commends St. Basil's
piety and prudence for the like practice. It hap
pened in his time, that Cappadocia was divided into
two provinces, and Tyana made the metropolis of
the second province, in the civil account : this gave
occasion to Anthimus, bishop of Tyana, to lay claim
to the rights of a metropolitan in the church ; which
St. Basil opposed, as injurious to his own church of
Csesarea, which, by ancient custom and prescription,
had been the metropolis of the whole province.
But Anthimus proving a very contentious adversary,
and raising great disturbance and commotions about
it, St. Basil was willing to buy the peace of the
church with the loss of his own rights ; so he vo
luntarily relinquished his jurisdiction over that part
of Cappadocia, which Anthimus laid claim to : and,
to compensate his own loss in some measure, he
erected several new bishoprics in his own province ;
as, at Sasima, and some other such obscure places
of that region. Now, though this was done con
trary to the letter of a canon, yet Nazianzen extols
the fact upon three accounts. First, because hereby
a greater care was taken of men's souls.28 Secondly,
by this means every city had its own revenues.
And lastly, the war between the two metropolitans
was ended. This, he says, was an admirable policy,
worthy the great and noble soul of St. Basil, who
could turn a dispute so to the benefit of the church,
and draw a considerable advantage out of a calamity,
by making it an occasion to guard and defend his
country with more bishops. Whence we may col
lect, that in Nazianzen's opinion, it is an advantage
to the church to be well stocked with bishops ; and
that it is no dishonour to her to have bishops in
small towns, when necessity and reason require it.

CHAPTER XIII.
OF THE RULE WHICH FORBIDS TWO BISHOPS TO
BE 'ORDAINED IN ONE CITY.
Another rule generally observed in
the chm-ch, was, that in one city there The g^erai ™ie
should be but one bishop, though it ShurKo'ha've but
. *" - one bishop in a city.
was large enough to admit of many

concilio tamen plenario et primatis auctoritate.
17 Collat. Carth. 1. c. 117. Petilianus episcopus dixit, In
una plebe Januarii colleges nostri praesentis, in unadioacesi,
quatuor sunt constituti contra ipsum ; ut numerus scilicet
augeretur. 13 Ibid. c. 181. Alypius dixit, Scriptum sit istos omnes in
villis vel in fundis esse episcopos ordinatos, non in aliquibus
civitatibus. 19 Ibid. c. 182. Petilianus episcopus dixit: Sic etiam tu
multos habes per omnes agros dispersos : imo crebros ubi
habes, sane et sine populis habes.
20 Naz. Orat. 20. de Laud. Basil, t. 1. p. 356.

Chap. XIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

53

presbyters. In the time of Cornelius, there were
forty-six presbyters ' in the church of Rome, seven
deacons, as many sub-deacons, and ninety-four of
the inferior orders of the clergy : and the body of
the people, at a moderate computation, are reckoned
by some2 to be about fifty thousand ; by others,8 to
be a far greater number ; yet there was but one bi
shop overall these. So that when Novatian got
himself ordained bishop of Rome, in opposition to
Cornehus, he was generally condemned over all the
world, as transgressing the rule of the catholic
church. Cyprian4 delivers it as a maxim upon this
occasion ; that there ought to be but one bishop in
a church at a time, and one judge as the vicegerent
of Christ. Therefore he says5 Novatian was no bi
shop, since there could not be a second after the
first ; but he was an adulterer,6 and a foreigner, and
ambitious usurper of another man's church, who had
been regularly ordained before him. And so he was
told not only by Cyprian,7 but a whole African coun
cil at once ; who, in return to Novatian's communi
catory letter, which (according to custom) he wrote
to them upon his ordination, sent him this plain
and positive answer : That he was an ahen ; and
that none of them could communicate with him, who
had attempted to erect a profane altar, and set up
an adulterous chair, and offer sacrilegious sacrifice
against Cornehus the true bishop ; who had been
ordained by the approbation of God, and the suf
frage of the clergy and people. There were, in
deed, some confessors at Rome, who at first sided
with Novatian : but Cyprian ° wrote a remonstrat
ing letter to them, wherein he soberly laid before
them the sinfulness of their practice. And his
admonition wrought so effectually on some of the
chief of them, that not long after they returned
to Cornehus, and publicly confessed their fault in
these words : We acknowledge our error ; we have
been imposed upon and deluded by treacherous and
deceitful words ; for though we seemed to commu
nicate with a schismatical and heretical man, yet our
mind was always sincerely in the church. For we
are not ignorant,9 that as there is but one God, one

Christ the Lord, and one Holy Spirit; so there
ought to be but one bishop in a catholic church.
Pamelius '" and others, who take this for a confes
sion of the bishop of Rome's supremacy, betray
either gross ignorance, or great partiality for a
cause : for though this was spoken of a bishop of
Rome, yet it was not peculiar to him, but the com
mon case of bishops in all churches. Ignatius, and
all the writers after him, who have said any thing
of bishops, always speak of a single bishop in every
church. And though Origen11 seems to say other
wise, that there were two bishops in every church ;
yet, as he explains his own notion, his meaning is
the same with all the rest : for he says, the one
was visible, the other invisible ; the one an angel,
the other a man. So that his testimony (though
there be something peculiar in his notion) is a fur
ther confirmation of the church's practice.
The writers of the following ages do so frequent
ly mention the same thing, that it would be as te
dious as it is needless to recite their testimonies.12
Therefore I shall only add these two things : First,
That the council of Nice repeats and confirms this
ancient rule. For in the eighth canon, which
speaks of the Novatian bishops that return to the
catholic church, it is said, that any bishop may
admit them to officiate as presbyters in the city, or
as chorepiscopi in the country, but not as city
bishops, for this reason, 'Iva pri iv ry iroXti Ivo iiriaico-
ttoi uoiv, that there may not be two bishops in one
city. Secondly, That in fact the people were gener
ally possessed with the opinion of the absolute un
lawfulness of having two bishops sit together : in
somuch that Theodoret tells us,13 when Constantius
proposed to the Roman people to have Liberius
and Felix sit as copartners, and govern the church
in common, they unanimously agreed to reject the
motion, crying out, One God, one Christ, one bishop.
Yet it must be observed, that as
the great end and design of this rule Yet two bishops
" sometimes allowed,
was to prevent schism, and preserve by compromise, to
r A end a dispute, or
the peace and unity of the church ; jjjjjjjj1 i,lve'erat8
so, on the other hand, when it mani-

1 Cornel. Ep. ad Fabium. ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
2 Bishop Burnet, Letter 4. p. 207.
9 Basnag. Exerc. ad Annal. Baron, an. 44. p. 532.
4 Cypr. Epist. 55. al. 59. ad Cornel, p. 129. Unus in ec
clesia ad tempus sacerdos, et ad tempus judex vice Christi.
5 Id. Epist. 52. al. 55. ad Antonian. p. 104. Cum post pri-
mum secundus esse non possit, quisquis post unum, qui solus
esse debeat, factus est, non jam secundus ille, sed nullus est.
6 Ibid. p. 112. Nisi si episcopus tibi videtur, qui epis
copo in ecclesia a sedecim coepiscopis facto, adulter atque
extraneus, episcopus fieri a desertoribus per ambitum uititur.
7 Cypr. Ep. 67. al. 68. ad Steph. p. 177. Se foris esse
ccepisse, nee posse a qiioquam nostrum sibi communicari;
qui, episcopo Cornelio in catholica ecclesia de Dei judicio,
et cleri ac plebis suffragio ordinato, profanum altare erigere,
adulteram cathedram collocare, et sacrilega contra vorum
sacerdotem sacrificia off.-rre tentaverit.

8 Cypr. Ep. 44. al. 46. ad Nicostrat. et Maxim.
9 Cornel. Ep. 46. al. 49. ad Cyprian. Nee enim ignora
mus unum Deum esse, unum Christum Doniinum, quem
confessi sumus, unum Spiritum Sanctum, unum episcopum
in catholica ecclesia esse debere.
10 Pamel. Not. in loc.
11 Orig. Horn. 13. in Luc. Per singulas ecclesias bini
sunt episcopi, alius visibilis, alius invisibilis.  Ego puto
inveniri simul posse et angelum et hominem bonos (leg.
binos) ecclesiae episcopos.
12 See Chrysost. Epist. 125. ad Cyriac. et Horn. 1. in
Philip. Jerom. Epist. 4, ad Rustic. Ep. 85. ad Evagr.
Com. in Tit. ii. Pseudo-Hieron. Com. in 1 Tim. iii. Hilar.
Diac. Com. in Phil. i. 1. It. in 1 Cor. xii. 28. et in 1 Tim.
iii. 12. Pacian. Ep. 3. ad Sempronian. Socrat. lib. 6. c.
22. Sozom. lib. 4. c. 14 et 15. Theod. lib. 3. c. 4.
13 Theod. lib. 2. u. 11.

54

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

festly appeared, that the allowing of two bishops
in one city, in some certain circumstances and
critical junctures, was the only way to put an end
to some long and inveterate schism, in that case
there were some catholic bishops, who were willing
to take a partner into their throne, and share the
episcopal power and dignity between them. Thus
Meletius, bishop of Antioch, made the proposal to
Paulinus his antagonist, who, though he was of the
same faith, yet kept up a church divided in com
munion from him. I shall relate the proposal in
the words of Theodoret.'4 Meletius, says he, the
meekest of men, thus friendly and mildly addressed
himself to Paulinus : Forasmuch as the Lord hath
committed to me the care of these sheep, and thou
hast received the care of others, and all the sheep
agree in one common faith, let us join our flocks,
my friend, and dispute no longer about primacy and
government: but let us feed the sheep in common,
and bestow a common care upon them.15 And if it
be the throne that creates the dispute, I will try to
take away this cause also. We will lay the holy
Gospel upon the seat, and then each of us take his
place on either side of it. And if I die first, you
shall take the government of the flock alone : but
if it be your fate to die before me, then I will feed
them according to my power. Thus spake the
divine Meletius, says our author, lovingly and
meekly ; but Paulinus would not acquiesce, nor
hearken to him.
We meet with another such proposal made to the
Donatist bishops, by all the catholic bishops of
Africa assembled together, at the opening of the fa
mous conference of Carthage. There they offered
them freely before the conference began, that if
they would return to the unity and communion of
the church, upon due conviction, they should retain
their episcopal honour and dignity still : '° and be
cause this could not be done, as the circumstances
and case of the church then were, without allowing
two bishops for some time to be in the same city, it
was further proposed, that every catholic bishop
should take the other to be his copartner, and share
the honour with him ; allowing him to sit with him
in his own chair, as was usual for bishops to treat
their fellow bishops that were strangers ; and also

granting him a church of his own, where he might
be capable of returning him the like civility : that
so they might pay mutual respect and honour to
each other, and take their turns to sit highest in the
church, till such times as one of them should die;
and then the right of succession should be always
in a single bishop, as it was before. And this, they
say, was no new thing in Africa : for, from the be
ginning of the schism, they that would recant their
error, and condemn their separation, and return to
the unity of the church, were by the charity of
catholics always treated in the same courteous man
ner. From hence it is plain, that this had been the
practice of Africa for above one whole century ; and
the present bishops proposed to follow the example
of their predecessors, in making this concession to
the Donatists, in order to close up and heal the di
visions of the church. But they add, that forasmuch
as this method might not be acceptable to all Chris
tian people, who would be much better pleased to
see only a single bishop in every church, and, per
haps, would not endure the partnership of two,
which was an unusual thing ; they therefore pro
posed, in this case, that both the bishops should
freely resign, and suffer a single bishop to be chosen
by such bishops as were singly possessed of other
churches. So that at once they testify both what
was the usual and ordinary rule of the church, to
have but one bishop in a city, and also how far they
were willing to have receded, in order to establish
the peace and unity of the church in that extraor
dinary juncture. I have been the more easily
tempted to recite this passage at large, not only
because it is a full proof of all that has been as
serted in this chapter, but because it gives us such
an instance of a noble, self-denying zeal and charity,
as is scarce to be paralleled in any history ; and
shows us the admirable spirit of those holy bishops,
among whom St. Austin was a leader.
Some very learned persons17 are Sect3
further of opinion, that this rule about JSed0SrS»nf.
one bishop in a city, did not take place "T Sfy Stoma!
in the apostolical age : for they think j™."^ "the other
.•,.,}, ,i ,' . • 4.- of the Gentiles.
that, before the perfect incorporation
and coalition of the Jews and Gentiles into one
body, there were two bishops in many cities, one of

14 Theod. lib. 5. c. 3.
15 EI Si 6 itto-os 0ai/cos Trjv tpiv yEvva, iyuj Kal Tau-nju
l^aXacrcu iTEipaaopai' iv yap tovtoj to GeIov irpoTtOeiKbos
EvayyiXiov, iKaTEpvodEV ritias Kadrjadai irapeyyvo}.
16 Collat. Carth. 1. die, c. 16. Sic nobiscum teneantuni-
tatem, ut non solum viam salutis inveniant, sed nee honorem
episcopatus amittant.  Poterit quippe unusquisque nos
trum, honoris sibi socio copulato, vicissim sedere eminen-
tius, sicut peregrino episcopo juxta considente collega. Hoc
cum alternis Basilicis utrisque conceditur, uterque ab alter-
utrohonoremutuopracvenitur: quia ubi praeceptio charitatis
dilataverit corda, possessio pacis non fit angusta, ut uno
eorum defuncto, deincepsjam singulis singuli, pristinomore,

succedant. Nee novum aliquid fiet: nam hoc ab ipsius
separationis exordio, in eis qui damnato nefariae discessionis
errore, unitatis dulcedinem vel sero sapuerunt, catholica
dilectio custodivit. Aut si forte Christiani populi singulis
delectantur episcopis, et duorum consortium, inusitata rerum
facie, tolerare non possunt : utrique de medio secedamus ; et
ecclesiis in singulis, damnata schismatis causa, in imitate
pacifica constitutis, ab his qui singuli in ecclesiis singulis
invenientur, unitati factae per longa necessaria singuli con-
stituantur episcopi.
17 Pearson, Vind. Ignat. par. 2. t. 13. p. 414. Hammond,
Dissert. 5. adv. Blondel, c. 1.

Chap. XIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

55

the Jews, and another of the Gentiles. Thus they
think it was at Antioch,'where Euodius and Ignatius
are said to be bishops ordained by the apostles ; as
also Linus and Clemens at Rome, the one ordained
by St. Peter bishop of the Jews, and the other by
St. Paul bishop of the Gentiles. Epiphanius seems
to have been of this opinion ; for he says,19 Peter
and Paul where the first bishops of Rome : and he
makes it a question whether they did not ordain two
other bishops to supply their places in their absence.
In another place19 he takes occasion to say, that
Alexandria never had two bishops, as other churches
had: which observation, Bishop Pearson thinks,
ought to be extended to the apostolical ages ; as im
plying that St. Mark, being the only preacher of the
gospel at Alexandria, left but one bishop his suc
cessor, but in other churches sometimes two apostles
gathered churches, and each of them left a bishop
in his place. Yet this does not satisfy other learned
persons,20 who are of a different judgment, and think
that though the apostles had occasion to ordain two
bishops in some cities, yet it was not upon the ac
count of different churches of Jews and Gentiles,
but in the ordinary way of succession : as Ignatius
was ordained at Antioch after the death of Euodius,
and Clemens at Rome after the death of Linus. I
shall not pretend to determine on which side the
right lies in so nice a dispute,21 but leave it to the
judicious reader, and only say, that if the former
opinion prevails, it proves another exception to the
common rule of having but one bishop in a city ;
or rather shows what was the practice of the church
before the rule was made.
To these we may add a third excep-
The case of coad- tion in a case that is more plain, which
was that of the coadjutors. These
were such bishops as were ordained to assist some
other bishops in case of infirmity or old age, and
were to be subordinate to them as long as they hved,
and succeed them when they died. Thus, when
Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem, was disabled by rea
son of his great age, (being a hundred and twenty
years old,) Alexander was made his coadjutor. Eu
sebius22 and St. Jerom both say it was done by
revelation ; but they do not mean, that Narcissus

needed a revelation to authorize him to take a co
adjutor, but only to point out to him that particular
man : for Alexander was a stranger, and a bishop
already in another country, so that without a re
velation he could not have been judged qualified
for this office ; but being once declared to be so,
there was no scruple upon any other account, but
by the unanimous consent23 of all the bishops in
Palestine, he was chosen to take part with Narcissus
in the care and government of the church. Vale
sius21 reckons this the first instance of any coadjutor
to be met with in ancient history, but there are
several examples in the following ages. Theotec-
nus, bishop of Ceesarea, made Anatolius his coad
jutor, designing him to be his successor, so that for
some time they25 both governed the same church
together. Maximus26 is said by Sozomen to be bi
shop of Jerusalem together with Macarius. Orion,
bishop of Palcebisca, being grown old, ordained Si-
derius his coadjutor and successor, as Synesius27
informs us. So Theodoret28 takes notice that John,
bishop of Apamea, had one Stephen for his colleague.
And St. Ambrose29 mentions one Senecio, who was
coadjutor to Bassus. In the same manner Gregory
Nazianzen was bishop of Nazianzum together with
his aged father. Baronius indeed30 denies that ever
he was bishop of Nazianzum, but St. Jerom31 and
all the ancient historians, Socrates,32 Sozomen,33
Ruffin,3* and Theodoret35 expressly assert it ; though
some of them mistake in calling him his father's
successor : for he was no otherwise bishop of Nazi
anzum, but only as his father's coadjutor. He en
tered upon the office with this protestation, that he
would not be obliged to continue bishop there any
longer than his father lived, as he himself acquaints
us in his own Life,36 and other places ; so that after
his father's death he actually resigned, and getting
Eulalius to be ordained in his room, he betook him
self to a private life.37 All which evidently proves
that he was not his father's successor, but only his
coadjutor. I will but add one instance more of this
nature, which is the known case of St. Austin, who
was ordained bishop of Hippo whilst Valerius was
hving, and sat with him38 for some time as his coad
jutor ; which he did by the consent of the primate

18 Epiphan. Haer. 27. Carpocrat. n. 6.
19 Idem, Haer. 68. Meletian. n. 6.
20 Coteler. Not. in Constitut. Apost. lib. 7. c. 46.
21 Bishop Pearson himself altered his opinion. See his
Dissert. 2. de Successione Rom. Pontif. c. 3.
22 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 11.
23 Hieron. de Script. Eccl. in Alexandro. Cunctis in Pa-
laestina episcopis in unum congregatis, adnitente quoque ip
so vel maxime Narcisso. Hierosolymitanae ecclesiae cum
eo gubernaculum suscepit.
24 Vales. Not. in. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 11.
23 Euseb. lib. 7. u. 32. &p<peo Trjs auTf)s irpouo-Tvaav
EKieXricrias. 28 Sozom. lib. 2. c. 20

27 Synes. Ep. 67.
28 Theod. lib. 5. c. 4.
29 Ambr. 79. ad Theophil. Fratri nostro et coepiscopo
Basso in consortium regendae ecclesiae datus est Senecio.
"Baron, an. 371. n. 106.
31 Hieron. de Script. Eccl. Gregorius primum Sasimo-
mm, deinde Nazianzenus episcopus, &c.
82 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 26. 33 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 8.
84 Ruffin. lib. 2. c. 9. 35 Theodor. lib. 5. c. 8.
33 Naz. Carm. de Vita sua. It. Orat. 8. ad Patr.
37 Naz. Ep. 42. ad Greg. Nyss.
33 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 8. Paulin. Ep. 45. ad Roman.
Aug. Ep. 31 et 110.

56

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

of Carthage, and the primate of Numidia, who or
dained him. Possidius says, he had some scruple
upon him at first, because he looked upon it as con
trary to the custom of the church ; but being told
that it was a thing commonly practised both in the
African and transmarine churches, he yielded with
some reluctancy to be ordained. These instances
are evident proof, that it was not thought contrary
to the true sense of the canon, in case of infirmity
or old age, to have coadjutors in the church :
though, it is true, St. Austin was of opinion that
his own ordination was not regular, when afterward
he came to know the Nicene canon, which he did
not know before ; and for this reason he would not
ordain39 Eradius bishop whilst he himself lived,
though he had nominated him with the consent of
the church to be his successor. But all men did
not understand the canon in this strict and rigorous
sense that St. Austin did, as absolutely forbidding
two bishops to be in a church at the same time in
all cases whatsoever, but only when there was no
just reason, and the necessities of the church did
not require it : but if there was a reasonable cause
to have more bishops than one, as when a bishop
was unable to execute his office, or in any the like
case, the canon did not oblige, as appears from the
instances that have been mentioned, and several
others that might be added to them. '

CHAPTER XIV.
of the chorepiscopi, nEPIOAEYTAl, and suf
fragan bishops : and how these differed
from one another.
sect. 1. As the bishops, when they were dis-
the name'XTey"'- abled by old age or infirmity, ordained
ta&of'some'about themselves coadjutors in the citv- so
it , , . J ' '
when their dioceses were enlarged by
the conversion of pagans in the country and villages
at a great distance from the city church, they cre
ated themselves another sort of assistants in the
country, whom they called chorepiscopi ,- who were
so named, not because they were ex choro sacerdo
tum, as a Latin writer l by mistake derives the word,

39 Aug. Ep. 110. Quod reprehensum est in me, nolo re-
preheiidi in filio meo. Erit presbyter ut est, quando Deus
voluerit futurus episcopus.
1 Raban. Maur. de Instit. Sacerd. lib. 1. c. 5. Salmas.
de Primat. c. 1.
2 Turrian. Not. in can. 54. Con. Nic. Arabic.
3 Est. in 4. Sent. dist. 24. sect. 30.
4 Ant. August. Epit. Jur. Can. lib. 6. tit. 1. c. 8, 11 13.
5 Grat. Dist. 6. u. 4, 5. 6 Walo Messalin. c. 5. p.315.

but because they were rrjg x&pas Mokoitoi, country
bishops, as the word properly signifies, and not
presbyters of the city regions, as Salmasius under
stands it.
Now, though the name does in some
measure determine their quality, yet ^^fl™^
great dispute has been among learned S! "hat tlSy"*™
men concerning the nature of this mere wW"'- "
order. Among the schoolmen and canonists, it is
a received opinion, that they were only presbyters •
as may be seen in Turrian,2 Estius,3 Antonius Au-
gustinus,4 and Gratian,5 who are followed not only
by Salmasius,6 but by Spalatensis,7 Dr. Field,8 and
Dr. Forbes,9 the last of which brings several argu
ments to prove that they were mere presbyters, and
never had any episcopal ordination.
Others think there were two sorts Sect
of chorepiscopi, some that had epis- tha^oroSffin
copal ordination, and others that were anLKfot Em
simple presbyters : which is the opi- ™ op"'
nion of Cabassutius,10 Peter de Marca11 and Bellar-
min.lz They allow that in some cases it happened
that the chorepiscopi were bishops, because they
were ordained bishops before they were made chor
episcopi. And thus much is certainly true : for in
the primitive church, sometimes bishops were or
dained to a place, but not received, either through
the perverseness of the people, or by reason of per
secution, or the like cause : and such bishops (whom
the ancient writers ls and canons term crxoAaioi and
erxoXdiovTig iiriaicoiroi, vacant bishops) not being per
mitted to officiate in their own church, were admit
ted to act as chorepiscopi under any other bishop
that would entertain them. The council of Nice"
made the like provision for such of the Novatian
bishops as would return to the cathohc church;
that the bishop of the place should admit them
either to the office of a city presbyter, or a chor-
episcopus ; that there might not be two bishops in
one city. And so it was determined likewise by the
same council15 in the case of the Meletian bishops,
that upon their return to the unity of the church,
they should be allowed to officiate in subordination
to the bishops of the catholic church. Now, it is
plain that all such chorepiscopi as these were pro
perly bishops, because they were originally ordained
bishops before they came to act in the quahty of
country bishops under others. But for all the rest,
De Marca thinks they were only presbyters.

' Spalat. de Repub. par. 1. lib. 2. c. 9. u. 17, 18, 19.
8 Field, of the Church, lib. 5. c. 29.
9 Forb. Iren. lib. 2. c. 11. prop. 14. p. 249.
10 Cabassut. Notit. Concil. c. 8. p. 45.
11 Pet. de Marca, de Concord, lib. 2. c. 13.
12 Bellarm. de Cleric, lib. 1. c. 17.
13 Socrat. H. E. lib. 4. t. 7. Cone. Antioch. can. 16.
" Cone. Nic. can. 8.
15 Cone. Nic. Ep. Synod, ap. Socrat. H. E. lib. 1. c. 9.

Chap. XIV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

57

Both these opinions (which differ
The 3rd opinion, little from one another) are rejected
that they were all
hishops. the most fcy Bishop Barlow, Dr. Hammond,
Dr. Beverege,1" Dr. Cave,19 and even
by Mr. Blondel20 himself, who, though by some
reckoned among those of the contrary opinion, has
a long dissertation against De Marca, to prove that
all the chotrepiscopi mentioned in the ancient coun
cils were properly bishops. And there needs no
fuller proof of this than what Athanasius says in
his Second Apology, where he puts a manifest dis
tinction betwixt presbyters and the chorepiscopi.
For speaking of the irregular promotion of Ischyras,
who was made bishop of the region of Mareotis by
the Eusebian faction, he says, Mareotis was only a
region of Alexandria, and that all the churches of
that precinct were immediately subject to the
bishop of Alexandria, and never had either bishop
or chorepiscopus21 among them, but only presbyters
fixed each in their respective villages or churches.
This, as Blondel22 well observes, shows evidently
that the chorepiscopi were not the same with pres
byters, however the forger of the Decretal Epistles,
under the name of Pope Leo and Damasus, would
have persuaded the world to beheve so.
sect. 5 -^Ul- wny tnen ^oes 1-^le councll °f'
alrstthifSsTer- Neocsesarea23 say that the chorepiscopi
were only an imitation of the seventy ?
I answer, because they were subject to the city
bishops, as the seventy elders were subject to Moses,
or the seventy disciples to the apostles. For what
ever the council means by the seventy, it cannot
be proved thence that the chorepiscopi were mere
presbyters. But it is said, that they could not be bishops, be
cause the ordination of bishops was to be performed
by three bishops, with the consent of the metro
pohtan and the provincial bishops; whereas the
council of Antioch24 says, that a chorepiscopus was
ordained by one bishop only, the bishop of the city
to whose jurisdiction he belonged. To this the
reply is easy, that this was one principal difference
between the city bishops and country bishops, who
differed both in the manner of their ordination, and
in their power ; for the one was subordinate to the
other. Therefore, those canons which require three
bishops to impose hands in the ordination of a
bishop, speak only of such bishops as were to be
absolute and supreme governors of their own dio
cese, and not of such who were subordinate to them,

16 Barlow's Letter to Bishop Usher, in Ush. Let. 222.
p. 520.
" Ham. Dissert. 3. cont. Blondel, c. 8.
18 Bevereg. Pandect, t. 2. Not. in Cone. Ancyr. can. 13.
19 Cave, Prim. Christ, par. 1. u. 8. p. 224.
20 Blondel, Apol. p. 95, &c.
21 Athan. Apol. 2. 1. 1. p. 802.
22 Blondel, Apol. p. 127. Non unum cum presbyteri

whom the city bishops might ordain at their own
discretion, yet so as to stand accountable to a pro
vincial synod.
The office of these chorepiscopi was,
to preside over the country clergy, and ^t^uX
inquire into their behaviour, and „'of™e*Cy"efs,'orb'J'
. ... j..., ¦,,-! deacons, without
make report thereof to the city bishop; special licence from
as also to provide fit persons for the
inferior service and ministry of the church. And
to give them some authority, they had certain pri
vileges conferred on them. As, 1. They might or
dain readers, subdeacons, and exorcists for the use
of the country churches. St. Basil s requires of his
chorepiscopi, that they should first acquaint him with
the qualification of such persons, and take his li
cence to ordain them. But the council of Antioch28
gives them a general commission to ordain all under
presbyters and deacons, without consulting the city
bishop upon every such promotion. And for pres
byters and deacons, they might ordain them too,
but not Sixa tov iv ry iroXti eTrtffKOTTB, without the
special leave of the city bishop, under whose juris
diction both they and the country were. And this
is the meaning of the council of Ancyra,27 which
says, the chorepiscopi shall not have power to ordain
presbyters or deacons : which we must interpret by
the explication given in the council of Antioch,
that they should not be authorized to do it without
the particular direction of the city bishop, but by
his leave they might.
2. They had power to minister con-
i Scct- '•
firmation to such as were newly bap- They had power to
confirm.
tized in country churches. This is
expressly provided by the council of Riez28 in the
case of Armentarius, whom they reduced to the
quality of a chorepiscopus, but still allowed him
the privilege of confirming neophites ; which ar
gues that confirmation might then be adminis
tered by the hands of the chorepiscopi in country
churches. 3. They had power to grant letters Sect B
dimissory, or, as they were otherwise g^^E'dimis.
called, canonical and irenical letters, «>•* "> "« <="w-
to the country clergy, who desired to remove from
one diocese to another. Thus I understand that
canon of the council of Antioch29 which says, Coun
try presbyters shall not grant canonical letters,
navoviKag imo-roXag, or send letters to any neighbour
ing bishop ; but the chorepiscopi may grant eipifvucac,
letters dimissory, or letters of peace.

chorepiscopus fuisse, aut eandem formam gestasse, prout
decretalium suppositori somniare visum est.
23 Cone. Neocaesar. can. 14. x^pEirio-Koirol e'kti piv tiv
tvitov TU3V ifiSopriKOVTa.
24 Concil. Antioch. can. 10.
26 Cone. Antioch. can. 10.
28 Cone. Reiens. e. 3.
29 Cone. Antioch. can. 8.

23 Basil. Epist. 181.
27 Cone. Ancyr. can. 13.

58

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

Sect 10.
And to sit and
vote in councils.

4. They had hberty to officiate in
They hid power to the city church, in the presence of the
officiate in the pre- , - , . .
senceorthecity bishop and presbyters ot tne city,
bishop. r A
which country presbyters had not.
For so the council of Neocsesarea determined in two
canons to this purpose :s° " The country presbyters
shall not offer the oblation, nor distribute the bread
and wine in time of prayer in the city church,
when the bishop and presbyters are present : but
the country bishops, being in imitation of the se
venty, as fellow labourers, for their care of the poor,
are admitted to offer." 5. They had the privilege of sitting
and voting in synods and councils:
of which there are several instances
still remaining in the acts of the ancient councils.
In the first Nicene council31 Palladius and Seleucius
subscribe themselves chorepiscopi of the province
of Coelosyria : Eudaemon, chorepiscopus of the pro
vince of Cilicia: Gorgonius, Stephanus, Euphro-
nius, Rhodon, Theophanes, chorepiscopi of the
province of Cappadocia : Hesychius, Theodore,
Anatolius, Quintus, Aquila, chorepiscopi of the
province of Isauria : Theustinus and Eulalius, of
the province of Bithynia. So again in the council
of Neocsesarea,32 Stephanus and Rudus, or Rhodon,
two of the same that were in the council of Nice,
subscribed themselves chorepiscopi of the province
of Cappadocia. And in the council of Ephesus,33
Caesarius, clwrcpiscopus of Alee.
But here I must observe, that the
The power' of the power and privileges of the chorepis-
.nrpniser.ni not the
mes copi varied much, according to the
difference of times and places. For
when the synod of Riez, in France, anno 439, had
deposed Armentarius from his bishopric, because he
was uncanonically ordained, they allowed him the
privilege of being a chorepiscopus, after the example
of the Nicene fathers, but limited him as to the
exercise of his power. For though they gave him
authority to confirm neophites, and consecrate vir
gins, and celebrate the eucharist in any country
church with preference to any presbyter of the
region ; yet, first, They denied him the privilege of
consecrating the eucharist in the city church,34
which, by the thirteenth canon of the council of
Neocsesarea, was allowed to other chorepiscopi. Se
condly, They confined him to a single church in the
exercise of his chorepiscopal power ; whereas others
had power over a whole region. Thirdly, They for
bade him to ordain any of the inferior clergy even in
his own church, which other chorepiscopi were al-

chorepiscrrpi not the
same in ail l.i
and places.

lowed to do by the thirteenth canon of the council
of Ancyra. And hence it appears, that, as their
power was precarious, and depending upon the will
of councils and city bishops, from whom they re
ceived it ; so by this time their authority began to
sink apace in the church.
The council of Laodicea gave them Sect 12
the first blow, anno 360. For there Their power tint
struck at by the
it was decreed,35 that for the future council or Laodicea,
which set up irepio-
no bishops should be placed in coun- Jeu™i " their
try villages, but only mpioSevrai, itiner
ant or visiting presbyters; and for such bishops
as were already constituted, they should do nothing
without the consent and direction of the city bishop.
In the council of Chalcedon we meet with some
such presbyters expressly styled Trsptolevral, as Alex
ander36 and Valentinus,37 each of which has the
title of presbyter and TrepioSevr^g. And so in the
fifth general council at Constantinople,38 one Ser-
gius, a presbyter, has the same title of jrepiofowijc
curator or visitor of the Syrian churches : yet still
the order of the chorepiscopi was preserved in many
places. For not only mention is made of them by
Gregory Nazianzen and St. Basil ™ in the fourth
century, but also by Theodoret,40 who speaks of
Hypatius and Abramius, his own chorepiscopi ; and
in the council of Chalcedon, in the fifth century, we
find the chorepiscopi sitting and subscribing in the
name of the bishops that sent them. But this was
some diminution of their power; for in former
councils they subscribed in their own names, as
learned men41 agree : but now their power was sink
ing, and it went on to decay and dwindle by de
grees, till at last, in the ninth century, when the
forged Decretals were set on foot, it was pretended
that, they were not true bishops, and so the order,
by the pope's tyranny, came to be laid aside in the
western chm-ch.
Some attempt was made in Eng- sect is
land, at the beginning of the Reform- J^tS£
ation, to restore these under the name Kb" namenor*X
of suffragan bishops. For as our rasa" 1! °pB
Histories inform us,42 by an act of the 26th of
Henry VIII., anno 1534, several towns were ap
pointed for suffragan sees, viz. Thetford, Ipswich.
Colchester, Dover, Guildford, Southampton, Taun
ton, Shaftesbury, Molton, Marlborough, Bedford,
Leicester, Gloucester, Shrewsbury, Bristol, Penrith,
Bridgewater, Nottingham, -Grantham, Hull, Hun
tingdon, Cambridge, Penreth, Berwick, St. Germains
in Cornwall, and the Isle of Wight. These suf
fragans were to be consecrated by the archbishop

30 Con. Neocaes. can. 13 et 14.
91 Con. Nic. 1. in Subscription.
32 Con. Neocaes. in Subscription.
53 Con. Ephes. Act. 1. 34 Cone. Reiens. can. 3.
35 Con. Laod. can. 57. 3S Con. Chalced. Act. 4.
»' Ibid. Act. 10.

39 Con. CP. sub'Menna, Act. 1. p. 5&3.
39 Nazian. Ep. 88. Theodoro. Basil. Ep. 181.
40 Theod. Ep. 113. ad Leon.
" Blondel, Apol. p. 113. Bevereg. Not. in Con. Ancyr.
c. 13.
42 Burnet, Hist, of Refor. vol. 1. p. 157.

Chap. XV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

59

and two other bishops, and by the act to have the
same episcopal power as suffragans formerly had
within this realm : but none of them either to have
or act any thing properly episcopal, without the
consent and permission of the bishop of the city, in
whose diocese he was placed and constituted. Now,
any one that compares this with the account that I
have given of the ancient chorepiscopi, will easily per
ceive that these suffragans were much of the same
nature with them. But then I must observe, that
this was a new name for them : for anciently suffra
gan bishops were all the city bishops
suffragan bfshops of any province under a metropohtan,
different from the . -, -. - .
chorepieccpi in the who were called his suffragans, be-
pnrmtive church. a
cause they met at his command to
give their suffrage, counsel, or advice in a provincial
synod. And in this sense the word was used in
England at the time when Linwood wrote his Pro-
vinciale, which was not above a hundred years
before the Reformation, anno 1430. In his comment
upon one of the constitutions of John Peckham,
archbishop of Canterbury, which begins with these
words, Omnibus et singulis coepiscopis suffraganeis
nostris, To all and singular our fellow bishops and
suffragans, upon the word suffragans he has this
note : " " They were called suffragans, because they
were bound to give their suffrage and assistance to
the archbishop, being summoned to take part in his
care, though not in the plenitude of his power."
Whence it is plain, that in his time suffragan bi
shops did not signify chorepiscopi, or rural bishops,
but all the bishops of England, under their archbi
shops or metropolitans. Thus it was also in other
churches : the seventy bishops who were immedi
ately subject to the bishop of Rome, as their pri
mate or metropolitan, were called his suffragans,
because they were frequently called to his synods ;
as the reason of the name is given in an ancient
Vatican MS. cited by Baronius.4'
_ . ,. And here it will not be amiss to ob-
Sect. 15.
sho^oV'thJ&ian serve, whilst we are speaking of suf-
r!evcnniciw,ele,? fragan bishops, that these seventy
il4r"' bishops, who were- suffragans to the
bishop of Rome, were by a peculiar technical name
called libra; which name was given them for no
other reason, but because of their number seventy.
For the Roman libra, as antiquaries45 note, consist
ed of seventy solidi, or so many parts ; and there
fore the number seventy in any other things, or
persons, thence took the name of libra: as the
seventy witnesses which are introduced deposing

against Marcellinus, in the council of Sinuessa,
that they saw him sacrifice, are by the author of
those acts 46 termed libra occidua, for no other reason,
as Baronius47 conceives, but because they were
seventy in number. And Grotius48 gives the same
reason for affixing this title on the seventy bishops,
who were assessors or suffragans to the bishop of
Rome ; they were, as one might say, his libra, or
ordinary provincial council.

CHAPTER XV.
OF THE INTERCESSORES AND INTERVENTORES IN
THE AFRICAN CHURCHES.
There is one appellation more given
to some bishops • in the African coun- whysomebishops
., , . - , , . called intercessors
cils, which must here be taken notice ™ the African
churches,
of, whilst we are speaking of bishops ;
which is the name intercessor and interventor; a
title given to some bishops upon the account of a
pro-tempore office which was sometimes committed
to them. In the African churches, and perhaps in
others also, upon the vacancy of a bishopric, it was
usual for the primate to appoint one of the provin
cial bishops to be a sort of procurator of the diocese,
partly to take care of the vacant see, and partly to
promote and procure the speedy election of a new
bishop. And from this he had the name of inter
cessor and interventor.
The design of this office was mani
festly to promote the good of the
church ; but it was liable to be abused la" above a year'
two ways. For the intercessor by this means had a
fair opportunity given to ingratiate himself with the
people, and promote his own interest among them,
instead of that of the church; either by keeping the
see void longer than was necessary ; or, if it was a
wealthier or more honourable place than his own,
by getting himself chosen into it. To obviate any
such designs, the African fathers in the fifth council
of Carthage made a decree, that no intercessor
should continue in his office for above a year ; but
if he did not procure a new bishop to be chosen
within that time, another intercessor should be sent
in his room : and the more effectually to cut off all
abuses, and prevent corruption, they enacted it also

Sect. 2.
The office of an
intercessor not to

48 Linwood, Provinc. lib. 1. tit. 2. c. 1. Suffraganeis. Sic
dictis, quia archiepiscopo sufFragari et assistere tenentur, &c.
44 Baron, an. 1057. n. 23. Praeter septem collaterals
episcopos erant alii episcopi, qui dicuntur suffraganei Ro-
mani pontificis, nulli alii primati vel archiepiscopo subjecti,
qui, frequenter ad synodos vocarentur.
15 Brerewood de Ponder, et Pret. c. 15,

48 Concil. Sinuess. ap. Crab. 1. 1. p. 190. Hi omnes electi
sunt viri, libra occidua, qui testimonium perhibent, viden-
tes Marcellinum thurificasse.
47 Baron, an. 302. u. 92.
48 Grot, in Luc. x. 1. Romanis episcopis jam olim 70
episcopi adsessores libra dicti, quod libra Romana tot sobdos
contineret.

60

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

into a law,49 that no intercessor should
no i'."rcessor to t,e capable of succeeding himself in
be made bishop of r ^
the place where he ti,e vacant see, whatever motions or
was constituted in- " ,
tercesso,. solicitations were made by the people
in his behalf. So extremely cautious were these
holy African fathers to prevent abuses in matters of
this nature.

CHAPTER XVI.

OF PRIMATES, OR METROPOLITANS.
The same reasons which first brought
somlteive th. in chorepiscopi and coadjutors, as sub-
pXn.Iromeapo"s- ordinate to bishops in every city
tolical constitution. „ , -i.-i-.--i /¦
church, made the bishops of every
province think it necessary to make one of them
selves superior to all the rest, and invest him with
certain powers and privileges for the good of the
whole, whom they therefore named their primate,
or metropolitan, that is, the principal bishop of the
province. Bishop Usher' derives the origin of this
settlement from apostolical constitution. So also
Bishop Beverege,2 Dr. Hammond,3 Peter de Marca,
and some others. And there are several passages
in Eusebius and Chrysostom which seem to favour
this. For Eusebius says,4 Titus had the superin-
tendency of all the churches in Crete : and Chry
sostom in like manner,5 that the apostle committed
to him the whole island, and gave him power to
censure all the bishops therein. He says the same
of Timothy,6 that he was intrusted with the go
vernment of the church in the whole region or pro
vince of Asia. And it is certain the Cyprian
bishops, in the council of Ephesus,7 pleaded the
privileges of their metropohtan to be as ancient as
the apostles.Sect 2 But it may be doubted, whether
a^neTtattSSe the apostles made any such general
"pos e*' settlement of metropolitans in every
province ; and the records of the original of most
churches being lost, it cannot be certainly proved
they did. De Marca8 thinks, that though the
apostles gave a model or specimen in Timothy and
Titus, yet they left it to following ages to finish
and complete it. Dr. Cave says9 it commenced

not long after the apostolic age, when sects and
schisms began to break in apace, and controversies
multiplying between particular bishops, it was
found necessary to pitch upon one in every pro
vince, to whom the umpirage of cases might be
referred, and by whom all common and public
affairs might be directed. Perhaps it took its rise
from that common respect and deference, which
was usually paid by the rest of the bishops, to the
bishop of the civil metropolis in every province;
which advancing into a custom, was afterward
made into a canon by the council of Nice.
This is certain, that the Nicene
, . Sect, a
council speaks of metropolitans as confessed b?»u
£ to have been long
settled by ancient custom long be- ]**«; «» ccuncJ
fore, when it ushers in the canon
about them with, 'Apxdia ZQi) KpardTiD, Let ancient
customs be continued,10 and then goes on to speak
of the custom in Egypt, which was for the bishop
of Alexandria to have power over all the churches
of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis ; which was me
tropolitical, if not patriarchal, power. Epipha
nius " mentions the same: speaking of Alexander
and Peter, bishops of Alexandria, before the coun
cil of Nice, he says, they had eKKXjjo-taorticijv jiowqiny,
the administration of ecclesiastical affairs through
out all Egypt, Thebais, Mareotes, Libya, Ammoni-
aca, Mareotis, and Pentapolis. And Athanasius,1'
speaking of Dionysius, who was bishop of Alex
andria above sixty years before this council, says,
he also enjoyed this power, having the care of the
churches of Pentapolis and Libya, when Sabellius
broached his heresy, and that he wrote letters of
admonition to several bishops of those parts, who
began to be infected with his heresy. These are
undeniable evidences that the bishops of Alexan
dria were not first invested with metropolitical
power by the council of Nice, but only confirmed
in those rights which, by ancient custom and pre
scription, they had long enjoyed. And this was
also the case of other churches.
The council of Eliberis in Spain13 speaks of a
primes cathedrcs episcopus, a primate or bishop of
the first see ; and those called the Apostles' Canons
(which were the Canons of the Greek church in the
third century) mention a itpwrog, or chief bishop, in
every province, whom the rest were to look upon as
their head,14 and do nothing without him. And it
appears from several of Cyprian's epistles,15 that

49 Con. Carth. 5. can. 8. Placuit, ut nulli intercessori li-
citum sit, cathedram eui intercessor datus est, quibuslibet
populorum studiis, vel seditionibus retinere : sed dare ope-
ram, ut intra annum eisdem episcopum provideat. Quod si
neglexerit, anno expleto, interventor alius tribuatur.
1 Usse/. de Orig. Episc. et Metrop.
2 Bevereg. Cod. Can. Vind. lib. 2. c. 5. n. 12.
3 Ham. Pref. to Titus. It. Dissert. 4. cont. Blondel, c. 5.
4 Euseb. H. E. lib. 3. c. 4. twv iiel KpriTrjs iKKXijaewv
ifrlcrKOiri]v ElXrjxival.

5 Chrys. Horn. 1. in Tit. vnaov oXokXtipov — Kal tooou-
TviV iirKTKOTreav Kplerlv iiTETpi^EV.
6 Id. Horn. 15. in 1 Tim. ' Con. Ephes. Act. 7.
8 Marca de Concord, lib. 6. c. I. n. 9.
9 Cave, Ane. Ch. Gov. p. 92. ,0 Con. Nicen. can. 6.
11 Epiphan. Haer. 68. n. 1. et Haar. 69.- n. 3.
12 Athan. de Sentent. Dionys. t. 1. p. 552.
19 Con. Eliber. an. 305. can. 58.
14 Can. Apost. c. 23.
15 Cypr. Ep. 42. ad Cornel. Per proviuciam nostram

Chap. XVI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

61

the bishop of Carthage had a presidency over all
the other African bishops, and power to send his
mandates among them. And St. Austin speaks of
the primate of Numidia, as well as the primate of
Carthage, before the schism of the Donatists, and
says, they gave that for one reason of their schism,16
that the primate of Numidia was not called to elect
and consecrate the primate of Carthage. And
therefore, as both the same St. Austin17 and Opta
tus18 take notice, the Donatists pretending that the
ordination of Ceecilian, bishop of Carthage, was
not vahd, because not performed by a primate, sent
for Secundus Tigisitanus, who was then primate of
Numidia, to ordain Majorinus in his room. Now,
as all this was transacted several years before the
council of Nice, so it proves that primates were in
Africa antecedent to the establishment of that
council. sect i If we asoelm higher yet, and look
iita'n?in°he1?elc°ond mto tne second century, there are some
century. footsteps of the same power, though
not so evident as the former. Lyons, in France, was
a metropolis in the civil account, and Ireneeus, who
was bishop of it, is said to have the superintendency
of the Gallican paroeciee, or dioceses, as Eusebius 19
words it. Philip, bishop of Gortyna, in Crete, is
styled, by Dionysius20 of Corinth, bishop of all the
Cretian churches. Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus,
presided in council over all the bishops of Asia ;21
Palmas, bishop of Amastris, over the bishops of
Pontus, and Theophilus,22 of Csesarea, with Nar
cissus, of Jerusalem, over the rest of the bishops of
Palestine. These are the common proofs, which are ordi
narily alleged in this case. Yet I shall freely own,
that the three last of them do not cogently prove
the thing in dispute. For presiding in council does
not necessarily infer metropolitical power ; because
they might preside as senior bishops, as Eusebius
says expressly one of them did, viz. Palmas, bishop of
Amastris, tig dpxa'°raTog irpovrkraKro, he presided as
the most ancient bishop among them. Which seems
to be noted by Eusebius not without good reason ;
for Heraclea, and not Amastris, was the civil me
tropolis of Pontus. Blondel, from this passage, con
cludes, that at this time the senior bishops in all
places were the metropolitans. But this does not

sufficiently appear to have been the custom any
where else but in the African churches, of which I
shall presently give an account : for the other in
stances that have been given, seem rather to make
it evident, that the bishops of the civil metropoles
were generally the primates or metropolitans in the
church also.
It is true, indeed, none of these are Sect 5
expressly called metropolitans; for mSJo'SSt^"™™
that name scarcely occurs in any an- a,u:le"' '"'' ' ¦
cient record before the council of Nice: but they
were at first termed 7rpwroi, and KiebaXai, chief bi
shops, and heads of the province, as the Apostolical
Canon styles them.23 After ages gave them other
names, as that of archbishops, at Alexandria24 and
other places, till that name became appropriate to
the patriarchs. The council of Sardica25 styles them,
i%apxoi rrjg iirapx'ag, exarchs of the province. St
Austin sometimes calls them principes™ princes :
and Pope Hilary,27 monarchs. But these being titles
of secular grandeur, and savouring too much of
absolute sovereignty and dominion, were expressly
prohibited by the third council of Carthage, which
ordered that no superior bishop should be called
high priest,28 or prince of the priests, but only primes
sedis episcopus, primate, or senior bishop. Hence
it was that those bishops, who, in other parts of the
world, were called metropolitans, in Africa had pom-
monly the name of primates ; though we sometimes
meet with the name metropolitan29 in the African
councils also.
But these primates, in Africa, are
frequently called patres and senes. As, Primates;,, Africa
1 y ¦* 'called senes, been use
in the African code, Xantippus, pri- ^t^meu-'o-
mate of Numidia, is once and again polltan-
styled senex Xantippus.31' And St. Austin, writing
to him, inscribes his epistle Patri et consacerdoti
seni Xantippo.™ And thus in many other epistles,32
writing to the primates, or speaking of them, he
gives them the name of senes. And there was a pe
culiar reason for giving them this name in Africa.
For here the primacy was not fixed, as in other
places, to the civil metropolis, but always went
along with the oldest bishop of the province, who
succeeded to this dignity by virtue of his seniority,
whatever place he lived in. In other parts of the
world, the bishop of the civil' metropolis was com-

haac eadem collegis singulis in notitiam perferentes, ab his
quoque fratres nostros cum literis dirigendos esse mandavi-
mus. See also Ep. 40. ad Pleb. Carthag. Ep. 45. ad
Cornel. 16 Aug. Brevic. Collat. tert. die, c. 16.
17 Aug. Cont. Parmen. lib. 1. c. 3. Venientes cum pri
mate suo tunc Secundo Tigisitano, &c.
19 Optat. lib. 1. p. 41.
10 Euseb. H. E. lib. 5. c. 23. TiV raxi TaXXiav va-
poikiuiv, ct's Wipt\vdio? iiriaKOTTEl.
20 Dionys. Ep. ap. Euseb. lib. 4. u. 23.
21 Euseb. lib. 5. c. 24. " Euseb. lib. 5. c. 23.

29 Canon. Apost. c. 37. 24 Epiphan. Haer. 68 et 69.
25 Con. Sard. can. 6.
26 Aug. Brevic. Collat. tert. die, u. 16. Non exspectavit
Caeciiianus, ut princeps a principe ordinaretur.
27 Hilar. Ep. ad Leont. Arelatens. ap. Baron, an. 462.
In provincia quae ad mouarchiam tuam spectat, &c.
28 Con. Carth. 3. can. 26. Ut primae sedis episcopus non
appelletur princeps sacerdotum, aut summus sacerdos, aut
aliquid hujusmodi, sed tantum primae sedis episcopus.
20 Con. Car. 3. can. 39. Carth. 4. can. 1.
90 Cod. Can. Eccl. Afr. c. 91 et 101. " Aug. Ep. 236.
92 Aug. Ep. 149, 152, 235, 261, &c.

62

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

monly metropolitan in the church also : and so it
was ordered to be by several canons both of the
eastern and western churches. The council of An
tioch33 bids all bishops observe, that the bishop of
the metropolis has the care of the whole province,
because all men that have business or controversies
to be decided, resort from all parts to the metropo
lis. And the council of Turin8* upon this foot de
termined a dispute about primacy betwixt the two
bishops of Aries and Vienna ; decreeing that he
that could prove his city to be the metropolis, should
be the primate of the whole province. The council
of Chalcedon has two canons,35 appointing those
cities to be metropoles in the church, which were
so in the civil division of the empire. And the
council of Trullo36 has one to the same purpose.
But in the African churches it was otherwise : for
they were governed by rules and canons of their
own ; and their rule was, to let the primacy remove
from city to city, and still go along with the senior
bishop, without any regard to the civil metropolis,
except only at Carthage, where the bishop was a
fixed and standing metropolitan for the province of
Africa, properly so called. But in Numidia and
Mauritania this honour was movable ; as may ap
pear from this one instance. Constanttna was the
civil metropolis of Numidia, as we learn both from
the ancient notitia of the empire, and one of the
canons3' of the African code, which expressly styles
it so : yet the primacy was so far from being settled
here, that we never so much as find that the bishop
of Constantina was at any time the primate ; but in
Constantine's time, Secundus Tigisitanus38 was pri
mate of Numidia ; in St. Austin's time, Megalius
bishop of Calama was primate, who by virtue of
his office39 ordained St. Austin bishop ; afterwards
Xantippus of Tagasta40 succeeded by virtue of his
seniority, whence he is always styled in St. Austin41
and the African councils,42 senex Xantippus. This
is sufficient to show, that the primacy in Africa was
not confined to the civil metropolis, but was always
conferred upon the senior bishop, whose seniority
was reckoned from the time of his consecration.
Some there are who pretend to say, that these

African primates, notwithstanding this, were subject
to the bishops of the civil metropoles, who were
properly the metropolitans. But there is no ground
for this opinion, and it is justly exploded by De
Marca43 and others, who have occasionally touched
upon this subject.
It is true indeed, by the African dis
cipline, a bishop might lose his pri- ijow African
r r _ - . , . . biBhops might for-
mogeniture, and so forfeit his title to f^t their title to the
the primacy; as is evident from a
passage in St. Austin,44 which speaks of such a
punishment inflicted upon one Priscus, a Maurita-
nian bishop, who for some misdemeanor was denied
this privilege, though he still kept his bishopric :
but in such cases, the primacy did not devolve to
the bishop of the civil metropolis, but to the next
in order, who could prove himself senior by conse
cration. And because disputes sometimes
r Sect, 8.
arose about seniority ; to prevent ^K^beM
these, several good orders were made church?riAndBaii
by the African fathers relating to this phrebVseSrity,
matter. As, first, that a matricula, or
archivus, as they called it, should be kept both in
the primate's church,45 and in the metropolis of the
province, for bishops to prove the time of their
ordination by.
Then, secondly, every bishop was to have his let
ters of ordination subscribed by his ordainers, and
dated with the year and day of his consecration.48
Thirdly, all bishops were to take place according to
seniority, and so sit and vote, and have their names
subscribed in council ; which was a. rule not only
in Africa,47 but in all other churches, being enacted
by several councils,48 and inserted into the civil law"
by Justinian the emperor. But they were the more
nice in observing this in Africa, where the primacy
went by seniority, lest the neglect of it should have
bred confusion among them. Insomuch that St.
Austin50 blames Victorinus, (who pretended to be
primate of Numidia,) only because in his tractoria,
or letter of summons to a provincial council, he
wrote the names of the Numidian bishops in a con
fused order, and put Austin's name before many of

93 Con. Antioch. can. 9.
34 Con. Taurin. can. 2. Qui ex iis comprobaverit suam
civitatem esse metropolim, is totius provincial honorem pri
matus obtineat.
95 Con. Chalced. can. 12 et 17.
96 Con. Trull, can. 38.
31 Cod. Can. Eccl. Afr. c. 86.
98 Aug. cont. Parmen. lib. 1. c. 3. Ep. 68. ad Januar.
99 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 8. Adveniente ad ecclesiam Hippo-
nensem tunc primate Numidiae MegalioCalamensi episcopo.
40 Con. Milev. 1. in Cod. Afr. can. 81. Xantippus primaa
sedis Numidiae episcopus. Aug. Ep. 217. Collega noster
Xantippus Tagastensis dicit, quod eum primatus ipse con-
tingat, &c.
41 Aug. Ep. 236. 42 Cod. Can. Afr. c. 91, 101.
43 Marca, Dissert, de Primat. n. 3. Albaspin. Not. in Op-

tat, lib. 1. p. 121. Stillingfleet, Hist, of Separ. par. 3. sect.
9. p. 253. Fell, Not. in Con. Carth. ap. Cypr. p. 230.
44 Aug. Ep. 261.
45 Con. Milev. in Cod. Can. Afr. u. 86.
4e Con. Milev. can. 14. Placuit ut qnicunque ab episco
pis ordinantur, literas accipiant ab ordinatoribus suis, manu
eorum subscriptas, continentes consulem et diem, ut nulla
altercatio de posterioribus vel anterioribus oriatur.
47 Con. Milev. c. 13. Posteriores anterioribus deferant,
&c. Vit. Fulgentii, cap. 20. Inter episcopos, tempore or-
dinationis inferior, ultimus sedebat.
48 Con. Bracar. 1. can. 24. Con. Tolet. 4. can. 4. Secun
dum ordinationis suae tempora residcant.
49 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. tit. 4. c. 29. Episcopi tempore
ordinationis praelati, &c.
50 Aug. Ep. 217. ad Victorin.

Chap. XVI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

63

his seniors : which was a thing, he says, equally
injurious to them, and invidious to himself. So
cautious was he of doing any thing that might seem
to intrench upon this rule, for fear of breeding con
fusion in the government of their churches.
sect, s J must here take notice further, that
ho^Vprirr.'ates, besides the primacy of power, there
mpower!iep"mnte was in most provinces also a primacy
of honour ; whence some bishops had
the name and title of primates, who had not the
jurisdiction. And these were of three sorts : 1. The
primates eevo, the oldest bishop in each province
next to the metropohtan. These had no power
above others, except when the metropohtan was
some way disabled, or unqualified for discharging
his office by irregularity or suspension : then his
power of course devolved to the senior bishop of
the province. And this, I conceive, was the reason
why the bishop of Amastris5' presided in council
over the bishops of Pontus, when yet Heraclea,
and not Amastris, was the metropolis of the pro
vince. The second sort of honorary pri-
Sect. 10. . ,. , , ...
2. Titular metro- mates were the titular metropolitans,
politans. ...
which were the bishops of such cities
as had the name and title of civil metropoles
bestowed on them by some emperor, without the
power and privileges, which were still retained to
the ancient metropolis of the province. Thus
Marcian the emperor dignified the city Chalcedon
with the title of a metropolis, and the honour
was confirmed to the bishop by the council of
Chalcedon 52 itself, only with a salvo jure to the
rights of Nicomedia the old metropolis : from that
time therefore the bishop of Chalcedon styled him
self metropolitan of Bithynia, as may be seen in the
Acts ™ of the Sixth General Council. The same
honour was done to the city and bishop of Nice, in
the council of Chalcedon " likewise. So that here
were three metropolitans in one province, but one
only had the power ; the privileges of the other two
were only honorary, to sit and vote in council next
to their metropohtan. Yet this gave such bishops
an opportunity to exalt themselves, and sometimes
they so far encroached upon the rights of the first
metropolitan, as to draw off his suffragans, and
divide the province with him. Thus it was with
the bishop of Nice, who before the time of the
sixth general council, had got a synod of suffra
gans under him. For so Photius subscribed him
self in that council 55 bishop of Nice, and metropo-

61 Euseb. lib. 5. c. 23, says he presided as the senior bi
shop, cos ipxaioTaTOS irpovTtTaKTO.
62 Con. Chalced. Act. 6. t. 4. p. 612.
63 Con. 6. Gen. Act. 18.
84 Con. Chalced. Act. 13. p. 716.
58 Con. 6. Gen. Act. 18. p. 1080.
56 Con. Nic. can. 7". EX8"™ ""I" aKoXouSriav Ti]i Tipr\i,

litan of Bithynia for himself and the synod that
was under him.
Besides these there were a third sort Sect n
of primates, who, though they were 0Llhe'ST
neither bishops of titular metropoles, wereho'nraredby
, i_ . . . -, ¦ , - , , • ancient custom.
nor tne oldest bishops of the province,
yet took place of all the rest, by a general deference
that was paid to them, out of regard to the eminency
of their see, being some mother church, or particu
larly honoured by ancient prescription. This was
the case of the bishop of Jerusalem. That city
was no metropolis of the empire, but subject to
Csesarea, the metropolis of Palestine ; yet, in regard
that it was the mother church of the world, this
peculiar honour was paid to it, that the bishop
thereof was always next in dignity to the metropo
litan of Csesarea, and took place of all the other
bishops of the province. And this privilege was
confirmed to him by the Nicene council,50 which
made a canon to this purpose : That whereas, by
ancient custom and tradition, the bishop of iElia
had a particular honour paid him, the same should
be continued to him, still reserving to the metropo
lis the dignity and privilege which belonged to it.
Some fondly imagine 57 that this canon gave the
bishop of Jerusalem patriarchal power ; whereas it
does not so much as make him a metropolitan, but
leaves him subject to the metropolis of Palestine,
which was Csesarea, as St. Jerom53 informs us,
whose words clear the sense of this canon, and
prove that the bishop of Jerusalem was no metro
politan, nor independent of his metropolitan, as
Valesius 59 imagines, but had only the second place
of honour assigned him next to his metropolitan,
which was that honorary primacy which the bishops
of Jerusalem had always enjoyed, because, as the
council of Constantinople words it,60 Jerusalem was
the mother of all other churches.
But leaving these honorary pri-
,-,,., i Sect. 12.
mates, who had little more than a The offices of me
tropolitans. 1. To
name, I am here to show what were orrfain their suffra-
7 gan bishops. ,
the offices and privileges of those who
were properly metropolitans ; and they were these
that follow. First, They were to regulate the elec
tions of all their provincial bishops, and either or
dain, or authorize the ordination of them. No
bishop was to be elected or ordained without their
consent and approbation : otherwise the canons
pronounce both the election and the ordination null.
The KOpoc, or ratification of all that is done, says the
council of Nice,61 belongs to the metropohtan in

X7j p>]Tpoir6\El aw^opiuov tov o'lkelov dfclutpaTos.
57 Sylvius Addit. ad Caranz. summ. Concil.
58 Jerom. Ep.61. ad Pammach. Hoc ibi decernitur ut
Palaestina; metropolis Caesarea sit.
88 Vales. Not. in Euseb. 5. 23.
60 Con. Constant. Ep. Synod, ad Damas.
61 Con. Nic. can. 4.

64

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

every province. And again, If any bishop is made
without the consent of the metropolitan, this great
synod62 pronounces such a one to be no bishop.
The same rule is repeated in the councils of Anti
och,68 Laodicea,64 Aries,65 Turin,66 Sardica,67 Ephe
sus,68 and Chalcedon.69 And whereas some pretend
that the African primates had not this power, the
contrary appears evidently from several canons of
their councils. The second council of Carthage ™
says, No one shall presume to ordain a bishop with
out consulting the primate of the province, and
taking his precept, though many other bishops
should join with him. The third council of Car
thage requires but three bishops to the ordination
of a bishop, but then71 they must be such as are
expressly authorized by the metropolitan. And
the fourth council72 requires either his presence, or
at least his authority and commission. Here a
primate and a metropolitan are the same thing, viz.
the senior bishop of the province, who usually went
to the church, where the new bishop was to be
placed, and consecrated him with his own hands,
as St. Austin and Possidius73 testify, who are good
witnesses of their practice.
Nor was this power at all infringed
This power 'conti- by setting up of patriarchs above
nued to them after / ° f \
the setting up of pa- them. For though the metropolitans
triarchs. °
were then to be ordained by the patri
archs, and obliged to attend on them for it, who
before were ordained by their own provincial sy
nod ; yet still the right of ordaining their own suf
fragans was all along preserved to them, and ex
pressly confirmed by the council of Chalcedon;74
nor do we ever find any patriarch assuming this
power, except the bishop of Alexandria, for a par
ticular reason, of which I shall give an account in
the following chapter, sect. 11.
Sfrt ]4 But here I must observe, that this
«rwtrary™ Eurdeter^ power of metropolitans was not arbi-
vXeofa' piovSciai trary : for though no bishop was to
be elected or ordained without their
consent, yet they had no negative voice in the mat
ter, but were to be determined and concluded by the
major part of a provincial synod. For so the coun-

64 Con. Laodic. can. 12.
66 Con. Taurin. can. 1.

62 Con. Nic. can. 6.
69 Con. Antioch. can. 19.
65 Con. Arelat. 2. can. 5 et 6.
67 Con. Sardic. can. 6.
68 Con. Ephes. Decret. de-Episc. Cypr.
69 Con. Chalced. Act. 13. It. can. 25.
70 Con. Carth. 2. t. 12. Iuconsulto primate cujuslibet
provinciae nemo praesumat, licet cum multis episcopis, sine
ejus praacepto, episcopum ordinare.
71 Con. Carth. 3. c 39. Non minus quam tres sufficiant,
qui fuerint a metropolitano directi ad ordinandum epis
copum. 72 Con. Carth. 4. c. 1. Conventu totius provinciae epis
coporum, maximeque metropolitani vel praesentia, vel auc
toritate ordinetur episcopus.
73 Aug. Ep. 261. Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 8.

cil of Aries75 decreed, that if there arose any doubt
or hesitation betwixt the parties, the metropohtan
should side with the greater number. And the
council of Nice76 to the same purpose: If two or
three out of a contentious humour shall oppose the
common election, duly and regularly made accord
ing to the canons of the church, in this case let the
majority of voices prevail.
And the same rule was to be ob- , . Sect. 15.
served in the ordination of metropoli- ^"^J"™ <j
tans themselves, who were to be chosen ^£|° l^T"
and consecrated by their own pro
vincial bishops ; who were not obliged to send for a
metropolitan out of another province to do it, but
they had power to do it in their own provincial sy
nod among themselves. This, St. Austin says, was
the custom of the catholic church, both in Africa
and at Rome. And therefore, when the Donatists
objected against Csecilian, primate of Carfhage, that
his ordination was uncanonical, because he had not
sent for the neighbouring primate of Numidia to
come and ordain him : his answer was,77 that Cae
cilian had no need of this ; since the custom of the
catholic church was otherwise, which was not to
have the Numidian bishops to ordain the bishop
of Carthage, but the neighbouring bishops of
the province of Carthage : as it was not the
custom at Rome to send for a metropolitan out
of another province, to ordain the bishop of
Rome, but he was always ordained by the bishop
of Ostia, a neighbouring bishop of the same pro
vince. It is true there is a canon in the council of Sar
dica,78 which orders the bishops of the next province,
as some interpret it, to be called in to the ordination
of a metropolitan, 7011c dwb rijc irXnaiox^pov iirap\iae
iirajKoirovg. But this perhaps may as well be ren
dered, the neighbouring bishops of the same pro
vince ;79 and since custom and the practice of the
church, which is the best interpreter of doubtful
canons, does manifestly favour this sense, there is
some reason so to understand it. But however it
be, here is no mention of one metropolitan having
a right to ordain another. From which it appears,

74 Con. Chalced. Act. 16. in fin.
75 Con. Arelat. 2. can. 5. Si inter partes aliqua natafuerit
dubitatio, majori numero metropolitanus in electione con-
sentiat. 76 Con. Nic. can. 6.
77 Aug. Brevic. Collat. tert. die, c. 16. Non exspectavit
Caecilianus ut princeps a principe ordinaretur ; cum aliud
habeat ecclesiae catholicae consuetudo, ut non Numidiaa, sed
propinquiores episcopi episcopum ecclesiae Carthaginis ordi-
nent : sicut nee Romanae ecclesiae ordinat aliquis episcopus
metropolitanus, sed de proximo Ostierisis episcopus.
78 Con. Sard. can. 6.
79 Harmenopulus so understood it ; for in his Epitome he
thus words it: 01 vrXrjo-ioxtopoi t?/s iirapxias iraptw
cruv. Vid. Harmen. Epit. Canon, ap. Leunclav. Jur. Gr.
Rom. t. I. p. 2.

Chap. XVI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

65

that in these times no metropolitan was obliged to
go or send out of his own province, much less to
Rome, for Iris ordination ; but all was to be done by
his suffragans in his own church. Nor was any
bishop obliged to go for ordination to his metro
politan's church, but ordinarily the metropolitan
and the rest of the bishops met synodically in the
vacant church, and there elected and consecrated a
new bishop in the presence of the people for whom
they ordained him. This was the first part of the
metropolitan's office.
„ . . Their next office was, to preside over
Sect. 16. r
m5„powa„Mo0f their pro™"™1 bishops, and if any
Sg'am^S controversies arose among them, to
En°dVtake,1appeojIs" interpose their authority to end and
decide them : as also to hear the ac
cusations of others, who complained of injury done
them by their own bishops, from whom there was
liberty always to appeal to their metropohtan. Thus
in Africa it was ordained by the council of Milevis, B0
that if two bishops disputed about the bounds of
their dioceses, the metropohtan should appoint a
committee of bishops to hear and determine their
controversy. If a presbyter or deacon was excom
municated by his own bishop, the council of Sar
dica81 allows him hberty to appeal to the metropoli
tan of his province ; or if he were absent, to the
metropohtan of the next province, to desire a new
hearing of his cause. In such cases as these the
metropolitan had three ways of proceeding : either,
first, he was to appoint a select number of bishops
to be judges; which was the practice of Africa,
where such judges were therefore called82 judices
electi, and their number assigned to be twelve,33 if a
bishop's cause was to be tried before them. Or, se
condly, he was to refer the matter to a provincial
synod, which seems to have been the general prac
tice, when those called the Apostolical Canons were
made ; one of which orders,84 that when a bishop is
accused, he shall be convened before a, synod of
bishops. Another says,35 The primate shall do no
thing without the consent of all the other bishops ;
so concord will be preserved, and God will be glo
rified. And another, Twice a year let there be a
synod of bishops86 to examine doctrines of religion,
and terminate all ecclesiastical controversies that
may happen. But, thirdly, by Justinian's law87 the
metropolitan has power to hear causes upon appeal
himself without a synod : yet whether he could pro

ceed so far as to depose a bishop by his sole au
thority, is questioned. Spalatensis88 gives some
instances of bishops that were deposed by their
metropolitans, but for aught that appears it was
done in synod: but whether it was, or was not,
matters not much ; for still in all cases, by the same
law of Justinian99 and the Canons, there lay an ap
peal from the metropolitan*to a provincial synod, of
which he was only the president, or moderator and
director of business in it.
And this leads us to a third office „ . ,.
Sect. 17.
of the metropolitans, which was, to <,aT1hpiov,uldclSi™ito
call provincial synods, and preside in ?r°4an" ™ obliged
them. For since the Canons30 ap- toattend'
pointed two synods to be held ordinarily every year
in each province, (besides such as might be called
upon extraordinary occasions,) it was necessary some
one should be appointed to give notice of the time
and place, and have authority both to convocate and
preside in them. All things therefore relating to this
matter, were by common consent put into the pri
mate's power, whose circular letters (which some
times are called synodicce and tractories,9' as the em
peror's were called sacrcsj were a legal summons,
which no bishop of the province might disobey un
der pain of suspension, or some such canonical
censure, which is left to the discretion92 of the me
tropolitan and the council.
4. It belonged to metropolitans to Smt ]fl
publish and disperse such imperial to^Sff^lL
laws and canons, as were either by IS d?„Ceses,°"nd
councils or emperors made for the t'°"ec' ab°aes'
common good of the church. This they are re
quired to do by several laws83 both of the church
and state, the better to diffuse the knowledge and
enforce the practice of them. Nor were they only
to disperse the canons that were made, but to see
that they were observed : which gave them right to
visit and inquire into neglects, abuses, and dis
orders committed by any bishop throughout the
whole province. The metropolitan in this respect
is said to have the care of the whole province, by
the council of Antioch.94 Not that this gave him
power to officiate in any other bishop's church, or
perform such acts as the bishop himself might per
form alone, such as the ordaining of presbyters and
deacons, and the like ; which are specialties of every
bishop, reserved to them by the same council : but
in case of omission or scandalous neglect, the bishop

80 Con. Milev. can. 21. Per episcopos judices causa
finiatur, sive quos eis primates dederint, sive quos ipsi vici-
nos ex consultu primatis delegerint.
81 Con. Sard. can. 14. 82 Con. Carth. 3. can. 7.
83 Con. Carth. 1. can. 11. Episcopus a duodecim consa-
cerdotibus audiatur.
81 Can. Apost. c. 74. Con. Constant. 2 Gen. can. 6.
85 Ibid. c. 35. Con. Antioch. can. 9. K Ibid. c. 38.
87 Cod. Just. lib. 1. tit. 4. c. 29.
88 Spalat. de Repub. Eccl. par. 1. lib. 3. c. 7. n. 19.
F

89 Cod. Just. ibid.
80 Con. Nic. can. 5. Antioch. c. 20. Agathen. c. 35. Are
lat. 2. c. 18. Can. Apost. c. 38.
81 Aug. Ep. 217. ad Victorin. Tractoria ad me quinto
idus Novembris venit, &c.
82 Con. Chalced. can. 19. Con. Carth. 4. can. 21. Theo
doret, Ep. 81.
03 Justin. Novel. 6 et 42.
84 Con. Antioch. can. 9. tt]V eppovTiSa ivaSixEaQai ira-
o-tjs ttj-s itrapx^as.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

66
of the metropolis was to manifest his care with the
advice of the rest of his brethren.
5. In Africa all bishops paid a pe-
5.BS"htop1s9notto culiar deference to the primate, in
»£ of'S » taking his hcence to travel, when-
tropohtan. ^ ^ ^^ ^^ j^ & foreign
country upon extraordinary occasions. This was
expressly provided by a canon of the third council
of Carthage,95 that no bishop should go beyond sea
without consulting his primate, and taking his for
mates, or letters of commendation. Nor was this so
peculiar to Africa, but that we may meet with the
same rule and practice in other places, even as low
as the time of Gregory the Great, who in one of his
epistles96 gives the same direction to some bishops
in reference to their metropolitan, that they should
not travel upon urgent occasion without his letters
of concession. C. It belonged to metropolitans to
e. Metro'powansto take care of all vacant sees within
.JmSinE" their province; to administer the af-
provmce. ^.^ ^ ^ churcn ,juring the vacancy,
to secure the revenues of the bishopric, and pro
cure a speedy election of a new bishop. In Africa
the primate commonly appointed one of the neigh
bouring bishops to be his vicegerent in such a case,
whom therefore the canons (as have been observed
before) call an interventor.97 The council of Riez98
in France in hke manner puts the administration
of a vacant see into the hands of a neighbouring
bishop, under the inspection of the metropolitan.
And the council of Valentia99 in Spain authorizes
the metropolitan to punish purloiners of the re
venues in the vacancy, and to send an administrator
till a new bishop is chosen. By a canon of the
council of Chalcedon,100 the care of the revenues of
the church is committed to the steward of the
church, the ceconomus ; but the care of supplying
the vacant see with a new bishop within three
months, is the business of the metropolitan.
sect. 21 7- It belonged to the metropolitan
caSl°ti.e'nU0. yearly to review the calculation of
of Easter. ^ time of ]jaster> an(l give notice to
his suffragans of it. The care of composing the
cycle indeed was by the Nicene fathers particularly
committed to the bishop of Alexandria,101 as Pope
Leo and others inform us ; and he was to give no
tice to other churches : but due care was not al
ways taken in this matter, and therefore the metro
politan in every province was concerned to settle

the time, and acquaint the whole province with it.
As we find St. Ambrose102 did for the province of
Milan; and the bishop of Carthage,108 for the pro
vince of Africa: and the Spanish councils104 order
their metropolitans first to concert the matter among
themselves, and then communicate it to their corn-
provincials. Some later canons105 make it the gMtB.
nrivileffe of metropolitans to conse- metropolitans greW
crate all churches throughout the
province. But I have showed before, that this was
originally the privilege of every bishop in his own
diocese ; and being a private act, which only con
cerned his own church, and not the whole pro
vince, the' metropolitan was to have no hand in it,
no more than in the consecration of presbyters and
deacons, by the.ninth canon of the council of An
tioch. Other canons 106 bind the whole province to
follow the forms and rites of Divine service used in
the metropohtan church : but I have observed be
fore, that anciently every bishop had hberty to pre
scribe for his own diocese, and was under no limit
ation as to this matter, unless it were the order of a
provincial council.
By this we see that the power of
•> _ - Sect-. 2i.
metropolitans in some places exceeded h™n&T„lf»„
others. And I must here observe, f™^"" °'
that the primate of Alexandria was
the greatest metropolitan in the world, both for the
absoluteness of his power, and the extent of his
jurisdiction. For he was not metropolitan of a
single province, but of all the provinces of Egypt,
Libya, and Pentapolis, in which there were at least
six large provinces, out of which sometimes above
a hundred bishops were called to a provincial
council. Alexander summoned near that number
to the condemnation of Arius 107 before the council
of Nice. And Athanasius103 speaks of the same
number meeting at other times : particularly the
council of Alexandria, anno 339, which heard and
justified the cause of Athanasius after his return
from his banishment, had almost a hundred bishops
in it ; which was above thirty more than the bishop
of Rome's libra, which was but sixty-nine. Nor
was the primate of Alexandria's power less than the
extent of his jurisdiction ; for he not only ordained
all his suffragan bishops, but had liberty to ordain
presbyters and deacons in all churches throughout
the whole district. Mr. Basnage and Launoy1"9
will have it that he had the sole power of ordaining,

98 Con. Carth. 3. can. 28. Ut episcopi trans mare non
proficiscantur, nisi consulto primae sedis episcopo, &c.
88 Greg. M. Ep. 8. lib. 7.
87 Con. Carth. 5. can. 8.
88 Con. Reiens. can. 5 et 6. " Con. Valent. can. 2.
100 Con. Chalced. c. 25.
101 Leo, Ep. 72. al. 70. ad Marcian Imper.
102 Ambros. Ep. 83. ad Episc. per ^mjljam.
103 Con. Carth. 3. can. 1 et 41.

104 Con. Bracar. 2. can. 9. Con. Tolet. 4. can. 5.
105 Gelas. Ep. 1. c. 4. Montan. Tolet. Ep. ad Palentinos
ap. Blondel, Apol. p. 150.
108 Concil. Gerundens. can. 1. Con. Epaun. can. 27. Con.
Tolet. 11. can. 3.
187 Alexand. Ep. Encycl. ap. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 6.
108 Athan. Apol. 2. p. 720. Cop. Alexai(dr. Ep. Encycl-
Con. t. 2. p. 533.
109 Basnag. Exerc. in Baron, p. 307. et Launoy, ibid.

Chap. XVII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

67

and that not so much as a presbyter or deacon
could be ordained without him. Valesius110 thinks
his privilege was rather that he might ordain if he
pleased, but not that he had the sole power of or
daining presbyters and deacons. But either way it
was a great privilege, and pecuhar to the bishop of
Alexandria; for no other metropolitan pretended
to the like power besides himself.
I have but one thing more to ob-
ah metropolitans serve concerning metropolitans, which
called apostolici, .
and their sees, sedes is, that they were anciently all dig-
apostulica. .
nified with the name apostolici ; which
was then no peculiar title of the bishop of Rome.
For Pope Siricius himself gives all primates111 this
appellation : and it continued to be their title to the
days of Alcuin, who, speaking of the election of
bishops, says,112 when the clergy and people have
chosen one, they draw up an instrument, and go
with their elect to the apostolicus: by whom he
means not the pope, but the primate or rrfetropolitan
of every province, who had the right and power of
consecration.

CHAPTER XVII.
OF PATRIARCHS.
sect. 1. Next in order to the metropolitans
cuLtiy called arch- or primates, were the patriarchs; or,
bujiops. gs ^ey were at first called, arch
bishops and exarchs of the diocese. For though
now an archbishop and a metropohtan be gener
ally taken for the same, to wit, the primate of
a single province ; yet anciently the name arch
bishop was a more extensive title, and scarce
given to any but those whose jurisdiction extended
over a whole imperial diocese, as the bishops of
Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, &c. That this was
so, appears evidently from one of Justinian's Novels,
where erecting the bishopric of Justiniana Prima
into a patriarchal see, he says, Our pleasure is, that
the bishop of Justiniana shall not only be a metro
pohtan, but an archbishop.1 Here the names are
clearly distinguished, and an archbishop reckoned
superior to a metropolitan. And hence it was, that
after the setting up of patriarchal power, the name
archbishop was appropriated to the patriarchs.

Liberatus' gives all the patriarchs this title of
archbishops. So does the council of Chalcedon
frequently, speaking of the patriarchs of Rome and
Constantinople3 under the name of archbishops also.
These were otherwise called t£apx<>i
rrjg StoiK-nanag, exarchs of the diocese, And exarchs 'of the
to distinguish them from the i%apxoi
rfig ^apxiag, the exarchs qf a single province, which
were only metropolitans. Thus Domnus, bishop of
Antioch, is styled exarch of the eastern diocese,4 by
the councils of Antioch and Chalcedon. And in
the subscriptions of the sixth general council at
Constantinople, Theodore, bishop of Ephesus, sub
scribes himself both metropohtan of Ephesus,5 and
exarch of the Asiatic diocese. As also Philalethes,
bishop of Ceesarea in Cappadocia, styles himself
exarch of the Pontic diocese. Which shows, that
as the exarch of a province is a metropolitan, so
the exarch of a diocese is a patriarch in the ancient
language of the church. And by this we under
stand the meaning of the ninth and seventeenth
canons of the council of Chalcedon, which allow of
appeals from the metropohtan to the exarch of the
diocese. As to the name patriarch, there is
some dispute among learned men, saimaaiiuVmn-
T_ « . , , lake about the first
when first it began to be used as an <™> »' 'he mob
0 patriarch.
appropriate title of any Christian bi
shops. Salmasius6 and some others are of opinion,
that the bishop of Alexandria had this title from the
time of the emperor Hadrian, which was in the be
ginning of the second century. Their reason is,
because that emperor, in an epistle mentioned by
Vopiscus, speaks of a patriarch at Alexandria. But
the patriarch there spoken of, was not any Chris
tian, but a Jewish patriarch ; as may appear from
Hadrian's words, and the character which he gives
of him.7 For he says, he was one who was com
pelled to worship both Christ and Serapis : which
agrees very well to the character of a Jewish patri
arch, who neither acknowledged the heathen nor
the Christian rehgion, and therefore needed as much
compulsion to bring him to worship Christ, as Se
rapis ; but it does not at all agree to the character
of a Christian bishop, who, however he might need
force to compel him to worship Serapis, yet must be
supposed willing of his own accord to worship
Christ. Besides, the patriarch which the emperor
speaks of was one who came only occasionally into

1,0 Vales. Observ. in Socrat. lib. 3. c. 5.
111 Siric. Ep. 4. c. 1. Ut extra conscientiam sedis apos-
tolicae, id est, primatis, nemo audeat ordinare.
1,2 Alcuin. de Div. OfHc. c. 36. Cum episcopus civitatis
fuerit defunctus, eligitur alius a clero seu populo, fitque de-
cretum ab illis, et veniunt ad apostolicum cum suo electo.
1 Justin. Novel. 11. Volumus, ut non solum metropoli
tanus, sed etiam archiepiscopus fiat.
2 Liberat. Breviar. c. 1 7.
3 Con. Chalced. Act. 16. It. Act. 4. et can. 30.
F 2

4 Con. Antioch. in Act. 14. Con. Chalced.
5 Con. 6. Gen. Act. 18. Con. t. 6 p. 1077 et 1080.
6 Salmas. de Primat. c. 4. p. 44. It. not. in Vopiscum.
7 Hadrian. Epist. ap. Vopiscum Vit. Saturnin. Illi qui
Serapin colunt, Christiani sunt : et devoti sunt Serapi, qui
se Christi episcopos dicunt. Nemo illic archisynagogus
Judseorum, nemo Samarites, nemo Christianorum presby
ter, non mathematicus, non aruspex, non aliptes. Ille ipse
patriarcha, quum JEgyptum venerit, ab aliis Serapidem
adorare, ab aliis cogitur Christum.

G8

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

Egypt out of another country; which cannot be
said of the bishop of Alexandria, who had his fixed
and continual residence there : but it suits exactly
the state and condition of the Jewish patriarch,
who resided at Tiberias in Palestine, and came but
accidentally, or at some certain times, into Egypt.
These, and the hke reasons, make others conclude
against Salmasius, that whoever is meant, it is not
any Christian patriarch that is here spoken of. Ba
ronius8 fancies it was the heathen pontif ex, or high
priest of Egypt: but the same reasons will hold
against his opinion as against the other; for the
high priest of Egypt lived in Egypt, and needed no
compulsion to worship Serapis, as this patriarch
did : so that it must be the Jewish patriarch, and no
other, which Hadrian speaks of, as Mr. Basnage and
Bishop Pearson," with some others, have observed.
These Jewish patriarchs, from
Sect. 4. . r '
tri0fc'hhe Je™h p»- whom, as is generally agreed, the
llumctiin'0"' and Christian patriarchs borrowed their
names, were a sort of governors
among the Jews set up upon the destruction of Je
rusalem ; one of which had his residence at Tiberias,
and another at Babylon, who were the heads of the
Jews dispersed throughout the Roman and the Per
sian empire. Of these there is frequent mention
made in the ancient writers of the church, Origen,10
Epiphanius,11 Cyril of Jerusalem,12 Theodoret,13 and
many others. They continued in great power and
dignity till the latter end of the fourth century,
about which time their order ceased. For Theodoret
says expressly, that long before his time their go
vernment was wholly abolished : and one of the
laws of the younger Theodosius, anno 429,14 speaks
of them as then extinct.
sect. 5. Much about the same time the
among the Monta- Montanists, or Cataphrygian heretics
had an order of men among them,
which they called patriarchs, and another which
they called cenones, both which were superior to
their bishops, and, as it should seem, distinct orders
from them. For St. Jerom 15 charges it on them as
a crime, that they thrust down the order of the bi
shops, who were the apostles' successors, and set up

8 Baron. Annal. tom. 2. an. 112.
8 Basnag. Exercit. Histor. p. 281. Pearson, Vindic Ig
nat. par. 1. u. 11. p. 328. Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. Verbo
iraTpiapxn?. Cave, Ane. Chur. Gov. p. 153.
10 Orig. wepl ipxHv, lib. 4. c. 1.
11 Epiphan. Hser. 30.
12 Cyr Catech. 12. n. ]. is Theodor Dia, ,
14 Cod. Iheod. lib. 16. tit. 8. de Jud. lib. 29.
18 Jerom. Ep. 54. ad Marcel, adv. Montam t. 2. p 128
Apud nos apostolorum locum episcopi tenent : apud eos
tpisropus tertius est. Habent enim primos de Pepuza
hrygi* patriarchas: secundos quos appellant cenones-
atque ita in tertium, id est, pene ultimum locum, episcopi
devolvuntur. 16 Basnag. Exercit. Histor. p. 285. Hinc colligi possit,

an order of patriarchs and an order of cenones
among them: .which makes some learned men16
think, that when St. Jerom wrote that against the
Montanists, the name patriarch was not as yet
adopted into the church, though the power was
under another name.
Indeed, the first time we meet with Serf 6
the name patriarch given to any bi- arc^nSnled"""
shop by any public authority of the coOuC„acii„?cdh,!0ee.
church, is in the council of Chalcedon,
which mentions lr the most holy patriarchs of every
diocese, and particularly Leo patriarch1" of great
Rome. Richerius, who has written accurately
about the councils, can trace the name no higher.1*
Among private authors, the first that mentions pa
triarchs by name is Socrates,20 who wrote his history
about the year 440, eleven years before the council
of Chalcedon. By what he says, it appears that
during the interval between the general council of
Constantinople, anno 381, and that of Chalcedon,
the name patriarch began to be an appropriate title
of some eminent bishops in the church. For speak
ing of the fathers at Constantinople, he says, They
constituted patriarchs, dividing the provinces among
them. Valesius " and Dr. Cave M think Socrates
speaks not of true and proper patriarchs, but only
of extraordinary legates, or pro-tempore commission
ers, appointed by the council to judge who were fit
to be received to cathohc communion in the several
dioceses that were allotted them. But all others
understand him in the proper sense, because by
this time patriarchal power was settled in all the
dioceses of the Roman empire.
But though the name of patriarchs
came not into the church till about r<Ji&Lt
the time of Socrates, yet the power iXgtne'S*™*!
itself, as is agreed on all hands, was patn"'*a' """"*'
much earher ; though where precisely to fix the
epocha, and date its rise, is not so easy to deter
mine. Some carry it as high as the apostles, and
derive it, as they do the pope's supremacy, from St.
Peter. So Baronius,23 who is followed by the most
eminent writers of his own communion, De Marca,
Valesius, Richerius, Pagius, and Schelstrate. Others

priscis temporibus nondum episcopis insignioribus ajlixum
fuisse nomen patriarchal.
17 Con. Chalced. Act. 2. p. 338. beri&TaToi irarpiapxi"
6lOLKJ]0r£.CO<S ircaTtjs.
18 Act. 3. p. 395.
19 Rich. Hist. Concil. tom. 1. e. 2. u. 11. Nomen patri-
archarum primum quod sciamusurpatum in synodo Chalce-
donensi. 20 Socrat. H. E. lib. 5. c. 8.
21 Vales. Annot. in Socrat.
22 Auc. Ch. Gov. p. 147.
23 Baron. Annal. t. 1. an. 39. n. 16. Pet. de Marca, de
Concord, t. 1. lib. 1. c. 3. n, 5. Vales^ Observ. Eccles. lib.
3. Richer. Hist. Concil. I. 1. c. 1. n. 14. Ant. Pag. Cijtip.
an. 37. ... 9. ' ¦ '

Chap. XVII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

69

justly reject this, as founded upon no good author
ity, nor evidenced by any genuine records of the
ancient church, but only the spurious epistles of the
first popes ; and reckon the first rise of patriarchs
to have been after the apostolical age, and some
time before the council of Nice. This is the opinion
of Spalatensis24 and Mr. Brerewood. The third
opinion is that of Balzamon,25 and other modern
Greeks, that patriarchs were first instituted by the
council of Nice : and this seems to be favoured by
St. Jerom : for in his epistle to Pammachius, writing
against the errors of John of Jerusalem, he says,
it was decreed in the council of Nice,26 that Ceesarea
should be the metropolis of Palestine, and Antioch
the metropolis of the whole East. Therefore the
bishop of Jerusalem must either appeal to the
bishop of Caesarea, as his immediate metropolitan,
or to the bishop of Antioch, as metropohtan of the
East. But if I rightly understand St. Jerom, he
does not mean (as some mistake him) that patriarchs
were first set up by the council of Nice : for then
metropolitans must be so too; since he says the
same of them, which yet every one knows were in
the church long before the council of Nice. His
meaning then must be, that both metropolitans of
provinces and metropolitans of dioceses were in
being before the council of Nice, and only received
confirmation, or a canonical establishment, from it.
And indeed it is evident, that the Nicene fathers
made no alteration in these matters, but only con
firmed the ancient rights of the bishops of principal
cities, as they found them authorized by custom be
fore. For the words " they use are, Td dpxdla I9ij
KparuTU), " Let ancient customs still take place ; so
as in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, the bishop of
Alexandria shall have power over all ; because
such also is the custom of the bishop of Rome.
And accordingly in Antioch, and in other provinces,
let the privileges be preserved to the churches."
Here it is plain, that no new power is given to
any bishops, but only what ancient custom and
practice had assigned them. So that either patri
archs were set up by custom before the council of
Nice,28 and confirmed by the council, as St. Jerom
thinks ; or else not introduced till afterwards. This
last opinion (notwithstanding what St. Jerom says)
is embraced by the famous Mr. Launoy,29 Mr. Bas-
nage,30 Dr. Beverege,31 and Dr. Cave,32 who think

that patriarchal power was not confirmed by the
Nicene canon, nor known in the church till about
the time of the second general council of Constanti
nople, anno 381.
In a matter so obscure, and so Sect a
variously controverted among learned SpTlS£md st
men, it is not easy to determine where Jerom v™'°"° ¦
the right lies. Patriarchal power was not set up
at one and the same time in all places. Alexandria
and Antioch were as early as any, and the bishop
of Alexandria before the council of Nice had all
Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis under his jurisdiction,
as appears from the Nicene canons. This was the
dicecesis JEgyptiaca, which consisted of six large
provinces, four in Egypt, viz. Thebais, Arcadia,
Augustanica, and iEgyptus properly so called, Li
bya Inferior, and Libya Superior, which is Penta
polis. As all these were subject to the preefectus
Augustalis of Egypt, so they were likewise under
the jurisdiction of the bishop of Alexandria. So
that he was not only a metropolitan of a single
province, but of six provinces joined in one diocese.
But now the question is, whether at this time he
had any metropolitans under him ? For if he had,
then he was properly a patriarch at the time of the
Nicene council. As to this, I can only say, that
Epiphanius and Synesius do expressly mention
archbishops and metropolitans under the archbishop
of Alexandria, in the time of Athanasius, and Alex
ander his predecessor, who were both present in the
council of Nice. But whether they mean metro
politans in the proper sense, or only coadjutors to
the archbishop of Alexandria, I cannot yet deter
mine. I will recite the passages, and leave the
curious and the learned to make further inquiry.
Synesius says, The great Athanasius seeing the
church of Ptolemais had need of a bishop that was
able to cherish and augment the small sparks of
true religion, which was then in a dwindling con
dition there ; and finding Siderius, bishop of Palae-
bisca, a man fit for great business ; he commanded
him to remove thence to Ptolemais,33 to govern
the metropolitical church there. And Epiphanius,34
speaking of Meletius, the author of the Meletian
schism before the council of Nice, says expressly,
" He was an archbishop in Egypt, under Alexander,
archbishop of Alexandria, to whom he gave the
first information against Arius." This agrees with

24 Spalat. de Repub. par. 1. 1. 3. u. 12. u. 21. Brere
wood of Patriar. Gov. q. 1.
25 Balzam. in can. 6. Con. Nic.
26 Hieron. Ep. 61. t. 2. p. 178. Ad Alexandrinum epis
copum Palaestina quid pertinet ? Ni fallor, hoc ibi decerni-
tur, ut Palaestinse metropolis Cassarea sit, et totius Orientis
Antiochia. Aut igitur ad Caesariensem episcopum referre
debueras ;  Aut si procul expetendum judicium erat,
Antiochiam potius literae dirigendae.
27 Con. Nic. can. 6.
29 So Du Pin, Bibliothec. vol. 2. p. 252. It. de Antiq.

Eccl. Disciplin. Dissert. 1. sect. 11. p. .37.
29 Launoy, de Rect. Interpr. Can. 6. Con. Nic.
30 Basnag. Exercit. Histor. p. 307.
31 Bevereg. Not. in Can. 2. Con. Constant.
32 Cave, Ane. Ch. Gov. c. 2 et 4.
33 Synes. Ep. 67. ad Theoph. p. 231. TIAppEyav 'Ada-
vieriov, — tov avSpa tovtov, lis pEt^oeri -repay paeriv iiri-
tyiSelov, 'ekei Sia&nvai KEXEverai, tt]V py]TpoiroXiT7]V ekkXt]-
eriav ettit poiTEvo-ovTa.
34 Epiphan. Haer. 69. n. 3. '0 apxt-EiriaKoiros MtAri-
Ttos o KGC-ra Tr\v AlyvirTov, vtto Se XEipu AXtfcivSpov.

70

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

what he says of him in another place,35 " That he
was chief of the Egyptian bishops, and next in
order to Peter in the archbishopric, being his
assistant, and administering ecclesiastical affairs
under him. For there the custom is, for the arch
bishop of Alexandria to have the ordering of eccle
siastical matters throughout all Egypt, Thebais,
Mareotes, Libya, Ammoniaca, Mareotis, and Penta
polis.'' So that as the bishop of Alexandria had
six provinces under him, he seems also to have had
subordinate metropolitans or archbishops under
him likewise, as the archbishop of Lycopolis in
Thebais, the metropohtan of Ptolemais in Penta
polis. And if these were properly metropolitans,
he must be a patriarch, under the name of metro
pohtan of the whole Egyptian diocese, as they were
metropolitans of their respective provinces : which
is the thing that St. Jerom asserts in reference to
Caesarea and Antioch, that the one was the metro
polis of Palestine, and the other the metropolis of
the Oriental diocese ; and this from ancient custom,
ratified and confirmed by the council of Nice.
But however this be, (for I deter-
patriarchki power mine nothing positively in this matter,)
estabhshed in three
general councils sue- the next age affords us very pregnant
cessively, viz. Con- b J r to
s?s°and pchaicedon Pro°f s 01? the establishment and growth
of patriarchal power. The general
council of Constantinople,38 anno 381, has a canon
to fix the limits of the several dioceses : so that the
bishop of Alexandria should only administer the
affairs of the Egyptian diocese : the bishops of the
East, the Eastern diocese, reserving the privileges
granted by the council of Nice to the church of
Antioch : the bishops of the Asiatic diocese, the
Asiatic churches only : those of the Pontic diocese,
the Pontic churches : and those of the Thracian
diocese, the Thracian churches only.
Theodoret,37 speaking of this council, says, they
divided the dioceses, and assigned every diocese its
proper limits and jurisdiction. And Socrates,38
more expressly, " that they constituted patriarchs,
and distributed the provinces, so that no bishops
should meddle with the affairs of another diocese, as
was used to be done in times of persecution. Nec
tarius was allotted Constantinople and Thrace; Hel-
ladius, St. Basil's successor, the Pontic diocese," &c.
About fifty years after this, anno 431, the third
general council was held at Ephesus, where we find
the bishop of Antioch laying claim to the power of
ordinations in the province of Cyprus: but this
proving to be an unjust claim, the council made a
35 Haer. 68. Meletian. n. 1. '0 MeXjitos ™ KaTi tv.v
AlyvirTov irporiKiuv, Kal SEVTEpEVvOV too TlETpca, KaTi TTJV
apXLETritTKO'm'iv, tie Si ivTlXv^/EO>^ aiiTOv X&piv, &c.
36 Con. C. Pol. can. 2.
37 Theod. Ep. 86. ad Flav. t. 3. p 963
38 Socrat. H. E. lib. 5. c. 8. waTpeapxas KaSierTti-
trav, &c.

decree in favour of the Cyprian bishops, exempting
them from the jm-isdiction of Antioch, because by
ancient custom they always were exempt : and it
is added,39 " that the same rule should be observed
in all dioceses and provinces, that no bishop should
seize upon any province, which did not anciently
belong to his jurisdiction." This plainly imphes,
that the bishop of Antioch had then several pro
vinces, or a whole diocese, under his power ; which
was confirmed to him by the council, and he was
only denied jurisdiction over the province of Cyprus,
because of ancient right it did not belong to him.
About eighteen years after this, Theodosius,
junior, and Valentinian, called the second council
of Ephesus, anno 449. And in the letter of sum
mons to Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria, they give
him orders to bring ten metropolitans40 of his
diocese with him. This is noted by Liberatus in
his Breviary, and the letter is still extant in the
council of Chalcedon,41 by which it appears, that at
this time the archbishop of Alexandria had a great
number of metropolitans within the Egyptian dio
cese, under his jurisdiction. So that though there
be some dispute concerning the first rise and original
of patriarchal power, yet there remains no manner
of doubt, but that it was come to its full height and
establishment in the time of the general councils of
Ephesus and Chalcedon.
Therefore the next inquiry is into
the rights and privileges of these pa- The Peower of P».
,. -, a-ii -,-.. ¦ i triarchs not exaclir
triarchs. And here it is to be nicely the same man
. churches.
observed, that the power of patriarchs The patriarch of
r * Constantinople had
was not one and the same precisely some peculiar privt-
in all churches, but differed according
to the different customs of places and countries, or
according as it was the pleasure of kings and councils
to bestow greater privileges on them. The patri
arch of Constantinople, when he was first advanced
by the second general council, had only the single
diocese of Thrace assigned him42 for the exercise
of his jurisdiction ; but in the next age he was
grown to be a sort of patriarch over the patriarchs
of Ephesus and Caesarea in the Asiatic and Pontic
dioceses, by the voluntary consent of those two ex
archs (no doubt) at first, paying a deference to the
exarch of the royal city, which, advancing into a
custom, was afterwards confirmed by canon in the
council of Chalcedon. In the sixteenth session of
that council, there is a long debate about this mat
ter, the pope's legates warmly stickling against it j
but all the metropolitans of the two dioceses of Asia

39 Con. Ephes. 1. Act. 7. Decret. de Episc. Cypr.
40 Liberat. Breviar. c. 12. Imperator dirigens sacrara
Dioscoro in Alexandriam, praacepit, ut cum decern metro-
politanis episcopis, quos voluisset, ipse eligeret, et veniret
Ephesum. 41 Con. Chalced. Act. 1. C. t. 4. p. 100.
42 Con. Const. 1. can. 2.

Chap. XVII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

71

and Pontus then in council, together with Thalas
sius, bishop of Caesarea, and exarch of the Pontic
diocese, with one voice declaring, that the bishop
of Constantinople had, by long custom and pre
scription, enjoyed the privilege of ordaining metro
politans in tho,e two dioceses, as well as that of
Thrace ; it was decreed, that this privilege should
be continued to him, notwithstanding the bishop of
Rome's intercession against it.43 Also by two canons
of that council he is allowed to receive appeals44
from the exarchs of those dioceses, because his
throne was in the royal city. And in such parts of
those dioceses, as were chiefly in the hands of bar
barians, he is authorized by another canon45 to or
dain all the bishops, which in other parts was the
sole privilege of the metropolitans. Theodoret46
observes even of Chrysostom himself, before the
council of Chalcedon, that he exercised this power
over all the three dioceses. For he says, " His
care extended not only over Constantinople and
Thrace, which consisted of six provinces, but over
Asia and Pontus, each of which had eleven civil
praetors in them." We are not therefore to take an
estimate of patriarchal power from the growing
greatness of Constantinople, but to distinguish the
pecuhar privileges of some patriarchs above others,
which is the only way to understand the power of
each. For the patriarch of Alexandria
The patriarch of had also some prerogatives, which
Alexandria had also . . ,
privileges peculiar no other patriarch besides himself en-
to himself. *
joyed. Such was the right of conse
crating and approving every single bishop through
out all the provinces of his diocese. This privilege
was not allowed even to the patriarch of Constan
tinople ; for the council of Chalcedon, in the very
same place where they give him power to conse
crate the metropolitans of three whole dioceses, deny
him the privilege of consecrating the suffragan
bishops of those metropolitans ; and reserve it as an
ancient right of each metropohtan, with a synod of
his provincial bishops, to consecrate all the bishops
within his province, the archbishops of Constanti
nople neither being consulted, nor having47 any
hand in those ordinations. But it was otherwise
at Alexandria. For the bishop of Alexandria,
whilst he was only a metropolitan, had the ordina
tion of all the bishops of the six provinces of the
Egyptian diocese, being the sole and only metropo
litan in all those provinces: and having but the

same diocese when he came to be a patriarch, he
continued his ancient custom of ordaining all the
bishops throughout the six provinces, notwith
standing that new metropolitans were set up in
them. And in this the patriarch of Alexandria
differed from all others : for in all other dioceses
the metropolitans had the right of ordaining their
suffragan bishops, which here the patriarch retain
ed to himself, as an ancient branch of his metropo
litical power. I know indeed a very learned43 per
son is of a different opinion : he says, " The bishop
of Alexandria was rather a loser by being made a
patriarch : for now, according to the constitution of
church policy, the ordination of suffragan bishops,
which before belonged entirely to him, was devolved
upon the several metropolitans under him." But
this assertion proceeds upon a supposition, that
patriarchal rights were exactly the same in all
places ; which, from the instance I have given of
Constantinople, appears to be otherwise ; for the
patriarchs of Ephesus and Caesarea had not the
ordination of their own metropolitans, but they
were all subject to the bishop of Constantinople.
And as to the case of Alexandria, it appears from
Synesius, who was himself metropolitan of Ptole
mais, that the ordination not only of the metropoli
tans, but of all the suffragan bishops throughout the
whole district of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, be
longed still to the patriarch of Alexandria. For in
a letter to Theophilus, acquainting him how he and
two other bishops had met at Olbiae to make choice
of a bishop, and that one Antonius was unani
mously chosen by the people ; he adds,49 that yet
there was one thing wanting, which was more
necessary than all, viz. his sacred hand to consecrate
him. Which shows, that the bishop of Alexandria
still retained his ancient right of consecrating all
the bishops of the Egyptian diocese.
In other dioceses, the patriarch's
power was chiefly seen in the ordina- The^p'iviiege
- ,. n 11 .-. . of patriarchs was, to
tion or confirmation ot all tne metro- ordain an the me-
, . _- . tropolitans of the
pohtans that were under him. 1 ms diocese, and receive
* his own ordination
appears from the forecited canons50 of froma diocesan
the council of Chalcedon, and several
of Justinian's Novels ; one of which51 takes notice
of the bishop of Constantinople's ordaining all the
metropolitans under him ; and another gives the
same power to the patriarch of Justiniana Prima,52
then newly advanced to patriarchal dignity by Jus
tinian, because it was the place of his nativity.

43 Con. Chalced. can. 28. et Act. 16. per tot.
41 Ibid. can. 9 et 17. " Con. Chal. can. 28.
48 Theod. Hist. Eccl. lib. 5. c. 28.
47 Con. Chalced. Act. 16. in fin. Etiam nihil communi-
cante in illorum ordinationibus archiepiscopo regiae Con-
stantinopolis. 49 Dr. Cave, Ane. Ch. Gov. c. 4. p. 159.
49 Synes. Ep. 76. ad Theoph. ei/os eti SeI, tov KvpiaTu..
tvv pie Tot, t?)s tEpu.'i cov XEipds.

60 Con. Chalc. can. 28. et Act. 16.
61 Justin. Novel. 7. c. 1.
52 Justin. Nov. 131. c. 3. Per tempus beatissimum Jus
tiniana; Primae patriae nostraa archiepiscopum habere sem
per sub sua jurisdictione episcopos provinciarum Daciae
Mediterraneae, et Daciae Ripensis, et Privalis, (al. Tribal-
lias,) et Dardaniae, et Mysioe superioris, et Pannoniac : et
ab eo hos ordinari, ipsuin vero a proprio ordinari concilio.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IL

And that this was a pecuhar privilege of patriarchs,
appears further from one of the Arabic canons pub
lished by Turrian, under the name of the Nicene
Canons, which were invented after the name of
patriarchs was well known in the church. The
36th of these canons, speaking of the catholic of
Ethiopia,53 who was no patriarch, but subject to the
patriarch of Alexandria, says, He shall not have
power to ordain archbishops, as patriarchs have ;
because he hath not the power or honour of a
patriarch. It was therefore the prerogative of patriarchs
(those of Ephesus and Caesarea only excepted) to
ordain the metropolitans under them : but they
themselves were to be ordained by a diocesan sy
nod, as Justinian's forecited Novel54 informs us.
And this was called the canonical ordination of a
patriarch. For so the council of Constantinople,
in their synodical epistle to the western bishops,
prove the ordination of Flavian, bishop of Antioch,
(who presided over all the Eastern diocese,55 as The
odoret says,) to be canonical, because he was or
dained not only by the bishops of the province, but
rijg 'AvaroXiKTJg Sioncrjoeuig, the bishops of the whole
Eastern diocese56 synodically met together.
2. The next privilege of patriarchs
Sect. 13. ,i « . ,-> ¦
a 2nd privilege was, the power of convening their
wa-, to call diocesan - ...
synods, and p.es.de metropolitans and all the provincial
bishops to a diocesan synod; which
privilege was founded upon the same canons that
granted metropolitans authority to summon provin
cial synods, and preside in them. For by just
analogy, the patriarch was to have the same power
over the metropolitans, that they had over their
provincial bishops. And therefore Theodoret,57
speaking of his own attendance at the synods of
his patriarch at Antioch, says, he did it in obedience
to the ecclesiastical canons, which make him a cri
minal that is summoned to a synod, and refuses to
pay his attendance at it.
3. Another privilege of patriarchs
Sect. 14. ., „ . . ,
a 3rd privilege, to was, the power of receiving appeals
receive appeals from JrJ-
metropoiitans and from metropolitans and provincial
provincial synods, ¦*¦ r
synods, and reversing their decrees, if
they were found faulty. If any bishop or clergy
man have a controversy with the metropolitan of
his province, let him have recourse to the exarch of
the diocese, says the council of Chalcedon,58 in one
canon : and in another,59 If any man is injured by

his own bishop, or metropolitan, let him bring his
cause before the exarch of the diocese, or the throne
of Constantinople. These canons are adopted into
the civil law, and confirmed by imperial edicts. For
by one of Justinian's constitutions,60 the patriarch
is to receive appeals from a provincial synod, and
give a final determination to all causes that are re
gularly brought before him : and the regular way
of proceeding is there specified, which is, that no
man shall bring his cause first before the patriarch,
but first before his own bishop, then before the me
tropohtan, after that before a provincial synod, and
last of all before the patriarch, from whose judg
ment there lay no appeal. The same is repeated
and confirmed by other laws61 of that emperor,
which need mot here be recited.
4. As patriarchs might receive ap- Sect
peals from metropolitans, so they had t^£l™JZ'.
power to inquire into their administra- ffi",^;

and also
ragana,

tion, and correct and censure them, TO,,. ,,.,„„„,„ .,.„

when metropolitans
were remiss ii
surlng them.

in case of heresy, or misdemeanor, or
any mal-administration, which made them liable by
the canons to ecclesiastical censure. Justinian
made an express law to this purpose,62 That if any
clergyman was accused in point of faith, or morals,
or transgression of the sacred canons ; if he was a
bishop, he should be examined before his metropo
htan ; but if he was a metropolitan, then before the
archbishop, that is, the patriarch to whom he was
subject. By virtue of this power Chrysostom de
posed Gerontius,63 metropolitan of Nicomedia : and
Atticus decided a controversy between Theodosius
and Agapetus,61 who contended about the throne of
Synada, the metropolis of Phrygia Pacatiana : and
it were easy to add many other instances of the like
nature out of the ancient councils, which concurred
with the patriarchs in the exercise of this power.
Nor did this power extend only over metropoli
tans, but over their suffragan bishops also. For
though every provincial bishop was to be tried by
his own metropohtan and a provincial synod, yet
in case they were negligent and remiss in executing
the canons against delinquents, the patriarch had
power to take the matter into his own cognizance,
and censure any bishop within the limits of his ju
risdiction. Thus Sozomen65 observes of Chrysos
tom, that at one visitation at Ephesus he deposed
thirteen bishops of Asia, Lycia, and Phrygia, for
simony, and such other corrupt practices. This

53 Con. Nicen. Arab. c. 36. Non tamen jus habeat con-
stituendi archiepiscopos, ut habet patriarcha; siquidem uon
habet patriarchal houorem et potestatem.
54 Novel. 131. Ipsum vero (patriarcham) a proprio ordi
nal! concilio.
55 Theod. H. E. lib. 5. c. 23.
56 Con. Constant. Ep. ad Occident, ap. Theod. H. E. lib.
5. c. P.
87 Theod. Ep. 81. M Con. Chalced. can. 9.
89 Ibid. can. 17. 60 Cod. Just. lib. 1. tit. 4. w. 29.

61 Just. Novel. 123. e. 22. Phot. Nomocan. tit. 9. c 1.
62 Novel. 37. c. 5. Quoties quidam sacerdotum accusa-
buntur vel de fide, aut turpi vita, aut ob aliquid aliud con
tra sacros canones admissum ; si quidem episcopus est is qui
accusatus est, ejus metropolitanus examinet ea quae dicta
sunt: si vero metropolitanus sit, ejus beatissimus archiepis-
copus sub quo degit.
63 Sozom. H. E. lib. 8. c. 6.
" Socrat. H. E. lib. 7. c. 3.
65 Soiom. H. E. lib. 8. c. 6

Chap. XVII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

73

was done in a synod of seventy bishops held at
Ephesus, anno 401, as Valesius68 and Du Pin ob
serve out of Palladius; who mentions the same thing,
though he speaks but of six bishops then deposed.
Sec( 16 5. The patriarch had power to de-
FaWarhcKSS legate or send a metropolitan into
Sen^ol?n2sion- " any part of his diocese, as his com
missioner, to hear and determine ec
clesiastical causes in his name. At least it was
so in the diocese of Egypt, where Synesius was bi
shop. For in one of his epistles,67 writing to Theo
philus, patriarch of Alexandria, he tells him what a
difficult task he had put upon him, when he sent
him through an enemy's country, to Hydrax and
Pakebisca, two villages in the confines of Libya, to
determine a dispute that was risen there about erect
ing those places into bishops' sees : But, says he,
there lies a necessity upon me, vo/jok iiyelaSai, to take
every thing for a law that is enjoined me by the
throne of Alexandria. 6. And as the metropolitans did
A6tii privilege, every thing that was canonically en-
The patriarch to be .._, .
consulted by bis joined them by the patriarch, so they
metropolitans UI J x J
moment?' a°rsreat °-^ n°thing of any great moment
without him; paying the same de
ference to him, that the canons obhged their suf
fragans to pay to them. This at least was the cus
tom of Egypt, as appears from a noted passage
related in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon,68
where we find, that when Pope Leo's epistle against
Eutyches was subscribed by all the bishops in
council, the Egyptian bishops then present refused
to do it, because they had then no patriarch, and it
was not lawful for them to do it without the con
sent of a patriarch, by the rule of the council of
Nice, which orders all the bishops of the Egyptian
diocese to follow the archbishop of Alexandria, and
do nothing without him. This they pleaded in
council, and their plea was accepted, and a decree69
passed in their favour upon it, That since this was
the custom of the Egyptian diocese, to do nothing
of this nature without the consent and authority of
their archbishop, they should not be compelled to
subscribe till a new archbishop was chosen.
7- It was the patriarch's office to
7. Patriarchs to publish both ecclesiastical and civil
communicate to the ...
metropolitans such laws, which concerned the church, and
imperial laws as
concerned the to take care for the dispersion and
church, &c. r
pubhcation of them in all churches of
their diocese. The method is prescribed by Justi
nian in the Epilogue to the sixth Novel : " The
patriarchs of every diocese shall publish these our
laws in their respective churches, and notify them
to the metropolitans under them. The metropoli-

66 Vales. Not. in loc. Du Pin, Biblioth. vol. 3. Vit. Chrys.
67 Synes. Ep. 67. p. 208.
68 Cone. Chalced. Act. 4. p. 512, 513.

tans likewise shall publish them in their metropo
litical churches, and make them known to the bi
shops under them ; that so they may publish them
in their respective churches, and no one be left
ignorant in our whole empire of what we have
enacted for the glory of the great God and our Sa
viour Jesus Christ." See also Novel 42, directed
to Menas, patriarch of Constantinople, concluding
in the same tenor.
8. Synesius observes another privi
lege in the diocese of Alexandria, The sui privilege.
... i7 ^ . j-. . p .. Great criminals re-
wfnch was, that in the exercise of dis- served to the patri
arch's absolution.
cipline upon great criminals and scan
dalous offenders, a peculiar deference was paid to
the patriarch, by reserving their absolution to his
wisdom and discretion. As he gives an instance in
one Lamponianus a presbyter, whom he had ex
communicated for abusing Jason his fellow pres
byter. " Though," says he,70 " he expressed his re
pentance with tears, and the people interceded for
him , yet I refused to absolve him, but remitted him
over for that to the sacred see : only assuming this
to myself, that if the man should happen to be in
manifest danger of death, any presbyter that was
present should receive him into communion by my
order. For no man shall go excommunicate out
of the world by me. But in case he recovered, he
should still be liable to the former penalty, and ex
pect the ratification of his pardon from your divine
and courteous soul." But whether this respect
was paid by all metropolitans to their patriarch in
every diocese, I have not yet observed.
9. The last privilege of patriarchs
was, that they were originally all co- The greater patri-
. - archs absolute and
ordinate and independent of one an- independent of one
x another.
other. I speak now of them as they
were at their first institution : for after ages, and
councils, and emperors, made great alteration in
this matter. At first learned men71 reckon there
were about thirteen or fourteen patriarchs in the
church, that is, one in every capital city of each dio
cese of the Roman empire ; the patriarch of Alex
andria over the Egyptian diocese, the patriarch of
Antioch over the Eastern diocese, the patriarch of
Ephesus over the Asiatic diocese, the patriarch of
Caesarea in Cappadocia over the Pontic diocese ;
Thessalonica in Macedon or Illyricum Orientale,
Sirmium in Illyricum Occidentale, Rome in the
Roman praefecture, Milan in the Italian diocese;
Carthage in Africa, Lyons in France, Toledo in
Spain, and York in the diocese of Britain. The
greatest part of these, if not all, were real patriarchs,
and independent of one another, till Rome by en
croachment, and Constantinople by law, got them-

88 Cone. Chalced. can. 30. ex Act. 4.
™ Synes. Ep. 67. p. 215.
*» Brerewood, Patriarch. Gov. qu. 1.

74

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

selves made superior to some of their neighbours,
who became subordinate and subject unto them.
The ancient hberties of the Britannic churches, as
also the African and Italian diocese, and their long
contests with Rome, before they could be brought
to yield obedience to her, are largely set forth by
several of our learned writers72 in particular dis
courses on this subject. I only here note, that the
Eastern patriarchs, Alexandria, Antioch, Ephesus,
Caesarea, and Constantinople, were never subject to
Rome, but maintained the ancient liberty which the
canons gave them. For though Caesarea and Ephe
sus were made subordinate to the patriarch of Con
stantinople, and any one might appeal from them to
him ; yet the appeal was to be carried no further,73
unless it were to a general council. Which shows
the independency of the greater patriarchs one of
another. The patriarch of Constantinople
The patriarch of had also the honourable title of cectl-
Constantinonle dig- ,
nined with ihc tme menical, or universal patriarch, given
of (Ecumenical, and r ' °
aiuhhurch"ead °f nim! probably in regard of the great
extent of his jurisdiction. Thus Jus
tinian styles Menas, Epiphanius, and Antherriius,
archbishops and oecumenical patriarchs, in several
of his rescripts ;74 and Leo gives the same title to
Stephen, archbishop and universal patriarch, in
ten laws75 one after another. So that it was no
such new thing as Pope Gregory made it, for the
patriarch of Constantinople to be styled oecumenical
bishop : for that title was given him by law many
years before, even from the time of Justinian ; and
it is a vulgar error in history to date the original of
that title from the time of Gregory I. which was in
use at least a whole century before. But Justinian
in another rescript goes a little further, and76 says
expressly, that Constantinople was the head of all
churches. Which is as much as ever any council
allowed to Rome, that is, a supremacy in its own
diocese, and a precedency of honour in regard that
it was the capital city of the empire. Equal privi
leges are granted to Constantinople upon the same
ground, because it was New Rome, and the royal seat,
as the councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon,77
with some others, word it. So that they had privi
leges of honour, and privileges of power; the first
of which were peculiar to those two sees ; the other,
in a great measure common to them and all other
patriarchal churches, except those of Ephesus and
Caesarea, which, as I have often observed, were le
gally made subordinate to that of Constantinople.

72 Brerewood, Patr. Gov. qu. 2 et 3. Cave, Ane. Ch
Gov. c. 5.
73 See the authorities cited before, sect. 14.
74 See Justin. Novel. 7. 16 42.
75 Leo, Imp. Constit. Novel. 2, 3, &c.
76 Just. Cod. l'b. 1. tit. 2. ..-. 21. Constantinopolitana ec
clesia omnium aliarum est caput.

Some here may be desirous to know,
what authority those patriarchs had or subordinate
in the church after their subordination p.reuiey'raade'ij"
to the other. There are who tell us '!>« ••were notion!
titular patriarchs.
that they were sunk down to the con
dition of metropolitans again by the council of Chal
cedon : but that is a mistake : for, first, They retained
the name of exarchs of the diocese still, and so sub
scribed themselves in all councils. As in the sixth
general council, Theodoret subscribes himself metro
politan of Ephesus and exarch of the Asiatic dio
cese;76 and PhilaletheSj metropolitan of CaBsarea and
exarch of the Pontic diocese. Secondly, They al
ways sat and voted in general councils next imme
diately after the five great patriarchs, Rome, Con
stantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem,
who by the canons'9 had precedence of all the rest.
Next to these, before all the metropolitans, the bi
shops of Ephesus and Caesarea took place, as may
be seen in the subscriptions of the fourth and sixth
general councils.80 Thirdly, They had power to
receive appeals from metropolitans, which is evident
from the same canons of Chalcedon, which give81
the patriarch of Constantinople power to take ap
peals from them. So that they were not mere titu
lar patriarchs, as some in after ages, but had the
power as well as the name ; the right of ordaining
metropolitans and receiving ultimate appeals only
excepted. But how long they or any others retained
their power, is not my business here any further to
inquire.

CHAPTER XVIII.

OF THE 'AYTOKE*AAOI.

Among other titles which were an- „ . ,
, Sect. l.
ciently given to sortie certain bishops, a„*LSyrt»7$dtlm!
we frequently meet with the name aiT°»^<"-
avroKktpdXoi, absolute and independent bishops;
which was not the name of any one sort of bishops,
but given to several upon different reasons. For
first, before the setting up of patriarchs, all metro
politans were avToxifaXoi, ordering the affairs of
their own province with their provincial bishops,
and being accountable to no superior but a synod,
and that in case of heresy, or some great crime
committed against rehgion and the rules of the
church.

77 Con. Const, can. 3. Con. Chalced. can. 28. Con.
Trull, can. 36. Justin. Novel. 131. c 2
78 Con. 6. Gen. Act. 18.
79 See Cone. Trull, can. 36. et Justin. Novel. 131 c. 2.
« n^ ^,ha!Ced- Act' 1 et 3' Con- 6- Ge»- Act. 18.
61 Con. Chalc. can. 9 et 17.

Chap. XVIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

75

And even after the advancement of
somemetro'iioH- patriarchs, several metropolitans con^
afcr'the'settir^'up tinued thus independent ; receiving
of patriarchal .. ,. ,. .. ,. .
po»er, as those of their ordination from their own pro-
Cyprus, Iberia, Ar- ,
menia,and the ymcial synod, and not from any pa-
church of Britain. * ' J *
triarch ; terminating all controversies
in their own synods, from which there was no ap
peal to any superior, except a general council. Bal
samon reckons among this sort of airoickipaXm the
metropolitans of Bulgaria,1 Cyprus, and Iberia. And
his observation is certainly true of the two last, who
were only metropolitans, yet independent of any pa
triarchal or superior power. For though the bishop
of Antioch laid claim to the ordination of the Cy
prian bishops in the council of Ephesus, yet the
council, upon hearing the case, determined against
him, making a decree,2 That whereas it never had
been the custom for the bishop of Antioch to ordain
bishops in Cyprus, the Cyprian bishops should retain
their rights inviolable, and according to canon and
ancient custom ordain bishops among themselves.
And this was again repeated and confirmed by the
council of Trullo,3 even after the Cypriots were
driven into another country by the incursions of the
barbarians. Others" observe the same privilege in the Iberian
churches, now commonly called Georgians ; that
they never were subject either to the patriarch of
Constantinople, or any other ; but all their bishops,
being eighteen in number, profess absolute obe
dience to their own metropolitan, without any other
higher dependence or relation.
And this was the case of the Armenian churches
in the time of Photius, as appears from an ancient
Greek notitia episcopatuum, cited by Peter de Marca,5
which says it was an avroxkipaXog, and not subject
to the throne of Constantinople, but honoured with
independence in respect to St. Gregory of Armenia,
their first apostle.
And this was also the ancient liberty of the Bri
tannic church, before the coming of Austin the
monk, when the seven British bishops, which were
all that were then remaining, paid obedience to the
archbishop of Caer-Leon, and acknowledged no
superior in spirituals above him. As Dinothus, the
learned abbot of Bangor, told Austin5 in the name
of all the Britannic churches, that they owed no
other obedience to the pope of Rome, than they did
to every godly Christian, to love every one in his
degree in perfect charity : other obedience than this
they knew none due to him whom he named pope,
&c. But they were under the government of the

bishop of Caer-Leon upon Uske, who was their
overseer under God.
Besides all these, there was yet a

Sect. 3.

third sort of auTOKk^aXoi, which were J,^^f
such bishops as were subject to no »"« "uijoEt " no
metropolitan, but immediately under SlTthe^atri-'
, , . . . - , . t , arch of the diocese.
the patriarch of the diocese, who was
to them instead of a metropolitan. Thus for
instance, in the patriarchate or large diocese of
Constantinople, the ancient Notitia, published by
Leunclavius,7 reckons thirty-nine such bishops
throughout the several provinces : that published
by Dr. Beverege8 counts them forty-one, and the
Notitia in Carolus a Sancto Paulo9 augments the
number to forty-six. The bishop of Jerusalem is
said10 to have had twenty-five such bishoprics in
his patriarchate, and the bishop of Antioch sixteen,
as Nilus Doxopatrius, a writer of the eleventh cen
tury, in his book of the patriarchal sees, informs us.
But what time this sort of independent bishoprics
were first set up in the church, is not certain : for
the earliest account we have of them is in the No
titia of the emperor Leo Sapiens, written in the
ninth century, where they are called archbishoprics,
as in some other Notitia's they are called metropo
litical sees ; though both these names were but
titular, for they had no suffragan bishops under
them. Valesius mentions another sort of Sect 4.
avronipaXot, which were such bishops a fourth sort of.
as were wholly independent of all
others : as they had no suffragans under them, so
neither did they acknowledge any superior above
them, whether metropolitan, or patriarch, or any
other whatsoever. Of this sort he reckons the bi
shops of Jerusalem11 before they were advanced to
patriarchal dignity : but in this instance he plainly
mistakes, and contradicts St. Jerom, who says ex
pressly, that the bishop of Jerusalem was subject
to the bishop of Caesarea, as the metropolitan of all
Palestine, and to the bishop of Antioch, as metro
pohtan of the whole East, as has been noted in the
last chapter. If there were any such bishops as he
speaks of, they must be such as the bishop of Tomis
in Scythia, who, as Sozomen12 notes, was the only
bishop of all the cities of that province : so that
he could neither have any suffragans under him,
nor metropohtan above him. But such instances
are very rare, and we scarce meet with such an
other example in all the history of the church. I
have now completed the account of primitive bi
shops, and showed the distinctions which were

1 Balsam, in Con. Constan. 1. can. 2.
2 Con. Ephes. Act. 7. Decret. de Cypr. Epis.
8 Con. Trull, can. 39.
4 Brerewood, Enquir. c. 18. Chytraeus de Statu Eccles. &c.
« Marca, de Primat. u. 27. p. 122.
6 Spelman. Con. Brit. an. 601. t. 1. p. 108.

' Leunclav. Jus. Gr. Rom. t. 1. lib. 2. p. 88.
8 Bevereg. Pandect, t. 2. Not. in can. 36. Concil. Trull.
9 Car. a S. Paulo, Append, ad Geogr. Sacr. p. 10.
10 Nilus Doxopatr. ap. le Moyne Varia Sacra, t. 1.
11 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 5. c. 23. See chap. 17. sect. 7
12 Sozim. lib. 6. u. 21. lib. 7. c. 19.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

76among them in the external polity of the church :
I proceed in the next place therefore to consider
the second order of the clergy, which is that of
presbyters.

Book II.

CHAPTER XIX.

OF PRESBYTERS.

The name, Trpeo-^urepot, presbyters or
The meaning of elders, is a word borrowed from the
" * "' Greek translation of the Old Testa
ment, where it commonly signifies rulers and go
vernors, being (as St. Jerom1 notes) a name of
office and dignity, and not a mere indication of
men's age : for elders were chosen, not by their age,
but by their merits and wisdom. So that, as a
senator among the Romans, and an alderman in
our own language, signifies a person of such an
order and station, without any regard to his age ; in
hke manner, a presbyter or elder in the Christian
church, is one who is ordained to a certain office,
and authorized by his quality, not by his age, to
discharge the several duties of that office and sta
tion wherein he is placed.
«, , „ And in this large, extensive sense,
Sect. 3. nil-
.ho^sori'f it is readily granted by all, that bi-
caiied presbjter,. shopS are sometimes called presbyters
in the New Testament ; for the apostles themselves
do not refuse the title. On the other hand, it is
the opinion of many learned men, both ancient2
and modern,8 that presbyters were sometimes called
bishops, whilst the bishops that were properly such
were distinguished by other titles, as that of chief
priests and apostles, &c, of which I have given a
particular account in one of the preceding chapters,
and there evinced that they who maintained this
identity of names, did not thence infer an identity
of offices, but always esteemed bishops and pres
byters to be distinct orders.
rf 3 Here then, taking presbyters in the
p,I.beyteiiSpr'oap4 strictest sense, for those only of the
so called. second order, we must first inquire into
their original. The learned Dr. Hammond4 ad
vances an opinion about this matter, which is some
thing singular: he asserts, that in Scripture times
the name of presbyters belonged principally, if not

alone, to bishops ; and that there is no evidence,
that any of this second order were then instituted,
though soon after, he thinks, before the writing of
Ignatius's Epistles, there were such instituted in all
churches. The authorities he builds upon are
Clemens Romanus and Epiphanius, who say, that
in some churches at first there were bishops and
deacons, without any presbyters. But I conceive
it will not hence follow, that it was so in all
churches : nor does Epiphanius maintain that, but
the contrary, that as in some churches 5 there were
only bishops and deacons, so in others there were
only presbyters and deacons ; and that in large and
populous churches the apostles settled both bishops,
presbyters, and deacons; as at Ephesus, where
Timothy was bishop, and had presbyters subject to
him; which Epiphanius proves from Scripture:
That a bishop and presbyter, says he, are not the
same, the apostle informs us, when writing to Timo
thy, who was a bishop, he bids him not rebuke an
elder, but entreat him as a father. How comes the
bishop to be concerned not to rebuke an elder, if
he had no power over an elder ? In like manner
the apostle says, Against an elder receive not an ac
cusation, but before two or three witnesses : but he
never said to any presbyter, Receive not an accus
ation against a bishop ; nor did he ever write to
any presbyter, not to rebuke a bishop. This plainly
implies, that in all such large and populous churches
as that of Ephesus, according to Epiphanius, all
the three orders of bishops, presbyters, and deacons
were settled by the apostles; though the smaller
churches were differently supplied at first, some only
with presbyters and deacons, before bishops were
constituted in them, and others only with bishops and
deacons without any presbyters. For all churches
had not immediately all the same church officers
upon their first foundation, but time was required
to complete their constitution, as Bishop Pearson'
has observed on this very passage of Epiphanius.
Admitting then that presbyters, as Sect 4,
well as bishops, were originally set- p™iieges'ofpresbj.
tied in the church by the apostles,
we are next to inquire into the power and privileges
that were proper to their order. And here I shall
have occasion to say the less, having already showed
what offices they might perform by virtue of their
ordinary power, only acting in dependence on and
subordination to their bishop, as the supreme minis
ter of the church : they might baptize, preach, con-

1 Hieron. in Esai. iii. t. 5. p. 16. in Scripturis Sanctis
presbyteros merito et sapientia eligi, non aetate.
2 Chrysost. Horn. 1. in Phil. i. It. Horn. 11. in 1 Tim. iii.
Theodoret, Com. in Phil. i. 1. It. in Phil. ii. 25. et in 1 Tim.
iii. 1. Ambrosiaster, in Eph. iv. 11. Hieron. Com. in Tit. i.
Ep. 83. ad Ocean, et 85. ad Evagr.
3 Usser. Dissert, in Ignat. c. 18. p. 232. It. Orig. of
Bish. et Metrop. p. 55. Coteler. Not. in Ignat. Ep. ad

Magnes. ... 1.
4 Ham. Annot. on Acts xi. 30.
5 Epiph. Haer. 75. Aerian. n. 5.
6 Pearson, Vind. Ignat. par. 2. c. 13. p. 412. In aliquibus
ecclesiis ab origine fuisse presbyteros, nondum constitute
episcopis ; in aliquibus episcopos, nondum constitutis pres
byteris. 7 See before, chap. 3.

Chap. XIX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

77

secrate and administer the eucharist, &c. in the
bishop's absence, or in his presence, if he authorized
and deputed them, as has been noted before : they
might also reconcile penitents, and grant them ab
solution in the bishop's absence : and some think
they had power likewise to confirm in cases of ne
cessity by special licence and delegation. But these
two things will be considered and discussed more
particularly hereafter, when we come to treat of
disciphne and confirmation. What is further to be
noted in this place, is the honour and respect that
was paid to them, acting in conjunction with their
bishop, who scarce did any thing in the adminis
tration and government of the church, without the
advice, consent, and amicable concurrence of his
presbyters. Hence it was that presbyters were
Presbyters allowed allowed to sit together with the bi
shop on thrones in shop in the church (which privilege
was never allowed to deacons) : and
their seats were dignified with the name of thrones,
as the bishop's was, only with this difference, that
his was the high throne, and theirs the second
thrones. In allusion to this, Gregory Nazianzen,9
speaking of his own ordination to the degree of
presbyter, says, his father who ordained him, brought
him by violence to the second thrones. And in his
vision concerning the church of Anastasia,9 he thus
represents the several orders of the church : Me-
thought I saw myself (the bishop) sitting on the
high throne, and the presbyters, that is, the guides
of the Christian flock, sitting on both sides by me
on lower thrones, and the deacons standing by
them. By this we may understand what Constan
tine meant in his letter to Chrestus bishop of Syra
cuse,10 when giving him a summons to the council
of Aries, he bids him also bring with him two of
the second throne, that is, two presbyters. And
what Eusebius means by those words in his pane
gyric " upon the temple of Paulinus, where he says,
he beautified and adorned the structure with thrones
set up on high for the honour of the presidents or
rulers. By which it is plain he means the thrones
of the presbyters, as well as the bishop ; for they
were both exalted above the seats of the common
people. Nay, both the name and thing was then

Sect. 6.
The form of their
asemicir-

so usual, that Aerius drew it into an argument,12 to
prove the identity and parity of bishops and presby
ters : a bishop sits upon a throne, and so does a
presbyter likewise. Which though it be but a very,
lame and foolish argument to prove what he intend
ed, yet it is a plain intimation of what has here
been noted to have been the then known custom and
practice of the church. And little regard is to be
had to those modern authors, who pretend to say
that presbyters had not power to sit in the presence
of their bishops; which is confuted by the acts
and canons ls almost of every council, and the writ
ings of every ancient author, in which nothing
more commonly occurs than the phrases, consessus
presbyterorum, and sedere in presbyterio, importing
the custom and privilege whereof we are now
speaking. There is one thing further to be
noted concerning the manner of their sitting hi'
sitting, which was on each hand of t'enlt\\eic^Sm
the bishop, in the form or figure of a p'"hyUr"-
semicircle ; which is described by the author " of the
Constitutions under the name of Clemens Romanus,
and Gregory Nazianzen, and others. Whence, as
the bishop's throne is called the middle throne, or
the middle seat, by Theodoret15 and the Constitu
tions ; so for the same reason Ignatius16 and the
Constitutions17 term the presbyters the spiritual
crown or circle of the presbytery, and the crown of
the church : unless we will take this for a meta
phorical expression, to denote only that presby
ters, united with their bishop, were the glory of the
church. This honour was done them in re- „ . ,
Sect. 7.
gard to their authority in the church, J^T^T
wherein they were considered as a cUrc^vlhom'rhe
. r, i • . • i , ¦. bishop consulted
sort of ecclesiastical senate, or council and advised with
,, . . , ¦, t . upon all occasions.
to the bishop, who scarce did any
thing of great weight and moment without asking
their advice, and taking their consent, to give the
greater force and authority to all public acts done
in the name of the church. Upon which account,
St. Chrysostom18 and Synesius19 style them the
court or sanhedrim of the presbyters ; and Cyprian,20
the sacred and venerable bench of the clergy ; St.
Jerom21 and others,22 the church's senate, and the

8 Naz. Carm, de Vita, kuutttei /3tatois sis Sevtepovs Srpo-
vovs. 9 Id. Somn. de Ecclesia Anastasia;. Orat. 20. de Laud.
Basil, p. 4. iEVTEpa -rf/s KaSiipas.
10 A p. Euseb, lib. 10. c. 5. Svo y^Tivas two ix toO Sev-
Tipov Spovov.
11 Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4. 12 Epiphan. Hasr. 75. Aerian.
18 Con. Carthag. 4, e. 35, 36. Euseb. lib. 5. c. 20. Origen.
Horn. 2. in Cantic. Urn. Iiaudic. v. 56. Constit. Apost. lib.
2. c. 57. Con. Ancyr. c. 18.
14 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57 Keto-3-m Si picros 6 tov
LTTlnKOTrav Srpovos, &c.
15 Theod, Hist, lib, 5. c. 3. '0 /uso-os floj/cos

16 Ignat. Ep. ad Magnes, ... 13. irvEvpaTiKov ^iepavov t»
nrpEcrtvTEp iov.
17 Constitut. lib. 2. c. 28. TEebavov EKKXnarias.
18 Chrys. de Sacerdot. lib, 3. c. 15. to tw irpEatvTipan)
ervviSpiov. 19 Synes. Ep. 67. ad Theoph.
20 Cypr. Ep. 55. al. 59. ad Cornel. Cleri sacrum veneran-
dumque consessum. Concjl. Carth. 4. c. 35. Episcopus
in consessu presbyterorum sqblimior sedeat, &c.
21 Hieron. in Esai. iii. tom, 5. p. 17. Et nos habemus in
ecclesia senatum nostrum, ccetum presbyterorum.
22 Pius, Ep.- 2. ad Just. Vien. Salutat te senatus pauper
Christi apud Komam constitutus.

7S

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

senate of Christ ; Origen23 and the author of the
Constitutions,24 the bishop's counsellors, and the
council of the church : because though the bishop
was prince and head of this ecclesiastical senate,
and nothing could regularly be done without him ;
yet neither did he ordinarily do any pubhc act, re
lating to the government or discipline of the church,
without their advice and assistance.
The first ages afford the most preg-
some evidences nant proofs of this Divine harmony
out of Ignatius and r
pSe'^Vreroga- between the bishop and his presby-
fn'co^uEion'ffth ters. For any one that ever looked
the bishop. into the writjngs 0f Cyprian, must ac
knowledge, that at Rome and Carthage, the two
great churches of the West, all things were thus
transacted by joint consent : the bishop with his
clergy did communi consilio ponderare,25 weigh things
by common advice and deliberation ; whether it was
in the ordinations of the clergy, (for Cyprian would
not so much as ordain a subdeacon or a reader
without their consent,) or whether it was in the
exercise of discipline and reconciliation of penitents,
Cyprian declares26 his resolution to do all by com
mon consent. And so Cornelius at the same time
acted at Rome : for when Maximus and the rest of
the confessors, who had sided with Novatian, came
afterward and made confession of their error, and
desired to be admitted again into the communion of
the church, Cornelius would do nothing in it, till
he had first called a presbytery, and taken both their
advice and consent27 in the affair, that he might
proceed according to their unanimous resolution.
Cyprian, in several other of his epistles,28 speaks of
the same deference paid to his presbytery, and in
one place he more particularly tells them, that it
was a law and a rule29 that he had laid down to him
self, from the first entrance on his bishopric, that he
would do nothing without their advice, and the'
consent of the people. Epiphanius observes the
same practice at Ephesus in the condemnation of
Noetus : for first, he says, he was convened before
the presbytery,30 and then again upon a relapse by
I hem expelled the church. Which at least must

mean, that the bishop and his presbyters joined to
gether in this ecclesiastical censure. In like man
ner, speaking of the first condemnation of Arius, he
says, Alexander, bishop of Alexandria,3' called a
presbytery against him, before whom, and some bi
shops then present, he examined him, and expelled
him. Cotelerius, in his Notes upon the Constitutions,
has pubhshed, from an ancient manuscript, one of
the forms of Arius's deposition,32 which may give
some light to this matter. For thereby it appears,
that when Alexander sent forth his circular letters
to all other bishops against Arius, he first summoned
all the presbyters and deacons of Alexandria, and
region of Mareotes, not only to hear what he had
written, but also to testify their consent to it, and
declare that they agreed with him in the condemna
tion of Arius. From whence we learn, that though
the deposition was properly the bishop's act, yet, to
have it done with the greater solemnity, the consent
both of the presbyters and deacons was required to
it. And thus it was also in the condemnation of
Origen : the council of Alexandria, which expelled
him the city, was composed both of bishops and
presbyters, who decreed that he should remove from
Alexandria, and neither teach nor inhabit there, as
Pamphilus33 relates in the second book of his Apo
logy for Origen, some fragments of which are pre
served in Photius. The council of Rome, that was
gathered against Novatian, consisted of sixty bi
shops, and many more34 presbyters and deacons.
The first council of Antioch, that was held against
Paulus Samosatensis, had also35 presbyters and dea
cons in it ; the name of one of them, Malchion, a
presbyter of Antioch, is still remaining in the syno
dical epistle among the bishops in the inscription.
From all which it appears, that this was an an
cient privilege of presbyters, to sit and dehberatewith
bishops both in their consistorial and provincial
councils. And if we ascend yet higher, we shall
find matters always thus transacted in the church
ab origine ; as appears from Ignatius, whose writings
(as a learned man observes,36) speak as much for the
honour of the presbytery, as they do for the superi-

23 Orig. Com. in Mat. tovXij iicKX-rtcrLas. Pearson, Vind.
Ignat. par. l.c. 11. p. 321. Hi autem tovXEVTal Chris
tiani sane fuerunt presbyteri.
24 Const. Apost. lib. 2. c. 28. (TvptovXoL tov iiriarKOirov,
ervviSpiov Kal ~€ovXi) tTjs fiK/cXijcrias.
a Cypr. Ep. 33. al38. ad Cler. In ordinationibus cleri
cis solemus vos ante consulere, et mores ac merita singulo-
ruin communi consilio ponderare.
26 Id. Ep. 6. al. 14. ad Cler. Ut ea quae circa ecclesiae
gubemaculum utilitas communis exposcit, tractare sitnul, et
plurimorum consilio examinata limare possemus.
27 Cornel. Ep. 46. al. 49. ad Cypr. p. 92. Omni actu ad
me perlato, placuit contrahi presbyterium — ut firmato con
silio, quid circa personam eorum observari deberet, con
sensu omnium statueretur.
28 Cypr. Ep. 21. al. 29. ad Cler. Ep. 32. ad Cler.
20 Cypr. Ep. 6. al. 14. Quando a primordio episcopatus

mei statuerim, nihil sine consilio vestro, et sine consensu
plebis, mea privata sententia gerere : sed cum ad vos per
Dei gratiam venero — in commune tractabimus.
30 Epiph. Haer. 57. u. 1. i-irl irpEo-tvTEpiov ayoptvoi.
Ibid, oi ai/Tol irpEcrtuTEpOL ifciwcrav abTov t?Js e/ckXtjo-kis.
31 Epiph. Hser. 69. Arian n. 3. o-uy/caXelxat to irpEatn-
TEpiov, ko.1 aXXous -rivets iiTLeTKoiTovi irapovTas, &c.
32 Depositio Arii ap. Coteler. Not. in Constit. Apost. lib.
8. c. 28. "Iva Kal Ta vvv ypaepopEva yvwTE, TJjf TE EV
toutois (Tvpcprvviav iavTOjv £-7Tt5£t^rjo-0E, KalTlj KavaipEOEl
Ttiiv irepl " ApEiov cri;iit|rriepoi yivrjadE.
33 Pamphil. Apol. ap. Phot. Cod. 118 p. 298. SiWos
aQpoi^ETai. iirLerKoireov Kal Tivatv TrpEafivTEpayv KCtT upl-
yivovs. 84 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43. 35 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 28.
30 Pearson, Vind. Ignat. par. 2. c. 16. p. 428. Si quid
ego in hac re intelligo, quicunque presbyterali dignitati

Chap. XIX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

79

ority of episcopacy ; no ancient author having given
so many great and noble characters of the presby
tery, as he does. For which reason it concerns
those, who are most zealous for the honour and au
thority of presbyters, to look upon Ignatius as one
of the best asserters and defenders of their power and
reputation. For he always joins the bishops and
presbyters together, as presiding over the church,
the one in the place of God and Jesus Christ, and
the other as the great council of God in the room of
the apostles. Thus in his epistle37 to the Ephesians,
he bids them be subject to the bishop and the pres
bytery : and in his epistle to the Magnesians,39 he
commends Sotion the deacon, because he was sub
ject to the bishop, as the gift of God, and to the
presbytery, as the law of Christ. And a httle after
in the same epistle, he speaks of the bishop as pre
siding39 in the place of God, and the presbyters in
the place of the council of apostles. So in his epistle
to the Trallians,40 he bids them be subject to the
presbytery, as to the apostles of Jesus Christ. And
again, Reverence the presbyters,41 as the council of
God, and the united company of apostles. Without
which no church is called a church. Several other
passages of the same importance may be seen in his
epistles to Polycarp and the church of Smyrna.42
And indeed all his epistles are so

Sect 9.
The power of

pSytersThought f«U °f cF^4 eulogiums of the presby-
KSmfnihedin'the tery, as acting in the nature of an ec-
fourth century. clesiastical senate together with the bi
shop, that our late learned defender of those epistles
thence concludes, that the power and privileges of
presbyteries was greater in the second century, when
Igurtius lived, than in the fourth age of the church,
when he thinks the power and authority of presby
teries was a httle sunk and diminished over all the
world, and even at Alexandria itself, where it had
most of all flourished. And this he makes an argu
ment of the antiquity of those epistles, that they
were the genuine product of Ignatius, because no
one of the fourth age would have given such encor
miums of the presbytery, or armed ° them with so
great authority and power. I shall not dispute this
matter, nor enter upon any nice comparison of the

different powers of presbyters in these two ages, but
only represent to the reader what privileges still re
mained to them in the fourth century.
And here it cannot be denied, but
that in this age, in the ordination of Yet stiii'thej were
admitted to join
a presbyter, all the presbyters that ™th the bishop in
* * A * the imposition of
were present were allowed, nay, even h?nds y ""» °td,n-
* ' J ' ation of presbytere.
required, to join with the bishop in
imposition of hands upon the party to be ordained.
That it was so in the African churches is beyond
all dispute ; for in the fourth council of Carthage,44
there is a canon expressly enjoining it: When a
presbyter is ordained, while the bishop pronounces
the benediction, and lays his hand upon his head
all the presbyters that are present shah lay their
hands by the bishop's hand upon his head also.
And this in all likelihood was the universal practice
of the church. For in the Constitutions of the
Church of Alexandria,45 there is a rule to the same
purpose. In the Latin church the decree of the
council of Carthage seems also to have prevailed,
because it is inserted into their canon law by Gra
tian46 and other collectors, from whence it became
the common practice of our own church, which is
continued to this day. Some ancient canons47 in
deed say, that one bishop alone shall ordain a pres
byter; but that is not said to exclude presbyters
from assisting, but only to put a difference between
the ordination of a bishop and a presbyter ; for the
ordination of a bishop could not regularly be per
formed without the concurrence of three bishops
with the metropolitan; but a presbyter might be
ordained by a single bishop, without any other as
sistance, save that of his presbyters joining with
him. And this plainly appears to have been the
practice of the fourth century.
It is further evident from the re- Sec( „
cords of the same age, that presbyters ,/i„dc„!S>
had still the privilege of sitting in "iththeir bi5hop5'
consistory with their bishops. For Pope Siricius,
in the latter end of this century, acted as Cornelius
had done before him. When he went about to con
demn the errors of Jovinian, he first called48 a pres
bytery, and with their advice censured his doctrines,

auctoritatique maxime student, non habent suae existima-
tionis firmius aut solidius fundamentum, quam epistolas
sancti Ignatii nostri : neque enim in ullo vere antiquo
Scriptore extra has epistolas tot aq tanta presbyteratus
praeconia invenient, neque illius ordinis honorern sine epis
copatus praerogativa ullibi constitutum reperient.
37 Ignat. Ep. ad Ephes. u. 2. viroraaaopEvoi too iirta-
KOTrcp Kal TrpEOrf3vTEpiet>.
38 Ep. ad. Magnes. n.2.
39 Ep. ad Magnes. u. 6. TlpoKaOypivov iirierKoirov eis
to-itov Qeov, Kal toov irpEerfSvTLpeov eis tottov avvESpiov twv
airoaToXeov. 40 Ep. ad Trail, n. 2. *Y7roT-ao-o-£o-0£ Tea TrpEtrfivTEpim uts
-pus (r7roo"ro^.ots.
?' Ityid. n. 3, 'Qs crvviSpiov Beov, Kal (is o-vvSeapov
dlraaToXqiv. Xcopts TOVTitiv EKK\tto-ia ov KaXEiTai.
42 Ep. ad Polycarp. u. 6. Ep. ad Smyrn. n. 8.

48 Pearson, Vindic. Ignat. par. 2. c. 16. p. 428. Nemo
tarn seris ecclesiae temporibus — Presbyterium tot laudibus
cumulasset, tanta auctoritate armasset, cujus potestas ea
tempestate, etiam Alexandrice, ubi maxime fioruerat, tan-
topere imminuta est. •
44 Con. Carth. 4. c. 3. Presbyter cum ordinatur, epis
copo eum benedicente, et manum super caput ejus tenente,
etiam omries presbyteri, qui praesentes sunt, manus suas
juxta manum episcopi super caput illius teneant.
45 Eccl. Alex. Constit. c. 6. ap. Bevereg. Not. in Canon.
Apost. c. 2. Cum vult episcopus ordinare presbyterum,
manum suam capiti ejus imponat, simulque omnes presby
teri istud tangant.
40 Grat. Dist. 23. c. 8. Ivo Part. 6. c. 12.
47 Can. Apost. u. 2. Con. Carthag. 3. c. 45.
48 Siric. Ep. 2. ad Eccles. Mediolan. Facto presbyterio,
constitit doctrinae nostra, id est, Chrislianae, legi esse con-

80

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

and then, with the consent of the deacons also and
the rest of the clergy, expelled him the church.
And so likewise Synesius, bishop of Ptolemais, pro
ceeded against Andronicus, the impious and blas
pheming prefect of Pentapolis ; he first laid open
his horrible crimes before the consistory of his
church, and then, with their consent, pronounced
the sentence of excommunication against him;
which he therefore calls the act of the consistory,49
or sanhedrim of Ptolemais, in the circular letters
which he wrote to give notice of his excommunica
tion to other churches. Baronius indeed, and the
common editors of the councils, reckon this by mis
take among the provincial synods ; but it appears
evidently from Synesius, that it was only the private
consistory of the church of Ptolemais ; for he says
expressly,50 The church of Ptolemais gave notice of
this excommunication to all her sister churches
throughout the world, requiring them to hold An
dronicus excommunicated, and not to despise her
act, as being only a poor church in a small city.
Which agrees very well with the state of a private
consistory, but is not spoken in the style of a pro
vincial council. Yet this is not said with any design
to deny that presbyters were allowed
to sit in provincial synods ; for there
are undeniable evidences of their enjoying this
privilege within the compass of the fourth century,
and after ages also. In the council of Eliberis,
which was held in the beginning of the fourth age,
there were no less than thirty-six presbyters 51 sit
ting together with the bishops, as is expressly said
in the acts of the council. The first council of
Aries, called by Constantine, had also several pres
byters in it, the names of many of which are lost,
as are also the names of most of the bishops, who
were two hundred, yet the names of fifteen presby
ters52 are still remaining. And it is observable, that
in Constantine's tractoriee, or letters of summons,
the presbyters, as well as bishops, were called by
imperial edict to attend at that council ; if we may
judge of all the rest by that one example, which re

sect. 12.
As also in pro
vincial councils.

mains upon record in Eusebius ; for there, in the
letter sent to summon Chrestus, bishop of Syracuse,
orders are given him53 to bring along with him two
of the second throne ; which phrase, as has been
observed before, denotes two presbyters. So that
from hence it is clear, that presbyters were then
privileged to sit in council with their bishops, and
that by imperial edict. In Justellus's Bibliotheca
Juris Canonici, there are three or four Roman
councils, where the presbyters are particularly men
tioned as sitting, and sometimes voting with the
bishops. In the council under Hilarius, anno 461,
the presbyters of Rome all sat54 together with the
bishops, and the deacons stood by them. So again
in the council under Felix, anno 487,55 the names
of seventy-six presbyters are mentioned that sat to
gether with the bishops in council, the deacons as
before standing by them. And in the council un
der Symmachus, anno 499, sixty-seven presbyters
and six deacons subscribed in the very same form
of words 56 as the bishops did. In another council
under the same Symmachus, anno 502, thirty-six
presbyters are named,57 who sat therein. And in
the council under Gregory II., anno 7\b, the bi
shops, presbyters, and deacons all subscribe in the
same form58 to the decrees then pubhshed by them
all together.
The like instances may be seen in the first coun
cils of Toledo,59 and Bracara,60 where we may also
observe the difference made between presbyters and
deacons ; that the presbyters are always represent
ed as sitting together with their bishops, but the
deacons only standing by to attend them. All which
notwithstanding, Cellotius the Jesuit, and some
others of that strain, have the confidence to assert,
that presbyters were never allowed to sit with bi
shops in their councils. Bellarmin61 does not go so
far, but only denies them a decisive voice there : in
which assertion he is opposed, not only by the
generality of protestant writers,62 but also by Ha-
bertus63 and other learned defenders64 of the GaUi
can liberties in his own communion. So that it is
agreed on all hands by unprejudiced writers, and

traria  TJnde omnium nostrorum tarn presbyterorum et
diaconorum, quam totius cleri unam scitote fuisse senten-
tiam, ut Jovinianus, Auxentius, &c, in perpetuum damnati,
extra ecclesiam remanerent.
19 Synes. Ep. 57. p. 190. Nuut Si oh to avviSpiov /iet-
jJ\0E Ti]V ' AvSpov'iKOv paviav, aKovaaTE.
50 Id. Ep. 58. p. 199.
51 Con. Eliber. Prooem. Residentibus etiam 36 [al. 26]
presbyteris, astantibus diaconibus et omni plebe.
52 Con. Arelat. 1. in Catalogo eorum qui Concilio inter-
ftierunt. In Edit. Crab, male vocatur Secundum.
58 Euseb. lib. 10. C. 5. Su^Et^as OEavTio /cat Svo yi Tl-
I/CIS TU1V £K TOV StVTEpOV SpOVOV.
54 Con. Rom. ap. Justel. 1. 1. p. 250. Residentibus etiam
universis presbyteris, adstantibus quoque diaconis, &c.
5S Ibid. p. 255.
56 Ibid. p. 259. Subscripserunt presbyteri numero 67.
Oaelius Laurentius archipresbyter tituli Praxedis hie sub-

scripsi et consensi synodalibus constitutis, atque in hac me
profiteor manere sententia, &c.
57 Ibid. p. 261. Residentibus etiam presbyteris, Projecti-
tio, Martino, &c. Adstantibus quoque diaconis.
58 Ibid. p. 234. Sisinnius presbyter huic constituto, a nobis
promulgato, subscripsi. Petrus archidiaconus huic consti
tuto, a nobis promulgato subscripsi.
39 Con. Tolet. 1. Convenientibus episcopis in ecclesia—
considentibus presbyteris, astantibus diaconis, &c.
60 Con. Bracar. 2. Considentibus simul episcopis, prae-
sentibus quoque presbyteris, astantibusque ministris, vel
universo clero.
61 Bellarm. de Concil. lib. 1. c. 15.
62 Morton, Apol. Cathol. part 2. lib. 4. <;. 8. Whitaker,
de Concil. Quaest. 3.
63 Habertus, Not. in lib. Pontiff. Greegor. p. 175.
64 Ranchin, Review of the Council of Trent, lib. 1. c. 8.

Chap. XIX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

81

curious searchers of antiquity, that presbyters had
hberty to sit and deliberate with bishops in pro
vincial councils. But to general or universal coun-
And mineral cils, there are some protestant writers,
councils likewise. '
who seem to make it a dispute, whe
ther presbyters anciently were allowed to sit in
them. A learned person65 of our own church says,
It was never before heard of, that priests did sit in
oecumenical councils, meaning, before the council
of Lateran under Callistus the Second, anno 1123,
where six hundred abbots were present. But I see
no reason why we may not reckon the first council
of Aries a general council, if a multitude of bishops
from all quarters can make it so : for there were
two hundred bishops present ; and, as I noted be
fore, several presbyters were ordered to come along
with them. However, the council of Constantinople,
anno 381, is reckoned by all a general council
(though there were but one hundred and fifty bi
shops in it) ; and there we find three presbyters
together66 subscribing among the bishops also. The*
learned Habertus Ogives several other instances out
of the council of Chalcedon, the second council of
Nice, the eighth council called against Photius,
and others. From all which, and what has here
been alleged, it must be concluded, that presbyters
had anciently the privilege of sitting and voting also
in general councils. These prerogatives of presbyters,
honour" 'v'en'ttf heing thus allowed in so many cases
sES:l?"hatM to act in conjunction with their bi-
befwe^them'aT1* shops, advanced their character and
appUed to both. ... i • r -, -i ,1
reputation very high, and made them
of great esteem in the church : insomuch that many
of the same titles of honour, which were given to
bishops, were with a httle variation given to pres
byters also. Hence they are called irpoeSpot, by
Synesius and Eusebius;69 5rpos-=r<uTe-c, by Nazianzen
and Basil;69 irpo^drai, by Chrysostom and Nazi
anzen70 likewise : which names answer to the titles
of prespositi and antistites in Latin, and signify
presidents, or rulers and governors of the people.

I know indeed some learned persons 71 are of opinion,
that the name antistes is never given to any pres
byter by any ancient writer. But this assertion
must be understood with a httle qualification ;
otherwise it will not be exactly true : for Hilarius
Sardus,'2 speaking of presbyters, against whom a
bishop is not to receive an accusation, but before
two or three witnesses, gives them expressly the
title of antistites Dei. So does also the author73 of
the Questions upon the Old and New Testament
under the name of St. Austin. And though pres
positi in Cyprian's epistles commonly signifies
bishops, yet it does not always so : for the pres
byters of Rome, writing74 to the clergy of Carthage,
style themselves prcepositi ; and Celerinus,75 in his
epistle to Lucian, gives them the same title. But
Sidonius Apollinaris 76 sets this matter right, when
he teacheth us to distinguish between an antistes
of the first order, and an antistes of the second j
which distinction, whenever presbyters are called
antistites, if it be not expressed, is always to be un
derstood. Therefore Blondel argues very loosely,
when he would infer from this community of names
and titles, that bishops and presbyters were but one
and the same order. Which might as well be in
ferred from the name, sacerdotes, priests, which so
frequently occurs in the ancient writers ; and, as
Cyprian observes,77 denotes an honour common both
to bishops and presbyters : though when there was
occasion to speak more accurately and distinctly of
bishops, their appropriate title was that of summi
sacerdotes, chief priests, to distinguish them from
those of the inferior order, as I have showed before
in speaking of the titles of bishops; to which I
shall only add here the testimony of Optatus, who78
gives both bishops, priests, and deacons the name
of priests, and their office the name of priesthood .
but with this difference, that the deacons were only
in the third degree of priesthood, and the presbyters
in the second, but the bishops were the heads and
chief of all. From whence it is plain, that if a bare
community of names argued an identity of offices,
one might as well infer, that bishops and deacons,

65 Bishop Burnet's Vindication of the Ordination, &c.
Pref. p. 32.
66 Con. Constantin. t. 2. p. 957. Tyrannus presbyter
Amorii : Auxanon presbyter Apameae : Helladius presbyter
Commanensis. 67 Habert. Not. in Pontif. p. 175.
K Synes. Ep. 12. Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4.
69 Naz. Orat. 1. Basil. Reg. Moral. 70.
70 Chrys. Horn. 11. in 1 Tim. iv. 1. Naz. Orat. I. p. 37.
" Bevereg. Not. in Concil. Ancyr. c. 13. Neque enim
presbyter unquam antistes dicitur.
72 Ambros. al. Hilar. Com. in 1 Tim. v. Hujus ordinis
sublimis honor est; hujusmodi enim vicarii sunt Christi:
idcirco non facile de hac persona accusatio debet admitti.
Incredibile enim debet videri, istum qui Del antistes est,
criminose versatum.
's Aug. Quaest. Vet. et Nov. Test. c. 101. Propter quod
G

antistites Dei sunt, in domo Dei et in honore Christi cum
dignitate consistunt.
74 Ep. 3. al. 8. ap. Cyprian. Cum incumbat nobis qui
videmur praepositi esse, et vice pastoris custodire gregem.
75 Celerin. Ep. 21. ap. Cypr. Praeceperunt eos praepositi
tantisper sic esse, donee episcopus constituatur.
76 Sidon. lib. 4. Ep. 11. Antistes fuit ordine in secundo,
fratrem fasce levans episcopali.
77 Cypr. Ep. 58. al. 61. ad Lucium, p. 145. Presbyteri
cum episcopo sacerdotali honore conj uncti.
79 Optat. lib. 1. p. 35. Quid commemorem diaconos in
tertio ? Quid presbyteros in secundo sacerdotio constitutos?
Ipsi apices et principes omnium, aliqui episcopi illis tem-
poribus — Instrumenta divinae legis impie tradiderunt. Con
fer Hieron. Epist. 27, where he calls presbyters, secundi
ordinis sacerdotes.

82

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

or presbyters and deacons, were but one and the
same order, because they share in the same common
titles of priest and priesthood.
If here it be inquired, as it is very
in what' sense w- natural to ask the question, Why Op-
an7oeaJons1caued tatus gives all the three orders of
priests by Optatus. bishops, presbyters, and deacons, the
title of priesthood ? the answer is plain and ob
vious : Because according to him every order had
its share, though in different degrees, in the Chris
tian priesthood. Which is not, as some imagine, a
power to offer Christ's body and blood really upon
the altar, as a propitiatory sacrifice for the quick
and dead ; (which is such a notion of the Christian
priesthood, as no ancient author or ritual ever men
tions ;) but it consists in a power and authority to
minister publicly according to God's appointment
in holy things, or things pertaining to God. And
there are several parts of this power, according to
the different participation of which, in the opinion
of Optatus, bishops, presbyters, and deacons had
each their respective share in the priesthood. Thus
it was one act of the priest's office to offer up the sa
crifice of the people's prayers, praises, and thanks
givings to God, as their mouth and orator, and to
make intercession to God for them ; another part of
the office was, in God's name to bless the people,
particularly by admitting them to the benefit and
privilege of remission of sins by spiritual regener
ation or baptism. And thus far deacons were an
ciently allowed to minister in holy things, as medi
ators between God and the people. Upon which
account a late learned writer79 joins entirely with
Optatus, in declaring deacons to be sharers in this
lowest degree of the Christian priesthood. Above
this, was the power of offering up to God the people's
sacrifices at the altar; that is, as Mr. Mede90 and
others explain them, first the eucharistical oblations
of bread and wine, to agnize or acknowledge God
to be the Lord of the creatures ; then the sacrifice
of prayer and thanksgiving in commemoration of
Christ's bloody sacrifice upon the cross, mystically
represented in the creatures of bread and wine;
which whole sacred action was commonly called the
Christian's reasonable and unbloody sacrifice, or the
sacrifice of the altar. Now, the deacons (as we shall
see in the next chapter) were never allowed to offer
these oblations at the altar, but it was always a pe
culiar act of the presbyter's office, which was there
fore reckoned a superior degree of the priesthood.
Another act of the priestly office was, to interpret
the mind and will of God to the people ; as also to
bless them solemnly in his name, and upon con-

" Dr. Hicks' Discourse of the Christian Priesthood, c. 2.
$ 5. p. 33.
80 Mede, Christ. Sacrif. c. 2. p. 356. Hicks, ibid. p. 49.
with many others cited by him.
81 Epiphanius calls it, 'iEpapyEii/ to EvayyiXtov, Haer.

fession and repentance, grant them ministerial abso
lution. And these being also the ordinary offices
of presbyters, they gave them a further title to the
priesthood. All these offices, and some more the
bishops81 could perform, such as the solemn conse
cration or benediction of persons set apart for the
ministry, &c, which, together with their spiritual
jurisdiction, or power of ruling and governing the
church, as vicars of Christ, gave them a title to a
yet higher degree of the Christian priesthood ;
whence, as I noted before, they were called chief
priests, primi sacerdotes, summi sacerdotes, principes
sacerdotum, and pontifices maximi. I know indeed, Al
baspiny and several others of the Roman82 commu
nion make a distinction between the prelatical and
sacerdotal office in a bishop, which is invented to
serve some peculiar hypotheses of their own; as,
1. That a bishop differs nothing from a presbyter
as he is a priest ; 2. That bishop and presbyter
are but one sacerdotal order; and, 3. That the
proper notion and specific character of the sacer-
' dotal order, is a power to offer Christ's body and
blood, as a propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and
dead. All which are contrary to the plain sense of
antiquity, which knew no such specific character of
the sacerdotal order, nor ever dreamt of bishops and
presbyters being but one order in reference to the
priesthood; but always spake of them as distinct
orders, and placed their distinction in their enjoy
ing different powers of the priesthood; making pres
byters only the second order, and second priesthood,
secundus ordo et secundum sacerdotium, and bishops
the first ; and asserting that the juridical acts of a
bishop were also sacerdotal, or acts of a superior
degree of the Christian priesthood pecuhar to his
order. St. Cyprian83 scruples not to call such acts,
sacerdotii vigor, the vigour and power of the episco
pal priesthood, speaking of the power and jurisdic
tion which he had as the priest of God, to punish
presbyters and deacons that were under him ; which
he had improperly called the power of his priest
hood, had his jurisdiction and priesthood been two
different powers in him. This may serve at once
to caution the reader against that subtle distinction
of the Romanists, and give him a short account
both of the nature and different degrees of the
Christian priesthood.
There is another name frequently sect, it
occurring in the Greek writers, when iS*
they speak of Christian priests, which God ""* me"'
will deserve to be explained : that is, the name,
ptefirai, mediators between God and men; a title
given them by the author of the Constitutions,"

79. n. 3. See before, chap. 2. sect. 6.
82 Bellarm. de Cleric, lib. 1. c. 11. Canisius Catech. d«
Sacram. Ord. § 4.
83 Cypr. Ep. 15. al. 20.
84 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 25.

Chap. XIX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

83

as also by Origen, Chrysostom, Basil, Isidore of
Pelusium, and many others, whose authorities are
collected by Cotelerius.85 The Latin writers are
more sparing in the use of this term ; for except
St. Jerom, Cotelerius could find none that used it.
St. Austin is so far from using it, that he condemns
it86 as intolerable in Parmenian the Donatist, who
had said, that the bishop was mediator between
God and the people. And, indeed, there is a sense
in which it is intolerable to say, there is any other
mediator besides one, the man Christ Jesus. But
the Greek fathers used the word in a qualified sense,
not for an authentic mediator, or mediator of re
demption, who pleads his own merits before God
in the behalf of others ; but only for a mediator of
ministerial intercession, in which sense some97 of
the ancients think Moses is called a mediator by
St. Paul, Gal. iii. 19, because he was the internun
cio to relate the mind of God to the people, and
the people's requests and resolutions to God again.
And in this qualified sense it is generally owned88
that Christian priests may be called mediators also,
as those that are appointed to convey the people's
devotions to God, and the will and blessing of God
to the people.
sect. n. Having thus far spoken of the se-
an™mannee°offo™ veral offices and titles of presbyters,
m.ng pres y ers. ^ remaJns jjjat J gjvg & short aCCOUnt
of the form and manner of their ordination, by
which they were invested with their power, and
authorized to perform the several duties of their
function. Now, as to this, it is plain, the ancient
form was only imposition of hands and a consecra
tion prayer. Thus it is described in the canon89 of
the council of Carthage, which has been cited be
fore, and in the author under the name of Diony
sius,90 who represents it in this manner : he says,
The person to be ordained kneeled before the bi
shop at the altar, and he, laying his hand upon his
head, did consecrate him with a holy prayer, and
then signed him with the sign of the cross ; after
which the bishop and the rest of the clergy that
were present gave him the kiss of peace. The au
thor of the Constitutions91 speaks also of imposition
of hands and prayer, but no more. From which
we may reasonably conclude, that the words which
the Roman church makes to be the most necessary
and essential part of the priest's ordination, viz.
" Receive thou power to offer sacrifice to God, and

to celebrate mass both for the living and the dead,"
were not in any of the ancient forms of consecra
tion. One of their own writers,92 Morinus, after
the most dihgent search he could make into these
matters, could find no form for nine hundred years
together, that made any mention of them. And
for their other ceremonies superadded to the old
ones, other learned writers of that church do as in
genuously confess the novelty of them. Habertus93
proves against Catumsiritus, that material unction
is a new thing, and not to be met with in any ancient
ordination ; as neither is it in use in the Greek
church at this day. So that when Gregory Nazi
anzen94 and others speak of an unction, they are
to be understood as speaking mystically of the spi
ritual unction of the Holy Ghost. Cabassutius95
observes the same of the custom of delivering the
sacred vessels into the hands of the person that was
ordained, that however some plead very stiffly for
its antiquity, yet it is really but a modern custom ;
and he cites Morinus for the same opinion. So
that I need not stand to show the novelty of these
things, which is so evidently proved, as well by the
confession of these learned men, as by the silence
of all ancient rituals. But there is one thing the
reader may be desirous to know further, viz. what
form of words the consecration prayer was con
ceived in. To which I must answer, as I have
done before about bishops, that there was no such
general form then extant ; but every bishop having
liberty to frame his own liturgy, he used such a form
as he thought convenient in his own church : it
being a thing indifferent, as a learned person96 ob
serves, so the substance of the blessing were pre
served. The only form now remaining is that which
is extant in the Constitutions, which, because it will
show the reader what was then the substance of the
benediction, I will here insert the words of it, which
are these : " Look, 0 Lord, upon this thy servant,
who is chosen into the presbytery by the suffrage
and judgment of all the clergy, and fill him with
the spirit of grace and counsel, that he may help and
govern thy people with a pure heart : in like man
ner as thou hadst respect to thy chosen people, com
manding Moses to make choice of elders, whom thou
didst replenish with thy Spirit. And now, Lord,
do- the same thing, preserving in us the never-fail
ing Spirit of thy grace : that he being full of healing
powers and instructive discourse, may with meekness

85 Coteler. Not. ibid.
86 Aug. Cont. Parmen. lib. 2. c. 8. Si Johannes diceret
— mediatorem me habetis apud Patrem, et ego exoro pro
peccatis vestris, (sicut Parmenianus quodam loco posuit
episcopum mediatorem inter populum et Deum,) quis eum
ferret bonorum atque fidelium Christianorum ?
97 Basil, de Spir. S" c. 14. Theodor. Com. in Gal. iii. 19.
88 See Dr. Potter, Ch. Gov. c. 5. p. 251. Coteler. Not. in
Constit. lib. 2. c. 25. G 2

89 Con. Carth. 4. c. 3. cited before, sect. 10.
90 Dionys. de Eccles. Hierarch. c. 5. part 2. p. 364.
91 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 16.
92 See Bishop Burnet of Ordination, p. 24, who cites
Morinus. 93 Habert. Observ. in Pontif. Graec. p. 386
94 Naz. Orat. 5. p. 136.
05 Cabassut. Notit. Concil. t. 43.
96 Bishop Burn. Vindication of the Ordination, &c. p. 25.

84

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

teach thy people, and serve thee sincerely with a pure
mind, and willing soul, and unblamably perform the
sacred97 services for thy people, through Christ,"
&c. Where we may observe, that it was not then
thought necessary to express all or any of the
offices of a presbyter in particular, but only in ge
neral to pray for grace to be given to the priest then
ordained, whereby he might be enabled to perform
them. And this, with a solemn imposition of hands,
was reckoned a sufficient form of consecration.
Which I note for the instruction of those, who may
be apt to think that modern forms of ordination
are in every circumstance like the primitive ones ;
whereas if Morinus say true, the words which are now
most in use, viz. " Receive the Holy Ghost," were
not in the Roman Pontifical above four hundred
years ago. Which makes good the observation of
a learned person,98 that the church catholic did
never agree on one uniform ritual, or book of ordi
nation, but that was still left to the freedom of par
ticular churches ; and so the church of England
had as much power to make or alter rituals, as any
other had. I should here have ended this chap-
of ih^archipres- ter about presbyters, but that it is
necessary to give some account of the
archipresbyteri, and seniores ecclesics, which are some
times mentioned in ancient writers. The archpres-
byters are spoken of by St. Jerom, who seems99 to
say there was one, and but one, in every church :
and perhaps he is the first author that mentions
them. After him Socrates 10° speaks of one Peter,
protopresbyter of Alexandria, whom Sozomen101
calls arch/presbyter. And Liberatus 102 mentions one
Proterius, archpresbyter in the same church. From
whom we also learn in some measure what was the
office and quality of the archpresbyter. He was
not always the senior presbyter of the church, as
some are apt to imagine, but one chosen out of the
college of presbyters at the pleasure of the bishop.
For Liberatus says expressly, that Dioscorus the
bishop made Proterius archpresbyter of the church :
which imphes that he did not come to the office by
virtue of his seniority, but by the bishop's appoint
ment. As to his office, it is plain from Liberatus,
that it was to preside over the church next under
the bishop, as chief of the college of presbyters, and
to take care of all things relating to the church in
the bishop's absence ; as Proterius is said to have

done, while Dioscorus went to the council of Chal
cedon. And therefore some,103 not without reason,
think these archipresbyteri were much of the same
nature with our deans in cathedral churches, as the
college of presbyters were the chapter. But they
wholly mistake the matter, who104 confound these
archipresbyteri with the cardinales presbyteri. For
that is a name of much later date,, not to be found
in any genuine writer till the time of Gregory the
Great : for the council of Rome, which is the only
authority that Bellarmin195 alleges to prove it more
ancient, is a mere fiction. Besides that the cardinal
presbyters were many in the same church or city,
but the archpresbyter was but one. So that, what
ever was the first original of cardinal presbyters .
(whether they were so called from their being fixed
in some principal churches, where baptism might
be administered, which were therefore called eccle
sics vel tituli cardinales, as Bellarmin thinks ; or
whether, as others 106 imagine, when the number of
presbyters was grown so great in large and populous
cities, that they could not conveniently meet, and
join with the bishop, for ordering the government
of the church, there were some as the chief of them
chosen out from the rest, to be as the bishop's coun
cil, who were therefore called cardinales presbyteri ;
a dispute that does not concern me any further to
inquire into or determine ;) I say, whatever was
their rise, or the reason of their name, it is certain
they were not the same with the archipresbyteri of
the primitive church.
As to the seniores ecclesics, they were Sect 19
a sort of elders, who were not of the e^SS^bat
clergy, yet had some concern in the 'uXTnthe"'"
j, . i , . .tv, e. dern acceptation.
care of the church. 1 he name often
occurs in Optatus and St. Austin, from whom we
may easily learn the nature of their office. Optatus
says,'07 when Mensurius bishop of Carthage was
forced to leave his church in the time of the Diocle
tian persecution, he committed the ornaments and
utensils of the church to such of the elders as he could
trust, fidelibus senioribus commendavit. Upon which
Albaspiny109 notes, that, besides the clergy, there
were then some lay-elders, who were intrusted to
take care of the goods of the church. At the end
of Optatus there is a tract, called, The Purgation of
Felix and CtEcihan, wherein there are several epis
tles that make mention of the same name, as that
of Fortis109 and Purpurius, and another nameless

97 Constitut. Apostol. lib. 8. c. 16. xds virip tov Xaov
lEp-ovpyias dpwpovs ekteXti.
98 Bishop Burnet, Vind. of the Ordin. p. 35.
99 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Singuli ecclesiarum epis
copi, singuli archipresbyteri, singuli archidiaconi.
100 Socrat. lib. 6. c. 9. ntVnos tIs irpuiToirpEa^vTEpoi,
101 Sozom. lib. 8. c. 12.
102 Liberat. Breviar. u. 14. Proterio Dioscorus commen
davit ecclesiam, qui et eum archipresbyterum fecerat. In
edit. Crab, male legitur archiepiscopum.

103 Stillingfl. Irenic. part. 2. u. 7. p. 358.
104 Onuphr. Interpret. Vocum Ecclesiast. Salmas. de
Primat. c. 1. p. 10.
105: Bellar. de Cleric, lib. 1. c. 16.
106 Stillingfl. ibid.
107 Optat. lib. 1. p. 41.
i°8 Albaspia. Not. in. Optat. p. 123. Prater ecclesiasticis
et clericos quidam ex plebe seniores et probatae vital res
ecclesia? curabant.
109 Gesta, Purgat. Caecil. et Fel. p. 268. ex Epist. Fortis:

Chap. XX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

85

author. St. Austin inscribes one of his epistles110
to his own church of Hippo in this manner, Clero,
senioribus, et universes plebi, To the clergy, the eld
ers, and all the people : and in several other places
has occasion to mention these seniores in other
churches.111 From whence some have concluded,112 that these
were ruling lay-elders, according to the new model
and modern acceptation. Whereas, as the ingenious
author118 of the Humble Remonstrance rightly ob
serves in his reply, those seniores of the primitive
church were quite another thing. Some of them
were the optimates, the chief men or magistrates
of the place, such as we still call aldermen, from the
ancient appellation of seniores. These are those
which the Cabarsiessitan council of Donatists in
St. Austin calls seniores nobilissimi ;114 and one of
the councils115 of Carthage more expressly, ma-
gistratus vel seniores locorum, the magistrates or
elders of every city ; whom the bishops were to take
with them to give the Donatists a meeting. In this
sense Dr. Hammond116 observes, from Sir Henry
Spelman, and some of our Saxon writings, that an
ciently our Saxon kings had the same title of elders,
aldermanni, presbyteri, and seniores. As in the Saxon
translation of the Bible, the word, princes, is com
monly rendered, aldermen. And of this sort were
some of those seniores ecclesics that have been men
tioned, whose advice and assistance also, no doubt,
the bishops took in many weighty affairs of the
church. The other sort, which were more properly
called seniores ecclesiastici, were such as were some
times trusted with the utensils, treasure, and out
ward affairs of the church ; and may be compared
to our churchwardens, vestrymen, stewards, who
have some care of the affairs of the church, but are
not concerned as ruling elders in the government
or disciphne thereof. Now, lay-elders are a degree
above the deacons ; but the seniores ecclesics were
below them : which is a further evidence, that they
were not lay-elders in the modern acceptation. But
of this enough. I now proceed to consider the third
order of the clergy in the primitive church, which
is that of deacons.

CHAPTER XX.

OF DEACONS.

The name Sidieovoi, which is the on-
. -, - , . . Sect. 1.
gmal word for deacons, is sometimes Deacons always
reckoned one of the
used in the New Testament for any three sacred orders
J of the church.
one that ministers in the service of
God : in which large sense we sometimes find bi
shops and presbyters styled deacons, not only in the
New Testament,1 but in ecclesiastical writers also.2
But here we take it in a more strict sense for the
name of the third order of the clergy of the primi
tive church. In treating of which it will be neces
sary, in the first place, to show the sense of antiquity
concerning their original. The council of Trullo
advances a very singular notion about this matter,
asserting, that the seven deacons spoken of in the
Acts, are not to be understood of such as ministered
in Divine service or the sacred mysteries,3 but only
of such as served tables and attended the poor.
But the whole current of antiquity runs against
this : Ignatius4 styles them expressly, ministers of
the mysteries of Christ, adding, that they are not
ministers of meats and drinks, but of the church
of God. In another place,5 he speaks of them as
ministers of Jesus Christ, and gives them a sort of
presidency over the people, together with the bishop
and presbyters : Study to do all things, says he, in
divine concord, under your bishop presiding in the
place of God, and the presbyters in the place of the
apostolical senate, and the deacons most dear to me,
as those to whom is committed the ministry of Je
sus Christ. And in many other places,6 he requires
the people to be subject to them, and reverence
them as Jesus Christ, that is, as his ministers at
tending on his service. Cyprian speaks of them in
the same style, calhng them7 ministers of episco
pacy and the church ; withal referring their original
to that place in the Acts of the Apostles, which the
council of Trullo disputes about, at the same time
that he asserts8 they were called ad altaris ministe-
rium, to the ministry and service of the altar. Ter
tullian9 was so far from thinking them only minis-

Omnes vos episcopi, presbyteri, diacones, seniores, scitis,
&c. Ibid, ex Epist. Purpurii : Adhibete conclericos, et seni
ores plebis, ecclesiasticos viros, et inquirant diligenter, quae
sunt istae dissensiones. Ibid. Clericis et senioribus Cirthen-
sium in Domino aeternam salutem.
110 Aug. Ep. 137.
111 Id. cont. Crescon. lib. 3. c. 29 et 56. Concio 2. in Psal.
xxxvi. p. 120.
112 Smectymn. Answer to the Remonstrance, p. 74.
113 Hamon 1' Estrange, Defence of the Remonstrance.
1,4 Aug. Cone. 2. in Psal. xxxvi. p. 120.
115 Con. Carthag. an. 403. in Con. African, c. 58. et in
Cod. Can. Eccl. Afr. c. 91. Debere unumquemque nostrum
in civitate sua per se convenire Donatistarum prcepositos,
aut adjungere sibi vicinum collegam, ut pariter eos in sin

gulis quibusque civitatibus vel locis, per magistratus vel
seniores locorum conveniant.
116 Ham. Dissert. 4. cont. Blondel, c. 19. u. 1.
1 Acts i. 25 ; 2 Cor. vi. 4; 2 Tim. iv. 5 ; 1 Cor. iii. 5 ;
Ephes. iii. 7.
2 Athan. cont. Gent. Chrysost. Horn. 1. in Phil. i. 1.
3 Cone. Trull. C. 16. 'Eir-rct SiaKOVOvi pi} iirl tojv Ten's
pvcrTtjpioil SiaKOvou pivcov Xapj3dvE<rQai.
4 Ignat. Ep. ad Trail. ... 2. 5 Epist. ad Magnes. n. 6.
" Epist. ad Polycarp. n. 6. Ep. ad Trail. ... 3.
' Cypr. Ep. 65. al. 3. ad Rogatian. Diaconos post ascen-
sum Domini in coelos apostoli sibi constituerunt episcopatus
sui et ecclesiae ministros.
8 Id. Ep. 68. al. 67. ad Pleb. Legion, et Astur. p. 172.
9 Tertul. de Fuga, c 11. Quum ipsi auctores, id est, ipsi

86

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

ters of meats and drinks, that he joins them with
bishops and presbyters in the honourable titles of
guides and leaders to the laity, and makes them in
their degree pastors and overseers of the flock of
Christ. And so St. Jerom, though he sometimes in
an angry humour speaks a httle contemptuously of
them, styling them 10 ministers of widows and tables ;
yet in other places11 he treats them with greater re
spect, giving them the same honourable title as
TertuUian does, and ranking them among the guides
of the people. I showed before, in the last chapter,
that Optatus 12 had so great an opinion of them, as
to reckon their office a lower degree of the priest
hood. And St. Austin seems to have had the same
sentiments ; for in one of his epistles 13 he gives
Praesidius the title of consacerdos, his fellow priest,
whom yet St. Jerom in the next epistle14 calls a
deacon. Yet here, that I may not seem to
Yet not generally impose upon my readers, I must ob-
called priests, but * r
ministers and Le- serve, that the name of priests was not
vites. ' r
generally given to the deacons, by
those that esteemed them a sacred order ; but they
are commonly distinguished from priests by the
names of ministers and Levites. Thus St. Jerom15
distinguishes them from the priests of the second
order, that is, from the presbyters, by the title of
Levites. The author of the Questions15 upon the
Old and New Testament under the name of St.
Austin, and Hilarius Sardus17 under the name of
St. Ambrose, are more positive and express in de
nying them the name of priests. And Salvian,18
though he acknowledges their ministration and
function to be about holy things, yet he gives them
but the same title of Levites, and that in contradis
tinction to the priests. And so frequently in the
councils,19 the names sacerdos and Levita, are used
as the peculiar distinguishing titles of presbyters
and deacons. The fourth council of Carthage20
speaks more expressly, that deacons are not ordain
ed to the priesthood, but only to the ministering
office, or inferior service. And hence the canons
sometimes give them the name of ujrijplrtu and

Sect. 2.
For this reason the
i was not tied

ministri, the ministers and servants, not only of the
church, but of the bishops and presbyters, as may
be seen in the councils of Nice,21 and Carthage,22 and
many others. Whence some learned men23 con
clude against Optatus and St. Austin, that deacons
were in no sense allowed to be priests : whilst
others24 with Optatus distinguish the several degrees
of the priesthood, and reckon that though deacons .
were not absolutely called priests, because that was
the appropriate title of bishops and presbyters,
whose ministers and attendants they were ; yet
deacons sometimes performed such offices, as did
entitle them to a lower degree of the priesthood.
Having thus fairly stated and represented the matter
on both sides, I must leave the judicious reader to
determine for himself which opinion has the strong
est reasons, whilst I proceed to give an account of
the ordination of deacons, and their several offices,
and such laws and rules as concerned their order.
The ordination of a deacon differed
from that of a presbyter, both in the h^^
form and manner of it, and also in the i°„«™r anYpSbv.
gifts and powers that were conferred te0'°°«ki"»"™-
thereby. For in the ordination of a presbyter, as
has been noted before, the presbyters who were
present, were required to join in the imposition of
hands with the bishop. But the ordination of a
deacon might be performed by the bishop alone,
because, as the council of Carthage25 words it, he
was ordained not to the priesthood, but to the in
ferior services of the church. These services are
not particularly mentioned in the form of ordination
now remaining in the Constitutions ; but there the
bishop only prays in general, that God would26 make
his face to shine upon that his servant, who was
then chosen to the office of a deacon, and fill him
with his Holy Spirit and power, as he did Stephen
the martyr ; that he, behaving himself acceptably,
and uniformly, and unblamably in his office, might
be thought worthy of a higher degree, &c. What
therefore were the particular offices of the deacons,
we are to learn not from the forms of the church,
but from other writers.

diaeoni, presbyteri, et episcopi fugiunt, quomodo laicus in-
telligere poterit, Sec. Cum duces fugiunt, quis de gregario
numero sustinebit?
10 Hieron. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. et Com. in Ezek. xlviii.
Mensarum et viduarum ministri.
11 Id. Com. in Mich. vii. Nolite credere in ducibus, non
in episcopo, non in presbytero, non in diacono.
12 Optat. lib. 1. 13Aug. Ep.16.
14 Hieron. Ep. 17. inter Epist. Aug.
15 Hieron. Ep. 27. Episcopi, et sacerdotum inferioris
gradus, ac Levitarum innumerabilis multitudo.
10 Aug. Quaest. Vet. et N. Test. t. 4. qu. 46. Nunquid
diaconus potest vicem gerere sacerdotis.  Sacerdotis vi-
cem agere non potest, qui non est sacerdos.
17 Hilar. Com. in Ephes. iv. Evangelistae diaeoni sunt
sicut fuit Philippus, quamvis non sint sacerdotes.
18 Salvian. ad Eccles. Cathol. lib. 2. p. 394. Levitis ac

sacerdotibus tanta divinarum rerum administratione fun-
gentibus. 19 Con. Turon. 1. can. 1.
20 Con. Carth. 4. c. 4. Diaconus non ad sacerdotium, sed
ad ministerium consecratur.
21 Con. Nic. c. 18. Tou piv iiricKoieov viriipiTai eWiv.
22 Con. Carth. 4. c. 37. Diaconus ita se presbyteri, ut
episcopi, ministrum esse cognoscat. Vid. Con. Eliber. in
titulis can. 18 et 33. Con. Turon. 1. c. I.
23 Bp. Fell, Not. in Cypr. Ep. 18. Habert. Not. in Pon
tine, p. 125.
21 Rigalt. Not. in Cypr. Ep. 12. Dr. Hicks, Disc, of
Priesthood, p. 33.
25 Con. Carth. 4. c. 4. Diaconus quum ordinatur, solus
episcopus qui eum benedicit, manum super caput illius pnnat:
quia non ad sacerdotium, sed ad ministerium consecratur.
20 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. n. 18.

Chap. XX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

87

Where we find, first, that the most
Tho deacon's of- ordinary and common office of the
fice to take care of . .
the utensils of the deacons, was to be subservient and as-
altar. sistant to the bishop and presbyters
in the service of the altar. It belonged to them to
take care of the holy table, and all the ornaments
and utensils appertaining thereto. The author
under the name of St. Austin27 takes notice of this
as the common office of deacons in all churches,
except in such great churches as the church of
Rome, where there being a multitude of inferior
clergy, this office was devolved on some of them.
But in other churches it was the deacon's office,
where the inferior clergy, subdeacons, &c. were pro
hibited by canon to come into the sanctuary, or
touch any of the sacred vessels in the time of Divine
service, as may be seen in several canons28 of the
ancient councils. Another part of the deacon's office
indivrro receive was, to receive the people's offerings,
the oblations of the ^ ,,i . ./i • . T_
peopie, and present and present them to tne priest, who
them to the priest, , -
andrecitethenames presented them to bod at the altar:
ofthosethatoffered. r
after which the deacon repeated the
names of those that offered, pubhcly ; and this re
hearsal was commonly called, offerre nomina, as
may be seen in Cyprian, who29 speaks of it as part
of the communion service of those times; which
is also noted by Rigaltius30 and others; of which
custom I shall say more hereafter, when we come
to treat of the ancient service of the church. At
present I only observe, that tshis recital of the names
of such as made their oblations, was part of the
deacon's office, as is evident from St. Jerom, who
tells us,31 that extortioners and oppressors made
their oblations out of their ill-gotten goods, that
they might glory in their wickedness, while the
deacon in the church publicly recites the names of
those that offered: Such a one offers so much,
such a one hath promised so much : and so they
please themselves with the applause of the people,
while their conscience secretly lashes and torments
them. Some indeed deny that there was any such
custom as this pubhc and particular rehearsal of
men's names that offered in the church, and by con
sequence, that this was any part of the deacon's

office : but I think St. Jerom's testimony is unde
niable proof, and cannot otherwise be expounded,
to make any tolerable sense of his words ; for which
reason I have made this one part of the deacon's
office, though contrary to the judgment of some
learned men.
Thirdly, In some churches, but not Sect 6
in all, the deacons read the Gospel both Go%JS-ir;05ormed lhe
in the communion service, and before
it also. The author of the Constitutions assigns all
other parts of Scripture to the readers, but the Gos
pel is to be read32 only by a presbyter or a deacon.
St. Jerom intimates '* that it was part of the dea
con's function ; and so it is said by the council of
Vaison, which authorizes deacons to read the homilies
of the ancient fathers in the absence of a presbyter,
assigning this reason for it : If the deacons be wor
thy to read34 the discourses of Christ in the Gospel,
why should they not be thought worthy to read the
expositions of the holy fathers ? This implies, that
in the Western churches it was the ordinary office
of the deacons to read the Gospels. But in other
churches the custom varied: for, as Sozomen ob
serves, it was customary at Alexandria for the arch
deacon only to read the Gospels, in other churches
the deacons, in others the priests only, and in some
churches on high festivals the bishop himself read,
as at Constantinople on Easter-day. In the Afri
can churches, in the time of Cyprian, the readers
were allowed to read the Gospels as well as other
parts of Scripture, as appears from one of Cyprian's
epistles, where, speaking of Celerinus the confessor,
whom he had ordained a reader, he says, It was
fitting he should be advanced to the pulpit85 or tri
bunal of the church, (as they then called the read
ing desk,) that he might thence read the precepts
and Gospels of his Lord, which he himself, like a
courageous confessor, had followed and observed.
So that we are not to look upon this to have been
the deacon's peculiar office, but only in some
churches and some ages.
But it was something more appro
priate to them to assist the bishop or tt4ea*j^j^,B£
presbyters in the administration ofthe S°eVfth«'%opi5d
eucharist: where their business was m "ie eucharls'-

27 Aug. Qutest. Vet. et Nov. Testament, t. 4. c. 101. Ut
autem non omnia ministeria obsequiorum per ordinem agant,
multitudo facit clericorum. Nam utique et altare portarent,
et vasa ejus, et aquam in man us funderent sacerdoti, sicut
videmus per omnes ecclesias.
28 Con. Agathens. c. 66. Non oportet in sacratos minis-
tros licentiam habere, in secretarium (quod Graeci diaconi-
con appellant) ingredi et contingere vasa Dominica. Con.
Laodic. c. 21. cum Notis Balsamon. et Zonar. in loc.
29 Cypr. Ep. 10. al. 16. p. 37. Ad communicationem ad-
mittuntur, et offertur nomen eorum, &c.
*> Rigalt. Not. in Cypr. Ep. 60. Bona,Rer. Liturg. lib.
2. c. 8. n.7.
31 Hieron. Com. in Ezek. xviii. p. 537. Multos conspici-
mus qui opprimunt per potentiam, vel furta cummittunt, ut

de multis parva pauperibus tribuanf, et in suis sceleribus
glorientur, publiceque diaconus in ecclesia recitet ofteren-
tium nomina: Tantum offert ille, tantum ille pollicitus est,
placentque sibi ad plausum populi, torquente conscientia.
82 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57.
83 Hieron. Ep. 57. ad Sabin. Evangelium Christi quasi
diaconus lectitabas.
34 Con. Vasens. 2. c. 2. Si digni sunt diaeoni, quae Chris
tus in evangelio locutus est legere, quare indigni judicentur
sanctorum patrum expositiones publice recitare ?
35 Cypr. Ep. 34. al. 39. Quid aliud quam super pulpitum,
id est, super tribunal ecclesiae opoitebat imponi, ut loci
altioris celsitate subnixus— legat pracepta et evangelia Do
mini, quae fortiter ac fideliter sequitur.

88

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

to distribute the elements to the people that were
present, and carry them to those that were absent
also, as Justin Martyr36 acquaints us in his second
Apology. The author of the Constitutions37 like
wise, describing the manner of the ancient service,
divides the whole action between the bishop and
the deacon; appointing the bishop to deliver the
bread to every communicant singly, saying, The
body of Christ : and the deacon in hke manner to
deliver the cup, saying, The blood of Christ, the cup
of hfe. This the author under the name of St.
Austin88 calls the proper office of the deacon's order.
Yet it was not so proper to their order, but. that they
were to depend upon the will and licence of the
bishop and the presbyters, if they were present, as
is expressly provided in some of the ancient39 coun
cils, which forbid the deacon to give the eucharist
in the presence of a presbyter, except necessity re
quire, and he have his leave to do it. And there
fore it was looked upon as a great absurdity for a
presbyter to sit by and receive the sacrament from
the hands of a deacon, as was sometimes practised,
but the council of Nice40 made a severe canon
against it. So that what was allowed to deacons,
was not to consecrate the eucharist, but only to dis
tribute it, and that not to the bishop or presbyters,
but only to the people. Yet this action of theirs is
sometimes called oblation or offering, as in Cyprian,41
and the council of Ancyra,42 which forbids some
deacons that were under censure, dprov r) irorripiov
dvacbkpuv, to offer either the bread or wine, as dea
cons otherwise were allowed to do.
Sect s Some learned persons,43 1 know, put
co™tr,talttmat a different sense upon the words of
this council: they understand by of
fering, consecration, and thence conclude, that dea
cons anciently were invested with the ordinary
power of consecrating the eucharist in the absence
of the presbyters. But this is more than can fairly
be deduced from the words, which are capable of
two more reasonable constructions : either they may
signify the deacon's offering the people's oblations
to the priest, which was a part of their office, as I
showed before: and so Petavius44 and Habertus
understand them : or else they may be interpreted

30 Just. M. Apol. 2. p. 97.
87 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 13.
38 Aug. Queest. Vet. et Nov. Test. c. 101. Diaeoni ordo
est accipere a sacerdote, et sic dare plebi.
39 Con. Carth. 4. c. 38. Diaconus, praesente presbytero, eu-
charistiam corporis Christi populo, si necessitas cogat, jussus
eioget. Vid. Con. Arelat. 2. c. 15.
40 Con. Nic. can. 18.
41 Cypr. de Lapsis, p. 1.32. Solemnibusadimpletis calicem
diaconus offerre prasentibus coepit.
42 Con. Ancyr. c. 2.
43 Hospin. Hist. Sacram. lib. 2. c. 1. p. 23.
44 Petav. Diatrib. de Potest. Consecr. c. 3. t. 4. p. 211.
Habert. in Pontifical. Par. 9. Observ. 2. p. 190.
45 Suicer. Thesaur. t. 1. p. 871.

by Cyprian's words, who expresses himself more
fully, calling it offering the consecrated bread and
wine to the people; which seems to be the most
natural sense, and is preferred to all others by some
late learned writers.45 Whatever it be, there is no
reason to believe it means that deacons were allow
ed the ordinary power of consecration. For the
council of Nice, which was not long after the coun
cil of Ancyra, says expressly,40 that deacons had
not power to offer ; that is, in the sense in which
offering signifies consecration ; for in that sense if
was the proper office of presbyters. Some deacons,
indeed, did, about this time, take upon them thus to
offer, but the council of Aries, which was held in
the same year with that of Ancyra, reckons it a
presumption and transgression of their rule, and
therefore made a new canon to restrain them.47 St.
Hilary is a good witness of the practice of the
church in his own time, and he assures us there
could be no sacrifice, or consecration of the eucha
rist, without a presbyter.48 And St. Jerom says the
same,49 that presbyters were the only persons whose
prayers consecrated bread and wine into the body
and blood of Christ. For which reason, speaking
of one Hilary, a deacon, he says, he could not con
secrate the eucharist,50 because he was only a dea
con. The reason of this was, because the holy
eucharist was looked upon as the prime Christian
sacrifice, and one of the. highest offices of the Chris
tian priesthood : and deacons being generally reck
oned no priests, or but in the lowest degree, they
were therefore forbidden to offer or consecrate this
sacrifice at the altar. This reason is assigned by
the author of the Constitutions,51 and the author
under the name of St. Austin, and several others.
But there is a passage in St. Ambrose, which
seems to intimate, that in the third century the
deacons at Rome had power to consecrate the
eucharist ; for speaking of Laurentius the deacon,
he brings him in thus addressing himself to Sixtus,
his bishop, as he was going to his martyrdom:
Whither go you, holy priest, without your deacon ?
You did not use to offer sacrifice without your
minister. Why are you then now displeased with
me ? Why may I not be partner with you in shed-

Con. Nic. c. 18. Tous i^ovariav pi} £)£ovTas irpoaripE-
pEiv, &c.
47 Con. Arelat. 1. c. 15. De diaconibus, quos cognovimus
multis locis offerre, placuit minime fieri debere.
48 Hilar. Fragm. p. 129. Sacrificii opus sine presbytero
esse non potuit.
49 Hieron. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. Quid patitur mensarum et
viduarum minister, ut supra eos tumidus se efferat, ad quo
rum preces Christi corpus et sanguis conficitur ?
50 Id. Dial. cont. Lucif. p. 145. Hilarius cum diaconus
de ecclesia recesserit, solusque ut putat turba sit mundi :
neque euchai-istiam conficere potest, episcopos et presby
teros non habens, &c.
51 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 28. Aug. Quaest. Vet. et Nov.
Test. qu. 46.

Chap. XX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

89

ding my blood, who was used to consecrate52 the
blood of Christ by your commission, and be your
partner in consummating the holy mysteries ? Ba
ronius was so perplexed with this difficulty, that he
resolves it to be a corruption of the text, and that
instead of consecrationem, it should be read53 dis-
pensationem: and some shameless editors have,
without any grounds, made bold to foist this cor
rection into the text; which Bona54 and Habertus
ingenuously condemn, as done against the authority
of all the MSS., as well as former editions, and that
without any reason for it from the difficulty of the
expression. For the word, consecration, in this
place, does not signify the sacramental consecration
of the elements by prayer at the altar, which was
performed by the bishop himself, as appears evi
dently from the context, where it is said, the bi
shop was never used to offer sacrifice without his
minister or deacon: therefore the consecration,
which was committed to the deacon, must be of
another sort ; for he could not offer, or consecrate
the elements on the altar, in the bishop's presence,
and at the same time that the bishop himself conse
crated, but he might assist him, or bear a part with
him, as it is there worded, in consummating the
holy mysteries, that is, in giving the cup with the
usual form of words to the people ; which, in the
lauguage of those times, was called a ministerial
consecration, or consummation of the sacrament,
forasmuch as the receivers were hereby conse
crated with the blood of Christ, and also consum
mated or made perfect partakers of the sacrament
in both kinds, having received the bread from the
hands of the bishop, and the cup from the hands of
the deacon. This is plainly the consecration here
spoken of, which refers only to the deacon's minis
tering of the cup to the people, which was their
usual office, and so cannot be made an argument,
as Hospinian and Grotius55 would have it, that
deacons were allowed to consecrate the eucharist
at the altar.
sect. 9 But rar the other sacrament of bap-
lowed^baptein tism, it is more evident, that they
some places. were permitted in some cases to ad
minister it solely. For though the author56 of the
Constitutions says, that the deacons did neither bap

tize, nor offer; and Epiphanius57 affirms universal
ly, that the deacons were not intrusted with the
sole administration of any sacrament ; yet it appears
from other writers that they had this power, at least
in some places, ordinarily conferred upon them.
Tertullian58 invests them with the same right as
presbyters, that is, to baptize by the bishop's leave.
And St. Jerom59 entitles them to the very same pri
vilege. The council of Eliberis60 as plainly asserts
this right, when it says, If a deacon, that takes care
of a people without either bishop or presbyter, bap
tizes any, the bishop shall consummate them by
his benediction. This plainly supposes, that dea
cons had the ordinary right of baptizing in such
churches over which they presided. So when Cy
ril61 directs his catechumens, how they should be
have themselves at the time of baptism, when they
came either before a bishop, or presbyter, or deacon,
in city or in village ; this may be presumed a fair
intimation, that then deacons were ordinarily allow
ed to minister baptism in country places. I speak
only now of their ordinary power. For as to extra
ordinary cases, not only deacons, but the inferior
clergy, and laymen also, were admitted to baptize
in the primitive church, as will be showed in its
proper place.
Another office of the deacons was, Sect ]0
to be a sort of monitors and directors vr%fr°^°tl cln-d
to the people in the exercise of their s™8"'10"-
pubhc devotions in the church. To which purpose
they were wont to use certain known forms of
words, to give notice when each part of the service
began, and to excite the people to join attentively
therein ; also to give notice to the catechumens,
penitents, energumens, when to come up and make
their prayers, and when to depart ; and in several
prayers they repeated the words before them, to
teach them what they were to pray for. All this
was called by the general name of ktjpvtteiv, among
the Greeks, and presdicare, among the Latins
which does not ordinarily signify preaching, as
some mistake it, but performing the office of a
KijpvH, or prcsco, in the assembly : whence Syne
sius62 and some others call the deacons, Upoxripvices,
the holy criers of the church, as those that gave
notice to the congregation how all things were re-

52 Ambros. de Offic. lib. 1. u. 41. Quo sacerdos sancte
sine diacono properas ? Nunquam sacrificium sine ministro
offerre consueveras. Quid in me ergo displicuit pater ? —
Cui commisisti Dominici sanguinis consecrationem, cui
consummandorum .consortium sacramentorum, huic con
sortium tui sanguinis negas.
53 Baron, an. 261. n. 7.
64 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. u. 4. Habert. Not. in
Pontifical. Graec. p. 191.
55 Vid. Grot, de Comae Administratione ubi Pastores non
sunt. Cited and confuted by Petavius.
56 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 38.
57 Epiphan. Hier. 79. Collyrid. n. 4.

68 Tertul. de Bapt. u. 17. Dandi quidem habet jus sum
mus sacerdos, qui est episcopus ; dehinc presbyteri et
diaeoni, non tamen sine episcopi auctoritate, &c.
59 Hieron. Dial. cont. Lucif. c. 4. p. 139. Inde venit, ut
sine jussione episcopi, neque presbyter neque diaconus jus
habeant baptizandi.
60 Concil. Eliber. c. 77. Si quis diaconus, regens plebem
sine episcopo vel presbytero, aliquos baptizaverit, episcopus
eos per benedictionem perficere debebit.
61 Cyril. Catech. 17. n. 17.
62 Synes. Ep. 67. p. 224. Chrysost. Horn. 17. in Heb. ix.
KrJjOb-£ otixv e'lttti, xct &yia toTs dyiois.

90

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

gularly to be performed. Thus the word Ktipilai
frequently occurs in the ancient rituals and canons;
as in the Apostolical Constitutions, as soon as the
bishop has ended his sermon, the deacon is to cry,
Let the hearers and unbelievers depart.63 Then he
is to bid the catechumens pray, and to call upon
the faithful also to pray for them, repeating a form
of bidding prayer, to instruct the people after what
manner they were to pray for them. Which form
may be seen both in the Constitutions,6' and in St.
Chrysostom.65 After this the deacon was to call
in like manner upon the energumens, the compe
tentes, and the penitents in their several orders,
using the solemn words of exhortation both to them
and the people to pray for them, ixTiviog SinSuifiEv,
Let us ardently pray for them. Then again, when
the deacon had dismissed all these by a solemn cry,
dieoXieaBi, wpoi\9iTe, or, Ite, Missa est; he called upon
the faithful to pray again for themselves, and the
whole" state of Christ's church, repeating60 another
form of bidding prayer before them. And this is
there called the deacon's irpoo-fuvrio-ig, or exhorta
tion to pray, to distinguish it from the bishop's
£7riic\>jcrtc, which was a direct form of address to God,
whereas the deacon's address was to the people :
for which reason it was called irpoof&vrimg, and
Knpi£ai, bidding the people pray ; or a call and ex
hortation to pray, with directions what they should
pray for in particular. This the Latins called both
oratio and preedicatio, as may be seen in one of the
councils of Toledo,67 which explains the word
orare, by presdicare, making them both to signify
this office of the deacon. And hence one of the
deacon's ornaments (that I may note this by the
way) is called by the same council his orarium, be
cause he used it sometimes as a private signal to
give notice of the prayers to his brethren of the
clergy. By all this we may understand what So
crates means, when he says Athanasius68 com
manded his deacon K-qpvZai ivxijv, to bid prayer;
and how we are to interpret that controverted canon
of the council of Ancyra, which, speaking of some
deacons that had lapsed into idolatry, and degrad
ing them, says, They should no longer Kijpiaauv :69
which some interpret preaching, but others70 more
truly understand it of this part of the deacon's office,
which was to be the Ki)pv£ or presco, the sacred crier
of the congregation.

63 Const. Apost. lib. 8. c. 5. kijouxtetw, pij tis tuiv
&Kp003pEVttlV' M71 TIS TWV aTTLGTlOV.
64 Ibid. c. 6. « Chrys Hom 2. in J Cor.
66 Const. Apost. lib. 8. c. 10.
67 Con. Tolet. 4. c. 40. Unum orarium oportet Levitam
gestare in sinistra humero, propter quod orat, id est, praedicat.
18 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 11. «> Con. Ancyr. c. 2.
70 Habert. Pontifical, p. 203. Bevereg. Not. in Con. An
cyr. c. 2. Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. t. 2. p. 99.
71 Ambros. Com. in Eph. iv. Nunc neque diaeoni in po-
pulo praedicant, neque clerici vel laici baptizant.

Sect, n.
7. Deacons allow.

If it be inquired, whether deacons
had any power to preach publicly in edVJreacnVv'thl
the congregation? the answer must ^^'"^n,.
be the same as in the case of baptism : they had
power to preach by licence and authority from the
bishop, but not without it. The author under the
name of St. Ambrose71 says positively, that deacons
did not preach in his time ; though he thinks ori
ginally all deacons were evangelists, as Philip and
Stephen were. I have showed before, that pres
byters themselves in many places were not allowed
to preach in the bishop's presence, but by his special
leave ; and therefore it is much more reasonable to
conclude the same of deacons. Blondel72 and Ba
ronius think that St. Chrysostom preached those
elegant discourses, de Incomprehensibili Dei Natura,
de Anathemate, tfc. while he was but a deacon. But
others think73 more probably, that those were not
sermons which he preached in the church, but only
discourses that he composed upon other occasions ;
and that his first sermon was that which he preach
ed when he was ordained presbyter, now extant in
his 4th vol. p. 953. But if he ever preached while
he was deacon, there is no question to be made but
that he had the authority of his bishop Meletius for
doing it: as Philostorgius74 says, Leontius the
Arian bishop of Antioch permitted Aetius his dea
con to preach pubhcly in the church. Ephrem
Syrus perhaps was another such instance : for he
was never more than a deacon of the church of
Edessa ; yet Photius75 says he composed several ho
milies or sermons, which were so excellent in then-
kind, that after his death they were translated into
other languages, and allowed to be read in many
churches immediately after the reading of the Scrip
tures, as St. Jerom76 acquaints us. In some places,
as in the French churches, the deacons were au
thorized by canon to read some such homilies in the
church instead of t sermon, when the presbyter
happened to be sick, and could not preach, as ap
pears from the order made in the council of Vaison77
upon this occasion. But here was necessity and
permission too : so that the case of deacons preach
ing in those ages of the church seems to have been
(according to the resolution, which Vigilius ™ after
ward gave of it) allowable, if authorized by the
bishop ; but a presumption both against custom and
canon, if done without his permission.

72 Blondel, Apol. p. 57. Baron, an. 386. p. 512.
73 Cave, Hist. Liter, vol. 1. p. 253.
74 Philostorg. lib. 3. c. 17. SiSaerKEi'v iv iK/cXtjo-t? E7ri-
TpETTEt. 75 Phot. Cod. 196. Aoyoi ivvia Kal TECtrapaKOVTa.
76 Hieron. de Scriptor. c. 115.
77 Con. Vasens. 3. c. 2. Si presbyter, aliqua infirmitate
prohibente, per seipsum non potuerit praedicare, Sanctorum
Patrum homiliae a diaconibus recitentur.
73 Vigil. Ep. ad Rustic, et Sebastian. Concil. t. 5. p.
554. Adjecistis etiam execranda superbia, qua; nee legim-

Chap. XX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

91

And so the case stood likewise with
s. .»!soC'"toISrecon- deacons in reference to the power of
tile penitents in ... ... -,
cases of extreme ne- reconciling penitents, and granting
them absolution. This was ordinarily
the bishop's sole prerogative, as the supreme minis
ter of the church ; and therefore rarely committed
to presbyters, but never to deacons, except in cases
of extreme necessity, when neither bishop nor pres
byter were ready at hand to do it : in this case dea
cons were sometimes authorized, as the bishop's
special delegates, to give men the solemn imposi
tion of hands, which was the sign of reconcihation.
Thus we find it in Cyprian, in the case of those
penitents, whom the martyrs by their letters recom
mended to the favour of the church : If, says he,79
they are seized by any dangerous distemper, they
need not expect my return, but may have recourse
to any presbyter that is present ; or if a presbyter
cannot be found, they may make their confession
before a deacon ; that so they may receive imposi
tion of hands, and go to the Lord in peace. Here
it is observable, that none below a deacon are com
missioned to perform this office ; nor were the dea
cons authorized to do it, but as the bishop's delegates,
and that in cases of extreme necessity, when no
presbyter could be found to reconcile the penitent
at the point of death.
... , , In the like case, that is, in the case
And to suspend ' *
^.SStriSSl of absolute necessity, it seems very
nary case.. probable, that in some of the Greek
churches they had power to suspend the inferior
clergy, when need so required, and neither bishop
nor presbyter was present to do it. Which may be
collected from those words of the author of the
Constitutions,80 where he says, a deacon excommu
nicates a subdeacon, a reader, a singer, a deacon-
ness, if there be occasion, and the presbyter be not
at hand to do it. But a subdeacon shall have no
power to excommunicate any, either clergy or laity ;
for subdeacons are only ministers of the deacons.
This was a power then committed to deacons in ex
traordinary cases, and a pecuhar privilege which
none of the inferior clergy might enjoy.
It may be reckoned also among
9. Dea'cons'to at- their extraordinary offices, that they
tend upon their bi- . - , v i . l • . •
shops, and some- were sometimes deputed by their bi-
times represent .
them in general shops to be their representatives and
councils. r *
proxies in general councils. Their
ordinary office there was only to attend upon their
bishops, and perform the duties of scribes, and dis
putants, &c. according as they were directed by

them ; in which station we commonly find them
employed in the ancient councils : but then there
were two things in which they were treated as in
ferior to presbyters: 1. In that presbyters are
usually represented as sitting together with their
bishops, while the deacons stood with all the peo
ple. 2. Presbyters were sometimes allowed to vote,
as has been showed before ; but there are no in
stances that I know of, to evidence the same pri
vilege to belong to deacons. Only when bishops
could not attend in person, they many times sent
their deacons to represent them ; and then they sat
and voted, not as deacons, but as proxies, in the
room and place of those that sent them. Of which
there are so many instances in the acts of the coun
cils, that it is needless to refer the reader to any of
them. Yet they that desire to see examples, may
consult Christianus Lupus in his notes upon the
seventh canon of the council of Trullo, where he
observes some difference in the sitting and voting
of deacons in the Eastern and Western councils : in
the Eastern councils, if a deacon represented a me
tropolitan or a patriarch, he sat and subscribed in
the place that the metropolitan or patriarch him
self would have done, had he been present ; but in
the Western councils it was otherwise ; there the
deacons voted after all the bishops, and not in the
place of those whose proxies they were.
Thus it was in general councils. But in pro
vincial and consistorial synods, the deacons were
sometimes allowed to give their voice, as well as
the presbyters, in their own name. Of which the
reader may see several instances in the Roman
councils under Symmachus and Gregory II., pub
lished by Justellus81 in his Bibhotheca Juris Ca
nonici, and in the fourth tome of the councils,
where first the bishops, then the presbyters, and
then the deacons, subscribe every one in their own
name in particular. And those that are curious
about this matter, may furnish themselves with
many other such examples.
There are two things more to be
observed concerning the office of dea- io. Deacons em-
. , .. . rrvL powered to rebuke
cons in church assemblies. 1 . 1 hat *"» correct men
that behaved them-
as they were the regulators and direct- "Jj^jjg;"1"11' in
ors of men's behaviour in Divine ser
vice ; so they had power to rebuke the irregular,
and chastise them for any indecent and unseemly
deportment. The Constitutions often mention such
acts as these belonging to the deacon's office. If
any one be found sitting out of his place,82 let the

tur, nee sine sui pontificis jussione aliquando ordinis vestri
homines praesumpserunt, auctoritatem vobis prsedicationis
contra omnem consuetudinem vel canones vindicare.
79 Cypr. Ep. 13. al. 18. ad. Cler. Si incommodo aliquo et in-
firmitatis periculo occupati fuerint, non expectata praesentia
nostra, apud presbyterumquemcunque praesentem, velsi pres
byter repertus non fuerit, et urge re exitus cceperit, apud diaco-

num quoque exomologesin facere delicti sui possint ; ut manu
eis in pcenitentia imposita veniant ad Dominum cum pace.
80 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c 28. AiaKovos d<popiX,Ei. tov
vitoSl&kovov, &c.
81 See before, chap. 19. sect. 12.
82 Const. Apost, lib. 2. c. 57. iTrnrXtjaeriadeo viro tov
SiaKovov, a>s 7rpojp£oos, &c.

92

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

deacon rebuke him, and transfer him to his proper
station, as the pilot or steersman of the church.
And again a little after, Let the deacon88 overlook
and superintend the people, that no one talk, or
sleep, or laugh, but give ear to the word of God.
This is evident also from St. Chrysostom, who,
speaking of the irreverent behaviour of some in the
chm-ch, bids their neighbours first rebuke them,
and if they would not bear it, to call the deacon84
to do his office toward them. Agreeable to this,
Optatus tells us a very remarkable story of Csecilian,
archdeacon of Carthage, that observing one Lu
cilla, a rich woman, commit an indecent act in the
time of receiving the holy communion, (for before
she received the bread and wine, she was used to
kiss the relics of some pretended martyr,) he re
buked her85 for it by virtue of his office : which
she so highly resented, that afterward, when he was
chosen bishop, she factiously withdrew herself,
with some others, from his communion, and pre
tending his ordination to be illegal, she, by her
power, got Majorinus ordained against him: and
this was one of the principal causes of the schism
of the Donatists, as Optatus there observes : It had
its rise from the implacable malice of a proud and
angry woman, who could never forgive the deacon
that rebuked her in the chm-ch. Some may per
haps imagine, that what Ccecilian did was by virtue
of a superior office, and that as archdeacon he was
of a higher order, as now commonly archdeacons
are. But I shall show in the next chapter, that
anciently archdeacons were always of the order of
deacons, and of no other degree : and it appears
from what has here been already discoursed, that
this act of Csecilian was not from any peculiar
power that he enjoyed as archdeacon, but from that
ordinary power to rebuke offenders, which he had
in common with all the other deacons ofthe church.
sect. 15. The other thing I would further
cientiyDp"fo°rnid" remark concerning the office of dea-
the offices of all the • . -i • , . . . r. . .
inferior orders of the cons is tills, tfiat before the insti
tution of the inferior orders of the
church, (which were not set up in all churches at
once, nor perhaps in any church for the two first
ages, as shall be showed hereafter,) the deacons
were employed to perform all such offices as were
in after ages committed to those orders; such as
the offices of readers, subdeacons, exorcists or cate
chists, door-keepers, and the like. Thus Epipha
nius86 observes, that originally all offices of the

83 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. u. 57. p. 264. 'O Si&kovos iieicr-
koiteIt(o tov Xadv, &c. Confer lib. 8. u. 11.
84 Chrys. Horn. 24. in Act.
85 Optat. lib. 1. p. 40. Cum correptionem archidiaconi
Caeciliani ferre non posset, qua? ante spiritalem cibum et
potum, os nescio cujus martyris, si tamen martyris, libare
dicebatur, &c.
86 Epiphan. Hasr. 75. Aerian.

church were performed by bishops, presbyters, and
deacons, and therefore no church was without a
deacon. This was certainly the practice in the
time of Ignatius, who never speaks of any order be
low that of deacons ; but without them, he says, no
church was87 called a church. So that all the in
ferior offices must then be performed by deacons.
And even in after ages we find that several of the
inferior offices were many times put upon the same
man, perhaps to avoid the charge of maintaining
an over-numerous clergy in lesser churches. Thus
Eusebius tells us, that Romanus the martyr88 was
both deacon and exorcist in the church of Caesarea.
And Procopius the martyr had three offices in the
church of Scythopolis; he was at once reader, in
terpreter, and exorcist ; as we learn from the Acts
of his Martyrdom89 published by Valesius. Now
both these were martyred in the beginning of the
fourth century, in the time of the Diocletian perse
cution. And we find, a whole age after this, if the
author under the name of St. Austin90 may be cre
dited, that except in such great and rich churches
as the church of Rome, where there was a numer
ous clergy, all the inferior services were still per
formed by the deacons. In the Greek church they
were always the irvXwpol, or door-keepers, in the time
of the oblation and celebration of the eucharist, as
may be seen in the Apostolical Constitutions,91
where the deacons are commanded to stand at the
men's gate, and the subdeacons at the women's, to
see that no one should go out or come in during
the time of the oblation. These were anciently the
deacons' principal employments in the assembhes
of the church.
But besides these, we are to take
notice of two or three other offices, in
which they were commonly employed
by the bishop out of the church. One of these was
to be his sub-almoner, to take care of the necessi
tous, such as orphans, widows, virgins, martyrs in
prison, and all the poor and sick who had any
title to be maintained out of the public revenues
of the church. The deacons were particularly to
inquire into the necessities and wants of all these,
and make relation thereof to the bishop, and then
distribute to them such charities as they received
from him towards their relief and assistance. The
archdeacon indeed was as it were the bishop's trea
surer, but all the deacons were his dispensers, or
ministers of the church's charity to the indigent.

Sect. IS.
12. Deacons the
bishop's sub-al
moners.

67 Ignat. Ep. ad Trai. n. 3.
88 Euseb. de Martyr. Palaestin. c. 2.
89 Acta Procop. ap. Vales. Not. in Euseb. de Martyr.
Palaest. c. 1. Ibi ecclesiae tria ministeria praebebat : unum
in legendi officio, alteram in Syri interpretatione sermonis, et
tertium adversus daemones manus impositione eonsummans.
90 Aug. Qujest. Vet. et N. Test. c. 101. cited before, sect. 4.
91 Const. Apost. lib. 8. t. 11.

Chap. XX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

93

Which appears from several passages in Cyprian,92
Dionysius93 of Alexandria, and the author94 of the
Constitutions, who speak indifferently of this office
as common to all the deacons. Particularly in the
Constitutions, the duty of the deacon is thus de
scribed, that he should inform his bishop, when he
knows any one to be in distress, and then distribute
to their necessities by the directions of the bishop ;
but to do nothing clancularly without his consent,
lest that might seem to accuse him of neglecting
the distressed, and so turn to his reproach, and raise
a murmuring against him.
Another office ofthe deacons in this
Sect. 17. .....
13. Deacons to respect was, to make inquiry into the
inform the bishop
ofthemisdemean- morals and conversation of the peo-
ore of the people. x
pie ; and such evils as he could not
redress himself, by the ordinary power which was
intrusted in his hands, of those he was to give in
formation to the bishop, that he by his supreme
authority might redress them. Let the deacon, says
the book95 of Constitutions, refer all things to the
bishop, as Christ did to the Father : such things as
he is able, let him rectify, by the power which he
has from the bishop ; but the weightier causes let
the bishop judge.
„ . ,„ Upon this account the deacons were
Sect. 18. *
cornmonid/cSI"d usually styled the bishop's eyes and
hle™S,'sa„reS, Ws ears, his mouth, his right hand,
prophets, &c. an(^ j^ j,ear(. . because by their min
istry he overlooked his charge, and by them took
cognizance of men's actions, as much as if he him
self had seen them with his own eyes, or heard
them with his own ears : by them he sent directions
and orders to his flock, in which respect they were
his mouth and his heart ; by them he distributed to
the necessities of the indigent, and so they were his
right hand. These titles are frequently to be met
with in the Constitutions,95 and the author of the
Epistle97 to St. James. And Isidore of Pelusium, in
allusion to them, writing to Lucius,98 an archdeacon,
he tells him in the phrase of the church, that he
ought to be all eye, forasmuch as deacons were the
eyes of the bishop. The author of the Constitu
tions99 terms them hke wise the bishop's angels and
prophets, because they were the persons whom he
chiefly employed in messages, either to his own peo
ple, or foreign churches. For then bishops did no
thing but by the mouth or hands of one of their clergy.

For this reason, there being such a
, . -, -, . ... Sect. 19.
multitude and variety oi business com- Deacons to be
" multiplied accord-
monly attending the deacon's office, »g to the neccssi-
J o ' ties of the church.
it was usual to have several deacons
in the same church. In some churches they were
very precise to the number seven, in imitation of
the first church of Jerusalem. The council of
Neoca3sarea100 enacted it into a canon, that there
ought to be but seven deacons in any city, though
it was never so great, because this was according to
the rule suggested in the Acts of the Apostles. And
the church of Rome, both before and after this
council, seems to have looked upon that as a bind
ing rule also. For it is evident from the epistle of
Cornelius,101 written in the middle of the third cen
tury, that there were then but seven deacons in the
church of Rome, though there were forty-six pres
byters at the same time. And Prudentius intimates
that it was so in the time of Sixtus also, anno 261.
For speaking of Laurentius the deacon, he terms
him,102 the chief of those seven men, who had their
station near the altar ; meaning the seven deacons
of the church. Nay, in the fourth and fifth cen
turies, the custom there continued the same, as we
learn both from Sozomen,103 and Hilarius Sardus,104
the Roman deacon who wrote under the name of
St. Ambrose. But Sozomen says, this rule was not
observed in other churches, but the number of dea
cons was indifferent, as the business of every church
required. And it is certain it was so at Alexandria
and Constantinople. For though one of the writers
of the Life of St. Mark, cited by Bishop Pearson,105
says St. Mark ordained but seven deacons at Alex
andria, yet in after ages there were more : for Alex
ander, in one of his circular letters,105 names nine
deacons, whom he deposed with Arius for their
heretical opinions ; and it is probable there were
several others who continued orthodox : for in the
form of Arius his condemnation, published 107 by
Cotelerius, the catholic deacons of Alexandria and
Mareotes are mentioned, as joining with their bishop
in condemning him. And for the church of Con
stantinople, the number of deacons was there so
great, that in one of Justinian's Novels,108 we
find them limited to a hundred for the service of
the great church and three others only. So that
it is evident the number of deacons usually in
creased with the necessities of the church, and

92 Cypr. Ep. 49. al. 52. ad Cornel.
93 Dionys. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. II.
94 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. u. 31 et 32. lib. 3. u. 19.
95 Const. Apost. lib. 2. c. 44.
96 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 44. lib. 3. c. 19.
97 Clem. Ep. ad Jacob, c. 12.
98 Isidor. lib. 1. Ep. 29. " Const. Apost. lib. 2. c. 30.
100 Cone. Neocessar. c. 15.
101 Cornel. Ep. ad Fabi. ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
102 Prudent. Hymn, de S. Laurent. Hie primus e sep-
tem viris qui stant ad aram proximi.

103 Sozom. lib. 7. C 19. AiaKOVOl irapi 'Pojiiatots eI-
crEVt vvv oil ttXeious elo-iv iirTa.
m Ambros. Com. in 1 Tim. iii. p. 995. Nunc autem sep-
tem diaconos esse oportet, aliquantos presbyteros, ut bini
sint per ecclesias, et unus in civitate episcopus.
105 Vit. S. Marci ap. Pearson. Vind. Ignat, par. 1. u. 11.
p. 329. B. Marcus Anizanum Alexandriae ordinavit epis
copum, et tres presbyteros, et septem diaconos.
106 Alex. Ep. Encycl. ap. Theodor. lib. 1. c. 4.
107 Coteler. Not. in Const. Apost. lib. 8. c. 28.
108 Justin. Novel. 3. c. 1.

94

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

the church of Rome was singular in the contrary
practice. sect 20. I speak nothing here of the qualifi-
do™m"rnei|ht"bich cations required in deacons, because
ordained. they wepe generaiiy tr,e same that
were required in bishops and presbyters, and will
be spoken of hereafter : only in their age there was
some difference, which is here to be observed. Bi
shops and presbyters, as has been noted above,
might not ordinarily be ordained before thirty, but
deacons were allowed to be ordained at twenty-five,
and not before. This is the term fixed both by the
civil and canon law, as may be seen in Justinian's
Novels,109 the councils of Agde,110 Carthage, Trullo,
and many others. And it was a rule very nicely
observed : for though we meet with some bishops
that were ordained before this age, yet those (as I
have showed before) were never deacons, but or
dained immediately bishops from lay men : but among
those that were ordained deacons, we scarce meet
with an instance of any one that was ordained be
fore the age of twenty-five in all the history of the
church. sect 21. The last thing which I shall ob-
wSchdeaco™ paid serve of deacons, is the great deference
to presbyters, and -, . n . v v .
received from the and respect they were obliged to pay
to presbyters, as well as to the bishop.
It has been proved before, that the presbyters had
their thrones in the church, whereon they sat toge
ther with their bishop : but the deacons had no
such privilege, but are always represented as stand
ing by them. So the author ln of the Constitutions
and Gregory Nazianzen112 place them in this order,
viz. the bishop sitting on the middle throne, the
presbyters sitting on each hand of him, and the
deacons standing by. The council of Nice ex
pressly113 forbids deacons to sit among the presbyters
in the church. And it is evident from St. Je
rom111 and the author under the name of St. Aus
tin,115 that though the Roman deacons were grown
the most elated of any others, yet they did not pre
sume to sit in the church. Nay, some canons go
further, and forbid116 deacons to sit any where in the
presence of a presbyter, except by his permission.
The like respect they were to pay to presbyters
in several other instances, being obliged to minister

to them, as well as to the bishop, in the performance
of all divine offices ; none of which might be per
formed by a deacon in the presence of a presbyter,
without some special reason for it, as has been noted
before. Nay, a deacon was not allowed so much as
to bless a common feast, if a presbyter was present
at it : as we may see in St. Jerom's epistle117 to
Evagrius, where he censures the Roman deacons
somewhat sharply for presuming to do so.
But then, as the canons obhged deacons to pay
this respect to presbyters ; so, to distinguish them
from the lesser clergy, all the inferior orders were
required to pay the same respect to them. The
council of Laodicea, in the same canon that says, a
deacon shall not sit in the presence of a presbyter
without his leave, adds immediately after, that in like •
manner the deacon shall be honoured by the sub
deacons and all the other clergy. And the council
of Agde118 repeats the canon in the same words. I
shall here also remind the reader of what I have ob
served before, that deacons in some churches had
power to censure the inferior clergy in the absence
of the presbyters. St. Jerom119 seems also to say,
that then- revenues were rather greater than those
of the presbyters, which made them sometimes trou
blesome and assuming. Beside all this, the order of
deacons was of great repute, because the archdeacon
was always then one of this order, and he was com
monly a man of great interest and authority in the
church ; of whose powers and privileges, because
it is necessary to discourse a little more particularly,
I shall treat distinctly of them in the following
chapter.

CHAPTER XXI.

OF ARCHDEACONS.
Though archdeacons in these last Sectli
ages of the church have usually been cienUjoraui°°Lime
j, , -, -, - . . . ... order with deacons.
of the order of presbyters, yet anciently
they were no more than deacons ; which appears
evidently from those writers, who give us the first

109 Just. Novel. 123. c. 13- Presbyterumminorem triginta
quinque annorum fieri non permittimus. Sed neque diaco-
num aut subdiaconum viginti quinque.
110 Cone. Agathens. c. 16. Cone. Carthag. 3. c. 4. Cone.
Trull, c. 14. Cone. Tolet. 4. c. 20.
111 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57.
112 Greg. Naz. Somn. de Eccles. Anastas.
113 Cone. Nic. c. 18.
114 Hieron. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. In ecclesia Romae pres
byteri sedent, et stant diaeoni.
115 Aug. Quajst. Vet. et Nov. Test. c. 101. Quanquam
Romanae ecclesiae diaeoni modice inverecundiores videantur
sedendi tamen dignitatem in ecclesia non praesumunt.

116 Concil. Laodic. c. 20. Carthag. 4. c. 39.
117 Hieron. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. Licet increbrescentibus
vitiis, inter presbyteros absente episcopo sedere diaconum
viderim: et in domesticis conviviis, benedictiones presby
teris dare, al. benedictiones coram presbyteris dare.
118 Cone. Agathens. u. 65. Non oportet diaconum sedere
praesente presbytero, sed ex jussione presbyteri sedeat. Si
militer autem honorificetur diaconus a ministris inferioribus
et omnibus clericis.
119 Hieron. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. Presbyter noverit se lucris
minorem, sacerdotio esse majorem. Id. Com. in Ezek. .;•
xlviii. Ultra sacerdotes, hoc est, presbyteros intumescunt:
et dignitatem non merito sed divitiis aestimant.

Chap. XXI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

95

account of them. St. Jerom1 says the archdeacon
was chosen out of the deacons, and was the princi
pal deacon in every church, as the archpresbyter
was the principal presbyter ; and that there was but
one of each in every church. Optatus calls Cae
cilian2 archdeacon of Carthage, yet he was never
more than a deacon, till he was ordained bishop, as
has been showed before: and that made Caecilian
himself say, that if he was not rightly ordained
bishop, as the Donatists pretended, he was to be
treated only as a deacon.8 It is certain also St.
Laurence, archdeacon of Rome, was no more than
the chief of the deacons, or the principal man of
the seven,4 who stood and waited at the altar, as
Prudentius words it. From these testimonies it is
very plain, that in those times the archdeacon was
always one of the order of deacons.
,, . „ But how the archdeacon came by
Sect 2. J
bishoptndVo't8 nis honour, and after what manner
made by seniority. fe w&g mveste(i vrrith his Office, IS 3.
matter of some dispute among learned men. Sal-
- masius5 and some others are of opinion, that ori
ginally he was no more than the senior deacon,
though they own that in process of time the office
became elective. Habertus6 thinks it was always
elective, and that it was at the bishop's liberty and
discretion to nominate which of the deacons he
thought fit to the office. That it was so in the case
of Athanasius, seems pretty evident from what
Theodoret says of him,7 that though he was very
young, yet he was made chief of the order of dea
cons. For this implies, as Valesius there observes,
that he was chosen by the bishop, and preferred
before his seniors. St. Jerom, in the forecited pas
sage, as plainly asserts that the office went not by
seniority, but election : only he seems to put the
power of electing in the deacons ; but if they had
any hand in it, it must be understood to be under
the direction of the bishop, who is required by some
canons to choose his own archdeacon, and ordina
rily to give preference to the senior, if he was duly
qualified ; but if not, to make choice of any other,
whom he thought most fit to discharge the offices
of the church,8 and the trust that was reposed in
him.

The office of the archdeacon was
always a place of great honour and common'iy'per-
... -n 1 .1 , • 1 , sons of such interest
reputation. For he was the bishop s in the chm-ch, that
they were chosen
constant attendant and assistant ; and »he bishops- succes-
next to the bishop, the eyes of the
whole church were fixed upon him. By which
means he commonly gained such an interest, as to
get himself chosen the bishop's successor before the
presbyters. Of which it were easy to give several
instances, as Athanasius, Csecilian, and many others.
And this, I presume, was the reason why St. Jerom
says, that an archdeacon thought himself injured,9
if he was ordained a presbyter : probably because
he thereby lost his interest in the church, and was
disappointed of his preferment. We might certain
ly conclude it was thus in the church of Rome, if
what Eulogius, a Greek writer in Photius, says,
might be depended on as true : that it was a law at
Rome to choose the archdeacon the bishop's suc
cessor,10 and that therefore Cornelius ordained No
vatian presbyter, to deprive him of the privilege
and hopes of succeeding. But I confess there is no
small reason to question the truth of this relation,
both because we read of no such law in any writer
of the Latin church, and because this author pal
pably mistakes, in saying, that Cornelius ordained
Novatian presbyter, who was presbyter long before ;
and probably never was archdeacon, nor deacon,
but ordained presbyter immediately from a layman,
as may be collected from the letters of Cyprian "
and Cornelius,12 which tacitly reflect upon him for
it. Yet if by law Eulogius meant no more than
custom, perhaps it might be customary at Rome,
as at some other places, to make the archdeacons
the bishops' successors ; their power and privileges,
as I observed, commonly gaining them a consider
able interest both among the clergy and the people.
As to the archdeacon's office, he
was always the bishop's immediate The offices of the
. . archdeacon. l.To
minister and attendant: a latere pon- attend the bishop at
* the altar, &c.
tificis non recessit, to use St. Jerom's
phrase, he was always by his side, ready to assist
him. Particularly at the altar, when the bishop
ministered, he performed the usual offices of a dea
con, that have been mentioned in the last chapter.

1 Hieron. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. Aut diaeoni eligant de se,
quem industrium noverint, et archidiaconum vocent. Id.
Ep.4.ad Rustic. Singuli ecclesiarum episcopi, singuli archi
presbyteri, singuli archidiaconi.
2 Optat. lib. 1. p. 40. Cum correptionem archidiaconi
Caeciliani ferre non posset, &c.
8 Optat. ibid. p. 41. Iterum a Caeciliano mandatum est,
ut si felix in se, sicut illi arbitrabantur, nihil contulisset, ipsi
tanquam adhuc diaconum ordinarent Caecilianum.
4 Prudent. Hymn, de S. Steph. Hie primus e septem
viris, qui stant ad aram proximi.
5 Salmas. de Primat. p. 8. Suicer. Thesaur. Eccl. t. 1. p.
531 :
6 Habert. Pontifical. Obs. 6. p. 206.

7 Theod. lib. 1. c. 26. Ne'os fjiiv ebv ti)v rjXiKiav, tov
Xopov Setcov SiaKovcov riyovpEvos.
8 Cone. Agathens. c. 23. Si officium archidiaconatus,
propter simpliciorem naturam implere aut expedire nequi-
verit, ille loci sui nomen teneat, et ordinationi ecclesiae,
quem episcopus elegerit, praeponatur.
9 Hieron. Com. in Ezek. xlviii. Certe qui primus fuerit
ministrorum, quia per singula concionatur in populos, et a
pontificis latere non recedit, injuriam putat, si presbyter
ordinetur. 10 Eulog. ap. Phot. Cod. 182. Tov ipxtiiaKovov evevo.
plTO Sliioxov tov apxiEpaTtvovTov KaSriTaoSaL.
11 Cypr. Ep. 52. al. 55. ad Antonian, p. 103.
12 Cornel. Ep. ad Fabian, ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.

98

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

The author of the Constitutions calls him the <5
jrapeTtic rip dpxitpti, the deacon that stood by the
bishop, and proclaimed, when the communion
service began, Let no13 one approach in wrath
against his brother, let no one come in hypocrisy.
To him it belonged to minister the cup to the peo
ple, when the bishop celebrated the eucharist, and
had administered the bread before him, as we learn
from the account which St. Ambrose " gives of Lau
rentius, archdeacon of Rome. It was his business
also, as the bishop's substitute, to order all things
relating to the inferior clergy, and their ministra
tions and services in the church : as what deacon
should read the Gospel, who should bid the prayers,
which of them should keep the doors, which walk
about the church to observe the behaviour of the
people; which of the readers, acolythists, sub
deacons, should perform their service at such a time,
or in what post and station : for these things were
not. precisely determined, but at the bishop's liberty
to ordain and appoint them ; which he commonly
did by his archdeacon ; whose orders and directions
therefore are sometimes called ordinationes, and
ordinatio ecclesics^ in some of the ancient councils.
Whence, I presume, came the name, ordinary, which
is a title given to archdeacons in after ages.
Sect 5, 2. He assisted the bishop in man-
2. to assist him aging and dispensing the church's

revenues, having the chief care of the
poor, orphans, widows, &c. under the bishop, whose
portions were assigned by him, and sent by the
hands of the other deacons that were under him.
The fourth council16 of Carthage makes mention of
this part of his office, when it requires the bishop
not to concern himself personally in the care and
government of the widows, orphans, strangers, but
to commit this to his archpresbyter or archdeacon.
Upon this account Prudentius, describing 17 the
offices of St. Laurence, whom he makes to be arch
deacon of Rome, among other things, assigns him
the keys of the church's treasure, and the care of
dispensing the oblations of the people. And for the
same reason both he and St. Ambrose,18 and all
other writers of his passion, bring in the heathen
persecutor demanding of him those treasures, which
he had in his keeping : which he promising to do,
in a short time after brought before him the poor,
the lame, the blind, the infirm, telling him, those

were the riches which he had in his custody ; for on
them he had expended the church's treasure. St.
Austin says this was his office, as he was archdeacon
of the church. Paulinus ls therefore calls the arch
deacon, arces custodem, the keeper ofthe chest; be
cause, though the other deacons were the dispensers
and conveyors, yet he was the chief manager and di
rector of them, and from him they took their orders
as from the guardian of the church's treasure. It
was upon this account that the Donatists charged
Caecilian, among other things, that he had pro
hibited the deacons from carrying any provision a to
the martyrs in prison. Which objection must be
grounded upon this, that he was obliged by his
office, as he was archdeacon, to see that the martyrs
were provided of sustenance ; which they pretended
he had not only neglected, but abused his authority,
in forbidding those that were under his command
to minister unto them.
3. Another part of his office was to Sect 6
assist the bishop in preaching. For 3' '" preacning-
as any deacon was authorized to preach by the
bishop's leave, so the archdeacon, being the most
eminent of the deacons, was more frequently pitch
ed upon to discharge this office, if we may so under
stand those words of St. Jerom, which have been
cited before in the 3rd section, Primus ministrorum
per singula concionatur in populos, The chief minister,
or archdeacon, is many times, and in many places,
employed in preaching to the people. For the word,
singula, may relate both to times and places. But
if any one thinks, that concionari here signifies no
more than presdicare and Knpvaotiv, doing the office
of a holy crier in the assembly, I shall not contend
about it ; but only say, that St. Jerom, speaking of
something that then made the archdeacons popular,
seems rather to mean the office of preaching, than
any other.
4. The archdeacon usually bore a Sect. 7.
part with the bishop in the ordina- t- in ordaining the
rn r inferior clergy.
tions of the inferior clergy, subdea
cons, acolythists, &c. His office in this matter is
particularly described in several canons of the fourth
council of Carthage,21 which relate the manner how
the inferior clergy were to be ordained ; viz. not by
imposition of hands, which belonged only to the
superior orders, but by receiving some vessels or
utensils of the chm-ch, partly from the hands of the

18 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57.
14 Ambros. de Offic. lib. 1. t. 41.
15 Vid. Concil. Agathens. c. 23. Isidor. Hispal. Ep. ad
Ludifred. ap. Gratian. Dist. 25. c. 1.
16 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 17. Ut episcopus gubernationem
viduarum, pupillorum, ac peregrinorum, non per seipsum,
sed per archipresbyterum, aut per archidiaconum a»at.
17 Prudent. Hymn, de S. Laur. Levita sublimis gradu, et
caeteris praestantior, claustris sacrorum praeerat, ccelestis
arcanum domus fidis gubernans clavibus, votasque dispen-
sans opes.

» Ambros. de Offic. lib. 2. c. 28. Aug. Serm. 111. de
Diversis. Sanctus Laurentius archidiaconus fuit: opes ec
clesiae ab illo persecutore quaerebantur. Id. de divers.
Ser. 123.
19 Paulin. de Mirac. S. Martin, lib. 4. Bibl. Patr. t. 8.
p. 865. Protinus adstanti diacono, quem more priorum
Antistes sanctae custodem legerat area?,
Imperat, &c.
20 Aug. Brevic. Collat. 3. c. 14.
» Concil. Carth. 4. c. 5, 6, 9.

Chap. XXI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

97

bishop, and partly from the hands of the archdea
con. As, to give only one instance in the ordination
of an acolythist, the canon says, The bishop was to
inform him what his duty was, and then the arch
deacon was to give him a taper into his hand, that
he might know that he was appointed to light the
candles of the church. 5. The archdeacon was invested
Sect 8.
5. The archdeacon gjgQ with a power of censuring the
had power to cen- -T o
mtsTteS^but" otller deacons, and all the inferior
not presbjteW. ^^ q{ ^ church_ qv^,. i(. wag s0>
at least in some churches, is very evident from a
passage in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon,
where Ibas, bishop of Edessa, speaking of Maras,
one of the deacons of his chm-ch, says, he was not
excommunicated by himself, but by his archdeacon,
who,22 for a crime committed against a presbyter,
suspended him from the communion.
But whether the archdeacon had any power over
presbyters, is a matter of dispute among learned
men. Salmasius,23 and the learned Suicerus24 after
him, scruple not to assert, that even the archpresby
ter himself, in the Roman church, was subject to
him. Cujacius, and some others, who are cited by
Baluzius,25 go one step further, and say it was so in
all churches. Yet there is not the least footstep of
any such power to be met with in any ancient writer
or council : but the original of all the mistake is
owing to a corruption in Gratian's Decree, and Gre
gory the Ninth's Decretals, who cite the words
alleged in the margin,26 the one as from Isidore of
Seville, and the other from the council of Toledo,
pretending that the archpresbyter is to be subject
to the archdeacon : when yet, as both Baluzius and
the Roman correctors confess, there are no such
words to be found in Isidore's Epistle; nor will
Garsias Loaisa own them to be the genuine decree
of any council of Toledo. So that the whole credit
of this matter rests upon Gratian and the compilers
of the Decretals, whose authority is of httle esteem
in tilings relating to antiquity, when there is no
better proof than their bare assertion. Yet I shall
not deny, but that in Gratian's time it might be as
he represents it: for, probably, by this time the
archdeacons were chosen out of the order of pres
byters ; though when first they began to be so, is
not very easy to determine. Only we are certain,
that some centuries before the time of Gratian the

custom was altered. For archdeacons, in the ninth
century, were some of them, at least, of the order
of presbyters : as appears from Hincmar's Capitula,27
directed to Guntharius and Odelhardus, two of his
archdeacons, whom he styles presbyter-archdeacons.
And there, is reason enough to think it was so in
the time of Gratian; the archdeacons were then
generally of the order of presbyters, as they have
been ever since : which makes it no wonder that in
Gratian's time they should have power over the
archipresbyteri, which, in the language of that age,
often signifies no more than rural deans, over which
the archdeacons have usually power at this day.
But by this the reader may judge how little such
writers are to be depended on, who take their esti
mate of former ages from the practice of their own-,
and reckon every thing ancient that is agreeable to
the rules and customs of the times they live in.
But to return to the archdeacons of Sect 9
the primitive chm-ch: there is one ,°f'hename
^ a7ro.vT.Ti;?, cir-
thing more may admit of some dispute, vXc1theSJrarch'd?a-<i
whether the archdeacon's power an- 0°er a!elwhSep'wer
ciently extended over the whole dio
cese, or was confined to the city or mother chm-ch.
In the middle ages of the church there is no ques
tion but they had power over the whole diocese.
For Isidorus Hispalensis, who lived in the begin
ning of the seventh century, in the account which
he gives of the archdeacon's office, says, the paro
chial clergy were under his care, that is, the deacons
and inferior clergy ; and that it belonged to him to
order matters,28 and end controversies among them ;
to give the bishop an account what churches stood
in need of repairing, to make inquiry by the bi
shop's order into the state of every parish, and
to see what condition the ornaments and goods of
the church were in, and whether the ecclesiastical
liberties were maintained. Habertus thinks29 the
archdeacons were invested with the same power
some ages before, and for proof cites a passage
out of the council of Chalcedon, where, in an in
strument30 presented by the presbyters of Edessa
against Ibas their bishop, one Abramius, a deacon
of that church, in all the Latin translations, is call
ed diaconus apantita, which Habertus takes to be a
general inspector of the church. But there are two
evident reasons against this, which it is a wonder
so observing a person as Habertus should not see :

22 Con. Chalced. Act. 10. p. 653. ' Akolvcoviitos eo-titoj
ISiea dpxiiiaKOVoi, &c.
23 Salmas. de Primat. c. 1. p. 9.
24 Suicer. Thesaur. t. 1. p. 533.
25 Baluz. Not. ad Gratian. Dist. 25. c. 1. p. 455.
26 Grat. Dist. 25. c. 1. ex Epist. Isidor. Hispal. ad Ludi-
fred. Archipresbyter vero se esse sub archidiacono, ejusque
praeceptis, sicut episcopi sui, sciat obedire. In Gregory's
Decretal, lib. 1. Tit. 24. de Officio Archipresb. u. 1. the
same words are cited ex Concilio Toletano.
27 Hincmar. Capitula Archidiaconibus Presbyteris data.
H

Concil. t. 8. p. 591.
28 Isidor. Ep. ad Ludifred. et ap. Gratian. Dist. 25. c. 1.
Sollicitudo quoque parochitanorum (al. parochiarum) et or-
dinatio, etjurgia ad ejus pertinent curam: pro reparandis
dio3cesanis basilicis ipse suggerit sacerdoti: ipse inquirit
parochias cum jussione episcopi, et ornamenta, vel res
basilicarum parochitanorum (al. parochiarum) et libertatum
ecclesiasticarum episcopo idem refert.
29 Habert. in Pontifical, par. 9. Obser. 6.
80 Concil. Chalced. Act. 10. p. 650.

93

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

1. That Abramius was not an archdeacon, but only
a private deacon of the church ; for in the same
place there is mention made of another archdea
con, who, when Ibas was about to have had Abra
mius ordained bishop of Batena, interposed and
hindered him from doing it, because he had been
censured for the practice of magic, and never given
any satisfaction to the church. And though it is
said, that Ibas took occasion to remove that, arch
deacon from his office, yet it is not once intimated
that he put Abramius in his room ; which, if he had
done, it would doubtless have been made another
article of accusation against him before the council.
2. The original Greek in Labbe's edition is not
didmvog d-jvavTiT-ng, as Habertus reads it, but only
tSiaKojioc dw' aiirrjg 7-ijc v/itrsprjc ttcieXitjCiiag, a deacon of
that our church of Edessa : and though d-Kavrir-ng
be put into the margin, yet it is not owned to be
any various reading, but only the editor's conjecture,
which I think is not sufficient to build such an as
sertion upon, when no other proof or authority is
pretended. Therefore I determine nothing con
cerning this power of the archdeacons in ancient
times, but leave it to further inquiry, and the deter
mination of every judicious reader.
_ . ,„ Valesius takes notice of another
Sect. 10.
e,,?/r"'i why'gSm name, which he thinks was sometimes
to srchueacons. ^yen to the arcilrieacons, that is, the
name cor-episeopi ; for which he cites the words of
one Joannes Abbas,31 in a, book written about the
translation of the relics of St. Glodesindis. This at
first may look like a corruption only of the name
chorepiscopus, because in latter ages the power of
the ancient chorepiscopi dwindled into that of the
archdeacons ; but when it is considered, that all the
deacons anciently were called the bishop's eyes, and
his ears, his mouth, and his heart, as has been noted
in the last chapter, sect. 18, it will appear very
probable that the archdeacon should be peculiarly
dignified with those titles ; and therefore be called
cor-episeopi, the bishop's heart, because he was used
to signify his mind and will to the people : as he is
called oculus episcopi, not only in ancient authors,32
but in the Decretals,33 and the council of Trent,34
because he was the bishop's eye to inspect the
diocese under him. Some may perhaps be desirous to
The opinions c Know further the first rise and original
cerning the first of the name and office of archdeacons
original ol the name
and otHce of arch- jn the church ; but this is a matter
deacon. '
involved in so great obscurity that it

cannot easily be determined. Habertus and some
others85 of the Roman communion, reckon this
office as ancient as that of deacons themselves,
deriving both from apostolical constitution, and
making Stephen the first archdeacon of the church.
But others, with greater reason,36 deduce it only
from the third century, and leave it as a matter
under debate and inquiry, whether there were any
such thing as the archdeacon's office in the time of
Cornelius, bishop of Rome, which was in the middle
of the third century. This is certain, that Corne
lius, in his epistle to Fabius, where he gives a
catalogue'7 of the Roman clergy, though he speaks
of deacons, and subdeacons, acolythists, exorcists,
readers, and door-keepers, makes no particular men
tion of the archdeacon ; nor does Cyprian ever so
much as once use the name : yet before the end of
this century Ccecilian is supposed to have had the title
as well as the office of archdeacon of Carthage, be
cause Optatus calls him so, and the name of ten occurs
in St. Jerom and other writers of the fourth age,
in which St. Jerom lived. Baronius indeed urges
St. Austin's authority, to prove that Stephen was
properly an archdeacon; for he says St. Austin
calls him primicerius diaconorum : but he that will
look into St. Austin, will quickly find his mistake ;
for his words are not primicerius diaconorum, but
primicerius martyrum,33 the protomartyr, as we com
monly call him, because he was the first that suf
fered for the name of Christ. And hence the
reader may observe by the way, that the words pri
micerius and primus do not always denote principal
ity, or priority of power and jurisdiction, but only
priority of time, or precedency of honour and dignity
in respect of place or outward order. In which sense
the same St. Austin39 says in another place, that Ste
phen is named first among the deacons, as Peter was
among the apostles. Which is a primacy that may
be allowed to them both without any pretence of ju
risdiction. Habertus urges further the authority of
the Greek Menologion, which gives Stephen the title
of archdejicon ; but such books are not sufficient
evidence, being they are of a modern date, and speak
of ancient things in the language and phrase of
their own times ; for which reason they are not
much to be depended on, except when they are
backed with the concurrent testimony of some an
cient authors, of which there are none in this case
to yield any collateral evidence to this assertion.
Yet on the other hand, the opinion of Salmasius is
equally to be discarded, who40 asserts that the office

81 Joh. Abbas ap. Vales. Not. in Theodoret. lib. 1. c. 26.
Ad hoc inspiciendum saerorum ministros cum archidiacono
majore, quem cor-episeopi dicunt, pontifex direxit.
82 Isidor. Pelus. lib. 1. Ep. 29.
33 Decretal, lib. 1. Tit. 23. c. 7.
34 Con. Trid. Sess. 24. cap. 12. de Reform.
35 Habert. Not. in Pontifical, p. 207. Baron, an. 31. n. 285.

86 Bp. Fell, Not. in Cypr. Ep. 52. al. 49. ad Cornel.
37 Cornel. Ep. ad Fab. ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
88 Aug. Ser. 1. de Sanctis, t. 10. Hodie celebvamus na-
talem, quo primicerius martyrum migravit ex mundo.
39 Aug. Ser. 94. de Diversis. Inter diaconos illos noun
natus primus, sicut inter apostolos Petrus.
40 Salmas. de Primat. c. 1. p. 8.

Chap. XXII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

99

of archdeacon was not in the church in the time of
St. Jerom, though St. Jerom41 himself says in most
express words, that the custom then was to have
one bishop, one archpresbyter, one archdeacon in
every church. But this is the usual way of that
author in his book de Primatu, to advance para
doxes of his own fancy for ancient history, and lay
down positive assertions upon the most slender con
jectures ; yea, many times against the plainest evi
dence of primitive records, as in the case before us,
and many others which I have had occasion to take
notice of in this discourse. It were to be wished,
that that author, who wrote upon a useful design,
had been a little more accurate in his accounts of
the state of the clergy of the primitive church ; and
whilst he was demolishing the pope's supremacy,
had not confusedly treated of some other orders
and offices, which were of greater antiquity in the
church.

CHAPTER XXII.

OF DEACONESSES.

sect. 1. Having spoken of deacons and arch-
ofSScSSsB^™™' deacons, it remains that I say some-
pp!ie°','md!%, thing in this place of deaconesses, be
cause their office and service was of
great use in the primitive church. There is some
mention made of them in Scripture, by which it
appears that their office was as ancient as the apos
tolical age. St. Paul calls Phoebe a servant of
the church of Cenchrea, Rom. xvi. 1. The original
word is o'caeoj'Of;, a deaconess, answerable to the
Latin word ministra, which is the name that is
given them in Pliny's Epistle,1 which speaks about
the Christians. Tertullian 2 and some others call
them vidues, widows, and their office viduatus, be
cause they were commonly chosen out of the
widows of the church. For the same reason Epi
phanius" and the council of Laodicea4 call them
irpto-piTiSag, elderly widows, because none but such
were ordinarily taken into this office.

For indeed by some ancient laws Sect 2
these four qualifications were re- ™?™ oV™™" b°
quired in every one, that was to be laws'
taken into this order. 1. That she should be a
widow. 2. That she should be a widow that had
borne children. 3. A widow that was but once
married. 4. One of a considerable age, forty, fifty,
or sixty years old. Though all these rules admit
ted of exceptions. In Tertullian's time the dea
conesses were so commonly chosen out of the
widows, that when a certain young virgin was
made a deaconess, he speaks of it 5 as a miracle or
monstrous thing in the church. Yet some learned
men are of opinion, that virgins were sometimes
made deaconesses even in the time of Ignatius;
because Ignatius, in his epistle to the church of
Smyrna,6 salutes the virgins that were called wi
dows, that is, deaconesses, as Cotelerius and Vossius
truly expound it ; for virgins could not be called
widows congruously in any other sense. Some
suspect that the word, virgins, is a corruption crept
into the text : but there is no reason for this con
jecture, for Ignatius is not the only author that
speaks of virgin-deaconesses. Epiphanius7 says,
in his time there were some virgins, and some wi
dows that had been but once married. The author
of the Constitutions8 says the same, that the dea
coness was either to be a chaste virgin, or a widow
that had been the wife of one man. And one of
Justinian's Novels9 enacted it into a law, that the
deaconesses should be chosen out of one of these
orders. Accordingly we find in the practice of the
church, virgins as well as widows admitted to
this office. Gregory Nyssen1" says his own sister
Macrina, who was a virgin, was a deaconess, and so
was Lampadia, another virgin. And Sozomen11 re
lates, how that Chrysostom would have ordained
Nicarete, a famous virgin, to this office, but she re
fused it for the love she had to a private and philo
sophic hfe.
Yet by some laws they were re
quired not only to be widows, but such And Buch widows
as had children.
widows as had children also. Ter
tullian12 seems to intimate that this was the custom
of the age he lived in, to put none into this office
but such as were mothers, and had had the edu-

41 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic, cited before, sect. 1.
1 Plin. lib. 10. Ep. 97. Quo magis necessarium credidi,
ex duabus ancillis, quae ministrae dicebantur, quid esset veri
et per tormenta quaerere.
2 Tertul. lib. 1. ad Uxor. u. 7. Id. de veland. Virg. c. 9.
Epiph. Haer. 79. ... 4. Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. u. 13.
3 Epiphan. Hm. 79. Collyrid. n. 4.
4 Con. Laodic. c. 11.
5 Tertul. de veland. Virgin, c. 9. Scio alicubi virginem
in viduatu ab annis nondum viginti collocatam. Cui si
quid refrigerii debuerat episcopus, aliter utique salvo re-
spectu disciplinae, praestare potuisset, ne tale nunc miracu-
lum, ne dixerim monstrum, in ecclesia denotaretur.
8 Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. n. 13. 'Ao-ira^o/nai -rets -irapQl-
H 2

vovs Tcie XEyopivas x^Pa^- Coteler. in loc. Viduse voca-
bantur, quia in gradu viduali sen diaconico erant constitutae#
7 Epiph. Expos. Fid. Ii. 21. f} xVPEvaaaai arret povoya-
plas, 77 ill TrapVEVOl overai.
8 Const. Apost. lib. 6. c. 17.
9 Just. Novel. 6. c. 6. Aut virgines constitutas, aut unius
viri quae fuerant uxores.
10 Nyssen. Vit. Macrin. t. 2. p. 181 et 197.
11 Sozom. lib. 8. c.23.
12 Tertul. de vel. Virg. e. 9. Ad quam sedem praeter
annos sexaginta non tantum univirae, id est nuptae, ali-
quando eliguntur, sed et matres et quidem educatrices fili-
orum : scilicet ut experiments omnium affeetuum structae,
facile norint caeteras et consilio et solatio juvare.

100

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

cation of children, in the training up of whom they
had learnt to be tender and compassionate in their
affections, and so were qualified to assist others both
by their counsel and comfort. Sozomen also men
tions a law18 made by Theodosius to this purpose,
that no women should be admitted to the office,
except they had children, and were above sixty
years old, according to the express rule of St. Paul.
The law is still extant in the Theodosian Code,14 in
the same words as Sozomen cites it : but he speaks
of it as a new law, that was then made upon a par
ticular occasion, by reason of some scandal that had
happened in the church ; which is a plain intima
tion, that from the time of Tertullian, to the making
of this law, the church had varied in her practice.
And so she had likewise with re-
Not to iie ordained spect to the age of deaconesses. For
age,eby tnJmcJun- though the forementioned law of The-
cient canons. ,
odosius require them to be sixty years
of age complete; and TertuUian15 and St. Basil16
speak of the same age ; yet Justinian in one of his
Novels17 requires but fifty, and in another18 but
forty ; which is all that was insisted on before by
the great19 council of Chalcedon, whose words are,
No woman shall be ordained a deaconess before she
is forty years old. And it is probable in some cases
that term was not strictly required : for Sozomen20
says, Nectarius bishop of Constantinople ordained
Olympias a deaconess, though she was but a young
widow, because she was a person of extraordinary
virtue. By which we may judge, that as the church
varied in her rule about this matter, so bishops
took a liberty to ordain deaconesses at what age
they thought fit, provided they could be assured of
their probity and virtue.
Sect 5 But there was another qualification,
heln'oniy'fhe^vivS which they were more strict in exact
or one man. -^ wnjcr, waS) that the deaconesses
should be such widows as had been only the wives
of one man, according to the apostle's prescription,
1 Tim. v. 9. Which rule they generally understood
as a prohibition of electing any to be deaconesses
who had been twice married, though lawfully and
successively to two husbands one after another.

In this sense Tertullian21 says, the apostle requires
them to be unkiree, the wives of one man ; which
Epiphanius22 calls xr\9lvaaaal "7™ povoyapiag, wi
dows that have been but once married. So the au
thor of the Constitutions, and Justinian's Novels,21
which have been cited before.
But Theodoret gives a different sense of the apos
tle's words : for he supposes the apostle not to for
bid the choosing of widows that had been twice
married, but only such24 as had married again after
they had divorced themselves from, a former hus
band ; which was such a scandalous act, as justly
excluded them from the church's service. And
this sense is embraced as the most probable and
rational, by the learned Justellus,25 Dr. Hammond,15
Suicerus,27 and several others, of which I shall have
occasion to give a further account, when I come to
speak of that apostolical rule, as it concerned all
the clergy. Thus much will suffice to be spoken at
present concerning the qualifications of deaconesses
before they were ordained.
The next inquiry is concerning
their ordination itself, whether it was whether de«™i-
. . , „ esses were ancielllh
always performed by imposition oi °rdalne<| bjimpon.
hands ? And here learned men are
very much divided in their sentiments. Baroniusa
thinks they had no imposition of hands at the time
of the council of Nice, and he grounds his assertion
upon one of the canons of that council, which, as
he expounds it, denies that deaconesses were or
dained by imposition of hands, and therefore makes
no other account of them than as mere lay-persons,
Valesius a gives the same exposition of the canon;
though he owns that Balsamon and Zonaras, the
ancient expositors, were of a contrary judgment, viz.
that the canon speaks not of the deaconesses of the
church, but of such as returned to the catholic
church from the Paulianists, or Samosatenian here
tics, among whom they had received no imposition
of hands, and therefore were to be treated as mere
laics. And in this sense Suicerus30 and Albaspiny,31
Christianus Lupus, Fabrotus, and other modern
critics and expositors of the canon, explain it also.
To make the reader himself judge in the matter, I

13 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 16. Et pi} ircclSai exolev, &c.
» Cod. Theod. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc et Cler. Leg. 27.
Nulla nisi emensis sexaginta annis, cui votiva domi proles
sit, secundum praeceptum apostpli ad diaconissarum con
sortium transferatur.
15 Tertul. ibid.
16 Basil. Ep. Canonic, c. 24.
17 Just. Novel. 6. c. 6. Super mediam constitutas
aetatem, et circa quinquaginta annos.
18 Novel. 123. c. 13. Diaconissa in sancta ecclesia non
ordinatur, quae minor quadraginta annis sit.
19 Con. Chalced. c. 14. al. 15. Aiokovov pi} xzi9°tove~l-
trdai yvvalKa irpd iTeov TEaerapaKovra. Vid. Concil. Trul-
lan. c. 14 et 40.
2(1 Sozom. lib. 8. c. 9. KatTrap viav x^pav yEVOpivr}v —
SUlKOVOV EXEipOTOV1}CrE.

21 Tertul. ad Uxor. lib. 1. t. 7. Viduam allegi in ordi-
nationem nisi univiram non coucedit. It. de Virg. veland.
c. 9.
22 Epiph. Exp. Fid. n. 21.
23 Justin. Novel. 6. c. 6. Constit. Apost. lib. 6. c. 17.
24 Theod. Com. in 1 Tim. v. 9.
25 Justel. Not. ad can. 1. Concil. Laodic.
26 Ham. Annot. on 1 Tim. iii. 2.
27 Suicer. Thesaur. t. 1. p. 899.
28 Baron, an. 34. u. 283. It. Cabassut. Notit. Concil. c.
56. p. 342.
29 Vales. Not. in Sozomen. lib. 8. c. 9.
20 Suicer. Thesaur. t. 1. p. 867.
31 Albasp. Not. in can. 19. Concil. Niccn. Lupus, t. I
Schol. in eund. can. Fabrot. Not. ad Balsamon. Collect.
Constitut. p. 1417.

Chap. XXII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

101

must here recite the words of the canon, which are
these : Concerning the Paulianists which return to
the cathohc church, it is decreed, that they shall be
by all means re-baptized. And if any of them were
heretofore reckoned among the clergy, if they ap
pear to be blameless, and without rebuke, let them
be first baptized, and then ordained by the bishop
of the catholic church: but if upon examination
they be found unfit, let them be deposed. The
same rule shall be observed concerning deaconesses,
and all others who are reckoned among their clergy.
And we particularly take notice82 of deaconesses,
which appear in that habit or dignity, that having
never had any imposition of hands, they are to be
reckoned only among the laity. These last words
about deaconesses seem to refer to what goes be
fore ; and then they must be interpreted of deacon
esses among the Paulianists, who took upon them
the habit of deaconesses without any consecration.
Or if we understand them as spoken of deaconesses
already in the church, they may mean that there
were some deaconesses which had crept into the
office without imposition of hands, and such the
council accounts no more than lay-persons. That
which will incline a man to interpret this canon to
some such sense as this is, that all other councils
and writers speak of ordaining deaconesses by im
position of hands. Valesius himself owns that it
was so in the time of the council of Chalcedon ; for
in one of the canons of that council,83 their ordina
tion is expressly called both x"porovia and ^i-ipoSt-
aia, ordination by imposition of hands. And the
author of the Constitutions,84 speaking of their or
dination, requires the bishop to use imposition of
hands, with a form of prayer, which is there recited.
And thus it was both in the Greek and Latin
church, so long as the order itself continued to be
in use. The council of Trullo, anno 692, speaks of
their ordination in two canons,35 under the name of
xuporovia. And Sozomen36 uses the same word in
speaking of the ordination of Olympias. And
though there be not so many examples of this prac
tice to be met with in the Latin church, because
the order was there much sooner laid aside ; yet
Cotelerius 87 has furnished us with some out of For
tunatus and the council of Worms, both which ex
pressly say, the ordination of deaconesses was per
formed by imposition of hands. In the council of
Worms, the 15th canon of the council of Chalcedon

is repeated. And Fortunatus his words are, manu
superposita'" consecravit diaconam, speaking of one
whom Medardus the bishop consecrated a deacon
ess by laying his hands upon her. All which shows,
that it was the constant practice of the church to
ordain deaconesses by imposition of hands : and
that makes it very probable, that the Nicene canon
is to be understood in that sense, which is most
agreeable to the church's practice.
But the learned Justellus " still raises another
scruple about their ordination : he thinks this im
position of hands was not properly an ordination,
but only a benediction: for he distinguishes be
twixt those two things, and says, every solemn im
position of hands is not an ordination ; which is
very true ; for then the imposition of hands upon
the catechumens, or upon the baptized in confirm
ation, or upon the penitents in order to reconcile
them, or upon the sick in order to their cure, or
upon any persons whatsoever to give them a com
mon benediction, would be an ordination : but then
that learned person seems not to have considered,
that the imposition of hands upon the deaconesses
was something more than all these ; for it was a,
consecration of them to a certain office in the
church, which sort of imposition of hands, j oined with
a prayer of benediction for grace to discharge that
office aright, is what the church has always meant
and called particularly by the name of ordination.
Yet we are not to imagine, that this Sect ,
consecration gave them any power toanyorHoe""tbi
to execute any part of the sacerdotal ptleBt 00 '
office, or do the duties of the sacred function. Wo
men were always forbidden to perform any such
offices as those. Therefore the author of the Con
stitutions calls it a heathenish practice to ordain
women-priests, Upiiag xtiporovtiv ; for the Christian
law allowed no such custom.40 Some heretics in
deed, as Tertullian observes,4' allowed women to
teach, and exorcise, and administer baptism; but all
this, he says, was against the rule of the apostle.42
Epiphanius brings the charge particularly against
the Pepuzians, which were a branch of the Montan
ists, that they made women-bishops,43 and women-
presbyters, abusing that passage of the apostle, " In
Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female," to
put some colour upon their practice. He charges
it also upon the Collyridians,44 that they did Upovp-
yilv Sid ywaiKwv, use women to sacrifice to the Vir-

32 Con. Nic. c. 19. 'Epvvadi}pEV Si tuiv SiaKovia-eruiv twv
iv Ttv axvpari i^ETaer^Eiawv, ettel pnSi XEtpoSEcriav Tiva
EXovcrtv, UiffTE i^airavro^ iv TolsXaiKuTs aiiTis i'^ETaX.Eadai.
38 Con. Chalced. c. 15.
31 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c 19. tu iiriaKOTTE, ETrtS-ricrajs
dvTij Tas x£1pas, Sec.
35 Con. Trull, c. 14 et 40. 80 Sozom. lib. 8. c. 9.
37 Coteler. Not. in Const. Apost. lib. 8. c. 19. Con.
Wormatiens. c. 73. ex Concil. Chalced. c. 15.
38 Fortun. Vit. Eadegundis ap. Surium. Aug. 13.

99 Justel. Bibl. Jur. Canon, t. 1 . p. 75. Not. in Con. Nic.
c. 19.
40 Constitut. Apost. lib. 3. u. 9.
41 Tertul. de Prescript, c. 41. Ipsae mulieres haereticae
quam procaces, quae audeant docere, contendere, exorcis-
mos agere, curationes repromittere, forsitan et tinguere.
42 Id. c. 17. de Baplismo.
43 Epiph. Haer. 69. Pepuzian. n. 2. iieitjKoiroi neap
avTol? yvvaiKES, Kal TrpEafivTEpoi yvvaiKEi.
41 Id. Haer. 78. Antidicomarianit. n. 23.

102

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

gin Mary. Where it is observed, that the charge
is double ; 1. That they gave divine worship to the
holy Virgin, and, 2. That they used women-priests
in their service. Against these he has a particular
dissertation, wherein he shows at large that no
woman from the foundation of the world was ever
ordained to offer sacrifice, or perform any solemn
service of the church :45 which, if it had been al
lowed to any, would certainly have been granted to
the Virgin Mary herself, who was so highly fa
voured of God. But neither she nor any other
woman had ever the priest's office committed to
them. There is indeed, says he, an order of dea
conesses in the church, but their business 4S is not
to sacrifice, or perform any part of the sacerdotal
office, or any of the sacred mysteries, but to be a
decent help to the female sex in the time of their
baptism, sickness, affliction, or the like : and there
fore he denies, that the church made them either
presbyteresses of priestesses, j) Trpsa^vrEpiSag, t) up-
iao-ag. Where the reader is to observe, that Epipha
nius puts a distinction betwixt the names Trpnrf3vTi-
Sag and irpio-pvTEpidag, because the former only
denotes elderly women, such as the deaconesses
commonly were ; but the latter he uses to signify
persons ordained to the office of presbyters or
priests, which he absolutely denies any women in
the Christian church to be.
„ . „ And from hence it is plain, the
Sect- 8. * >
i. Toeass°iScaetthe offices of the deaconesses were only
baptism of women. to perform sorne inferior services of
the chm-ch, and those chiefly relating to the women,
for whose sake they were ordained. One part of
their office was, to assist the minister at the baptiz
ing of women, where for decency's sake they were
employed to divest them, (the custom then being to
baptize all adult persons by immersion,) and so to
order the matter, that the whole ceremony might
be performed with all the decency becoming so
sacred an action. This is evident from Epiphanius,
both in the forecited passage, and other places.47
And it is taken notice of also by Justinian,48 and
the author of the Constitutions,49 who adds, that the
deaconesses were used to anoint the women in bap
tism with the holy oil, as the custom of the Greek
church then was, not only for the bishops, presby
ters, and deacons, but also for the deaconesses, to

45 Epiph. Haer. 79. Collyrid. n.3. Ei lEpaTEvEivyvvaiKEs
Qelo irpoa-ETacTCTOVTO, ri Kavovitcov tI ipyaX.Eer%aL iv t/ccXtj-
crta, eSei paXXov avTrjvTrivMapiuv lepaTEiav, iiriTEXicrai,
&c. 46 Ibid. AiaKOViaaaiv Taypa ETty EtSTt'jy iKKX^aiav, 6.XX'
OVXl ElS TO LEpaTEVEiV, oi}Si Tt fiTTi^E LOBIV ilTLTp E1TEIV .
47 Epiph. Expos. Fid. n. 21. w Justin. Novel. 6. c. 6.
49 Const. Apost. lib. 3. c. 15. » Coteler. in loc.
51 Hieron. Com. in Rom. xvi. 1. Sicut etiam nunc in Ori-
entalibus diaconissae mulieres in suo sexu ministrare viden-
tur in baptismo, sive in ministerio verbi, quia privatim do-
cuisse fceminas invenimus, &c.

use this ceremony of unction before baptism; of
which Cotelerius, in his Notes,50 gives several in
stances out of the ancient writers, but these belong
to another place.
2. Another part of their office was,
to be a sort of private catechists to 2. to bVa 'sort oi
- , private catechists to
the women-catechumens, who were the women-catechu
mens.
preparing for baptism. For though
they were not allowed to teach publicly in the
church, yet they might privately instruct and teach
those, how to make the proper answers that were
required of all persons at their baptism. The au
thor of the Short Notes on the Epistles51 under the
name of St. Jerom, calls this, private ministry of
the word, which the deaconesses performed in the
Eastern churches in his time. And it was so usual
and ordinary a part of their office in the African
churches, that the fathers of the fourth council of
Carthage62 require it as a necessary qualification in
deaconesses when they are ordained, that they shall
be persons of such good understanding, as to be
able to instruct the ignorant and rustic women, how
to make responses to the interrogatories, which the
minister puts to them in baptism, and how they
were to order their conversation afterward.
3. Another part of their employ-
. .. -, . , Sect 10.
ment was, to visit and attend women 3. to visual at-
. tend women that
that were sick, which is noted by were sick and in dis-
J tress.
Epiphanius53 and the author of the
Constitutions, who54 says they were employed like
wise in delivering the bishop's messages and direc
tions to women that were in health, whom the
deacons could not visit because of unbelievers ; that
is, because of the scandal and reproach which the
heathens were ready to cast upon them.
4. In times of danger and perse- Sect ,,_
cution they were employed in minis- thtrJari^and10
. . . ., . . . confessors in prison.
tenng to the martyrs in pnson ; be
cause they could more easily gain access to them,
and go with less suspicion, and less danger and ha
zard of their lives from the heathen, than the
deacons or any other ministers of the church could
do. Cotelerius55 and Gothofred collect this from
some passages in Lucian and Libanius, which seem
plainly to refer to this part of the deaconesses' min
istry. For Lucian, in one of his Dialogues, speak
ing of Peregrine the philosopher, how he was ca-

52 Con. Carthag. 4. c. 12. Viduae velsanctimoniales, quae
ad ministerium baptizandarum mulierum eliguntur, tarn in-
structae sint ad officium, ut possint apto et sano sermone
docere imperitas et rusticas mulieres, tempore quo bapti-
zandae sunt, qualiter baptizatori interrogate respondeant, et
qualiter, accepto baptismate, vivant.
53 Epiph. Hasr. 79. n. 3. Expos. Fid. n. 21.
54 Constit. Apost. lib. 3. c. 15 et 19. Hieron. Ep. 2. ad
Nepot. Multas anus alit ecclesia quae officium aegrotanti
praestant, &c.
55 Coteler. Not. in Const, lib. 3. u. 15. Gothofred. Com. in
Cod. Theodos. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 27.

Chap. XXII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

103

Sect. 18.
5. To attend the
women-church.

ressed by the Christians, whilst he was in prison
for the profession of their rehgion, says, In the
morning one might observe the old women the
widows waiting at the prison gate66 with some of
the orphan children; where by the widows he
doubtless means the deaconesses of the Christians.
And there is little question but Libanius57 means
the same, when he says, that the mother or mistress
of the old women, when she finds any one bound
in prison, runs about, and begs and makes a col
lection for him. This plainly refers to the great
charity and liberality of the Christians toward their
martyrs, which was collected and sent to them by
the hand of these deaconesses.
5. In the Greek churches the dea-
's'gatedinththe conesses had also the charge of the
doors of the church, which part of
their office is mentioned by the author58 of the Con
stitutions, and the author under the name of Igna
tius, who59 styles them ebpovpovg tuiv dylvjv irvXiltvoiv,
the keepers of the holy gates. But probably this was
only in such churches as made a distinction betwixt
the men's gate and the women's gate : for Bishop
Usher observes,60 that no ancient writer beside
these two make any mention of this, as part of the
office of deaconesses : and in another place of the
Constitutions61 this distinction is plainly expressed:
Let the door-keepers stand at the gate of the men,
and the deaconesses at the gate of the women.
Lastly, they were to assign all wo-
Secl. 13. -, ¦ -, , , m , ¦
6. to preside over men their places, and regulate their
the widows, &c. \ °
behaviour in the church ; to preside
over the rest of the widows ; "* whence in some
canons they are styled wpoicaSjnpivai, governesses ; as
Balsamon and Zonaras note upon the council64 of
Laodicea : and if any woman had any suit to
prefer to a deacon or a bishop, a deaconess55 was
to introduce her. These were the offices of the
deaconesses in the primitive church, which I have
been a httle more particular in describing, because
they are not now so commonly known ; the order
itself having been for some ages wholly laid aside.
sect u li it be inquired, how long this or-
»eri°™t,niedhin'°r" der continued in the church, and
the church. what time i(. wag totaily abolished?

I answer, it was not laid aside every where at once,
but continued in the Greek church longer than in
the Latin, and in some of the Latin churches longer
than in others. In the Greek church they con
tinued to the time of Balsamon, that is, to the lat
ter end of the twelfth century ; for he speaks of
them66 as then ministering in the church of Con
stantinople ; though it appears from some other
passages of the same author, that in other churches
they were generally laid aside.57 In the Latin
church there were some decrees made against their
ordination long before. For the first council of
Orange, anno 441, forbids68 any more deaconesses
to be ordained. And the council of Epone,69 anno
517, has a canon to the same purpose, wholly abro
gating their consecration. Not long after which,
the second council of Orleans, anno 533, renewed
the decree70 against them. And before any of these,
the council of Laodicea in the Eastern church had
forbidden them under the name of ancient widows
or governesses, decreeing71 that no such for the
future should be constituted in the church. But
these decrees had no effect at all in the East, nor
did they universally take effect in the West till many
ages after. The author, indeed, under the name of
St. Ambrose, would lead an unwary reader into a
great mistake : for he makes as if the order of dea
conesses was no where used'2 but among the Mon
tanists ; ignorantly confounding the presbyteresses
of the Montanists with the deaconesses of the
church. And the author under the name of St.
Jerom is not much more to be regarded, when he
seems to intimate that in his time the order of dea
conesses was wholly laid aside in the West, and
only retained in the Oriental churches.73 For I
have already showed, (sect. 6,) from Venantius For
tunatus, who lived anno 560, and the council of
Worms, which was held in the ninth century, that
deaconesses were still retained in some parts of
the Western church : which may be evinced also
from the Ordo Romanus,7" and other rituals in
use about that time, where among other forms we
meet with an Ordo ad Diaconam faciendam, an or
der or form to consecrate a deaconess. But in
an age or two after, that is, in the tenth or ele-

50 Lucian. Peregrin. TJapi too 8EcrpotT7}pleo irspipivovTa
ypatiia, xopai Tivis, &c.
57 Liban. Orat. 16. in Tisamen. It. Orat. de V metis,
cited by Gothofred.
"Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 28.
59 Pseudo- Ignat. Ep. ad Antioch. n. 12.
60 TJsser. Dissert. 16. in Ignat. p. 224.
61 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57.
62 Constit. lib. 2. c. 58. ¦* Ibid. lib. 3. c. 7.
64 Con. Laodic. c. 11.
65 Constit. lib. 2. c. 25.
66 Balsam. Resp. ad Interrog. Marci, i;. 35. ap. Leun-
clav. Jus Gr. Rom. t. 1. p. 381.
67 Id. Com. in Concil. Chalced. c. 15.

68 Cone. Arausic. I. c. 26. Diaconissae omuimodse non
ordinandae, &c.
69 Cone. Epaunens. c. 21. Viduarum consecrationem,
quas diaconissas vocant, ab omni religione nostra penitus
abrogamus, 70 Cone. Aurel. 2. .;. 18. Placuit ut nulli postmodum
foeminae diaconalis benedictio pro conditionis hujus fragili-
tate credatur.
71 Cone. Laodic. c. 11. Heol tov pi) Selv irpEvfivTiSai
tjtoi TrpoKaSiipivas iv £/c/c\Tjo-ict Ka^L^aer^ai.
72 Ambros. Com. in 1 Tim. iii. 11.
73 Hieron. Com. in Rom. xvi. 1, and in 1 Tim. iii. 11.
74 Ordo Roman, p. 161. in Bibl. Patr. t. 9. par. 1624.

104

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book II.

venth century, Bona 75 thinks the whole order was
quite extinct. Before I make an end of this sub-
Another notion of ject, I cannot but acquaint the reader,
the name diaconis- , - . , , . . n , -i
««, as it signifies a that there is another notion ot tne
deacon's wife. , . ,
name diaconissa, sometimes to be met
with in the writers of the middle ages ofthe church,
who use it to signify not a deaconess, but a deacon's
¦wife, in the same sense as presbytera signifies the
wife of a presbyter, and episcopa, the wife of a bi
shop. The word episcopa is thus used in the second
council of Tours, where it is said, that if a bishop
hath not a wife,76 there shall no train of women
follow him. So also the words presbytera, diaco
nissa, and subdiaconissa^ for the wives of a pres
byter, a deacon, and a subdeacon, occur a httle
after in the same council. And so in the council
of Auxerre78 and some other places. From which a
learned and ingenious examiner79 of the council of
Trent concludes, that bishops in those times were
not as yet obliged by the law of celibacy, not to co
habit with their wives, in the Gallican chm-ch. But
I shall freely own, I take this to be a mistake : for
from the time of Pope Siricius the celibacy of the
clergy began to be pressed in the Western church,
and these very canons do enforce it : therefore I
lay no greater stress upon them than they will bear :

for as for the cause of the married clergy, it needs
not be defended by such arguments, having the
rule and practice of the whole cathohc church, for
some of the purest ages, to abet and support it ; of
which I shall give a just account hereafter, when I
come to consider the general qualifications that
were necessarily required of the clergy of the pri
mitive church, among which the vow of cehbacy
will be found to have no place. What therefore
these canons mean by episcopa and presbytera, is no
more than the wife of a bishop or presbyter, which
they had before they were ordained, but in those
declining ages of the church were not allowed to
cohabit with them after ordination. This explica
tion agrees both with the scope of those canons,
and the practice of the times they were made in ;
and we have no dispute with Antonius Augustinus,80
or any candid writer of the Romish communion,
who carry this notion no higher than the ages in
which it was broached : but when Baronius81 and
others transfer it to the primitive ages, and make
the practice of the Western church in the sixth age
to be the practice of the universal church in all
ages, they manifestly prevaricate, and put a fallacy
upon their readers, which it may be sufficient to
have hinted here, and shall be more fully made out
in its proper place.

75 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. n. 15.
76 Con. Turon. 2. c. 13. Episcopum episcopam non ha-
bentem, nulla sequatur turba mulierum.
77 Ibid. c. 19. Si inventusfuerit presbyter cum sua presby
tera, aut diaconus cum sua diaconissa, aut subdiaconus cum sua

subdiaconissa, annum integrum excommunicatus habeatur.
76 Con. Antissiodor. c. 21.
79 Gentillet. Exam. Concil. Trid. lib. 4. p. 259.
80 Anton. Aug. de Emend. Gratiani, lib. 1. Dial. 20. p. 226
81 Baron, an. 58. u. 18

BOOK III.
OF THE INFERIOR ORDERS OF THE CLERGY IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTEE I.

OF THE FIRST ORIGINAL OF THE INFERIOR ORDERS, AND THE NUMBER AND USE OF THEM :
AND HOW THET DIFFERED FROM THE SUPERIOR ORDERS OF BISHOPS, PRESBYTERS, AND
DEACONS.

proved against
Baronius and the
council of Trent.

„ . , Having in the last book discoursed of
Sect. 1.
oToVapostSal"5 ^e superior orders of the clergy in
caunstftutfonf5'1" the primitive church, I come now to
treat of those which are commonly
called the inferior orders. And here
our first inquiry must be concerning the original
and number of them. The two great oracles of
the Romish church, Baronius ' and the council of
Trent,2 are very dogmatical and positive in their
assertions both about their rise and number ; that
they are precisely five, viz. subdeacons, acolythists,
exorcists, readers, and door-keepers ; and that they
are all of apostolical institution. And herein they
are followed not only by Bellarmine,8 and the com
mon writers of that side, but also by Schelstrate,4
a person who lived in greater light, and might have
seen through the mists that were cast before the
eyes of others. Cardinal Bona 5 distinguishes be
tween subdeacons and the rest. He fairly owns,
that acolythists, exorcists, readers, and door-keepers
are not of apostolical institution, as the modern
school-men pretend; but as to subdeacons, he joins
with them entirely, and says,6 that though the
Scripture makes no express mention of them, yet
their institution must be referred either to Christ,
or at least to his apostles. The French writers are
not generally so tenacious of this opinion, as having
never sworn to receive the decrees of the Triden

tine fathers with an implicit faith ; but many of
them ingenuously confess the rise of the inferior
orders to be owing only to ecclesiastical institution.
Morinus7 undertakes to prove that there was no
such order as that of acolythists, or exorcists, or
door-keepers among the Greeks in the age next
to the apostles ; nor does Schelstrate disprove his
arguments, though he makes a show of refuting
him. Duarenus8 says there were no such orders
originally in the first and primitive church. Co
telerius9 confesses their original is involved wholly
in obscurity ; that there is no mention made of any
of them in Ignatius, or any other ancient writer
before Cyprian and TertuUian. And therefore
Habertus 10 is clearly of opinion, that it would be
more advisable for their church to expunge all
the inferior orders out of the number and cata
logue of sacraments, and refer them only to ec
clesiastical institution, as the ancient divines were
used to do. By the ancient divines, he means the
school-men, who were generally of this opinion
heretofore. For Peter Lombard, who is set at the
head of them,11 declares that the primitive church
had no orders below those of presbyters and dea
cons ; nor did the apostle give command about
any other, but the church in succeeding ages in
stituted subdeacons and acolythists herself. And
this is the opinion of Aquinas,12 and Amalarius

1 Baron, an. 44. ... 78.
2 Cone. Trid. Sess. 23. c. 2. It. Catechism, ad Parochos
tit. de Sacramento Ordinis, p. 222.
8 Bellarm. de Clericis, lib. 1. c. 11.
4 Schelstrat. Concil. Antiochen. Restitut. Dissert. 4. t.
17. art. 2. p. 520.
5 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. ] . c. 25. n. 17. Acolythos, ex-
orcistas, lectores, et ostiarios, ab apostolis, vel ab immediatis
eorum successoribus institutos, doctores scholastici asserunt,
sed non probant.
6 Bona, ibid. n. 16. Subdiaconorum licet expressa mentio
in sacris Uteris non reperiatur, eorum tamen institutio vel
ad Christum, ut recentiores scholastici existimant, vel ad
apostolos referenda est.

7Morin. de Ordinat. Exercit. 14. cap. 1.
9 Duaren. de Minister, et Beneficiis Eccl. lib. 1. c. 14.
9 Coteler. Not. in Constitut. Apost. lib. 2. c. 25.
10 Habert. Archieratic. par. 5. observ. 1. p. 48. Consultius
meo quidem judicio, ordines hierarchicis inferiores, ipsum-
que adeo hypodiaconi, et a sacramentorum censu expun-
gere, et ad institutionem duntaxat ecclesiasticam cum anti-
quis theologis referre.
11 Lombard. Sent. lib. 4. Dist. 24. p. 348. Hos solos pn-
mitiva ecclesia legitur habuisse, et de his solis praeceptum
apostoli habemus. Subdiaconos vero et acolythos proce-
dente tempore ecclesia sibi constituit.
12 Aquin. Supplement, par. 3. qu. 37. Art. 2. Resp. ad
secundum.

108

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book HI.

Fortunatus,13 and many others. Schelstrate him
self14 owns, that it was the opinion of two popes,
Urban II. and Innocent III., that the order of sub
deacons was. not reckoned among the sacred orders
of the primitive church : it was indeed an inferior
order in the third century, but not dignified with
the title of a sacred or superior order till the twelfth
age of the church ; when, as Menardus informs us
out of a MS. book of Petrus Cantor,15 a writer of that
age, it was then but just newly dignified with that
character: that is, in an age when bishops and
presbyters began to be reckoned but one order, in
compliance with an hypothesis peculiar to the
Romish chm-ch, then the order of subdeacons step
ped up to be a superior order ; and whereas the pri
mitive church was used to reckon the three superior
orders to be those of bishops, presbyters, and dea
cons, the Romish church now began to speak in a
different style, and count the three superior orders,
those of priests, deacons, and subdeacons : so that
this last became a superior order, which for some
ages before had been only an inferior order, and at
first was no order at all. For the testimonies al
leged by Schelstrate after Bellarmine and Baronius,
to prove the inferior orders of apostolical institu
tion, are of no authority or weight in this case. The
Epistle under the name of Ignatius ad Antiochenos,
and the Constitutions under the name of Clemens
Romanus, which are the only authorities pretended
in this matter, are now vulgarly known to be none
of their genuine writings, but the works of some
authors of much later date. So that till some bet
ter proofs be given, there will be reason to conclude,
that these inferior orders were not of apostolical,
but only of ecclesiastical constitution.
sect. i. And this may be argued further,
berfVtheam inX" not only from the silence of the most
primitive c urc . arlcient writers, but also from the
accounts of those who speak of them presently after
their institution. For though the Romish church
determines them to be precisely five in number, yet
in the ancient church there was no such rule ; but
some accounts speak of more than five, and others
not of so many ; which argues that they were not
of apostolical institution. The author under the
name of Ignatius 16 reckons six without acolythists,
viz. subdeacons, readers, singers, door-keepers,
copiatee, and exorcists. The author of the Consti
tutions under the name of Clemens Romanus17
counts but four of these orders, viz. subdeacons,

18 Amalar. de Offic. Eccl. lib. 2. c. 6.
14 Schelstrat. de Concil. Antioch. p. 515.
15 Pet. Cantor, de Verbo Mirifico, ap. Menard. Not. in
Sacramental. Gregor. p. 280. De novo institutum est, sub-
diaconatum esse sacrum ordinem.
16 Ep. ad Antioch. n. 12. " Constit. Apost. lib. 3. c. 11.
18 Ibid. lib. 8. c. 26. is Can. Apost. .,-. 69.
20 Jerom. de Septem Ordin. Eccl. t. 4. p. 81.

readers, singers, and door-keepers. For he makes
no mention of the copiatee, or of acolythists : and
though he speaks of exorcists, yet he says ls express
ly it was no church order. The Apostolical Canons,19
as they are commonly called, name only three, sub
deacons, readers, and singers. And though the
author under the name of St. Jerom20 mentions
four, yet he brings the copiates or fossarii into the
account, and makes them the first order of the
clergy, leaving out acolythists and exorcists. Epi
phanius21 makes no mention of acolythists, but in
stead of them puts in the copiates, and interpreters.
Others add the parabolani also ; and except Cor
nelius,22 there is scarce any other ancient writer, who
is so precise to the number of five inferior orders, as
now computed in the church of Rome.
The reason of which difference must „ ..
Sect. 3.
needs be this, that there was no cer- aifchurcKfthe
tain rule left originally about any Mme K™-
such orders ; but every church instituted them for
herself, at such times and in such numbers as her
own necessities seemed to require. For at first
most of the offices of these inferior orders were per
formed by the deacons, as I have had occasion to
show in another place.23 But as the number of
converts increased in large churches, such as that
of Rome, which confined herself to the number of
seven deacons, the duties of the deacon's office
quickly became too great and heavy for them:
whereupon a sort of assistants to them were ap
pointed, first in those great churches, under the
names of these inferior orders, to take off from the
deacons some of the heavy burden that lay upon
them. And that is the reason why we meet with
the inferior orders in such great and populous
churches as Rome and Carthage in the beginning
of the third century ; whereas in many of the
lesser churches all the offices were still performed
by deacons, even in the fourth and fifth centuries :
which may be concluded from the words of the
author under the name24 of St. Austin, where speak
ing of the deacons of Rome, he says, the reason
why they did not perform all the inferior services of
the church was, that there was a multitude of the
lesser clergy under them ; whereas otherwise they
must have taken care of the altar and its utensils,
&c. as it was in other churches at that time. Which
seems evidently to imply, that these inferior orders
were not taken into all churches when that author
made this observation.

21 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. ... 21.
22 Cornel. Ep. ad Fab. ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
23 Book II. chap. 20. sect. 15.
24 Aug. Qusest. Vet. et Nov. Test. t. 4. c. 101. Ut autem
non omnia ministeria obsequiorum per ordinem agant, mul-
titudo facit clericorum. Nam utique et altare portarent, et
vasa ejus, et aquam in manus funderent sacerdoti, sicut vi-
demus per omnes ecclesias.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

107

„ . , But such churches as admitted
Sect. 4.
ofTh™rii"thPeal use them, made them subservient to di-
rca~s.rto.nLe- vers good ends and purposes. For
ry for the lerarc y. r^ggj^gg fl,at Qf reyeving the deaCOnS
in some part of their office, they were also a sort of
nursery for the sacred hierarchy, or superior orders
of the church. For in those days such churches as
had these orders settled in them, commonly chose
their superior ministers, bishops, presbyters, and
deacons, out of them ; and the clergy of these lesser
orders were a sort of candidates under trial and pro
bation for the greater. For the church, not having
the advantage of Christian academies at that time,
took this method to train up fit persons for the
ministry, first exercising them in some of the lower
offices, that they might be the better disciplined and
qualified for the duties of the superior functions.
And by this means every bishop knew perfectly
both the abilities and morals of all the clergy of his
diocese, for they were bred up under his eye, and
governed by his care and inspection. In some
places they lived all in one house, and ate all at one
table: as Possidius25 particularly notes of St. Aus
tin's chm-ch at Hippo, and Sozomen26 of the church
of Rinocurura in the confines of Palestine and
Egypt, that they had house, and table, and every
thing in common. Hence it became a custom in
Spain, in the time of the Gothic kings, about the
end of the fifth century, for parents to dedicate
their children very young to the service of the
church ; in which case they were taken into the bi
shop's family, and educated under him by some dis
creet and grave presbyter, whom the bishop deputed
for that purpose, and set over them by the name of,
prcepositus, et magister disciplines, the superintendent,
or master of discipline, because his chief business
was to inspect their behaviour, and instruct them
in the rules and disciphne of the church. As we
may see in the second and fourth councils27 of Tole
do, which give directions about this affair.
Sect 5 And upon this account these infe-
foSaelheTrlerJice, ™i clergy were tied as well as others
m'Sersecuiar°iffe to the perpetual service ofthe church,
when once they had devoted and de
dicated themselves to it ; they might not then for

sake their station, and return to a mere secular life
again at their own pleasure. The council of Chal
cedon28 has a peremptory canon to this purpose :
That if any person ordained among the clergy be
take himself to any military or civil employment,
and does not repent and return to the office he had
first chosen for God's sake, he should be anathe
matized. Which is repeated in the council of Tours,20
and Tribur,90 and some others, where it is inter
preted so, as to include the inferior orders as well
as the superior.
But though they agreed in this, yet Sect 6
in other respects they differed very ,r^Jell^,ei
much from one another. As, 1. In MlVCiZZn.'!
... r. ,. . of ordination.
name : the clergy of the superior or
ders are commonly called the upwpevoi, holy31 and
sacred, as in Socrates and others ; whence the
name hierarchy is used by the author under the
name of Dionysius82 the Areopagite, to signify
peculiarly the orders of bishops, presbyters, and
deacons ; as Hallier, a famous Sorbonne doctor,
has abundantly proved against Cellotius the Jesuit,
in his learned and elaborate Defence33 of the Hier
archy of the Church. But on the other hand, the
inferior orders in the ancient canons have only
the name of insacrati, unconsecrated; as in the
council34 of Agde, where the insacrati ministri are
forbidden to touch the sacred vessels, or to enter
into the diaconicon or sanctuaiy, it is plain there
must be meant the inferior orders. 2. Another dif
ference, which gave rise to the former distinction,
was the different ceremonies observed in the man
ner of their ordination. The one were always or
dained at the altar ; the others not so : the one with
the solemn rite of imposition of hands ; the other
commonly without it. Whence St. Basil35 calls the
one fiadpc-g, a degree; but the other, dxapoTovnroQ
virrjpiaia, an inferior ministry, which had no impo
sition of hands. 3. The main difference was in
the exercise of their office and function. The one
were ordained to minister before God as priests, to
celebrate his sacraments, expound his word publicly
in the chm-ch, &c. In which respects the three
superior orders of bishops, presbyters, and deacons,
are said by Optatus, and others, to have each their

28 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 25. Cum ipso semper clerici, una
etiam domo ac mensa, sumptibusque communibus alebantur
et vestiebantur.
26 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 31. TILoivr} Si eo-ti tois ai/Todi KXwpi-
/cots otKjjtris Kal TpdlTE^a Kal TaXXa iravTa.
27 Cone. Tolet. 2. c. 1. De his, quos voluntas parentum a
primis infantiac annis in clericatus officio vel monachali
posuit, statuimus  ut in domo ecclesiae sub episcopali
praesentia a praeposito sibi debeant erudiri. It. Tolet. 4. c.
23. Si qui in clero puberes ant adolescentes existuut, omnes
in uno conclavi atrii commorentur, ut in disciplinis ecclesi
asticis agant, deputati probatissimo seniore, quem et ma-
gistrum disciplinae et testem vitae habeant.
28 Cone. Chalced. u. 7. Tous airafc iv KXripeo KaTEiXEy-

pivous, mpiaapEV, iatjte iirl GTpaTEiav, prjTE iirl d£iav
KocrptKT}V 'ipxEadai, &c.
29 Si quis clericus, relicto officii sui ordine, laicam voluerit
agere vitam, vel se militiae tradiderit, excommunicationis
pcena feriatur.
80 Cone. Triburiens. c. 27.
31 Socrat. lib. l.c. 10 et 15.
32 Dionys. de Hierar. Eccles. c. 5. n. 2.
83 Hallier, Defensio Hierarch. Eccles. lib. 1. c 3. lib. 3.
sect. 2. c. 1 et 2.
84 Cone. Agathen. c. 66. Non licet insacratos ministros
licentiam habere, in secretarium, quod Gracci diaconicon
appellant, ingredi, et contingere vasa dominica.
85 Basil. Ep. Canon, c. 51.

103

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

share and degree in the Christian priesthood, as
has been noted in the former book :86 but the in
ferior orders were not appointed to any such minis
try, but only to attend the ministers in Divine
service, and perform some lower and ordinary
offices, which any Christian, by the bishop's ap
pointment, was qualified to perform. What these
offices were, shall be showed by a particular ac
count of them in the following chapters.

CHAPTER II.

OP SUBDEACONS.

„ , , The first notice we have of this order
Sect. 1.
.ubde™'n.iotarthe in any ancient writers is in the middle
third century. of the third centurT) when Cyprian
and Cornehus lived, who both speak of subdeacons
as settled in the church in their time. Cyprian1
mentions them at least ten times in his epistles;
and Cornelius, in his famous epistle2 to Fabius,
bishop of Antioch, where he gives a catalogue of
the clergy then belonging to the church of Rome,
reckons seven subdeacons among them. But some
think they were not quite so early in the Greek
church : for Habertus8 says, no Greek writer speaks
of them before Athanasius,4 who lived in the fourth
century. The author of the Constitutions,
Sect. 2. . ...
Their ordination indeed, refers them to an apostohcal
performed without Jr
.XeSLati'n0cfhhuren'' original, and, in compliance with that
hypothesis, brings in Thomas the
apostle giving directions to bishops to ordain them
with imposition of hands and prayer,5 as he does
for all the rest of the inferior orders. But that
author is singular in this ; for it does not appear to
have been the practice of the Greek church, whose
customs he chiefly represents : St. Basil, a more
credible witness, says of this and all the other in
ferior orders, that they" were dxnpoToviirot, ordained
without imposition of hands. And for the Latin
church it is evident, from a canon of the fourth
council of Carthage, where we have the form and
manner of their ordination thus expressed : When
a subdeacon is ordained,7 seeing he has no imposi
tion of hands, let him receive an empty patin and

86 See Book II. chap. 19. sect. 15.
1 Cypr. Ep. 8, 20, 29, 34, 35, 45, 78, 79. ed. Oxon.
2 Ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43. 3 Habert. Archieratic. p. 49.
4 Athan. Ep. ad Solitar. Vit. agent.
5 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 21. 6 Basil. Ep. Canon, u. 51.
7 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 5. Subdiaconus quum ordinatur, quia
mantis impositionemnon accipit, patinam de episcopi manu
accipiat vacuam, et calicem vacuum. De manu vero archi
diaconi, urceolum cum aqua, et mantile, et manutergium.

an empty cup from the hands of the bishop, and an
ewer and towel from the archdeacon: Which form
wholly excluding imposition of hands, is a good
collateral evidence (as Habertus " confesses ingenu
ously) to prove that this order was not instituted
by the apostles : for they did not use to omit this
ceremony in any of their ordinations.
As to the office of subdeacons, we
may, in some measure, learn what it a brief account 0t
was from the forementioned canon,
viz. that it was to fit and prepare the sacred ves
sels and utensils of the altar, and deliver them to
the deacon in time of Divine service. But they
were not allowed to minister as deacons at the altar;
no, nor so much as to come within the rails of it, to
set a patin or cup or the oblations of the people
thereon : as appears from a canon of the council of
Laodicea,9 which forbids the iirnperai, by which is
meant subdeacons, to have any place within the
diaconicon, or sanctuary, nor to touch the holy ves
sels, meaning at the communion table. Though
this is now their office in the church of Rome ; and
in that, Bona10 owns they differ from those of the
ancient church. Another of their offices was, to
attend the doors of the chm-ch during the commu
nion service. This is mentioned by the council of
Laodicea, in a canon1' which fixes them to that
station. And Valesius thinks Eusebius meant them,
when describing the temple of Paulinus, he speaks
of some 12 whose office it was GvpavXilv nal nodriytiv
roig daidvTag, to attend the doors, and conduct those
that came in to their proper places. The author of
the Constitutions18 divides this office between the
deacons and subdeacons, ordering the deacons to
stand at the men's gate, and the subdeacons at the
women's ; that no one might go forth, nor the doors
be opened in the time of the oblation. Besides
these offices in the church, they had another office
out of the church, which was to go on the bishop's
embassies, with his letters or messages to foreign
churches. For in those days, by reason of the per
secutions, a bishop did not so much as send a letter
to a foreign church but by the hands of one of his
clergy. Whence Cyprian14 gives such letters the
flame of Uteres clericce : and the subdeacons were the
men that were commonly employed in this office,
as appears from every one of those epistles in Cy
prian, which speak of subdeacons : particularly in
that which he wrote to the clergy of Carthage in

8 Habert. Archieratic. p. 48. 9 Cone. Laodic. c. 21.
10 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. I. u. 25. n. 16. Olim nee calicem
nee patinam nee oblationes in altari ponebant,
11 Cone. Laodic. c. 22. oil SeI virtfpiT-riv tAs Oupas iyiea-
TaXipiravEiv. 12 Euseb. Hist. lib. 10. c. 4.
18 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 11.
14 Cypr. Ep. 4. al. 9. Grave est si epistolae clericae Veri
tas mendacio aliquo et fraude corrupta est.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

109

his retirement, where he15 tells them, that having
occasion to write to the church of Rome, and need
ing some of the clergy to convey his letter by, he
was obliged to ordain a new subdeacon for this pur
pose, because the church could not spare him one at
that time, having scarce enough left to perform her
own daily services. These were anciently the chief
of the subdeacons' offices at their first institution.
And great care was taken that they
what offices' they should not exceed their bounds, or
might not perform. , l i ,
encroach too much upon the deacon s
office. They might not take upon them to minister
the bread16 or the cup to the people at the Lord's
table ; they might not bid the prayers, or do any
part of that service which the deacons did, as they
were the Kripvietg or holy criers of the church. This
is the meaning of the canon17 of the council of Lao
dicea, which prohibits the subdeacons from wearing
an h&rarium in time of Divine service : which was a
habit of deacons, that they made use of as a signal
to give notice of the prayers, and other services of
the church, to the catechumens, penitents, &c, who
were to observe their directions : this habit there
fore the subdeacons might not wear, because it was
a distinguishing habit of a superior order. And
further, to show the same subjection and deference
to deacons, as deacons did to presbyters, they are
forbidden by another canon 19 of that council to sit
in the presence of a deacon without his leave.
sect. 5 There is but one thing more I shall
tb!churcIofaRom°ef rlote concerning this order, which is
p'recSnmber of" the singularity of the church of Rome
seven subdeacons. ^ fo^fog t„ th(J numbeX of Seven
subdeacons. For in the epistle of Cornelius 10 which
gives us the catalogue of the Romish clergy, we
find but seven deacons, and seven subdeacons,
though there were forty-four presbyters, and forty-
two acolythists, and of exorcists, readers, and door
keepers no less than fifty-two. But other churches
did not tie themselves to follow this example. For
in the great church of Constantinople, and three
lesser that belonged to it, there were ninety subdea
cons, as may be seen in one of Justinian's Novels,20
where he gives a catalogue of the clergy, and fixes
the number of every order, amounting to above five
hundred in the whole.

CHAPTER III.

OF ACOLYTHISTS.

Next to the subdeacons the Latin
writers commonly put acolythists, Acolythists an or-
... n - , , der peculiar to the
which was an order peculiar to tne Latin church, and
never mentioned by
Latin church: for there was no ?"y Greek writer, for
four centuries.
such order in the Greek church for
above four hundred years ; nor is it ever so much
as mentioned among the orders of the church by
any Greek writer all that time, as Cabassutius1 and
Schelstrate2 confess. And though it occurs some
times in the later Greek rituals, ye"t Schelstrate says
it is there only another name for the order of sub
deacons. But in the Latin church these two were
distinguished : for Cornelius in his catalogue makes
a plain difference between them, in saying there
were forty-two acolythists, and but seven sub
deacons in the church of Rome. Cyprian also
speaks of them3 frequently in his epistles, as dis
tinct from the order of subdeacons ; though wherein
their offices differed is not very easy to determine
from either of those authors.
But in the fourth council of Car
thage there is a canon which gives a Their ordination
httle light in the matter : for there
we have the form of their ordination, and some in
timation of their office also. The canon4 is to this
effect : When any acolythist is ordained, the bishop
shall inform him how he is to behave himself in his
office: and he shall receive a candlestick with a
taper in it, from the archdeacon, that he may un
derstand that he is appointed to light the candles
of the church. He shall also receive an empty
pitcher to furnish wine for the eucharist of the blood
of Christ. So that the acolythist's office seems at
that time to have consisted chiefly in these two
things, hghting the candles of the church, and at
tending the ministers with wine for the eucharist :
the designation to which office needed no imposition
of hands, but only the bishop's appointment, as is
plain from the words of the canon now cited.
Some think5 they had another of-
J . Sect. 3.
fice, which was to accompany and at- The origination
x of the name.
tend the bishop whithersoever he went ;
and that they were called acolythists upon this ac-

15 Cypr. Ep.24. al. 29. Quoniam oportuit me per clericos
scribere ; scio autem nostros plurimos absentes esse, paucos
vero, qui illic sunt, vix ad ministerium quotidiani opei-is suffi-
cere : necesse fuit novos aliquos constituere, qui mitteren-
tur : fecisse me autem sciatis lectorem Saturum et hypodia-
conum Optatum confessorem.
16 Cone. Laodic. c. 25. u SeI inrtipETas dpTov SiSovai, &Si
TTOTYipiOV EllXoyElV.
17 Ibid. C 22. 8 SeI VTrrjpETr}V ehpapiov epopEtv, &c.
18 Cone. Laodic. c. 20. ,s Ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
20 Justin. Novel. 3.

1 Cabassut. Notit. Concil. c. 42. p. 249.
2 Schelstrat. de Concil. Antiocheno, Dissert. 4. u. 17.
p. 526.
8 Cypr. Ep. 7, 34, 52, 59, 77, 78, 79. ed. Oxon.
4 Cone. Carthag. 4. c. 6. Acolythus quum ordinatur, ab
episcopo quidem doceatur qualiter in officio suo agere de-
beat : sed ab archidiacono accipiat ceroferarium cum cereo,
ut sciat se ad accendenda ecclesiae luminaria mancipari.
Accipiat et urceolum vacuum ad suggerendum vinum in
eucharistiam sanguinis Christi.
5 Duaren. de Minister, et Benefic. lib. 1. c. 14.

110

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

count : or perhaps because they were obliged to at
tend at funerals in the company of the canonices and
ascetries, with whom they are joined in one of Justi
nian's Novels.6 The original word, aKoXovSog, as
Hesychius7 explains it, signifies a young servant, or
an attendant who waits continually upon another.
And the name seems to be given them from this.
But the inference which a learned person8 makes
from hence, that the order of acolythists was first
in the Greek church, because the name is of Greek
original, seems not to be so certain ; because it can
hardly be imagined, that it should be an order of
the Greek church, and yet no Greek writer before
Justinian's time make any mention of it.
„ . , I know, indeed, St. Jerom9 says, it
Sect. 4.
.. 7.ne'h!r aC0,y- was a custom in the Oriental churches
trusts be the same
3ceh™/er;..°of to set up lighted tapers when the Gos-
laterages. ^j was K^ as a ^0Ytn and demon
stration of their joy ; but he does not so much as
once intimate, that they had a peculiar order of
acolythists for this purpose : nor does it appear
that this was any part of their office in the Latin
church; for that which the council of Carthage
speaks of, is probably no more than hghting the
candles at night, when the church was to meet for
their lucernalis oratio, or evening prayer. This of
fice of acolythists, as much as the Romanists con
tend for the apostolical institution of it, is now no
longer in being in the church of Rome, but changed
into that of the ceroferarii, or taper-bearers, whose
office is only to walk before the deacons, &c, with
a lighted taper in their hands. Which is so differ
ent from the office of the ancient acolythists, that
Duarenus10 cannot but express his wonder, how the
one came to be changed into the other, and why
their doctors should call him an acolythist of the
ancient church, who is no more then a taper-bearer
of the present. Cardinal Bona1' carries the reflec
tion a little further, and with some resentment com
plains, that the inferior orders of the Romish church
bear no resemblance to those of the primitive chm-ch,
• and that for five hundred years the ancient disci
pline has been lost.

CHAPTER IV.

OF EXORCISTS.

There is nothing more certain than S;cth
that in the apostolical age, and the J^St^A
next following, the power of exor- u"eder^-
cising, or casting out devils, was a miraculous gift
of the Holy Ghost, not confined to the clergy, much
less to any single order among them, but given to
other Christians also, as many other extraordinary
spiritual gifts then were. Origen1 says, private
Christians, that is, laymen, did by their prayers and
adjurations dispossess devils. And Socrates2 ob
serves particularly of Gregory Thaumaturgus, that
whilst he was a layman he wrought many miracles,
healing the sick, and casting out devils, by sending
letters to the possessed party only. And that this
power was common to all orders of Christians, ap
pears further from the challenges of the ancient
apologists, Tertullian8 and others, to the heathens,
wherein they undertake, that if they would bring
any person possessed with a devil into open court
before the magistrate, any ordinary Christian should
make him confess that he was a devil, and not a
god. Minucius 4 speaks of this power among Chris
tians, but he does not ascribe it to any particular
order of men : as neither does Justin Martyr,5 nor
Irenseus,6 nor Cyprian,7 nor Arnobius,8 though they
frequently speak of such a power in the church.
But as this gift was common to all Sect 2
orders of men, so it is reasonable to ^X'theK
believe, that it was in a more especial SjJif '"Si $"
.. -, .-, i • l the church.
manner conferred upon the bisnops
and presbyters of the church, who, when there was
any occasion to use any exorcism in the church,
were the ordinary ministers of it. Thus Cardinal
Bona9 understands that famous passage of Tertul
lian, where speaking10 of a Christian woman, who
went to the theatre, and returned possessed with a
devil, he says, the unclean spirit was rebuked in
exorcism for presuming to make such an attempt

6 Justin. Novel. 59.
7 Hesych. ' AkoXovStos, b vEiliTEpos ttcus, 3-tpdiroji/, 6 WEpl
to ampa.
8 Bp. Fell, Not. in Cypr. Ep. 7.
9 Hieron. cont. Vigilant, t. 2. p. 123. Per totas Orientis
ecclesias, quando legendum est evangelium, accenduntur
lumina, &c.
10Duaren. de Minister, et Benefic. lib. 1. u. 14. p. 74.
Nescio quomodo tandem factum est, ut hoc munus in lumi-
nariorum curam postea conversum sit, et doctores nostri
passim acolythos ceroferarios interpretentur.
11 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. n. 18. Desierunt quoque
minorum ordinum officia, quae plerumque a pueris, et homi-
nibus mercede conductis, nullisque ordinibus initiatis exer-
centur, &c.
1 Orig. cont. Cels. lib. 7. p. 334. evxfi Kal opKeaaEaiv ISiw-
Tai to toiovtov Tr pierce overt, &C.

2 Socrat. lib. 4. c 27. Xat/cds u>v iroXXi o-rjitsta iiroii}aE,
voerHVTats^Epa'KEvmv,KalSaipova,5 SC ettitoXojv epvyaiEvutv.
3 Tertul. Apol. u. 23. Edatur hie aliquis sub tribunalibus
vestris, quem daemone agi constet. Jussus a quolibet Chris-
tiano loqui spiritus ille, tarn se daemonem confitebitur de
vero, quam alibi Deum de falso.
4 Minuc. Octav. p. 83. Ipsos daemonas de semetipsis
confiteri, quoties a nobis tormentis verborum et orationis
incendiis de corporibus exiguntur.
5 Justin. Apol. 1. p. 45. 6 Iren. lib. 2. c. 56 et 57.
7 Cypr. ad Donat. p. 4. 8 Arnob. cont. Gent. lib. 1.
9 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. u. 17.
10 Tertul. de Spectac. u. 26. Theatrum adiit, et inde
cum daemonio rediit. Itaque in exorcismo cum oneraretur
iminundus spiritus, quod ausus esset fidelem aggredi : Con-
stanter et justissime quidem (inquit) feci, in meo enim itt-
veni.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Ill

upon a believer : to which the spirit replied, that
he had a right to her, because he found her upon
his own ground. This exorcism, I say, Bona sup-
pose's to be performed by some presbyter of the
church, endowed with that miraculous gift. And
the like may be said of those exorcists in Cyprian,1'
who cast out devils by a Divine power : and of
those also who are mentioned by Firmilian,12 as
persons inspired by Divine grace, to discern evil
spirits and detect them : as one of them did a
woman of Cappadocia, who pretended to be in
spired, and to work miracles, and to baptize, and
consecrate the eucharist by Divine direction.
These exorcisms were plainly miraculous, and
prove nothing more than that some persons had
such a gift, who probably were some eminent pres
byters of the church : at least, they do not prove
that exorcists were as yet become any distinct
order among the clergy in the church.
Sect 3 Some think the order was as old as
.vlVmi'Ewn Tertulhan, because Ulpian, the great
exorcist lawyer, who lived in Tertullian's time,
in one of his books 13 speaks of exorcising, as a thing
used by impostors, by whom probably he means
the Christians. Gothofred thinks he means the
Jewish exorcists, who were commonly impostors
indeed: but admitting that he means Christians,
(which is more probable, .considering what Lactan
tius14 says of him, that he published a collection of
the penal laws that had been made against them,)
yet it proves no more than what every one owns,
that exorcising was a thing then commonly known
and practised among the Christians. Others urge
the authority of Tertullian himself in his b&ok de
Corona Militis, where yet he is so far from owning
any particular order of exorcists, that he rather
seems to make every man his own exorcist. For
there, among other arguments which he urges to
dissuade Christians from the military hfe under
heathen emperors, he makes use of this,15 that they
would be put to guard the idol temples, and then
they must defend those devils by night, whom they
had put to flight by day by their exorcisms ; by
which he means their prayers, as Junius rightly
understands him. And so in another place, dis
suading Christians from selling such things as
would contribute toward upholding of idolatry, or
the worship of devils, he argues thus ; that other

wise the devils would be their alumni; that is,
might be said to be fostered and maintained by
them, so long as they furnished out materials to
carry on their service : and with what confidence,
says he,16 can any man exorcise his own alumni,
those devils, whose service he makes his own house
an armoury to maintain ? Vicecomes 17 and Bona,18
by mistake, understand this as spoken of exorcism
before baptism, taking the word, alumni, to signify
the catechumens of the church : whereas, indeed, it
signifies devils in this place, who are so called by
Tertullian, in respect of those who contribute to
uphold their worship ; for such men are a sort of
foster-fathers to them. So that this passage, when
rightly understood, makes nothing for the antiquity
of exorcists, as a peculiar order of the clergy, but
only shows in what sense every Christian is to be
his own exorcist, viz. by his prayers, resisting the
devil, that he may fly from him.
Setting aside then both that extra
ordinary pOWer Of exorcising, Which Exorcists consti-
tuted into an order
was miraculous, and this ordinary in the latter end of
' J the third century.
way also, in which every man was his
own exorcist ; it remains to be inquired, when the
order of the exorcists was first settled in the church.
And here I take Bona's opinion to be the truest,
that it came in upon the withdrawing 19 of that ex
traordinary and miraculous power ; which probably
was by degrees, and not at the same time in all
places. Cornelius,20 who lived in the third century,
reckons exorcists among the inferior orders of the
church of Rome : yet the author of the Constitu
tions, who lived after him, says it was no certain
order,21 but God bestowed the gift of exorcising as
a free grace upon whom he pleased : and therefore,
consonant to that hypothesis,.there is no rule among
those Constitutions for giving any ordination to
exorcists, as being appointed by God only, and not
by the church. But the credit of the Constitutions
is not to be relied upon in this matter : for it is cer
tain, by this time exorcists were settled as an order
in most parts of the Greek church, as well as the
Latin ; which is evident from the council of An
tioch, anno 341, in one of whose canons22 leave is
given to the chorepiscopi to promote subdeacons,
readers, and exorcists ; which argues, that those
were then all standing orders of the church. After
this, exorcists are frequently mentioned among the

11 Cypr. Ep. 76. al. 69. ad Magnum, p. 187. Quod hodie
etiam geritur, ut per exorcistas, voce humana et potestate
divina, flagelletur, et uratur, et torqueatur diabolus.
12 Firmil. Ep. 75. ap. Cypr. p. 223. Unus de exorcistis —
inspiratus Dei gratia fortiter restitit, et esse ilium nequissi-
mum spiritum, qui prius sanctus putabatur, ostendit.
13 Ulpian. lib. 8. de Tribunal, in Digest, lib. 50. Tit. 13.
Leg. 1. Si incantavit, si imprecatus est, si (ut vulgari verbo
impostorum utar) exorcisavit.
14 Lact. Instit. lib. 5. u. IL

15 Tertul. de Coron. Milit. c. 11. Quos interdiu exor-
cismis fugavit, noctibus defensabit.
16 Tertul. de Idol. c. 11. Qua eonstantia exorcisabit
alumnos suos, quibus domum suam cellariam praestat ?
17 Vicecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 2. c. 30. p. 362.
18 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. e. 25. ... 17.
19 Bona, ibid. Postea subtracta hac potestate, constituit
ecclesia ordinem, qui daemonia expelleret.
20 Ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
21 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 26. M Cone. Antioch. c. 10.

112

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

inferior orders by the writers of the fourth century,
as in the council of Laodicea,23 Epiphanius,24 Pauli
nus,25 Sulpicius Severus,26 and the Rescripts of
Theodosius,27 and Gratian23 in the Theodosian Code,
where those emperors grant them the same immu
nity from civil offices, as they do to the other orders
of the clergy. Their ordination and office is thus
Thei/oVdination described by the fourth council of
and office. „ „,,., . , .
Carthage i29 When an exorcist is or
dained, he shall receive at the hands of the bishop
a book, wherein the forms of exorcising are written,
the bishop saying, Receive thou these and commit
them to memory, and have thou power to lay hands
upon the energumens, whether they be baptized or
only catechumens. These forms were certain pray
ers, together with adjurations in the name of Christ,
commanding the unclean spirit to depart out of the
possessed person : which may be collected from the
words of Paulinus concerning the promotion of St.
Felix to this office, where he says,30 from a reader
he arose to that degree, whose office was to adjure
evil spirits, and to drive them out by certain holy
words. It does not appear that they were ordained
to this office by any imposition of hands either in
the Greek or Latin church ; but yet no one might
pretend to exercise it either publicly or privately, in
the church or in any house, without the appoint
ment of the bishop, as the council of Laodicea di
rects ;31 or at least the licence of a chorepiscopus,
who, in that case, was authorized82 by the bishop's
deputation. As to the energumens, for whose
Ashortaccountof sake tnjg 0fi[ce was appointed, they
were so called from the Greek word,
ivepyovptyoi, which, in its largest sig
nification, denotes persons who are under the motion
and operation of any spirit, whether good or bad ;
but in a more restrained sense, it is used by eccle
siastical writers for persons whose bodies are seized
or possessed with an evil spirit. Upon which ac
count they are otherwise called Saipovelopivoi, de
moniacs, and Karexoptvoi, possessed. And because
this was frequently attended with great commotions

the energumens,
their names, and
.station in the
church.

and vexations, and disturbances of the body, occa
sioning sometimes frenzy and madness, sometimes
epileptic fits, and other violent tossings and con
tortions ; such persons are often upon that account
styled xtipalopEvoi by the Greek, and hyemantes by
the Latin writers, that is, tossed as in a winter
storm or tempest. Thus the author of the Consti
tutions in some places styles them simply xupoZopi-
vot,33 by which that he means the energumens is
evident, because in another place he styles them
Xtipatopivoi inch tov dXXorpiov,31 such as were under
the commotions and vexations of Satan ; and tells
us, that prayer was made for them under that cha
racter, in the oblation at the altar for all states and
conditions of men, that God would deliver them
from that violent energy or agitation of the wicked
one. And thus most learned men, except Albas-
pinaeus, understand that phrase in the canon of
the council of Ancyra,35 which orders some certain
notorious sinners, tig roig xHrla£°lx*v0V£ tvxio9ai, to
pray in loco hyemantium, in that part of the church
where the demoniacs stood, which was a place
separate from all the rest. And some also think
the name,36 xXvivivilopEvoi, was given to the energu
mens upon the same account, because it signifies
persons agitated by a spirit, as a wave in a tempest.
Now these energumens, or demo- Sect 7
niacs, or whatever other. name they chSjcomemedm
.... .. • . . the care of them.
were called by, were the persons about
whom the exorcists were chiefly concerned. For
besides the prayers which were offered for them in
all public assembhes, by the deacons and bishops,
and the whole congregation, (some forms of which
prayers may be seen in the author37 of the Consti
tutions,) the exorcists were obliged to pray over
them at other times,38 when there was no assembly
in the church ; and to keep them employed in some
innocent business, as in sweeping39 the church and
the like, to prevent more violent agitations of Sa
tan, lest idleness should tempt the tempter; and
to see them provided of daily food40 and suste
nance, while they abode in the church, which it
seems was the chief place of their residence and
habitation.

28 Cone. Laodic. c. 24 et 26.
24 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. n. 21.
25 Paulin. Natal. 4. S. Felicis.
26 Sulpic. Vit. S. Martin, c. 5.
27 Cod. Theod. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Decurion. Leg. 121.
28 Ibid. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 24.
29 Cone. Carth. 4. u. 7. Exorcista quum ordinatur, ac
cipiat de manu episcopi libellum, in quo scripti sunt exor
cism!, dicente sibi episcopo : Accipe et commenda memoriae,
et habeto potestatem imponendi manus super energume-
num, sive baptizatum, sive catechumenum.
80 Paulin. Natal. 4. Felic. Primis lector servivit in annis,
inde gradum cepit, cui munus voce fideli adjurare malos, et
sacris pellere verbis.
31 Cone. Laod. u. 26.

82 Concil. Antioch. c. 10.
33 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 35 et 37.
31 Constit. lib. 8. c. 12. irapaKaXovph at virip tuv
X-t-paX,opivu3V vied tov dXXoTpiov — 07rws Kadapiays tKTtjs
ivEpytias tov 7ruvnpov.
35 Cone. Ancyr. c. 17.
36 Vid. Dodwel. Dissert. 1. in Cypr. n. 17.
37 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 6 et 7.
38 Cone. Carthag. 4. c. 90. Omni die exorcistae energu-
menis manus imponant.
39 Ibid. c. 91. Pavimenta domorum Dei energumeni
verrant. 40 Ibid. c. 92. Energumenis in domo Dei assidentibns
victus quotidianus per exorcistas opportuno tempore minis-
tretur.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

113

„ . „ This was the exorcist's office in re
sect. 8.
cwJ'toSrer.Sto ference to the energumens; to which
the catechumens. Valesius ,J and Gothofred42 add an
other office, viz. that of exorcising the catechumens
before baptism. Which is a matter that will admit
of some dispute. For it does not appear always to
have been the exorcist's office, save only in one of
these two cases : either, first, when a catechumen
was also an energumen, which was a case that very
often happened : and then he was to be committed
to the care of the exorcists, whose office was to ex
orcise all energumens, whether they were baptized,
or only catechumens, as is evident from the canon
already alleged, sect. 5, out of the council of Car
thage. Or, secondly, it might happen that the ex
orcist was also made the catechist, and in that case
there can be no question but that his office was as
weU to exorcise as to instruct the catechumens.
But then the catechist's office was many times se
parate from that of the exorcist's : (though some
modern writers confound them together :) some
times a presbyter, or a deacon, or a reader was the
catechist : and in that case it seems more probable
that the exorcism of the catechumens was performed
by the catechist than by the exorcist ; and for that
reason I shall treat of the office of catechist dis
tinctly in its proper place.

CHAPTER "V.
OF LECTORS OR READERS.
a tl It is the opinion now of most learn-
J^t0l£tatrt4' ed men> even in the Romish chm-ch,
till the 3rd century. ^ ^g wag nQ su(;h Qr(ier M that
of readers distinct from others for at least two
ages in the primitive church. Bona owns1 it to
be one of the four orders, which he thinks only of
ecclesiastical institution. And Cotelerius '' says there
is no mention made of it before the time of Tertul
lian, who is the first author that speaks of it as a
standing order in the church. For writing against
the heretics,3 he objects to them, that their orders
were desultory and inconstant : a man was a dea
con among them one day, and a reader the next.
Which imphes, that it was otherwise in the church,

and that readers then were as much a settled order
as deacons, or any other. Cyprian, who lived not
long after Tertullian, frequently speaks of them as
an order of the clergy. In one place4 he says he
had made one Saturus a reader ; and in another
place he mentions one Aurelius, a confessor, whom
he had ordained a reader for his singular merits,
and constancy in time of persecution :5 and for the
same reason he made Celermus, another confessor,
one of the same order among the clergy.6 So that
it was then reckoned not only a clerical office, but
an honourable office, to be a reader in the church,
and such a one as a confessor needed not to be
ashamed of. Sometimes persons of the greatest
dignity were ordained to this office, as Julian is said
to have been in the church of Nicomedia7 while he
professed himself a Christian. Sozomen8 says ex
pressly, that both he and his brother Gallus were
reckoned among the clergy, and read the Scriptures
pubhcly to the people. And there is no writer of
that age, but always speaks of readers as a distinct
order of the clergy in the church.
But since the order of readers, Sect 2
though frequently spoken of in the Script"res™ lereeread
,-,.-, i j, , i_ in the church before
third and fourth ages, are never once the institution of
mentioned in the two first, it will be
proper to inquire, by whom the Scriptures were read
in the church for those two centuries ? Mr. Basnage8
is of opinion that the Christian chm-ch at first fol
lowed the example of the Jewish church, and in
this matter took her model from the synagogue,
where, as he observes out of Dr. Lightfoot,10 the
custom was on every sabbath day to have seven read
ers, first a priest, then a Levite, and after them five
Israelites, such as the minister of the congregation
(whom they called the bishop or inspector and angel
of the church) thought fit to call forth and nomi
nate for that purpose : he thinks it was much after
the same manner in the Christian church ; the of
fice was not perpetually assigned to any particular
man, but chiefly performed by presbyters and dea
cons, yet so as that any other might do it by the
bishop's appointment. But indeed the matter is in
volved in so great obscurity, that no certain conjec
ture can be made from the writings of the two first
ages, but all that we can argue is from the seeming
remains of the ancient customs in the following
ages. For since we find that deacons in many
churches continued to read the Gospel, even after the

" Vales. Not. in Euseb. de Martyr. Palaestin. c. 2.
42 Gothofred. Not. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 24.
1 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. n. 17.
2 Coteler. Not. in Constitut. Apost. lib. 2. c. 25.
3 Tertul. de Praescript. c. 41. Hodie diaconus, qui eras
lector. 4 Cypr. Ep. 24. al. 29. Fecisse me sciatis lectorem Sa-
turum. 5 Id. Ep. 33. al. 38. Merebatur Aurelius clericae ordina
tionis ulteriores gradus — Sed interim placuit ut ab officio
I

lectionis incipiat, &c.
6 Id. Ep. 34. al. 38. Referimus ad vos, Celerinum — clero
nostro non humana suffragatioue, sed divina dignatione
conjunctum, &c.
7 Socrat. lib. 3. u. 1. Nazian. Invectiv. 1. 1. 1. p. 58.
8 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 2. (is Kal KXnpt? iyKaTaXEyvvai, Kal
viravayivwtTKEiv too Xaio TcVs iKKXrjtriacrTLKis [SiflXovs.
9 Basnag. Exercit. in Baron, p. 623.
10 Lightfoot, Harm. p. 479.

114

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

order of readers was set up ; as I have had occasion
to show11 in another place from the author12 of the
Constitutions, and St. Jerom,18 and the council14 of
Vaison ; we may thence reasonably conclude, that
this was part of their office before ; and since pres
byters and bishops in other churches did the same,
as Sozomen15 informs us, it may as rationally be in
ferred, that this was their custom in former ages.
But whether laymen performed this office at any
time by the bishop's particular direction, as the Is
raelites did in the Jewish church, cannot be so cer
tainly determined ; only we find that in after ages,
in the most celebrated church of Alexandria, even
the catechumens, as well as believers,16 were admit
ted to do the office of readers ; and that may incline
a man to think that this office was not wholly con
fined to the clergy in the two first ages. But this
being peculiar to the church of Alexandria, nothing
can be argued from it concerning the practice of
the universal church ; and therefore, till some bet
ter light is afforded, I leave this matter undeter
mined. It is more certain, that after the
order of readers was set up, it was ge
nerally computed among the orders of
the clergy, except perhaps at Alexandria, where
that singular custom prevailed of putting catechu
mens into the office ; for it can hardly be supposed,
that they reckoned persons that were unbaptized,
and not yet allowed to partake of the holy mysteries,
into the number of their clergy. But in all other
places it was reputed a clerical order, and persons
deputed to the office were ordained to it with the
usual solemnities and ceremonies of the other infe
rior orders. In the Greek church Habertus 17 thinks
they were ordained with imposition of hands, but
among the Latins without it. The author of the
Constitutions prescribes a form of prayer to be used
with imposition of hands ; but whether that was
the practice of all the Greek church is very much
questioned. In the Latin church it was certainly
otherwise. The council of Carthage18 speaks of no
other ceremony, but the bishop's putting the Bible
into his hands in the presence of the people, with
these words : Take this book, and be thou a reader
of the word of Ged, which office if thou fulfil
faithfully and profitably, thou shalt have part with

Sect. 3.
The manner of
ordaining readers.

those that minister in the word of God. And in
Cyprian's time they seem not to have had so much
as this ceremony of delivering the Bible to them,
but they were made readers by the bishop's com
mission and deputation only to such a station in the
church. This was the pulpitum, or tribunal
. n j • Sect- *•
ecclesics, as it is commonly called in Their station and
,...,-. office i° the church.
Cyprian, the reading-desk m the body
of the church, which was distinguished from the
bema, or tribunal of the sanctuary. For the read
er's office was not to read the Scriptures at the
altar, but in the reading-desk only. Whence, super
pulpitum imponi, et ad pulpitum venire, are phrases
in Cyprian19 to denote the ordination of a reader.
In this place, in Cyprian's time, they read the
Gospels, as well as other parts of Scripture; which
is clear from one of Cyprian's epistles,20 where
speaking of Celerinus the confessor, whom he had
ordained a reader, he says, It was fitting he should
be advanced to the pulpit or tribunal of the church,
that having the advantage of a higher station, he
might thence read the precepts and Gospels of his
Lord, which he himself as a courageous confessor
had followed and observed. Albaspinseus21 says,
they also read the Epistles and Gospels in the com
munion service : but he should first have proved,
that those were anciently any part of the commu
nion service ; for they do not appear to have been
so from the most ancient liturgies, but were only
read in the missa catechumenorum, or, as we now
call it, the first service, at which the catechumens
were present. And wheresoever they were taken
into the communion service, it was the office of
deacons, and not the readers, to rehearse them.
But of this more when we come to the liturgy and
service of the ancient church.
There is but one thing more to be Stcl 5
noted concerning this order, which is the^m^hf beh'o*
the age at which readers might be
ordained. That is fixed by one of Justinian's
Novels,22 precisely forbidding any one to be ordained
reader before he was completely eighteen years old.
But before this law was made it was customary to
ordain them much younger : for Ennodius, bishop
of Ticinum, says of Epiphanius his predecessor,3
that he was ordained reader at eight years old : as

11 Book II. chap. 20. sect. 6.
12 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57.
18 Hieron. Ep. 58. ad Sabin.
14 Cone. Vasens. 2. c. 2.
15 Sozom. lib. 7. c 19.
18 Socrat. lib. 5. c. 22. iv tt; giuti; Si 'AXE^avSpEia dva-
yvuicrTai Kal VTrofloXEis dSiaepopov, e'Ite KaTnxovpEvoi Elerlv,
eIte iriaToi.
17 Habert. Archieratic. par. 4. obs. 1. p. 41.
18 Cunc. Carth. 4. c. 8. Lector cum ordinatur, faciat de
illo veibum episcopus ad plebem, indicans ejus fidem, vi
tam, et ingenium. Post haec spectante plebe tradat ei codi-

cem, de quo lecturus est, dicens, Accipe et esto lector verbi
Dei, habiturus, si fideliter et utiliter impleveris officium,
partem cum eis qui verbum Dei ministraverunt.
19 Cypr. Ep. 38 et 39. ed. Oxon.
20 Cypr. Ep. 34. al. 39. Quid aliud quam super pulpitum,
id est, super tribunal ecclesiae oportebat imponi, ut loci
altioris celsitate subnixus — legat praecepta et evangelia Do
mini, quae fortiter ac fideliter sequitur?
21 Albaspin. Not. in Concil. Carthag. 3. can. 4.
22 Justin. Novel. 123. c. 54.
23 Ennod. Vit. Epiphan. Bibl. Patr. t. 15. p. 295. Anno-
rum ferme octo lectoris ecclesiastici suscipit officium.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

115

Ceesarius Arelatensis24 is said to have been at seven.
And this leads us to understand what Sidonius
Apollinaris means, when speaking of John, bishop
of Chalons, he says, he was a reader from his in
fancy.25 Which is also said of St. Felix by Pauli
nus,26 that he served in the office of a reader from
his tender years. So Victor Uticensis, describing
the barbarity of the Vandalic persecution in Africa,
he aggravates their cruelty with this circumstance,
that they had murdered or famished all the clergy
of Carthage, five hundred or more, among whom
there were many infant readers.27 Now, the reason
why persons were ordained so young to this office,
was what I have intimated before, that parents
sometimes dedicated their children to the service of
God from their infancy, and then they were trained
up and disciplined in some inferior offices, that they
might be qualified and rendered more expert for the
greater services of the church.

CHAPTER VI.
OF THE OSTIARH OR DOOR-KEEPERS.
This is the last of those five orders,
no mention of which are pretended by the present
this order till the , , „ * _ - ...
third or fourth cen- church of Rome to be of apostolical
institution : but for three whole cen
turies, we never so much as meet with the name of
it in any ancient writer, except in the epistle of
Cornehus,1 bishop of Rome, where the wvXwpoi, or
door-keepers, are mentioned with the rest. In Cy
prian and Tertullian there is no mention of them :
the first and lowest order with them is that of read
ers, as it is now in the Greek church, among whom
the order of door-keepers has been laid aside from
the time of the council of Trullo, anno 692, as
Schelstrate2 scruples not to confess; though he
blames Morinus for being a httle too frank and
liberal in extending this concession to the apostoli
cal ages ; and in order to confute him, alleges the
authority of Ignatius and Clemens Romanus8 for
the antiquity of this order. But he refers us only
to spurious treatises under their names, not known
till the fourth century, about which time it is owned
this order began to be spoken of by some few Greek

writers. For Epiphanius'1 and the council of Lao
dicea5 put the Bupvipoi, that is, door-keepers, among
the other orders of the clergy. And Justinian also,
in one of his Novels,6 speaks of them as settled in
the great church of Constantinople, where he limits
their number to one hundred, for the use of that
and three other churches. This proves that they
were settled in some parts of the Greek church,
though, as Habertus7 observes, they continued not
many ages, nor ever universally obtained an estab
hshment in all churches.
What sort of ordination they had gMt 2
in the Greek church we do not find ; thSJ ordSonin
for there is no author that speaks of * m ° urc '
it. In the Latin church it was no more but the
bishop's commission, with the ceremony of deliver
ing the keys of the church into their hands, and
saying, Behave thyself as one that must give an ac
count to God of the things that are kept locked
under these keys ; as the form is 8 in the fourth coun
cil of Carthage, and the Ordo Romanus," and Gra
tian,10 who have it from that council.
Their office is commonly said to
consist in taking care of the doors of Their oie and
... „ -r-.. . . function.
the church in time of Divine service,
and in making a distinction betwixt the faithful and
the catechumens, and excommunicated persons, and
such others as were to be excluded from the church.
But I confess this is more than can be made out
from ancient history, at least in reference to the
state and disciphne of many churches. For, in the
African church particularly, as I shall have occasion
to show in another place, a hberty was given not
only to catechumens and penitents, but also to here
tics, Jews, and heathens, to come to the first part
of the church's service, called the missa catechume-
norum, that is, to hear the Scripture read, and the
homily or sermon that was made upon it : because
these were instructive, and might be means of their
conversion, so that there was no need of making
any distinction here. Then, for the other part of
the service, called missafidelium, or the communion
service, the distinction that was made in that, was
done by the deacons or subdeacons, and deaconesses,
as I have showed before in speaking of those orders.
So that all that the door-keepers could have to do
in this matter was only to open and shut the doors
as officers and servants under the other, and to be
governed wholly by their direction. It belonged to

24 Vit. Caesar, ap. Sur. 27. Aug. Clero adscriptum inter
ipsa infantiae rudimenta, post exactum aetatis septennium.
26 Sidon. lib. 4. Ep. 25. Lector hie primum, sic minister
altaris, idque ab infantia.
26 Paulin. Natal. 4. Felic. Primis lector servivit in annis.
27 Victor, de Persec. Vandal, lib. 3. Bibl. Patr. t. 7. 613.
Fere quingenti vel amplius, inter quos quamplurimi erant
lectores infantuli, &c.
1 Ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
2 Schelstrat Cone. Antioch. Dissert. 4. c. 17. p. 520.
I 2

3 Ignat. Ep. ad Antioch. et Clement. Constit. lib. 3. c. 11.
4 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. n. 21. 5 Cone. Laodic. c. 24.
6 Just. Novel. 3. c. 1. Insuper centum existentibus iis,
qui vocantur ostiarii.
7 Habert. Archieratic. par. 5. obs. 1. p. 47.
8 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 9. Ostiarius cum ordinatur — ad sug
gestionem archidiaconi tradat ei episcopus claves ecclesiae,
dicens, Sic age quasi redditurus Deo rationem de his rebus
quae his claoibus recluduntur.
3 Ordo Roman, part. 2. p. 98. 10 Grat. Dist. 23. c. 19.

116

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

them likewise to give notice of the times of prayer
and church assemblies ; which in time of persecu
tion required a private signal for fear of discovery :
and that perhaps was the first reason of instituting
this order in the church of Rome, whose example
by degrees was followed by other churches. How
ever it be, their office and station seems to have
been httle more than that of clerks and sextons in
our modern churches.

CHAPTER VII.
OP THE PSALMIST^:, OR SINGERS.
I have hitherto given an account of
The smgcrs a dis- those five inferior orders, which the
readers in the an- church of Rome has singled out
cient church. from the rest, and without any reason
stamped them with the authority and character of
apostolical institution ; whilst yet she takes no no
tice of some others, which have as good pretence to
antiquity, and to be styled distinct clerical orders,
as most of the former. Among these I reckon the
vsalmistes, the copiates, and the parabolani of the
primitive church. Habertus,1 and Bellarmine,2 and
others, who are concerned to maintain the credit of
the Romish church in making but five inferior
orders, pretend that singers and readers are only
one and the same order. But as the canonists
of their own church generally reckon them two, so
nothing can be more evident than that they were
always accounted so in the primitive church from
their first institution. For they are distinguished
as much as any other orders, by all the writers that
mention them, as the reader that is curious in this
matter may satisfy himself by consulting the places
of Ephrem Syrus,3 the council of Laodicea,4 and
those called the Apostolical Canons,5 and Constitu
tions,6 the author7 of St. Mark's liturgy, the epistle
under the name of Ignatius,8 Justinian,9 and the
council of Trullo,10 referred to in the margin. Par
ticularly Justinian's Novel does so distinguish them,
as to inform us that there were twenty-five singers
and one hundred and ten readers in the Greek
church of Constantinople. Which is a convincing
evidence that they were of different orders.
sect. 2. The first rise and institution of
Their institution
and office. these singers, as an order of the clergy,

seems to have been about the beginning of the
fourth century. For the council of Laodicea is
the first that mentions them, unless any one
thinks perhaps the Apostolical Canons to be a ht
tle more ancient. The reason of instituting them
seems to have been to regulate and encourage the
ancient psalmody of the church. For from the
first and apostolical age singing was always a part
of Divine service, in which the whole body of the
church joined together : which is a thing so evi
dent, that though Cabassutius11 denies it, and in his
spite to the reformed churches, where it is generally
practised, calls it only a protestant whim; yet
Cardinal Bona has more than once 12 not only con
fessed, but solidly proved it to have been the pri
mitive practice. Of which therefore I shall say no
more at present, but only observe, that it was the
decay of this that first brought the order of singers
into the church. For when it was found by expe
rience, that the negligence and unskilfulness of the
people rendered them unfit to perform this service
without some more curious and skilful to guide and
assist them ; then a pecuhar order of men were ap
pointed, and set over this business, with a design to
retrieve and improve the ancient psalmody, and not
to abolish or destroy it. And from this time these
were called kuvovikoI t|/a\rat, the canonical singers,
that is, such as were entered into the canon or cata
logue of the clergy, which distinguished them from
the body of the church. In some places, it was
thought fit for some time to prohibit all others from
singing but only these ; with design, no doubt, to
restore the concent of the ancient ecclesiastical har
mony, which otherwise could not well have been
done, but by obliging the rest for some time to be
silent, and learn of those who were more skilful in
the art of music. Thus I understand that canon of
the council of Laodicea,18 which forbids all others
to sing in the church, except only the canonical
singers, who went up into the ambo, or singing
desk, and sung out of a book. This was a tempo
rary provision, designed only to restore and revive
the ancient psalmody, by reducing it to its primitive
harmony and perfection. That which the rather
inclines me to put this sense upon the canon, and
look upon it only as a prohibition for a time, is,
that in after ages we find the people enjoyed their
ancient privilege of singing all together ; which is
frequently mentioned by St. Austin, Ambrose, Chry
sostom, Basil, and many others, who give an ac
count of the psalmody and service of the church in

1 Habert. Archierat. par. 4. obs. 4. p. 44.
2 Bellarm. de Clericis, lib. 1. c. 11.
3 Ephrem. 93. Serm.de Secundo Dom. Advent.
4 Cone. Laodic. can. 24. 5 Can. Apost. c. 69 et 43.
6 Constit. Apost. lib. 3. c. 11.
' Liturg. Marci, Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 2. p. 35.
8 Epist. ad Antiochen. B Justin. Novel. 3. c. 1 .

10 Concil. Trull, c. 4.
11 Cabassut. Notit. Concil. c. 38. p. 201.
12 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. u. 19. It. de Divin.
Psalmod. c. 17.
13 Cone. Laodic. u. 15. pf) SeIv ttXeov toiv KavoviKwv
v\raXTwv two iirl tov appwva CtvafiaivovToiv, koi airo
Upas TJ/aXXovTeov, ETEpous -rtj/ds tyaXXtiv iv eKKXtjo-ta.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

117

Sect 3.
Why called
virofioXeZr.

their own ages, of which I shall speak more here
after in its proper place.
Here I must note, that these ca
nonical singers were also called u7ro-
PoXeTc, monitors, or suggestors, from
their office, which was to be a sort of precentors to
the people : for the custom in some places was for
the singer or psalmist to begin a psalm or hymn,
and sing half a verse by himself, and then the peo
ple answered in the latter clause; and from this
they were said iienxiiv, or succinere, to sing after
him, by way of antiphona or responsal. In this
sense, Epiphanius Scholasticus understands the
name viro^oXiig in Socrates,14 for he translates it,
psalmi pronunciatores : and so both Valesius 15 and
Cotelerius16 explain it. But Habertus is of the
contrary mind : he thinks the name,17 ujro(3o\Ei£, de
notes not singers, but readers ; and that they were
so called, because they suggested to the preachers
a portion of Scripture to discourse upon : for then
their homilies were frequently upon such parts of
Scripture, as the reader had just before repeated.
The controversy is nice betwixt these learned men,
and I shall no further inquire into the merits of it,
but leave it to every judicious reader to determine.
There is but one thing more that
Sect, t ....
what sort of or- needs be noted concerning this order,
dmation they had, _ °
which is the manner of their designa
tion to this office : which in this agreed with all the
other inferior orders, that it required no imposition
of hands, or solemn consecration : but in one thing
it differed from them, that whereas the rest were
usually conferred by the bishop or a chorepiscopus,
this might be conferred by a presbyter, using this
form of words, as it is in the canon of the fourth
council of Carthage : 18 See that thou beheve in thy
heart what thou singest with thy mouth, and ap
prove in thy works what thou believest in thy heart.
And this is all the ceremony we find any where
used about their designation.

CHAPTER VIII.
OF THE C0P1AT./E OR FOSSARII.
Another order of the inferior clergy Sect t
in the primitive church were those, /oSJ1fS'0'n°dr
whose business was to take care of on^prhL^ivT'
funerals, and provide for the decent chu™h-
interment of the dead. These, in ancient writers,
are commonly termed copiates, which is the name
that Constantine gives them in two rescripts1 in
the Theodosian Code. Epiphanius speaks of them2
under the same name, styling them Koiridrai, and
the author8 under the name of Ignatius, kothwitec.
Gothofred4 deduces it from the Greek word xoird-
Zetv, which signifies resting; others from KOTrtrdc,
mourning ; but generally the name is thought to be
given them from koVoc, and Kowido-Sai, which signify
labouring ; whence they are by some called labor-
antes. The author under the name of St. Jerom5
styles them fossarii, from digging of graves : and in
Justinian's Novels6 they are called lecticarii, from
carrying the corpse or bier at funerals. Gothofred
thinks it improper to reckon these among the cle
rici'' of the ancient church: but when we are speak
ing of things and customs of the ancient church, I
know not how we shall speak more properly than
in the language of the ancients, who themselves
call them so. For not only the author" under the
name of St. Jerom calls them the first order of the
clerici, as they are in his account ; but St. Jerom
himself also gives them the same title, speaking of
one that was to be interred : The clerici, says he,
whose office9 it was, wound up the body, digged the
earth, builded a vault, and so according to custom
made ready the grave. This is the reason why
Epiphanius10 and the counterfeit Ignatius reckon
them among the inferior orders. And Gothofred
had no need to make emendations upon those im
perial laws11 in the Theodosian Code, which give the
copiatee the name of clerici, and entitle them to some
immunities and privileges upon that account : for
this, as appears, was only to speak in the language
and style of other ecclesiastical writers.

14 Socrat. lib. 5. c. 22. ls Vales, in Socrat. ibid.
16 Coteler. Not. in Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57.
17 Habert. Archierat. par. 4. obs. 1. p. 39.
18 Cone. Carthag. 4. e. 10. Psalmista, id est, cantor po
test absque scientia episcopi, sola jussione presbyteri, of
ficium suscipere cantandi, dicente sibi presbytero : Vide ut
quod ore cantas, corde credas: et quod corde credis, operi-
bus comprobes.
1 Cod. Th. lib. 13. Tit. 1. de Lustrali Collat. Leg. 1. It.
lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 15.
2 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. n. 21.
" Epist. ad Antioch. n. 12.
4 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 13. Tit. 1. Leg. 1.
5 Hieron. de septem Ordin. Eccles. t. 4, p. 81.
6 Justin. Novel. 43 et 59.

7 Gothofr. Not. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 15.
8 De septem Ordin. Eccles. Primus in clericis fossari-
orum ordo est, &c.
9 Hieron. Ep. ad Innocent, de Muliere septies icta, t. 1.
p. 235. Clerioi, quibus id officii erat, cruentum linteo ca
daver obvolvunt, et fossam humum lapidibus construentes,
ex more tumulum parant.
10 Epiphan. et Ignat. ubi supra.
11 Cod. Th. lib. 7. Tit. 20. de Veteranis, Leg. 12. Dum
se quidam vocabulo clericorum, et infaustis defunctorum
obsequiis occupatos — defendunt, &c. Ibid. lib. 13. Tit. 1. de
Lustrali Collat. Leg. 1. Clericos excipi tantum, qui copi
atae appellantur, &c. Ibid. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg.
15. Clerici vero, vel hi quos copiatas recens usus instituit
nuncupari, &c.

IIS

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

This order seems to have been first
Sect. 2.
First instituted in instituted in the time of Constantine :
the time ot Con-
stanhne. f0T Constantius his son, in one of
those laws just now referred to, speaks of it as a
late institution ; and there is no writer of the three
first ages that ever mentions it, but all that time the
care of interring the dead was only a charitable
office, which every Christian thought himself obhged
to perform as occasion required. And that is the
reason why we meet with so many noble encomiums
of this sort of charity in the writers of those ages,
but never once mention of any order instituted for
that purpose. But when Constantine came to the
throne, and was quietly settled in his new seat at
Constantinople, he incorporated a body of men to
the number of eleven hundred in that city, under
the name of copiatee, for that particular service :
and so they continued to the time of Honorius and
Theodosius junior, who reduced them to nine hun
dred and fifty : 12 but Anastasius augmented them
again to the first number, which Justinian confirm
ed by two Novels 18 pubhshed for that purpose. And
I suppose from this example of the Constantinopo
litan church they took their rise in other populous
churches. But probably there might be some
why caiiei decani httle difference between those in the
and cullegiati. . ,
church of Constantinople and others in
the lesser churches. For at Constantinople they were
incorporated into a sort of civil society, in the Ro
man language called, collegium, a college, whence the
laws sometimes style them collegiati, and decani, col-
legiates, and deans. As in the forementioned laws
of Honorius and Theodosius junior, and Justinian,
and another of Theodosius the Great14 in the Jus
tinian Code, where he grants them an exemption
from some other civil offices, provided they did not
act upon a feigned and pretended title, but were
really employed in the service of the chm-ch. But
wiry they were called decani, is not very easy to
conjecture. Probably it might be, because they re
sembled the palatine deans, who were a sort of miU
tary officers belonging to the emperor's palace, and
are styled also corpus decanorum in both the Codes u
mentioned by St. Chrysostom16 and other Greek
writers under the name of SekovoI iv rote fiaaiXeioig,
deans of the palace, to distinguish them from those
other deans of the church, which some unwarily
confound together. But I am not very confident

12 Cod. Just. lib. I. Tit. 2. de SS. Eccles. Leg. 4. Non
plures quam nongenti quinquaginta decani deputentur ec
clesiae, &c.
13 Justin. Novel. 43 et 59.
14 Cod. Just. lib. 11. Tit. 17. de Collegiatis Leg. unica.
Qui sub praetextu decanorum seu collegiatorum, cum id
munus non impleant, aliis se muneribus conantur subtrahere,
eorum fraudibus credimus esse obviandum.
15 Vid. Cod. Theod. lib. 6. Tit. 33. de Decanis. Leg. 1.

that this was the reason of the name, and therefore
I only propose it as a conjecture, till some one as
signs a better reason for it.
Their office was to take the whole
care of funerals upon themselves, and Their qiticeand
to see that all persons had a decent
and honourable interment. Especially they were
obliged to perform this last office to the poorer sort,
without exacting any thing of their relations upon
that account. That it was so at Constantinople,
appears from one of Justinian's Novels,17 which ac
quaints us how Anastasius the emperor settled cer
tain revenues of land upon this society, and ordered
a certain number of shops or work-houses in the
city to be freed from all manner of tribute, and to
be appropriated to this use ; out of whose income
and annual rents of the lands, the defensors and
stewards of the church, who had the chief care and
oversight of the matter, were to pay these deans,
and see the expenses of such funerals defrayed.
Justinian not only confirmed that settlement ; but
a complaint being made of an abuse that, notwith
standing the laws of Anastasius, pay was exacted
for funerals, he published that his Novel on purpose
to correct it. But we do not find that such settle
ments were made in all other churches, but it is
more probable that the copiates were maintained
partly out of the common stock of the church, and
partly out of their own labour and traffic, which
for their encouragement was generally exempted
from paying custom or tribute, as we shall see
hereafter.

CHAPTER IX.

OF THE PARABOLANI.

Another order of men, which by Slttli
some are reckoned among the clerici ^7^2™"'
of the ancient church, were those "¦»»¦« a» ""^
whom they called parabolani. Theodosius junior,
in one of his laws relating to them in the Theodo
sian Code,1 puts them among the clerici, and evi
dently includes them under that common title, as
Gothofred rightly observes in his exposition of the
place. Baronius himself does not deny that they
were of the clergy, but he would persuade his reader

It. Cod. Just. lib. 12. Tit. 27. Leg. 1 et 2.
16 Chrys. Horn. 13. in Hebr. p. 1849.
17 Justin. Novel. 59.
¦ Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 42. Placet
nostrae Clementiae, ut nihil commune clerici cum publicis
actibus vel ad curiam pertinentibus habeant. Gothofr. Not.
in loc. Sane clericorum eos numero fuisse, turn hujus legis
initium, turn utraque haec lex et sequens ostendunt.

Chap. IX.-

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

119

that they were not a distinct order, but chosen out
of the inferior orders of the clergy,2 of which there
is nothing said in that law, but rather the contrary,
that they were to be chosen out of the poor of
Alexandria. Their office is described in the next
Their institution law, where they are said to be de
puted to attend upon the sick, and to
take care of their bodies in time of their weakness.3
At Alexandria they were incorporated into a society
to the number of five or six hundred, to be chosen
at the discretion of the bishop of the place, out of
any sort of men except the honorati and curiales,
who were tied to serve in the civil offices of their
country, and therefore were not allowed to enter
themselves into any ecclesiastical service. They
were to be under the government and direction of
the bishop, as appears from the same law, which is
a correction of the former law ; for by it they were
put under the government of the presfectus augusta-
lis (as the chief civil magistrate was called at
Alexandria) : but by this law Theodosius revoked
his former decree, and subjected them entirely to
the care and disposition of the bishop ; or, as the
Greek collector of the ecclesiastical constitutions
out of the civil law styles him,4 the pope ; mean
ing, not the pope of Rome, as some ignorantly mis
take, but the pope or bishop of Alexandria. For
then it was customary to give every bishop the
name oipapa, as has been showed in another place.5
What time this order began, we cannot certainly
determine : the first notice we have of it is in these
laws of Theodosius junior, anno 415. Yet it is not
there spoken of as newly instituted, but as settled
in the church before. And probably it might be
instituted about the same time as the copiates were
under Constantine, when some charitable offices,
which were only voluntarily practised by Christians
before, as every one's piety inclined him, were now
turned into standing offices, and settled upon a cer
tain order of men particularly devoted to such ser
vices. That it was not any order pecuhar to the
church of Alexandria, is evident, because there is
mention made of the parabalani being at Ephesus
in the time of the second council that was held
there, anno 449. For Basilius Seleuciensis, who
subscribed there to the condemnation of Flavian,
and the absolution of Eutyches the heretic, being
brought to a recantation in the council of Chalce
don, makes this apology for himself, that he was

terrified into that subscription, by the soldiers that
came armed into the church, together with Barsu-
mas and his monks, and the parabalani? and a great
multitude of others. The original word is Trapa/Sa-
XaviTg, which the old translator rightly renders,
parabalani, which is the same with parabolani, for
it is written both ways in ancient authors : but
Binius, in his Greek edition of the councils, not
understanding the word, explains it, ii qui circa
balnea versantur, as if the parabalani had been per
sons attending at the pubhc baths; whereas now
all men know their office was of a different na
ture, and their names given them for a reason
very different from that of giving attendance at
the baths.
As to the reason of their name, to
omit the fanciful interpretations of The reason of the
name parabolani.
Alciat and Accursms, which are suffi
ciently exposed by Gothofred, the opinion of Dua-
renus7 and Gothofred seems to be the truest, that
they were called parabolani from their undertaking
irapd)3oXov fpyov, a most dangerous and hazardous
office, in attending the sick, especially in infectious
and pestilential diseases. The Greeks were used to
call those irapdfioXoi, who hired themselves out to
fight with wild beasts in the amphitheatre. And
so Socrates the historian uses the word,8 speaking
of Theodosius his exhibiting one of the public
games to the people at Constantinople, he says, The
people cried out to him that he should suffer one of
the bold 7r«pa/3oXot to fight with the wild beasts.
These were those whom the Romans called bestiarii,
and sometimes paraboli and parabolarii, from the
Greek word 7rapa/3aXXto-6,at, which signifies exposing
a man's life to danger, as they that fought with wild
beasts did. In this sense, I have had occasion to
show before,9 the Christians were generally called
parabolarii by the heathens, because they were so
ready to expose their lives to martyrdom. And it
is the opinion of Gothofred10 and some other11
learned critics, that the ancient reading of the
Greek copies of St. Paul's Epistle to the Philip-
pians, chap. ii. ver. 30, was TrapafioXtvadpfvog ttj
•pvxy, exposing his hfe to danger, as an old Latin
interpreter of Puteanus's renders it, parabolatus de
anima sua. In the same sense these parabolani of
the primitive church we are now speaking of, had
their name from their bold exposing their lives to
danger in attendance upon the sick in all infectious
and pestilential distempers.

2 Baron, an. 416. t. 4. p. 400. Fuisse hosminoris ordinis
clericos allectos, exordium dati hoc anno rescripti insinuare
videtur. 3 Cod, Th. ibid. Leg. 43. Parabalani, qui ad curanda
debilium aegra corpora deputantur, quingentos esse ante
praecepimus : sed quia hos minus sufficere in praasenti cogno-
vimus, pro quingentis sexcentos constitui praecipimus, &c.
4 Collect. Constit. Eccles. lib. 1. Tit. 3. c. 18.

6 Book II. chap. 2. sect. 7.
0 Concil. Chalced. Act. 1. t. 4. p. 252.
7 Duaren. de Minist. et Benefic. lib. 1. c. 19.
9 Socrat. lib. 7. c. 22. 'O Sf/poi KaTE/36a, Seivw duplet*
Eva Tmv Evtpvuiv irapafloXojv pdxEcrdai.
9 Book I. chap. 2. sect. 9.
10 Gothofr. Not. in Cod. Th. 16. t. 42.
11 Vid. Grot. Hammond. Capel. in Philip, ii. 30.

120

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

sect 4- I shall only observe further of them,
rufeTconcTrrSg that being commonly, according to
their behaviour. ^^ ^^ men of & boU and darjng
spirit, they were ready upon all occasions to engage
in any quarrel that should happen in church or
state. As they seem to have done in the dispute
between Cyril the bishop, and Orestes the governor
of Alexandria : which was the reason why Theodo
sius by his first law sunk their Kumber to five hun
dred, and put them under the inspection of the
prcsfeetus augustalis, and strictly prohibited them
from appearing at any public shows, or in the com
mon council of the city, or in the judges' court, un
less any of them had a cause of his own, or of the
whole body, as their syndic, to prosecute there ; and
then he must appear single, without any of his
order or associates to abet him. And though he
not long after revoked this law as to the former
part, allowing them to be six hundred, and the bi
shop to have the choice and cognizance of them ;
yet in all other respects he ordered it to stand in
its full force, still prohibiting them to appear in a
body upon any of the foresaid occasions : 12 and
Justinian made this law perpetual by inserting it
into his own Code. Which shows that the civil
government always looked upon these parabolani
as a formidable body of men, and accordingly kept
a .watchful eye and strict hand over them ; that
whilst they were serving the chm-ch, they might not
do any disservice to the state, but keep within the
bounds of that office whereto they were appointed.

CHAPTER X.

OF THE CATECHISTS.

sect. 1. I have hitherto discoursed of such
tinrt'Sderlf'thf" particular orders of the ecclesiastics
ouToi'any other™ in the primitive church, as were des-
tinated precisely to some particular
office and function: but there were some offices
which did not require a man to be of any one dis
tinct order, but might be performed by persons of
any order ; and it will be necessary I should give
some account of these also, whilst I am treating of
the clergy of the church. The first of these I shall

12 Cod. Just. lib. i. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 18. Hi sexcenti
viri reverendissimi sacerdotis praeceptis ac dispositionibus
obsecundent : reliquis, quae dudum lata? legis forma eom-
plectitur super his parabolanis, vel de spectaculis, vel de
judiciis, caeterisque (sicut jam statutum est) custodiendis.
1 Ambros. Ep. 33. Post lectiones atque tractatum, di-
missis catechumenis, symbolum aliquibus competentibus in
baptisteriis tradebam basilica?.
2 Theodor. Lector. Collectan. lib. 2. p. 563. to ervp/ioXov
ll-rea^ tov etov-s XEyopEVOv irpoTEpov iv tjj dyiet irapa-
&X""} rov 6eiou irddovs, too KUipw toiv yivopivmv biro

speak of is the catechist, whose office was to in
struct the catechumens in the first principles of re
hgion, and thereby prepare them for the reception
of baptism. This office was sometimes done by the •
bishop himself, as is evident from that passage in
St. Ambrose, where he says,1 upon a certain Lord's
day, after the reading the Scriptures and the sermon,
when the catechumens were dismissed, he took the
competentes, or candidates for baptism, into the bap
tistery of the church, and there rehearsed the creed
to them. This was on Palm-Sunday, when it was
customary for the bishop himself to catechise such
of the catechumens as were to be baptized on
Easter-eve. Theodorus Lector2 takes notice ofthe
same custom in the Eastern churches, when he tells
us, that before the time of Timothy, bishop of Con
stantinople, the Nicene creed was never used to be
repeated publicly in that church, except only once
a year, on the great day of preparation, the day of
our Lord's passion, when the bishop was wont to
catechise. At other times presbyters and deacons .
were the catechists. St. Chrysostom performed
this office when he was presbyter of Antioch, as
appears from one of his Homilies,8 which is in
scribed, KaTrixvo-ig jrpbg roiig pkXXovrag pturf&v&K, A
catechism or instruction for the candidates of bap
tism. Deogratias was catechist when he was dea
con of Carthage, as we learn from St. Austin's
book* de Catechizandis Rudibus", which he wrote
at his request, to give him some assistance in per
forming his duty.
Nor was it only the superior orders Sect 2
that performed this office, but some- t£made"S.
times persons were chosen out of the chM*
inferior orders to do it. Optatus was but a reader
in the church of Carthage, and yet Cyprian made
him catechist, or, as it is in his phrase,5 the doctor
audientium, the master of the hearers, or lowest
rank of catechumens. Origen seems to have had
no higher degree in the church when he was first
made catechist at Alexandria. For both Eusebius8
and St. Jerom7 say, he was but eighteen years old
when he was deputed to that office ; which was at
least seven years before he could be ordained dea
con by the canons of the church.
The author under the name of Sffit 3
Clemens Romanus seems to have had WhVw

regard to this, when comparing the

vavro\atot by
some Greek writers.

TOU ETTUTKOTTOV KaTVX^^EOiV.
8 Chrys. Horn. 21. ad Popul. Antiochen.
4 Aug. de catechizand. Rudibus, c. 1. 1. 4. p. 295. Dixisti
quod saepe apud Carthaginem, ubi diaconus es, ad te ad-
ducantur, qui fide Christiana imbuendi sunt, &c.
5 Cypr. Ep. 24. al. 29. Optatum inter lectores doctorem.
audientium constjtuimus.
6 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 3.
' Hieron. de Scriptor. in Origene. Decimo octavo teta-
tis suae anno KaTjjx>io-E<u» opus aggressus, &c.

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

121

church to a ship, and the clergy to the officers in
it, he plainly distinguishes the catechists from the
bishop, presbyters, and deacons, saying, The bishop8
is to resemble the irpuipcic, or pilot ; the presbyters
the vavrai, or mariners ; the deacons, the rotxopxoi,
or chief rowers ; the catechists, the vauroXdyot, or
those whose office it was to admit passengers into
the ship, and contract with them for the fare of
their passage. This was properly the catechist's
duty, to show the catechumens the contract they
were to make, and the conditions they were to per
form, viz. repentance, faith, and new obedience,
in order to their admittance into the Christian ship,
the church, in which they were to pass through
this world to the kingdom of heaven. Upon this
account the catechists were termed vavroXoyot, and
as such distinguished from bishops, presbyters, and
deacons. Cotelerius9 says he found a Greek manu
script in one of the French king's libraries, where
the same comparison is made, and cited out of the
Constitutions, in these words : The church is like a
ship: Christ is the governor ; the bishop, the pilot;
the presbyters, the mariners ; the deacons, the chief
rowers ; the catechists, or nautologi, the orders of
subdeacons and readers. So that it is evident the
catechists were sometimes chosen out of the inferior
orders, when any of them were found duly qualified
to discharge the duties of that function. And this
will be the less wondered at by any one that con
siders, that the deaconesses, whilst their order was
in being, were required to be a sort of private cate
chists to the more ignorant and rustic women-
catechumens : which I need not stand to evidence
here, because I have done it heretofore in speaking
of the offices which belonged to that order. See
Book II. chap. 22. sect. 9.
sect i. -But m au these cases there is one
chKfgifrSbt thing to be diligently noted, that this
hdyin the church. gort Q£ gatggjjjgtg were not aV|owetJ J0
instruct their catechumens pubhcly in the church,
but only in private auditories appointed particularly
for that purpose. Valesius10 observes this in the
case of Origen, and rightly concludes it from the
invective of Demetrius bishop of Alexandria, against
Alexander bishop of Jerusalem, and Theoctistus
bishop of Csesarea, who had authorized Origen to

preach pubhcly in the church, when as yet he was
no presbyter. This accusation had been ridiculous,
had he himself given Origen the same power before,
when he was catechist at eighteen years of age at
Alexandria. Ruffin indeed, in his translation of
Eusebius, says positively that Demetrius gave him
authority to catechise and teach pubhcly in the
church." But that is an interpolation and false
paraphrase of Eusebius his words, who says no such
thing, but only,12 that Demetrius, bishop of the
church, had committed to his care the office of ca
techising, or, as we may render it, the catechetic
school, where probably for some time he also taught
grammar and other human learning. That there
were such sort of catechetic schools adjoining to
the church in many places, is evident from a Novel ls
of the emperor Leo, who calls them Karnxovptva,
and says they were a sort of buildings belonging to
the church. It might be the baptistery, as St.
Ambrose calls it, or any other places set apart for
that purpose.
Such a school as this we may sup
pose that to have been, wherein Ori- ofthe'succession
, _ in the catechetic
gen and so many other famous men school at Aiexan-
read catechetic lectures at Alexan
dria. Eusebius says Pantsenus taught in this school,14
anno 181, and that it was a school of sacred learn
ing from ancient custom long before, and that it
continued so to be to his own time. St. Jerom de
duces its original from St. Mark, the first founder of
the church of Alexandria, telling us, that Pantse
nus15 taught Christian philosophy at Alexandria,
where it had been the custom of old always to have
ecclesiastical doctors from the time of St. Mark.
Where by ecclesiastical doctors he does not mean
the bishop and presbyters of the church, (which
were originally in all churches as well as Alexan
dria,) but the doctors of Christian philosophy in the
catechetic school, whereof there had been a suc
cession from the first foundation of the church.
And the succession was continued for some ages
after : for Clemens Alexandrinus 18 succeeded Pan
tsenus ; and Origen,17 Clemens ; Heraclas,18 Origen ;
and Dionysius,19 Heraclas. After whom some20 add
Athenodorus, Malchion, Athanasius, and Didymus.
And the author of the Greek Synodicon published

8 Clem. Ep. ad Jacob, n. 14.
9 Coteler. Not. in Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57. p. 263.
eoikev it iKKX-ntria vni' b-piv yvtepvriTns etiv b Xpt<roV o Si
irptapEvs, b iirtffKoiros' ol vavrai, ol irpeo-toTEpoi, ol tei-
XaPX°h ot SiaKovot, ol vavToXdyoi, to tiov dvayvto^eov Kal
iilrnpETaiv Taypa.
10 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 6. c. 19. It. Hallier. de H ier-
arch. Eccles. lib. 1. c. 7. p. 66.
11 Ruffin. lib. 6. c. 3. Demetrius — catechizandi ei, id est,
docendi magisterium in ecclesia tribuit.
Euseb. lib. 6. c. 3. avTto povua tt/s th KaTr\XEiv StaTpt-
Grjs vird Anpt}Tpiu tb T»is £K^\Tjo-ttts irpoeraiTos iiriTE-
Tpappivr\s. "*
13 Leo, Novel. 73. In ecclesiarum ccenaculis, quae pro-

miscuum vulgus KaTnxovpEva vocare solet. Vid. Concil.
Trull, c. 97. et Balsamon. et Zonar. in loc.
14 Euseb. lib. 5. c. 10. nysiTo Ttji/i/caDTa Tf)s two- ttltwv
avToSlStaTp&rtsfldvTaLvos' i^apxaiov eSovs SiSacrKaXEiov
Ttiiv LEpSiv Xdytov Trap avTols cvvetlutos' b Kal e'ls rjpas
irapaTELVETal. 15 Hieron. de Scriptor. t. 36. Panteenus Stoicae sectae phi-
losophus, j uxta quandam veterum in Alexandria consuetudi-
nem, ubi a Marco evangelista semper ecclesiastic! fuere
doctores  docuit sub severo principe, &c.
16 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 6. 17 Id. lib. 6. •.-. 19.
18 Hieron. de Scriptor. in Origene. Euseb. lib. 6. ¦;. 26
19 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 29.
20 Hospin. de Templis, lib. 3. t. 5.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

122 j
by Pappus, says,21 Arius taught in the same school
before he broached his heresy. It were easy to re
count many other such schools at Rome, Csesarea,
Antioch, &c; but I shall have another occasion to
speak of these, when I come to consider the encou
ragement that Christian emperors gave to schools
of learning and the professors of liberal arts and
sciences : what has here been suggested upon this
head, may suffice at present to show what was the
office of the catechist, and what the use of cateche
tical schools in the church.

Book III.

CHAPTER XI.
OF THE ECCLESIECDICI AND DEFENSORES, OR
SYNDICS OF THE CHURCH.
Another office which will deserve to
Five sorts of o-e- be spoken of in this place, because it
femores noted, two . - . -,
whereofoniy belong- was sometimes, though not always,
ed to Ule church. !~
managed by the hands of the clergy,
is that of the defensores. For the understanding of
which it will be necessary in the first place to dis
tinguish between the civil and ecclesiastical defen
sors. For Gothofred thinks there were in all four
sorts of them, viz. the defensores senatus, defensores
urbium, defensores ecclesiarum, and defensores pau-
perum. But he might have added one more, which
Ulpian1 calls, defensores rerum publicarum, whose
office was, to be a sort of proctors or syndics in
managing of the public causes of that corporation
or company of tradesmen to which they belonged :
which sort of defensors were first instituted by
Alexander Severus, as Lampridius2 tells us in his
Life. The defensores civitatum, or, as they are other
wise called, defensores plebis, were a sort of tribunes
of the people ; one of their chief offices being to de
fend the poor plebeians against the insults and op
pressions of the great and wealthy citizens. Now,
in imitation of these, I presume, the ecclesiastical
defensors were instituted, as both their name and
office seems plainly to imply.
The defensors of the poor had
oraJdcfaisores much the same employment in. the
chm-ch, as the defensores plebis had in
the state : for if any of the poor, or virgins, or wi
dows belonging to the church, were injured or op-

Sect.3.
Of the defensores
ecclesia, their office

21 Synodicon Concil. t. 1. p. 1494.
1 Digest, lib. 49. Tit. 4. Leg. 1.
2 Lamprid. Vit. Alexand. Corpora omnium constituit, vi-
nariorum, lupinariorum, caligariorum, et omnino omnium
artium : hisque ex sese defensores dedit.
3 Cone. Carth. 5. c. 9. Ab imperatoribus universis visum
est postulandum, propter afflictionem pauperum, quorum
molestiis sine intermissione fatigatur ecclesia, ut defensores
eis, adversus potentias divitum, cum episcoporum provisione

pressed by the rich, it was the business of these
defensors, as their proctors or advocates, to see
them righted, and to solicit the magistrate that they
might have justice done them. This is evident from
the decree made in the fifth council of Carthage,
anno 401, which is also inserted into the African
Code, and is to this purpose : That3 forasmuch as
the church was incessantly wearied with the com
plaints and afflictions of the poor, it was unanimous
ly agreed upon by them in council, that the empe
rors should be petitioned to allow defensors to be
chosen for them by the procurement and approba
tion of the bishops, that they might defend them
from the power and tyranny of the rich.
As to the other sort of defensors,
called defensores ecclesics, (whom I
speak of separately, because Gothofred and tuQC'""1-
makes a distinction between them, though others
take them to be the same,) their office did as plainly
resemble that of the other sort of civil defensors,
called defensores rerum publicarum. For as those
were the proctors and syndics of their respective
companies, to manage the public concerns of their
societies at law upon all emergent occasions; so
these did the same for the church, whose syndics
they were, being employed to solicit the cause of
the church, or any single ecclesiastic, when they
were injured or oppressed, and had occasion for re
dress in a civil court ; or if they were not remedied
there, they were to address the emperors themselves
in the name of the church, to procure a particular
precept in her favour. Thus Possidius4 tells us in
the Life of St. Austin, that when the Circumcel
lions, in their mad zeal, had plundered and slain
some of the catholic clergy, the defensor of the
church prosecuted them at law for the fact, that the
peace of the church might no more be disturbed or
impeded. In hke manner, we read in the first coun
cil of Carthage,5 that it being a thing against the
imperial laws for any layman to impose a secular
office upon a clergyman ; if any such injury was
offered to the church, it is said, the affront might be
redressed, if the defensors of the church did not
fail in their duty. Which plainly imphes, that it
was the "business of the defensors to see the rights
of the church, that were settled upon her by law,
truly maintained ; and if any encroachments were
made upon them, they were to prosecute the ag
gressors and invaders before the magistrates, and
execute the sentence which they gave in favour of

delegentur. Vid. Cod. Eccles. Afr. can. 75.
4 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 12. De qua re, ne pacis ecclesias
amplius impediretur profectus, defensor ecclesia? inter leges
non siluit, &c.
5 Cone. Carthag. 1. c. 9. Ipsis non liceat clericos noslros
eligereapothecariosvelratiociuatores. — Quuds. .UJuriacon-
stitutionis imperatoriae clericos inquietandos putaverint, si
defensio ecclesiastica nos non deridet, pudor publicus vm-
dicabitur.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

123

the church. It is further observable from a law of
Arcadius and Honorius, recited in the next para
graph, that in case of necessity they were likewise
to make application to the emperors, and bring their
mandate to the inferior judges, when they could not
otherwise have justice done them. By a canon of
the council of Chalcedon, defensors are also em
powered to admonish such idle monks and clerks as
resorted to the royal city Constantinople, without
any licence or commission from their bishop ; and
if after admonition they continued still to loiter
there, the same defensors were to expel them thence
by force,6 and cause them to return to their own
habitation. It appears also, from Justinian's laws,'
that the defensors; together with the ceconomi, were
made a sort of superintendents over the copiates, or
great body of deans, whose business was to attend
at funerals, as has been showed before : the defen
sors were charged with the care of these, both in
reference to their revenues and persons. They were
likewise to make mquiry, whether every clerk be
longing to the church carefully attended the cele
bration of morning and evening service in the
church, and to inform the bishop of such as neg
lected, that they might be proceeded against with
ecclesiastical censures.8 These were the chief, if not
the only offices of the defensors in the primitive
church : for as to any spiritual power or jurisdiction
over the clergy, they had none ; nor were they as
yet admitted to hear criminal causes, great or little,
in the bishop's name; but these things were devolved
upon them in latter ages, as Morinus9 shows at
large in a long dissertation upon this subject, to
which I refer the inquisitive reader, contenting my
self to give such an account of the defensor's office
and power, as I find it to have been in the ages
next after their institution. The next inquiry must be into their
Sect. t. ,
or their quality, quality, whether they were of the
whether they were
Jj!™ °r h7- clergy or laity ? For learned men are
not agreed about this. Petavius 10 says
they were always laymen. But Morinus11 and Go
thofred,12 with much better reason, assert the con
trary, that at first they were generally chosen out
of the clergy, till, for some particular reasons, it
was thought most proper to have advocates at law

to discharge this office in the African churches.
This change was made about the year 407, when
the African fathers, in the council of Carthage,13
petitioned the emperor Honorius, that he would
give them leave to choose their defensors out of the
scholastici, or advocates at law, who were actually
concerned in pleading of causes ; that so they who
took upon them the defence of the churches, might
have the same hberty as the provincial priests were
used to have, to go, upon necessary occasion, into
the judges' consistory, or council-chamber behind
the veil, and there suggest what they thought neces
sary to promote their own cause, or obviate the
plots of their adversaries. In answer to this petition,
Honorius shortly after pubhshed a law, wherein
he granted them liberty to make use of such advo
cates for their defensors as they desired : for he de
creed,14 that whatever privileges were specially
obtained of the emperor, relating to the church,
should be intimated to the judges, and executed,
non per coronatos, not by clergymen, as Gothofred
rightly explains it, but by advocates at law. So
that now it was no longer necessary that the de
fensors should be of the clergy, but the office was
frequently intrusted in the hands of laymen. Which
is further evident from an epistle of Pope Zosimus,
who lived about the same time : for he says,15 the
defensors of the church were chosen out of the
laity, and might afterward, if they were deserving,
be ordained among the clergy. Yet after this we
find the defensors in some places continued still to
be of the clergy. For Morinus shows, that in the
first session of the council of Chalcedon there is
frequent mention made of one John, a presbyter
and defensor ;16 as also in many epistles of Gregory
the Great, the defensors of the Roman church are
said to be of the clergy : to which I shall add a
fragment of Theodorus Lector taken out of Damas-
cen,17 which speaks of one John, as both deacon
and defensor of the church of St. Stephen at Con
stantinople in the time of Anastasius the emperor,
which was in the beginning of the sixth century.
From all which it is very evident against Petavius,
that the defensors were sometimes chosen out of
the clergy, and not always made of advocates or
laymen.

6 Cone. Chalced. c. 23. "Akovtocs avTi\i Sii t« aiiTa
iKS'tKU iK(iaXXs<r8ai, Kal teis 16*185 KaTaXap(3dvEtv T07T8S.
7 Justin. Novel. 59.
8 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 42. n. 10.
8 Morin. de Ordinat. Eccles. par. 3. Exercit. 16. c. 7.
10 Petav. Not. in Epiphan. Haer. 72. n. 10.
11 Morin. ibid. Exerc. 16. c. 6. a. 16.
12 Gothofred. Not. in Cod. Theod. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc.
Leg. 38.
13 Concil. African, vulgo dictum, can. 64. Placuit ut
petantlegati a gloriosissimis imperatoribus, utdent faculta-
tem defensores constituendi scholasticos, qui in actu sunt,
vel in munere defensionis causarum, ut more sacerdotum
provinciae, iidem ipsi qui defensionem ecclesiarum suscepe-
rint, habeant facultatem pro negotiis ecclesiarum, quoties

necessitas flagitaverit, vel ad obsistendum obrepentibus, vel
ad necessaria suggerenda, ingredi judicum secretaria. Vid.
Cod. can. Afr. Gr. Lat. c. 97. et Concil. Milevitan. c. 16, to
the same purpose.
14 Cod.Th. lib. 16.Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 38. Ut quajcunque
de nobis ad ecclesiam tantum pertinentia, specialiter fuerint
impetrata, non per coronatos, sed ab advocatis, eorum ar-
bitratu, et judicibus innotescant, et sortiantur effectum, &c.
18 Zosim. Ep, 1. u. 3. Defensores ecclesiae, qui ex laicis
fiunt, supradicta observatione teneantur, si meruerint esse in
ordine clericatus.
18 Concil. Chalced. -"Act. 1.
" Vid. Damascen. Orat. 3. de Imagin. p. 799. et Frag
ment. Theodor. Lector, edit, a Vales, p. 583. Iamwris <5i-
aKOVOs ical ekSikos t5 Evayus o'Lkh SrEtpana, &c.

124

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

I must not omit to acquaint the
Tne IS«oi and reader, that what the Latins call de-
imo^theGreeks fensores, the Greek church commonly
the same with the -^ 1.-T,
defensors of the La- calls EKOIKOI and EKKX/ltrtEKOtKOt, WnlCH
tin church. signify the same as defensors; though
Gothofred,18 without any just reason, makes a differ
ence between them : for not only their offices and
powers are described to be the same, but also when
ever the Greeks have any occasion to speak of the
Latin defensors, they give them the name of hSueoi,
as may be seen either in the Code of the African
church19 published by Justellus, or that which the
Greeks commonly call the council of Carthage, pub
lished by Ehinger,20 and Dr. Beverege21 in the Pan
dects. But whether vpo^driig be another Greek
name for a defensor, is not so certain. The word
is only found once used by Epiphanius,22 who speak
ing of one Cyriacus, styles him KvptctKoc n-pos-aV/je,
which Petavius renders, Cyriacus defensor. He
seems indeed to have had some office in the church,
because he is joined in the subscription of a letter
with the clergy, presbyters, deacons, subdeacons,
and readers : but whether that be a sufficient reason
to make him a defensor, I must leave the judicious
reader to determine. There is one thing more must be
chancellors and resolved before I dismiss this subject ;
defensors not the
sameintheprimi- that is, whether chancellors and de
rive church. '
fensors were the same in the primitive
church ? In answer to which I say, it is very plain
they were not : because the first time we find any
mention of the office of chancellors in the church,
they are expressly distinguished from the ekcWoi or
defensors ; and that is in the Novel of Heraclius,
made in the beginning of the seventh century, where,
determining the number of ecclesiastical officers
that were to be allowed in the great church of Con
stantinople, he says, there should be two syncelh,
twelve chancellors,23 ten defensors, twelve refer
endaries, forty notaries, and twelve sceuophylaces,
whereof four to be presbyters, six deacons, and two
readers. It is not very easy to determine what the
office of these chancellors was at that time ; but it
is very evident, however, from this, that they were
not the same with the defensors. They who are
acquainted with the civil law, know that the cancel-
larii in the civil courts were not judges, but officers
attending the judge in an inferior station : which
appears evidently from a title in both the Theo
dosian and Justinian Code,24 De adsessoribus et
domesticis et cancellariis judicum. Hottoman and Ac-
cursius take them for actuaries or notaries ; but Go
thofred, in his learned Notes M upon the Theodosian

18 Gothofred. Not. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 38
19 Cod. Can, Eccles. Afr. c. 75 et 97.
20 Concil. Carthag. Gr. ap. Ehinger. c. 76 et 99.
21 Cone. Carth. ap. Bevereg. c. 78 et 100.
22 Epiph. Haer. 72. Marcel, n. 10.
23 Heracl. Novel. 2. ap. Leunclav. Jus. Gr. Rom. t. 1

Sect. 7.
Whether the de
fensors' ofnee was
the same with thatof

Code, proves at large out of Cassiodore andAgathias,
that they were the custodes secretarii, the guards of
the judges' consistory, and called cancellarii because
they stood ad cancellos, at the rails or barriers which
separated the secretum from the rest of the court.
So that their office then was not to sit as judges or
assessors, but only to attend the judge, and keep
peace and good order under him. And if this was
the condition of the cancellarii in the state, it is
probable they had some such office in the church
in the time of Heraclius, who first mentions them;
but what that office was I am not able to determine
any further, save only that it was not the same with
that of the defensors of the church.
It may be asked then, whether the
office of our modern chancellors has
any relation or resemblance to that of ouVrrSeru .£'
defensors in the ancient church? cel0™!
There are some learned men who make them alto
gether the same. Bishop Beverege derives the au
thority of them both from the same fountain. For
he says26 the defensors heard and determined causes
in the bishop's name ; and those not only that re
lated to the poor, who sought the patronage of the
church ; but also when presbyters and deacons had
any controversy with any other, whether of the
clergy or laity, they might bring their action before
the 7rpuiT-iKc*iKoc or defensor. Whence he concludes,
that chancellors of later ages are the very same
ecclesiastical officials, as the defensors of the primi
tive church. It were to be wished that that learned
person had given us ancient records for that power
which he ascribes to the old defensors; for then
they would have looked more hke chancellors under
another name : but indeed the authorities he alleges
are all modern, such as Papias's Glossary, and
Balsamon's Meditata, and the catalogues of officials
in the church of Constantinople, which were written
several ages after the first institution of defensors,
and in times when the protecdicus among the Greeks
was become an officer of great authority and power-
So that though the power of chancellors might be
much the same as that of the hSueoi among the
modern Greeks, yet that it was altogether the same
with the ancient defensors, seems not hitherto to
be solidly proved ; since the business of the ancient
defensors, was not to do the office of judges, but of
advocates at law, to defend the rights of the poor,
and the hberties of the church, against all aggress
ors and invaders. But if any can show from an
cient records, that the defensors had a larger power,
he will very much oblige the world with such a
discovery : in the mean time the reader will pardon

p. 79. KayKEXapiovs Si e!s t/3- ek^ikous eis 1.
24 Cod. Th. lib. 1. Tit. 12. Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 51.
25 Gothofred, Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 1. Tit. 12. de Adses-
sorib. Leg. 3.
28 Bevereg. Not. in can. 23. Concil. Chalced.

Chap. XII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

125

me for not ascribing to them greater powers than I
had authority to do. The. matter is curious, and
may exercise the pens of learned men, and be the
subject of further disquisition and inquiry.

CHAPTER XII.
OF THE CECONOMI.
sect 1 -^N *ne writings of the fourth and fifth
sttuhrfTKourth centuries we frequently meet with an
so°Sthe?LX" officer in the church, styled by the
Greeks1 oltcovouog, and by the Latins2
ceconomus, or prcepositus domus, as it is in St. Austin.8
His office was to manage the revenues of the whole
diocese under the inspection of the bishop. For
anciently, as I have showed elsewhere,4 the whole
revenue of the church was intrusted in the hands
of the bishop, to be divided among the clergy and
poor of the church by his direction and appoint
ment : and in managing this affair he commonly
made use of his archdeacon, as a proper assistant
to ease himself of the great burden and encum
brance of it. But upon the general conversion of
heathens, and the consequent augmentation of
every diocese and church revenues, both the bi
shop and his archdeacon had business enough of
another nature to take up the greatest part of their
time ; and then it was found necessary to institute
officers on purpose, and set them over this affair;
under the name of ceconomi, or stewards of the
church. Morinus5 thinks they were instituted to
avoid suspicion ; and in some churches there is no
question but it was so : for in the remaining frag
ments of the council of Tyre, anno 448, which are
inserted into the acts of the council of Chalcedon,8
we find that Ibas, bishop of Edessa, being accused
by some of his clergy for embezzling the revenues
of the church, is obhged to promise, that for the
future the revenues should be managed by ceconomi,
or stewards, chosen out of the clergy, after the man
ner of the great church of Antioch. And it is not
improbable, but the like accusation being brought
agamst Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria, in the
council of Chalcedon, was the reason that moved
that council to make a general decree in this mat
ter, that forasmuch *as they were informed, that in
some churches the bishops alone administered the

ecclesiastical revenues, without any stewards, they
now ordained, that every church having a bishop,
should also have a steward of her own clergy,7 to
manage the revenues of the church by the direction
of the bishop ; that so there might be witnesses of
the right administration of them ; and by that
means neither the church's goods be embezzledj
nor any scandal or reproach brought upon the
priesthood. But then I cannot think this was
the case of all churches. For these canons were
made plainly against such bishops as managed the
revenues of the church, dpdprvpoi, as the canon
words it, without either archdeacon or ceconomus to
attest the fidelity of their management : but in such
churches where bishops took the assistance of their
archdeacon, this could not be the reason for setting
up the office of the ceconomus, because suspicion of
mismanagement was provided against as well by
the testimony of an archdeacon, as any other officer
that could be appointed. And therefore I have
assigned a more general, and, as I take it, a truer
reason for the institution of this office in the church.
And that which further confirms
..... . Sect, 2,
my opinion is, that the ceconomi, as Always to be chosen
J r out of the clergy.
well as the archdeacons, were always
to be chosen out of the clergy. For so those canons
of the councils of Tyre and Chalcedon, already
cited, plainly direct. And for any thing that ap
pears to the contrary, this was the constant practice
of the church. We find in the acts of the council
of Ephesus,8 which are inserted also into the coun
cil of Chalcedon, one Charisius styled both presby
ter and ceconomus of the church of Philadelphia.
And Liberatus9 speaks of one John, who was ceeo-
nomus of Alexandria, and presbyter of Tabennesus,
a region belonging to Alexandria. Possidius tells
us, in the Life of St. Austin,10 that he always made
one of his clergy the prcepositus domus, as he calls
him, whose office was to take care of the church
revenues, and give an account of what he received
and expended, when it was demanded of him. And
to the same purpose Socrates1' says of Theophilus,
bishop of Alexandria, that having advanced two
monks to the honour of the clergy, he made them
the ceconomi of the church. So that it was both
the rule and practice of the church to take the ceco
nomi out of some of the clergy, and we never meet
with any instance or order to the contrary. Which
argues plainly, that the true reason for devolving this
office upon them, which formerly belonged to the

1 Vid. Cone. Chalced. c. 2, 25, 26.
2 Liberat. Breviar. c. 16. 8 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 24.
4 Book II. chap. 4. sect. 6.
5 Morin. de Ordinat. Eccl. par. 3. Exerc. 16. m. 5. u. 3.
Concil. Chalced. Act. 9.
7 Cone. Chalced. c. 26. eSo£ev iraaav iKKXijaiav iiria-Ko-
irov Exovaav, Kal olKovdpov exeiv ek tov ISiov KXvpov. 
oWe pr} dpdpTvpov Erivai tx}V o'tKovopiav Tfjs EartcXtlo-tas, &c.
8 Cone. Ephes. in Act. 1. Cone. Chalced. t. 4. p. 292.
Charisius presbyter et ceconomus Philadelphioe.

9 Liberat. Breviar. c. 16. Johannes ex ceconomo factus
presbyter Tabennesiotes. — Factusque est iterum ceconomus,
habens causas omnium ecclesiarum.
10 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 24. Domus ecclesiae curam, om-
nemque substantiam ad vices valentioribus clericis delega-
bat et credebat: nunquam clavem, nunquam annulum in
manu habens, sed ab eisdem domus praepositis cuncta et
accepta et erogata notabantur.
11 Socrat. lib. 6. v. 7. Trjv oiKovopiav EKKA.r|o-ias avTots
ivEXElpicrEV.

126

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book III.

arcndeacons, was no other than that because of a
multiplicity of business the archdeacons now could
not so well attend it.
t What the office itself was, appears
caTehofrtrSCreven'Ues from what has already been said : to
cL^fthe^cir," which I shall only add one thing:
bishopric ^j. by tj,e authority of the council of
Chalcedon 12 the ceconomus was to continue in his
office during the vacancy of the bishopric, and to
look after the income of the church, that it might
be preserved safe for the succeeding bishop. Which
canon some not improbably think was designed to
prevent delays in filling of vacant sees ; that no me
tropohtan, or interventor, under whose care the
vacant church was, might He under any temptation
to defer the election of a new bishop, in hopes of
enriching himself from the revenues of the church ;
but whether this was the reason or not, it certainly
argues that these men were generally persons of
extraordinary credit and worth, since the church
could securely repose so great a confidence in them.
Sect i And indeed all imaginable care was
cieTgrre^hed0™6 taken in their election, that they
"  "' ' ""' should be persons of such a character.
To which purpose some canons required, that they
should be chosen by all the clergy ; as particularly
Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria,13 in his canonical
epistle, gives a direction in that case. Which pro
vision was but reasonable : for since all the clergy
had a common concern in the revenues of the
church, which were their livelihood and Subsistence,
it was fit the ceconomus, to whose care the revenues
were committed, should be chosen by common con
sent, that he might be a person without exception,
and no one have reason to complain that he was
injured or defrauded of his dividend or portion.

CHAPTER XIII.
A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF SOME OTHER INFERIOR OF
FICERS IN THE CHURCH.
Sect , Beside the officers already mention-
Jo\oT°*%Z°~- ed, there were in the fourth and fifth
'"*"'' century some few others, whose names
are not very commonly met with, and therefore I
shall but just hint the signification of them, and
not spend time in any curious inquiries about their
offices and employments. The same canon1 of the
council of Chalcedon, which speaks of the ceconomus
and defensor, mentions also another officer belong
ing to the church, who is styled TrapaitoWpioc in the

>2 Concil. Chalced. c. 25.
18 Theophil. can. 9. ap. Bevereg. Pandect, t. 2. p. 173.
yvdipy iravTos UpaTEta otKovdpov diroSEixQr}vai, &c.
1 Concil. Chalced. u. 2. 2 Greg. M. Dial. lib. 3. c. 25.
8 Ib. Dial. lib. 1. c. 5. Constantius mansionarius omnes

language of that council. But the translators and
critics are not agreed upon the meaning of the word.
The ancient translation of Dionysius Exiguus ren
ders it mansionarius, and explains that in a marginal
reading by ostiarius, or door-keeper of the church.
And indeed this was the office of the mansionarius
in the Roman church about the time when Dio
nysius Exiguus lived. For Gregory the Great, not
long after, in one of his dialogues,2 speaking of
Abundius mansionarius, gives him also the title of
custos ecclesics ; and in another dialogue he makes it
the office of the mansionarius'1 to light the lamps or
candles of the church. Yet, notwithstanding this,
the best learned of the modern critics give another
sense of the Greek name 7rapo/jovaptof;. Justellus'
explains it by villicus, a bailiff, or steward of the
lands. Bishop Beverege5 styles him rerum ecch-
siasticarum administrator, which is the same. And
their opinion is confirmed by Gothofred, Cujacius,
Suicerus, Vossius, and many others, whose judg
ment in the case may be sufficient to decide the
controversy, till the reader sees better reason other
wise to determine him.
The civil law takes notice of an
other sort of officers, who are called oftheCc™««s
7 T . -, . i , ecclesiarum, and
custodes ecclesiarum, and custodes loco- custodes tocomm
sanctorum : and
rum sanctorum ; which, though some J0™ the«; "'J™1
o from each other,
writers confound together, yet Gotho
fred makes a distinction between them. The cus
todes ecclesiarum were either the same with the osti-
arii, or order of door-keepers, or else with those called
seniores ecclesics, which, as I have showed8 in an
other place, were much of the same nature with
our churchwardens and vestry-men. But the cus
todes locorum sanctorum were the keepers of those
particular places in Palestine, which, if Gothofred
judge right, had more peculiarly the title of bca
sancta, holy places, because they were a sort of me
morials of our Saviour; such as Bethlehem, the
place of his nativity ; and Mount Golgotha, the
place of his crucifixion ; and Iris grave or monu
ment, which was the place of his resui-rection ; and
Mount Olivet, the place of his ascension. These
places were frequently visited by Christians in
those ages, as appears from Eusebius, Gregory
Nyssen, St. Jerom, and several others, whom the
reader, that is curious in this matter, may find
quoted by Gothofred,' who maintains, that upon
that very account those places had a sort of guardians
or keepers assigned them, under the title of custodes
locorum sanctorum. But however this matter be, it
is certain they had such an employment in the
church as, in the eye of the law, was reputed a re
ligious service ; and accordingly they were entitled

lampades ecclesiae implevit aqua, &c.
4 Justel. Bibliothec. Jur. Canon. 1. 1. p. 91.
5 Bevereg. Not. in Cone. Chalced. c. 2.
6 Book II. chap. 19. sect. 19.
7 Gothofred. Not. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 26.

Chap. XIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

127

to the same privilege8 as the ecclesiastics had, to be
exempt from personal tribute in regard to this their
employment, as appears from a law of Theodosius
the Great, by whom this immunity was granted
them. sect. 3 Next to these, for the similitude of
te°e.,'o*SS^ the name and office, I mention the
sceuophylaces, or, as they were other
wise called, KciprjXimv epiXaxeg, keepers of the KiiprjXia,
that is, the sacred vessels, utensils, and such pre
cious things as were laid up in the sacred repository
of the church. This was commonly some presby
ter: for Theodoras Lector9 says, Macedonius was
both presbyter and sceuophylax of the church of
Constantinople; and Sozomen10 before him, speak
ing of the famous Theodore, presbyter of Antioch,
who suffered martyrdom in the days of Julian,
styles him epiXaica tSv KHpnXiaiv, keeper of the sacred
utensils, and says, he was put to death because he
would not dehver up what he had under his custo
dy to the persecutors. It will not be improper to
give this officer also the name of chartophylax and
custos archivorum, because the rolls and archives
are reckoned part of the sacred repository of the
church. Whence Suicerus " observes, that in Pho
tius the names sceuophylax and chartophylax are
given to the same person. But I must note, that
the modern Greeks have a httle changed this office,
and added a power to it which did not belong to it
in the primitive chm-ch. For now, as Balsamon12
informs us, the chartophylax acts as the patriarch's
substitute, excommunicating, censuring, and licens
ing the ordinations of presbyters and deacons, and
sits as supreme ecclesiastical judge under the patri
arch in many other cases relating to the church,
which are things we do not find belonging to the
office of a sceuophylax in the primitive ages.
sect. 4. Epiphanius takes notice of another
neSL%*SSpret- sort of officers in the church, to whom
he gives the name13 of ipp^vivral, in
terpreters, and says, their office was to render one
language into another as there was occasion, both
in reading the Scriptures, and in the homilies that
were made to the people. That there was such an
office in the church appears further from the Passion
of Procopius the martyr, pubhshed by Valesius,14
where it is said, that Procopius had three offices in
the church of Scythopolis, he was reader, exorcist,
and interpreter of the Syriac tongue. I conceive

the office was chiefly in such churches where the
people spake different languages, as in the churches
of Palestine, where probably some spoke Syriac
and others Greek, and in the churches of Africa,
where some spake Latin and others Punic. In such
churches there was occasion for an interpreter, that
those who understood not the language in which
the Scriptures were read, or the homilies preached,
might receive edification by having them imme
diately rendered into a tongue which they did un
derstand. So far was the primitive church from
encouraging ignorance, by locking up the Scrip
tures in an unknown tongue, that she not only
translated them into all languages, but also ap
pointed a standing office of interpreters, who were
viva voce to make men understand what was read,
and not suffer them to be barbarians in the service
of God, which is a tyranny that was unknown to
former ages !
Another office, that must not wholly Sect 6
be passed over whilst we are upon 0!lh°™"-"<-
this head, is that of the notarii, or exceptores, as the
Latins called them; who are the same that the
Greeks call 6%vypdcboi, or raxvypdipoi, from their writ
ing short-hand by characters, which was necessary
in the service they were chiefly employed in. For
the first use of them was to take in writing the whole
process of the heathen judges against the Christian
martyrs, and minutely to describe the several cir
cumstances of their examination and passion ; what
questions were put to them ; what answers they
made; and whatever passed during the time of
their trial and suffering. Whence such descriptions
were called gesta martyrum, the Acts and Monu
ments of the Martyrs ; which were the original ac
counts which every church preseived of her own
martyrs. The first institution of these notarii into
a standing office at Rome, Bishop Pearson15 and
some other learned persons think, was under Fabian
in the time of the Decian persecution. For in one
of the most ancient catalogues 16 of the bishops of
Rome, Fabian is said to have appointed seven sub
deacons to inspect the seven notaries, and see that
they faithfully collected the acts of the martyrs.
But though it was no standing office before, yet
the thing itself was always done by some persons
fitly qualified for the work ; as appears from the
ancient acts of Ignatius and Polycarp, and several
others, which were written before Fabian is said to

8 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 26. Universos
quos constituerit custodes ecclesiarum esse, vel sanctorum
locorum, ac religiosis obsequiis deservire, nullius adtentati-
onis molestiam sustinere decernimus. Quis enim eos capite
censos patiatur esse devinctos, quos necessario intelligit
supra memorato obsequio mancipatos ?
9 Theodor. Lector, lib. 2. 10 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 8.
11 Suicer, Thesaur. t. 2. p. 971.
12 Balsam. Not. ad can. 9. Concil. Nic. 2. ,
13 Epiph. Expos. Fid. ... 21. ippt}VEVTal ¦yXwcro-tis eis

yXoieraav, n iv Tats ivayvcaeTEmv, fi iv Tats TrpocropiXlais.
14 Acta Procop. ap. Vales. Not. in Euseb. de Martyr. Pa-
laestin. c. 1. Ibi ecclesiae tria ministeria praebebat : unum in
legendi officio, alterum in Syri intT*rprelatione sermonis, et
tertium adversus daemones manus impositione consummans.
18 Pearson, de Succession. Episc. Rom. Dissert. 1. u. 4.
u. 3. Fell, Not. in Cypr. Ep. 12.
16 Catalog. Rom. Pontif. in Fabian. Hie fecit sex vel
septem subdiaconos, qui septem notariis imminerent, ut
gesta martyrum fideliter colligerent.

123

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IN.

have instituted public and standing notaries at
Rome. In after ages these notaries were also em
ployed in writing the acts of the councils, and
taking speeches and disputations, and whatever else
passed in synod. Thus Eusebius17 notes that Mal-
chion's dispute with Paulus Samosatensis in the
council of Antioch was recorded as it was spoken,
by the notaries who took it from their mouths :
and Socrates says the same18 of the disputation be
tween Basilius Ancyranus and Photinus in the
council of Sirmium. We read also of a sort of no
taries in councils, whose office was to recite all in
struments, allegations, petitions, or whatever else
of the hke nature was to be offered or read in
council. And these were commonly deacons, and
sometimes a presbyter was the chief of them, and
thereupon styled primicerius notariorum ; as in the
acts of the general councils of Ephesus and Chal
cedon19 there is frequent mention of Aetius, dea
con and notary, and Peter, presbyter of Alexan
dria and chief ofthe notaries, primicerius notariorum.
There were also notaries that were employed to
take the discourses of famous and eloquent preach
ers from their mouths : by which means, Socrates20
observes, many of St. Chrysostom's sermons were
preserved, and some of Atticus his successor. Bi
shops also had their private viroypa<piig, which some
call notaries: but Valesius21 reckons them in the
quality of readers. Whatever they were, Athanasius
served in this office, as vvoypaebevg, under Alexander,
and Proclus under Atticus, as Socrates n informs us.
The curious reader perhaps will find
ofthe apocrisa- several other of these lesser offices,
rii, or responsales. which he will think might come into
this catalogue : but, that I may not seem too minute
in small matters, I will only add one office more,
which is that of the apocrisarii, or responsales.
These were a sort of residents in the imperial city
in the name of foreign churches and bishops, whose
office was to negociate as proctors at the emperor's
court, in all ecclesiastical causes wherein their
principals might be concerned. The institution of
the office seems to have been in the time of Con
stantine, or not long after, when the emperors being
become Christians, foreign churches had more oc
casion to promote their suits at the imperial court
than formerly : however, we find it established by
law in the time of Justinian ; for in one of his

Novels it is ordered,23 that forasmuch as no bishop
was to be long absent from his church without
special command from the emperor, if therefore
any one had occasion to negociate any ecclesiastical
cause at court, he should prefer his petition either
by the apocrisarius of his church, whose business
was to act in behalf of the church, and prosecute
her affairs ; or else by the ceconomus, or some other
of his clergy sent on purpose to signify his request.
It does not indeed appear from that law, that these
apocrisarii were of the clergy, but from other writ
ers we may easily collect it. For Liberatus says,21
Anatolius, a deacon of Alexandria, was apocrisarius
or resident for Dioscorus his bishop at Constan
tinople, by which means he gained a favourable
opportunity of being chosen bishop of Constanti
nople upon the death of Flavian. And Evagrius *°
observes the same of Eutychius, that from being
apocrisarius to the bishop of Amasia, he was imme
diately advanced to be bishop ofthe royal city after
Mennas. Which seems plainly to imply, that he was
one of the clergy before, since it does not appear that
he was promoted^er saltum. I must further observe,
that in imitation of these apocrisarii in the church,
almost every monastery had their apocrisarii like
wise, whose business was not to reside in the royal
city, as the former did, but to act as proctors for
their monastery, or any member of it, when they
had occasion to give any appearance at law before
the bishop under whose jurisdiction they were.
This is clear from another of Justinian's Novels,
which requires the Ascetics in such cases to an
swer by their apocrisarii or responsales.26 And these
were sometimes also of the clergy, as appears from
the acts of the fifth general council, where one
Theonas27 styles himself presbyter and apocrisarius
of the monastery of Mount Sinai. The Latin trans
lator calls him ambasiator, which is not so very
proper, yet in some measure expresses the thing :
for, as Suicerus29 observes, in process of time the
emperors also gave the name of apocrisarii to their
own ambassadors, and it became the common title
of every legate whatsoever. Which I the rather
note, that the reader may distinguish these things,
and not confound the civil and ecclesiastical sense
of the name apocrisarius together. And thus much
of the inferior orders and offices of the clergy in
the primitive church.

17 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 29. iirtanpEiovpiviav Taxvypdepuiv.
18 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 30. 6£vypd<pwv Tds tpou/ds aiiTiov
ypaipovTwv. 19 Concil. Ephes. Act. 1. in Actione 1. Concil. Chalced. t.
4. p. 292.
20 Socrat. lib. 6. c.4. It. lib. 7. c. 2. 21 Vales. Not.
in Socr. lib. 5. u. 22. « Socrat. lib. 7. c. 17 et 41.
23 Justin. Novel. 6. c. 2. Sancimus, si quando propter
ecclesiasticam occasionem incident necessitas, hanc aut
per eos qui res agunt sanctarum ecclesiarum (quos apocri-
sarios vocant) aut per aliquos clericos hue destinatos, aut

oeconomos suos notam imperio facere, &c.
24 Liberat. .Breviar. c. 12. Ordinatus est pro eo (Fla-
viano) Anatolius diaconus, qui fuit Constantinopoli apocri
sarius Dioscori.
25 Evagr. lib. 4. c. 38. Tats o-iroKpto-Etrti/ 'Aiiao-efas vtti-
KOTTOV Sl-nKOVElTO, &C
28 Justin. Novel. 79. c. 1.
27 Concil. 5. General, Act. 1. in Libello Monachor. Syriae
Secundae. t. 5. p. 116. 8soji/as TrpEo-/3uTEpos, ical airoKpt-
a-d/nos tou dyiov opovs Stya.
28 Suicer. Thesaur. t. 1. p. 456.

BOOK IV.
OF THE ELECTIONS AND ORDINATIONS OF THE CLERGY, AND THE PARTICULAR
QUALIFICATIONS OF SUCH AS WERE TO BE ORDAINED.

CHAPTER I.
OE THE SEVEEAL WAYS OF DESIGNING PEESONS TO THE MINISTRY, IN THE APOSTOLICAL AND
PEIMITIVE AGES OF THE CHUECH.

Sect j Having thus far given an account of
of SgoinliS all the orders of the clergy in the pri-
t'he'flr.t^ay.'o'y of mitive church, both superior and in
ferior, together with the several offices
and functions that were annexed to them, I now
proceed to consider the rules and methods that were
observed in setting apart fit persons for the minis
try, especially for the three superior orders, which
were always of principal concern. And here in the
first place it will be proper to obsewe, that in the
apostolical and following ages, there were four
several ways of designing persons for the ministry,
or discovering who were most fit to be ordained :
the first of which was by casting lots ; the second,
by making choice of the first-fruits of the Gentile
converts ; the third, by particular direction and in
spiration of the Holy Ghost ; and the last, in the
common and ordinary way of examination and elec
tion. The first method was observed in the de
signation of Matthias to be an apostle, as we read,
Acts i. 23, 26, where it is said, that the disciples
themselves first appointed two, Joseph called Bar
sabas, and Matthias ; and then praying to God,
that he would show whether of those two he had
• chosen, they gave forth their lots, and the lot fell
upon Matthias. St. Chrysostom1 says, they used
this method because as yet the Holy Ghost was not
descended on them, and they had not at this time
the power of choosing by inspiration ; and therefore
they committed the business to prayer, and left the
determination to God. The author of the Ecclesi
astical Hierarchy under the name of Dionysius,2
fancies that God answered their prayer by some
visible token : but if so, this had not been choosing
by lot, as the Scripture says it was, but a quite dif

ferent method of election. However, interpreters
generally agree, that there was something extraor
dinary in it : Dr. Lightfoot3 thinks Matthias had
no other ordination to his apostleship ; for the apos
tles did not give him any ordination by imposition
of hands after this, as they did to presbyters after
wards : and that, if true, was extraordinary indeed.
Others reckon the extraordinariness of it to consist
in the singular way of electing and designing him
to that office by lot : for they say* all ecclesiastical
history scarce affords such another instance : and I
confess there are not very many, but some few there
are, which show that that method of electing was
not altogether so singular as is commonly imagined.
For in Spain, it was once the common practice, as
may be concluded from a canon5 of the council of
Barcelona, anno 599, which orders, that when a
vacant bishopric is to be filled, two or three shall
be elected by the consent of the clergy and people,
who shall present them to the metropolitan and his
fellow bishops, and they, having first fasted, shall
cast lots, leaving the determination to Christ the
Lord : then he on whom the lot shall fall, shall be
consummated by the blessingof consecration. There
is nothing different in this from the first example,
save only that in this there is express mention of a
consecration afterward, which is not in the history
of Matthias ; and yet, perhaps, there might be a
consecration in his case too, though not expressly
mentioned : but I leave this to further inquiry.
The second way of designation was, Secl 2
by making choice of the first-fruits of b™eaSncdhS
the Gentile converts to be ordained to the dentiie co'n-
the ministry. For these expressing
a greater zeal than others, by their readiness and

1 Chrys. Horn. 5. in 1 Tim.
* Dionys. Eccl. Hier. c. 5. p. 367.
3 Lightfoot, in Acts i. 21.
4 Dodwel, Dissert. 1. in Cypr. a. 17.
s Concil. Barcinon. c. 3. tom. 5. p. 1606. Duobus aut
K

tribus, quos ante consensus cleri et plebis elegerit, metro-
politani judicio ejusque coepiscopis praesentatis, quem sors,
praeeunte jejunio, Christo Domino terminante, monstrave-
rit, benedictio consecrationis accumulet

130

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

forwardness to embrace the gospel, were generally
pitched upon by the apostles, as best qualified for
propagating the Christian religion in the world.
Clemens Romanus, in his epistle to the Corinthi
ans,6 says, the apostles in all countries and cities
where they preached, ordained their first converts
bishops and deacons, for the conversion of others ;
and that they had the direction of the Spirit for
doing this. And hence the author that personates
the same Clemens, in his pretended epistle to
James, bishop of Jerusalem, giving him an account
of the reasons that moved St. Peter to ordain him,
says,7 it was because he was chief of the first-fruits
of his converts among the Gentiles. Some com
pare this to the right of primogeniture among the
ancient patriarchs, which entitled the first-born to
the priesthood; and I will not deny but there
might be something of allusion in it : but then the
parallel will not hold throughout ; for in the latter
case it was not any natural right, but personal
merit attending their primogeniture, that entitled
the first converts to the Christian priesthood.
Sect 3 Which will appear further by con-
paTt1c,lia'rcildire"'iS sidering, that many of them were or-
„t the Hoiy Ghost. dained by the particular direction of
the Holy Ghost. For so the words, Sompdlovng r<f
Uviipari, in Clemens Romanus, may be understood,
to signify the Spirit's pointing out the particular
persons whom he would have to be ordained ;
which I observed to be the third way of designation
of persons to the ministry, very usual in those pri
mitive times of the church. Thus Timothy was
chosen and ordained, according to the prophecies
that went before of him, 1 Tim. i. 18. Whence his
ordination is also called the gift that was given him
by prophecy, 1 Tim. iv. 14. In regard to which
the ancient interpreters, Chrysostom8 and Theo
doret, say, he had not any human vocation, but was
chosen by Divine revelation, and ordained by the
direction of the Spirit. Clemens Alexandrinus, in
his famous homily, entitled, Quis Dives salvetur,
observes the same of the clergy of the Asiatic
churches, whom St. John ordained after his return
from the isle of Patmos : he says, they were such
as were signified or pointed out9 to him by the
Spirit. I know indeed Combefis10 puts a different
sense upon these words, and says, the designation

here spoken of, means not any new or distinct re
velation, but I know not what Divine predestination
of the persons ; or else their ordination itself, which
was the seal or consignation of the Spirit ; and that
there is no authority for the common sense which
interpreters put upon this passage. But as he owns
his notion to be singular, and contrary to the sense
of all other learned men ; so it is evidently against
matter of fact and ancient history, which affords
several other instances of the like designations in
the following ages. I will give an instance or two
out of many. Eusebius1' says, Alexander, bishop
of Jerusalem, was chosen Kara aTroKdXwpiv, by reve
lation, and an oracular voice, which signified to
some Ascetics of the church, that they should go
forth out of the gates of the city, and there meet
him whom God had appointed to be their bishop ;
which was this Alexander, a stranger from Cap
padocia, coming upon other business to Jerusalem.
He was indeed bishop of another place before, but
his translation to the see of Jerusalem was wholly by
Divine direction, which is the thing I allege it for.
We have another such instance in the election of
Alexander, surnamed Carbonarius, bishop of Coma-
na, mentioned by Gregory Nyssen in the Life of Gre
gory Thaumaturgus. This Alexander was a Gentile
philosopher, and very learned man, who upon his con
version to Christianity, that he might avoid observa
tion, and follow his philosophical studies with the
greater privacy, in his great humility betook himself
to the trade of a collier, whence he had the name of
Carbonarius. Now it happened upon the vacancy
of the bishopric of Comana, that the citizens sent
to Gregory Thaumaturgus to desire him to come and
ordain them a bishop ; but they not agreeing in
their choice, one by way of jest and ridicule proposed
Alexander the collier; who being discovered12 by
special revelation to Gregory Thaumaturgus to be a
man of extraordinary virtues and worth, who had
submitted to that contemptible calling only to avoid
being taken notice of; and being found upon a due
inquiry to be the man he was represented to be, he
was thereupon unanimously chosen by all the
church to be their bishop, and immediately ordained
by St. Gregory. Cyprian often speaks of this Di
vine designation in the case of Celerinus,18 and Au
relius,1'1 when they were but to be ordained readers :

0 Clem. Rom. Ep. 1. n. 42. Kara xtipas rat tto'Xeis
Ki}pveraovTES, KaSL^avov Tas dirapxis aVTwv, SoKtpd^ovTES
TO) HvEiipaTi els £7rto-K'07rous Kal SlOKOVOVS twv peXXovtvjv

ITtTEVElV.

' Pseudo-Clem. Ep. ad Jacob, ap. Coteler. t. 1. p. 606. o-u
yip oV Eiiot; Ttoy croi^opivajv iSvwv e\ KpEiTTlov dwapx^.
8 Chrys. et Theod. in Tim. i. 18.
" Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. lib. 3. c. 23. et ap. Combefis.
Auctar. Noviss. p. 185. tc\rjpw 'ivayE Ttva KXt}pdicruiv twv
otto tov UvEiipaTos aypaivopivaiv.
10 Combefis. Not. in loc. p. 192. Quos Spiritus designasset
Divina potius praedestinatione, quam nova aliqua et dis-

tincta revelatione, quam nee Clemens significavit, nee ulla
probat auctoritas, &c.
11 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 11.
12 Nyssen. t. 3. p. 562.
13 Cypr. Ep. 34. al. 39. ad Cler. Carthag. Referimus ad
vos Celerinum fratrem nostrum — Clero nostro non human!
sufTragatione, sed Divina dignatione conjunctum. Qui cum
consentire dubitaret, ecclesiae ipsius admonitu et hortatu in
visione per noctem compulsus est, ne negaret nobis suaden-
tibus, &c.
14 Id. Ep. 33. al. 38. Exspectanda non sunt testimonia
humana, cum prsecedunt Divina suffragia.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

131

and he says also, he had a Divine direction15 to
translate Numidicus from another church to the
church of Carthage. And Sozomen 16 tells us from
ApoUinarius, that Alexander, bishop of Alexandria,
appointed Athanasius his successor by Divine com
mand. For some time before his death it was sig
nified to him by Divine revelation, that no one
should succeed him but Athanasius : and therefore,
when he lay upon his death-bed, he called Atha
nasius by name, who was then absent and fled for
fear of being made bishop ; and another ofthe same
name, who was present, answering to the call, he
said nothing to him, but called Athanasius again :
which he did several times, whereby it was at last
understood, that he meant the Athanasius that was
fled ; to whom, though absent, he then prophetically
said, Thinkest thou that thou art escaped, Atha
nasius ? No : thou art not escaped. It were easy
to add many other instances of the like nature, but
these are sufficient to show against Combefis, that
in those early ages men were sometimes designed to
the ministry by particular Divine revelation and
prophecy, or else the ancients themselves were won
derfully deceived. Whilst I am upon this head, I
must suggest two things further : First, that a dove's
hghting upon the head of any man at an election
was usually taken for a Divine omen ; and com
monly the person who had that sign, was looked
upon as pointed out by the Spirit, and accordingly
chosen before all others, as having a sort of emblem
of the Holy Ghost. Eusebius observes,17 it was this
that turned the election upon Fabian, bishop of
Rome, and gave him the preference before all others,
though he was a stranger. No one at first thought
of choosing him : but a dove being observed by the
people to settle upon his head, they took it for an
emblem of the Holy Ghost, which heretofore de
scended upon our Saviour in the form of a dove ;
and thereupon with one consent, as if they had been
moved themselves by the Holy Ghost, they cried
out,"A£tov, he was worthy ; which was the word then
used to signify their consent ; and so without more
ado they took him and set him upon the bishop's
throne. The election of Severus, bishop of Ra
venna, and that of Euortius, bishop of Orleans, was
determined the same way, as Blondel18 has observed
out of their hves in Surius ; and the inquisitive
reader may furnish himself with other instances
from his own observation. The other thing I would
suggest is, that sometimes an accidental circum
stance was so providentially disposed, as to be taken

for an indication of the Divine will, and approba
tion of an election. Sulpicius Severus makes this
observation particularly upon a circumstance that
happened in the election of St. Martin, bishop of
Tours. Some of the provincial bishops, who were
met at the place, for very unjust reasons opposed
his election ; and more especially one, whose name
was Defensor, was a violent stickler against him.
Now it happened, that the reader who was to have
read that day, not being able to get in due time to
his place, by reason of the press and crowding of
the people ; and the rest being in a little confusion
upon that account ; one of those that stood by,
taking up a book, read the first verse that he lighted
upon, which happened to be those words of the 8th
Psalm, " Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings
thou hast perfected praise, because of thine enemies,
that thou mightest destroy the enemy and defensor."
For so it seems the vulgar GaUican translation then
read it, ut destruas inimicum et defensorem. These
words were no sooner read, but the people gave a
shout, and the adverse party were confounded. And
so, says our author,19 it was generally believed that
this Psalm was read by Divine appointment, that
Defensor the bishop might hear his own work con
demned, whilst the praises of God were perfected in
St. Martin out of the mouth of babes and suck
lings, and the enemy was at once both discovered
and destroyed. By what has been said, the reader
now will be able to judge of the meaning of the an
cients, when they speak of particular Divine de
signations of persons to the ministry of the church.
The fourth and last way of design- gmt 4
ation, was by the ordinary course of ^^J eurSIge
suffrage arid election of the church : aod election'
the method of which in general was so accurate and
highly approved, that one of the Roman emperors,
though a heathen, thought fit to give a great cha
racter and encomium of it, and propose it to himself
as an example proper to be imitated in the designa
tion and choice of civil officers for the service of the
empire. For so Lampridius20 represents the prac
tice of Alexander Severus : whenever he was about
to constitute any governors of provinces, or receiv
ers of the pubhc revenues, he first proposed their
names, desiring the people to make evidence against
them, if any one could prove them guilty of any
crime : but if they accused them falsely, it should
be at the peril of their own lives : saying, it was
unreasonable, that when the Christians and Jews
did this in propounding those whom they ordained

Cypr. E p. 35. al. 40. Admonitos nosetinstructos sciatis
dignatione Divina, ut Numidicus presbyter adscribatur pres
byterorum Carthaginiensium numero.
la Sozom. lib. 2. c. 17. AXi%avSpos StdSoxov avTu Ka-
teKiitev ASavdartov Qtt'tu? -n-jOOo-Td^Eo-ty iir' aijTbv dyaytov
Tt}V tyijcpov, &c.
17 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 29. K 2

" Blond. Apol. p. 426. Surras, Vit. Sanct. Feb. 1. et Sep. 7.
19 Sever. Vit. S. Martin, c. 7. p. 225. Ita habitum est,
Divino nutu Psalmum hunc lectum fuisse, ut testimonium
operis sui Defensor audiret, quia ex ore infantium atque
lactantium in Martino Domini laude perfecta, et ostensus
pariter et destructus est inimicus.
20 Lamprid. Vit. Alex. Sever, c. 45.

132

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

their priests and ministers, the same should not be
done in the appointment of governors of provinces,
in whose hands the lives and fortunes of men were
intrusted. This argues, that all imaginable care
was taken in the election of Christian ministers,
since their practice in this respect has such ample
testimony from the heathens. And indeed all mo
dern writers agree upon the matter in general, that
anciently elections were made with a great deal of
caution and exactness : but as to the particular
methods that were used, men are strangely divided
in their accounts of them ; by which means there is
no one subject has been rendered more intricate
and perplexed than this of elections, which has
even frighted some from attempting to give an ac
count of it : but I must not wholly disappoint my
readers through such fears, and therefore I shall
briefly acquaint them with the different sentiments
of modern authors who have handled this subject,
and then clear what I take to be the true state of
the case, from evident proofs of ancient history,
which shall be the business of the next chapter.

CHAPTER II.

A MORE PARTICULAR ACCOUNT OF THE ANCIENT
METHOD AND MANNER OF ELECTIONS OF THE
CLERGY.
sect. 1. The grand question in this affair,
ophSon^nelrned uPon which learned men are so much

people's powerlrj6 divided, is concerning the persons who
ciently in elecUons. j^ & j^f. to v0(.g Jn tJ,e electjoris „f
the clergy. Some think the people were never al
lowed any other power, save only to give their tes
timonials to the party elected, or to make objections,
if they had any just and reasonable exceptions,
against him. So Habertus,1 and Sixtus Senensis,2
and Bellarmine.3 Others say the people were abso
lute and proper electors, and that from apostolical
right, which they always enjoyed for a succession
of many ages. This opinion is advanced, and with
great show of learning asserted, by Blondel,4 against
Sancta Clara, and the rest of the other opinion. De

1 Habert. Archieratic. p. 436.
2 Sixt. Biblioth. lib. 5. Annot. 118.
3 Bellarm. de Clericis, lib. 1. c. 7
4 Blondel, Apol. p. 379, &c.
5 Marca, de Concord, lib. 8. cap. 2. n. 2.
6 Mason, Consecrat. of Bishops, lib. 4. u. 4. p. 159, 160.
7 Andrews, Resp. ad Apol. Bell. c. 13. p. 313. Preesen-
tia plebis apud Cyprianum includit testimonium de vita,
nee excludit suffragium de persona.
8 Spalat. de Repub. lib. 3. c. 3. n. 42.
9 Richer. Hist. Concil. lib. 1. c. 12. n. 18. p. 389.
10 Justel. Not. in Can. 6. Cone. Chalced.

Marca5 takes a middle way between those two ex
tremes. He says the people had as much power
anciently, as any of the clergy below bishops ; that
is, their consent was required in the promotion of a
bishop, as well as their testimony : yet he will not
allow this to be called electing ; for the designation,
election, or judgment, he says, still belonged only
to the metropohtan, together with the synod of pro
vincial bishops. And though we read sometimes of
their giving their vote or suffrage, yet that, he says,
is only to be understood of suffrage of consent, not
the suffrage of election. But Mr. Mason, in answer
to Pamelius, who had advanced something of this
notion before De Marca, rejects this as a deluding
distinction, and asserts, that the people had pro
perly a voice or suffrage of election, and he quotes'
Bishop Andrews' for the same opinion. Yet he
does not carry the point so high, as to maintain
with Blondel, that it was of unalterable right, but
left by God as a thing indifferent, to be ordered by
the discretion of the church, so all things be done
honestly and in order. And this seems to have
been the opinion of Spalatensis,8 Richerius,9 Justel-
Ius,10 Suicerus, and some other learned men of both
churches. Others there are, who distinguish be
tween the times preceding the council of Nice, and
those that followed after : for they think whatever
power was allowed the people in the three first ages,
was taken away by that council, and the councils
of Antioch and Laodicea, that followed not long
after. So Schelstrate,11 in his dissertations upon
the council of Antioch, where he quotes Christianus
Lupus and Sirmond for the same opinion. But this
is exploded as » groundless fiction, not only by
Spalatensis,12 and Bishop Pearson,13 but also by
Richerius,14 Cabassutius,15 Valesius,18 Petavius,17 De
Marca,18 and other learned persons of the Roman
communion, who think the fathers of the Nicene
council made no alteration in this matter, but left
all things as they found them. Some, again, distin
guish between the election of bishops and the other
clergy, and say, the people's consent was only re
quired in the election of bishops, but not in the
promotion of the inferior clergy. So Cabassutius,19
and Bishop Beverege,20 who reckons this so clear a
point, that there is no dispute to be made of it.
Yet Valesius disputes it, and asserts the contrary,21

11 Schelstr. Not. in Can. 19. Cone. Antioch.
12 Spalat. de Repub. lib. 3. c. 3. u. 12.
13 Pearson, Vind. Ignat. par. 1. c. 11. p. 324.
" Richer. Hist. Concil. t. 1. c. 2. n. 7.
15 Cabassut. Notit. Concil. c. 17. p. 83.
16 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
17 Petav. Not. in Synes. p. 56.
18 Marca, de Concord, lib. 8. c. 3. u. 4.
19 Cabassut. Notit. Concil. c. 36. p. 196.
20 Bevereg. Not. in Can. 6. Cone. Chalced.
21 Vales, in Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43. Presbyteri olim ab epis
copo ordinari non poterant sine consensu cleri et poptdi.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

133

that anciently presbyters were not to be ordained
by the bishop without the consent of the clergy and
people. Bishop Stillingfleet, who is one of the last
that has considered this matter, gives us his sense
in these following observations. First, That the
main ground of the people's interest was founded
upon the apostles' canon,22 that a bishop must be
blameless and of good report. And therefore, he
says,23 the people's share and concern in elections,
even in Cyprian's time, was not to give their votes,
but only their testimony concerning the good or ill
behaviour of the person. Secondly, That yet upon
this the people assumed the power of elections, and
thereby caused great disturbances and disorders in
the church. Thirdly, That to prevent these, many
bishops were appointed without their choice, and
canons made for the better regulating of them.
Fourthly, That when there were Christian magis
trates, they did interpose as they thought fit, not
withstanding the popular claim, in a matter of so
great consequence to the peace of church and state.
Fifthly, That upon the alteration of the government
of Christendom, the interest of the people was se
cured by their consent in parliaments, and that by
such consent the nomination of bishops was re
served to princes, and the patronage of livings to
particular persons. In this great variety of judg
ments and opinions of learned men, it will be no
crime to dissent from any of them, and therefore I
shall take the hberty to review their opinions, and
express impartially what I take to be agreeable or
disagreeable in any of them to ancient history, and
the rules and practice of the church.
sect. 2 &n& here> first of all, it will be pro-
peSe eo^jftotiiit Per to observe, that there was no one
in the dectiori o?I universal, unalterable rule observed in
all times and places about this mat
ter, but the practice varied according to the different
exigences and circumstances of the church ; as will
evidently appear in the sequel of this history. In
the mean time, I conceive the observation made by
De Marca, thus far to be very true, That whatever
power the inferior clergy enjoyed in the election of
their bishop, the same was generally allowed to the
people, or whole body of the church, under the re
gulation and conduct of the metropohtan and synod
of provincial bishops. For their power, whatever

it was, is spoken of in the very same terms, and
expressed in the same words. Some call it consent,
others suffrage or vote, others election or choice;
but all agree in this, that it was equally the con
sent, suffrage, vote, election, and choice, both of
clergy and people. Thus Cyprian observes of Cor
nelius,24 that he was made bishop by the testimony
of the clergy and suffiage of the people. Where it
is evident the words, testimony and suffrage, are
equally ascribed both to clergy and people. So
crates,25 speaking of the election of Chrysostom,
says he was chosen by the common vote of all, both
clergy and people. And Theodoret describes the
election of Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, after the
same manner, when he tells us26 he was compelled
to take the bishopric by the common vote of the
bishops and clergy, and all the people. Siricius27
styles this the election of the clergy and people;
and Celestin,28 the consent and desire of the clergy
and people ; and Leo,29 both the consent, and elec
tion, and suffrage or votes of the people ; who adds
also, that in case the parties were divided in their
votes, then the decision should be referred to the
judgment of the metropolitan, who should choose
him who had most votes and greatest merit to re
commend him. From all which, and many other
passages that might be alleged to the same purpose,
it is very evident, that the power of the clergy and
people was equal in this matter, and that nothing
was challenged by the one, that was not allowed to
the other also.
And hence it appears further, that
this conjunctive power of clergy and tus poWnot
- . , -i . . • • , hareiy testimonial,
people was not barely testimonial, hut judicial and
elective.
but, as Bishop Andrews and Mr.
Mason assert, a judicial and effective power, by way
of proper suffrage and election ; and that as well in
the time of Cyprian, as afterwards : for Cyprian
speaks both of testimony and suffrage belonging to
both clergy and people : and says further,30 that that
is a just and legitimate ordination, which is ex
amined by the suffrage and judgment of all, both
clergy and people. So that they were then present
at the choice of their bishop, not merely to give tes
timony concerning his hfe, but, as Bishop Andrews
words it, to give their vote and suffrage in reference
to his person. Which observation will be further

22 Stillingfleet, Unreason, of Separat. par. 3. n. 25. p. 312.
23 Ibid. p. 316, 317.
24 Cypr. Ep. 52. al 55. ad Antonian. p. 104. Factus est
Cornelius episcopus — de clericorum pene omnium testimo-
nio, de plebis quae turn adfuit suffragio.
oocrat. lib. 6. c. 2. ^wifrlapaTi koivw bpov irdvTtuv,
KXripov te Kal Xaov.
Iheod. lib. 1. c. 7. ^p-Tjcpw Koivy KaTrp/dyKatrav dp-
XlEpiU te Kal UpEls Kal iVas o \eoos.
27 Siric. Ep. 1. ad Himerium Tarracon. c. 10. Presby
terio vel episcopatui, si eum cleri ac plebis evocaverit
electio, non immerito societur.

28 Celestin. Ep. 2. e. 5. Nullus invitis detur episcopus.
Cleri, plebis, et ordinis consensus et desiderium requiratur.
29 Leo, M. Ep. 84. ad Anastas. c. 5. Cum de summi sa
cerdotis electione tractabitur, ille omnibus praeponatur,
quem cleri plebisque consensus concorditer postularit; ita
ut si in aliam forte personam partium se vota diviserint,
metropolitani judicio is alteri praeferatur, qui majoribus et
studiis juvatur et meritis, &c.
30 Cypr. Ep. 68. al. 67. ad Fratr. Hispan. p. 172. Ordi-
natio justa et legitima, quae omnium suffragio et judicio
fuerit examinata.

134

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

evidenced and confirmed, by proceeding with the
account of several rules and customs generally ob
served in these elections. One of these was, that no bishop
Evidence's of this was to be obtruded on any orthodox
power from some an- *
tims'o'i'tne'church. people against their consent. I say,
fhlHaU'tolroh-1' an orthodox people, for in case the
oorpeopkwithou?" majority of them were heretics or
their consent. , . ,. ,-. .. 3nrc
schismatics, the practice was difler-
ent, as will be showed hereafter : but where they
were all catholics, and could agree upon a cathohc
and deserving bishop, they were usually gratified in
their choice, and no person was to be put upon
them against their inclination. Sometimes the bi
shops in synod proposed a person, and the people
accepted him: sometimes, again, the people proposed
and the bishops consented ; and where they were
unanimous in a worthy choice, we scarce ever find
they were rejected. If they were divided, it was
the metropolitan's care to unite and fix them in
their choice, but not to obtrude upon them an un-
chosen person. This we learn from one of Leo's
epistles,31 where he gives us at once both the
church's rule and practice, and the reasons of it.
In the choice of a bishop, says he, let him be pre
ferred, whom the clergy and people do unanimously
agree upon and require : if they be divided in their
choice, then let the metropohtan give preference to
him, who has most votes and most merits : always
provided, that no one be ordained against the will
and desire of the people, lest they contemn or hate
their bishop, and become irreligious or disrespectful,
when they cannot have him whom they desired.
The transgression of this rule was objected as a
great crime to Hilarius Arelatensis by the emperor
Valentinian III., that32 he ordained bishops in se
veral places against the will and consent of the
people, whom when they would not admit of, be
cause they had not chosen them, he used armed
force to settle them in their sees, introducing the
preachers of peace by the violence of war. Leo
objects33 the same thing to him, saying, that he
ought to have proceeded by another rule, and first
to have required the votes of the citizens, the tes
timonies of the people, the will of the gentry, and
the election of the clergy : for he that was to pre
side over all, was to be chosen by all. This evi

dently shows, that the suffrage of the people was
then something more than barely testimonial.
Secondly, Another argument is, g^s
that in many cases the voices of the ^^f^1^'
people prevailed against the bishops K^S"
themselves, when they happened to be ^le^K
divided in their first proposals. Thus °™ tadl»a'ta-
it happened in the famous election of St. Martin,
bishop of Tours, which has been mentioned in the
last chapter, sect. 3. The people were unanimously
for him ; Defensor with a great party of bishops at
first were against him ; but the voice of the people
prevailed, and the bishops complied and ordained
him. Philostorgius gives us such another instance.
Demophilus, bishop of Constantinople, with some
other bishops suspected of Arianism, meeting at
Cyzicum to ordain a bishop there, the people first
made a protestation against them, that unless they
would anathematize pubhcly Aetius and Eunomius
both in word and writing, they should ordain no
bishop there : and when they had complied to do
this, they still insisted on their privilege, that no
one should be ordained but one of their own choos
ing.34 Which was one, who, as soon as he was or
dained, preached the cathohc doctrine of the opoov-
aiav, that the Son was of the same substance with
the Father. Ancient history will furnish the reader
with many other instances of the hke nature.
Thirdly, Another evidence of the
people's power in elections is the 3<uy, From' the
- - . . - „ manner of the peo-
manner of their voting, or the way oi pics voting at eiec-
giving their assent or dissent to the
ordination of any person : which was threefold :
for either, first, they were unanimous in their vcte
for or against a man, and then their way was to
express their mind by a general acclamation, crying
out with one voice, *A?toc, or ' Avd£,iog, dignus, or in-
dignus, as the word then was, He is worthy, or un
worthy. Instances of which form the reader may
find in St. Ambrose,35 St. Austin,36 Eusebius,37 Phi
lostorgius,38 Photius,39 the author of the Constitu
tions,40 and several others. Or else, secondly, they
were divided in their choice, and then they ex
pressed their dissent in particular accusations of
the parties proposed, and sidings, and sometimes
outrageous tumults. St. Chrysostom,41 reflects upon
this way in his books of the priesthood, when he

" Leo, Ep. 84. c. 5. Si in aliam forte personam partium
se vota diviserint, metropolitani judicio is alteri preeferatur,
qui majoribus et studiis juvatur et meritis: tantum ut nul-
lus invitis et non petentibus ordinetur, ne plebs invita epis
copum non optatum aut contemnat aut oderit, et fiat minus
religiosa quam convenit, cui non licuerit habere quem voluit.
32 Novel. 24. ad calcem Cod. Theod. Indecenter alios
jnvitis et repugnantibus civibus ordinavit. Qui quidem,
quoniam non facile ab his qui non elegerant, recipiebantur
manum sibi contrahebat armatam— Et ad sedem quietis
pacem praedicaturos per bella ducebat.
33 Leo, Ep. 89. ad Episc. Vien. Expectarentur certe

vota civium, testimonia populorum, quaereretur honorato-
rum arbitrium, electio clericorum. — Qui praefuturus est om
nibus, ab omnibus eligatur.
34 Philostorg. lib. 9. c. 13. ov aiiTuv al xjrriipoi irponi-

TaTTOV.

35 Ambr. de Dignit. Sacerd. u. 5. In ordinationibus
eorum clamant et dicunt, Dignus es, et Justus es.
36 Aug. Ep. 110. Dignus et Justus est, dictum est vicies.
37 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 29. irdvTa Xabv "A£iov i-mjsor}aat.
38 Philostorg. lib. 9. c. 10. *» Phot. Cod. 256. p. 1414
40 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 4.
41 Chrys. de Sacerdot. lib. 3. c. 15.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

135

tells us, that in those popular solemnities, which
were then customarily held for the choice of ec-
clesiastial rulers, one might see a bishop exposed
to as many accusations, as there were heads among
the people. And the account that is given not
only by Ammianus Marcellinus,42 but by Socrates,43
and the other historians, of the tumult raised at
Rome in the election of Damasus, shows that the
people were indulged in something more than
barely giving testimony, else they had hardly run
into so great a heat and ungovernable tumult.
There was also a third way of expressing their
consent, which was by subscribing the decree of
election for greater security, that no party might
pretend afterward that they had not given assent
to it. Thus it was in the election of Meletius, bi
shop of Antioch, who was chosen by common con
sent both of catholics and Arians, each party pre
suming him to be of their own opinion. The
election-paper was subscribed by all, Theodoret44
says, and put into the hands of Eusebius Samosa-
tensis, which Constantius, when Meletius proved a
catholic, demanded to have had it destroyed, but
with all his menaces' he could not extort it from
him. St. Austin gives the like account45 of the
election of Eradius his successor at Hippo, which
for some reasons he got done in his own life-time.
He first ordered the notaries of the church to take
the acclamations of the people in writing, and then
required all that could write, to subscribe the in
strument themselves. And this was the common
way, whenever the metropohtan could not be pre
sent at the election ; then the decree of the whole
church was drawn up in writing, and carried to
him for his consent and approbation. The remains
of which custom may still be seen in the ancient
Ordo Romanus,™ where there is a form of a decree,
which the clergy and people were to sign upon
their choice of a bishop, and present it to the metro
pohtan and the synod, in order to his consecration.
In which case, if the metropohtan found him upon
examination to be a person every way qualified, as
they represented him, he then confirmed and ratified
their choice, and so proceeded immediately to his
ordination. All which argues that the people had
something of a decisive power in elections, and that
their suffrage was not merely testimonial.

Fourthly, This is further evident

use and office of in-
terventors.

in the Latin church, whose business
was to promote and procure a speedy election of a
new bishop in any vacant see, as I have had occa
sion to show in another place.47 For in the Roman
and African churches, upon the vacancy of a bi
shopric, it was usual for the metropolitan to grant
a commission to some of his provincial bishops to
go to the vacant chm-ch, and dispose the clergy and
people to be unanimous in the choice of a new bi
shop ; and when they were agreed, they petitioned
the metropolitan by the interventor to confirm their
choice, and with a synod of provincial bishops to
come and ordain him whom they had elected. Or
else they drew up an instrument in writing, sub
scribed both by the interventor and themselves, and
presented the new elect bishop to the metropolitan,
who ordained him in his own church. This was
the practice of the Roman province in the time of
Symmachus and Gregory the Great, as appears
from their epistles, which gave directions to the in-
terventors, or visitors, as they call them, concern
ing their behaviour in the present case. Let no
one, says Symmachus,43 draw up an instrument of
election without the presence of the visitor, by
whose testimony the agreement of the clergy and
people may be declared. And Gregory, writing to
Barbaras, bishop of Beneventum, and visitor of the
church of Palermo, bids him endeavour to make
the clergy and people unanimous in their present
ation of a worthy person to be their bishop, who
could not49 be rejected by the canons; and then
drawing up their petition in form of a decree signed
with all their hands, and the letters testimonial of
the visitor, they should send him to Rome for con
secration. Nothing can be plainer, than that here
the clergy and people made the choice of their
bishop with the assistance of a visitor or interventor,
and then presented him to the metropohtan, who, if
he had no canonical exception against him, con
firmed their choice, and proceeded to his ordination.
Fifthly, As a further evidence of Sect 8
this power and privilege indulged to custom of'the peo-
the people, it may be observed like- £?££?££
..... . .-, dained by force.
wise, that it was customary m those
days for the people in many places to lay violent

42 Ammian. lib. 27. c. 3. 43 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 29.
44 Theod. lib. 2. c. 31.
45 Aug. Ep. 110. A notariis ecclesiae, sicut cernitis, exci-
piuntur quae dieimus, excipiuntur quae dicitis, et meus ser-
mo, et vestrae acclamationes in lerram non cadunt.  Hoc
ad ultimum rogo, ut gestis istis dignemini subscribere qui
potestis. 48 Ordo Rom. Biblioth. Patr. t. 10. p. 104. Decretum
quod clerus et populus firmare (al. formare) debet de electo
episcopo. — Ut omnium nostrorum vota in hanc electionem
convenire noscatis, huic decreto canonico promptissiraa
voluntate singuli manibus propriis roborantes subscripsimus.

47 Book II. chap. 15.
48 Symmach. Ep. 5. c. 6. Decretum sine visitatoris prae-
sentia nemo conficiat," cujus testimonio clericorum, ac civium
possit unanimitas declarari.
49 Greg. lib. II. Ep. 16. Dilectio tua clerum plebemque
ejusdem ecclesiae admonere festinet, ut remoto studio, uno
eodemque consensu talem sibi praeficiendum expetant sacer
dotem, qui et tanto ministerio dignus valeat reperiri, et
venerandis canonibus nullatenus respuatur. Qui dum fuerit
postulatus cum solemnitate decreti omnium subscriptioni-
bus roborati, et dilectionis tuae testimonio literarum, ad nos
sacrandus occurrat.

136

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

hands upon persons, and bring them by force to
the bishop to be ordained. Thus Possidius50 tells
us it was in the ordination of St. Austin, the peo
ple seized him and brought him to the bishop, re
quiring with one voice that he would ordain him pres
byter, whilst he in the mean time wept abundantly
for the force that was put upon him. Paulinus51
says the same of himself, that he was ordained pres
byter by force and the irresistible violence of an
inflamed and zealous people. And there are many
other instances of the like nature.
Sixthly, I observe but one thing
6thiySeF,om the more relating to this matter, which
some hfshops'upon was the compliment that some bishops
this account by way , - . .
of compliment passed upon their people upon tms
gave to their people. * * .
account, styling them fathers, in re
gard to the share and influence they had in their
designation and election. St. Ambrose himself
speaking to his people, addresses himself to them in
this style : Ye are52 my fathers, who chose me to be
bishop : ye, I say, are both my children and fathers ;
children in particular, fathers altogether. In which
words he plainly refers to that providential consent
of the people of Milan, who, when they were divided
before into several factions, as soon as Ambrose was
named, all unanimously conspired together in his
election. These are some of those collateral evi
dences, that may be brought to prove that anciently
the clergy and people joined in a common vote in
the election of their bishop, and that their suffrage
was something more than testimonial, especially in
the fourth and fifth ages, in the Latin church, where,
as De Marca owns, the people's request was chiefly
considered. Nor was this privilege only indulg-
what power the ed them in the election of their bishop,
people had in the . . - 1 . . ~
designation of pres- but sometimes m the designation ot
byters. .
presbyters also. For St. Austin and
Paulinus were but to be ordained presbyters, when
that forcible constraint, just now spoken of, was
laid upon them by the people. Besides, St. Jerom53
says expressly, that presbyters and the other clergy
were as much chosen by the people, as the bishops
were. And Possidius 54 notes this to have been both
the custom of the church and St. Austin's practice,

in the ordinations of priests and clerks, to have re
gard to the majority or general consent of Christian
people. And Siricius, who speaks the sense and
practice of the Roman church, says,55 that when a
deacon was to be ordained either presbyter or
bishop, he was first to be chosen both by the clergy
and people. And therefore I cannot so readily sub
scribe to the assertion of those learned men, who
say that bishops before their ordination were pro
pounded to the people, but not presbyters or any
other of the inferior clergy.
As to those who assert, that the
people were anciently indulged in whether the coon-
r r cil of Nice made any
these matters before the council of alteration in these
matters.
Nice, but that their power was abridg
ed by a new decree of that council, they are evi
dently under a mistake ; for it is certain the Ni
cene fathers made no alteration in this affair, but
left the whole matter as they found it. For though
in one of their canons56 it is said, that the presence,
or at least the consent, of all the provincial bishops,
and the confirmation or ratification of the metro
pohtan, shall be necessary to the election and ordin
ation of a bishop ; yet that is not said to exclude
any ancient privilege that the people enjoyed, but
only to establish the rights of metropolitans and
provincial bishops, which Meletius, the schismatical
Egyptian bishop, had particularly invaded, by pre
suming to ordain bishops without the authority of
his metropolitan, or consent of his fellow bishops in
the provinces of Egypt. That nothing else was
designed by that canon is evident from this, that
the same council, in the synodical epistle written to
the church of Alexandria, expressly mentions the
choice of the people, and requires it as a condition
of a canonical election. For speaking of such Me
letian bishops as would return to the unity of the
catholic church, it says, that when any cathohc bi
shop died, Meletian bishops might succeed in their
room, provided they were worthy, and that the
people57 chose them, and the bishop of Alexandria
ratified and confirmed their choice. Our learned
Bishop Pearson has rightly observed, that Atha
nasius53 himself was thus chosen after the Nicene
council was ended; which is a certain argument

50 Possid. Vit. Aug. u. 4. Eum tenuerunt, et ut in talibus
consuetum est, episcopo ordinandum iutulerimt, omnibus id
uno consensu et desiderio fieri perficique petentibus, mag-
noque studio et clamore flagitantibus, ubertim eo flente.
51 Paulin. Ep. 35. inter Epist. August. A Lampio apud
Barcilnonam in Hispania, per vim inflammatae subito plebis
sacratus sum. Vid. Paulin. Ep. 6. ad Severum, p. 101.
62 Ambr. Com. in Luc. lib. 8. c. 17. Vos enim mihi estis
parentes, qui sacerdotium detulistis: vos, inquam, filii vel
parentes, filii singuli, universi parentes.
53 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Cum te vel populus vel pon-
tifex civitatis in clerum elegerit, agito quae clerici sunt. Id.
in Ezek. lib. 10. c. 33. p. 609. Speculator ecclesiae, vel epis
copus vel presbyter, qui a populo electus est.

54 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 21. In ordinandis sacerdotibus et
clericis consensum majorem Christianorum et consuetudi-
nem ecclesiae sequendam esse arbitrabatur.
55 Siric. Ep. 1. ad Himer. Tarracon. c. 10. Exinde jam
accessu temporum, presbyterium vel episcoparum, si eum
cleri ac plebis evocaverit electio, non immerito sortietur.
56 Cone. Nic. can. 4.
57 Cone. Nic. Ep. Synod, ap. Theod. lib. 1. c. 9. et So
crat. lib. 1. c. 9. ei a£tcu epaivoivTO, Kal b Xaos alpotTO,
crui'E7ri\l/'Tjcpto-o"Tos avTto Kal EiriaeppayiXfiVTOS tov Ttjs
'AXE^avSpELai iTrlrrKoirov.
M Pearson, Vind. Ignat. par. 1. c. 11. p. 324. ed. Ant
werp. Eusebiani, qui creationem Athanasii abrogare vo-
luerunt, defectum popularis electionis objiciebant, et epis-

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

137

that the people's right was not abrogated in that
council. The Eusebian party made it an objection
against him, that he had not the choice of the peo
ple : but the bishops of Egypt assembled in synod,
in their synodical epistle do with great earnestness
maintain the contrary, asserting, that the whole
multitude of the people of the cathohc church,59 as
if they had been all united in one soul and body,
cried out, requiring Athanasius to be ordained bi
shop. Whence Gregory Nazianzen60 also says of
him, that he was brought to the throne of St. Mark,
ijriifif tov Xaov -leavrbg, by the suffrage of all the peo
ple. It were easy to add many other instances and
proofs of the like nature to the time of the council
of Chalcedon, when the people of Alexandria still
enjoyed their ancient privilege, as appears from
several passages in Liberatus, who says of Proterius
and some other of their bishops, that they were
chosen by the nobles, and the decree61 and voice of
all the people : but I shall say no more upon this
head, but only allege two canons of the fourth
council of Carthage, which comprise the whole
practice of the church in relation to this matter :
the one decreeing,02 that the ordination of a bishop
should always be by the consent of four parties,
the clergy, the laity, the provincial bishops, and
the metropohtan, whose presence and authority
was principally necessaiy in all such cases. The
other canon63 orders, that no bishop shall or
dain any clergymen without consulting with his
clergy, and asking the consent, approbation, and
testimony of his people. This seems to have
been the most common and ordinary practice of the
church. But then, as all general rules have
Some esceptions their exceptions, so it cannot be de-
to the general rule. ... .
First & case the nied but that this rule varied SOme-
greatest part of the
tics"orbschS^uc"s. ^^es, or at least had its limitations
and restrictions ; and I shall not do
justice to the reader, nor the subject neither, unless
I mention those also. Here therefore we are to
observe in the first place, that this rule did not hold
when the greatest part of any chm-ch were turned
heretics or schismatics. For in that case, had elec
tions been made by the general suffrage of the peo

ple, none but heretical or schismatical bishops must
have been ordained. And therefore in the time of
the great prevalency of Arianism, and the long
schism of the Donatists, the church did not tie her
self always to act precisely by this rule. We find
it objected by the Donatists in the collation of Car
thage,61 that the catholics made bishops in many
places where they had no people ; that is, no ca
tholic people, for they were all Donatists ; conse
quently, those bishops were ordained not only with
out, but against the consent of the people, And
this I take to be the case of those bishops mentioned
in the seventeenth and eighteenth canons of the
council of Antioch ; one of which says, That if any
bishop is ordained to preside over a people, and
does not take upon him his office, and go to the
church to which he is ordained, he shall be excom
municated, till he complies, or a provincial synod
determines otherwise about him : and the other
says, If such a bishop absents from his diocese, not
by his own default, but Bid. r-nv tov Xaov irapairnoiv,
because the people refuse to receive him, in that
case he shall be honoured as a bishop, though not
admitted to his own church. These canons were
made at a time when the Arian faction had raised
great commotions in the church, which probably
made some bishops unwilling to go to their churches,
and others could not be admitted, because the fac
tion strongly prevailed against them : and in both
of them it is supposed the ordinations were made
without asking the people's consent ; of which prac
tice we have frequent instances in ecclesiastical
history in cases of the same nature.
Secondly, Another exception to the
rule was, when bishops were to be or- 2naiy, in case of
_ ordaining bishops to
dained for very distant countries or far distant places, or
J barbarous nat.ons.
barbarous nations. When Athanasius
ordained Frumentius bishop of the Indies at Alex
andria, as the historians65 report, no one can imagine
that he had the formal consent, though he might
have the presumptive approbation, of all his people.
As neither can we suppose the bishop of Tomi in
Scythia to be ohosen by his people, when he was
the only bishop 66 in all that region, and commonly
ordained at Constantinople, as by the twenty-eighth

copi JSgypti, in synodo congregati, epistola ad omnes
ecclesiae catholicse episcopos scripta, contrarium magna
animi contentione asseruerunt.  Quod neque hi neque
illi fecissent, si populi suflragia in eligendo episcopo locum
nullum habuissent.
59 Ep. Synod. Concil. Alex. ap. Athan. Apol. 2. t. 2. p.
l Id. 7ras o Xaos — ivE%6eov, EKpaXpv, aWovvTzs 'Adavdaiov
Eiria-KOTrov. 60 Naz. Orat. 21. t. 1. p. 377.
61 Liberat. Breviar. ... 14. Collecti sunt nobiles civitatis,
ut eum qui esset vita et sermone pontificatu dignus, elige-
rent.  Novissime in Proterium omnium sententia de-
clinavit. Id. u. 15. Scripsit imperator Leo duci Alexan
dra Stil8B,ut pelleret quidem abepiscopatu modis omnibus

Timotheum, inthronizaret autem alium decreto populi, qui
synodum vindicaret.
62 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 1. Cum consensu clericorum et lai-
corum, et conventu totius provinciae episcoporum, maxi-
meque metropolitani vel auctoritate vel praesentia ordinetur
episcopus. 63 Ibid. can. 22. Ut episcopus sine consilio clericorum
suorum clericos non ordinet; ita ut civium assensum, et
conniventiam, et testimonium quaerat.
61 Collat. Carth. 1. c. 182. Petilianus episcopus dixit,
Imo crebros ubi habes episcopos, sane et sine populis habes.
65 Ruffin. lib. 1. u. 9. Socrat. lib. 1. u. 19. Theodoret.
lib. I. „. 23.
66 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 19.

138

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

canon of the council of Chalcedon, the bishops of
barbarous nations were appointed to be.
Thirdly, In case an interventor, or
3diy, in caBe on yisitor, who was sent to procure a
interventor or any
thor bishop intrud- Speedy election m any vacant see, got

ed himself into any
see without the con
sent of a provincial

see without the con- njmseif settled in the see, by the in-

8J°°d' ' terest which he had gained in the
people during his administration ; yet he was not
allowed to continue in the possession of that see,
though he had made never so strong a party among
the people, or had the consent of them all. As ap
pears from a canon of the fifth council of Carthage,6'
which is also inserted into the Code of the African
church. The case was the same with any vacant
bishops, £7rt'o-(co7rot oxoXdZovTig, as the canons call
them, who were ordained to such places as would
not receive them : if any of them intruded them
selves into any vacant church without the consent
of the metropolitan and a provincial synod, they
were to be rejected, though all the people were
unanimous in choosing them, as the council of An
tioch decreed in express terms against68 such in
vaders : If, say they, a vacant bishop transfers him
self into a vacant church, and seizes the throne by
stealth, without the authority of a full synod of the
province, he shall be discarded, though all the peo
ple upon whom he thrust himself should agree in
the choice of him. The same council has another
canon,69 which prohibits any bishop to remove from
one diocese to another, either of his own accord, or
by the compulsion of the people. Which plainly im
phes, that in all such cases no regard was had to the
choice of the people, when they pretended to act
without the concurrence of a provincial synod.
Fourthly, When the people were
4tMy, in'caa'e of divided in their choice, and could not
factions and di
visions among the unanimously agree upon any one :
people. ^ o x v
then, to prevent further disputes, and
the mischievous consequences of faction and di
vision, it was usual for the metropolitan and the
synod to choose an indifferent person, whom no
party had named, and prefer him before all the
competitors of the people. And this was usually
done with good success ; for the people commonly
were ashamed of their own choice, and universally
acquiesced in this. Sidonius ApoUinarius gives us
a famous instance in the ordination of John, bishop
of Chalons : a triumvirate of competitors, whose
characters were not extraordinary, had, by different

interests, drawn the people into three very great
factions ; to remedy which, the metropohtan, pri
vately consulting with his fellow bishops, but taking
none of the people into council, ordained this John,
to the surprise of them all : but, as our author™ ob
serves, it was managed with that prudence, that
though the advice of the people was not taken, yet
the holy man was ordained, to the astonishment of
the factious, and the confusion of the wicked, with
the general acclamations of the good, and the con
tradictions and oppositions of none. And this was
a common method in case of incurable divisions
among the people.
Fifthly, Sometimes the emperors in
terposed their authority, and them- sthiy, The'emne-
r .-ir i_ rors sometimes 10 -
selves nominated the person wtiom terposed their au
. ... thorlty to prevent
they would have to be ordained bi- t™ul" "> th« '*«
shop, when they found by experience
what dangerous tumults these popular elections
raised among the people. Thus it was in the case
of Nectarius, bishop of Constantinople, who was
nominated by Theodosius only. For the people
were not so much as consulted in the matter, but
the emperor ordered the bishops to give him in a
catalogue of fit persons, reserving the power of
election entirely to himself. Nay, when some of
the bishops objected against Nectarius, that he was
but a catechumen and unbaptized, the emperor,
notwithstanding, persisted in his choice, and the
bishops complied, and immediately baptized and
ordained him, as Sozomen" informs us. Socrates
takes notice of the same prerogative made use of
by Theodosius junior, upon the hke occasion, who
nominated Nestorius to the see of Constantinople,
Sid roig KsvodTrovSiaTdg, by reason of factious and
vain-glorious persons'2 in the chm-ch. And for the
hke reason, the same author73 tells us, upon an
other vacancy, to prevent tumults in the election,
he gave his mandate to the bishops to enthrone
Proclus in the church. De Marca" will furnish the
reader with other instances, and ecclesiastical his
tory with more to the same purpose.
Sometimes, again, we find the peo- Sect n
pie and clergy were confined in their soSmeSreKin-
choice, to take one out of three that one^out onE,"
j. . . -, . . , , . , which were nomi-
were first nominated by the bishops natea by the
in council. Thus it was in France in
the time of the second council of Aries, anno 452,
when that council made an order about elections to

67 Cone. Carth. 5. c. 8. Placuit, ut nulli intercessori lici-
tum sit, cathedram cui intercessor datus est, quibuslibet
populorum studiis, vel seditionibus retinere. Vid. Cod.
Can. Eccl. Afr. c. 74.
69 Cone. Antioch. c. 16. ei tis iirio-KOiros erxoXd^wv iirl
aXoXdXfivaav iKKXi}criav iavrov iirippl^fas, v(pap7rdX>et tov
Opovov Stxa ffvvoSov TeXetas : thtov &iro£Xl}TOV Eivai, Kal
eI irdl b Xaos, ov vcpdpiracrEV, eXoito avTov.
69 Ibid, cam 21. 'E7rto-/co7roi/ dirb irapotKias etejocco eIs

tTEpav pi} ptSrirrairSai, /ttiTt avSaipETtas iTetpp'nrTOvrti
iavTov, pr}TE tnrd Xawv iKtia^opEVOV.
70 Sidon. lib. 4. Ep. 25. Strepitu furentis turbae despecto,
sanctum Johannem, stupentibus factiosis, erubescentibus
malis, acclamantibus bonis, reclamantibus nullis, collegam
sibi consecravere.
71 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 8.
72 Socrat. lib. 7. c. 29. '3 Idem, Kb. ". c. 40.
74 Marca, de Concord, lib. 8. u. 9. ... 18.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

139

this purpose : That in the ordination of a bishop75
this rule should be observed, the bishops shall
nominate three, out of which the clergy and people
shall have power to choose one. Other laws76 ap
pointed the clergy and people to nominate three,
and the metropohtan and provincial bishops to
cast lots which of the three should be ordained ;
which was the rule of the Spanish church in the
time of the council of Barcelona, anno 599.
„ ^ „ Lastly, We find also in Justinian's
Sect 18. J
lastly, By justi- laws, that a considerable alteration
man's laws, the elec- '
to°the"^«ZSed was made in this affair wherever those
peopkwSoiiyTi- laws took place ; for thereby the in
ferior sort of the common people were
wholly cut off from having any concern in these
elections, which were now confined to the clergy
and the optimates, or persons of better rank and
quality in every church. For so, by two of his
Novels,77 it is expressly provided, that when a
bishop is to be ordained for any city, the clergy
and chief men of the city shall meet, and nominate
three persons, drawing up an instrument, and in
serting therein upon their oath that they choose
them neither for any gift, nor promise, nor friend
ship, nor any other cause, but because they know
them to be of the true cathohc faith, and of honest
life, and good learning, &c. That out of these
three, one that is best qualified may be chosen by
the discretion and judgment of the ordainer. De
Marca thinks the council of Laodicea long before
made a canon to the same purpose, forbidding the
elections of the clergy to be committed role fixXois,
viii plebeculee, as De Marca renders it,78 that is, to
the common and inferior sort of people. But it is
not certain the canon intended the prohibition in
that sense ; or if it did, it was of no force, for the
people continued their ancient practice for some
ages after that council. However, upon the whole
matter it appears that this power of the people did
never so universally obtain, but that it was limited
in several cases by certain restrictions, and varied
according to the different state of times and nations.
sect. 19. At last, upon the breaking of the
princ'Is'aVpatrons Roman empire, the Gothic kings in

France and Spain were generally Sp™"of'ei«c-
complimented with a share in these *"""•
elections, and their consent was as necessary as any
other to the ordination of bishops within their do
minions. By which means their power quickly
increased into a prerogative of nominating solely,
and all others had little else to do but to accept
their nominations. Which the reader, that is cu
rious in this matter, may find discoursed at large
by De Marca,79 in his account of the change that
was made in the French and Spanish churches in
after ages, which it is none of my business here
further to pursue. As to the power of nomination
in inferior patrons, it is generally agreed by learned
men,80 that it came in upon the division of dioceses
into distinct parishes, and the founding of churches
in country places. For, to give greater encourage
ment to such pious and useful works, the founder
of any church, who settled an endowment upon it,
was allowed to retain the right of presentation to
himself, to nominate a fit clerk to the bishop for his
approbation. That which led the way to this prac
tice, was a decree of the first council of Orange,
anno 441, wherein this power and privilege was first
granted to bishops, that if any bishop was disposed
to found a church in the territory of another bishop,
the bishop of the diocese where the church was
built, should consecrate it ; reserving to the found
er81 the right of nominating such clerks as he should
desire to have in his own church, whom the bishop
of the diocese should ordain at his request ; or if
they were already ordained, he should allow them
to continue without any molestation. And this
canon is repeated in the second council of Aries,82
in the editions of Sirmond and Labbe, though it be
wanting in some others. After this, by the laws of
Justinian, all founders of churches, and their heirs,
are allowed to nominate their own clerks, upon the
right of patronage, to those churches. If any man
builds an oratory, says one of his Novels,83 and
either he or his heirs are minded to have clerks or
dained thereto ; if they allow maintenance to them,
and they be worthy persons, such as they nominate
shall be ordained. And the bishop has no power

75 Cone. Arelat. 2. c. 54. Placuit in ordinatione episcopi
hunc ordinem custodiri, ut tres ab episcopis nominentur, de
quibus clerici vel cives erga unum habeant eligendi potes
tatem. 76 Cone. Barcinon. can. 3.
77 Justin. Novel. 123. c. 1. Sancimus, quoties opus fuerit
episcopum ordinari, clericos et primates civitatis, cui epis
copus ordinandus est, mox in tribus personis decreta facere,
propositis sacrosanctis evangeliis, periculo suarum anima
rum dicentes in ipsis decretis, quia neque propter aliquam
donationem, neque propter aliquam promissionem, aut ami-
citiam, aut aliam quamlibet causam ; sed scientes eos rectae
et catholicae fidei, et honestae esse vitae, et literas nosse, hos
elegerint:  ut ex tribus illis personis melior ordinetur,
electione et judicio ordinantis. See also Novel. 137. c. 2.
et Cod. lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 42.

78 Concil. Laodic. c. 13. Marca, de Concord, lib. 8. i;.
6. n. 8.
79 Marca, de Concord, lib. 8. c. 9 et 10.
B» See Stillingfleet, Unreas. of Separ. p. 326.
81 Cone. Arausican. 1. c. 9. Reservata edificatori epis
copo hac gratia, ut quos desiderat clericos in re sua videre,
ipsos ordinet is in cujus civitatis territorio est ; vel si jam
ordinati sunt, ipsos habere acquiescat.
82 Cone. Arelat. 2. an. 452. can. 36.
83 Novel. 123. c. 18. Si qtlis oratorii domum aedificaverit,
et voluerit in ea clericos ordinare aut ipse, aut ejus haere-
des : si expensas ipsis clericis ministrant, et dignos de-
nominant, denominatos ordinari. Si vero qui ab eis eli-
guntur, tanquam indignos prohibent sacrae regulae ordinari,
tunc episcopus quoscunque putaverit meliores, ordinari pro
cured

140

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

to ordain any other, unless the persons so nomin
ated be unqualified by the canons. Another Novel84
allows the bishop liberty to examine them, and
judge of their qualifications ; but if he finds them
worthy, he is obliged to ordain them, having in that
case no power to refuse them. They who would
see more of this matter, may consult our learned
Bishop Stillingfleet, who gives an account85 of the
progress of it in future ages ; which being foreign
to my subject, I return to the business of elections
in the ancient church, and proceed to give an ac
count of the several qualifications, that were neces
sarily required in persons to be elected and ordained
to any office or dignity in the church.

CHAPTER III.
OF THE EXAMINATION AND QUALIFICATIONS OF PER
SONS TO BE ORDAINED TO ANY OFFICE OF THE
CLERGY IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. AND FIRST,
OF THEIR FAITH AND MORALS.

Sect 1.

Before any person could regularly
Three inquiries be elected or ordained to any clerical
made about persons rv * , l 1 1.1 1 . 1
to he ordained, re- office m the church, the electors and
specting, 1st, Their n . - ,
faith. 2diy their ordamers were obhged to make several
morals. 3dly, their °
condition" *"d inquiries concerning him, which I
think may be reduced to these three
heads : the examination of his faith, his morals, and
his outward state and condition in the world. The
two first of these they were most strict in canvass
ing and examining, because they were more essen
tial and necessary to the ministry ; but the third
they did not omit, because the peculiar state of
those times did more especially require it'. For then
men were tied by the laws of the empire to bear the
offices of the state, according to their quality and
substance, and those offices were commonly incon
sistent with the offices of the church : which made
it necessary to inquire, before men were ordained,
whether they were under any obligation to the state,
or obnoxious to any distinct power, for fear the
church should seem to encroach upon other men's
rights, or bring trouble upon herself, by having her
clergy recalled to a secular life again.
The trial of their faith and ortho-
sect. 2. .
The rule and me- doxy, under which I also comprehend
thod or examining r
ie£nuiSh a°d tne^r learning, was made three ways :
partly by obliging the electors to give
84 Nov. 77. c. 2. 8S Still. Unreas. of Separ. par. 3. p. 327.
1 Justin. Novel. 137. n. 2. Quemque ipsorum jurare se
cundum divina eloquia, et ipsis psephismatibus inscribi —
Quod scientes ipsos rectae et catholicae fidei et honestae vitae,
ipsos elegerint. Ibid. Exigi etiam ante omnia ab eo qui
ordinandus est, libellum ejus propria subscriptione com-
plectentem quae ad rectam ejus fidem pertinent. Enunciari

in their public testimony of them ; partly by obliging
the persons elected to answer to certain interro
gatories, or questions of doctrine, that were put to
them ; and partly by making them subscribe a body
of articles, or confession of faith, at the time of their
ordination. By a law of Justinian's,1 the electors
themselves were to declare upon oath in the instru
ment or decree of election, if it were a bishop that
was chosen, that they knew him to be a man of
the true cathohc faith, and of good hfe and convers
ation, &c. And by the same law, the bishop to be
ordained was required to give in a libel, or form of
confession of his faith, subscribed with his own
hand ; and to repeat the form of prayer used at the
oblation of the holy eucharist, and at baptism, with
the other prayers of the church. Which was an
intimation that he allowed and approved the liturgy,
or pubhc service of the church. The fourth council
of Carthage prescribes a particular form of examin
ation by way of interrogatories to the bishop who
was to be ordained, which is too long to be here
inserted ; but it . consists chiefly of such questions
as relate to the articles of the creed, and doctrines
levelled against the most noted heresies,2 that either
then were, or lately had been, predominant in the
church. Orders also are there given to examine,
whether the candidate be well instructed in the law
of God, and able to expound the sense of Scripture,
and be thoroughly exercised in the doctrines of the
church. By which we may judge what due pre
caution was then taken, to admit none but persons
rightly qualified, as to their faith, to the chief ad
ministrations of the church.
Upon which consideration it has Sects
seemed very difficult to some learned dJif^^'i
men, to account for the practice and cons"Ur8d-
conduct of Theophilus of Alexandria, in ordaining
Synesius, at the same time that he professed he could
not yet believe the doctrine of the resurrection, and
some other articles of the Christian faith. Baro
nius 3 and Habertus,4 and our learned Bishop Tay
lor,5 reckon he only dissembled, and used this
stratagem to avoid being ordained. But had this
been the case, it had still been a just canonical ex
ception against him: for the canons6 forbid the
ordination of any one, who accuses himself as guilty
of any heinous crime, whether his accusation be
true or false : for he proves himself guilty, either
by confessing a truth, or at least by telling a lie
about it. But indeed the case of Synesius was no
feigned case, for he spake the real sense of his soul;

etiam ab ipso et sanctam oblationis formulam, quae in sancta
communione fit, et earn quae fit in baptismate precationem,
et reliquas deprecationes.
2 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 1. s Baron, an. 410. t. 5. p. 315.
4 Habert. Archieratic. p. 500.
6 Taylor, Duct. Dubit. book 3. c. 2. p. 495.
6 Cone. Valentin, t. 4. Quicunque sub ordinatione vel

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

141

as appears not only from what the historian says of
it,7 but from the account which he himself gives
in one of his epistles8 to his brother Euoptius:
You know, says he, that philosophy teaches the
contrary to many of those generally-received doc
trines. Therefore I cannot persuade myself, that
the soul is postnate to the body ; I cannot say that
the world and all its parts shall be dissolved; I
look upon the resurrection to be Upov n icai diroppt)-
rov, a sort of mystical and ineffable thing, and am
far from assenting to the vulgar opinions about it.
— And now being called to the priesthood, I would
not dissemble these things, but testify them both
before God and man. This asseveration seems too
solemn and serious, to be the speech of one who
was only acting a part, and dissembling his opinion ;
and therefore it is more probable that he was in
earnest, as Lucas Holstenius s more fully shows in
a peculiar dissertation upon this subject against
Baronius. Valesius, to vindicate Theophilus, says,10
Synesius altered his opinions before he was ordain
ed: but that is more than can be proved. The
best account of the thing is that which is given by
Holstenius, that it was the man's admirable vir
tues, and excellent qualifications in other respects,
and a great want of fit men in those difficult times,
that encouraged Theophilus to ordain him, in hopes
that God would enlighten his mind, and not suffer
so excellent a person long to labour under such
errors in rehgion. But the fairest colours that can
be put upon it, will hardly justify a fact so contrary
to the rules of the church. The instance was sin
gular, and never made a precedent, or drawn into
imitation ; the general practice of the church being,
as has been showed, to examine men's orthodoxy,
and require their assent and subscriptions to the
rule of faith before their ordination.
Their next inquiry was into the
Sect. 4. , „ , ^ J -, • v
a strict inquiry morals of the person to be ordamed.
made into the mo- Jr
to beordaihned.,'e'e -^n<^ nere the examination was very
strict and accurate. For then the
custom was generally to ordain such only as were
known to all the people, and of whose life and
character they were satisfied, and could bear testi
mony to them. The bishops and presbyters who

preside over us, says TertuUian,1 ' are advanced to
that honour only by public testimony. The law is,
says Cyprian,12 to choose bishops in the presence
of the people, who have perfect knowledge of every
man's life, and are acquainted with the tenor of
their actions by their conversation.
Upon which account the laws for
bade the ordination of strangers in For which 'reason
. . ... n0 stranger to be
any church to which they did not be- ordained ma foreign
•* land.
long. Optatus makes it an objection
against the Donatists, that in the Roman see they
never had a bishop who was a citizen of Rome, but
still their succession in that city was supplied by
Africans and strangers.13 Whereas, on the contrary,
he challenges them to show,14 whenever the church
at any time brought a Frenchman or a Spaniard
into Africa ; or ordained a stranger to a people that
knew nothing of him. In the civil law we have a
constitution of Honorius the emperor to this pur
pose,15 That no clerks should be ordained out of any
other possession or village, but only that where
their church was. Or if any thinks that decree
was made rather for reasons of state, he may read
the same in the canons of the church : as in the
council of Eliberis,16 which decrees, That no stran
ger baptized in a foreign country, should be or
dained out of the province where he was baptized,
because his life and conversation could not be
known. And this rule was generally observed, ex
cept in some extraordinary cases, when either pubhc
fame had made a man eminent and noted over all
the world; or there were some particular reasons
for going against the rule, of which I have given
an account in another place. See Book II. chap.
10. sect. 3.
The strictness of this examination, Seo(. 6
as to men's morals, will appear fur- haddorSpSbi'c"'!?
ther from this, that the commission of nancem' cc urch-
any scandalous crime, for which a man was obliged
to do penance in the church, did, for ever after, ac
cording to the rules and discipline of those times,
render that person irregular and incapable of holy
orders. For though they granted pardon and ab
solution, and lay-communion, to all offenders that
submitted to the disciphne of public penance ; yet

diaconatus, vel presbyterii, vel episcopatus, mortali crimine
se dixerint esse pollutos, a supradictis ordinationibus esse
submovendos, reos scilicet vel veri confessione, vel mendacio
falsitatis. ' Ev-agr. lib. 1. c. 15. ovirw tov Xdyov T-fis ava^daztm
irapadEXopzvov, &c.
8 Synes. Ep. 105. p. 397.
9 Holsten. Dissert. 3. de Synesio, ap. Vales. Not. in
Theodor. p. 203.
10 Vales. Not. in Evagr. lib. 1. c. 15. It. Petav. Vit.
Synes. p. 4.
11 Tertul. Apol. c. 39. Praesident apud nos probati qui
que seniores, honorem istum non pretio, sed testimonio adepti.
12 Cypr. Ep. 68. al. 67. p. 172. Episcopus deligatur plebe

praesente, quae singulorum vitam plenissime novit, et unius-
cujusque actum de ejus conversatione perspexit.
13 Optat. lib. 2. p. 48. Quid est hoc, quod pars vestra in
urbe Roma episcopum civem habere non potuit ? Quid est
quod toti Afri et peregrini in ilia civitate sibi successisse
noscuntur. 14 Ibid. p. 51. Nunquid nos adduximus Hispanum aut
Galium ? Aut nos ordinavimus ignorantibus peregrinum ?
15 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 33. Clerici non
ex alia possessione vel vico, sed ex eo ubi ecclesiam esse
constiterit, ordinentur.
18 Cone. Eliber. c. 24. Omnes qui peregre fuerint bap-
tizati, eo quod eorum minime sit cognita vita, placuit, ad
clerum non esse promovendos in alienis provinciis.

142

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

they thought it not proper to admit such to clerical
dignities, but excluded them from the orders and
promotions of the church. At least it was thus in
most of the Western churches in the fourth and
fifth centuries, as appears from the Latin writers of
those ages. The epistles of Siricius and Innocent
show it to have been the practice of the Roman
church in their time. For Siricius 17 says, no lay
man, after public penance and reconciliation, was
to be admitted to the honour of the clergy : because,
though they were cleansed from the contagion of
all their sins, yet they ought not to touch the in
struments of the sanctuary, who themselves before
had been the instruments and vessels of sin. The
letters of Innocent19 are to the same purpose. And
so for the French churches we have the testimony
of Gennadius,19 and the second council of Aries,20
and Agde.2' And for the Spanish churches, a canon
of the first council of Toledo,22 which allows not
penitents to be ordained, except in case of necessity,
and then only to the offices of the inferior orders,
door-keepers and readers. The practice of the Afri
can churches is evident, from the fourth council of
Carthage, which decrees that no penitent should be
ordained,23 though he was a good man at the pre
sent. And if any such was ordained by the bishop's
ignorance, not knowing his character, he should be
deposed, because he did not declare that he had
been a penitent, at the time of his ordination. By
this we may understand what Optatus means, when,
speaking of the Donatists, who made some of the
catholic children do public penance in the church,
he says they thereby gave them a wound, which
was intended24 to cut them off from the benefit of
ordination ; plainly referring to this rule in the
church, that he who had done public penance, was
thereby made incapable of ordination. Which
seems also to be St. Austin's meaning, when speak
ing of a Christian astrologer, who had done penance
for his fault, he says, his conversion perhaps25 might
make some think he intended to get an office among
the clergy of the church : but no, says he, he is a

penitent ; he seeks nothing more but only a pardon
and absolution : meaning, that a person in his cir
cumstances could not pretend to sue for orders by
the rules and canons of the church. But we are to
note, that this is always to be understood of public
penance, not of private : for the council of Girone,
or Gerunda, in Catalonia, expressly makes this dis
tinction26 between public penance in the church,
and private penance in time of sickness ; making
the one to incapacitate men from taking orders, but
not the other. And in all other canons, where this
distinction is not expressed, it is always to be un
derstood. For it was only that penance which left
some public mark of disgrace upon men, which un
qualified them for the orders of the church. But
this rule might be dispensed with in extraordinary
cases, and there are some learned men who think it
was not so generally insisted on in the three first
ages of the church.
As to particular crimes, there were Stct T
a great many that unqualified men, „rd!,°„™ ^adaf."
whether they had done public pe- Sap'sed0™ t!m'
nance for them or not. Such as the ° feru
three great crimes of murder, adultery, and lapsing
in time of persecution. The council of Toledo27
sets murder in the front of those sins which ex
clude men from holy orders. The crime of fornica
tion and adultery is noted upon the same account
by those called the Apostolical Canons,28 the coun
cil of Neocsesarea,29 the council of Nice,30 Eliberis,*1
and several others. Nay, the council of Neocee-
sarea goes a httle further, and decrees,32 that if any
man's wife committed adultery whilst he was a lay
man, he should not be admitted to any ecclesiasti
cal function. Or if she committed adultery when
he was in office, he must give her a bill of divorce
and put her away ; otherwise be degraded from his
office. As to the crime of lapsing and sacrificing in
time of persecution, Origen ss assures us it was the
custom of the church in his time to exclude such as
were guilty of it, from all ecclesiastical power and
government. And Athanasius34 says the same, that

17 Siric. Ep. I. ad Himer. Tarracon. c. 14. Post poeni-
tudinem et reeonciliationem nulli unquam laico liceat ho
norem clericatus adipisci: quia quamvis sint omnium
peccatorum contagione mundati, nulla tamen debent geren-
dorum sacramentorum instrumenta suscipere, qui dudum
fuerint vasa vitiorum.
18 Innoc. Ep. 22. c. 3. Ubi pcenitentiee remedium necessa-
rium est illic ordinationis honorem locum habere non posse.
19 Gennad. de Eccl. Dogm. u. 72.
20 Cone. Arelat. 2. c. 25.
21 Cone. Agath. <;. 93. De pcenitentibus nullus clericus
ordinetur. 22 Cone. Tolet. 1. c. 2. Pcenitentes non admittantur ad
clerum, nisi tantum necessitas aut usus exegerit, et tunc
inter ostiarios deputentur, vel inter lectores.
23 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 68. Ex pcenitentibus (quamvis sit
bonus) clericus non ordinetur. Si per ignorantiam episcopi
factum fuerit, deponatur a clero, quia se ordinationis tem

pore non prodidit fuisse pcenitentem.
24 Optat. lib.. 2. p. 59. Invenistis pueros, de poenitentia
sauciastis, ne aliqui ordinari potuissent.
25 Aug. Append. Enarrat. Psal. lxi. Posset videri, quia
sic conversus est, clericatum quaerere in ecclesia. Pcenitens
est: non quaerit nisi solam misericordiam. Vid. Aug. Ep.
50. ad Bonifac. p. 87.
26 Cone. Gerundens. an. 517. u. 9. Qui aegritudinis lan-
guore depressus, pcenitentiae benedictionem, quam viati
cum deputamus, per communionem acceperit; et postmo-
dum reconvalescens caput pcenitentiae in ecclesia publice
non subdiderit; si prohibitis vitiis non detinetur obnoxius,
admittatur ad clerum.
27 Cone. Tolet. 1. can. 2. ffl Canon. Apost. c. 61.
29 Cone. Neocaes. e. 9 et 10. *> Cone. Nic. c. 2.
31 Cone. Eliber. c. 30. a2 Cone. Neocas. c. 8.
33 Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 3. p. 143.
31 Athan. Ep. ad Rutin, t. 2. p. 41.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

143

they were allowed the privilege of repentance, but
not to have any place among the clergy. Or if any
were ignorantly ordained, they were to be deposed
as soon as they were discovered, by a rule35 of the
great council of Nice. Which was no new rule,
but the ancient rule of the whole catholic church :
for Cyprian36 says it was agreed upon at Rome, and
in Africa, and by the bishops of the whole world,
that such men might be admitted to repentance,
but should be kept back from the ordinations of the
clergy, and the honour of the priesthood. Upon
this account the Arians themselves, though they
were not much given to act by rules, sometimes
thought fit to deny men ordination ; as Athanasius 37
and Socrates38 say they did by Asterius the sophist,
whom they would not ordain, because he had sa
crificed in time of persecution. But they were far
from being constant to this rule ; for if Philostor
gius89 says true, the leading bishops of the Arian
party, Eusebius of Nicomedia, Maris of Chalcedon,
Theognis of Nice, Leontius of Antioch, Antonius of
Tarsus, Menophantus of Ephesus, Numenius, Eu-
doxius, Alexander, and Asterius of Cappadocia, all
sacrificed in the Diocletian persecution. But then
it must be owned, that some of these were ordained
bishops in the church before the Arian heresy be
gan to appear: whence we must conclude, that
either the bishops who ordained them knew nothing
of their lapsing; or else that the church herself
sometimes granted dispensations in this case also.
Baronius40 and some others lay it to the charge of
Eusebius the historian, that he sacrificed in time of
persecution: Petavius,41 and Huetius,42 and Mr.
Pagi43 bring the same charge against Origen out of
Epiphanius, the first reporter of the story : whilst
Valesius44 and Du Pin45 undertake to vindicate the
reputation of Origen from so foul an aspersion ; and
Hanckius46 and Dr. Cave47 do the same for Euse
bius. I will not interpose in these controversies,
but only observe, that if the accusations brought
against those two persons were true, the conse
quence must be, either that persons who had lapsed
might be ordained, or at least continue in their orders
undeposed, when the church saw fit to dispense with
her ordinary rule ; which probably was not so strict,
but that it might admit of some relaxation, when

proper occasions and cases extraordinary seemed to
require it.
Another crime which unqualified
men for orders in those times, was No usurer^ m sedi-
sedition or rebellion; for he that
stood convicted of treasonable practices was never
to be ordained. This appears from the fourth
council of Carthage,48 which joins the seditious and
usurers together, and excludes them both from or
dination. As to the crime of usury, I shall not
here stand to explain the nature of it, which will
be done in a more convenient place,48 but only ob
serve, that this crime, in the sense in which the
ancients condemned it, was of such an odious and
scandalous nature, as to debar men that had been
guilty of it, from the honour and privilege of ordin
ation. Whence Gennadius, speaking of the prac
tice of the Latin church, and the qualifications re
quired in persons to be ordained, says, they must
not be men convicted of taking usury.50 In the
Greek church, at least in the province of Cappa
docia, the rule seems not to have been altogether so
strict: for St. Basil's canons51 do not absolutely
exclude such from the ministry, but allow them to
be ordained, provided they first gave away to the
poor what they had gained by usury, and promised
not to exercise it for the future.
Another crime which made a man Sect 9
irregular, and debarred him from the yJZtSY dis™™
privilege of ordination, was the dis- bered "" own body'
figuring or dismembering of his own body. If any
man indeed happened to be born a eunuch, there
was no law against his ordination : for Eusebius52
says, Dorotheus, presbyter of Antioch, was a eunuch
from his mother's womb; and Socrates53 and Sozo
men say of Tigris, presbyter of Constantinople,
that he was made a eunuch by a barbarian master.
Or if a man had suffered the loss of any member by
the cruelty of the persecutors ; as many confessors
in the Diocletian persecution had their right eyes
bored out, and their left legs enfeebled; in that
case there was no prohibition of their ordination,
except they were utterly incapacitated from doing
the office of ministers, by being made blind, or
deaf, or dumb ; for so those called the Apostolical
Canons51 determined: A man that hath lost an

35 Cone. Nic. c. 10.
38 Cypr. Ep. 68. al. 67. p. 174. Cum jampridem nobis-
cum, et'cum omnibus omnino episcopis in toto mundo con-
stitutis, etiam Cornelius collega noster— decreverit, ejus-
modi homines ad pcenitentiam quidem agendam posse
admitti ; ab ordinatione autem cleri, atque sacerdotali
honore prohiberi.
37 Athan. de Synod. Arim. et Seleuc. 1. 1. p. 887.
38 Socrat. lib. 1. c. 36. S9 Philostorg. lib. 2. c. 14.
40 Baron, ad an. 335. n. 8.
41 Petav. Animadvers. in Epiphan. Haer. 64. n.2.
12 Huet. Origenian. lib. 1. v. 4.
43 Pagi Critic, in Baron, an. 251. u. 6.

44 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 6. c. 39.
45 Du Pin, Bibliotheque, t. 1. p. 444.
46 Hanckius, de Scriptor. Byzantin. par. 1. c. 1. n. 158.
47 Cave, Hist. Liter, vol. 1. p. 128.
48 Cone. Carth. 4. u. 67. Seditionarios nunquam ordinan-
dos clericos, sicut nee usurarios.
™ Book VI. c. 2. sect. 8.
50 Gennad. de Eccles. Dogm. u. 172. Neque ilium qui
usuras accepisse convincitur.
51 Basil. Can. 14. ap. Bevereg. Pandect, t. 2.
62 Euseb. lib. 7. c 32.
53 Socrat. lib. 6. c. 15. Sozom. lib. 8. c. 24.
" Canon. Apost. c. 76 et 77.

144

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

eye, or is maimed in his leg, may be ordained
bishop, if he be otherwise worthy. For it is not
any imperfection of body that defiles a man, but
the pollution of his soul. Yet if a man is deaf or
blind, he shall not be made bishop ; not because he
is polluted, but because he will not be able to per
form the duties of his function. The council of
Nice adds a third case, in which it was lawful to
ordain dismembered persons, which was when, in
case of a mortal distemper, the physicians thought
it necessary to cut off one limb of the body to save
the whole. All these were excepted cases, and the
prohibition of the canons did not extend to them :
but the crime was, when any one dismembered him
self in health, as the Nicene canon words it;55 such
a one was not to be ordained, or if he was ordained
when he committed the fact, he was to be deposed.
The Apostolical Canons give this reason for it,56 be
cause such a one is in effect a self-murderer, and
an enemy of the workmanship of God. Nor was it
any excuse in this case, that a man made himself a
eunuch out of a pretended piety, or to avoid forni
cation. For such were liable to the penalty of the
canon, as well as any others ; which is noted by
Gennadius57 and the council of Aries.53 And in
deed the first reason of making the canon was to
prevent that mistaken notion of piety, which had
once possessed Origen,59 who taking those words of
our Saviour, " There are some that make themselves
eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake," in a
wrong sense, fulfilled them literally upon himself.
And the Valesian heretics carried the matter a little
further, asserting, that men ought to serve God after
that manner ; and therefore they both made them
selves eunuchs, and all that came over to them, as
St. Austin60 informs us. It was to correct and dis
countenance these erroneous opinions and practices,
that the church at first made this rule ; which was
so nicely observed, that we scarce meet with two
instances to the contrary in after ages. Leontius
made himself a eunuch, to avoid suspicion in his
converse with the virgin Eustolium ; but he was
deposed from the office of presbyter for the fact,
and it gave occasion to the council of Nice to renew
the ancient canon against such practices ; so that
when the Arians afterward ordained him bishop of
Antioch, the historians61 tell us the catholics gener
ally declaimed against his ordination as uncanoni-
cal. The only instance that looks hke a dispensa
tion with this rule, is what we have in Baronius
concerning Timotheus, bishop of Alexandria, his
ordaining Ammon the Egyptian monk, who, to

avoid being ordained, had cut off his own right ear,
to make himself irregular ; notwithstanding which,
Baronius says,62 Timotheus ordained him, and jus
tified what he did with this expression : That this
law indeed was observed by the Jews ; but for his
own part, if they brought to him a man without a
nose, that was but of good morals, he would ordain
him bishop. But there is some reason to question
the truth of this narration ; for not only Palladius,
whom Baronius cites, but Socrates and Sozomen,03
in telling the story, seem rather to intimate that he
was not ordained. However, supposing it to be
true, it is a singular instance, and we shaU hardly
find such another in all the history of the church.
Which shows how cautious the ancients were in
observing this rule, that they might not bring any
disrepute or scandal upon the church.
But in all these and the like cases . .
iSect. 10.
there is one thing particularly to be .^"JJJSJcS
observed, that the crimes which made E^as^X'
men irregular, were generally under- »n™"«i °">™-
stood to be such only as were com
mitted after baptism. For all crimes committed be
fore baptism were supposed to be so purged away
in the waters of baptism, as that a perfect amnesty
passed upon them, and men notwithstanding them
were capable of ordination. So that not only the
crimes which men committed whilst they were hea
thens, but such as they fell into when they were
catechumens, were overlooked in this inquiry, when
their morals came to be examined for ordination.
This is evident not only from the known case of St.
Austin, whose faults were never objected to him at
his ordination, because they were only such as pre
ceded his baptism ; but also from the rule made in
the council of Ancyra, in the case of such as lapsed
into idolatry whilst they were only catechumens.
For the canon61 s"ays, That such as sacrificed before
baptism, and were afterwards baptized, might be
promoted to ecclesiastical dignities, as persons that
were cleansed from all crimes by the sanctification
of baptism. It is true, only that one crime of sacri
ficing is here specified ; but by parity of reason, the
rule must be understood to extend to all other cases
ofthe like nature : and so the practice of the church
has commonly determined it.
Yet here again we must observe,
that if any great irregularity happen- Encept any great
J- , ? ^- .? ,o ¦, • irregularity happen
ed, in mens baptism itself, such crimes ed in their bapusm
r ' itself. As in the
were always objected against them, caseofciinicbap-
to debar them from ordination. Thus
it was frequently with those who were baptized

55 Cone. Nic. c. 1. s« Canon. Apost. c. 21.
57 Gennad. de Eccles. Dogm. c. 72.
58 Cone. Arelat. 2. c. 7. Si qui se, carnali vitio repugnare
nescientes, abscindunt, ad clerum pervenire non possunt.
53 Vid. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 8. Epiphan. Haer. 61. n. 3.
60 Aug. de Haeres. c. 37. Valesii et seipsos castrant, et

hospites suos, hoc modo existimantes Deo se debere servire.
61 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 26. Theodor. lib. 2. <.-. 24.
62 Baron, an. 3S5. p. 513.
63 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 23. Sozom. lib. 7. u. 30. Pallad. Hist.
Lausiac. c. 12.
61 Cone. Ancyr. «.-. 12.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

145

only with clinic baptism, in time of sickness or
urgent necessity, when they had carelessly deferred
their baptism to such a critical moment, and might
have had it sooner, had it not been their own de
fault. This delaying of baptism was always esteem
ed a very great crime, and worthy of some ecclesi
astical censure: and therefore the church, among
other methods which she took to discountenance
the practice of it, thought fit to punish persons who
had been guilty of it, and had put themselves upon
the fatal necessity of a clinic baptism by denying
them ordination. We have a canon in the council of
Neocaesarea65 to this purpose : If any man is bap
tized only in time of sickness, he shall not be or
dained a presbyter ; because his faith was not vo
luntary, but as it were of constraint ; except his
subsequent faith and diligence recommend him, or
else the scarcity of men make it necessary to ordain
him. And that this was an old rule of the church,
appears from the account which Cornelius65 gives
of the ordination of Novatian to be presbyter. He
says, the clergy and many of the people objected
agamst it, alleging, that it was not lawful to ordain
one who had been baptized upon his bed in time of
sickness ; and that the bishop was forced to inter
cede with them, to give way to his ordination, as a
matter of grace and favour. Which shows, that
the ordination of such was contrary to the common
rule and practice of the church.
In like manner, they who were bap-
Sect. 12. . ' ' r
And hereucai tized by heretics, were not ordinarily
baptism. J J
allowed clerical promotion, when they
returned to the bosom of the cathohc church. The
council of Eliberis is very peremptory67 in its decree,
That whatever heresy they came from, they should
not be ordained : or if any such were already or
dained, they should be undoubtedly degraded. Pope
Innocent68 testifies for the same practice in the Ro
man church, saying, It is the custom of our church,
to grant only lay-communion to those that return
from heretics, by whom they were baptized, and not
to admit any of them to the very lowest order of the
clergy. But it must be confessed, that the council of
Nice dispensed with the Novatians69 in this respect,
allowing their clergy, though both baptized and or
dained among them, to be received with imposition of
hands, and retain their orders in the church. And
the African fathers granted the same indulgence to
the Donatists, to encourage them to return to the
unity of the catholic church. For in the council of

Carthage, anno 397, which is inserted into the Afri
can Code,™ a proposal was made, that such as had
been baptized among the Donatists in their infancy,
by their parents' fault, without their own know
ledge and consent, should, upon their return to the
church, be allowed the privilege of ordination : and
in the next council71 the proposal was accepted, and
a decree passed accordingly in favour of them. By
which we may understand, that this was a piece of
disciphne, that might be insisted on or waved, ac
cording as church governors in prudence thought
most for the benefit and advantage of the church.
But in case the persons so returning had been bap
tized by such heretics, whose baptism was null, and
to be reiterated in the 'church ; as the baptism of
the Paulianists, or Samosatenian heretics, was; in
that case it was determined by the great council of
Nice, that such persons, when they were rebaptized,
might be ordained.72 For baptism, as has been
noted before, set men clear of all crimes : and their
former baptism being null, that was reckoned their
only baptism, which they received at their return
to the catholic church ; and no crimes committed
before that were then to prejudice their ordination
in the church.
I cannot here omit to mention an- Se
other qualification required of per- data°e£who°hador"
sons to be ordained, because it was fam^catiioiio1"
of great use and service in the church ; chlistanB-
which was, that none should be admitted, at least to
the superior degrees of bishops, presbyters, or dea
cons, before they had made all the members of their
family catholic Christians. This is a rule we find
in the third council of Carthage,73 which was
equally designed to promote the conversion of pa
gans, Jews, heretics, and schismatics, who are all
opposed to catholic Christians : and it was a very
proper rule in that case ; since nothing could be
more disadvantageous or dishonourable to religion,
than to have any countenance or secret encourage
ment given to its opposers, by those who were de
signed to serve at the altar. Besides that this was
but a proper way of making reprisals upon the hea
then religion. For Julian had made a like decree
for his pagan priests, in opposition to the Chris
tians ; charging Arsacius, high priest of Galatia,
that he should admit none to the priest's office,74
who tolerated either servants, or children, or wives
that were Galilaeans ; and did not come with their
whole family and retinue to the worship of the gods

65 Cone. Neocaes. c. 12.
66 Ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
87 Cone. Eliber. c. 51. Ex omni haeresi qui ad nos fidelis
yenerit, minime est ad clerum promovendus. Vel si qui sunt
in praeteritum ordinati, sine dubio deponentur.
68 Innoc. Ep. 22. Nostra lex ecclesiae est, venientibus
ab haereticis, qui tamen illic baptizati sunt, per manus im-
positionem laicam tantum tribuere communionem, nee ex
his aliquem in clericatus honorem vel exiguum subrogare.

69 Cone. Nic. c. 8. )(Eino3-£Tou»AEVous ovtovs pivEiv 8TWS
EV TOO KXvpOJ.
¦"> Cod. Can. Afric. c. 48. al. 47.
71 Ibid. c. 58. al. 57.
72 Cone. Nic. c. 19. dvatairTio-SrivTES xi'-P0'Tovl'la^"J"T0L"'
78 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 18. Ut episcopi, presbyteri, et dia
eoni non ordinentur, priusquam omnes qui sunt in domo
eorum Christianos catholicos fecerint.
74 Julian. Ep. ad Arsac. ap. Sozomen. lib. 5. c. 16.

146

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV

in the idol temples. It had been a great omission
and oversight in the governors of the Christian
church, had they not been as careful to secure the
interest of the true religion in the families of their
ministers, as that pagan prince was to secure a
false religion among his idol priests : and there
fore, had there been nothing more than emulation
in the case, yet that had been a sufficient reason to
have laid this injunction upon all the candidates of
the Christian priesthood. There is but one qualification more
wf,atmetf.odS I shall mention under this head,
were anciently taken ... . tit
to prevent simo- which was, that men should come
niacal promotions. ,
honestly and legally to their prefer
ment, and use no indirect or sinister arts to procure
themselves an ordination. Merit, and not bribery,
was to be their advocate, and the only thing to be
considered in all elections. In the three first ages,
whilst the preferments were small, and the perse
cutions great, there was no great danger of ambi
tious spirits, nor any great occasion to make laws
against simoniacal promotions. For then martyr
dom was as it were a thing annexed to a bishopric ;
and the first persons that were commonly aimed and
struck at, were the ruleis and governors of the
church. But in after ages, ambition and bribery
crept in among other vices, and then severe laws were
made both in church and state to check and prevent
them. Sulpitius Severus takes notice of this differ
ence betwixt the ages of persecution and those that
followed, when he says,75 that in the former, men
strove who should run fastest to those glorious com
bats, and more greedily sought for martyrdom by
honourable deaths, than in after times by wicked
ambitions they sought for the bishoprics of the
church. This implies, that in the age when Sulpi
tius lived, in the fifth century, some irregular arts
were used by particular men to advance themselves
to the preferments of the church. To correct
whose ambition and ill designs, the church inflicted
very severe censures upon all such as were found
guilty of simony, or, as some then76 called it, xP""--
ipwopuav, the selling of Christ. The council of
Chalcedon decreed,77 that if any bishop gave ordin
ation, or an ecclesiastical office or preferment of
any kind, for money, he himself should lose his
office, and the party so preferred be deposed. And
the reader may find several other constitutions of

75 Sever. Hist. lib. 2. p. 99. Certatim in gloriosa certa-
mina ruebatur, multoque avidius turn martyria gloriosis
mortibus qu£Erebantur, quam nunc episcopatus pravis am-
bitionibus appetuutur.
78 Vid. Epist. Alexandri Alexandrini ap. Theodor. lib
1. c. 4.
77 Cone. Chalced. c. 2. 78 Canon. Apost. c. 29.
79 Cone. CP. Epist. Synod. Con. t. 4. p. 1025.
80 Cone. Aurel. 2. c. 3 et 4.
81 Bracar. 3. c. 3.
82 Justin. Novel. 123. u. 1. Propositis eis sacrosanctis

the same import in those called the Apostolical
Canons,78 the council of Constantinople79 under
Gennadius, anno 459, the second council of Or
leans,80 Bracara,81 and many others. The imperial
laws also were very properly contrived to prevent
this abuse. For by one of Justinian's laws it was
enacted,82 that whenever a bishop was to be chosen
the electors themselves should take an oath, and
insert it into the election paper, that they did not
choose him for any gift, or promise, or friendship,
or any other cause, but only because they knew
him to be a man of the true catholic faith, and an
unblamable life, and good learning. And in an
other of his laws, where this same injunction is re
peated, it is further provided, that the party elected
shall also at the time of his ordination take an
oath, upon the holy Gospels, that he neither gave
nor promised,83 by himself or other, nor hereafter
will give to his ordainer, or to his electors, or any
other person, any thing to procure him an ordina
tion. And for any bishop to ordain another with
out observing the rule prescribed, is deposition by
the same law, both for himself and the other whom
he ordained. These were some of those ancient
rules to be observed in the examination of wen's
hves and morals, before they were consecrated to
the sacred function, or admitted to serve in any of
the chief offices of the church.

CHAPTER IV.

OF THE QUALIFICATIONS OF PERSONS TO BE OR
DAINED, RESPECTING THEIR OUTWARD STATE AXD
CONDITION IN THE WORLD.
A third inquiry was made into men's
outward state and condition in the mo soldier to be
ordained.
world. For there were some callings
and states of life, which debarred men from the
privilege of ordination, not because they were
esteemed absolutely sinful vocations, but because
the duties attending them were commonly incom
patible and inconsistent with the offices of the
clergy. Of this nature were all those callings,
which come under the general name of militia Mo-

evangeliis, periculo suarum animarum dicentes in ipsis de-
cretis, quia neque propter aliquam donationem, nee pro-
missionem, aut amicitiam, aut aliam quamlibet causam, aed
scientes eos rectae et catholicae fidei, et honestae esse vitae,
et literas nosse, hos elegerunt.
83 Novel. 1.37. c. 2. Jusjurandum autem suscipere eum
qui ordinatur, per Divinas Scripturas, quod neque per se
ipsum neque per aliam personam dedit quid, aut promisit,
neque posthac dabit, vel ordinanti ipsum, vel his qui sacra
pro eo suffragia fecerunt, vel alii cuiquam ordinationis tie
ipso faciendae nomine, &c.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

147

mana, which we cannot so properly English, the
military life, as, the service of the empire. For it
includes several offices, as well civil as military :
the Romans, as Gothofred and other learned per
sons have observed,1 calling all inferior offices by
the name of militia: so there were three sorts of it,
militia palatina, militia castrensis or armata, and
militia prcesidialis or cohortalis: the first including
the officers of the emperor's palace; the second,
the armed soldiery of the camp ; and the third, the
apparitors and officials of judges and governors of
provinces ; all which were so tied to their service,
that they could not forsake their station : and for
that reason the laws of the state forbade any of them
to be entertained as ecclesiastics, or ordained among
the clergy. Honorius' the emperor particularly
made a law to this purpose, That no one who was
originally tied to the military life, as some were
even by birth, should, either before or after they
-vere entered upon that life, take upon them any
clerical office, or think to excuse themselves from
their service under the notion of becoming ecclesias
tical persons. The canons of the church seem to
have carried the matter a httle further; for they
forbade the ordination of any who had been soldiers
after baptism, because they might perhaps have
imbrued their hands in blood. This appears from
the letters of Innocent I., who blames the Spanish
churches3 for admitting such persons into orders,
alleging the canons of the church against it. The
first council of Toledo forbids any such to be or
dained deacons, though they had never been concern
ed in shedding of blood ; because, though they had
not actually shed blood,4 yet by entering upon the
military hfe they had obhged themselves, if occa
sion had so required, to have done it. Which
seems to import, that soldiers might be allowed in
the inferior services, but were not to be admitted to
the sacred and superior orders of the church.
Another state of hfe, which debar-
Sect.2. .
Nor any slave or red men from the privilege of ordma-
freedman without r °
patron?"" °f h" ^on, was that of slaves or vassals in
the Roman empire; who, being ori
ginally tied by birth or purchase to their patron's or
master's service, could not legally be ordained, be

cause the service of the church was incompatible
with their other duties, and no man was to be
defrauded of his right under pretence of an or
dination. In this case therefore the patron was
always to be consulted before the servant was or
dained. Thus in one of those called the Apos
tolical Canons5 we find a decree, that no servants
should be admitted among the clergy without the
consent of their masters, to the grievance of the
owners, and subversion of their famihes. But if
a servant be found worthy of an ecclesiastical
promotion, as Onesimus was, and his master give
his consent, and grant him his freedom, and let
him go forth from his house, he may be ordained.
The council of Toledo6 has a canon to the same
purpose. And the council of Eliberis7 goes a little
further, and says, though a secular master, that is,
a heathen, as Albaspinceus interprets it, had made
his servant a freeman, he should not be ordained.
The reason of which is conceived to be, that such
masters gave them only a conditional freedom, and
still retained a right to exact certain services and
manual labours of them, which would' not consist
with the service of the church. The imperial laws
also8 made provision in this case, that no persons
under such obligations should be admitted to any
office of the clergy, or if they were admitted, merely
to evade their obhgations, their masters should
have power to recall them to their service, unless
they were bishops or presbyters, or had continued
thirty years in some other office of the church. By
which it appears, that the ordination of such per
sons was prohibited only upon a civil account, not
because that state of hfe was sinful, or that it was
any undervaluing or disgrace to the function to have
such persons ordained, but because the duties of
the civil and ecclesiastical state would not well con
sist together.
For the same reason, the laws for
bade the ordination of any persons, Nor any member
. of a civil company,
who were incorporated into any socie- or society of trades-
x * men, who were tied
ty for the service of the common- to the service ofthe
J commonwealth.
wealth, unless they had first obtained
the leave of the society and prince under whom
they served. This is the meaning of that law of

1 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Dera
tion. Leg. 63. Vales. Not. in Sozomen. lib. 5. c. 4. Pagi
Critic, in Baron, an. 375. n. 12.
2 Cod. Th. lib. 7. Tit. 20. de Veteranis Leg. 12. Quoniam
plurimos vel ante militiam, vel post inchoatam, nee per-
actam, latere objectu'piae religionis agnovimus, dum se
quidam vocabulo clericorum — defendunt, uulli omnino tali
excusari objectione permittimus, &c.
3 Innoc. Ep. 22. c. 4. Quantos ex militia, qui cum po-
testatibus obedierunt, severa necessario praecepta sunt exe-
cuti. Ibid. c. 6. Ne quispiam qui post baptismum milita-
verit, ad ordinem debeat clericatus admitti. Vid. Ep. 2. ad
Victricium Rothomagens. c. 2.
Cone. Tolet. 1. c. 8. Si quis post baptismum militaverit,
et chlamydera sumpserit, aut cingulum ad necandos fideles,
L 2

etiamsi graviora non admiserit, si ad clerum admissus fuerit
diaconii non accipiat dignitatem.
5 Canon. Apost. c. 82.
8 Cone. Tolet. 1. c. 10. Clericos, si quidem obligati sint vel
pro eequatione, vel de genere alicujus domus, non ordinandos,
nisi probatse vitae fuerint, et patroni consensus accesserit.
7 Cone. Eliber. u. 80. Prohibendum est, ut liberti, quo
rum patroni in sacculo fuerint, ad clerum provehantur.
8 Valent. 3. Novel. 12. ad calcem Cod. Th. Nullus ori-
ginarius, inquilinus, servus, vel colonus ad clericale munus
accedat  ut vinculum debitae conditionis evadat.  Ori-
ginarii sane vel servi, qui jugum natalium declinantes, ad
ecclesiasticum se ordinem transtulerunt, exceptis episcopis
et presbyteris, ad dominorum jura recedant, si non in
eodem officio annum tricesimum compleverunt.

14S

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

Justinian," which forbids any of those called TuZtui-
rat, or cohortales, that is, the officers or apparitors of
judges, to be ordained, unless they had first spent
fifteen years in a monastic life. And the first coun
cil of Orleans 10 requires expressly either the com
mand of the prince, or the consent of the judge,
before any such secular officer be ordained. By the
laws of Theodosius junior,1' and Valentinian III.,12
all corporation men are forbidden to be ordained ;
and if any such were ordained among the inferior
clergy, they were to be reclaimed by their respective
companies ; if among the superior, bishops, presby
ters, or deacons, they must provide a proper substi
tute, qualified with their estate to serve in the com
pany from whence they were taken. The reader,
that is curious in this matter, may find several other
laws in the Theodosian Code,13 made by the elder
Valentinian and Theodosius the Great, with respect
to particular civil societies so incorporated for the
use of the public, no member of which might be
ordained, but either they must quit their estates,
or be liable to be recalled to the service, which they
had unwarrantably forsaken.
For reasons of the same nature, the
Noranyorihe canons were precise in forbidding the
atriales, or decuri- .... „ - ,
on. s, or the Eoman ordination of any of those who are
government. •*
commonly known by the name of
curiales, or decuriones, in the Roman government ;
that is, such as were members of the curia, the
court, or common council of every city. These were
men who, by virtue of then- estates, were tied to
bear the offices of their country ; so that out of their
body were chosen all civil officers, the magistrates
of every city, the collectors of the pubhc revenue,
the overseers of all public works, the pontifices or
jia-nens, who exhibited the pubhc games and shows
to the people, with abundance of others, whose
offices are specified by Gothofred,1'1 to the number
of twenty-two, which I need not here recite. These
were always men of estates, whose substance amount
ed to the value of three hundred solids ; which is
the sum that is specified by Theodosius junior,15 as
qualifying a man to be a member of the curia ; and

3 Justin. Novel. 123. u. 15. Sed neque cohortales, neque
decuriones clerici fiunto.  Dempto si monachicam aliquis
ex ipsis vitam non minus quindecim annis transegerit.
,0 Cone. Aurel. 1. u. 4. Nullus saecularium ad clericatus
officium praesumatur, nisi aut cum regis jussione, aut cum
judicis voluntate.
" Theodos. Novel. 26. de Corporatis Urbis Romae, ad
calcem Cod. Th.
12 Valentin. Novel. 12. ibid.
13 Cod. Th. lib. 14. Tit. 4. de Suariis Leg. 8. Eos qui
ad clericatus se privilegia contulerunt, aut agnoscere opor-
tet propriam functionem, aut ei corpori, quod declinant,
proprii patrimonii facere cessionem. Vid. ibid. 1. 14. Tit!
3. de Pistoribus Leg. 11. It. lib. 8. Tit. 5. de Cursu Pub
lico Lpg. 46.
14 Gothofred. Paratitlon. Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de De-
curiunibus, t. 4. p. 339.

both they and their estates were so tied to civil
offices, that no member of that body was to be ad
mitted into any ecclesiastical office, till he had first
discharged all the offices of his country, or else pro
vided a proper substitute, one of his relations quali
fied with his estate to bear offices in his room:
otherwise the person so ordained was liable, by the
laws of the empire, (of which I give a more particu
lar account hereafter16 in the next book,) to be call
ed back by the curia from an ecclesiastical to a
secular life again. "Which was such an inconveni
ence to the church, that she herself made laws to
prohibit the ordination of any of these curiales, to
avoid the trouble and molestation, which was com
monly the consequent of their ordination. St. Am
brose17 assures us, that sometimes presbyters and
deacons, who were thus ordained out of the curiales,
were fetched back to serve in curial offices, after
they had been thirty years and more in the service
of the church. And therefore, to prevent this ca
lamity, the council of Illyricum, mentioned by The
odoret,18 made a decree, that presbyters and deacons
should always be chosen out of the inferior clergy,
and not out of these curiales, or any other officers of
the civil government. Innocent, bishop of Rome,
frequently refers to this rule of the church19 in his
epistles, where he gives two reasons against their
ordination : first, that they were often recalled by
the curia to serve in civil offices, which brought
some tribulation upon the church. Secondly, be
cause many of them had served in the office of
fiamens20 after baptism, and w7ere crowned as the
heathen high priests were used to be, while they
exhibited the pubhc games and shows to the people,
Which, though it was indulged by the civil law in
Christian magistrates, yet the church reckoned it a
crime, for which men were sometimes obliged to do
pubhc penance, as appears from the canons31 ofthe
council of Eliberis : and consequently such a crime,
as made men irregular and incapable of ordination.
So that upon both accounts, these curiales were to
be excluded from the orders of the church. And
though this rule by the importunity of men was

15 Theod. Novel. 38. ad'calcem Cod. Th.
16 See Book V. chap. 3. sect. 15.
17 Ambr, Ep. 29. Per triginta et innumeros annos pres
byteri quidam gradu fundi, vel ministri ecclesias retrahun-
tur a muuere sacro, et curiae deputantur.
18 Ap. Theodor. lib. 4. c. 9. 'ek tov UpaTtKov Tdyparos,
Kai pi} iirb tov (sovXEvTrjpiov Kal crTpaTiwTiKr}s dpxfc
19 Innoc. Ep. 4. c. 3. De curialibus manifesta ratio est,
quoniam etsi inveniantur hujusmodi viri qui debeant clerici
fieri, tamen quoniam saepius ad curiam repetuntur, caven-
dum ab his est propter tribulatiunem, quie saepe de his ec
clesiae provenit.
20 Innoc. Ep. 23. c.6. Neque de curialibus aliquem ad
eeclesiasticum ordinem venire posse, qui post baptismum
vel coronati fuerint, vel sacerdotium, quod dicitur, sustirni-
erint, et editiones publicas celebraverint, &c.
21 Cone. Etiber. u 3.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

149

sometimes transgressed, yet the laws both of church
and state always stood in force against such ordin
ations ; and sometimes the ordainers themselves
were punished with ecclesiastical censures. Of
which there is a famous instance related by Sozo
men,22 who says the council of Constantinople, anno
360, deposed Neonas from his bishopric for ordain
ing some of these curiales bishops. Sozomen indeed
calls them jroXtrEutV""" ; but that is but another
name for curiales, whom the Greeks otherwise term
{SovXtvrai, counsellors ; and the Latins, municipes,
burghers, or corporation men ; and minor senatus,23
the httle senate of every city, in opposition to the
great senate of Constantinople and Rome. These
persons, whatever denomination they went by, were
so entirely devoted to the service of the common
wealth, that till they had some way or other dis
charged that duty, they might not (as appears) be
admitted to serve in any office of the church.
SecL 6 Indeed it was a general rule in this
or^aCifflhi. matter, as we learn from one of the
offlce expired. counciis24 0f Carthage, that no one
was to be ordained, who was bound to any secular
service. And for that reason it was decreed by the
same council, at least for the churches of Africa,
that no agent or factor in other men's business, nor
any guardian of orphans, should be ordained, till his
office and administration was perfectly expired;
because the ordination of such25 would otherwise
turn to the reproach and defamation of the church.
But if I mistake not, this prohibition did not extend
to the inferior orders, but only to those whose office
was to serve at the altar.
In some churches there seems also
pleaders at law to have been an absolute prohibition
denied ordination x
charchRomim alw TV^e agaillSi: ordaining advocates
or pleaders at law, not only whilst
they continued in their profession, but for ever
after. This seems to have been the custom of the
Roman and Spanish churches. For Innocent,
bishop of Rome, in a letter26 to the council of
Toledo, complains of an abuse then crept into the
Spanish church, which was, that many who were
exercised in pleading at the bar, were called to the
priesthood. To correct which abuse, as he deemed
it, he proposed this rule to them to be observed,
that no one who had pleaded causes after baptism,27
should be admitted to any order of the clergy.
What particular reasons the church of Rome might

then have for this prohibition, I cannot say ; but it
does not appear, that this was the general rule of
the whole catholic church. For the council of
Sardica28 allows a lawyer even to be ordained bi
shop, if he first went regularly through the offices
of reader, deacon, and presbyter. "Which shows,
that the custom, as to this particular, was not one
and the same in all churches.
The reader may find several other Smt 7
cautions given by Gennadius,29 against „.£" 'uff-'S^,
ordaining any who had been actors or *"• i"'iU1°cl»"*"-'
stage-players ; or energumens, during the time of
their being possessed ; or such as had married con
cubines, that is, wives without formality of law ; or
that had married harlots, or wives divorced from a
former husband. But I need not insist upon these,
since the very naming them shows all such persons
to have been in such a state of life, as might reason
ably be accounted a just impediment of ordination.
It will be more material to inquire, what the an
cients meant by digamy, which after the apostle they
always reckoned an objection against a man's or
dination ? And whether any vow of perpetual celi
bacy was exacted of the ancient clergy, when they
were admitted to the orders of the church ? Which
because they are questions that come properly
under this head, it will not be amiss to resolve them
distinctly, but briefly, in the following chapter.

CHAPTER V.
OF THE STATE OF DIGAMY AND CELIBACY IN PAR
TICULAR : AND OF THE LAWS OF THE CHURCH
ABOUT THESE, IN REFERENCE TO THE ANCIENT
CLERGY.
As to what concerns digamy, it was gecL ,
a primitive apostolical rule, that a orSned^the^ote
bishop or a deacon should be one who °' the apostte'
was the husband of one wife only : on which rule
all the laws against digamy in the primitive church
were founded. But then we are to observe, that
the ancients were not exactly agreed about the sense
of that apostolical rule ; and that occasioned differ
ent notions and different practices among them in
reference to the ordination of digamists.

22 Sozom. lib. 4. c. 24.
28 Majorian. Novel. 1. ad calcSm Cod. Theod. Curiales
servos esse reipublicae ac viscera civitatum nullus ignorat,
quorum ccetum recte appellavit antiquitas minorem senatum.
24 Cone. Carth. 1. c. 9. Obnoxii alienis negotiis non
ordinentur. 25 Ibid. c. 8. Procuratores et actofes, etiam tutores pu-
pillorum— si ante libertatem negotiorum vel officiorum, ab
aliquosineconsideratione fuerint ordinati, ecclesia in famatur.
23 Innoc. Ep. 23. ad Concil. Tolet. c. 2. Quantos ex eis,

qui post acceptam baptismi gratiam, in forensi exercitatione
versati sunt, et obtinendi pertinaciam susceperunt, accitos
ad sacerdotium esse comperimus ?
27 Ibid. c. 4. Ne quispiam ad ordinem debeat clericatus
admitti, qui causas post acceptum baptismum egerint.
28 Cone. Sardic. u. 10. idv Tts axoXaTiKOS died xtjs dyo-
pas di[ioXTO iiritsKoiroi yivEaSai, pr) irporEpov KaS'iTarrdai,
iiv pr] Kal dvayvurzov Kal StaKovov Kal irpEa-fivTEpov vtty}-
pEaiav iKTEXEerrj.
29 Gennad. de Eccles. Dogm. c. 73.

150

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV

One very common and prevailing
Thmdifferent notion was, that all persons were to
opinions among the • ± "U
ancientsahoutdiga- >,e refused orders, as digamists, who
my. Fust, that ail °
fecfos0edorierst0a»e were twice married after baptism,
t^cTmarrMato though legally and successively to
haptism. twQ wiveg one after another. por
though they did not condemn second marriages, as
sinful and unlawful, with the Novatians and Mon
tanists ; yet, upon presumption that the apostle had
forbidden persons twice married to be ordained bi
shops, they repelled such from the superior orders
of the church. That this was the practice of some
churches in the time of Origen, may appear from
what he says in his Comments upon St. Luke, that
not only1 fornication, but marriages excluded men
from the dignities of the church : for no digamist
could be either bishop, or presbyter, or deacon, or
deaconess in the church. Tertullian, when he be
came a Montanist, laid hold of this argument, and
urged it to decry second marriages in all persons ;
pleading2 that a layman could not in decency desire
licence of the ecclesiastics to be married a second
time, seeing the ecclesiastics themselves, bishops,
presbyters, and deacons, were but once married.
Which he repeats frequently3 in several parts of his
writings. And it cannot be denied but that many
other ancient writers, St. Ambrose,4 St. Jerom,
Gennadius,8 Epiphanius,7 and the councils of Agde8
and Carthage,9 put the same sense upon the words
of the apostle. Only Epiphanius puts a distinction
between the superior and inferior orders, making
the rule in this sense obligatory to the former, but
not to the latter.
Sect Some there are again, who gave
uheruie™toeaii pit the rule a stricter exposition, making
it a prohibition not only of ordaining
persons twice married after baptism,
but also such as were twice married before it, or
once before and once after ; as many Gentiles and
catechumens happened to be in those times, when
baptism was administered to adult persons. St.
Ambrose 10 was of opinion, that even these were to
be excluded from ordination : and so it was decreed
by Innocent, bishop of Rome," and the council of
Valencia12 in France. But this opinion was gener-

sons twice married,
whether before or
after baptism.

ally rejected by others, as furthest from the sense
of the apostle.
The most probable opinion is that
of those ancient writers, who interpret 3. The most pro-
the apostle's rule as a prohibition of those, who thought
1 • • 1 -j. x. X, 3 the apooUe hy di?
ordaining polygamists, or such as had pmista meant po-
married many wives at the same time ; "v™*"isd after
and such as had causelessly put away
their wives, and married others after divorcing of
the former ; which were then very common prac
tices both among Jews and Gentiles, but scandal
ous in themselves, and such as the apostles would
have to be accounted just impediments of ordina
tion. This is the sense which Chrysostom" and
Theodoret14 propose and defend, as most agreeable
to the mind of the apostle. And it is certain, that
second marriages in any other sense were not al
ways an insuperable objection against men's ordin
ation in the Christian church. For Tertullian
owns l0 that there were bishops among the catholics
who had been twice married ; though, in his style,
that was an affront to the apostle. And it appears
from the letters of Siricius,16 and Innocent,17 that
the bishops of Spain and Greece made no scruple
to ordain such generally among the clergy; for
they take upon them to reprove them for it. Theo
doret, agreeably to his own notion, ordained one
Irenseus bishop, who was twice married : and when
some objected against the legality ofthe ordination
upon that account, he defended it by the common
practice of other churches. Herein, says he,18 I
followed the example of my predecessors. Alex
ander, bishop of the apostolical see of Antioch, with
Acacius of Beraea, ordained Diogenes, a digamist;
and Praylius ordained Domninus of Caesarea, a di
gamist likewise. Proclus, bishop of Constantinople,
received and approved the ordination of many such ;
and so do the bishops of Pontus and Palestine,
among whom no controversy is made about it.
From hence it appears, that the practice of the
church varied in this matter; and that therefore
Bellarmine and other Romanists very much abuse
their readers, when they pretend that the ordin
ation of digamists, meaning persons twice law- '
fully married, is both against the rule of the apos-

1 Orig. Horn. 17. in Luc. p. 228. Ab ecclesiasticis dig-
nitatibus non solum fornicatio, sed et nuptiae repellunt :
neque enim episcopus, nee presbyter, nee diaconus, nee
vidua, possunt esse digami.
2 Tertul. de Monogam. u. 11. Qualis es id matrimonium
postulans, quod eis, a quibus postulas, non licet habere ? ab
episcopo monogamo, a presbyteris et diaconis ejusdem sa-
cramenti, &c.
3 Vid. Tertul. de Poenitent. c. 9. De Exhort. Castitat. e.
7. Ad Uxor. lib. 1. c. 7.
4 Ambros. de Offic. lib. 1. c. 50.
5 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian. Ep. 11. ad Geront. Ep.
83. ad Ocean.
0 Gennad. de Eccles. Dogm. c. 72.

7 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. 11. 21.
8 Cone. Agathen. u. 1.
9 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 69.
10 Ambros. Ep. 82. ad Vercellenses.
11 Innoc. Ep. 2. c. 6. Ep. 22. <;. 2. Ep. 24. c. 6.
12 Cone. Valentin, c. 1.
13 Chrysost. Horn. 10. in 1 Tim. iii. 2. Horn. 2. in
Tit. i. 6.
14 Theod. Com. in 1 Tim. iii. 2.
15 Tertul. de Monogam. c. 12. Quot enim et digami pre
sident apud vos, insultantes utique apostolo ?
,s Siric. Ep. 1. ad Himer. Tarracon. c. 8.
17 Innoc. Ep. 22. ad Episc. Maced. c. 1.
18 Theod. Ep. 110. ad Domnum.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

151

tie, and the universal consent and practice of the
church. They still more abuse their readers,
Noiowor celibacy in pretending that a vow of perpetual
reqoiredofthecler- r ° , .
p as a condhionfof cei1DaCy) 0r abstinence from conjugal
the three first ages. gociety, was required of the clergy, as
a condition of their ordination, even from the apos
tolical ages. For the contrary is very evident from
innumerable examples of bishops and presbyters,
who lived in a state of matrimony without any pre
judice to their ordination or function. It is gener
ally agreed by ancient writers, that most of the
apostles were married. Some say, all of them ex
cept19 St. Paul and St. John : others say, St. Paul
was married also, because he writes to his yoke
fellow, whom they interpret his wife, Phil. iv. 3.
This was the opinion of Clemens Alexandrinus,20
wherein he seems to be followed by Eusebius,2' and
Origen,22 and the author of the interpolated Epistle B
to the Church of Philadelphia, under the name of
Ignatius ; whom some modern Romanists, mistak
ing him for the true Ignatius, have most disingenu
ously mangled, by erasing the name of Paul out of
the text; which foul dealing Bishop Usher24 has
exposed, and Cotelerius25 does in effect confess it,
when he owns that the author himself wrote it, and
that he therein followed the authority of Clemens,
Origen, and Eusebius. But passing by this about
St. Paul, (which is a matter of dispute among
learned men, the major part inclining to think that
he always lived a single life,) it cannot be denied
that others of the apostles were married : and in the
next ages after them we have accounts of married
bishops, presbyters, and deacons, without any re
proof or mark of dishonour set upon them. As to
instance in a few, Valens, presbyter of Philippi, men
tioned by Polycarp ;2S Chaeremon, bishop of Nilus,
an exceeding old man, who fled with his wife to
Mount Arabion in time of persecution, where they
both perished together, as Eusebius informs us.27
Novatus was a married presbyter of Carthage, as
we learn from Cyprian's epistles.28 Cyprian himself
was also a married man, as Mr. Pagi29 confesses.
And so was Caecilius,30 the presbyter that converted
him. As also Numidicus, another presbyter of

Carthage, of whom Cyprian31 tells us this remark
able story, That in the Decian persecution he saw
his own wife with many other martyrs burned by
his side ; whilst he himself lying half burnt, and
covered with stones, and left for dead, was found
expiring by his own daughter, who drew him out
of the rubbish, and brought him to life again. Eu
sebius assures us, that Phileas,82 bishop of Thmuis,
and Philoromus, had both wife and children : for
they were urged with that argument by the heathen
magistrate to deny their rehgion in the Diocletian
persecution ; but they generously contemned his ar
gument, and gave preference to the laws of Christ.
Epiphanius58 says, Marcion the heretic was the son
of a bishop, and that he was excommunicated by
his own father for his lewdness. Domnus also, bi
shop of Antioch,34 is said to be son to Demetrian, who
was bishop of the same place before him. It were
easy to add abundance more such instances ; but
these are sufficient to show, that men of all states
were admitted to be bishops and presbyters in the
primitive ages of the church.
The most learned advocates of the
Roman communion have never found The vanity if the
contrary pretences.
any other reply to all this, save only
a groundless pretence of their own imagination,
that all married persons when they came to be or
dained, promised to live separate from their wives
by consent, which answered the vow of celibacy in
other persons. This is all that Pagi35 or Schel
strate30 have to say in the case, after all the writers
that have gone before them : which is said not only
without proof, but against the clearest evidences of
ancient history, which manifestly prove the con
trary. For Novatus, presbyter of Carthage, whose
case Pagi had under consideration, was certainly
allowed to cohabit with his wife after ordination :
as appears from the charge that Cyprian brings
against him, that he had struck and abused his
wife,37 and thereby caused her to miscarry ; for
which crime he had certainly been thrust out not
only from the presbytery, but the church also, had
not the persecution coming on so suddenly pre
vented his trial and condemnation. Cyprian does
not accuse him for cohabiting with his wife, or be-

13 Ambros. ad Hilar, in 2 Cor. xi. Omnes apostoli, ex
cepts Johanne et Paulo, uxores habuerunt. Vid. Epiphan.
Haer. 78. Antidicomarianit. a. 10. Cotelerius cites Euse
bius, Basil, and some others for the same opinion. Not. in
Ignat. Ep. ad Philadelph. Interpolat. n. 4.
M Clem. Alex. Strom. 3. p. 448.
21 Euseb. lib. 3. c. 30.
22 Orig. Com. in Rom. i. p. 459. Paulus ergo (sicut qui-
dam tradunt) cum uxore vocatus est : de qua dicit, ad Phi-
lippenses scribens : Rogo te etiam germana compar, &c.
23 Pseudo-Ignat. Ep. ad Philadelph. n. 4.
24 Usser. Dissert, in Ignat. c. 17.
25 Coteler. Not. in loc.
23 Polycarp. Ep. ad Philip, n. 11.

2' Euseb. lib. 6. c. 42.
28 Cypr. Ep. 49. al. 52. ad Cornel.
29 Pagi. Crit. in Baron, ad an. 248. n. 4.
30 Pontius Vit. Cyprian.
81 Cypr. Ep. 35. al. 40. Numidicus presbyter uxorem ad-
haerentem lateri suo, concrematam simul cum caeteris, vel
conservatam magis dixerim, laetus aspexit, &c.
32 Euseb. lib. 8. t. 9. 33 Epiphan. Hair. 42.
34 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 30.
35 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 248. n. 6.
36 Schelstrat. Eccles. Afric. Dissert. 3. c. 4. ap. Pagi, ibid.
87 Cypr. Ep. 52. al. 49. p. 97. Uterus uxoris calce per-
cussus, et abortione properante in parricidium partus ex-
pressus, &c.

1.32

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

getting children after ordination ; but for murder
ing his children which he had begotten; which
was indeed a crime that made him liable both to
deposition and excommunication : but the other
was no crime at all by any law then in force in the
African, or in the universal church. There seems
indeed in some places to have been a little ten
dency towards introducing such a law by one or
two zealous spirits ; but the motion was no sooner
made, but it was quashed immediately by the pru
dence and authority of wiser men. Thus Eusebius
observes, that Pinytus, bishop of Gnossus in Crete,
was for laying the iaw of cehbacy upon his bre
thren : but Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, wrote to
him, that he should consider the weakness of men,
and not impose38 that heavy burden upon them.
And thus matters continued for three centuries,
without any law that we read of, requiring celibacy
of the clergy at the time of their ordination.
sect, 7. In tne council of Nice, anno 325,
ti,Iireifof,f| bfthe the motion was again renewed, that
Nicene council. & j^ ^^ pasg tQ oblige the clergy
to abstain from all conjugal society with their wives,
which they had married before their ordination.
But the proposal was no sooner made, but Paphnu
tius, a famous Egyptian bishop, and one himself
never married, vigorously declaimed against it;
saying, So heavy a burden was not to be laid upon
the clergy ; that the marriage bed was honourable,
and that they should not by too great severity
bring detriment on the church ; for all men could
not bear so severe an exercise, and the chastity of
the wives so separated would be endangered also.
Conjugal society, he said, was chastity ; and it
was enough, that such of the clergy as were not
married before their ordination, should continue
unmarried, according to the ancient tradition of the
church ; but it was not proper to separate any one
from his wife, which he had married whilst he was
a layman. This said, the whole council agreed to
stifle the motion that had been made, and left every
man to his liberty as before. So Socrates39 and
Sozomen tell the story. To which all that Vale
sius40 after Bellarmine has to say, is, that he sus
pects the truth of the thing, and desires leave to
dissent from his historians. Which is but a poor
evasion, in the judgment of Du Pin himself, who
thus41 reflects upon them for it : Some question the
truth of this story, says he, but I believe they do it
for fear the story might prejudice the present dis

cipline, rather than from any solid proof they have
for it. But they should consider, that this canon is
purely a matter of disciphne, and that the disci
pline of the church may change according to the
times, and that it is not necessary for the defence
of it, to prove that it was always uniform in all
places. So that in the judgment of that learned
Romanist there is no question to be made, but that
the council of Nice decreed in favour of the mar
ried clergy, as the historians relate it did ; and that
then the practice was different from that of the
present church of Rome, which others are so un
willing to have the world believe.
It is as evident from other councils
of the same age, that the married And other councils
,, , . . , of that age.
clergy were allowed to continue in the
service of the church, and no vow of abstinence
required of them at their ordination. Socrates ob
serves, that the council of Gangra anathematized
Eustathius the heretic, because he taught men to
separate42 from such presbyters as retained their
wives, which they married while they were laymen,
saying, their communion and oblations were abo
minable. The decree is still extant among the
canons of that council,43 and runs in these words :
If any one separate from a married presbyter, as if
it were unlawful to participate of the eucharist
when such a one ministers, let him be anathema.
The council of Ancyra gives leave to deacons to
marry after ordination ; if they protested,44 at their
ordination, that they could not continue in an un
married state, they might marry, and yet continue
in their office, having, in that case, the bishop's
licence and permission to do it. And though the
council of Neocassarea in one canon forbids un
married presbyters to marry after ordination;45 yet
such as were married before ordination, are aUowed
by another canon to continue without any cen
sure,46 being only obhged to separate from their
wives in case of fornication. The council of Eli
beris,17 indeed, and some others in this age, began
to be a httle more rigorous toward the married
clergy -. but it does not appear that then- laws were
of any great force. For Socrates48 says, even in
his time, in the Eastern churches, many eminent
bishops begat children of their lawful wives ; and
such as abstained, did it not by obligation of any
law, but their own voluntary choice. Only in
Thessaly, Macedonia, and Hellas, the clergy were
obhged to abstain under pain of ecclesiastical cen-

38 Dionys. Ep. ad Pinytum, ap. Euseb. lib. 4. c. 23. Mij
(Supii epopTiov to irepl dyvEias iiravayKEi -rots dSEXcpols
iirtTi^EVal. 89 Socrat. lib. 1. c. 11. Sozom. lib. I.e. 23.
40 Vales. Not. in Socrat. lib. 1. u. 11.
41 Du Pin, Bibliotheque, vol. 2. p. 253. Edit. Anglic.
42 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 43. TIpEcrfivTEpov yvvaiKa exovtos,
ii" vopm XaiKos &v hyayzTO Tr)v EvXoyiav Kal xi'/i/ koivoo-
viav ws uuo-os iKKX'lVElV iKEXEVE.

43 Cone. Grangr. c. 4. Et tis itaKpivoiro irapa irpis-
(3vTEpov yEyapriKOTos, cos ixrj xprivat XzlTOvpyrto-aVTOi av-
tov irpocrcpopds pETaXappdvEiv, dvdSspa eo-tw.
44 Cone. Ancyr. c. 10. El ipapTvpavTo Kal EeptKrau
XpyPai yapijaai, pi} Svvdpevoi outgjs pivEtv, ovtoi pEra
TavTa yapntravTES Eo-Ttoaav iv Tr) virr}pEo-'ta, &c.
45 Cone. Neocaes. c. 1.
46 Ibid. c. 8. 47 Cone. Elib. c. 33. Cone. Arelat. 2. c. 2-
49 Socrat. lib. 5. c. 22.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

153

sure, which, he says, was occasioned by Bishop
Heliodore's writing his book called his Ethiopics.
So that as yet there was no universal decree against
married bishops in the Greek church, much less
against presbyters and deacons. But the council
of Trullo, anno 692, made a difference between bi
shops and presbyters ; allowing presbyters, deacons,
and all the inferior orders, to cohabit with their
wives after ordination;49 and giving the Roman
church a smart rebuke for the contrary prohibition ;
but yet laying an injunction upon bishops to hve
separate from their wives,50 and appointing the
wives to betake themselves to a monastic life,51 or
become deaconesses in the church. And so the
matter was altered in the Greek chm-ch, as to bi
shops, but not any others. In the Latin church
also the alteration was made but by slow steps in
many places. For in Africa even bishops them
selves cohabited with their wives at the time of the
council of Trullo, as appears from one of the fore-
mentioned canons of that council.52 But it is be
yond my design to carry this inquiry any further ;
what has been already said, being sufficient to show,
that the married clergy were allowed to officiate in
the first and primitive ages ; and that celibacy in
those times was no necessary condition of their
ordination, as is falsely pretended by the polemical
writers of the present church of Rome. I have
now gone through the several qualifications of the
ancient clergy, concerning which inquiry was made
before their ordination. I come now, in the next
place, to consider the solemnity of the thing itself,
together with the laws and customs which were
generally observed at the time of ordination.

CHAPTER VI.

OP THE ORDINATIONS OF THE PRIMITIVE CLERGY,
AND THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS GENERALLY OB
SERVED THEREIN.
sect. 1. When the election of a person duly
chSchTbrread'o qualified according to the foremen-
b4op'ordaJnedthe tioned rules was made, then it was
the bishop's office, or the metropoli
tan's, if the party elect was himself a bishop, to
ordain him. But before they proceeded to ordina

tion, there were some other laws and rules to be
observed. For not to mention here again the oath
against simony, and the subscriptions, which, I
have showed before,1 were anciently required of per
sons to be ordained ; I must not forget to note, that
in the African church a rule was made in the third
council of Carthage,2 and thence transferred into
the African Code,3 that before any bishop, or other
clergyman, was ordained, the ordainers should cause
the canons of the church to be read in his hearing ;
that they might not have cause to repent after
ward, that they had transgressed any of them.
This rule was made at the instance and request of
St. Austin, as Possidius notes in his Life,4 who
says, that because he was ordained bishop of Hippo
while Valerius was alive, which was contrary to
the rule of the council of Nice, which he was
ignorant of at the time of his ordination, he there
fore prevailed with the African fathers to make a
decree, that the canons of the church should be
read at every man's ordination. This rule implied
a tacit promise, that the party ordained would ob
serve the canons that were read to him : but for
greater security, it was afterward improved into an
explicit promise by a law of Justinian,5 which re
quires every clerk after the reading of the canons
to profess, that as far as it was possible for man to
do, he would fulfil what was contained in them.
Whence, no doubt, came those later forms of pro
fessing obedience to the canons of the seven ge
neral councils in the Greek church, and the oath
to St. Peter taken by the bishops of Rome in the
Latin church, that they would observe the decrees
of the eight general councils. The first of which
forms may be seen at length in Habertus,3 and the
other in Baronius,7 and the book called Liber Di-
urnus, by the reader that is curious to consult them.
Secondly,Anotherruletobeobserved Sect 2
in this case was, that every man should orSntTlwoXe-
be fixed to some church at his ordina- x»««""--
tion, and not be left at liberty to minister wherever
he would, because of several inconveniences that
attended that practice. This rule concerned bishops
as well as the inferior clergy ; for the nullatenenses
of later ages, as Panormitan calls titular and Uto
pian bishops, were rarely known in the primitive
church. For though every bishop was in some
sense ordained bishop of the catholic church, as I
have showed before, yet, for order's sake, he was
always confined to a certain district in the ordinary

49 Cone. Trull, c. 13. » Ibid. c. 12.
51 Ibid. c. 48. 52 rbit]_ ^ 12.
1 See chap. 3. sect. 2 and 14.
Cone. Carth. 3. v. 3. Placuit, ut ordinandis episcopis
vel clericis prius ab ordinatoribus suis decreta conciliorum
auribus eorum inculcentur; ne se aliquid contra statuta
concilii fecisse pceniteat.
8 Cod. Eccles. Afr. c. 18.
Possid. Vit. Aug. t. 8. Quod in seipso fieri non debuisse,

ut vivo suo episcopo ordinaretur, postea et dixit et scripsit,
propter concilii universalis vetitum, quod jam ordinatus
didicit: nee quod sibi factum esse doluit, aliis fieri voluit.
Unde etiam sategit, ut conciliis constitueretur episcoporum,
ab ordinatoribus deberi ordinandis, vel ordinatis, omnium
statuta sacerdotum in notitiam esse deferenda.
5 Justin. Novel. 6. c. 1. n. 8.
8 Habert. Archieratic. p. 496.
' Baron, an. 869. t. 10. p. 433.

154

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV

exercise of his power. And so presbyters and all
other inferior clergy were confined to the diocese of
their own bishop, and might not be ordained unless
they had some place wherein to exercise their
function. This was the ancient custom of the
church, which the council of Chalcedon confirmed
by a canon, that no presbyter, or deacon, or any other
ecclesiastic, should be ordained8 at large, but be as
signed either to the city church, or some chm-ch or
oratory in the country, or a monastery ; otherwise his
ordination to be null and void. This the Latins
called, ordinatio localis, and the persons so ordained,
locales, from their being fixed to a certain place.
As in the council of Valentia9 in Spain we find a
canon, that obliges every priest before his ordination
to give a promise, that he will be localis ,- to the in
tent that no one should be permitted to transgress
the rules and discipline of the church with impuni
ty ; which they might easily do, if they were allowed
to rove about from one place to another. This, in
the style of Leo, bishop of Rome, is, ordination10
founded upon a place, or, as we would say now, a'
title ; without wldeh, he says, the ordination wras
not to be looked upon as authentic. But it must
be observed, that a title then did not always signify
a parochial ehurch, or distinct cure ; for this was a.
rule before dioceses were divided into parishes : but
the confinement laid upon men at their ordination
was, that they should be fixed to their own bishop's
diocese, and officiate in the place where he ap
pointed them. There were indeed some few ex-
Sect. 3. .
Exceptions to this ceptions to this rule, but very rare,
rule very rare. A J '
and upon extraordinary occasions.
Paulinus and St. Jerom seem to have had the
privilege granted them of being ordained without
affixing to any church. Paulinus says ¦' expressly
of himself, that he was ordained presbyter at Barce
lona with this condition, that he should not be con
fined to that chm-ch, but remain » priest at large.
And St. Jerom gives the same account12 of his own
ordination at Antioch, that he was consecrated
presbyter, with licence to continue a monk, and re
turn to his monastery again. Sozomen13 relates
the hke of Barses and Eulogius, two monks of

3 Cone. Chalced. c. 6. p-nSha d-iroXEXvpiveos x*lporovEi-
oSal  ei pi} ISlKais iv E/ocXtjo-toc ttoXecos, % Kiiipr}s, f) pap-
TVpi<J0 f) pOVatTTrjpiu) ETTlK1}pVTT0lT0.
9 Cone. Valentin, c. 6. Nee ullum sacerdotem quispiam
ordinet, qui localem se futurum primitus non spoponderit :
ut per hoc nullus a regula vel disciplina ecclesiae deviare
permittatur impune.
10 Leo, Ep. 92. ad Rustic, c. 1. Vana est habenda or
dinatio, quae nee loco fundata est, nee auctoritate mu-
nita. 11 Paulin. Ep. 6. ad. Sever, p. 101. Ea conditione in
Barcinonensi ecclesia consecrari adductus sum, ut ipsi ec
clesiae non alligarer; in sacerdotium tantum Domini, non in
locum ecclesiae dedicatus.
12 Hieron. Ep. 61. ad. Pammach. t. 2. p. 181.

Edessa, that they were both ordained bishops, not
of any city, but only honorary bishops within their
own monasteries, out of respect to their eminent
virtues. And it was such a sort of ordination that,
Theodoret14 says, Flavian, bishop of Antioch, gave
to Macedonius, the famous Syrian anchoret, whom
he drew from his cell in the desert, only to ordain
him presbyter, and so let him return to the desert
again. These are all the instances of this kind
which I remember in ancient history. It was not
as yet the custom to ordain bishops partibus infi-
delium, that never meant to see their bishoprics.
Though after ages despised this rule, as Zonaras"
complains of the Greek church, and Habertus16 can
not but lament it in the Latin; yet the ancient
church was more punctual in observing the laws,
scarce ever ordaining either bishop or inferior clerk
without fixing them to a certain diocese, from which,
without the consent of their superiors, they were
not to remove to any other.
Thirdly, And from hence arose a
third rule about ordinations, That no No Mahop'to or-
... -, . -, -,. -,.,., aain another man's
bishop should ordain, or admit into cier*. without his
his church, any clerk belonging to
another church, without the consent of the bishop
to whom he formerly belonged. The councils17 are
very peremptory in this decree; particularly the
great council of Nice,18 and that of Sardica,19 and
the second of Aries,20 declare all such ordinations
null and void. The first council of Cartnage21 ex
tends the prohibition even to laymen belonging to
another diocese : for it decrees, that as no clerk
shall be received by another bishop without the
letters dimissory of his own bishop; so neither
shall any bishop take a layman out of another peo
ple, and ordain him, without the consent of that
bishop out of whose people he is taken. The rea
son of which laws was, that every bishop was sup
posed to have a peculiar right in all the clergy and
people of his own diocese; and it was very con
ducive to the peace and good order of the church
to have such rules maintained and observed. Only
in the African church the bishop of Carthage was
allowed a privilege in this case, as he was exarch
or primate of all the African provinces. For by

13 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 34.
14 Theod. Histor. Relig. c. 13. t. 3.
15 Zonar. Not. in Cone. Chalced. c. 6.
16 Habert. Archieratic. p. 351.
17 Vid. Cone. Carthag. 3. e, 21. Cone. Chalced. c. 20.
Arausican. 1. c. 8, 9.
Cone. Nic. c. 16. ct/cujoos eotLo ?; x£tP0Toy^a•
19 Cone. Sardic. c. 15.
20 Cone. Arelat. 2. c. 13. Si aliquis, invito episcopo suo,
in aliena ecclesia habitans, ab episcopo loci clericus fuerit
ordinatus, hujusmodi ordinatio irrita habeatur.
21 Cone. Carth. 1. c. 5. Non licere clericum alienum ab
aliquo suscipi sine literis episcopi sui, neque apud se rcti-
nere, nee laicum usurpare sibi de plebe aliena, ut eum ordi
net sine conscientia ejus episcopi, de cujus plebe est.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

155

ancient custom, confirmed by a canon in the third
council of Carthage,22 which is also inserted into the
African Code,23 the bishop of Carthage is allowed to
take a clerk out of another church, and ordain him
for the service of any church under his jurisdiction.
But an exception in his particular case confirms the
rule in all the rest. Fourthly, Another rule for the pre-
Sect-6. _ '' ... „. .
no wshop to or- gervation of order in this affair was,
dain in another '
man's diocese. fa^t. evely bishop should confine him
self to his own church, and not assume to himself
the power of ordaining in the diocese of another
man. So the council of Antioch,24 and those called
the Apostolical Canons25 determined, that a bishop
should not presume to ordain out of his own bounds,
in cities or countries not subject to him. St. Austin
had occasion to insist upon this rule in the case of
Pinianus, when the people of Hippo required him
to ordain him presbyter against his will, and threat
ened that, if he would not, they would have another
bishop to ordain him : St. Austin told26 them, that
no bishop could ordain him in his church without
first asking his leave and permission; and that
having given him a promise, that he would not or
dain him against his will, he could not in honour
consent that any other bishop should come and
ordain him. Socrates27 says, Epiphanius took upon
him to ordain a deacon in the diocese of Chrysos
tom at Constantinople : but Chrysostom told him,
that he acted contrary to canon, in ordaining in
churches that were not under his jurisdiction.
Which shows, that this was a universal law, pre
vailing both in the Eastern and Western churches.
And by the same rule, all metropolitans with their
provincial bishops were confined to their own pro
vince, and might not ordain any bishop in another
province, except they were invited by the bishops
of that province to come and give them their assist
ance. Which rule was made in the general coun
cil28 of Constantinople, and confirmed in the council
of Ephesus,29 upon the controversy that arose be
tween the churches of Cyprus and the patriarch of
Antioch, who laid claim to the power of ordinations
in those churches, but was rejected in his claim,
because they were out of his district, and under
another jurisdiction. But it is to be observed, that

these rules were only made for ordinary cases, to
preserve peace and a good understanding among
the bishops of the church, whilst every one acted in
his proper sphere, and kept to those bounds and
limits which the laws appointed. For otherwise,
as I have showed heretofore,80 every bishop was a
bishop of the whole cathohc church, and in that
capacity authorized to ordain, or perform any other
acts of the episcopal office, in any part of the world,
upon urgent necessity and extraordinary occasions.
As Athanasius and Eusebius Samosatensis did in
the times of the great prevalency of the Arian he
resy ; ordaining bishops and presbyters in any pro
vince or diocese, (though contrary to the letter of
this law,) in order to preserve the catholic faith,
and a succession of orthodox men in the service of
the church. So that this was only a rule for com
mon and ordinary cases. And in Cyprus, Epi
phanius31 says, they did not insist upon the rule at
all one among another, but any bishop ordained in
any other man's diocese, as occasion required, with
out breach of charity; for they gave a sort of general
leave to one another, as finding it most expedient
for the church in that province to use such a liberty
among themselves ; though they stiffly maintained
their privilege against the encroachments of all
foreign sees, and more especially that of Antioch.
The next things to be noted in this Sect 6
affair, are such as concern the time tiJfou""!!"™'
and place of ordination. Concerning lime8 '""^^
the time, there may several inquiries be made. 1.
Whether they had originally any set and constant
times of ordination, as the church now has four
times a year ? 2. Whether Sunday was always the
day of ordination ? 3. Whether ordinations were
always confined to morning service? As to the
first inquiry, it does not certainly appear, that the
church had any constant annual times of ordination
before the fourth century. For Habertus truly ob
serves,32 that then it was more usual to ordain men
singly, as the present occasions of every church re
quired. Pope Leo indeed " derives the jejunia qua-
tuor temporum, the fasts of the four seasons of the
year, which are now commonly called ember-weeks,
from apostolical tradition. But, as Mr. Pagi,34 and
Quesnel,35 in their censures of that author, observe,

22 Concil. Carth. 3. c. 45.
23 Cod. Can. Afric. t. 44. TIspl tov i%Elva~i ra Eirttr-
Koireo Kapx-nSovos, oQev BeXei, KXnpiKov xeipotoveIv.
24 Cone. Antioch. c. 22.
25 Canon. Apost. c. 35. ''EiriaKcnrov pi} ToXpdv e *f to toiv
lavTov optsiv xELporovias iroiEta-dai eIs tos pi} VTCOKEipivai
avrta iroX-Ets Kal ^copas.
28 Aug. Ep. 225. ad Albinam. Dicebam ego, quibus po-
teram, qui ad nos in absidem honoratiores et graviores as-
cenderant, nee a promissi fide me posse dimoveri, nee ab
alio episcopo in ecclesia mihi tradita, nisi me iuterrogato ac
permittente, posse ordinari.
27 Socrat. lib. 6. u. 12 et 14. *» Cone. Constant, c. 2.

29 Cone. Ephes. Act. 7. Decret. de Episc. Cypr.
30 Book II. chap. 5.
31 Epiphan. Ep. ad Johan. Hierosolym. t. 2. p. 313.
Multi episcopi communionis nostras presbyteros in nostra
ordinaverunt provincia, &c.
32 Habert. Archieratic. par. 8. Observ. 4. p. 130. Tune
singuli, et quidem rari, non vero tam multi ac hodie ordina-
bantur. 33 Leo, Serm. 2. de Jejun. Pentecost, p. 77. It. Serm. 9.
de Jejun. 7. Mensis, sive de jejunio quatuor temporum.
p. 88. It. Serm. 7.
34 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 67. n. 15.
35 Quesnel, ap. Pagi, ibid.

156

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

there is nothing more usual with him, than to call
every thing an apostolical law, which he found
either in the practice of his own church, or decreed
in the archives of his predecessors, Damasus and
Siricius. So that, all other authors before Leo be
ing silent upon this matter, we can lay no great
stress upon his authority for it. Beside, he does
not so much as once intimate, that these fasts were
appointed upon the account of any set and solemn
times of ordinations, but upon other more general
reasons. So that it is not certain, that the church
had any fixed times of ordination when Leo wrote,
anno 450. And in the ages before it is more evi
dent she had not. For as to bishops, it is certain
the church never confined herself to any set times
for the ordination of them ; but as soon as any
bishop was dead, another was chosen and ordained
in his room with all convenient speed ; and in some
places this was done within a day or two after his
decease, as has been showed in a former book.36 As
to presbyters and deacons, and others below them,
it is evident also, that for the three first ages they
were ordained at all times, as the occasions of the
chm-ch required. Cyprian ordained Aurelius a
reader upon the 1st of December, as Bishop Pear
son37 computes by the critical rules of calculation ;
and he ordained Saturus a reader, and Optatus a
subdeacon, in the month of August ; S8 neither of
which were solemn times of ordination. Paulinus,
who lived in the fourth century, was ordained on
Christmas day, as he himself39 informs us : yet
neither was that one of the four days, which after
wards became the stated times of ordination. The
Roman Pontifical, under the name of Damasus, in
the life of almost every bishop, takes notice of the
ordinations which they made in the Roman pro
vince, of bishops, presbyters, and deacons, during
their whole life ; and always the ordinations are
said to be made in the month of December. Which,
if that book were of any great authority, would
prove, that there was one fixed time of ordination
at Rome ; but not four. But I confess, the credit
of that book cannot much be depended upon for the
history of the primitive ages one way or other ; it.
being of much later date than the title pretends ;
and perhaps the author only spake of ancient things
according to the custom of his own times, when one
of these four times might be brought into use :

36 Book II. chap. 11. sect. 2.
37 Pearson, Annal. Cypr. an. 250. n. 20. p. 25.
38 Pearson, ibid. n. 15.
39 Paulin. Ep. 6. ad Sever, p. 101. Die Domini, quo
nasci carne dignatus est, repentina vi multitudinis — presby-
teratu initiatus sum.
40 Pontifical. Vit. Gelas. Hie fecit ordinationes in urbe
Roma tres, per mensem Decembrem et Februarium.
41 Gelas. Ep. 9. ad Episc. Lucaniae, u. 11. al. 13. Ordi
nationes etiam presbyterorum et diaconorum nisi certis
temporibus et diebus exerceri non debent, id est, quarti

which seems to have been before the time of Sim-
plicius, anno 467. For the Pontifical in his hfe"
adds February to December ; as it does also in the
life of Gelasius. And in one of the decrees of Ge
lasius,4' there are no less than five stated times of
ordination appointed, viz. June, September, Decem
ber, the beginning of Lent, and the middle of Lent,
and Saturday in the evening in all these times to
be the precise time of ordination. Amalarius For
tunatus42 takes notice of the change that was made
in the time of Simplicius ; telling us, that all the
bishops of Rome before Simplicius, made their or
dinations always in the month of December, and
that he was the first that ordained in February.
Which, no doubt, he had from the forementioned
passages of the Pontifical, which in some places
speaks of one, and in others of two solemn times of
ordination, but never of four : which argues, that
these four were not as yet determined when that
book was written, which, with the interpolations
that it has now, was not till after the time of Jus
tinian, as learned men generally agree. So that I
leave it to further inquiry, whether there were any
such fixed times of ordination in the church of
Rome, as these authors mention, for four or five of
the first centuries. In other churches we read of
none, but the instances that have been produced
rather prove the contrary. The inquisitive reader
will be able to furnish himself with many other
such instances, from which it may be concluded,
that the times of ordination were not fixed for four
of the first centuries, since no ancient writer with
in that space makes any mention of them. And
therefore there is no necessity, with Baronius48
and Bellarmine,44 to make the jejunia quatuor tem
porum an apostolical tradition, but it is sufficient
to speak of them as a useful order of the church,
founded upon ecclesiastical institution some ages
after. The same must be said in an
swer to the second question, whe- ordinations in-
. _ differently given on
trier ounday was always the day of any day of the week
J for three centuries.
ordination ? It is evident, that for
the three first centuries it was not. For Mr. Pagi
has unanswerably proved45 against Papebrochius,
from the most certain rules of chronology, that be
fore the time of Constantine the ordinations of the
bishops of Rome themselves were performed in-

mensis jejunio, septimi, et decimi, sed et etiam quadra-
gesimalis iuitii, ac mediana quadragesimae die, sabbati je
junio circa vesperam noverint celebrandas.
42 Amalar. de Offic. Eccl. lib. 2. c. 1. Primi apostolici
semper in Decembrio mense consecrationes ministrabant
usque ad Simplicium, qui fuit a B. Petro quadragesimus
nonus. Ipse primus sacravit in Februario.
48 Baron, an. 57. n. 209.
44 Bellarm. de Verbo Dei non scripto, lib. 4. c 3. p.
206. 45 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 67. n. 14 et 16.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

157

differently upon any day of the week, and that the
affixing them to the Lord's day and other solemn
festivals was the business of the fourth century. So
that when Pope Leo46 says, that such ordinations
as were made upon other days than Sundays, were
against the canons and the tradition of the fathers,
he is to be understood, as before, to mean only the
custom of his own times ; if yet it was the custom
when Leo lived : for there is some reason to doubt
of the authority either of Leo's epistle, or that of
Gelasius, who lived not long after. For Gelasius
says,47 the ordinations of presbyters and deacons
were to be made on Saturday in the evening. So
that either one of these epistles is spurious, or else
the custom varied in the same century in the church
of Rome. sect s I confess Gelasius is singular in that
u.Iaiiy'iXrSldin part of his decree, which fixes ordina-
£io^.morlnu,sb" tions to evening service. For though
the ancients were not always precise
to a certain day of the year, or a certain day of the
week ; yet they more punctually observed the time
of the day, to give ordinations at morning service.
This was a very ancient rule of the church, as we
may learn from the objection that was made against
Novatian, that among his other irregularities he was
ordained at an uncanonical hour, ibpti Sacdry, at ten
o'clock, or four in the afternoon, as Cornehus48 in
his epistle to Fabian lays the charge against him.
The council of Laodicea is still more punctual to
the time, that ordinations should not be given while
the hearers or catechumens49 were present, but at
the time of the oblation. The reason of which was,
that the person ordained might either consecrate, or
at least participate of the eucharist at the time of
his ordination. Whence Theodoret, speaking of
the ordination of Macedonius the anchoret, says it
was done,50 rr\g pvsiicrjg tepspyiag irpoKEtpkvY\g, in the
time of the mystical, that is, the communion ser
vice. And so Epiphanius 51 represents the ordina
tion of Paulinianus, St. Jerom's brother, whom he
ordained presbyter, whilst he ministered in the holy
sacrifice of the altar. But this is to be understood
chiefly, if not only, of the three superior orders of
bishops, presbyters, and deacons : for as to the rest,
it was indifferent what time they were ordained, so
long as it was in the church in any part of Divine
service.

Sect. 10.
Ordination receiv
ed kneeling at the
altar.

But out of the church no ordina- Secl 9
nation could be regularly performed. oi^refS^doi
Though there was this difference be
tween the superior and inferior orders, that the one
were conferred within the sanctuary, or altar-part,
and the other without; yet they both agreed in
this, that the church was still the proper place to
give birth to all such orders, as were to be employed
in any ecclesiastical service. And therefore Gregory
Nazianzen52 justly upbraids Maximus the cynic,
who intruded himself into his see of Constantinople,
that being excluded from the church, he was or
dained in the house of a minstrel. Which was also
objected to Ursinus, who was competitor with Da
masus for the see of Rome, that he was not ordain
ed53 in a church, but in an obscure corner of the
hall called Sicona.
As to the ceremonies used in the
act of ordination itself, beside what
has been noted before in speaking of
each particular order, it will be proper to observe
some things of them in general. As, first, That the
ordinations of bishops, presbyters, and deacons
were always received kneeling before the altar. So
the author under the name of Dionysius54 represents
the matter in his' Rationale upon the church's
service. And Theodoret mentions it55 as the cus
tomary rite, when speaking of the ordination of a
bishop, he says, they brought him' to the holy table,
and made him kneel on his knees by force.
Secondly, The solemnity itself in Sect n
giving the superior orders was always Boni™rA.talSi'"
performed by imposition of hands and prayer'
prayer. Which is evident from St. Jerom, who
says, that imposition of hands was therefore added
to complete the ordinations 56 of the clergy, lest any
one by a silent and solitary prayer should be or
dained without his knowledge. Gregory Nyssen57
indeed tells us a very strange story of the ordination
of Gregory Thaumaturgus, how Phsedimus, bishop
of Amasea, ordained him only by prayer without
imposition of hands : for he was absent, being fled
to the wilderness, to avoid ordination: notwith
standing which Phsedimus consecrated him to the
bishopric of Neocsesarea, which he afterwards ac
cepted. But as a learned man conjectures,58 it is
most likely that he had another ordination ; or if
not, this act must pass for a singular instance, con-

48 Leo, Ep. 81. ad Dioscorum, c. 1.
47 Gelas. Ep, 9. ad Episc. Lucan. c. 11. Ordinationes
sabbati jejunio circa vesperam noverint celebrandas.
49 Ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
9 Cone. Laodic. i;. 5. rEgr/i t« pi} Seiv Ttis x^ipoTovias iirl
irapaaia iKpotopiveov yivsoSai.
50 Theod. Hist. Relig. c. 13.
51 Epiphan. Ep. ad Johan. Hierosol. Cum ministraret
in Sanctis sacrificiis, ordinavimus presbyterum.
52 Naz. Carm. de Vita, p. 15. Els yip x°pavXu Xvirpdv
otKtjTnptov, kvvSjv Tvirao-t tov KaKfzov irotixiva.

53 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 29.
54 Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccl. c. 5. Contempl. 3. ...
7 et 8.
55 Theod. lib. 4. c. 15.
66 Hieron. lib. 16. in Isai. c. 58. p. 265. XEtpo-roi/ta, id est,
ordinatio clericorum non solum ad imprecationem vocis, sed
ad impositionem impletur manus : ne scilicet vocis impre-
catio clandestina clericos ordinet nescientes.
37 Nyssen. Vit. Greg. Thaum. t. 3. p. 544.
53 Cave, Hist. Literar. vol. 1 p. 94.

153

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

trary to the common rule and established order of
the church. The Greeks call this imposition of
hands both x»P<""oi/ta, and x«p°^<"aj as may De
seen in the canons of the council of Nice59 and
Chalcedon. Yet sometimes those words are distin
guished, as in the author of the Constitutions,
where60 he says, Trpta^vripog xetpoSera, ov xtlP°rovH,
a presbyter gives imposition of hands, but does not
ordain. Where it is plain, that imposition of hands
means not ordination, but some other benediction
of the church, wherein imposition of hands was
used, as well as in ordination. Neither does x"P°"
Tovia always signify ordination in ancient writers ;
though it does most commonly so, as Fronto Du-
cseus61 and other learned persons have showed : but
sometimes it denotes no more than designation or
election; as when Ignatius uses the phrase, xftpo-
rovrjaat Gioirpno-fivTriv,*2 only to signify the election
or appointment of a messenger to go upon an errand
of the church. Which I note to caution the reader
against mistakes committed by some authors, who
confound ordinations with elections, for want of dis
tinguishing the critical senses of words, as the sub
ject matter requires.
sect 12 I must further observe, that as the
o™s S'mordm- sign of the cross was used upon many
occasions by the primitive Christians,
so particularly in their ordinations. Which we
learn from Chrysostom, who more than once men
tions it upon this occasion. If, says he, we are to
be regenerated, the cross is used, viz. in baptism;
or if we63 are to eat the mystical food, the eucharist,
or to receive an ordination, we are signed with the
sign of the cross. Upon this account, Suicerus64
notes out of the author under the name of Diony
sius, that the imposition of hands in ordination was
called atppaylg, consignation, and o-ratipo£t(5fi<; rrtppaylg,
consignation in form of a cross,65 because the sign of
the cross was made on the head of him that was
ordained. sect 13 -^-s to ^e ceremony °f unction, I
the!ceinemuoncy o"ie- have already had occasion to show its
IhltldToFpresS- novelty66 in another place; together
with the custom of delivering some of
the holy vessels into the hands of the person or
dained. Which Habertus says was never used in
giving any of the superior orders, but only the in

ferior, by the rule of the.fourth council of Carthage,
whieh makes that the chief part of their ordination.
Though Habertus67 and some others question the
authority of that very council, and reckon all its
canons spurious. But that only by the way.
When the ceremony of consecration Sjct
was ended, it was usual for the clergy ci°JedtlwVthniho011"
then present to salute the person ki""°fi*>«- "
newly ordained with the kiss of peace.68 And so
being conducted to his proper station belonging to
his office, if he was a bishop or a presbyter, he made
his first sermon to the people. But of this, as it re
lates to bishops, I have given an account before;
as it relates to presbyters in the Greek church,
where it was more usual for presbyters to preach,
the reader may find examples of such sermons
among those of Chrysostom,69 and Gregory Nys
sen,70 which they preached upon the day of their
ordination. I cannot omit to mention one thing
more, which should have been men- The anniversary
. i,i •. day of a bishop's
tioned m another place, because it orfinauonkepta
* feauval.
was an honour peculiarly paid to the
order of bishops ; which was, that in many places
the day of their ordination was solemnly kept
among the anniversary festivals of the church. On
these days they had church assembhes, and sermons,
and all the other solemnities of a festival. Which
appears from St. Austin's sermons, two of which71
were preached upon the anniversary of his own
ordination. And in another,7" published by Sir-
mondus, he also mentions the day under the same
title of his own anniversary. In a fourth he speaks
also of the anniversary of Aurelius,78 bishop of
Carthage, inviting the people to come and keep the
festival in Basilica Fausti, which was a noted church
in Carthage. Among the homilies also of Leo,
bishop of Rome, the three first are upon the anni
versary day of his assumption to the pontificate.
And a late learned critic74 has observed, that in St.
Jerom's, and some other ancient Martyrologies, there
sometimes occur such festivals under the titles of
Ordinatio episcopi, and Natale episcopatus N., that
is, the ordination or birth-day of such or such a
bishop. Which, doubtless, at first, were the anni
versaries of their ordination, which they themselves
kept in their life-time ; and which were continued

S9 Cone. Nic. c. 19. Chalced. c. 15.
60 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 28.
61 Fronto Ducae. Not. in Chrysost. Horn. 1. ad Pop. An
tioch. p. 1.
62 Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. u. 11. It. Ep. ad Philadelph. u.
10. Ep. ad Polycarp. n. 7.
68 Chrys. Horn. 55. in Matth. Kan ivayewr}8fivai Sit],
o-Taupos irapaylvETat' k&v Tpaepijvat ti)V puo-TiKi}v iKEtvijv
Tpoepriv' Kav XEipoTOVr}di]Val, &c.
64 Suicer. Thesaur. Voce atppayls, t. 2. p. 1199.
65 Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccl. c. 5. p. 312 et 314.
66 Book II. chap. 19. sect. 17.

67 Habert. Archieratic. p. 323.
63 Dionys. Hierarch. Eccl. c. 5. p. 367. Constitut. Apost,
lib. 8. c. 5.
69 Chrys. Homil. cum Presbyter esset designatus. t. 4.
p. 953. 70 Nyssen. Horn, in suam Ordinat. t. 2.
71 Aug. Homil. 24 et 25. ex quinquaginta.
72 Horn. 39. edit, a Sirmond. t. 10. p. 841.
73 Horn. 32. de Verb. Domini. Dies anniversarius ordina
tionis Domini Senis Aurelii crastinus illucescit. Eogat et
admonet per humilitatem meam charitatem vestram, ut ad
Basilicam Fausti devotissime venire dignemini.
74 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 67. n. 14.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

159

in memory of- them after death : by which means
they came to be inserted into the Martyrologies as
standing festivals, denoting there neither the day of
their natural birth, nor their death, (as some mis
take,) but the day of their ordination, or advance
ment to the episcopal throne. But of this more
when we come to speak of the festivals of the
church.

CHAPTER VII.
THE CASE OF FORCED ORDINATIONS AND RE-ORDI
NATIONS CONSIDERED.
. . , For the close of this book I shall
Sect. I.
ve^0ft^Jent°fn the5 add something concerning forced or-
primitive church. dinationS; and re-ordinations, which
were things that very often happened in the primi
tive church. For, anciently, while popular elec
tions were indulged, there was nothing more com
mon than for the people to take men by force, and
have them ordained even against then- wills. For
though, as Sulpicius Severus complains, many men
were too ambitious in courting the preferments of
the church ; yet there were some who ran as eagerly
from them as others ran to them ; and nothing but
force could bring such men to submit to an ordina
tion. We have seen an instance or two of this
ah-eady, in the cases of St. Austin ' and Paulinus :
and ecclesiastical history affords us many others.
For not to mention such as only fled or absconded
to avoid ordination ; such as Cyprian,2 and Gregory
Thaumaturgus,3 and Athanasius,4 and Evagrius,5
and St. Ambrose ;6 there were some who were
plainly ordained against their wills : as Nepotian,
of whom St. Jerom says, that when his uncle He-
hodore ordained him presbyter, he wept7 and la
mented his condition, and could not forbear ex
pressing his anger against his ordainer, though that
was the only time he ever had occasion to do it.
St. Martin, bishop of Tours, was so averse from
taking the bishopric, that he was forced to be
drawn out of his cell by craft, and carried under a
guard to his ordination, as the sacred historian in

forms us.8 And the ordination of Macedonius the
anchoret, by Flavian, bishop of Antioch, was so
much against his will, that they durst not let him
know what they were about, till the ceremony was
over ; and when he came to understand that he was
ordained presbyter, he broke forth into a rage
against Flavian, and all that were concerned in the
action, as thinking that his ordination would have
obhged him to another sort of life, and deprived
him of his retirement and return to the mountains.
So Theodoret, in his Lives of the Eastern Ancho
rets,0 relates the story. And that this was a very
common practice in those times, appears from what
Epiphanius10 says of the custom in Cyprus, that it
was usual, in that province, for persons that fled
to avoid ordination by their own bishop, to be
seized by any other bishop, and to be ordained by
them, and then be returned to the bishop from
whom they were fled. Which argues, that forced
ordinations in those times were both practised and
allowed. Nor was it any kind of remonstrance
or solicitation whatsoever, which the n? excu'ae admit-
party could make, that would prevent ceptamnn protested
r ^ ± upon oath that he
his ordination in such cases, except y>uia not be or-
* darned.
he chanced to protest solemnly upon
oath against ordination. For in that case he was
to be set at liberty, and not to be ordained against
so solemn a protestation. This is evident, from one
of the canons of St. Basil, which says, that they
who swear they will not be ordained,11 are not to be
compelled to forswear themselves by being ordain
ed. And this, I think, also may be collected from
the account which Epiphanius gives of his own
transaction with Paulinianus, St. Jerom's brother,
upon such an occasion. Paulinianus, he says, was
one of those who fled from their bishop for fear of
ordination, but providentially coming12 where Epi
phanius was, he caused him to be seized by his dea
cons, not dreaming or suspecting any thing of or
dination ; and when he came to it, he caused them to
hold his mouth, for fear he should have abjured him
by the name of Christ to set him free. Thus he
ordained him deacon first, and presbyter some time
after in the very same manner. Which seems to
imply, that if he had suffered him to have made his
protestation in the name of Christ, he could not

1 See before, chap. 2. sect. 8. 2 Pontius, Vit. Cypr.
8 Greg. Nyssen. Vita Greg. Thaumaturg.
4 Sozomen. lib. 2. c. 17. 5 Socrat. lib. 4. c.23.
6 Paulin. Vit. Ambros.
7 Hieron. Ep. 3. Epitaph. Nepotian. Presbyter ordinatur.
Jesu bone, qui gemitus, qui ejulatus, quae cibi interdictio,
quae fuga oculorum omnium ? Tunc primum et solum avun-
culo iratus est.
8 Sulp. Sever. Vit. St. Martin, lib. 1. p. 224. Dispositis
in itinere civiiim turbis, sub quadam custodia ad civitatem
usque deducitur, &c.
0 Theod. Hist. Relig. c. 13.

10 Epiph. Ep. ad Johan. Hierosol. Multi episcoporum
communionis nostrae et presbyteros in nostra ordinaverunt
provincia, quos nos comprehendere non poteramus, et mi-
serunt ad nos diaconos et hypodiaconos, quos suscepimus
cum gratia.
" Basil. Ep. Canon, ad Amphiloch. c. 10. Oi opviovTii
pij KaTaSixEadai tijv x^ip°Toviav, ifcopvvpEVOt pi] dvayKa-
%E<r6wc7av iirtopKEtv.
12 Epiphan. ibid. Ignorantem eum, et nullam penitus ha-
bentem suspicionem, per multos diaconos apprehendi jussi-
mus, et teneri os ejus, ne forte liberari se cupiens, adjuraret
nos per nomen Christi, &c.

1G0

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

have proceeded to his ordination. But it seems
nothing else but such an adjuration was available
to set him free : and that is a further argument, that
in those times men might be ordained against their
wills, and yet their ordination stand good, and be
accounted as valid as any others.
But in the next age this practice
Sect. 3. ° . .
tervJarY'rohibited was prohibited, because of several m-
KandcaSons conveniences that were found to at-
of tile church. tend ^ rpj^ emperorg J_,e0 and Ma,
jorian made a law with sanctions and penalties to
prevent it. For they decreed, that no one should be
ordained18 against his will. And whereas some bishops
did impose the burden of orders upon men against
their consent, they granted hberty in that case, either
to the party himself, or any other accuser, to bring an
action at law against the archdeacon, who was liable
to be fined ten pounds of gold, to be paid to the inj ured
party, or to the informers, or to the states of the city ;
the bishop also was to be censured by his superiors,
and the party ordained to be set at liberty, as if he
had never been ordained. Pursuant to this law, John,
bishop of Ravenna, for a transgression of this kind,
was threatened to be deprived of the power of or
dination by Simplicius,14 bishop of Rome, anno 482.
And the third council of Orleans,15 anno 538, made
a decree for the French churches, that if any bishop
ordained a clerk against his will, he should do pe
nance for the fact a whole year, and remain sus
pended from his office till that term was expired.
So great an alteration was there made in one age
in the rules and practice of the church, from what
they had been in the former.
But I must note, that after this cor
rection was made, there was still some
difference to be observed between the
forced ordination of a bishop, and
that of an inferior clerk, presbyter, deacon, or any
other. For though the forementioned imperial law
gave hberty to all inferiors so ordained, to relinquish
their office that was forced upon them, if they pleased,
and betake themselves to a secular life again, yet
it peremptorily denied 16this privilege to bishops, de
creeing that their ordination should stand good,

Sect. 4.
Yet a bishop or
dained against his
will, had not the
privilege to relin
quish.

Sect. 5.
He-ordinations y con-

and that no action brought against their ordainers
should be of force to evacuate or disannul their
consecration. Which seems to be grounded upon
that ancient rule of the church mentioned in the
council of Antioch,17 and confirmed in the council
of Chalcedon,18 that if any bishop was ordained to
a chm-ch to which he refused to go, he should be
excommunicated till he complied, or something
were determined in his case by a provincial synod.
Which seems to authorize the using a sort of vio
lence in compelling men to undergo the burden of
the episcopal function ; agreeably to that other
law of Leo and Anthemius, in the Justinian Code,"
which puts this among other qualifications of a
bishop, that he shall be so far from ambition, as to
be one rather that must be sought for and com
pelled to take a bishopric. Such were anciently
the laws of church and state relating to forced
ordinations. As to re-ordinations, before we can
answer to the question about them, ,^'°^mc
we must distinguish between the or- ™Ded'
ders that were given regularly and canonically by
persons rightly qualified in the church, and such as
were given irregularly by persons unqualified, or
by heretics and schismatics out of the church. As
to such orders as were given regularly in the
church, they were supposed, like baptism, to im
press a sort of indelible character, so as that there
was no necessity upon any occasion to repeat them,
but on the contrary, it was deemed a criminal act so
to do. The third council of Carthage, following
the steps of the plenary council of Capua, or Capsa,
decreed, that it was equally unlawful20 to re-bap
tize and re-ordain. And those called the Apostoli
cal Canons21 make it deposition both for the or-
dainer and ordained to give or receive a second
ordination. St. Austin22 says it was not the custom
of the catholic church to repeat either orders or
baptism. For men did not lose their orders,23 as to
the internal character and virtue, though they were
suspended from the execution of their office for
some misdemeanor. Optatus testifies the same,
telling us, that Donatus was condemned in the

13 Leo. Novel. 2. in Append. Cod. Theod. Nonnullorum
persuasio sacerdotum reluctantibus onus istud imponit, &c.
Eo ergo licentiam hujus praesumptionis excludimus, ut si
quispiam probatus fuerit vi coactus sub contumelia publica
clericatus officiis successisse, spontaneis accusatoribus, vel
si ipse voluerit allegare perpessam licentiam, commodemus
apud judices competentes hujusmodi admissa damnare, ut
si inter leges objecta constiterint, decern libras auri archi
diaconus cogatur inferre ei qui pertulerit exsolvendas : de-
hinc si ille desistit, accusatoris censibus et civitatis ordiui
profuturas : illo suae reddito voluntati, qui coactus non po-
tuit consecrari, &c.
14 Simplic. Ep. 2. ad Johan. Ravennatens.
15 Con. Aurelian. 3. c. 7. Episcopus qui invitum vel re-
clamantem prsesumpserit ordinare, annuali pcenitentiae sub-
ditus missas facere non praesumat.

16 Leo, Novel. 2. ibid. Si qui sane episcopus invitus
fuerit ordinatus, hanc consecrationem nulla violari accusa-
tione permittimus.
17 Cone. Antioch. c. 17. 19 Cone. Chalced. Act. 11.
19 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 31. Tantum ab
ambitu debet esse sepositus, ut quaeratur cogendus, &c.
20 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 38. In Capsensi plenaria synodo
statutum, quod non liceat fieri rebaptizationes, et reordina-
tiones, vel translationes episcoporum.
21 Canon. Apost. c. 67.
22 Aug. cont. Parmen. lib. 2. c. 13. In catholica utrum-
que non licet iterari.
23 Id. de Bona Conjugal, c. 24. t. 6. Manet in illis ordi-
natis sacramentum ordinationis; et si aliqua culpa quis-
quam ab officio removeatur, sacramento Domini semel im-
posito non carebit, &c.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

161

council of Rome under Melchiades, for re-ordaining
such bishops as had lapsed in time of persecution ; 21
which was contrary to the custom of the catholic
church. And others25 accuse the Arians upon the
same account, for re-ordaining such of the catholic
clergy as went over to their party.
There is indeed a passage in Opta-
The proposal tus concerning Csecilian, bishop of
S the Donatists Carthage, which at first view seems
examined. r °
to import as if Caecilian had been
willing to have submitted to a re-ordination. For
Optatus26 says, Ccecilian sent this message to the
Donatist bishops, That if Felix had given him no
true ordination, as they pretended, they should or
dain him again, as if he were still only a deacon.
But St. Austin, who perhaps best understood Cae-
cilian's meaning, says27 he only spoke this ironically
to deride them, not that he intended to submit to a
second ordination, but because he was certain that
Felix and the rest of his ordainers were no tradi-
tors, as they accused them. So that we have no
instances of re-ordaining such as were regularly
ordained in the cathohc church : it being esteem
ed unlawful, as Theodoret26 words it, to give any
man the same ordination twice. Whence neither
in the translation of bishops from one church to
another do we ever read of a new ordination, but
only of an enthronization or instalment ; as of a
new matriculation of presbyters and deacons, when
they were taken out of one church to be settled in
another. Cyprian, speaking of his admission of
Numidicus into his own church from another,
where he was presbyter before, does not say, he
gave him a new ordination, but only29 a name and
a seat among the presbyters of Carthage. And this
was the constant practice of the church in all such
cases, for any thing that appears to the contrary.
As to such as were ordained out of
schismatics some- the church by schismatical or hereti-
times re-ordained. "
cal bishops, the case was a little dif
ferent. For the church did not always allow of
their ordinations, but sometimes, for discipline's
sake, and to put a mark of infamy upon their errors,
made them take a new ordination. This was de-

21 Optat. lib. 1. p. 44. In Donatum sunt hae sententiae
latae : quod confessus sit se rebaptizasse, et episcopis lapsis
manum imposuisse : quod ab ecclesia alienum est.
25 Vid. Vales. Not. in Sozom. lib. 6. u. 26. ex Marcellin.
Libel. Precum.
28 Optat. lib. 1. p. 41. A Caeciliano mandatum est, ut si
rebx in se, sicut illi arbitrabantur, nihil contulisset, ipsi
tanquam adhuc diaconum ordinarent Caecilianum.
27 Aug. Brevic. Collat. Die 3. c. 16. Quod quidem si dic
tum est, ideo dici potuit ad illos deridendos, quibus hoc
mandasse perhibetur, quoniam certus erat ordinatores suos
non esse traditores.
28 Theod. Histor. Relig. c. 13. Ou SvvaTov Sis tiji/ avrvv
ElrtTE^relvai XElpoTOviav.
29 Cypr. Ep. 35. al. 40. Admonitos nos et instructos sci-
atis dignatione divina, ut Numklicus presbyter adscribatur
M

creed by the great council of Nice in the case of
those bishops and presbyters, whom Meletius the
schismatic ordained in Egypt, after he had been
deposed by his metropolitan of Alexandria. They
were not to be admitted to serve in the catholic
church, till they were first authorized by a more
sacred ordination,30 as that council words it in her
synodical epistle or directions to the church of
Alexandria. In pursuance of this decree, Theodore,
bishop of Oxyrinchus, re-ordained the Meletian
presbyters upon their return to the church; as
Valesius2' shows out of Marcellinus and Faustinus's
petition to the emperor Theodosius ; and other
learned men32 are of the same opinion. Yet in
some cases the church consented to receive schis
matical bishops and presbyters without obliging
them to take a new ordination. As in Africa, St.
Austin33 assures us, it was the custom to allow of
the ordinations of the Donatists, and to admit
them to officiate in whatever station they served
before their return to the unity of the chm-ch, with
out repeating their ordination any more than their
baptism. He repeats this in several places of his
writings. And that it was so, appears both from
the canons of the African councils,84 and the con
cessions made in the collation of Carthage,35 where
the proposal was, that the Donatist bishops should
enjoy their honours and dignities, if they would re
turn to the unity of the catholic church. This had
before been determined in the Roman council un
der Melchiades, where the Donatists had their first
hearing. For there, St. Austin informs us,86 it was
also decreed, that only Donatus the author of the
schism should be cashiered ; but for all the rest,
though they were ordained out of the church, they
should be received upon their repentance, in the very
same offices and quality, which they enjoyed before.
So that the rigour of church discipline was quicken
ed or abated in this respect, according as the benefit
or necessities of the church seemed to require.
And the treatment of persons or
dained by heretics was much of the And heretics also
. upon their return to
same nature. Some canons require the church, in some
^ places.
all such without exception to be re-

presbyterorum Cathaginiensium numero, et nobiscum sedeat
in clero.
30 Ep. Synod, ap. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 9. et Theodor. lib. 1.
C 9. Mv^iKcoTEpa XEtpoTovia [$Ef3aico2rEVTas} <&C
31 Vales. Not. in Socrat. lib. 1. c. 9.
32 Du Pin, Biblioth. Cent. 4. p. 251.
33 Aug. cont. Parmen. lib. 2. c. 13. Si visum est opus
esse, ut eadem officia gererent quae gerebant, non sunt rur-
sus ordinati, sed sicut baptismus in eis, ita ordinatio mansit
Integra, &c. Vid. cont. Crescon. lib. 2. m. 11. It. Ep. 50.
p. 87. Ep. 162. p. 279.
34 Cod. Can. Afr. c. 69 et 70. 35 Coll. Carth. Die 1. c. 1G.
33 Aug. Ep. 50. ad Bonifac. p. 87. Damnato uno quodam
Donato, qui author schismatis fuisse manifestatus est, cae-
teros correctos, etiamsi extra ecclesiam ordinati essent, in
suis honoribus recipiendos esse censuerunt.

1G2

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IV.

ordained. It was so in the Greek church, at the
time when those called the Apostolical Canons were
made. For the same canon87 that condemns re-
ordinations in the church, makes an exception in
the case of such as were ordained by heretics ; pro
nouncing their ordination void, and requiring them
to be ordained again. And this was generally the
practice of all those churches in the third century,
which denied the validity of heretical baptism ; for
by much stronger reason they denied their ordina
tions. Therefore Firmilian, who was of this opinion,
tells us also, that the council38 of Iconium, anno
256, decreed, that heretics had no power to minister
either baptism, or confirmation, or ordination. Nay,
some of those who allowed the baptism of heretics,
yet still continued to condemn their ordinations.
As Innocent, bishop of Rome, who determines
against such as39 were ordained by the Arians and
such other heretics, that they were not to be ad
mitted with their honours in the catholic church ;
though their baptism might stand good, being ad
ministered in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost. In another place40
he says, it was the ancient rule of the church of
Rome to cancel and disannul all such ordinations ;
though in some places, he owns, they were allowed :
for Anisius, bishop of Thessalonica, with a council
of his provincial bishops, agreed to receive those
whom Bonosus, an heretical bishop of Macedonia,
had ordained ; that they might not continue to
strengthen his party, and thereby bring no small
damage upon the church. Liberius not only admit
ted the Macedonian bishops to communion, but also
allowed them to continue in their office, upon their
subscription to the Nicene creed, and abjm-ation of
their former heresy ; as Socrates,4' and Sozomen,42
and St. Basil,43 and others testify. In France, the
custom was in the time of Clodoveus to give a new
imposition of hands to the Arian clergy that return
ed to the catholic faith ; as appears from the first
council of Orleans, which made a decree44 about it :
but that, perhaps, does not mean a new ordination,
but only such a reconciliatory imposition of hands,

as was used to be given to penitents in absolution.
But if otherwise, it proves that the church had dif
ferent methods of proceeding in this case, as she
judged it most expedient and beneficial for her ser
vice ; sometimes reversing and disannulling the or
dinations of heretics for discipline's sake, and to show
her resentments of their errors ; and sometimes al
lowing them to stand good for her own sake, to pre
vent greater scandals, and to encourage the straying
people to return with their leaders to the unity of
the cathohc faith. Upon which account the general
council of Ephesus45 made an order concerning the
Messalian heretics, otherwise called Euchites and
Enthusiasts, that if any of their clergy would re
turn to the church, and in writing anathematize
their former errors, they should continue in the same
station they were in before ; otherwise they should
be degraded, and enjoy neither clerical promotion
nor communion in the church. The council of Nice
is thought to have made the hke decree46 in favour
of the Novatian clergy, only giving them a recon
ciliatory imposition of hands by way of absolution,
not re-ordination. And there is nothing more cer
tain than that the African fathers so treated the
Donatists ; particularly St. Austin in all his writings
pleads as much for the validity of heretical ordina
tions, as heretical baptism ; and says further, that
when the church47 judged it expedient not to suffer
the Donatist bishops to officiate upon their return
to the church, she did not thereby intend to deny
the reality or validity of their ordination, but sup
posed that to remain still perfect and entire in them.
And this is what St. Austin meant by the sacrament
of ordination, as he words it, or the indehble charac
ter which was thereby imprinted ; that though a man
turned apostate, or was suspended or deprived for
any crime, yet if upon his repentance and satisfac
tion the church thought fit to admit him to officiate
again, there was no necessity of giving him a new
ordination, no more than a new baptism ; for the
character of both remained entire. This was the
doctrine and practice of the African church, and
most others, in the time of St. Austin.

37 Canon. Apost. u. 67.
88 Firmil. Ep. 75. ap. Cyprian, p. 221. Haeretico sicut or
dinare non licet, nee manum imponere, ita nee baptizare.
39 Innoc. Ep. 18. ad Alexand. c. 3. Non videtur clericos
eorum cum sacerdotii aut ministerii cujuspiam suscipi debere
dignitate ; quoniam iis solum baptisma ratum esse permitti-
mus, &c.
40 Id. Ep. 22. ad Episc. Macedon. u. 5. Anisii quondam
fratris nostri, aliorumque consacerdotum summa deliberatio
haec fuit, ut quos Bonosus ordinaverat, ne cum eodem rema-
nerent, ac ne fieret mediocre scandalum, ordinati reciperen-
tur.  Jam ergo quod pro remedio ac necessitate temporis
statutum est, constat primitus non fuisse.
41 Socrat. lib. 4. u. 12. ¦'- Sozom. lib. 6. u. 10.
43 Basil. Ep. 74. ad Episcopos Occident.

44 Cone. Aurel. 1. c. 12. De haereticis clericis, qui ad
fidem catholicam plena fide et voluntate venerint, id censu-
inius observarii  ut officium, quo eos episcopus dignos
esse censuerit, cum impositae manus benedictione suscipiant.
45 Cone. Ephes. Act. 7. Decret. cont. Messalian. t. 3. p.
809. Si clerici fuerint, maneant clerici.  Quod si renu-
erint anathematizare, si presbyteri vel diaeoni fuerint, vel
in alio quopiam gradu ecclesiae, excidant et a clero et a
gradu et a communione.
46 Cone. Nic. c. 8.
47 Aug. cont. Parmen. lib. 2. c. 13. Cum expedire hoc
judicatur ecclesiae, ut praepositi eorum venientes ad catholi
cam societatem, honores suos ibi non administrent; non eis
tamen ipsa ordinationis sacramenta detrahuntur, sed manent
super eos.

BOOK V.

OF THE PRIVILEGES, IMMUNITIES, AND REVENUES OF THE CLERGY IN THE
PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
SOME INSTANCES OP RESPECT WHICH THE CLERGY PAID MUTT/ALIiY TO ONE ANOTHER.

Having thus far discoursed of the
The dergy obliged necessary qualifications of the clergy,
to give entertain- , .
ment to their bre- and the several customs observed in
thren, travelling . ...
upon necessary oc- the designation of them to the minis-
casions. °
terial office ; it will be proper, in the
next place, to speak of the respect and honour that
was generally paid them upon the account of their
office. Under which head I shall comprise what
ever relates to the privileges, exemptions, immuni
ties, and revenues of the ancient clergy. Some
particular marks of honour, as they were peculiar
to this or that order, have already been mentioned
in speaking of those orders : but now I shall treat
of those which were more universal, and common
to all orders. And here it will not be amiss, in the
first place, to say something of that courteous treat
ment and friendship, wherewith the clergy of the
ancient church were obhged to receive and embrace
one another. Two or three instances of which it
will be sufficient to observe at present. First, That
wherever they travelled upon necessary occasions,
they were to be entertained by their brethren of
the clergy in all places, out of the pubhc revenues
of the church : and it was a sort of crime for a
bishop or other clerk to refuse the hospitality of the
church, and take it from any other. The historians,
Socrates and Sozomen,1 tacitly reflect upon Epi
phanius for an action of this nature, that when he
came to Constantinople, where Chrysostom showed
him all imaginable respect and honour, sending his
clergy out to meet him, and inviting him to an
apartment, according to custom, in his house, he re
fused the civility, and took up his habitation in a
separate mansion. This was interpreted the same
thing as breaking cathohc communion with him;
as it proved in effect ; for he came on purpose, by
the instigations of Theophilus, bishop of Alexan
dria, to form an accusation against him. On the

1 Socrat. lib. 6. c. 12. Sozom. lib. 8. c. 14.
2 Firmil. Ep. 75. ap. Cypr. p. 228. Ut venientibus non so
lum pax et communio, sed et tectum et hospitium negaretur.
M 2

other hand, to deny any of the clergy the hospi
tality of the church upon such occasions was a
more unpardonable crime, and looked upon as the
rudest way of denying communion. Therefore Fir
milian2 smartly reproves the behaviour of Pope
Stephen, both as insolent and unchristian, towards
the African bishops, who were sent as legates from
their churches to him, that he neither admitted them
to audience himself, nor suffered any of the bre
thren to receive them to his house ; so not only de
nying them the peace and communion of the church,
but the civility of Christian entertainment also.
"Which was so much the greater despite and affront
to them, because every private Christian travelhng
with letters of credence from his own church, might
have challenged that privilege upon the contessera-
tion of hospitality, as Tertullian' words it; and
much more the bishops and clergy from one an
other. By the laws of the African church, every
bishop that went as legate of a provincial synod to
that which they called a general or plenary synod,
was to be provided of all things necessary in his
travels from this liberality of the church : as ap
pears from a canon in the third council of Carthage,
which orders,4 that no province should send above
two or three legates; that so they might appear
with less pomp and envy, and be less charge to
their entertainers. This imphes that every church
was obhged, by custom at least, to give them en
tertainment in their passage.
Another instance of customary re- Secl 2
spect, which the clergy were obliged ^tH^t/^T
to show to one another, was, that K^u'cnarLTintn!
when any bishop or presbyter came
to a foreign church, they were to be complimented
with the honorary privilege of performing Divine
offices, and consecrating the eucharist in the church.
This was a very ancient custom, as appears from

3 Tertul. de Praescript. c. 20.
4 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 2. Ut et minus invidiosi, minusque
hospitibus sumptuosi existant.

164

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

what Irenseus says of Anicetus, bishop of Rome,
that when Polycarp came to settle the paschal con
troversy with him, Trapixo>pr)"EV Tt)v ivxapiariav Tip
noXviedpirtp,3 which does not barely signify, he gave
him the eucharist, as the first translators of Eusebius
render it ; but, he gave place to him, or liberty to
consecrate the eucharist in his church. The coun
cil of Aries, which turned this custom into a law,
uses the very same expression about it, that in every
church they should give place 5 to the bishop that
was a stranger, to offer the oblation or sacrifice.
And the fourth council of Carthage more plainly,
that a bishop or presbyter7 visiting another church,
shall be received each in their own degree, and be
invited to preach, and consecrate the oblation. So
they were to be admitted to all the honours which
the church could show them ; the bishop was to
seat his fellow bishop in the same throne with him
self, and the presbyters to do the same by their
fellow presbyter. For that the canon means by re
ceiving them in their own degree. Which custom
is referred to by the catholic bishops in the collation
of Carthage,8 where they promise the Donatist bi
shops, that if they would return to the church, they
should be treated by them as fellow bishops, and
sit upon the same thrones with them, as strangers
were used to do. The author of the Constitutions
joins all these things together, saying, Let the bishop
that is a stranger sit with the bishop, and be invited
to preach ; let him also be permitted to offer the
eucharist; or if in modesty he refuses it, let him
at least be constrained to give the blessing to the
people. But then it is to be observed, that
The u" of the these honours were not to be showed
litera format/E, or
commendatory let- to strangers, as mere strangers, but as
tars in this respect. they could someways give proof of
their orthodoxy and Catholicism to the church to
which they came. And in' this respect the literee
sgstatices, or commendatory letters, as they called
them, were of great use and service in the church.
For no strange clergyman was to be admitted so
much as to communicate, much less to officiate,
without these letters of his bishop, in any church
where he was a perfect stranger, for fear of surrep
titious or passive communion, as the canons9 call
it. And bishops were under the same obligations
to take the letters of their metropohtan, if they had
occasion to travel into a foreign country, where

they could not otherwise be known. The third
council of Carthage has a canon10 to this purpose
that no bishop should go beyond sea without con
sulting the primate of his province, that he might
have his formates, or letters of commendation. And
that the same discipline was observed in ah churches,
seems clear from one of those canons of the
Greek church, among those which go by the name
of Apostolical, which says, no strange bishops,"
presbyters, or deacons shall be received dvev ovtna-
tikuiv, unless they bring commendatory letters with
them : but without them they shall only be pro
vided of necessaries, and not be admitted to commu
nicate, because many things are surreptitiously
obtained. The' translation of Dionysius Exiguus
indeed denies them necessaries also : but that is a
manifest corruption of the Greek text, which allows
them to communicate in outward good things, but
not in the communion of the church. And this is
what some think the ancients meant by communio
peregrina, the communion of strangers, when such
as travelled without letters of credence, were hos
pitably entertained, and provided of sustenance, but
not admitted to participate of the eucharist, be
cause they had no testimonials of their hfe and
conversation. But others give a different account
of this, which I shall more nicely examine, when I
come to speak of the disciphne of the church, under
which head the communio peregrina will come to be
considered, as a species of ecclesiastical censure.
A third instance of respect which
the clergy showed to one another, was, The ciem ob%ed
° to end all their own
that if any controversies happened controversiesamong
•' A x themselves.
among themselves, they freely con
sented to have them determined by their bishops
and councils, without having recourse to the secular
magistrate for justice. Bishops, as I have had oc
casion to show before,12 were anciently authorized
by the imperial laws to hear and determine secular
pecuniary causes even among laymen, when both
the litigants would agree upon compromise to take
them for arbitrators : but among the clergy there
needed no such particular compromise, but by the
rules and canons of the church they were brought
under a general obligation not to molest one an
other before a secular magistrate, but to end all
their controversies under the cognizance of an ec
clesiastical tribunal. The case was somewhat dif
ferent when a layman and a clergyman had occa-

5 Iren. Ep. ad Victor, ap. Euseb. lib. 5. c. 24.
6 Cone. Arelat. 1. c. 20. Ut peregrino episcopo locus
sacrificandi detur.
7 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 33. Ut episcopi vel presbyteri, si
causa visendse ecclesiae alterius episcopi, ad ecclesiam vene-
rint, et in gradu suo suscipiantur, et tarn adverbum facien
dum, quam ad oblationem consccrandam invitentur.
8 Collat. Carthag. Die 1. c. 16. Sicut peregrino episcopo
jnxta considente collega.
9 Cone. Carthag. 1. c. 7. Clericus vel laicus non com-

municet in aliena plebe sine literis episcopi sui. Nisi hne
observatum fuerit, communio fiet passiva. Vid. Cone. Lao-
dicen. c. 41. Cone. Antioch. c. 7. Agathens. c. 38. Chalce
don. c. 11.
10 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 28, Ut episcopi trans mare non
proficiscantur, nisi consulto primae sedis episcopo, ut ab
episcopo praocipue (leg. praecipuo) possint sumere forma.
tam vel commendationem.
11 Canon. Apost. u. 11.
12 Book II. chap. 7.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

1G5

sion to go to law together : for then the layman
was at liberty to choose his court, and was not
obliged to refer his cause to any ecclesiastical judge,
unless by compromise he brought himself under
such an obligation. For so the imperial laws 13 in
this case had provided. Though in France in the
time of the Gothic kings it was otherwise : for lay
men there were not to sue a clerk in a secular court
without the bishop's permission ; as appears from a
canon of the council 14 of Agde, made under Alaric,
anno 506, which equally forbids a clergyman to sue
a layman in a secular court, or to answer to any ac
tion brought against him there, without the bishop's
permission. But whatever difference there was be
twixt the Roman and Gothic laws in this particular,
it is evident, that as to any controversies arising
among the clergy themselves, they were to be de
termined before ecclesiastical judges ; as appears
from a canon of the council of Chalcedon, which is
in these words : If any clergyman hath a controversy
with another, he shall not leave his own bishop,
and betake himself15 to any secular court, but first
have a hearing before his own bishop, or such arbi
trators as both parties should choose with the
bishop's approbation. Otherwise he should be lia
ble to canonical censure. Which censure in the
African church was the loss of his place, whether
he were bishop, presbyter, or deacon, or any other
inferior clerk, that declined the sentence of an ec
clesiastical court, either in a civil or criminal cause,
and betook himself to a secular court for justice :
though he carried his cause, and sentence were
given on his side, in a criminal action, yet he was
to be deposed ; or if it was a civil cause, he must
lose whatever advantage he gained by the action, as
the third council of Carthage 18 in this case deter
mined, because he despised the whole church, in
that he could not confide in any ecclesiastical per
sons to be his judges. Many other councils deter
mined the same thing, as that of Vannes,17 Chalons,18
and Mascon.19 And the council of Milevis20 decreed,
that no one should petition the emperor to assign
him secular judges, but only ecclesiastical,21 under
pain of deprivation. So great confidence did the
clergy generally place in one another, and pay such

a deference to the wisdom, integrity, and judgment
of their brethren, that it was then thought they
had no need to have recourse to secular courts for
justice, but they were willing to determine all con
troversies of their own among themselves : and as
the imperial laws did not hinder this, but encourage
it ; so we seldom find any ecclesiastics inclined to
oppose it, but either some factious and turbulent
men, or such whose crimes had made them so ob
noxious, that they had reason to dread an eccle
siastical censure.
I shall but observe one thing more Sect 5
upon this head, which is, the great tZn*ihllZ™e
care the clergy had of the reputation KXh^aX"'-
and character of one another; which s?0  '"
being a sacred and necessary thing in persons of
their function, they did not think fit to let it be
exposed to the malicious calumnies and slanders of
every base and false accuser. But first, in all accus
ations, especially against bishops, the testimony of
two or three witnesses was required, according to
the rule of the apostle. Therefore when the synod
of Antioch proceeded to condemn Eustathius, bishop
of Antioch, upon a single testimony, the historian
censures it22 as an arbitrary proceeding in them
against that apostolical canon, " Receive not an ac
cusation against an elder, but before two or three
witnesses." Secondly, The character of the wit
nesses was to be examined, before their testimony
was to be allowed of. A heretic was not to give
evidence against a bishop, as may be collected from
those canons which bear the name of the Apostles',
one of which joins these two things together : Re
ceive23 not a heretic to testify against a bishop ;
nor a single witness, though he be one of the faith
ful : for the law saith, " In the mouth of two or three
witnesses shall every word be established." Athana
sius pleaded the privilege of this law, when he was
accused for suffering Macarius his presbyter to break
the communion cup ; he urged,24 that his accusers
were Meletians, who ought not to be credited, being
schismatics, and enemies of the church. By the
second council of Carthage, not only heretics, but
any others that were known to be guilty25 of scan
dalous crimes, were to be rejected from giving tes-

13 Valentin. Novel. 12. ad calcem Cod. Th. In clerico
petitore consequens erit, ut secundum leges pulsati forum
sequatur, si adversarius suus ad episcopi vel presbyteri au-
dientiam non praestat adsensum.
14 Cone. Agathens. c. 32. Clericus nee quenquam prae-
sumat apud saecularem judicem, episcopo non permittente,
pulsare. Sed si pulsatus fuerit, non respondeat, nee pro-
ponat, nee audeat criminale negotium in judicio seculari
proponere. 15 Cone. Chalced. c. 9. Et Tt9 KAtjrn/coo irpos kXtjpikov
irpaypa exel, pi] iyKaTaXipiravEToo tSv oIkeTov iirio-KO-
irov, Kat Eirt KoaptKi StKaaTnpta KaTaTpEXETto, &C.
Cone. Carth. 3. c. 9. Quisquis episcoporum, presbyte
rorum, et diaconorum seu clericorum, cum in ecclesia ei
'rimen fuerit intentatum, vel civilis causa fuerit commota,

si derelicto ecclesiastico judicio publicis judiciis purgari
voluerit, etiamsi pro ipso prolata fuerit sententia, locum
suum amittat, et hoc in criminali actione. In ci viii vero
perdat quod evicerit, si locum suum obtinere maluerit, &c.
17 Cone. Venetic. c. 9. 18 Cone. Cabillon. u. 11.
19 Cone. Matiscon. c. 8. 2° Cone. Milev. c. 19.
21 Cone. Milev. u. 19. Quicunque ab imperatore cogni-
tionem judiciorum publicorum petierit, honore proprio pri-
vetur: si autem episcopale judicium ab imperatore postu-
laverit, nihil ei obsit.
22 Theod. Hist. lib. 1. c. 20. 2S Canon. Apost. c. 75.
** Athan. Apol. ad Constant, t. 1. p. 731.
25 Cone. Carth. 2. c. 6. Qui aliquibus sceleribus irretitus
est, vocem adversus majores natu non habeat accusaudi.
Vid. Cod. Can. Afric. c. 8.

166

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

timony against any elder of the church. The first
general council of Constantinople distinguishes the
causes, upon which an accusation might be brought
against a bishop : for a man might have a private
cause of complaint against him, as that he was de
frauded in his property, or in any the hke case in
jured by him ; in which case his accusation was to
be heard, without considering at all the quality of
the person or his rehgion. For a bishop was to
keep a good conscience, and any man that com
plained of being injured by him, was to have justice
done him, whatever religion he was of. But if the
crime was purely ecclesiastical that was alleged
against him, then the personal quahties of the ac
cusers were to be examined; so that no heretics
should be allowed to accuse28 orthodox bishops in
causes ecclesiastical ; nor any excommunicate per
sons, before they had first made satisfaction for
their own crimes ; nor any who were impeached of
crimes, of which they had not proved themselves
innocent. The council of Chalcedon27 adds, that
no clergyman or layman should be admitted to im
peach a bishop or a clerk, till his own reputation
and character were first inquired into and fully ex
amined. So careful were they in this matter not
to expose the credit of the clergy to the malicious
designs or wicked conspiracies of any profligate
wretches, whom malice or bribery might induce to
accuse them. Thirdly, In case of false accusation,
whether pubhc or private, the penalty against the
offender was very severe. If any clergyman, says
one28 of the Apostolical Canons, unjustly reproach a
bishop, he shall be deposed : for it is written, " Thou
shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.'' And
by a canon 2" of the council of Eliberis, for any man
to charge a bishop, presbyter, or deacon with a false
crime, which he could not make good against them,
was excommunication, without hopes of reconcilia
tion at the hour of death. Which was the usual
penalty that was inflicted by that council upon veiy
great and notorious offenders ; for which some have
censured the Spanish church as guilty of Novatian-
ism, but without reason, as I shall show when I
come to discourse of the discipline of the church.
Here it may be sufficient to observe, that they
thought this crime one of the first magnitude, since
they refused to give the external peace of the church
to such offenders, even at their last hour. Many
other instances of the like respect might here be
added, but by these few the reader will be able to

judge, with what candour and civility the clergy of
the primitive church were obliged to receive and
treat one another. And it would have been happy
for all ages, had they walked in the same steps, and
copied after so good an example.

CHAPTER II.
INSTANCES OF RESPECT SHOWED TO THE CLERGY
BY THE CIVIL GOVERNMENT. WHERE PARTICU
LARLY OF THEIR EXEMPTION FROM THE COGNI
ZANCE OF THE SECULAR COURTS IN ECCLESIAS
TICAL CAUSES.
Next to the respect which the clergy
, . .... Sect.1.
showed to one another, it will be pro- Bishops not to be
called into any
per to speak of the honours which E1^"^0^™
were done them by the civil magis
trates, which were more or less, according as either
the inclination and piety of the emperors led them,
or as the state of the times required. These honours
chiefly consisted in exempting them from some sort
of obligations to which others were hable, and in
granting them certain privileges and immunities
which others did not enjoy. Of this kind was that
instance of respect, which by the laws of Justinian
was granted to all bishops, that no secular judge
should compel1 them to appear in a pubhc court to
give their testimony before him, but he should send
one of his officers to take it from their mouth in
private. This law is also repeated in the Justinian
Code,2 and there said to be enacted first by Theodo
sius the Great, a law of whose is still extant in the
same words in the Theodosian Code.3 But Gotho
fred will have it, that this law, as first enacted by
Theodosius, meant no more than to exempt the
clergy from being bound to give an account to the
civil magistrates, of what judgments or sentences
they passed upon any secular causes that were re
ferred to their arbitration. And indeed it is evident,
that the law terms, ad testimonium devocari, and etc
paprvpiav iiriKaXticrSai, are taken in this sense by the
African fathers in the fifth council of Carthage,
where it was agreed4 to petition the emperors to
make a decree, that if any persons referred a civil
cause to the arbitration of the church, and one of
the parties chanced to be displeased with the de-

28 Cone. Constant. Gen. 1. c. 6.
27 Cone. Chalced. c. 21. a Canon. Apost. c. 47.
23 Cone. Eliber. c. 75. Si quis episcopum, presbyterum,
vel diaconum falsis criminibus appetierit, et probare non
potuerit, nee in fine dartidam ei communionem.
1 Justin. Novel. 123. c. 7. Nulli judicum licebit Deo
amabiles episcopos cogere ad judicium venire pro exhibendo
testimonio ; sed judex mittat ad eos quosdam ex personis
ministrantium sibi, &c.

2 Cod. Just. lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 7. Imperator
Theodosius dixit, Nee honore nee legibus episcopus ad tes
timonium dicendum flagitetur.
3 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 39. de Fide Testium, Leg. 8.
4 Cone. Carth. 5. c. 1. It. Cod. Can. Afr. c. 59. Et
Cone, vulgo diet. Africanum c. 26. Petendum ut statuere
dignentur, ut si qui forte in ecclesia quamlibet causam, jure
apostolico ecclesiis imposito, agere voluerint, et fortasse
decisio clericorum uni parti displicuerit; non liceat cleri-

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

167

cision or sentence that was given against him ; it
should not be lawful to draw the clergyman, who
was judge in the cause, into any secular court, to
make him give any testimony or account of his de
termination. This was not intended to exempt
clergymen in general from being called to be wit
nesses in a secular court, but only to free them from
the prosecutions of vexatious and troublesome men,
who, when they had chosen them for their arbi
trators, would not stand to their arbitration, but
prosecuted them in the civil courts, as if they had
given a partial sentence against them : and though
it was contrary to the law to give them any such
trouble; because, as I have showed5 in another
place, all such determinations were to be absolutely
decisive and final without appeal ; yet it is probable
some secular judges in Africa might give encourage
ment to such prosecutions : which made the African
fathers complain of the grievance, and desire to
have it redressed, in the forementioned canon, to
which Gothofred thinks the law of Theodosius
refers. But whether the law of Theodosius be thus
to be limited, is a matter that may admit of further
inquiry. Gothofred himself confesses that Justi
nian took it in a larger sense ; and that is enough
for me to found this privilege of bishops upon, that
they were not to be caRed into a secular court, to
give their testimony there in any case whatsoever.
Another privilege of this kind,
Nor obliged to which also argued great respect paid
give their testimony , f . .
opon oath, by the to bishops, was, that when their testi-
laivs of Jnstiman. Jr
mony was taken in private, they were
not obhged to give it upon oath, as other witnesses
were, but only upon their word, as became the
priests of God, laying the holy Gospels before them.
For the same law of Justinian6 which grants them
the former privilege, enacted this in their favour
and behalf also. And in pursuance of that law
probably the council of Tribur some ages after7 de
creed, that no presbyter should be questioned upon
oath, but instead of that only be interrogated upon
his consecration ; because it did not become a priest
to swear upon a hght cause. But it does not ap
pear, that this indulgence was granted to bishops
before the time of Justinian. For the council of
Chalcedon8 exacted an oath in a certain case of

the Egyptian bishops; and the council of Tyre9
required the same of Ibas, bishop of Edessa. And
there are many other instances of the hke nature.
Constantine the Greatgranted many
privileges to the clergy ; but there whether the
, , - . single evidence of
are some that go under his name, one bishop was good
^ in law against the
which were certainly never granted by testimony of many
him : as his famed donation to the
bishops of Rome, which Baronius w himself gives
up for a forgery, and De Marca" and Pagi12 prove
it to be a spurious fiction of the ninth century, in
vented most probably by the same Isidore Mercator,
who forged the decretal epistles of the ancient bi
shops of Rome. There are other privileges fathered
upon Constantine, which though not such manifest
forgeries as the former, are yet by learned men re
puted of a doubtful nature ; such as that which is
comprised in a law under the name of Constantine la
at the end of the Theodosian Code, where all judges
are commanded to take the single evidence of one
bishop as good in law, against all others whatso
ever. Gothofred is of opinion, that this whole title
in the Theodosian Code is spurious ; and for this
law in particular, there are two arguments that'
seem to prove it not genuine. First, Because Con
stantine himself in another law says,14 the testimony
of a single witness shall not be heard in any case,
no, not though the witness be a senator. Secondly,
Because the ecclesiastical laws, as well as the civil,
require two witnesses, as has been noted in the last
chapter. Which, I think, are sufficient arguments
to prove, that no such extravagant privilege could
be granted to bishops by Constantine : but I leave
the reader to judge for himself, if he can find better
arguments to the contrary.
We have better proof for another „ .
r Sect. 4.
privilege that we find granted to pres- leS'^iS/'Sin-
byters, which was, that if any of them £^"'"0^^°
were called to give testimony in a
public court, they should not be examined by
scourging or torture, as the law directed in other
cases. For by the Roman laws witnesses might be
examined upon the rack in some cases, to make
them declare the whole truth : as we learn not only
from the laws la themselves, but from St. Austin,15
and Synesius,17 who mentions several new sorts of

cumin judicium ad testimonium devocari eum, qui cognitor
vel praesens (forsan praeses) fuerit. Et nulla ad testimo
nium dicendum ecclesiastici cujuslibet persona pulsetur.
5 Book II. chap. 7. sect. 3 and 4.
8 Justin. Novel. 123. c. 7. Propositis SS. evangeliis, se
cundum quod decet sacerdotes, dicant quod noverint, non
tamen jurent.
' Cone. Tribur. c. 21. Presbyter vice juramenti per
sanctam consecrationem interrogetur; quia sacerdotes ex
levi causa jurare non debent, &e.
8 Cone. Chalced. Act. 4. t. 4. p. 518.
• Cone. Tyr. in Act. 9. Concil. Chalced. p. 629.
10 Baron, an. 324. n. 118.

11 Marca, de Concord, lib. 6. c. 6. n. 6.
12 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 324. n. 13.
13 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 12. de Episc. Audient. Leg. 1.
Testimonium etiam ab uno licet episcopo perhibitum, om
nes judices indubitanter accipiant, nee alius audiatur, cum
testimonium episcopi a qualibet parte fuerit repromissum.
14 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 39. de Fide Testium, Leg. 3.
Sancimus, utunius omnino testis responsio non audiatur,
etiamsi praeclarae curiae honore praefulgeat.
,s Vid. Cod. Justin, lib. 9. Tit. 41. de Qusestionibus. It.
Cod. Theod. lib. 13. Tit. 9. de Naufragiis, Leg. 2.
16 Aug. Serm. 49. de Divers, t. 10. p. 520.
17 Synes. Ep. 58.

163

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

torture, which Andronicus, the tyrannical prefect of
Ptolemais, invented, beyond what the law directed.
But now nothing of this kind could be imposed
upon any presbyter of the church : for they were
exempted from it by a law of Theodosius the Great,
which is still extant in both the Codes,18 by which
it also appears that it was a peculiar privilege
granted to bishops and presbyters, but to none be
low them : for the rest of the clergy are excepted,
and left to the common way of examination, which
in other cases the law directed to be used.
But the next privilege I am to
Theciergy'ex- mention, was a more universal one,
dhSry co'g\ikaence that extended to all the clergy ; which
of the secular courts .
in aii ecclesiastical wag their exemption from the ordi-
causes. *¦
nary cognizance of the secular courts
in several sorts of causes. To understand this
matter aright, we must carefully distinguish two
things. First, The different kinds of causes in
which the clergy might be concerned ; and, second
ly, The different powers of the inferior courts from
that of the supreme magistrate, who was invested
with a pecuhar prerogative power above them.
* The want of attending to which distinctions is the
thing that has bred so much confusion in modern
authors upon this subject, and especially in the
Romish writers, many of which are intolerably
partial in their accounts, and highly injurious to
the civil magistrates, under pretence of asserting
and maintaining the rights and liberties of the
church. In the first place, therefore, to have a
right understanding in this matter, we must dis
tinguish the several sorts of causes in which eccle
siastical persons might be concerned. Now these
were of four kinds. First, Such as related to mat
ters purely eccclesiastical, as crimes committed
against the faith, or canons, and discipline, and
good order of the church, which were to be punish
ed with ecclesiastical censures. Secondly, Such as
related to mere civil and pecuniary matters between
a clergyman and a' layman. Thirdly, Such as re
lated to pohtical matters, as gross and scandalous
crimes committed against the laws, and to the detri
ment of the commonwealth, as treason, rebellion,
robbery, murder, and the like, which in the laws
are called atrocia delicta. Fourthly, Such as related
to lesser crimes of the same nature, which the law
calls levia delicta, small or petty offences. Now,

according to this distinction of causes, the clergy
were, or were not, exempt from the cognizance of
the civil courts by the laws of the Roman empire.
In all matters that were purely ecclesiastical they
were absolutely exempt, as Gothofred,19 the great
civilian, scruples not to own. For all causes of
that nature were reserved to the hearing of bishops
and their councils, not only by the canons of the
church, but the laws of the state also.
This may be evidenced from the Sect 6
rescripts of several emperors succes- fro^he'if™".
sively one after another, most of which Con5ta"'lu,:
are extant in both the Codes. Constantius, anno
355, published a law,20 wherein he prohibited any
accusation to be brought against a bishop before a
secular magistrate ; but if any one had any com
plaint against him, his cause should be heard and
tried by a synod of bishops. This at least must
signify in ecclesiastical causes; though Gothofred
and some others say, it extended also to civil and
criminal causes; and that though it looked like
a privilege, yet it was intended as a snare to the
catholic bishops, to oppress them by his Arian
synods, in those times when the majority of bishops
in any synod were commonly such as favoured the
Arian party ; and a catholic bishop might expect
more favour and justice from a secular court than
from them. But whether this law extended to all
civil and criminal causes is not very easy to deter
mine : thus much is certain, that if it did, it was not
long after in that part revoked, whilst in the other
part it stood good, and was confirmed by the laws
of the succeeding emperors.
For Valentinian granted the clergy Ssct ,
the same immunity in all ecclesiasti- va^tiSand
i . /. -, . Gratian:
cal causes. As appears from what
St. Ambrose writes to the younger Valentinian con
cerning his father, saying, Your father, of august
memory,21 did not only say it in words, but enacted
it into a law, that in matters of faith and ecclesias
tical order they ought to judge who were qualified
by their office, and of the same order. For those
are the words, of his rescript. That is, he would
have priests to judge of priests. This law is not now
extant in the Code, but there is another of Valen
tinian and Gratian to the same purpose ; wherein
it is decreed,22 that the same custom should be ob
served in ecclesiastical business, as was in civil

18 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 39. de Fide Testium, Leg. 10.
Presbyteri citra injuriam quaestionis testimonium dicant;
ita tamen ut falsa non simulent. Caeteri vero clerici, qui
eorum gradum vel ordinem subsequuntur, si ad testimonium
dicendum petiti fuerint, prout leges praecipiunt, audiantur.
Vid. Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. Leg. 8.
19 Gothofr. Comment, in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 23.
23 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 12. Mansuetu-
dinis nostrae lege prohibemus in judiciis episcopos accusari.
 Si quid est igitur querelarum, quod quispiam defert,
apud alios potissimum episcopos convenit explorari, &c.

21 Ambros. Ep. 32. Augustae memoriae pater tuus non
solum sermone respondit, sed etiam legibus suis sanxit, m
causa fidei, vel ecclesiastici alicujus ordinis eum judicare
debere, qui nee munere impar, nee jure dissimilis. HffiC
enim verba rescripti sunt. Hoc est, sacerdotes de sacerdo-
tibus voluit judicare.
22 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 23. Qui mosest
causarum civilium, iidem in negotiis ecclesiasticis obtinendi
sunt : ut siqua sunt ex quibusdam dissensionibus, levi-
busque delictis, ad religionis observantiam pertinentia, locis
suis, et a sua? diceceseos synodis audiantur : exceptis qua)

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

169

causes : that if there arose any controversies about
matters of rehgion, either from the dissensions of
men, or other small offences, they should be heard
and determined in the places where they arose, or
in the synod of the whole diocese> except only such
criminal actions as were reserved to the hearing of
the ordinary judges, the proconsuls and prefects of
every province, or the extraordinary judges of the
emperor's own appointing, or the illustrious powers,
viz. the prcefectus-prcetorio of the diocese. Here it
is plain, that though criminal actions against the
state-laws are excepted, yet all matters ecclesiasti
cal were to be heard by ecclesiastical judges, and
no other. In the last title of the Theodosian
And Theodosius Code, there is a law under the name
the Great : .
of Theodosius the Great to the same
purpose, wherein it is decreed, that no bishop,23 or
any other minister of the church, shall be drawn
into the civil courts of any ordinary or extraordi
nary judges, about matters or causes of an ecclesi
astical nature ; because they have judges of their
own, and laws distinct from those of the state. This
law is cited in Gratian's decree, but the words,
quantum ad causas ecclesiasticas tamen pertinet, are
there 2' fraudulently left out, to serve the current
doctrine and hypothesis of his own times, and make
the reader believe, that the clergy anciently enjoyed
an exemption not only in ecclesiastical causes, but
all others. I the rather mention this corruption,
because none of the correctors of Gratian have taken
any notice of it. The Roman censors silently pass
it over, and it has escaped the diligence of Antonius
Augustinus and Baluzius also. Gothofred indeed
questions the authority of the law itself; but I shall
not stand to dispute that, since there is nothing in
it contrary to the preceding laws, or those that fol
lowed after. For Arcadius and Honorius con-
Sect. 9. , .
And Arcadius and tmued the same privilege to the cler-
Honorius : gy, confirming the ancient laws, that
whenever any cause relating to religion was debated,
the bishops23 were to be judges; but other causes,
belonging to the cognizance of the ordinary judges,
and the use of the common laws, were to be heard
by them only.

Theodosius junior and Valentinian
III. refer to this law of Honorius, as And vnientinian
- , III. and Justinian.
the standing law then in force con
cerning the immunities and liberties of the clergy,
saying in one of their decrees, that26 bishops and
presbyters had no court of secular laws, nor any
power to judge of other causes, except such as re
lated to religion, according to the constitutions of
Arcadius and Honorius inserted into the Theodosian
Code. So that all the same laws which denied
them power in secular causes, allowed them the pri
vilege of judging in ecclesiastical causes ; and the
very excepting of other causes is » manifest proof,
that there was no contest made about these to the
time of Justinian, who confirmed the privilege which
so many of his predecessors had granted before him.
For in one of his Novels27 we find it enacted, That
all ecclesiastical crimes, which were to be punished
with ecclesiastical penalties and censures, should
be judged by the bishop ; the provincial judges not
intermeddling with them. For, saith he, it is our
pleasure that such matters shall not be heard by the
civil judges.
Gothofred is also of opinion,2" that Secl „
some of the lesser criminal causes of eJmptc'nilsei8cri-
ecclesiastics were to be determined by mmal cause8'
the bishops and their synods likewise. For in the
forementioned law of Gratian, (see before, sect. 7,)
the levia delicta, or lesser crimes, are reserved to the
hearing of bishops. And St. Ambrose having spoken
of the decree of Valentinian, that orders all eccle
siastical causes to be judged by bishops only, adds
also, that if in other respects a bishop was to be cen
sured, and his morals29 came under examination,
such causes as those likewise should appertain to the
episcopal judgment. Which seems to put some dis
tinction between ecclesiastical and civil criminal
causes, and reserve both to the hearing of bishops
and their synods. But then, as Gothofred, rightly
observes, this must only be understood of lesser cri
minal causes : for in greater criminal actions the
clergy were liable to the cognizance of the secular
judges as well as all others. Which is freely owned
by De Marca, and some other ingenuous writers of
the Romish church. For De Marca30 quits the po
sitions of Baronius and the canonists, and confesses,

actio criminalis ab ordinariis extraordinariisque judicibus,
aut illustribus potestatibus audientia (leg. audienda) con-
stituit. 23 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 12. de Episc. Judicio. Leg. 3.
Continua lege sancimus, ut nullus episcoporum, vel eorum
qui ecclesiae necessitatibus serviunt, ad judicia sive ordina-
norum sive extradrdinariorum judicum (quantum tamen ad
causas ecclesiasticas pertinet) pertrahatur, &c.
24 Gratian. Caus. 11. Quaest. 1. c. 5.
25 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 11. de Religione, Leg. 1. Quotiens
de religione agitur, episcopos convenit j udicare : caeteras
vero causas, quae ad ordinarios cognitores, vel ad usum
publici juris pertinent, legibus oportet audiri.
28 Valentin. Novel. 12 ad calcem Cod. Theod. Constat

episcopos et presbyteros forum legibus non habere : nee de
aliis causis, secundum Arcadii et Honorii divalia constituta,
quae Theodosianum corpus ostendit, praeter religionem posse
cognosce re.
27 Justin. Novel. 83. Si vero ecclesiasticum sit delictum,
egens castigatione ecclesiastica et multa, Deo ainabilis
episcopus hoc discernat, nihil communicantibus clarissimis
provinciae judicibus. Neque enim volumus talia negotia
omnino scire civiles judices.
28 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 23.
29 Ambr. Ep. 32. Quinetiam si alias quoque argueretur
episcopus, et morum esset examinanda causa, etiam hanc
voluit ad episcopale judicium pertinere.
30 Marca, Dissert, in Cap. Clericus, ad calcem Antonii Au-

170

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

that as it appears from the Theodosian Code, that
the ecclesiastical crimes, and lesser civil crimes of
the clergy, were left to the hearing of bishops, and
the synods of every diocese or province; so the
greater civil crimes ofthe clergy, which he reckons
five in number, were reserved to the hearing of the
public courts and civil judges ; which, he says, ap
pears from the laws published by Sirmondus in his
Appendix to the Theodosian Code.
Some reckon those laws to be of
But not in greater no very great authority, and therefore
I shall rather choose to confirm this
position from the undoubted laws which occur in
the body of the Theodosian Code. Such as that of
Theodosius and Gratian, which particularly excepts
these greater criminal actions,81 and reserves them
to the hearing of the ordinary or extraordinary
judges, or the presfeclus-prcstorio of the diocese ;
and those other laws of Theodosius, and Arcadius,
and Honorius, and Valentinian III., which have
been cited in the foregoing sections,32 and need
not here be repeated. To which we may add that law
of the elder Valentinian, which orders38 all such ec
clesiastics to be prosecuted in the civil courts, that
were found guilty of creeping into the houses of
widows and orphans, and so insinuating into their
affections, as to prevail upon them to disinherit
their relations, and make them their heirs. And
that other law of the emperor Marcian, which in
criminal causes exempts the clergy of Constanti
nople84 from the cognizance of all inferior courts,
but not from the high court of the presfectus-pres-
torio of the royal city. Which appears also to have
been the practice at Rome. For Socrates85 ob
serves, that when, in the conflict which happened
at the election of Pope Damasus, some persons
were slain, many both of the laity and clergy upon
that account were punished by Maximinus, who was
then presfectus-prestorio at Rome. It appears fur

ther from the Novels88 of Valentinian III., that in
such criminal actions as those of murder, robbing
of graves, or the hke, bishops, as well as any other
clerks, were bound to answer before the civil magis
trate by their proctors. But Justinian a httle en
larged the privilege with respect to bishops, making
a decree,37 that no one should draw a bishop in any
pecuniary or criminal cause before a secular magis
trate against his will, unless the emperor gave par
ticular order to do it. This was the plain state of
the matter, as to what concerned the exemption of
the clergy in this sort of criminal causes, notwith
standing what Baronius or any others of that strain
have said to the contrary. Nay, some ages after,
such crimes as murder, theft, and witchcraft were
brought before the secular judges in France, as ap
pears from the council of Mascon,38 anno 581.
The case was much the same in all
civil pecuniary controversies which Nor in pecuniary
T-, causes with laymen,
the clergy had with laymen, tor
though they might end all such causes which they
had one with another, in their own courts, or be
fore a synod of bishops ; and the canons obhged
them so to do, as has been noted in the last chap
ter;39 yet if their controversy happened to be with
a layman, the layman was not bound to refer the
hearing of his cause to an ecclesiastical court, un
less he voluntarily consented by way of compromise
to take some ecclesiastical persons for his arbitra
tors. This is evident from one of the Constitutions
of Valentinian III., which says, That if the plain
tiff was a layman, he might compel any clergyman,
with whom he had a civil contest, to answer in a
civil court, if he40 rather chose it. And the council
of Epone,41 according to the reading of Sirmond's
edition, says the same, that the clergy, if they were
sued in a secular court, should make no scruple
to follow the plaintiff thither. But Justinian, at the
instance of Mennas, patriarch of Constantinople,

gustini de Emendat. Gratiani, p. 577. In Codice Theodo-
siano controversial quae ad religionem pertinent, in quibus
sunt crimina ecclesiastica, et minora delicta e civilium nu-
mero, episcopis et cujusque diceceseos sive provinciae sy
nodis relinquuntur: servata. judiciis publicis atrocium cri-
minum, quae numero quinque, adversus clericos cognitione ;
ut docent leges aliquot editae cura Sirmondi in Appendice
Codicis Theodosiani.
31 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 23. Exceptis
quae actio criminalis ab ordinariis extraordinariisque judici
bus, aut illustribus potestatibus audienda constituit.
32 See sect. 8, 9, 10.
33 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 20. Ecclesiastici-vidu-
arum ac pupillarum domos non adeant : sed publicis exter-
minentur judiciis, si posthac eos affines earum vel propin-
qui putaverint deferendos.
34 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 25. Actor in
nullo alio foro, vel apud quenquam alterum judicem eosdem
clericos litibus irretire, et civilibus vel criminalibus negotiis
tentet innectere.
3:' Socrat. lib. 4. c. 29. Ata tovto iroXXovs Xa'tKovs te Kal

KXqptKovs vied tov tote iirdpxov Ma£tiui/ou Tipmpr}^r]vai.
38 Valent. Novel. 5. de Sepulcr. Violat. ad calcem Cod.
Theod. It. Novel. 12. Quam formam etiam circa episcopo
rum personam observari oportere censemus. Ut si in hu-
jusmodi ordinis homines actionem pervasionis et atrocium
injuriarum dirigi necesse fuerit, per procuratorem solemni-
ter ordinatum, apud judicem publicum inter leges et jura
confligant. 37 Justin. Novel. 123. n. 8. Sed neque ut episcopus pro
pecuniaria aliqua aut criminali causa ad civilem milita-
remve magistratum invitus perducatur, sistaturve sine ira-
periali jussione concedimus.
38 Cone. Matiscon. 1. can. 7. 89 Chap. 1. sect. 4.
40 Valent. Novel. 12. Petitor laicus, seu in civili seu in
criminali causa, cujuslibet loci clericum adversarium suum,
si id magis eligat, per auctoritatem legitimam in publico
judicio respondere compellat.
¦" Cone. Epaunens. c. 11. Si pulsati fuerint, sequi ad se-
culare judicium non morentur. Yet note that other edi
tions, as that of Crab and Binius, read it to a contrary sense
sequi ad seculare judicium non praesumant.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

171

granted the clergy of the royal city a peculiar pri
vilege, that in all pecuniary matters42 their cause
should first be brought before the bishop ; and if
the nature of the cause happened to be such that
he could not determine it, then recourse might be
had to the civil judges, but not otherwise. From
all which it appears, that anciently exemptions of
this nature were not challenged as matters of Di
vine right, but depended wholly upon the will and
pleasure of Christian princes, however after ages
came to put another kind of gloss upon them.
Nay, it must be observed, that even
of theCnecessary in ecclesiastical causes, a great differ-
distinrtion between . . -, ,
the supreme and ence was always observed between
subordinate magis-
trates in this busi- the power of the prince or supreme
ness of exemptions. r x *¦
magistrate, and that of the subordin
ate and inferior judges. For though the ordinary
judges were bound by the laws not to intermeddle
with ecclesiastical causes; yet in some cases, the
prince himself interposed and appointed extraordi
nary judges, and sometimes heard and decided the
causes himself, or reversed the decisions of ecclesi
astics by his sovereign power, which no ordinary
judges were qualified to do. But this belongs to
another subject, that will have a more proper place
in this work, when we come to speak of the power
of Christian princes.

CHAPTER III.
OP THE IMMUNITIES OP THE CLERGY IN REFER
ENCE TO TAXES AND CIVIL OFFICES, AND OTHER
BURDENSOME EMPLOYMENTS IN THE ROMAN EM
PIRE. Sa,( , Another privilege which the clergy
piSed'by°thigahn- enjoyed by the favour of Christian
cient clergy to es- _ • ,, . . , .
empt themselves princes, was, that in some certain
from ta&es. .
cases, according to the exigence of
times and places, they were exempt from some of
the taxes that were laid upon the rest of the Roman
empire. But whatever they enjoyed of this kind,
they did not pretend to as matter of Divine right,
but freely acknowledged it to be owing to the pi
ous munificence and favour of Christian emperors.
Therefore1 Baronius does them great injustice, and
is guilty of very great prevarication, in pretending
that they claimed a freedom from tribute by the law

42 Justin. Novel. 83. ' Baron, an. 387. t. 4. p. 538.
2 Ambr. Orat. cont. Auxent. de tradend. basilicis post
Ep. 32. Si tributum petit imperator, non negamus ; agri
ecclesias solvunt tributum.  Solvimus quae sunt Caesaris
Cajsari, et quae sunt Dei Deo. Tributum Caesaris est, non
negatur. 3 Ambr. lib. 4. in Luc. v. et ap. Gratian. Caus. II. qu. I.

of Christ ; and that no emperor ever imposed any
tax upon them, except only Julian the apostate,
and Valens the Arian, and the younger Valentinian,
who was wholly governed by his mother Justina, an
Arian empress ; that when St. Ambrose paid tribute
under this Valentinian, he did it only out of his
Christian meekness, not that he was otherwise un
der any obligation to have done it. How true this
representation is, the reader may judge in part from
the words of St. Ambrose, which are these:2 If the
emperor demands tribute of us, we do not deny it :
the lands of the church pay tribute. We pay to
Ccesar the things that are Ceesar's, and to God the
things that are God's. Tribute is Caesar's, and
therefore we do not refuse to pay it. This is so far
from challenging any exemption by Divine right,
that it plainly asserts the contrary. As in another
place he argues, that all men are under an obliga
tion to pay tribute, because3 the Son of God him
self paid it, Matt. xvii. 27. And yet Baronius cites4
that very passage of the evangelist to prove that
the clergy are jure Divino exempt, because our Sa
viour says, " Then are the children free." For if,
says he, the children be free, much more so are
the fathers, that is, the pastors, under whose care
princes are. Bellarmine is much more ingenuous in
handling this question; for he asserts5 against the
canonists, (whose, opinion Baronius labours to main
tain,) that the exemption of the clergy in political
matters, whether relating to their persons or their
goods,-was introduced by human right only, and
not Divine : and that, in fact, they were never ex
empted from any other but persoral tribute, till the
time of Justinian, when they were freed from taxes
upon their estates and possessions also. So little
agreement is there betwixt these two great cardinals
of the Romish church in their accounts of this
matter, either as to fact or right, that in every thing
their assertions are point blank contrary to one
another. To set the matter in a clear light,
it will be necessary for me to give vet seneraiiy ex-
. cused from personal
the reader a distinct account of the taxes, or head-
money.
several sorts of tribute that were im
posed upon subjects in the Roman empire, and to
show how far the clergy were concerned in each of
them ; which will be best done by having recourse
to the Theodosian Code, where most of the laws re
lating to this affair are still extant. And this I
shall the rather do, because Baronius makes use of
the same authority, but with great partiality, dis-

c. 28. Si censum filius Dei solvit, quis tu tantus es, qui
non putes esse solvendum?
4 Baron, an. 387. n. 12. p. 538.
s Bellarm. de Clericis, lib. 1. c. 28. Exceptio clericorum
in rebus politicis, tarn quoad personas, quam quoad bona,
jure humano introducta est, non Divino. Haec propositio
est contra canonistas.

172

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

sembling every thing that would not serve the hy
pothesis he had undertaken to maintain.
Now, the first sort of tribute I shall take notice
of, is that which is commonly called census capitum,
or personal tribute, to distinguish it from the census
agrorum, or tribute arising from men's estates and
possessions. That the clergy were generally freed
from this sort of tribute is agreed on all hands, only
Gothofred has a very singular notion about it. For
he asserts8 that under the Christian emperors there
was no such tribute as this paid by any men ; so
that the exemption of the clergy in this case was
no peculiar privilege belonging to them, but only
what they enjoyed in common with all other sub
jects of the Roman empire. But in this that learn
ed man seems evidently to be mistaken. For, first,
he owns there was such a tribute under the heathen
emperors, from which, as Ulpian' relates, none were
excused, save only minors under fourteen, and per
sons superannuated, that is, above sixty-five : nor
does he produce any law to show when or by whom
that tribute was ordered to be laid aside. Secondly,
Theodosius junior, the author of the Theodosian
Code, makes express mention of it, when, in one of
his Novels,8 he distinguishes betwixt the census
capitum and census agrorum. Thirdly, there are
several laws in the Theodosian Code, exempting the
clergy from tribute, which cannot fairly be under
stood of any other tribute but this sort of capitation.
As when Constantius grants the clergy the same
immunity from tribute as minors had, he plainly re
fers to the old law about minors mentioned by Ul
pian, and puts the clergy upon the same foot with
them, granting them this privilege, that not only
they themselves, but9 their wives and children, their
men-servants and their maid-servants, should all be
free from tribute ; meaning personal tribute, or that
sort of capitation called capitis census. After the
same manner we are to understand those two laws
of Valentinian,10 where he grants to devoted virgins,
and widows, and orphans under twenty years of
age, the same immunity from tribute, or, as it is there

called, the capitation of the vulgar. As also that
other law" of his, where he grants the like privilege
to painters, together with their wives and children.
From all which we may very reasonably conclude,
that this exemption from personal taxes was not a
thing then common to all, but a peculiar privilege of
some certain arts and professions, among which the
most honourable was that of the clergy.
This may be further confirmed from an observ
ation or two out of Gregory Nazianzen and Basil.
Nazianzen, in one of his epistles 12 to Amphilochius,
complains, that the officers of the government had
made an illegal attempt upon one Euthalius a dea
con, to oblige him to pay taxes : therefore he desires
Amphilochius not to permit this injury to be done
him ; since otherwise 13 he would suffer a hardship
above other men, not being allowed to enjoy the
favour of the times, and the honour which the
emperors had granted to the clergy. Here he
plainly refers to some immunity from tribute, which
the imperial laws granted particularly to the
clergy ; which could not be any exemption of their
estates from tribute, for there was no such law then
in force to be appealed to : it must therefore mean
their exemption from personal taxes, from which
they were freed by the laws of Valentinian and
Constantius already mentioned. This will still re
ceive greater light and confirmation from the testi
mony of St. Basil, who had occasion to make a hke
complaint to Modestus, (who was prdfectus-prcetorio
Orientis under Valens,) of some who had infringed
the privilege of the clergy in exacting tribute of them
against the laws. The ancient way of taxing, says he,
excused such as were consecrated to God,14 presbyters
and deacons, from paying tribute : but now they who
are set over this affair, pretending to have no warrant
from your Eminency to excuse them, have taxed
them all, except such as could claim a privilege
from their age. Therefore his request to him was,
ovyxo>pi,S>]vai Kara tov iraXawv vouov rrjg ffwriXuag
roig iepaTivovrag, that the clergy might be exempt
from tribute according to the ancient laws. St.

6 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 1. de Annon.
et Tribut. Leg. 15. It. Com. in lib. 13. Tit. 10. de Censu,
Leg. 4.
7 Digest, lib. 50. Tit. 15. de Censibus, Leg. 3. Quibus-
dam setas tribuit, ne tributo onerentur. Veluti in Syriis a
quatuordecim annis masculi, a duodecim fceminae usque ad
sexagesimum quintum annum tributo capitis onerentur.
9 Theodos. Novel. 21.
8 Cod. Th. lib. 1G. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 10 et 14.
Clericis ac juvenibus praebeatur immunitas— Quod et con-
jugibus et liberis eorum et ministeriis majoribus pariter ac
foeminis indulgemus; quos a censibus etiam jubemus per-
severare immunes.
10 Cod. Th. lib. 13. Tit. 10. de Censu, Leg. 4. In vir-
ginitate perpetua viventes, et earn viduam de qua ipsa ma-
turitas pollicetur aetatis nulli jam earn esse nupturam, a
plebeiae capitationis injuria vindicandas esse decernimus :
item pupillos in virili sexu usque ad viginti annos ab istius-

modi functione immunes esse debere ; mulieres autem donee
virum unaquaeque sortitur. Ibid. Leg. 6. Nulla vidua, nemo
pupillus exactionem plebis agnoscat, &c.
11 Cod. Th. lib. 13. Tit. 4. de Excusat. Artific. Leg. 4.
Picturae professores, si modo ingenui sunt, placuit, neque
sui capitis censiohe, neque uxorum, aut etiam liberorum
nomine, tributis esse munificos.
12 Naz. Ep. 159. AiaypdepEivEiriXEipovenxpiaovolTiii
nyEpovtKrps t- a^Ecoc.
13 Ibid. AEtvOTara av irdSrol, povos ivSlpdsirmv pi]Tvy.
Xavov Trfs Teov Katpwv cpiXavSpeoTrias, Kal Tr}S SeSoptv^
Toil lEpaTtKoll irapi twv fiaeriXicov Tlpr}l.
14 Basil. Ep. 279. ad. Modest. To&s tw Saw UpuipEvovt,
irpEo-fivTEpovs Kal StaKovovs b iraXaids ktjvoos AteXeis
dtpriKEv' ol Si vvv diroypatydpEVOt, ois oi. XafiovrES irapa
-rfjs viTEpcpvovs arov i£ovo-ia$ irpdaTaypa, dirEypdtyavTO,
irXijv eI pr) irov tii/es dX't cos eIxov bird T7,s wXtKtas Tt;lt
dfpEcnv.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

173

Basil in this passage refers to two sorts of laws ex
empting persons from tribute ; the one, those an
cient laws of the heathen emperors, which only
excused minors and superannuates from personal
tribute ; the other, those laws of Constantius and
Valentinian, which exempted the clergy also, grant
ing them that immunity which only minors enjoyed
before. And this is the thing he oomplains of, that
the clergy were not allowed the benefit of Christian
laws, but only those laws of the heathen emperors,
whereby, if they chanced to be minors or super
annuated, that is, under twenty, or above sixty-five,
they were excused, but not otherwise. From all
which it evidently appears, that the clergy might
claim a peculiar privilege by the laws to be ex
empted from personal tribute, and that this was not
common to all the subjects of the empire, whatever
Gothofred and Pagi15 from him have suggested to
the contrary.
sect. 3. The next sort of tribute was that
forBther'andsC°ar;d which was exacted of men for their
possessions. lands and possessions, which goes by
several names in the civil law and ancient writers.
Sometimes it is called icavuiv, as by Athanasius,16
where he complains how he was unj ustly accused of
imposing a tax upon Egypt for the use of the church
of Alexandria. So in the Theodosian Code17 there
is a whole title, De canone frumentario urbis Pomes,
which signifies the tribute of corn that was exacted
of the African provinces for the use of the city of
Rome. It is otherwise called jugatio, from juga,
which, as Gothofred notes,18 signifies as much land
as a yoke of oxen could plough in a year : and, be
cause the taxation was made according to that rate,
it had, therefore, the name oi jugatio ariAjuga. It
has also frequently the name of capitatio and capita :
and because men's servants and cattle were reckon
ed into their taxable possessions as well as their
lands, therefore, in some laws19 the one is called
capitatio terrena, and the other capitatio humana et
animalium, or animarum descriptio. These taxes
were usually paid three times a year, once every
four months; whence Sidonius Apollinaris20 styles
them tria capita, or the monster with three heads,
which he desired the emperor Majorianus to free
him from, that he might live and subsist the bet

ter : for thus he addresses himself to him in his
poetical way :
Geryones nos esse puta, monstrumque tributum :
Hie capita, ut vivam, tu mihi tolle tria.
In which words, which none of the commentators
rightly understood, he refers to a law21 of Valen-
tinian's, and several others in the Theodosian Code,
where this sort of tribute is required to be paid by
three certain portions in a year, or once in four
months, which, in his phrase, is the tria capita, or
monster with three heads. The collectors of this
tax were also hence called cephaleotes, collectors of
the capitation,22 in some laws of the Theodosian
Code. And because this tribute was commonly paid
in specie, as in corn, wine, oil, iron, brass, &c, for
the emperor's service, therefore it is often called
specierum eollatio. And, being the ordinary stand
ing tax of the empire, it is no less frequently styled
indictio canonical in opposition to the superindicta
et extraordinaria, that is, such taxes as were levied
upon extraordinary occasions. I have noted these
things here all together, that I may not be put to
explain the terms at every turn hereafter, as I have
occasion to make use of them, which are indeed a
httle uncommon, and not easily understood, but by
such as are conversant in the civil law.
Now to the question in hand, whether the clergy
in general were exempt from this ordinary canoni
cal tribute laid upon men's goods and possessions ?
I answer in the negative, agamst Baronius, who
asserts the contrary. Some particular churches, in
deed, had special favours granted them by indulgent
princes, to exempt them from all tribute of this
kind : but those very exceptions prove, that what
was matter of grace to some particular churches,
could not be the common privilege of all churches.
Theodosius junior granted a special exemption to
the church of Thessalonica, that she should pay
no capitation for her own estate,24 provided she did
not take other lands into her protection, to the
detriment of the commonwealth, under the pretence
of an ecclesiastical title. He also allowed the
churches of Constantinople and Alexandria the
same privilege,25 upon the like condition, that they
should not take any villages, great or small, into

15 Pagi, Crit. in Baron, an. 353. n. 10.
Athan. Apol. 2. p. 778. 'Qs ipu icavova tois At-yuTrrtots
lETTlfidXXoVTOS, Sec.
17 Cod. Th. lib. 14. Tit. 15.
19 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Theod. lib. 13. Tit. 10. de
Censu, Leg. 2. p. 118. Ego juga putem dicta terrae modum,
cui colendo per annum jugo bourn opus est.
18 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 20. de Conlat. Donat. Leg. 6.
20 Sidon. Carm. 13. ad Majorian.
21 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 1. de Annona et Tribut. Leg. 15.
Unusquisque annonarias species, pro modo capitationis et
sortium, praabiturus, per quaternos menses anni curriculo
distributo, tribus vicibus summam coulationis implebit.

22 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 24. de Patrocin. Vicor. Leg. 5.
23 Cod. Th. lib. 6. Tit. 26. de Proximis Comitib. &c.
Leg. 14.
24 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 1. de Annona et Tribut. Leg. 33.
Sacrosancta Thessalonicensis ecclesia civitatis excepta : ita
tamen ut aperte sciat, propriee tantummodo capitationis mo
dum beneficio mei numinis sublevandum : nee externorum
gravamine tributorum rempublicam ecclesiastici nominis
abusione laedendam.
23 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 24. de Patrocin. Vicorum, Leg. 5.
Quicquid ecclesiae venerabiles, (id est, Constantinopolitana
et Alexandria,) possedisse deteguntur, id pro intuitu re
ligionis ab his praecipimus firmiter retineri : sub ea videlicet

174

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

their patronage, to excuse them from paying their
ancient capitation. Gothofred is also of opinion,
that in the beginning of Constantine's reign, while
the church was poor, and her standing revenues but
small, her estates and possessions were universally
excused from tribute : for there is a law in the
Theodosian Code which may be interpreted to this
purpose ; though the words are so obscure,26 that,
without the help of so wise an interpreter, one
would hardly find out the sense of them. However,
admitting them to signify such a privilege, it is cer
tain it lasted not many years : for in the next reign,
under Constantius, when the church was grown
pretty wealthy, all the clergy that were possessed
of lands, were obliged to pay tribute, in the same
manner as all others did : as appears from a law of
Constantius, directed to Taurus, presfectus-prestorio,
which is still extant in both the Codes.27 This is
further evident from the testimony of Valentinian,
who, in an epistle to the bishops of Asia, recorded
by Theodoret,23 says, all good bishops thought them
selves obliged to pay tribute, and did not resist the
imperial power. And thus matters continued to the
time of Honorius, and Theodosius junior, in one of
whose laws29 the church lands are still made liable
to this ordinary or canonical tribute, as it is there
worded, though excused from all other. So little
reason had Baronius to assert with that confidence,
that no prince, except Julian the apostate, and
Valens the Arian, and the younger Valentinian,
who was under the conduct of an Arian woman,
ever exacted any tribute of the clergy ; whenas it
appears, that every emperor after Constantine did
exact it ; and Baronius could not be ignorant of
this, having viewed and perused the Theodosian
Code, where these things are recorded.
If in any thing of this tribute they
Sect. 4. .
ofthe tribute were exempt, it must be from the
called, aurum tiro- x
nicTx'c'1"* """' obligation some provinces lay under
to furnish the emperors with new
soldiers, called tirones, and fresh horses for the
wars, which, because they were exhibited by way

of tribute, they are called in the law equi canonici,
from the civil law term canon, and canonica, which,
as I observed before, signifies the tribute that was
laid upon men's lands and possessions. Sometimes
this tribute was exacted in money instead of horses
and then it was called30 equorum canonicorum adce-
ratio, horse-money : in like manner as the sum that
was paid instead of the tirones was called aurum
tironicum, et stratioticum, soldiers' money, which
we find mentioned in Synesius, where, speaking81
of Andronicus, governor of Ptolemais, he says, He
set one Thoas to collect this aurum tironicum,
which the editor by mistake says was so called, quia
solvebatur tironibus, because it was paid to the
tirones, whereas indeed it was the money that was
paid instead of the tirones by way of tribute into the
treasury of the empire. Now, that some bishops, at
least in Africa, were excused from this tribute, is
concluded by some learned men from a law"2 of
Theodosius junior, which excuses certain persons
from it under the title of sacerdotales in the procon
sular Africa, and that because they were otherwise
obliged to be at great expenses in that province.
But now the question is, who are meant by the
name sacerdotales. The learned Petit33 says it de
notes Christian bishops ; and if so, the case would
be clear as to their exemption: but Gothofred
rather inclines84 to think it means the high priests
among the heathens, who were still in being, and
obliged by their office to be at great expenses in ex
hibiting the ludi sacerdotales to the people. I will
not venture to decide so nice a dispute betwixt two
such learned men, but think, however, I may safely
infer even from Gothofred's notion, that if the
Christian emperors were so liberal to the heathen
liigh priests, they would at least be as hberal to
their own bishops, and grant them the same immu
nity. But I leave this matter to further inquiry.
One thing is more certain, that Sect 6
whatever burdens any lands were obEdloTuch
originally encumbered with, they were mreS'to before
liable to the same even after their do-

sorte, ut in futurum functiones omnes quae metrocomiae de-
bent, et publici vici pro antiquae capitationis professione
debent, sciant subeundas.
28 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 1. de Annon. et Tribut. Leg. 1.
Prater privatas res nostras, et ecclesias catholicas, et domum
clarissimae memoriae Eusebii ex-consule, et Arsacis regis
Aimeniorum, nemo ex nostra jussione praecipuis emolu-
mentis familiaris juvetur substantiae.
27 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 15. De
his sane clericis qui praedia possident, sublimis auctoritas
tua non solum eos aliena juga nequaquam statuet excusare,
sed etiam his quae ipsi possident eosdem ad pensitanda fis-
calia perurgeri : universos namque clericos possessores
duntaxat provinciales pensitationes recognoscere jubemus.
Vid. Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. Leg. 3.
28 Theod. lib. 4. c. 8. Ta Sr]p6cria KaTi vdpovs eictko.
pi^Etv 'ia-aeri, Kal ovk dvTtXiyovcri ti) tov /cpa-roiWos
ifcovcriu.

29 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 40.
Nihil praster canonicam inlationem  ejus functionibus
adscribatur. 3u Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 17. de Equor. Conlat. Leg. 3.
Equos canonicos militaris diceceseos Africanse  jussimus
aduerari, &c.
31 Synes. Ep. 79. ad Anastas. p. 293. Ttus &KaiTfatcnv
HTCC^E TOV (TTpaTLCOTLKOV y(J3VtTLOV TOV KaXoVflivOV TipW"
VIKOV. 32 Cod. Th. lib. 7. Tit. 13. de Tironibus, Leg. 22. Pra.-
cipimus proconsularis provinciae non eandem sacerdotalium,
quae est de caHeris, in prsebendis tironibus habendam esse
rationem : non inique siquidem ea potissimum ab hoc officio
provincia videtur excepta, quse omnium intra Africam pvo-
vinciarum obtinet principatum, cujusque majoribus fatigan-
tur expensis.
33 Petit. Variar. Lection, lib. 3. c. 1. p. 28.
34 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. 7. Tit. 13. Leg. 22.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

175

nation to the church, unless discharged of them by
some particular grant and favour of the emperors.
This we learn from a memorable instance in a par
ticular case wherein St. Austin was concerned, the
account of which we have from his own relation.
For the right understanding of which I must first
acquaint the reader, that by the laws of the Roman
polity many times a company of tradesmen were so
incorporated into a society for the service of the
empire, that their estates were tied to that office and
duty, so that whoever had the propriety of them, he
was bound to the duty annexed to them. Thus it
was particularly with the incorporated company of
the navicularii of Africa and Egypt, who were con
cerned in transporting the yearly tribute of corn
from those provinces to Rome and Constantinople.
Their estates were tied to the performance of this
service, as appears from a title in the Theodosian
Code,35 which is Deprcediis naviculariorum : and they
were so tied, that if any ship chanced to be lost in
the passage, the whole body was obhged to make
good the effects to the emperor's coffers ; and the
master of the ship was obliged36 to give up his men
that escaped the shipwreck, to be examined by tor
ture afterwards ; otherwise he must have borne the
whole burden himself alone, on presumption that
he was guilty of some fraud in the matter against
the rest of his society. Now it happened while St.
Austin was bishop of Hippo, that one of these navi
cularii, Boniface, a master of a ship, left his whole
estate to the chm-ch ; which yet St. Austin refused
to receive, because of these burdens that lay upon
it. For, says he,37 1 was not willing to have the
church of Christ concerned in the business of trans
portation. It is true indeed there are many who
get estates by shipping : yet there is one tempta
tion in it, if a ship should chance to go and be lost,
then we should be required to give up our men to
the rack, to be examined by torture according to
law about the drowning of the ship, and the poor
wretches that had escaped the waves must undergo
a new severity from the hands of the judge : but
we could not thus deliver them up ; for it would
not become the chm-ch so to do. Therefore she
must answer the whole debt to the exchequer.
But whence should she do this ? For our circum
stances do not allow us to keep a treasury. A bi

shop ought not to lay up gold in bank, and mean
while refuse to reheve the poor. These words of
St. Austin do plainly evince what has been observed,
that the donation of an estate to the church did not
ordinarily free it from the tribute or duty, that the
public otherwise demanded of it ; but if the church
would receive it, she must take it with the usual
burdens that lay upon it. I confess, indeed, the
sense of the passage, as it lies in St. Austin without
a comment, is not very easy to be understood ; nor
have any of his editors, no, not the last Benedictins,
thought fit to expound it ; but for that reason, as
well as to make good my own observation, I have
recited it in this place, and explained it from those
laws and customs of the empire, to which it mani
festly refers. And such a digression, if it were a
digression, I presume would not be unacceptable
to the curious reader.
But now to proceed. Another sort
of tribute, in which the clergy had of the ciaysargy
rum, or lustral tax,
some concern, was the tax upon trade and the exemption
* # of the clergy from it.
and commerce. This in ancient writ
ers38 is known by the name of xpvodpyvpov, chrysar-
gyrum, the silver and gold tax, because it was paid
in those coins. Zosimus39 indeed makes the chry-
sargyrum another thing, viz. a scandalous tax ex
acted of lewd men and women ; and in his spite to
Christianity he represents Constantine as the au
thor of it ; in which his groundless calumny he is
abundantly refuted by Baronius,40 and more espe
cially by the learned Gothofred, and Pagi,41 whom
the curious reader may consult. Here I take the
chrysargyrum in the common notion only, for the
tax upon lawful trade and commerce, which St.
Basil calls '2 irpaypaTivriKov xpvaiov, commerce-money.
In the civil law it is known by the name of lus-
tralis collatio, the lustral tax, because it was ex
acted at the return of every lustrum, or four years'
end. It was indeed a very grievous tax, especially
upon the poor ; for not the meanest tradesman was
exempted from it. Evagrius43 says it was exacted
even of those who made begging their trade, i\\
iodvov rr)v rpotp-nv nopiZovat. Whence Libanius44
calls it the intolerable tax of silver and gold, that
made men dread the terrible pentaeteris, or return
of every fifth year. And for the same reason, as the
author under the name of St. Austin takes notice, it

35 Cod. Th. lib. 13. Tit. 6.
36 Cod. Th. lib. 13. Tit. 9. de Naufragiis, Leg. 2. Si
quando causatio est de impetu procellarum, medium ex his
nautis numerum navicularius exhibeat quaestioni  Quo
eorum tormentis plenior Veritas possit inquiri.
37 Aug. Serm. 49. de Diversis. t. 10. p. 520. Bonifacii
haereditatem suscipere nolui; non misericordia, sed timore.
Navicularium nolui esse ecclesiam Christi. Multi sunt
quidem qui etiam de navibus acquirunt : tamen una ten-
tatio est, si iret navis et naufragaret, homines ad tormenta
datun eramus, et de submersione navis secundum consue-
tudinem quaereretur : et torquerentur a judice qui essent a

fluctibus liberati : sed non eos daremus : nullo enim pacto
hoc facere deceret ecclesiam. Onus ergo fiscale persol-
veret. Sed unde per'solveret ? Enthecam nobis habere
non licet, &c.
»» Evagr. Hist. Eccles. lib. 3. c. 39. 39 Zosim. lib. 2.
40 Baron, an. 330. n. 36.
41 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 13 Tit. 1. de lustrali
Collatione, Leg. 1. Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 330. n. 6.
42 Basil. Ep. 243. 43 Evagr. lib. 3. c. 39.
44 Liban. Orat. 14. cont. Florent. t. 2. p. 427. <P6po?
i<p6pe]Tos, dpyvpos Kal xpoaos, epp'tTTEiv icpoaiova-ai iroi-
WV T&S SElvil 1TEVTETr]piSaS.

175

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

was commonly called, aurum pannosum,'5 the poor
man's tax, or, as some editions read it, aurum pceno-
sum, the cruel tax, because it was exacted of the
poor. But now a particular respect was paid to the
church in this matter ; for when her revenues were
scanty, and not sufficient to give all the clergy a de
cent maintenance, the inferior orders, the clerici,
were allowed to traffic to support themselves, with
out paying any tribute of this nature. This in
dulgence was first granted by Constantius without
any restriction, That if any of them43 was minded
to follow a calling to maintain themselves, they
should be freed from custom. But, that none of
them might abuse this privilege to covetousness,
they were confined afterwards by several laws to
trade within a certain sum, which if they exceeded,
they were to pay custom for it. This appears from
a second law of the same Constantius,47 and another
of Gratian's,13 where the Italian and Illyrican clerici
are confined to the sum of ten solids, and the Gal
lican to fifteen. Yet if any would trade further,
only with a charitable design, to raise funds and
Monte-Pio's for the use of the poor, they were al
lowed by two40 other laws of Constantius to employ
what sums they pleased, and pay none of this tri
bute for them. It is to be noted further, that this
immunity was granted by Honorius to the catholic
clergy only,50 and to no others. And the privilege
was esteemed so great, that some covetous trades
men would use means to get themselves admitted to
a titular office among the inferior clergy of the
church, with no other design but to enjoy this im
munity, and to follow their trade without paying
the lustral duty. Against whose fraudulency and
corruptions the emperor Arcadius made a severe
law,5' commanding all such, if they followed their
merchandise, to be deprived of this immunity of the
clergy ; or if they would devote themselves to the

sacred service, then they should abstain from all
such fraudulent and crafty ways of gain : for, saith
he, the wages of religion and craft are very different
from one another. And for this reason, probably,
when the revenues of the church were become suf
ficient to maintain all the clergy, Valentinian III.52
enacted a law, that none of the clergy should nego
ciate as formerly ; otherwise they should come un
der the cognizance of the secular judges, and not
enjoy the privilege of the clergy. Evagrius53 adds,
that the emperor Anastasius quite abolished the
chrysargyrum, or lustral tax, itself; and that is the
reason why there is no mention at all made of it
. afterward in the Justinian Code.
Another sort of duty incumbent on Seol
the subjects of the empire, was the w?Ll ™„j,E.
burden and charge of giving enter- enVioTthe'
tainment to the emperor's court and detsy tam '''
retinue, when they had occasion to travel; or to
the judges, or soldiers, as they passed from one place
to another. This the civil law calls metatum,si and
the Greeks ptrdrov, from the word, mptatores, which
signifies the emperor's harbingers or forerunners,
which were sent before to provide lodging and en
tertainment for them. In allusion to which, Cy
prian,55 speaking of Rogatian, an eminent presbyter
of Carthage, who was the first martyr that was sent
to prison in the Decian persecution, says, he was
metator to the rest, their harbinger, that went before
them to prepare a place in prison for them. And
in the same sense Lucian, the martyr in Cyprian,
elegantly styles Decius himself53 metatorem anti-
christi, the harbinger of antichrist, who by that
terrible persecution made preparation for his coming
into the world. From this notion of the word, me
tator, that duty of yielding entertainment to the
emperor's retinue, &c. has the name of metatum in
the two Codes of the civil law. But the clergy were

45 Aug. Quaest. Vet. et Nov. Test. c. 75. Didrachma ca
pitum vel tributi exactio intelligitur ; quod nunc pannosum
aurum appellatur, quia et pauperes exiguntur.
*» Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 8. Si
qui de vobis alimoniae causa negotiationem exercere volunt,
immunitate potientur. It. Cod. lib. 13. Tit. 1. de lustrali
Collatione, Leg. 1. Negotiatores omnes protinus convenit
aurum argentumque praebere: clericos excipi tantum, (et)
qui copiatae appellantur, nee alium quenquam esse im
munem. 47 Ibid. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 15. Clerici vero, vel
hi quos copiatas recens usus instituit nuncupari, ita a sor-
didis muneribus debent immunes atque a, conlatione prae-
stari, si exiguis admodum mercimoniis tenuem sibi victum
vestitumque conquirent.
49 Cod. Th. lib. 13. Tit. 1. de lustrali Collat. Leg. 11.
Etsi omnes mercatores spectat lustralis auri depensio, clerici
tamen intra Illyricum et Italiam in denis solidis ; intra Gal-
liam in quinis denis solidis immunem usum conversationis
exerceant. Quicquid autem supra hunc modum negotia-
tionis versabitur, id oportet ad functionem aurariam de-
vocari. 4" Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leo-, lo.

Negotiatorum dispendiis minime obligentur (clerici), cum
certum sit, quaestus quos ex tabernaculis (leg., tabernis)
atque ergasteriis colligunt, pauperibus profuturns. Ibid.
Leg. 14. Si quid mercatura congesserint, in usum pau-
perum atque egentium ministrari, oportet, &c.
50 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 36. Catholics religionis
clerici,  ab auraria pensione habeantur immunes.
51 Ibid. lib. 13. Tit. 1. de lustrali Collat. Leg. 16. Om
nes corporatos — praecipimus conveniri, ut aut commoda ne
gotiatorum sequentes, a clericorum excusatione discedant:
aut sacratissimo numini servientes, versutis quaestibus absti-
neant ; distincta enim stipendia sunt religionis et calliditatis.
52 Valentin. Novel. 12. ad calcem Cod. Theod. Jubemus
ut clerici nihil prorsus negotiationis exerceant. Si velint
negotiari, sciant se judicibus subditos, clericorum privilege
non muniti.
53 Evagr. lib. 3. c. 39.
54 Cod. Th. lib. 7. Tit. 8. de Onere Metati. Cod. Justin.
lib. 12. Tit. 41. de Metatis.
55 Cypr. Ep. 81. al. 6. edit. Oxon. Primum hospitium vo
bis in carcere pracparavit, et metator quodammodo vester
nunc quoque vos antecedit.
M Lucian. ap. Cypr. Ep. 20. al. 22.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

177

excused from this by a law of Constantius,57 where
he says they should not be obliged to entertain
strangers ; by which he cannot be supposed to ex
cuse them from the Christian duty of hospitality to
the indigent, but from this civil duty of the Roman
state, to which other subjects were obhged. Whence
Gothofred5' very truly observes, that the clergy in
this respect had equal privileges with senators'
houses, and Jewish synagogues, and Christian
churches ; all which were exempt from this duty
of entertaining. And if the Greek collector of the
ecclesiastical constitutions out of the Code, pub
hshed by Fabrottus, mistake not, this immunity
extended to their servants also. For he says59 nei
ther the clergy nor their servants were subject to
any new impositions, or to this burden called the
metatum. And hence it appears further, that
oi the ' suverin- they were freed from all exactions
dicta and exttaor- , . , - „
dmaria. The clergy which went by the name of super-
exempt from them. J -*
indicta, and extraordinaria, that is,
such impositions as the emperors thought necessary
to lay upon the empire, or any part of it, beyond
the ordinary canonical taxes, upon great exigences
and extraordinary occasions. For as the ordinary
taxes were called indictions, so these extraordinary
were called superindictions.00 From these the cler
gy were universally exempted by several laws of
Christian emperors. As by that of Constantius61
in the Theodosian Code, where he refers to a pre
ceding law to the same purpose. According to the
decree, says he, which you are said to have obtained
heretofore, no one shall impose any new taxes upon
you or your servants, but you shall enjoy a perfect
immunity in that respect. Gothofred upon the
place says, by this law they were freed from all ex
traordinary tribute, and only bound to the ordinary
and canonical taxes. And so it was in the time of
Honorius and Theodosius junior, anno 412, when
by a law granting many other privileges to the

church relating to her possessions, they insert this
among the rest, that no extraordinary tribute or
superindiotion, but only the common62 canonical
tax, should be required of her. Which was finally
confirmed by Justinian,63 and made the standing
law of the Roman empire.
As to some other duties and bur- Secl 9
dens, the laws a little varied : for tZe^ltZn\
sometimes the clergy were exempted, rep»at!on'1o> high6
and sometimes not ; as particularly in w"ys "'
the case of contributing to the maintenance and
reparation of public ways and bridges. By the
forementioned law of Honorius, anno 412, all church
lands are excused*1 from those duties, and it is call
ed an injury to bind them to any contribution to
ward them. Yet not long after, anno 423, Theodo
sius junior made a law for the Eastern empire,
which excepts no order of men from bearing a share
in this matter, but obliges as well his own posses
sions (called domus divines, in the style and lan
guage of those times) as churches65 to take their
proportion in it. And about the same time Valen
tinian III. made a law66 to the same effect in the
West. ustinian confirmed the law of Theodo
sius, by inserting it67 into his Code, and added an
other law of his own among his Novels, where,63
though he grants the clergy an immunity from ex
traordinary taxes, yet he adds, that if there was oc
casion to make a way, or build or repair a bridge,
then churches as well as other possessors should
contribute to those works, if they had possessions
in any city where such works were to be done.
The laws varied likewise in another
instance of duty required of the sub- as also from the
, . • , , duty caUed anga-
leCtS, Which WaS tO furnish OUt horses «o), and paranga-
. rim, &c.
and carriages for conveying of corn
for the soldiers, and such other things as belonged
to the emperor's exchequer. This duty in the civil
law 69 goes by the name of cursus publicus, and an
garies, and parangarics, and translatio, and evectio ;

57 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 8. Praeterea
neque hospites suscipietis.
53 Gothofred. Paratitlon ad Cod. Th. lib. 7. Tit. 8. de
Onei-e Metati, t. 2. p. 264. Immunes erant a metato clerici,
senatorum domus, synagogae Judaeorum, et religionum loca.
59 Collat. Constit. Eccles. ex Cod. lib. 1. Tit. 3. sect. 1.
Oi KXriptKol Kal Ttz rli'6'pa7ro6'a avTeov ovx VTTOKElVTai
Katvats Ettrtpopais f) pETaTots.
60 Vid. Cod. Theod. lib. II. Tit. 6. de Superindicto, et
Cod. Justin, lib. 10. Tit. 18. de eodem.
61 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 8. Juxta
sanctionem quam dudum meruisse perhibemini, et vos et
mancipia vestra nullus novis collationibus obligavit (id est,
obligabit,) sed vacatione gaudebitis. Gothofred. in loc.
Ab extraordinariis collationibus immunes facti fuerunt, at
nondum ab ordinariis et canonicis.
62 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 40. Nihil
extraordinarium ab hacsuperindictitiumve flagitetur.— Nihil
praeter canonicam inlationem ejus functionibus ascribatur.
Justin. Novel. 131. e. 5. Sancimus omnium sanctarum
N

ecclesiarum possessiones, neque sordidas functiones, neque
extraordinarias descriptiones sustinere.
84 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Til. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 40.
Nullam jugationem, quae talium privilegiorum sorte gratu-
latur, muniendi itineris constringat injuria. — Nulla pon-
tium instauratio : nulla translationum sollicitudo gignatur,
85 Cod. Th. lib. 15. Tit. 3. De Itin. muniendo, Leg. 6.
Ad instiuctiones reparationesque itinerum pontiumque nul
lum genus hominum — cessare opoi-tet. Domos etiam divi-
nas, ac venerandas ecclesias tarn laudabili titulo libenter
adscribimus. 68 Valentin. Novel. 21. ad calcem Cod. Th.
87 Cod. Just. lib. 1. Tit. 2. Leg. 7.
68 Just. Novel. 131. u. 5. Si tamen itineris sternendi aut
pontium aedificii vel reparationis opus fuerit, ad instar nli-
orum possessnrum, hujusmodi opus et sanctas ecclesias et
venerabiles domos complere, dum sub ilia possident civitale,
sub qua tale fit opus.
69 Cod. Th. lib. 8. Tit. 5. de Cursu Publico, Angariis, et
Parangariis. Cod. Justin, lib. 12. Tit. 51.

173

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

and the horses used in this service are particularly
called paraveredi, and equi cursuales. Now, the
clergy at first were exempt from this service by two
laws of Constantius,70 made in the former part of
his reign, which expressly excuse both their persons
and their estates from the duty of the parangarics.
But by another law made in the last year of his
reign, anno 360, he revoked this privilege, obliging
the clergy to the duty of translation, as it is there
worded,71 by which he means this duty of furnishing
horses and carriages for the emperor's service. And
this he did, notwithstanding that the council of
Ariminum had petitioned for an immunity, being at
a time when Constantius was displeased with them.
However, this law continued in force, not only un
der Julian, but under Valentinian and Theodosius,
till by a contrary72 law about twenty years after,
anno 382, they restored the clergy to their ancient
privilege. Which was further confirmed to them
by Honorius, anno 412, whose law is still extant73
in both the Codes. Yet Theodosius junior and
Valentinian III., anno 440, took away their privi
lege again, and by two laws74 made church lands
liable to these burdens of the angaries, paran
garics, &c, (whenever the emperor should be upon
any march or expedition,) as well as all others.
Prom all which it appears, that there was no cer
tain rule observed in this matter, but the clergy
had or had not this privilege, according as the state
of affairs would bear, or as the emperors were in
clined to grant it. Besides these public taxes and du-
of the tribute call- ties, there was also one private tax,
cias, and deuriptto from which all lands riven to the
lucraticoruiii : and °
tiiechiircii-sMtemp- church, or to any charitable use, were
tion from it. ' "
exempt by the laws of the empire.
This, in the civil law, is called denarismus, or uncics,

and descriptio lucrativorum. The reason of which
names will be understood by explaining the nature
of the tribute. It was a sort of tax paid, not to the
emperors, but to the curia or curiales of every city,
that is, to that body of men who were obliged, by
virtue of their estates, to be members of the court
or common council, and bear the offices of their
country. Now, it sometimes happened, that one of
these curiales left his estate to another that was not
of the curia ; and an estate so descending was said
to come to him ex causa lucrativa, which being op
posed to causa onerosa, is when a man enjoys an
estate by gift or legacy, and not by purchase. But
now, lest in this case the giving away an estate from
the curia might have brought a greater burden upon
the remaining part of the curiales, the person so
enjoying it was obhged to pay an annual tribute to
the curia of the city, which, from the nature of his
tenure, was called descriptio lucrativorum, the lucra
tive tax. And because every head of land, eveiy
jugum or caput, as the law terms it, was obhged to
pay annually a denarius, or ounce of silver, there
fore the tax itself was called uncics, and denarismus:
as in the laws of Theodosius M.,75 cited in the
margin. Theodosius junior and Valentinian III.
made this tax double, laying four siliquce,™ which is
two ounces of silver, upon every head of land. Ac
cording to which rate, every possessor who held
any estate by the aforesaid tenure, was obliged to
pay tribute out of it to the curia of the city to
which it belonged. But' if any such estate was
given to the church, it was exempt from this tri
bute, if not before, yet at least in the time of Jus
tinian. For there are two laws of his to this pur
pose,77 the one in his Code, the other in his Novels,
in both which such lands as any of the curiales gave
to a church, or a monastery, or hospital of any kind,

'» Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 10.
Parangariarum quoque parili modo (a clericis) cesset ex-
actio. Ibid. Leg. 14. Ad parangariarum quoque praesta-
tionem non vocentur, nee eorundem facultates atque sub
stantias. 71 Cod. Th. ibid. Leg. 15. Ut praeterea ad universa mu-
nia sustinenda, translationesque faciendas, omnes clerici
debeant adtineri.
72 Cod. Theod. lib. 11. Tit. 16. de Extraord. et Sordidis
Muner. Leg. 15. Circa ecclesias, rhetores, atque gram-
maticos eruditionis utriusque, vetusto more durante. — Ne
paraveredorum bujusmodi viris aut parangariarum proebitio
mandetur, &c.
73 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Epis. et Cler. Leg. 40.
Nulla translationum sollicitudo gignatur, &c. al. signetur,
as it is in the Justin. Code, lib. 1. Tit. 2. de Sacrosanct.
Eccl. Leg. 5.
74 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 2. Leg. 11. Neminem ab an-
gariis, vel parangariis, vel plaustris, vel quolibet munere
excusari praecipimus, cum ad felicissimam expeditionem
nostri numinis, omnium provincialium per loca, qua iter
arripimus, debeant solita nobis ministeria exhiberi : licet ad
sacrosanctas ecclesias possessiones pertineant. It. lib. 12.
Tit. 51. de Cursu Publico, Leg. 21. Nullus penitus cujus-

libet ordinis seu dignitatis, vel sacrosancta ecclesia, vel do
mus regia tempore expeditionis excusationem angariaruiu
seu parangariarum habeat.
's Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Decurionibus, Leg. 107.
Quicunque haeres curiali — vel si quem liberalitas locuple-
taverit forte viventis, quos a curiae nexu conditio solet din-
mere, sciant, pecuniariis descriptionibus — ad denarismum
sive uncias, sese auctoris sui nomine retineudum. It. Leg.
123. ibid.
78 Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 4. de Imponenda Lucrativis
Descriptione, Leg. unic. Hi qui ex lucrativa causa posses
siones detinent, quae aliquando curialium fuerint, pro singu
lis earum jugis et capitibus quaternas siliquas annuae (leg.
annuas) ordinibus nomine descriptionis exsolvant.
77 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 2. de Sacrosanct. Eccles. Leg.
22. Sancimus res ad venerabiles ecclesias, vel xenones, vel
monasteria, vel orphanotrophia, vel gerontocomia, vel pto-
chotrophia, &c, descendentes ex qualicunque curiali lihe-
ralitate — a lucrativorum inscriptionibus liberas immunesque
esse. — Cur enim non faciamus discrimen inter res Divinas et
humanas ? Id. Novel. 131. c. 5. Si quae vero res ex curialium
substantiis ad quamlibet sacrosanctam ecclesiam, aut aliam
venerabilem domum secundum leges venerunt, aut postea ve-
nerint, liberas eas esse sancimus descriptione lucrativorum.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

179

are particularly excepted from this lucrative tax ;
and that pietatis intuitu, as it is there worded, in
regard to religion, and because it was fit to put
some difference between things human and Divine.
But whether the church enjoyed this immunity un
der any other prince before Justinian, is what I
leave the curious to make the subject of a further
inquiry ; whilst I proceed to consider another sort
of immunity of the clergy, which was their exemp
tion from civil offices in the Roman empire.
sect. 12 Of these offices some were personal,
rroTmeahrcIvuepePr- and others predial, that is, such as
sonai offices. were tje(j to men's estates and pos
sessions : some, again, were called honores, honour
able offices ; and others, munera sordida, mean and
sordid offices. Now, from all these, as well patri
monial as personal, honourable as well as sordid,
by the first laws of Constantine the clergy were
universally and entirely exempt : but after ages
made a little distinction as to such of the clergy
who enjoyed patrimonial secular estates of their
own, distinct from those of the church : for such of
the clergy were sometimes forced to leave their
ecclesiastical employment, and bear the civil offices
of the empire ; of which more by and by. But as
to offices which were purely personal, the clergy
were entirely exempt from them ; as appears from
a law of Valentinian and Gratian,78 still extant in
both the Codes, where every order of the clergy, not
only presbyters and deacons, but subdeacons, exor
cists, readers, door-keepers, and acolythists, are
specified as exempt from personal offices. And that
is the meaning of that law of Constantius, men
tioned both by Athanasius,79 and Socrates,39 and
Sozomen,81 where they say he granted the clergy of
Egypt dXetToupyrioiav, and drk\Etav XeiTOvpynpaTuiv,
exemption from such offices as had been forced
upon them in the Arian persecution.
sect. 13. Again, for those called sordid offices,
omcc,1 brtrfpreS not only the persons of the clergy, but
the estates of the church, were dis
charged of all burdens of that nature. Constantius
made two laws82 to this purpose, which Valentinian
and Theodosius confirmed, granting the clergy, and
some other orders of men, the same immunity in
this respect, as they did to the chief officers and

dignitaries of the empire : and they intimate83 also,
that this was no new privilege, but what by ancient
custom they had always enjoyed. The same is said
by Honorius, that this was an ancient privilege of
the church, conferred upon her by his royal an
cestors, and that it ought not to be diminished:
therefore he made two laws particularly in behalf34
of the bishop of Rome, that no extraordinary office
or sordid function should be imposed upon him.
Nor do we ever find the clergy called to bear any
such office in the empire. For though Gothofred,
in his notes upon the forementioned law85 of Theo
dosius, where several of these offices are specified,
reckons the angaries, and building and repairing of
ways and bridges, among sordid offices ; yet I have
showed before, that what was exacted of the clergy
in reference to those two things, was under the no
tion of a tribute, and not an office : and the laws
which require the clergy to contribute toward them
say expressly,83 that they are not to be looked upon
as sordid offices, nor any duty to be exacted under
that notion.
As to the other sort of offices, called
honores, honourable or municipal of- Also from cu'riai or
„ , . , , . -, municipal offices.
flees, which are otherwise termed cu-
rial offices, because they who bare them were called
curiales et decuriones, men of the court or curia of
every city ; all the clergy, who had no lands of their
own, but lived upon the revenues and possessions of
the church, were entirely exempt from them ; be
cause the duties of the church and state were not
thought wrell consistent in one and the same per
son ; and it was deemed unreasonable to burden the
lands of the church with the civil duties of the
empire. When Constantine was first quietly set
tled in his government, immediately after the great
decennial, commonly called the Diocletian perse
cution, he seems to have granted a full and un
limited immunity in this respect to all the clergy, as
well those who had lands or patrimony of their own,
as those who lived wholly upon the revenues of the
church. For thus he expresses himself in a law
directed to Anulinus, proconsul of Africa, recorded
by Eusebius, which bears date anno 312, or 313 :
Our pleasure is, that all those in your province,
who minister in the catholic church, over which

78 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. et Cler. Leg. 24.
Presbyteros, diaconos, subdiaconos, exorcistas, lectores, os-
tianos etiam, et omnes perinde qui primi sunt, personalium
munerum expertes esse praocipimus. The Justinian Code,
lib. 1. Tit. 3. Leg. 6, has the same, only instead of the
words, omnes qui primi sunt, it reads acolythos.
n Athan. Apol. 2. t. 1. p. 772. 8» Socrat. lib. 2. c. 23.
91 Sozom. lib. 3. c. 21.
82 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 10 et 14. Re-
pellatur ab his exactio munerum sordidorum.
83 Ibid. lib. 11. Tit. 16. de Extraord. et Sordid. Muner.
Leg. 15. Maximarum culmina dignitatum— ab omnibus sor-
didis muneribus vindicentur. — Circa ecclesias, rhetores,
N 2

atque grammaticos eruditionis utriusque vetusto more du
rante, &c.
84 Ibid. Leg. 21 et 22. Privilegia venerabilis ecclesiae,
quae divi principes contulerunt, imminui non oportet : pro
inde etiam quae circa urbis Romae episcopum, observatio in-
temerata custodiet : ita ut nihil extraordinarii muneris vel
sordidae functionis agnoscat.
88 Gothofred. in Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 16. Leg. 15.
88 Cod. Th. lib. 15. Tit. 3. de Itin. muniendo, Leg. 6. Ho
nor, et Theodos. jun. Absit ut nos instructionem viae pub
lico, et pontium, stratarumque operam — inter sordida mu
nera numeremus, &c. Vid. Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 2. de SS.
Eccles. Leg. 7. Ejusdem Honorii et Theodos.

ISO

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

Ccecilian presides, who are commonly called the
clergy, be exempted87 from all pubhc offices what
soever, that they may not be let or hindered in the
performance of Divine service by any sacrilegious
distraction. Anulinus has also an epistle still ex
tant in St. Austin,88 written to Constantine not long
after, wherein he mentions this grant as sent to
him, to be intimated to Caecilian and the catholic
clergy, viz. That by the kind indulgence of his Ma
jesty they were exempt- from all manner of offices,
that they might with due reverence attend Divine
service. And this epistle of Anulinus is also re
lated, but not so correctly, in the collation89 of Car
thage. In this grant it is very observable, that this
privilege was only allowed to the catholic clergy :
which made the Donatists very uneasy, because
they could not enjoy the same favour : and upon
this they became tumultuous and troublesome to
the catholics, procuring the clergy in some places to
be nominated to public offices, and to be made re
ceivers of the public revenues, &c. But complaint
hereof being made to Constantine, it occasioned the
publishing of a new order in Africa, pursuant to the
former, that whereas he was given to understand,
that the clergy of the catholic church were90 molest
ed by the heretical faction, and by their procure
ment nominated to pubhc offices, and made suscep-
tors or receivers of tribute, in derogation of the
privileges which he had formerly granted them ; he
now signified his pleasure again, that if the magis
trates found any persons so aggrieved, they should
substitute another in his room, and take care for
the future that no such injuries should be offered
to the men of that profession. This law was pub
lished anno 313, and it is the first of this kind that
is extant in the Theodosian Code. About six years
after, anno 319, he put forth another, upon a like
complaint made in Italy, that the clergy were called
away from their proper function to serve in pubhc
offices ; and in this he grants them the same91 gene
ral immunity as before. So again, anno 330, a com
plaint being made against the Donatists in Numi
dia, that when they could not have their will upon
the superior clergy by reason of the former immu
nity that was granted them, they, notwithstanding,

87 Const. Ep. ad Anulin. ap. Euseb. lib. 10. c. 7. OvcrirEp
ttAjjpt/cas iirovopdX,Eiv EieoSatrtv, airo irdvTwv aira^airXeos
Tcov XEtTupyitJov (SuXopai aXEtTupyiiTus StaepvXax^T}-
vat, &c.
88 Anulin. Ep. ad Constant, ap. Aug. Ep. 68. Scripta
ccelestia niajestatis vestrss accepta atque adorata, Caeciliano
et his qui sub eodem agunt, quique clerici appellantur, de-
votio parvitatis meae insinuare curavit, eosdemque hortata
est, ut unitate consensu omnium facta, cum omni omnino
munere indulgentia niajestatis vestreo liberati esse videantur
catholici, custodita sanctitate legis, debita reverentia Divi-
nis rebus inserviant.
69 Collat. Carth. Die 3. c. 216 et 220.
M Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 1. Hreretico-
rum factione comperimus ecclesiae catholics clericos ita

forced the inferior clergy to bear offices in curia,
upon pretence that the exemption did not extend
to them : Constantine, to cut off all dispute, pub
lished another law, wherein92 he particularly ex
empts the inferior clergy, readers, subdeacons, and
the rest, from bearing offices in curia ; and orders,
that they should enjoy in Africa the same perfect
immunity as they did in the Oriental churches.
Now, this immunity was so great
a privilege, that it not only became b^M,5^ pri.
the envy of heretics, but also pro- ^Tof™""^,
yoked some cathohc laymen (who what beion!gedeto tits
. - . . t c • church, by the laws
were possessed of estates qualifying of constantine.
them to bear the offices of their coun
try) to get a sort of titular ordination to some of
the inferior offices of the church, on purpose to en
joy this immunity, when yet they neither designed
to do the duty of that office, nor to arise to any
higher order in the chm-ch. Which being inter
preted a mere fraudulent collusion to deprive the
state of fit men to serve the commonwealth, and
no ways benefit the church, it was presently re
sented by Constantine as an abuse, and various
laws were made both by him and his successors, as
occasion required, to restrain and correct it. Con
stantine at first, as I observed before, granted this
immunity indifferently to all the clergy, as well
possessors as not possessors of private estates, whom
he found actually engaged in the service of the
church when he came to the quiet possession of
the empire ; nor did he for some years after perhaps
restrain any sorts of men from taking orders in the
church -. but when he found this indulgence to the
church, by the artifice of cunning men, only turned
to the detriment of the state, and that rich men
sheltered themselves under an ecclesiastical title,
only to avoid the offices of their country, he then
made a law, that no rich plebeian who was qualified
by his estate to serve in curia, and bear civil offices
in any city, should become an ecclesiastic ; or if he
did, he should be liable from the time that law was
made to be fetched back and returned in curiam,
to bear the offices of his country as a layman.
What year that law was made is not very certain,
save only that it was before anno 320, when a

vexari, ut nominationibusseu susceptionibus aliquibus, quas
publicus mos expose-it, contra indulta sibi privilegia, pra>
graventur. Ideoque placet, si quem tua gravitas invenent
ita vexatum, eidem alium subrogari, et deinceps a supra-
dictae religionis hominibus hujusinodi injurias prohiben.
81 Cod. Th. ibid. Leg. 2. Qui divino cultui ministeria
religionis impeudunt, id est, hi qui clerici appellantur, ab
omnibus omnino muneribus excusentur : ne sacrilego hvore
quorundam a divinis obsequiis avocentur.
82 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 7. Lectores divinorum
apicum, et hypodiaconi, caeterique clerici, qui per injunam
haereticorum ad curiam devocati sunt, absolvantur: et "e
caetero ad similitudiuem Orientis minime ad curias devo-
centur, sed immunitate plenissima potiantur.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

1S1

second law was made upon the same subject, re
ferring to the first. And from this we learn what
was the import of both ; that it was Constantine's
design to put a distinction betwixt such of the
clergy as were ordained before that first law, and
such as were ordained afterward; the former he
exempted from civil offices, though they were pos
sessed of estates, but not the latter ; which plainly
appears from the words of the second law, which
are these :" Whereas by a former law we ordained,
that from henceforward no counsellor, or counsel
lor's son, or any one who by his estate was suffi
ciently qualified to bear pubhc offices, should take
upon him the name or function of the clergy, but
only such whose fortune is small, and they not tied
to any civil offices; we are now given to under
stand, that such of the clergy who were ordained be
fore the promulgation of that law, are molested
upon that account : wherefore our command is,
that those be discharged of all further trouble ; and
that such only as entered themselves among the
clergy since the law was made, with intention to
decline pubhc offices, shall be returned to the curia
and .states of their city, to serve in the civil offices
of their country. There is another law of Constan
tine's published after this,94 anno 326, a year after
the council of Nice, which speaks to the same effect,
and shows that this was the standing rule of the
latter part of Constantine's reign, to exempt none
among the clergy, who were qualified by estates of
their own, from bearing personally the pubhc offices
of the empire.
Sect 16. But however this might be well de-
amtieaSbylS signed at first by him to prevent some
rorslSvo.S'of'the abuses, yet in process of time it be
came very prejudicial to the church.
For by this means sometimes presbyters and dea
cons, after they had been twenty or thirty years in
the church's service, were called upon by litigious
men to bear civil offices inconsistent with the spi
ritual, and thereupon they were forced to forsake
their ecclesiastical function. This was so great an

inconvenience, that it well became the wisdom of
the following emperors to find out some suitable
remedy for it : which they did by new-modifying
Constantine's law, and abating something of the
rigour of it. For they did not lay the burden of
civil offices upon the persons of the clergy, but only
upon their patrimonial estates, not belonging to the
church, and in some cases they excused those also.
Constantius acquitted all bishops of this burden
both as to their estates and persons ; for by his
laws95 they might keep their estates to themselves,
and neither be obliged to bear civil offices in person,
nor substitute any other in their room. And he
allowed the same privilege to presbyters and deacons
and all others, provided they were ordained by the
consent of the civil court or curia, and the general
request of the people. But if they were not so or
dained, all that they were obliged to do was only to
part with two-thirds of their estate to their children
or next relations, and substitute them in their room :
or, in defect of such relations, to give up two parts
of their estate to the curia, and retain the third to
themselves. Valentinian, in the first year of his
reign, anno 364, made the law a little stricter, that
such persons,'6 when they were ordained, should give
all their estate to one of their relations, and substi
tute him as a curialis in their room, or else give it
up to the curia itself: otherwise they should be
liable to be called back to serve in civil offices as
laymen. But he extended this obligation no fur
ther than to the beginning of his own reign ; for by
another law made seven years after, anno 371, he
exempted all such as were in the service of the
church 97 when he came to the crown, though they
had estates of their own qualifying them to bear
civil offices. Valens exempted all such as had been
ten years " in the church's service ; so that if they
were not called upon by the civil courts within
that term, they were for ever after to be excused.
Valentinian II. exempted them,99 provided they
put a substitute in their room. Theodosius ex
empted all that were ordained109 before the year 388,

93 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 3. Cum con-
stitutio emissa praecipiat, nullum deinceps decurionem, vel
ex decurione progenitum, vel etiam instructum idoneis fa-
cultatibus, atque obeundis publicis muneribus opportunum,
ad clericorum nomen obsequiumque confugere ; sed eos —
qui furtuna tenues, neque muneribus civilibus teneantur
obstricti: cognovimus illos etiam inquietari, qui ante legis
promulgationem clericorum se consortio sociaverint: ideo-
que praecipirhus, his ab omni molestia liberatis, illos qui
_post legem latam obsequia publica declinantes, ad clerico
rum numerum confugerunt, curiae ordinibusque restitui, et
civilibus obsequiis inservire.
ibid. Leg. 6. Si inter civitatem et clericos super ali-
cujus nomine dubitetur, si eum asquitas ad publica trahat
munera, et progenie municeps, vel patrimonio idoneus dig-
noscetur, exemptus clericis civitati tradatur : opulentos enim
saeculi subire necessitates oportet, pauperes ecclesiarum di-
vitus sustentari.
95 Cod.Th. lib.- 12. Tit. 1. de Decurion. Leg. 49. Epis

copum facultates suas curia;, sicut. ante fuerat constitutum,
nullus adigat mancipare, sed antistes maneat, nee faciat sub
stantias cessionem, &c.
88 Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Decurion. Leg. 59. Qui
partes eligit ecclesiae, aut in propinquum bona propria con-
ferendo eum pro se faciet curialem, aut facultatibus curiae
cedat, quam reliquit ; ex necessitate revocando eo qui neu-
trum fecit, cum clericus esse ccepisset, &c.
87 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 21. Qui eccle
siae juge obsequium deputarunt, curiis habeantur immunes,
si tamen ante ortum imperii nostri ad cultum se legis nostra
contulisse constiterit.
88 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 19. Si in consortio cle
ricatus decennium quietis implcverit, cum patrimonio suo
habeatur immunis : si vero intra finitos annos fuerit a curia
revocatus, cum substantia sua functionibus subjaceat ci
vitatis. 88 Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Decurion. Leg. 99.
™ Ibid. Leg. 121 et 123.

1S2

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

which was the tenth year of his reign : and of those
that were ordained afterward he only required'01
the aforesaid conditions, that they should either
provide a proper substitute, or give up their estates
to the court at their ordination. Which is also
taken notice of by St. Ambrose in his answer to
Symmachus, where he shows 102 how unreasonable
it was for him to plead for the exemption of the
heathen priests in this respect, when the laws did
not grant it to the Christian clergy but upon such
conditions. Arcadius indeed, by the instigation of
Eutropius, anno 398, cancelled all these favourable
laws, and brought the clergy again to the hard rule
of Constantine, that if any103 ofthe curiales were or
dained in the church, they should by force be re
turned to the civil courts again in person, and not
enjoy the benefit of those laws, which allowed them
to take orders, provided they disposed of their estates
to proper substitutes, who might bear offices in
their stead. But this law was but very short-lived ;
for Chrysostom and some others very justly declaim
ing against it, Arcadius disannulled.it the year fol
lowing by a new law, wherein104 he granted such
of the clergy as were taken and ordained out of the
body of the curiales, the same privilege that they
had under his father Theodosius, which was, That
all that were ordained before the second consulship
of Theodosius, anno 388, should enjoy a perfect im
munity without any molestation : and such as were
ordained after that term, if they were of the superior
clergy, bishops, presbyters, or deacons, they might
continue in the church's service, either providing a
substitute to bear the offices of the curia for them,
or giving up their estates to the curia, as former laws
in that case had directed. Only it was required that
the inferior clergy, readers, subdeacons, &c, should
be returned to the curia again, and obliged to bear
¦^ offices in person. And the same was determined
by Theodosius junior,105 and Valentinian III.,106
and Majorian,107 whose laws are extant at the end of
the Theodosian Code. Justinian also has a Novel
to the same purpose, wherein108 he orders such of
the inferior clergy, as were taken out of any curia,
to be returned thither again, unless they had lived
fifteen years a monastic hfe ; and then they were to
give three parts of their patrimony to the curia, and
retain one for themselves : but he allowed bishops
to put in a substitute, and be free from bearing civil

offices in person, as Julianus Antecessor109 in his
Epitome of the Authentics understands him. Though
I confess there is something to incline a man to
think Justinian at first was a little more severe to
such bishops, because he revived that antiquated
law of Arcadius110 in his Code. But however this
be, upon the whole matter it appears, that the Chris
tian princes from first to last always made a wide
difference between the public patrimony of the
church, which was properly ecclesiastical, and the
private estates of such of the clergy as had lands of
a civil or secular tenure ; for the one the clergy were
obliged to no duty or burden of civil offices, but
for the other they were, and could not be excused
from them, but either by parting with some portion
of their estates, or providing proper substitutes to
officiate for them. The reason of which was, that
such of the clergy were looked upon as irregularly
promoted; it being as much against the rules of
the church, as the laws of the state, to admit any of
the curiales to an ecclesiastical function, without
first giving satisfaction to the curia whence they
were taken, as has been showed in another place.
I have been the more curious in searching to the
bottom this business about tribute and civil offices,
and given a particular and distinct account of them
from the grounds of the civil law, because but few
men have recourse to those fountains, whence this
matter is to be cleared ; and the reader will scarce
find this subject handled, but either very imperfect
ly, or with some partiality, or some confusion, in
modern authors.

CHAPTER IV.

OF THE REVENUES OF THE ANCIENT CLERGY.

The next thing tha* comes in order
to be considered, is the maintenance
of the ancient clergy. Where it will
be proper first to inquire into the
ways and methods that were taken for
raising of funds for their subsistence.
set aside a little the consideration of
will be spoken of in the next chapter,

Sect. 1.
Several ways of
providing afund for
the maintenance of
the clergy. 1st, by
oblations, Some of
which were weekly,

And here, to
tithes, which
we find other

101 Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Decurion. Leg. 104 et 115.
102 Ambros. cont. Symmach.
103 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. de his qui ad Eccles. confug.
Leg. 3. Decuriones manu mox injecta revocentur: quibus
ulterius legem prodesse non patimur, quae cessione patri
monii subsecuta, decuriones esse clericos non vetabat.
101 Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Decurion. Leg. 163. Si qui
ex secundo divi patris nostri consulatu curiam relinquentes,
clericorum se consortio manciparunt, si jam episcopi, vel
presbyteri, vel diaeoni esse meruerunt, in sacris quidem et
secretioribus Dei mysteriis perseverent, sed aut substitutum
pro se curiae offerre cogantur, aut juxta legem dudum latum

tradant curiae facultates. Residui omnes, lectores, subdiaco-
ni, vel hi clerici quibus clericorum privilegia non debentur,
debitis mox patriae muneribus praesententur.
185 Theod. Novel. 26 et 38. 10s Valentin. Novel. 12.
187 Majorian. Novel. 1.
198 Justin. Novel. 123. c. 15. Ex. Epitom. Julian. Antecess.
109 Vid. Julian. Epit. Novel. 123. c. 4. post Leg. 38. Cod.
de Episc. Episcopalis ordo liberat a fortuna servili, sed
non a curiali sive officiali ; nam et post ordinationem durat;
ita ut per subjectam vel interpositam personam officium ad-
impleatur, &c.
110 Cod. Just. lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 12.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

183

ways, by which in ancient times a decent provision
was made for them. As, first, by the voluntary
oblations of the people, of which some learned per
sons think there were two sorts; 1. The weekly or
daily oblations that were made at the altar ; 2. The
monthly oblations that were cast into the treasury
of the church. The first sort of oblations were such
as every rich and able communicant made at his
coming to partake of the eucharist; where they
offered not only bread and wine, out of which the
eucharist was taken, but also other necessaries, and
sometimes sums of money for the maintenance of
the church and rehef of the poor. As is evident
from those words of St. Jerom in his Comments
upon Ezekiel,1 where he tells us, that thieves and
oppressors made their oblations among others, out
of their ill-gotten goods, that they might glory in
their wickedness, while the deacon in the church
publicly recited the names of those that offered:
Such a one offers so much, such a one hath pro
mised so much : and so they please themselves with
the applause of the people, while their own con
science lashes and torments them. Those called
the Apostolical Canons2 speak also of the oblation
of fruits, and fowls, and beasts, but order such to
be sent home to the bishop and presbyters, who
were to divide them with the deacons and the rest of
the clergy. Another sort of oblations were made
monthly, when it was usual for per
sons that were able and willing, to
give as they thought fit something to the ark or
treasury of the church. Which sort of collation is
particularly taken notice of by Tertullian,3 who says,
it was made menstrua die, once a month, or when
every one pleased, and as they pleased ; for no man
was compelled to it : it was not any stated sum, but
a voluntary oblation. Baronius4 thinks this ark or
treasury was called the corban of the church, be
cause Cyprian5 uses that word when he speaks of
the offerings of the people; rebuking a rich and
wealthy matron for coming to celebrate the eu
charist without any regard to the corban, and par
taking of the Lord's supper without any sacrifice of
her own. Others6 conceive, that corban is not a

Sect 2.
And others
monthly.

name for the treasury, but signifies the gift or obla
tion itself; and that Cyprian so uses it, making it
the same with the sacrifices or offerings of the peo
ple. But the evangelist, Matt, xxvii. 6, seems ra
ther to favour the opinion of Baronius : for when
he says the chief priests did not think it lawful to
put Judas his money ilg rbv KopiSavav, it is evident,
he there by corban means the treasury, as most
translators render it.
But however this be, it is very pro
bable, that hence came the custom of whence 3camc
-, ¦ ¦ t ., ii, • ,,the custom of a
diviamg these oblations once a month monthly division
, among the clergy.
among the clergy. For as Tertullian
speaks of a monthly collation, so Cyprian frequent
ly mentions' a monthly division, in which the pres
byters had their shares by equal portions, and other
orders after the same manner. Whence the clergy
are also styled in his language,8 sportulantes fratres,
partakers of the distribution ; and what we now
call, suspensio a beneficio, is in his style,9 suspensio a
divisione mensuma, suspension from the monthly
division. Which plainly implies, that this sort of
church revenues was usually divided once a month
among the clergy. And perhaps in conformity to
this custom it was, that the Theodotian heretics
having persuaded one Natalius, a confessor, to be
ordained a bishop among them, promised him a
monthly salary of one hundred and fifty denarii ,
prjvtaia Svvdpta etcarbv 7revTi)tcovTa, as Eusebius words
it,10 referring to the usual way of distribution once
a month among the clergy.
Another sort of revenues which the
-, -, , Sect. 4.
clergy enjoyed, were such as arose an- 2diy, other reve
nually from the lands and possessions the lands and posses
sions of the church.
which were given to the church.
These, indeed, at first were but small, by reason of
the continual vexations and persecutions which the
church underwent for the three first ages, when
immovable goods were always most exposed to
danger. It was the custom of the chm-ch of Rome
therefore never to keep any immovable possessions,
no, not for many ages, if we may credit Theodorus
Lector,11 who speaks of it as customary in his own
time, anno 520. But if any such were given to the
church, they immediately sold them, and divided

1 Hieron. Com. in Ezek. xviii. p. 537. Multos conspici-
mus, qui opprimunt per potentiam, vel furta committunt, ut
de multis parva pauperibus tribuant, et in suis sceleribus
glorientur, publiceque diaconus in ecclesia recitet offerentium
nomina: tantum offert ille, tantum ille pollicitus est; pla-
centque sibi ad plausum populi, torquente conscientia.
2 Canon. Apost. c. 3, 4, 5.
8 Tertul. Apol. u. 39. Si quod arcae genus est, non de or-
dinaria summa, quasi redemptae religionis congregatur :
modicam unusquisque stipem menstrua die, vel quum velit,
et si modo velit, et si modo possit, apponit : nam nemo
compellitur, sed sponte confert.
4 Baron, an. 44. n. 69.
5 Cypr. de Oper. et Eleemos. p. 203. Locuples et dives

es, et Dominicum celebrare te credis, quae corbonam omnino
non respicis ; quae in Dominicum sine sacrificio venis; quae
partem de sacrificio, quod pauper obtulit, sumis ?
8 Basnag. Exercit. in Baron, p. 597.
7 Cypr. Ep. 34. al. 39. Ut et sportulis iisdem cum pres
byteris honorentur, et divisiones mensurnas aequatis quanti-
tatibus partiantur.
9 Id. Ep. 66. al. 1. Sportulantes fratres, tanquam deci-
mas ex fructibus accipientes.
9 Id. Ep. 28. al. 34. Interim se n. divisione mensurna
tantum contineant, &c.
18 Euseb. lib. 5. c. 28.
" Theodor. Lect. Collectan. lib. 2. p. 567. "ESos Ttj iK-
KXnaia T-rjs 'Pco/jrjs d/a'tojTa pi) Kpare'tv S'tKaia, &c.

184

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

the price into three parts, giving one to the church,
another to the bishop, and the third to the rest of
the clergy. And Valesius finds no exception to this
till near the time of Gregory the Great. But if this
was the custom of the church of Rome, it was a
very singular one. For other churches had their
immovables, both houses and lands, even in the
times of persecution : as appears from the edicts of
Maximums, wherein he revoked his former decrees
that had raised the persecution, and in these latter
edicts granted the Christians liberty not only to re
build their churches, but also ordered, that if any
houses or lands belonging to them had been confis
cated, or sold, or given away,12 they should be re
stored to them again. That this was meant of
houses and lands belonging to the church, as well
as private Christians, is evident from the decree of
Constantine and Licinius published the same year,
anno 313. Wherein they give orders, that whereas
the Christians were known to have not only places
of assembly, but also other places belonging not to
any private man, but to the whole body, all such
places 13 should be restored to the body and to every
particular assembly among them. Which is re
peated again in Constantine's letter to Anulinus,14
and other pubhc acts of his recorded by Eusebius 15
in his Life, where he makes mention of houses, gar
dens, lands, and other possessions belonging to the
church, of which she had been plundered and de
spoiled in the late persecutions. These are undeni
able evidences, that some part of the ecclesiastical
revenues were anciently raised from houses and
lands settled upon the church, even before any
Christian emperors could give encouragement to
them. But when Constantine was quietly
These very much settled upon the throne, the church
augmented by the
laws of constan- revenues received great augmentations
in this kind. For he enacted a law
at Rome, which is still extant in both the Codes,16
that any one whatsoever should have liberty at his
death to bequeath by will what part of his goods he
pleased to the holy catholic church. By which
means, the liberality of pious persons was very
much encouraged, and great additions were made
to the standing revenues of the church. Therefore
Baronius is very injurious 17 to the memory of Con

stantine, and justly corrected by Gothofred18 and
Mr. Pagi13 for it, in that he insinuates as if Con
stantine had relapsed toward heathenism at this
very time, anno 321, when he pubhshed this law so
much in favour of the church.
Others are no less injurious to some „ , ,
J Sect. 6.
of his successors, when they represent Cormh,meV°™dWnot
them as injurious to the church, in ™ed?»g !£$^
forbidding widows and orphans to as """ mi"al8'
leave any legacies to the church. Baronius cannot
help complaining also upon this point, though he
contradicts himself about it. For in one place™ he
says, the foresaid law of Constantine did so aug
ment the church's wealth, that the following em
perors began to dread the consequences of it, that
it would turn to the detriment and poverty of the
commonwealth; and therefore they made laws to
restrain the faithful from being so profuse in their
donations to the church. Yet when he comes to
speak particularly of those laws, he owns they were
not designed21 against the church, but only to cor
rect the scandalous practices of some sordid monks
and ecclesiastics, who being of an avaricious and
parasitical temper, made a gain of godliness, and
under pretence of religion, so screwed themselves
into the favour and affections of some rich widows
and orphans, that they prevailed upon them to leave
them great legacies, and sometimes their whole
estates, to the prejudice of the right heirs and next
relations. Which was so dishonest and unbecoming
a practice in such persons, that Valentinian made
a law to prevent it; decreeing, that22 no ecclesi
astics, or any that professed the monastic life, should
frequent the houses of widows or orphans ; nor be
qualified to receive any gift or legacy from the do
nation or last will of any such persons. Which
law, as Gothofred23 rightly observes, did not pro
hibit them from leaving any thing to the church ;
though some learned men so misunderstand it ; but
only tended to correct this unworthy practice of
some particular persons, which is equally complain
ed of by the ancient writers of the church. St.
Ambrose, and St. Jerom, and others mention this
law, but they do not at all inveigh agamst it, but
against those vices that occasioned it. I do not
complain of the law, says St. Jerom,24 but am grieved
that we should deserve such a law ; that when idol-

12 Euseb. lib. 9. u. 10. 13 Ap. Euseb. lib. 10. c. 5.
11 Constant. Ep. ad Anulin. ap. Euseb. ibid.
15 .Euseb. Vit. Const, lib. 2. c. 37 et 39.
18 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg, 4, It. Cod.
Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 2. de Sacrosanct. Eccles. Leg. 1. Habeat
unusquisque licentiam sanctissimo catholico venerabilique
concilio, decedens bonorum quod optaverit relinquere.
17 Baron, an. 321. ... 18.
18 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 10. de Paga-
nis, Leg. 1.
19 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 321. n. 4 et 5.
29 Baron, an. 321. n. 17.

21 Baron, an. 371. t. 4. p. 270. Qua quidem sanctione
nequaquam prohibentur ecclesiae haereditates accipere vel
legata, sed ecclesiasticae person&e, sive clerici, sive monachi.
— ut plane intelligas hosce nebulones, tanquam harpyas
quasdam inhiantes matronarum divitiis, &c.
22 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 20. Ecclesi-
astici, vel qui continentium se volunt nomine nuncupan,
viduarum aut pupillarum domos non adeant. — Censemus
etiam, ut memorati nihil de ejus mulieris liberalitate qua-
cunque vel extremo judicio possint adipisci.
23 Gothofred. in loc.
24 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian. Sacerdotes, dicere pudet,

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

185

priests, and stage-players, and carters, and harlots
may inherit, only clerks and monks are prohibited ;
and that not by persecuting emperors, but Christian
princes. He adds, that it was a very prudent cau
tion in the law, but yet it did not restrain the ava
rice of such persons, who found out an artifice to
elude the law, per fidei-commissa, by getting others
to receive in trust for them. Which shows us the
sense St. Jerom had of this matter, that he did not
think the emperors were injurious to the church in
making such a law, but those persons were only to
be blamed, whose avarice and sordid flatteries com
pelled them to make it. And any one that will
consult St. Ambrose,25 or the author under his
name,23 will find that they give the same account of
it. Theodosius indeed some years after made a law,
relating particularly to such deaconesses of the
church as were of noble families, that they should
not27 dispose of their jewels, or plate, or furniture,
or any other such things as were the ancient marks
of honour in their families, under pretence of re
ligion, while they lived ; nor make any church, or
clerk, or poor, their heirs when they died. But as
this law was made upon some particular reasons of
state, so it did no harm to the church ; for within
two months the same emperor recalled M it by a con
trary law, which granted liberty to such deacon
esses to dispose of their goods in their life-time to
any church or clerk whatsoever. And Marcian
made the law a httle more extensive, allowing29
deaconesses and all other religious women, to dis
pose of any part of their estate, by will or codicil,
to any church, or oratory, or clerk, or monk, or poor
whatsoever. Which law Justinian also confirmed
and inserted it into his Code.39 So that Constantine's
law continued always in its full force, and the suc
ceeding princes did not derogate from the privilege
which he had granted the church in this respect, for
fear (as Baronius pretends) lest the liberality of the
subject to the church should impoverish the com
monwealth. Men were very liberal indeed in their
gifts and donations to the church in this age, but
yet not so profuse as to need statutes of mortmain
to restrain them.
„ sect, 7. For besides the liberality of the
3rdly, Another J
part of church re»e- subjects, the emperors in these ages

found it necessary to make the clergy nues raised by aiiow.
, ances out ofthe em-
an allowance out of the public reve- p™or'« "cheque.-.
nues of the empire ; which was another way of
providing a maintenance for them. Constantine
both gave the clergy particular largesses, as their
occasions required, and also settled upon them a
standing allowance out of the exchequer. In one
of his epistles to Csecilian, bishop of Carthage, re
corded by Eusebius,31 he acquaints Caecilian with
his orders which he had given to Ursus, his general
receiver in Africa, to pay him three thousand polles,
TptaxiXiag eioXXiig, to be divided at his discretion
among the clergy of the provinces of Africa, Nu
midia, and the two Mauritanias. And if this sum
would not answer all their present necessities, he
gave him further orders to demand of his procurator
Heraclides whatever he desired more. I need not
stand here to inquire critically what this sum of
three thousand polles was, (though it may be com
puted above twenty thousand pounds,) since Con
stantine gave the bishop unlimited orders, to de
mand as much as the needs of the clergy should
require. But he not only supplied their present
necessities, but also gave orders for a standing al
lowance to be made them out of the public treasury.
For Theodoret32 and Sozomen33 say, he made a law
requiring the chief magistrates in every province to
grant the clergy, and virgins, and widows of the
church, an annual allowance of corn, h jjo-ta atrnpkata,
out of the yearly tribute of every city. And thus it
continued to the time of Julian, who withdrew the
whole allowance. But Jovian restored it again in
some measure, granting them a third part of the
former allowance only, because at that time the
public income was very low, by reason of a severe
famine ; but he promised them the whole, so soon
as the famine was ended, and the public storehouses
were better replenished. But either Jovian's death
prevented his design, or the necessities of the clergy
did not afterward require it. For though Sozomen
seems to say the whole was restored; yet Theo
doret, who is more accurate, affirms, that it was
only rptrnpopiov, a third part; and that so it con
tinued to his own times. In this sense therefore
we are to understand that law of the emperor
Marcian, which Justinian has inserted into his

idolorum, mimi, et aurigae, et scorta haereditates capiunt;
solis clericis et monachis prohibetur : et prohibetur non a
persecutoribus, sed a principibus Christianis. Nee de lege
conqueror, sed doleo cur meruimus hanc legem, &c.
25 Ambros. Ep. 31. ad Valentin, p. 145.
25 Idem, Homil. 7.
27 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 27. Nihil de
monilibus et supellectili, nihil de auro, argento, caeterisque
claraa domus insignibus, sub religionis defensione consumat.
Ac si quando diem obierit, nullam ecclesiam, nullum
clericum, nullum pauperem scribat haeredes, &c.
Ibid. Leg. 28. Legem, quae diaconissis vel viduis nuper
est promulgata, ne quis videlicet clericus, neve sub ecclesiae
nomine, mancipia, praedam, velut infirmi sexus despoliator,

et remotis adfinibus et propinquis, ipse sub praetextu catho
lica? disciplinae se ageret viventis haeredem, eatenus ani-
madvertat esse revocatam.
28 Marcian. Novel. 5. ad calcem Cod. Th. Generali lege
sancimus, sive vidua, sive diaconissa, sive virgo Deo dicata,
vel sanctimonialis mulier, sive quocunque alio nomine re-
ligiosi honoris vel dignitatis fremina nuncupetur, testamento
vel codicillo suo— ecclesiae, vel martyrio, vel clerico, vel
monacho, vel pauperibus aliquid vel ex integro vel ex parte,
in quacunque re vel specie credidit relinquendum, id modis
omnibus ratum firmumque constet.
88 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 2. de Sacrosanct. Eccl. Leg. 13.
31 Euseb. lib. 10. c. 6. " Theod. lib. 1. c. 11.
93 Sozomen, lib. 5. c. 5.

136

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

Code,34 decreeing, that the salaries which had been
always given to the churches in divers sorts of grain
out of the public treasures, should be allowed them,
without any diminution. This did not entitle them
to the whole allowance first made them by Constan
tine, (as some may be apt to imagine from the ge
neral words of the law,) but only to the third part,
which had been the customary allowance from the
time of Jovian. Another way by which some small
4thiy,eTnee'estates addition was made to the revenues of
of martyrs and con- ,, , , r. i j, /-,
lessors dying with- the ChUl'Ch, WaS trOm a laW Ot COn-
out heirs settled up- , T1 . _- .
on the church by stantme mentioned by Eusebius in
Constantine. J
his Life, where he tells us, that as he
ordered all the estates of martyrs and confessors,
and whoever had suffered in time of persecution, to
be restored to their next relations ; so if any of them
died without relations, the church should become
their heir, and in every place where they lived, suc
ceeded to their inheritance.
Sect 9 Theodosius junior and Valentinian
o""^"^^ HI. made such another law in re-
v.viul,0settied'in I'.ke ference to the temporal possessions of
the clergy : That if any presbyter, or
deacon,33 or deaconess, or subdeacon, or other clerk,
or any man or woman professing a monastic life,
died without will and without heirs, the estates and
goods they were possessed of should fall to the
church or monastery to which they belonged, un
less they were antecedently tied to some civil ser
vice. This imphes that the clergy were at liberty
to dispose of their own temporal estates as they
pleased ; and they fell to the church only in case
they died intestate. But the council of Agde, in
France, under Alaric the Goth, anno 506, went a
little further, and decreed, that every bishop,37 who
had no children or nephews, should make the
church his heir, and no other : as Caranza's edition,
and Gratian, and some others, read it. And the
council of Seville38 made a like decree for the
Spanish churches ; upon which Caranza30 makes
this remark, That the canon was fit to be renewed
in council, that the church should be the bishop's
heir, and not the pope. And that it was against the
mind of those fathers, that bishops should set up
primogenitures, or enrich their kindred out of the

revenues of the church. Which reflection, among
other things, might perhaps contribute towards his
being brought into the Spanish inquisition, though
he was archbishop of Toledo ; after which he un
derwent a ten years' imprisonment at Rome, and
had some of his books prohibited in the Roman
Index, of which Spondanus,49 in his Annals, will
give the reader a further account. But I return to
the primitive church.
Where we may observe another ad
dition made to the revenues of the 6tbiy, Heathen
temples and their
clersv, by the donation of heathen »"»" sometimea
¦ &¦" J given to the church.
temples, and sometimes the revenues
that were settled upon them. For though the
greatest part of these went commonly to the em
peror's coffers, or to favourites that begged them,
upon the demolishing of the temples; as appears
from the laws of Honorius41 and Gratian, and
several others in the Theodosian Code; yet some
of them were given to the church : for Honorius *
takes notice of several orders and decrees of his
own, whereby such settlements had been made up
on the church, which were to continue the church's
property and patrimony for ever. And it is pro
bable some other emperors might convert the re
venues of the temples to the same use. At least
the fabrics themselves, and the silver and golden
statues that were in them, were sometimes so dis
posed of. For Sozomen43 says, the piBptov, or temple
of the sun at Alexandria, was given to the church
by Constantius. And we learn from Socrates,44 that
in the time of Theodosius, the statues of Serapis,
and many other idols at Alexandria, were melted
down for the use of the church ; the emperor giving
orders that the gods should help to maintain the
poor. Honorius made a like decree, anno Scc, ,,
412, in reference to all the revenues ,eSi''convent'icies
1.1 • ,i j-i j.-, and their revenues.
belonging to heretical conventicles,
that both the churches or conventicles themselves,
and all the lands45 that were settled upon them,
should be forfeited, and become the possession and
property of the catholic church, as by former de
crees he had appointed. And I suppose it was by
virtue of these laws, that Cyril, bishop of Alexan
dria, shut up all the Novatian churches, and seized

34 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 2. de SS. Eccles. Leg. 12. Sa-
laria quae sacrosanctis ecclesiis in diversis speciebus de pub
lico hactenus ministrata sunt, jubemus nunc quoque incon-
cussa, et a nullo prorsus imminuta praestari.
35 Euseb. Vit. Const, lib. 2. c. 36.
36 Cod. Th. lib. 5. Tit. 3. de Bonis Clericor. Leg. 1. Cod.
Just. lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 20.
37 Cone. Agathen. c. 24. al. 33. ap. Gratian. Caus. 12, qu.
2. c. 34. Episcopus qui Alios aut nepotes non habuerit, alium
quam ecclesiam non relinquat haeredem.
31 Cone, llispalens. l.c. 1.
30 Caranz. in loc. Hie canon erat renovandus in concilio,
ut hoeres defuncti episcopi esset ecclesia, non tamen papa.

Secundo alienum est a sententia horum patrum licere epis
copo instituere primogenituras, vel locupletare consan-
guineos. 40 Spondan. Annal. Eccl. an. 1559. ... 29.
41 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 10. de Paganis, Leg. 19 et 20.
42 Ibid. Leg. 20. Ea autem quae multiplicibus constitutis
ad venerabilem ecclesiam voluimus pertinere, Christiana sibi
merito religio vindicavit, id est, vindicabit.
13 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 7. " Socrat. lib. 5. c. 16.
45 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 5. de Hairet. Leg. 52. Ecclesiis
eorum vel conventiculis, praediisque, siqua in eorum ec
clesias haereticorum largitas prava contulit, proprietati po-
testatique catholicae, sicut jamdudum statuimus, vindicatis.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

187

upon all their revenues, and deprived Theonas, their
bishop, of his substance ; though Socrates,46 in tell
ing the story, represents the matter a little more
invidiously, as if Cyril had done all this by his own
private usurped authority and arbitrary power :
which will hardly gain credit with any one that
considers, that those laws of Honorius were pub
lished before Cyril came to the episcopal throne,
which was not till the year 412, when those laws
were re-enforced by the imperial power.
While I am upon this head, it will
8thiy, The estates not be improper to observe further,
of clerks deserting t. ,. . , . ., . „
the church, to be for- that, by J ustmian s laws, if any
feited to the church. 7 J > J
clergymen or monks, who were pos
sessed of temporal estates, forsook their church or
monastery, and turned seculars again, all their sub
stance was forfeited to the church or monastery to
which they belonged. These were the several me
thods that were anciently taken for augmenting and
improving the revenues of the church, besides those
of first-fruits and tithes, of which more hereafter.
But I must observe, that as these
no disreputable methods were generally reputed legal
ways of augmenting; in , , .,
church-revenuesen- and allowable, so there were some
rouraged. Fathers
ttL'^hudntn to other as generally disallowed and con-
!heuaheirs':h°":h demned. Particularly we find in St.
Austin's time, that it was become a
rule in the African church, to receive no estates
that were given to the church to the great detri
ment and prejudice of the common rights of any
others. As if a father disinherited his children to
make the church his heir, in that case no bishop
would receive his donation. Possidius tells48 us
St. Austin refused some estates so given, because
he thought it more just and equal, that they should
be possessed by the children, or parents, or next
kindred of the deceased persons. And that he did
so, is evident from his own words in his discourse
de Vita Clericorum,49 where he says he had return
ed an estate to a son, which an angry father at his
death had taken from him : and he thought he did
well in it ; professing for his own part, that if any
disinherited his son, to make the church his heir,
he should seek some one else to receive his donation,
and not Austin ; and he hoped by the grace of God
there would be none that would receive it. He

" Socrat. lib. 7. c. 7.
47 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Epise. Leg. 53. Si illi
monasteria aut ecclesias relinquant, atque mundani fiant;
omne ipsorum jus ad monasterium aut ecclesiam pertinet.
Vid. Novel. 5. c. 4 et 6. It, Novel. 123. c. 42.
43 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 24.
" Aug. Serm. 49. de Diversis, t. 10. p. 520. Quando
donayi filio, quod iratus pater moriens abstulit, bene feci.
—Quid plura, fratres mei ? Quicunque vult exhasredato filio
hasredem facere ecclesiam, quaerat alteram qui suscipiat,
non Augustinum; imo Deo propitio neminem inveniat.
Id. ibid. Quidam cum filios non haberet, neque spera-
ret, res suas omnes, retento sibi usufructu, donavit eccle-

adds in the same place a very remarkable and laud
able instance of great generosity and equity in Au
relius, bishop of Carthage, in a case of the like na
ture. A certain man59 having no children, nor
hopes of any, gave away his whole estate to the
church, only reserving to himself the use of it for
hfe. Now it happened afterwards, that he had
children born to him; upon which the bishop
generously returned him his estate, when he did
not at all expect it. The bishop indeed, says St.
Austin, had it in his power to have kept it, sed jure
fori, non. jure poli, only by the laws of man, but
not by the laws of Heaven. And therefore he
thought himself obliged in conscience to return it.
This shows how tender they were of augmenting
the revenues of the church by any methods that
might be thought unequitable, or such as were not
reputable, honest, or of good report ; herein observ
ing the apostle's rule, to let their moderation, Tl
imuieig, their equity, be known to all men ; not do
ing any hard thing for lucre's sake, nor taking ad
vantages by rigour of law, when conscience and
charity were against them.
To avoid scandal also, and to pro-
.... , .... Sect. 14.
vide things honest m the sig-ht of all Nothing to be de-
° ° manded for admin-
men, they forbade any thing to be de- rne"i"frt'h\eChU™h~
manded for administering the sacra- cZ'™„T,a„ierl
ments of the church. The council of "ent of ihe dead'
Eliberis seems to intimate, that it was customary
with some persons at their baptism to cast money
into a bason, by way of gratuity to the minister ;
but even this is there forbidden by the canon, lest
the priest51 should seem to sell what he freely re
ceived. Whence we may conclude, that if the peo
ple might not offer, the priest might much less
exact or demand any thing for administering the
sacrament of baptism. In other churches a volun
tary oblation was allowed of, from persons that
were able and willing to make it ; but all exactions
of that nature from the poor were still prohibited, for
fear of discouraging them from offering themselves
or their children to baptism. Thus it was in the
Roman church in the time of Gelasius, as we learn
from his epistles ;52 and in the Greek church in the
time of Gregory Nazianzen, who takes occasion to
answer this objection which poor men made against

siae. Nati sunt illi filii, et reddidit episcopus nee opinanti
quae ille donaverat. In potestate habebat episcopus non
reddere ; sed jure fori, non jure poli.
81 Cone. Eliber. c. 48. Emendari placuit, ut hi qui bapti-
zantur (ut fieri solebat) nummos in concham non mittant ;
ne sacerdos, quod gratis accepit, pretio distrahere videatur.
52 Gelas. Ep. 1. al. 9. ad Episc. Lucaniae, c, 5. Bapti-
zandis consignandisque fidelibus pretia nulla presbyteri
praefigant, nee illationibus quibusdam impositis exagitare
cupiant renascentes ; quoniam quod gratis accipimus, gra
tis dare mandamur. Et ideo nihil a praedictis exigere mo-
liantur, quo vel paupertate cogente deterriti, vel indigna-
tione revocati, redemptionis suae causas adire despiciant

183

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

coming immediately to baptism,53 because they had
not wherewith to make the usual present that was
then to be offered, or to purchase the splendid robe
that was then to be worn, or to provide a treat for
the minister that baptized them. He tells them,
no such things would be expected or exacted of
them : they need only make a present of themselves
to Christ, and entertain the minister with their own
good life and conversation, which would be more
acceptable to him than any other offerings. This
implies, that it was then the custom for the people
to make a voluntary oblation at their baptism ; but
not the custom for ministers to demand it, as a
matter of right, for fear of giving scandal. Some
editions of Gratian54 and Vicecomes55 allege a canon
of the third or fourth council of Carthage to the
same purpose ; which, if the allegation were true,
would prove that the same custom obtained in the
African church. But, as Antonius Augustinus50
and the Roman correctors of Gratian5' have ob
served, there is no such canon to be found in any
African council ; but it is a canon of the second
council of Bracara in Spain, which finding a cor
rupt practice crept in among the clergy, (notwith
standing the former prohibition of the Eliberitan
council,) that ministers did exact pledges of the
poor, who had not ability to make any offering, en
deavoured to redress this corruption, by passing a
new order, that though50 voluntary oblations might
be received, yet no pledge should be extorted from
the poor who were not able to offer, because many
of the poor for fear of this kept back their children
from baptism. The same council of Bracara made
a decree, that no bishop should exact59 any thing
as a due of any founders of churches for their con
secration ; but if any thing was voluntarily offered,
he might receive it. And so in like manner for
confirmation,30 and administering the eucharist,61 all
bishops and presbyters are strictly enjoined not to
exact any thing of the receivers, because the grace
of God was not to be set to sale, nor the sanctifica
tion of the Spirit to be imparted for money. St.
Jerom assures us further, that it was not very hon
ourable in his time to exact any thing for the bury
ing-places of the dead, for he censures those that
practised it, as falling short62 of the merit of Ephron
the Hittite, whom Abraham forced to receive money

for the burying-place which he bought of him : but
now, says he, there are some who sell burying-
places and take money for them, not by compulsion,
as Ephron did, but by extortion rather from those
that were unwilling to pay. By which we may
understand, that in his time it was hardly allowable
to demand any thing for the use of a public or pri
vate cemetery : nor was this any part of the church
revenues in those days, when as yet the custom of
burying in churches was not generally broughtin, but
was the practice of later ages ; of which more when
we come to speak of the funeral rites of the church.
If any one is desirous to know what . , ,
J Sect. 15.
part of the church revenues was an- lh™e00oie »0"ie„0ti,
ciently most serviceable and benefi- vai™biepa™tso'r
cial to the church, he may be informed
from St. Chrysostom and St. Austin, who give the
greatest commendations to the offerings and obla
tions of the people, and seem to say, that the church
was never better provided than when her mainte
nance was raised chiefly from them. For then
men's zeal prompted them to be very liberal in their
daily offerings ; but as lands and possessions were
settled upon the church, this zeal sensibly abated ;
and so the church came to be worse provided for
under the notion of growing richer. Which is the
thing that St. Chrysostom complains of in his own
times, when the ancient revenue arising from obla
tions was in a great measure sunk, and the church,
with all her lands, left in a worse condition than she
was before. For now her ministers were forced to
submit to secular cares, to the management of lands
and houses, and the business of buying and selling,
for fear the orphans, and virgins, and widows of
the church should starve. He exhorts the people
therefore to return to their ancient liberality of
oblations, which would at once ease the ministry
of all such cares, and make a good provision for
the poor, and take off all the httle scoffs and ob
jections that some were so ready to make and cast
upon the clergy, that they were too much given
to secular cares and employments, when indeed
it was not choice, but necessity, that forced them
to it. There are, says he, in this place, (at Antioch
he means,) by the grace of God a hundred thou
sand persons that come to chm-ch. Now, if every
one63 of these would but give one loaf of bread

53 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. t. 1. p. 655.
54 Gratian. Caus. 1. qu. 1. c. 108.
55 Vicecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 4. c. 2.
58 Anton. Aug. de Emend. Gratiani, lib. 1. Dial. 14.
57 Gratian. ibid. Edit. Rom. an. 1582.
58 Cone. Bracar. 2. c. 7. edit. Crab. al. 3. Bracar. Ed.
Labbe. Qui infantes 'suos ad baptismum offerunt, si quid
voluntarie pro suo offerunt voto, suscipiatur ab eis; si vero
per necessitatem paupertatis aliquid non habent quod offe-
rant, nullum illis pignus violenter tollatur a clericis. Nam
multi pauperes hoc timentes, filios suos a baptismo retra-
hunt.

59 Ibid. can. 5.
60 Gelas. Ep. 1. al. 9. ad Episc. Lucan. c. 10.
61 Cone. Trul. c. 23.
62 Hieron. Quaest. Hebraic, in Gen. xxiii. t. 3. p. 214.
Postquam pretio victus est, ut sepulcrum venderet, &c,
appellatus est Ephran : significance scriptura, non eum
fuisse consummatae perfectaeque virtutis, qui potuerit me-
morias vendere mortuorum. .Sciant igitur qui sepulcra
venditant, et non coguntur ut accipiant pretium, sed a no-
lentibus etiam extorquent, immutari nomen suum, et perire
quid de merito eorum, &c.
63 Chrys. Horn. 86. in Matth.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

189

daily to the poor, the poor would live in plenty.
If every one would contribute but one halfpenny,
no man would want ; neither should we undergo so
many reproaches and derisions, as if we were too
intent upon our possessions. By this discourse of
Chrysostom's it plainly appears, that he thought
the oblations of the people in populous cities, when
men were acted with their primitive zeal, was a better
provision for the clergy than even the lands and
possessions of the church. And St. Austin seems
to have had the same sense of this matter. For
Possidius61 tells us in his Life, that when he found
the possessions of the church were become a little
invidious, he was used to tell the laity, that he had
rather hve upon the oblations of the people of God
than undergo the care and trouble of those pos
sessions; and that he was ready to part with them,
provided all the servants and ministers of God
might hve as they did under the Old Testament,
when, as we read, they that served at the altar
were made partakers of the altar. But though he
made this proposal to the people, they would never
accept of it. Which is an argument, that the peo
ple also thought, that the reducing the clergy's
maintenance to the precise model of the Old Testa
ment would have been a more chargeable way to
them than the other ; since the oblations of the Old
Testament included tithes and first-fruits ; concern
ing the state and original of which, as to what con
cerns the Christian church, I come now to make a
more particular inquiry.

CHAPTER V.

OF TITHES AND FIRST-FRUITS IN PARTICULAR.
secti. Concerning tithes, so far as relates
reckoned T'te'drie to the ancient church, it will be pro
per to make three inquiries. First,

Whether the primitive fathers esteemed them to be
due by Divine right ? Secondly, If they did, why
they were not always strictly demanded P Thirdly,
In what age they -were first generally settled upon
the church ? As to the first inquiry, it is generally
agreed by learned men, that the ancients accounted
tithes to be due by Divine right. Bellarmine indeed,1
and Rivet,2 and Mr. Selden,3 place them upon an
other foot : but our learned Bishop Andrews 4 and
Bishop Carleton,5 who wrote before Mr. Selden, and
Bishop Montague" and Tillesly,' who wrote in
answer to him, (not to mention many others who
have written since,) have clearly proved, that the
ancients believed the law about tithes not to be
merely a ceremonial or political command, but of
moral and perpetual obligation. It will be sufficient
for me in this place to present the reader with two
or three of their allegations. Origen, in one of his
homilies8 on Numbers, thus delivers his opinion
about it : How does our righteousness exceed the
righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, if they
dare not taste of the fruits of the earth, before they
offer the first-fruits to the priests, and separate the
tithes for the Levites ? Whilst I do nothing of this,
but only so abuse the fruits of the earth, that nei
ther the priest, nor the Levite, nor the altar of God
shall see any of them ? St. Jerom9 says expressly,
that the law about tithes and first-fruits was to be
understood to continue in its full force in the Chris
tian church ; where men were commanded not only
to give tithes, but to sell all that they had, and give
to the poor. But, says he, if we will not proceed
so far, let us at least imitate the Jewish practice,
and give part of the whole to the poor, and the
honour that is due to the priests and Levites.
Which he that does not, defrauds God, and makes
himself liable to a curse. St. Austin as plainly fa
vours the same opinion, telling men,19 that they
ought to separate something out of their yearly
fruits, or daily income; and that a tenth to a
Christian was but a small proportion. Because it

34 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 23. Dum forte (ut adsolet) de pos-
sessionibus ipsis invidia clericis fieret, alloquebatur plebem
Dei, malle se ex collationibus plebis Dei vivere quam illarum
possessionum curam vel gubernationem pati; et paratum
se illis cedere, ut eo modo omnes Dei servi et ministri vive-
rent, quo in Veteri Testamento leguntur altari deservientes
(le eodem. comparticipari. Sed nunquam id laici suscipere
voluerunt. 1 Bellarmin. de Clericis, lib. 1. t. 25.
1 Rivet, Exerc. 80. in Gen. xiv. p. 386.
3 Selden, Hist, of Tithes, c. 4.
4 Andrews, de Decimis, inter Opuscula.
5 Carleton, Divine Right, of Tithes, c. 4.
8 Montague, Diatribce, &c. » Tillesly, Answ. to Selden.
3 Orig. Horn. 11. in Num. xviii. t. 1. p. 210. Quomodo ergo
abundatjustitia nostra plusquam scribarum et Pharisaeorum,
si illi de fructibus terrae suae gustare non audent, priusquain
primitiassuassacerdotibusofferantetLevitisdecimaesepareii-
tur ? Et ego nihil horum faciens, fructibus terrae ita abutar, ut
sacerdos nesciat, Levites ignoret, Divinum altare non sentiat ?

8 Hieron. Com. in Mai. iii. Quod de decimis primitiisque
diximus, quae olim dabantur a populo sacerdotibus ac Le-
vitis, in ecclesiae quoque populis intelligite : Quibus prae-
ceptum est, non solum decimas dare et primitias, sed et
vendere omnia quae habent et dare pauperibus, et sequi Do
minion salvatorem. Quod si facere nolumus, saltern Judae-
orum imitemur exordia, ut pauperibus partem demus ex
toto, et sacerdotibus et Levitis honorem debitum deferamus.
Quod qui non fecerit, Deum fraudare et supplantare con-
vincitur, &c.
10 Aug. Com. in Psal. cxlvi. t. 8. p. 698. Praecidite ergo
aliquid, et deputate aliquid fixum vel ex annuis fructibus,
vel ex quotidianis quaestibus vestris. — Decimas vis? De
cimas exime, quanquam parum sit. Dictum est enim, quia
Pharisaei decimas dabant, &c. Et quid ait Dominus? Nisi
abundaverit justitia vestra plusquam scribarum et Phari
saeorum, non intrabitis in regnum crelorum. Et ille, super
quem debet abundare justitia tua, decimas dat: tu autem
nee millesimam das. Quomodo superabis eum, cui non
aequaris ?

190

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

is said, the Pharisees gave tithes : " I fast twice in
the week, I give tithes of all that I possess." And
our Lord saith, " Except your righteousness exceed
the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye
shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." But
if he, whose righteousness you are to exceed, give
tithes ; and you give not a thousandth part ; how
can you be said to exceed him, wdiom you do not
so much as equal ? By these few allegations the
reader may be able to judge, what notion the an
cients had of tithes, as due by Divine right under
the gospel, as well as under the law ; and that the
precept concerning them was not a mere ceremonial
or pohtical command given to the Jews only.
sect 2 -^ut w^y' then, it may be said, were
m^a'poXS not tithes exacted by the apostles at
frhen,edltel,;,oVhat first, or by the fathers in the ages
lmved' immediately following? For it is
generally believed that tithes were not the original
maintenance of ministers under the gospel. To this
Bishop Carleton1' has returned several very satis
factory answers, which the reader may take in his
own words. First, That tithes were paid to the
priests and Levites in the time of Christ and his
apostles : now, the synagogue must first be buried,
before these things could be orderly brought into
use in the church. Secondly, In the times of the
New Testament, and somewhat after, there was an
extraordinary maintenance by a community of all
things, which supplied the want of tithes : but this
community was extraordinary, and not to last al
ways. Thirdly, The use of paying tithes, as the
church then stood, was so incommodious and cum
bersome, that it could not well be practised. And
therefore, as circumcision was laid aside for a time,
whilst Israel travelled through the wilderness, not
because the people of right ought not then also to
have used it, but because it was so incommodious
for that estate and time of the church, that it could
not without great trouble be practised ; even so the
use of tithes in the time of Christ and his apostles
was laid aside, not because it ought not, but because
it could not, without great encumbrance, be done.
And as circumcision was resumed, as soon as the
estate of the church could bear it ; so tithes were
re-established, as soon as the condition of the
church could suffer it. For tithes cannot well be
paid, but where some whole state or kingdom re-
ceiveth Christianity, and where the magistrate doth
favour the church, which was not in the time of the
apostles. To these reasons some other learned

persons 12 have added a fourth, which is also worth
noting, That the tithes of fruits were not so early
paid to Christian priests, because the inhabitants of
the country were the latest converts ; whence also
the name pagans stuck by the heathens, because
the greatest rehcs of them were in country villages.
As to the last inquiry, when tithes
began first to be generally settled up- in whS age the.
, , „ ;, . . <™ "ret gcneralli
on the church r the common opinion settled upon the
A church.
is, that it was in the fourth century,
when magistrates began to favour the church, and
the world was generally converted from heathenism.
Some think13 Constantine settled them by law upon
the church : so Alsted, who cites Hermannus Gigas
for the same opinion. But there is no law of Con
stantine's now extant that makes express mention
of any such thing. That which comes the nearest
to it, seems to be the law about an annual allow
ance of corn to the clergy in all cities out of the
public treasuries, which has been spoken of in the
last chapter : but this was not so much as a tenth
of the yearly product ; for the whole tribute itself
seems to have been no more : for in some laws of
the Theodosian Code 14 the emperor's tribute is call
ed declines, tithes ; and the publicans, who collected
it, are, upon that account, by Tully15 called decu-
mani ; and in Hesychius, the word StKaTibuv, to
tithe, is explained by rtXoiviiv and Sekuttiv daitpaT-
rio-Bat, to pay tribute, or pay their tithes to the col
lectors of the tribute. Unless, therefore, we can
suppose that Constantine settled the whole tribute
of the empire upon the church, (which it is evident
he did not,) we cannot take that law for a settlement
of tithes upon the clergy. Yet it might be a step
towards it : for before the end of the fourth cen
tury, as Mr. Selden16 himself not only confesses,
but proves out of Cassian, Eugippius, and others,
tithes were paid to the chm-ch. St. Austin lived in
this age, and he says, tithes were paid before his
time, and much better than they were in his own
time, for he makes a great complaint of the non
payment of them. 0 ur forefathers, says he,1' abound
ed in all things, because they gave tithes to God,
and tribute to Ccesar. But now, because our devo
tion to God is sunk, the taxes of the state are raised
upon us. We would not give God his part in the
tithes, and therefore the whole is taken away from
us. The exchequer devours what we would not
give to Christ. St. Chrysostom,1" and the author of
the Opus Imperfectum™ on St. Matthew, that goes
under his name, testify for the practice of other

11 Carlton, Div. Right of Tithes, cap. 4. p 21.
12 Bishop Fell, Not. in Cypr. Ep. 66. al. 1.
13 Alsted, Supplement. Chamier de Membris Eccles. c. 10.
14 Cod. Th. lib. 10. Tit. 19. de Metallis, Leg. 10 et 11.
18 Vid. Cicer. Orat. 3,-in Ver. n. 21 et 22.
16 Selden, Hist, of Tith. c. 5. p. 47, &c.
17 Aug. Horn. 48. ex 50. t. 10. p. 201. Majores nostri
ideo copiis omnibus abundabant, quia Deo decimas dabant,

et Caesari censum reddebant. Modo autem quia decessit
devotio Dei, accessit indictio fisci. Nolumus partiri cum
Deo decimas, modo totum tollitur. Hoc tollit fiscus, quod
non accipit Christus.
18 Chyrs. Horn. 4. in Ephes. p. 1058.
19 Opus Imperf. in Matt. Horn. 44. Si populus decimas
non obtulerit, murmurant omnes : at si peccantem populum
viderint, nemo murmurat contra eum.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

191

churches about the same time. And it were easy
to add a hst of many other fathers and councils of
the next age, which speak of tithes20 as then actu
ally settled upon the church : but since they who
dispute most against the Divine right of them, do
not deny this as to fact, it is needless to prosecute
this matter any further ; which they that please may
see historically deduced through many centuries by
Mr. Selden.21 There is one part more of church
The pnginai of revenues, whose original remains to
mlnner'oi offering be inquired into, and that is first-
fruits, which are frequently mention
ed in the primitive writers. For not only those
called the Apostolical Canons22 and Constitutions23
speak of them as part of the maintenance of the
clergy; but writers more ancient and more au
thentic, as Origen and Irenaeus, mention them
also as oblations made to God. Celsus, says Ori
gen,24 would have us dedicate first-fruits to demons;
but we dedicate them to him, who said, " Let the
earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and
the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind." To
whom we give our first-fruits, to him also we send
up our prayers, having a great High Priest that is
entered into heaven, &c. In like manner Irenaeus
says,25 Christ taught his disciples to offer the first-
fruits of the creatures to God, and that this was the
church's continual oblation with thanksgiving for
the enjoyment of all the rest. Which implies,
either that they had a particular form of thanks
giving, as there is in both the Greek and Latin
rituals; or else that these first-fruits were offered
with other oblations at the time of the eucharist.
However this be, it is evident, that as they were
principally designed for agnizing the Creator, so
they were secondarily intended for the use of his
servants. And therefore we find the Eustathian
heretics censured by the synod of Gangra, anno
324, for that they took the first-fruits, which were
anciently given to the church, and divided them
among the saints of their own party;26 in opposition
to which practice there are two canons made by
that council,27 forbidding any one to receive or dis
tribute such oblations out of the church, otherwise
than by the directions of the bishop, under pain of
excommunication. Some other rules are also given
by one of the councils29 of Carthage, inserted into
the African Code, concerning these first-fruits, that
they should be only of grapes and corn; which
shows that it was also the practice of the African

church. Nazianzen likewise mentions the first-
fruits of the winepress and the floor, which were to
be dedicated to God.29 And the author of the Con
stitutions has a form of prayer,30 iiriicXijaie M dirap-
x&v, an invocation upon the first-fruits, to be used
at their dedication. So that it seems very clear,
that the offering of first-fruits was a very ancient
and general custom in the Christian church, and
that this also contributed something toward the
maintenance of the clergy ; whose revenues I have
now considered so far as concerns the several kinds
and first original of them.

CHAPTER VI.
OF THE MANAGEMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE
REVENUES OF THE ANCIENT CLERGY.

20 Cone. Aurelian. 1. an. 511. can. 17. Cone. Matiscon.
2. an. 588. c. 5.
21 Selden, Hist, of Tithes, c. 5, &c. M Canon. Apost. c.4.
23 Constit. lib. 2. c. 25. lib. 8. c. 30.
24 Orig. cont. Cels. lib. 8. p. 400.
Iren. lib. 4. c. 32. Sed et suis discipulis dans consilium
pnmitias Deo offerre ex suis creaturis, &c. Ibid. c. 34. Of-

The next thing to be considered is,
the ancient way of managing and The revenues of
-,.,.,..,, , the whole diocese
distributing these revenues among the anciently in tt.
hands of the hishop.
clergy, and such others as were depen
dants upon the church. Which being a little dif
ferent from the ways of later ages, since settlements
were made upon parochial churches ; for the right
understanding of it we are in the first place to ob
serve, that anciently the revenues of the whole dio
cese were all in the hands of the bishop ; who, with
the advice and consent of his senate of presbyters,
distributed them as the occasions of the church re
quired. This will appear evident to any one that
will consider these two things (which will hereafter
be proved, when we come to speak of parochial
churches and their original) : first, That there were
anciently no presbyters or other clergy fixed upon
particular churches or congregations in the same
city or diocese ; but they were served indifferently
by any presbyter from the ecclesia matrix, the mo
ther or cathedral church, to which all the clergy of
the city or diocese belonged, and not to any par
ticular congregation. Secondly, That when pres
byters were fixed to particular churches or assem
bhes in some cities, yet still those churches had no
separate revenues ; but the maintenance of the
clergy officiating in them was from the common
stock of the mother church, into which all the ob
lations of particular churches were put, as into a
common fund, that from thence there might be

ferre igitur oportet Deo primitias ejus creaturae, &c.
28 Cone. Gangr. in Praifat. ~K.apiro(popias te tcis tK/cXrj-
txiacTTiKii Tots dvEKa^EV SlSopival Ty iKKXi]tria, iavTolt
Kal -rots trvv avTols, chs d-ytcus, -rets StaSoaEts irotovpEvot.
27 Ibid. can. 7 et 8.
28 Cod. Can. Afr. c. 37. al. 40. Cone. African, c. 4.
28 Naz. Ep. 80. 30 Constit. lib. 8. c. 40.

192

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

made a general distribution. That thus it was at
Constantinople till the middle of the fifth century,
is evident from what we find in Theodorus Lector,
who says,1 that Marcian, the ceconomus or guardian
of that church under Gennadius, anno 460, was the
first that ordered the clergy of every particular
church to receive the offerings of their own church,
whereas before the great church received them all.
Now, this being the ancient custom,
Sect. 2. ' °
d^ut^long it gives us a clear account how all
the dergy. tne revenues 0f the church came to
be in the hands of the bishop, and how it was made
one part of his office and duty by the canons to
concern himself in the care and distribution of them.
Of which because I have already spoken elsewhere,2
I shall say no more in this place, save only that the
bishop himself, to avoid suspicion and prevent mis
management, was obliged to give an account of his
administration in a provincial synod;' as also at his
election to exhibit a list of his own goods and estate,
that such things as belonged to him4 might be dis
tinguished from those that belonged to God and
the church. And for the same reason the great
council of Chalcedon5 ordered, that every bishop
should have an ceconomus, or guardian of the church,
and he to be chosen by the vote of all the clergy,
as has been noted in another place. See Book III.
chap. 12. sect. 4.
„ . , As to the distribution itself, in the
Sect. 3. '
diSn of church most primitive ages we find no certain
revenues. rules about it ; but as it was in the
apostles' days, so it continued for some time after:
what was collected, was usually deposited with the
bishop, and distribution was made to every man
according as he had need. But the following ages
brought the matter to some certain rules, and then
the revenues were divided into certain portions,
monthly or yearly, according as occasion required,
and these proportioned to the state or needs of every
order. In the Western church, the division was
usually into three or four parts ; whereof one fell
to the bishop ; a second to the rest of the clergy ; a
third to the poor ; and the fourth was applied to
the maintenance of the fabric and other necessary
uses of the church. The council of Bracara6 makes
but three parts, one for the bishop, another for the

clergy, and the third for the fabric and lights ofthe
church. But then it was supposed, that the bishop's
hospitality should out of such a proportion provide •
for the necessities of the poor. By other rules the
poor, that is, all distressed people, the virgins and
widows of the church, together with the martyrs
and confessors in prison, the sick and strangers,
have one fourth7 in the dividend expressly allotted
them. For all these had relief (though not a per
fect maintenance) from the charity of the church.
At Rome there were fifteen hundred such persons,
besides the clergy," provided for this way in the
time of Cornelius; and above three thousand at
Antioch9 in the time of Chrysostom : by which we
may make an estimate of the revenues and charities
of those populous churches.
In some churches they made no Sec"t 4
such division, but lived all in common, a^'/SX
the clergy with the bishop, as it were i"c™°»1"-
in one mansion, and at one table. But this they
did not by any general canon, but only upon
choice, or particular combination and agreement in
some particular churches. As Sozomen18 notes it
to have been the custom at Rinocurura in Egypt,
and Possidius affirms11 the same of the church of
St. Austin. What was the practice of St. Austin
and his clergy we cannot better learn than from St.
Austin himself, who tells us, that ah his clergy12
laid themselves voluntarily under an obligation to
have all things in common ; and therefore none of
them could have any property, or any thing to dis
pose of by will ; or, if they had, they were liable to
be turned out, and have their names expunged out
of the roll of the clergy : which he resolved to do,
though they appealed to Rome, or to a thousand
councils, against him ; by the help of God, they
should not be clerks where he was bishop. For
his own part, he tells us, he was so punctual tp this
rule, that if any one presented him with a robe
finer than ordinary, he was used to sell it; that
since his clergy could not wear the same in kind,
they might at least ls partake of the benefit, when it
was sold and made common. But as this way of
living would not comport with the state of all
churches, so there were but few that embraced it;
and those that did, were not compelled to it by any

'Theod. Lect. lib. 1. p. 553.
2 Book II. chap. 4. sect. 6. 3 Cone. Antioch. c. 25.
4 Canon. Apost. c. 39. al. 40.
5 Cone. Chalced. c. 25.
6 Cone. Bracar. 1. c. 25. Placuit, ut de rebus ecclesias
ticis fiant tres sequse portiones, id est, una episcopi, alia
clericorum, tertia in reparatione vel in luminariis ecclesiae.
7 Gelas. Ep. 1, al. 9. ad Episc. Lucanice, u. 27. Quatuor
tarn de redditu quam de oblatione fidelium — convenit fieri
portiones : quarum sit una pontificis, altera clericorum
tertia pauperum, quarta fabricis applicanda. Vid. Sim-
plicii Ep. 3. ad Florent. Gregor. Magn. lib. 3. Ep. 11.
8 Cornel. Ep. ad Fab. ap. Euseb. lib. 6. c, 43.

8 Chrys. Horn. 67. in Matth. 10 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 31.
11 Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 25.
12 Aug. Ser. 50. de Diversis sive de Communi Vita Cleri
corum, t. 10. p. 523. Quia placuit illis socialis hanc vita,
quisquis cum hypocrisi vixerit, quisquis inventus fuerit ha
bens proprium, non illi permitto ut inde faciat testamentum,
sed delebo eum de tabula clericorum. interpellet contra
me mille concilia, naviget contra me quo voluerit, sit certe
ubi potuerit, adjuvabit me Deus, ut ubi ego episcopus sum,
illic clericus esse non possit.
13 Ibid. Si quis meliorem dederit, vendo, qunil et facere
soleo, ut quando nou potest vestis esse communis, pretiutn
vestis sit commune.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

193

general law, but only by local statutes of their own
appointment. Yet in one of these two ways the
Alterations' made clergy were commonly provided for
in these matterB by , , ..
the endowment of out of the revenues of the great church,
parochial churches. till such times as endowments and
settlements began to be made upon parochial
churches ; which was not done in all places at the
same time, nor in one and the same way : but it
seems to have had its rise from particular founders
of churches, who settled manse and glebe upon the
churches which they builded, and upon that score
were allowed a right of patronage, to present their
own clerk, and invest him with the revenues of the
church, wherewith they had endowed it. This
practice was begun in the time of Justinian, anno
500, if not before, for there are two of his laws
which14 authorize and confirm it. About the same
time, a settlement of other revenues, as oblations,
&c, was also made in some places upon parochial
churches, as has been observed before out of The
odorus Lector's accounts of the churches of Con
stantinople. Yet the change is thought by some15
to be much later in England : for they collect out
of Bede,16 that the ancient course of the clergy's
officiating only pro tempore in parochial churches,
whilst they received maintenance from the cathedral
church, continued in England more than a hun
dred years after the coming of Austin into England,
that is, till about the year 700. For Bede plainly
intimates, that at that time the bishop and his clergy
hved together, and had all things common, as they
had in the primitive church in the days of the
apostles. Sect 6 I have but one thing more to ob-
hetadhfiZch serve upon this head, which is, that
Sipon StrlSrd& such goods or revenues as were once
nary occasions. . , , , -, ,
given to the church, were always
esteemed devoted to God ; and therefore were only
to be employed in his service, and not to be diverted
to any other use, except some extraordinary case of
charity absolutely required it. As if it was to re
deem captives, or reheve the poor in time of famine,
when no other succours could be afforded them : in
that case, it was usual to sell even the sacred vessels
and utensils of the church, to make provision for
the hving temples of God, which were to be prefer
red before the ornaments of the material buildings.
Thus St. Ambrose melted down the communion-
plate of the church of Milan to redeem some cap
tives, which otherwise must have continued in
slavery : and when the Arians objected this to him

invidiously as a crime, he wrote a most elegant
apology and vindication for himself, where, among
other things worthy the reader's perusal, he pleads
his own cause after this manner : Is it not better
that the bishop 17 should melt the plate to sustain
the poor, when other sustenance cannot be had,
than that some sacrilegious enemy should carry it
off by spoil and plunder ? Will not our Lord ex
postulate with us upon this account ? Why did you
suffer so many helpless persons to die with famine,
when you had gold to provide them sustenance ?
Why were so many captives carried away and sold
without redemption ? Why were so many suffered
to be slain by the enemy ? It had been better to
have preserved the vessels of living men, than life
less metals. What answer can be returned to this ?
For what shall a man say ? I was afraid lest, the
temple of God should want its ornaments. But
Christ will answer, My sacraments do not require
gold, nor please me the more for being ministered
in gold, which are not bought with gold. The or
nament of my sacraments is the redemption of cap
tives : and those are truly precious vessels, which
redeem souls from death. Thus that holy father
goes on to justify the fact, which the Arians called
sacrilege, but he by a truer name, charity and
mercy ; for the sake of which he concludes, it was
no crime for a man to break, to melt, to sell the
mystical vessels of the church, though it were a
very great offence for any man to convert them to
his own private use. After the same example, we
find18 St. Austin disposed of the plate of his church
for the redemption of captives. Acacius, bishop of
Amida, did the same for the redemption of seven
thousand Persian slaves from the hands of the
Roman soldiers, as Socrates19 informs us. From
whence we also learn, that in such cases they did
not consider what religion men were of, but only
whether they were indigent and necessitous men,
and such as stood in need of their assistance. We
have the hke instances in the practice of Cyril of
Jerusalem, mentioned by Theodoret20 and Sozomen,
and in Deogratias, bishop of Carthage, whose cha
rity is extolled by Victor Uticensis21 upon the same
occasion. For he sold the communion-plate to re
deem the Roman soldiers, that were taken captives
in their wars with the Vandals. This was so far
from being esteemed sacrilege, or unjust alienation,
that the laws against sacrilege excepted this case,
though they did no other whatsoever. As may be
seen in the law of Justinian, which22 forbids the
selling or pawning the church plate, or vestments,

14 Justin. Novel. 57. c. 2. Novel. 123. c. 18.
15 Cawdrey, Disc, of Patronage, c. 2. p. 8. Selden, of
Tithes, c. 9. p. 255.
1S Bede, Hist. Gentis Anglor. lib. 4. c. 27.
17 Ambros. de Offic. lib. 2. u. 28.
18 Possid. Vit. Aug. u. 24. '» Socrat. lib. 7. c. 21.
O

28 Theod. lib. 2. u. 27. Sozom. lib. 4. c. 25.
21 Victor, de Persec. Vandal, lib. 1. Bibl. Patr. t. 7.
p. 591.
22 Cod. Just. lib. 1. Tit. 2. de Sacrosanct. Eccles. Leg. 21.
Sancimus, nemini licere sacratissima atque arcana vasa, vel
vestes, ceeteraque donaria qure ad Divinam religionem ne-

194

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book V.

or any other gifts, except in case of captivity or
famine, to redeem slaves, or relieve the poor ; be
cause in such cases the lives or souls of men were
to be preferred before any vessels or vestments
whatsoever. The poverty of the clergy was a piti
able case of the same nature : and therefore, if the
annual income of the church would not maintain
them, and there was no other way to provide them
of necessaries ; in that case some canons23 allowed
the bishop to ahenate or sell certain goods of the
church, to raise a present maintenance.
But that no fraud might be com-

i'oint consent of the
ishop and his cler-

h |Jj| mitted in any such cases, the same
appro" canons did specially provide, that
PitTnorsornTpro0- when any urgent necessity compelled
the bishop to take this extraordinary
course, he should first consult his clergy, and also
the metropolitan, and others his comprovincial bi
shops, that they might judge of the necessity, and
whether it were a reasonable ground for such a pro

ceeding. The fourth council of Carthage24 disannuls
all such acts of the bishop, whereby he either gives
away, or sells, or commutes any goods of the church,
without the consent and subscription of his clergy.
And the fifth council of Carthage25 requires him to
intimate the case and necessity of his church first
to the primate of the province, that he with a cer
tain number of bishops may judge whether it be
fitting to be done. The council of Agde28 says, he
should first consult two or three of his neighbouring
bishops, and take their approbation. Thus stood
the laws of the church, so long as the bishop and
his clergy had a common right in the dividend of
ecclesiastical revenues : nothing could be alienated
without the consent of both parties, and the cog
nizance and ratification of the metropohtan or pro
vincial synod. So that the utmost precaution was
taken in this affair, lest, under the pretence of ne
cessity or charity, any spoil or devastation should
be made ofthe goods and revenues ofthe church.

cessaria sunt — vel ad venditionem vel ad hypothecam vel
ad pignus trahere — exeepta causa captivitatis et famis in
locis quibus hoc contigerit. Nam si necessitas fuerit in re-
demptione captivorum, tunc et venditionem prsef'atarum
rerum divinartim, et hypothecam et pignorationes fieri con-
cedimus ; quoniam non absurdum est, animas hominum qui-
buscunque vasis vel vestimentis pi-Befeni.
23 Cone. Carthag. 5. c. 4. Cone. Agathen. u. 7,
24 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 32. Irrita erit donatio episcoporum,

vel venditio vel commutatio rei ecclesiasticas, absque con-
niventia et subscriptione clericorum.
25 Cone. Carth. 5. c. 4. Si aliqua necessitas cogit, hanc
insinuandam esse primati provinciae ipsius, ut cum statute
numero episcoporum, utrum faciendum sit, arbitretur.
26 Cone. Agathen. c. 7. Apud duos vel tres comprovin-
ciales vel vicinos episcopos, causa qua necesse sit vendi.
primitus comprobetur.

BOOK VI.
AN ACCOUNT OF SEVERAL LAWS AND RULES, RELATING TO THE EMPLOYMENT, LIFE.
AND CONVERSATION OF THE PRIMITIVE CLERGY.

CHAPTER I.
OF THE EXCELLENCY OF THESE EULES IN GENERAL, AND THE EXEMPLAKINESS OF THE
CLERGY IN CONFORMING TO THEM.

I have in the two foregoing Books
Sect. 1. . v
The excellency of given an account of the great care of
the Christian rules ° &
rtteheathens!'"1 ^ primitive church in providing and
training up fit persons for the minis
try, and of the great encouragements that were given
them by the state, as well to honour and distinguish
their calling, as to excite and provoke them to be
sedulous in the discharge of their several offices and
functions. There is one thing more remains, which
is, to give an account also of the church's care in
making necessary laws and canons, obliging every
member of the ecclesiastic body to live conformable
to his profession, and exercise himself in the duties
of his station and calling. These rules were many
of them so excellent in their own nature, and so
strictly and carefully observed by those who had a
concern in them, that some of the chief adversaries
of the Christian rehgion could not but take notice
of them, and with a sort of envy and emulation
bear testimony to them. Among the works of Ju
lian there is a famous epistle of his to Arsacius,
high priest of Galatia, (which is recorded also ¦ by
Sozomen,) wherein he takes occasion to tell him,
that it was very visible that the causes of the great
increase of Christianity were chiefly their professed
hospitality toward strangers, and their great care in
burying the dead, joined with a pretended sanctity
and holiness of hfe. Therefore he bids him, as
high priest of Galatia, to take care that all the priests
of that region that were under him, should be made
to answer the same character ; and that he should
either by his threatenings or persuasions bring them
to be diligent and sober men, or else remove them
from the office of priesthood: that he should ad
monish the priests, neither to appear at the theatre,
nor frequent the tavern, nor follow any calling or
employment that was dishonourable and scandal
ous ; and such as were observant of his directions
he should honour and promote them, but discard

1 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 16.

2 Ammian. Marcel, lib. 27
o 2

and expel the refractory and contumacious. This
is plainly to say, (and it is so much the more re
markable for its coming from the mouth of an ad
versary,) that the Christian clergy of those times
were men that lived by excellent rules, diligent in
their employment, grave and sober in their deport
ment, charitable to the indigent, and cautious and
reserved in their whole conversation and behaviour
toward all men. Which, as it tended mightily to
propagate and advance Christianity in the world,
so it was what Julian upon that account could not
but look upon with an envious eye, and desire that
his idol-priests might gain the same character ;
thereby to eclipse the envied reputation of the other,
and reflect honour and lustre upon his beloved hea
then religion. We have the like testimonies in
Ammianus Marcellinus 2 and others, concerning the
frugality, temperance, modesty, and humility of
Christian bishops in their own times ; which com
ing from the pens of professed heathens, and such
as did neither spare the emperors themselves, nor the
bishops of Rome, who lived in greater state and afflu
ence, may well be thought authentic relations, and
just accounts of those holy men, whose commenda
tions and characters so ample nothing but truth could
have extorted from the adversaries of their religion.
This being so, we may the more Sect 2
easily give credit to those noble pane- .hTckr^ftom6' of
gyrics and encomiums, which some chnst,!ln ,vrlterB-
ancient Christian writers make upon the clergy,
and their virtues and discipline in general. Origen
says,3 it was the business of their life to traverse
every corner of the world, and make converts and
proselytes to godliness both in cities and villages :
and they were so far from making a gain hereof,
that many of them took nothing for their service ;
and those that did, took only what was necessary
for their present subsistence, though there wanted
not persons enough, who in their liberality were

1 Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 3. p. 110.

195

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

ready to have communicated much more to them.
St. Austin4 gives the like good character of the bi
shops and presbyters of his own time, malting them
the chief ornament of the catholic church, and ex
tolling their virtues above those of a monastic life,
because their province was more difficult, having
to converse with all sorts of men, and being forced
to bear with their distempers in order to cure them.
He that would see more of this general character,
must consult the ancient apologists, where he will
find it interwoven with the character of Christians
in general ; whose innocence, and patience, and
charity, and universal goodness was owing partly
to the institutions, and partly to the provoking ex
amples of their guides and leaders ; who lived as
they spake, and first trod the path themselves,
which they required others to walk in. Which
was the thing that set the Christian teachers so
much above the philosophers of the Gentiles. For
the philosophers indeed discoursed and wrote very
finely about virtue in the theory, but they undid all
they said in their own practice. Their discourses,
as Minucius 5 observes, were only eloquent ha
rangues against their own vices ; whereas the Chris
tian philosophers expressed their profession not in
their words or habit, but in the real virtues of the
soul : they did not talk great, but live well ; and so
attained to that glory, which the philosophers pre
tended always to be offering at, but could never
happily arrive to. Lactantius8 triumphs over the
Gentile philosophers upon the same topic : and so
Gregory Nazianzen,7 TertuUian,8 Cyprian,9 and
many others ; whose arguments had been easily
retorted, had not the Christian teachers been ge
nerally men of a better character, and free from
those imputations which they cast upon the ad
verse party. Some few instances indeed, it can-
Partic'uior escep not be denied, are to be found of per-
tions no denigration
to their general good sons, who m these best ages were
character. °
scandals and reproaches to their pro
fession. The complaints that are made by good
men will' not suffer us to believe otherwise. Cy
prian1" and Eusebius11 lament the vices of some
among the clergy, as well as laity, and reckon them
among the causes that moved the Divine Provi
dence to send those two great fiery trials upon the
church, the Decian and the Diocletian persecutions;
thereby to purge the tares from the wheat, and
correct those enormities and abuses, which the or

dinary remedy of ecclesiastical discipline, through
the iniquity of the times, was not able to redress.
The like complaints are made by Chrysostom,12
Gregory Nazianzen,13 and St. Jerom,14 of some ec
clesiastics in their own times, whose practices were
corrupt, and dishonourable to their profession.
And indeed it were a wonder if all ages should not
afford some such instances of unsound members in
so great a body of men, since there was a Judas
even among the apostles. But then it is to be con
sidered, that a few such exceptions did not. derogate
from the good character, which the primitive clergy
did generally deserve : and the faults of those very
men were the occasion of many good laws and
rules of discipline, which the provincial synods of
those times enacted; out of which I have chiefly
collected the following account, which concerns the
lives and labours of the ancient clergy.
To these the reader may join those Sect 4
excellent tracts of the ancients, which „„*" Smt'i^
purposely handle this subject; such Se'S'S'tta
as St. Chrysostom's six books de Sa- ccrg7'
cerdotio ; St. Jerom's second epistle to Nepotian,
which is called, De Vita Clericorum ; and Gregory
Nazianzen's apology for his flying from the priest
hood ; in all which the duties of the clergy are ex
cellently described. Or if any one desires rather
to see them exemplified in some living instances
and great patterns of perfection, which commonly
make deeper impressions than bare rules, he must
consult those excellent characters of the most emi
nent primitive bishops, which are drawn to the
life by the best pens of the age ; such as the Life of
Ignatius by Chrysostom ; the Life of St. Basil and
Athanasius by Gregory Nazianzen ; the Life of St.
Austin by Possidius ; the Life of Gregory Thau
maturgus and Meletius by Gregory Nyssen ; in all
which the true character and idea of a Christian
bishop is set forth and described with this advan
tage, that a man does not barely read of rules, but
sees them, as it were, exemplified in practice. The
chief of these discourses in both kinds are already
translated into our own language by other pens,15
and they are too prolix to be inserted into a discourse
of this nature, which proceeds in a different method
from them. I shall therefore only extract such ob
servations from them, as fall in with the public and
general laws of the church, (of which I give an ac
count in the following chapters,) and leave the rest
to the curious diligence of the inquisitive reader.

4 Aug. de Moribus Eccles. Cathol. c. 32. t. I. p. 330.
s Minuc. Octav. p. 110.
s Lat-t. lib. 4. c. 23. lib. 3. c. 15.
7 Naz. Invect. 1. in Julian. 8 Terttd, Apol. t. 46.
° Cyprian, de Bono Patient, p. 210.
10 Cypr. de Lapsis, p. 121.

11 Euseb. lib. 8. c. 1.
12 Chrys. Horn. 30. in Act.
13 Naz. Carm. Cygn. de Episcopis, t. 2.
11 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian.
15 See Bishop Burnet's Pastoral Care, c. 4. and Seller's
Remarks on the Lives of the Primitive Fathers.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

107

CHAPTER II.
OF LAWS RELATING TO THE LIFE AND CONVERSA
TION OF THE PRIMITIVE CLERGY.

Sect. 1.

The laws of the church which con-
ExempfaVpurity cerned the clergy, I shall, for dis-
required in the cler- ... , . -, -, ,
pabove other men. tmction s sake, consider under three
Reasons for it. heads; speaking, first, Of such laws
as concerned their life and conversation. Secondly,
Of such as more particularly related to the exercise
of the several offices and duties of their function.
Thirdly, Of such as were a sort of outguards or
fences to both the former. The laws which related
to their life and conversation, were such as tended
to create in them a sublimity of virtue above other
men ; forasmuch as they were to be examples and
patterns to them ; which, if good, would be both a
light and a spur to others ; but if bad, the very pests
and banes of the church. It is Gregory Nazianzen's
reflection1 upon the different sorts of guides which
he had observed then in the church. Some, he com
plains, did with unwashed hands and profane minds
press to handle the holy mysteries, and affect to be
at the altar, before they were fit to be initiated to
any sacred service. They looked upon the holy
order and function, not as designed for an example
of virtue, but only as a way of subsisting them
selves ; not as a trust, of which they were to give
an account, but a state of absolute authority and
exemption. And these men's examples corrupted
the people's morals, faster than any cloth can im
bibe a colour, or a plague infect the air ; since men
were more disposed to receive the tincture of vice
than virtue from the example of their rulers. In
opposition to such he lays down this as the first
thing to be aimed at by all spiritual physicians, that
they should draw the picture of all manner of vir
tues in their own hves, and set themselves as ex
amples to the people ; that it might not be proverbi
ally said of them, that they set about curing others,
while they themselves were full of sores and ulcers.
Nor were they to draw this image of virtue slightly
and to a faint degree, but accurately and to the
highest perfection: since nothing less than such
degrees and measures of virtue were expected by
God from the rulers and governors of his people :
and then there would be hopes, that such heights
and eminences would draw the multitude at least to
a mediocrity in virtue, and allure them to embrace
that voluntarily by gentle persuasions, which they
would not be brought to so effectually and lastingly
by force and compulsion. He urges further2 the
necessity of such a purity, from the consideration of

the sacredness and majesty of the function itself.
A minister's office sets him in the same rank and
order with angels themselves ; he celebrates God
with archangels; transmits the church's sacrifices
to the altar in heaven, and performs the priest's of
fice with Christ himself; he reforms the work of
God's hands, and presents the image to his Maker ;
his workmanship is for the world above : and there
fore he should be exalted to a divine and heavenly
nature, whose business is to be as a god himself,
and make others gods also. St. Chrysostom' makes
use. of the same argument : That the priesthood,
though it be exercised upon earth, is occupied
wholly about heavenly things ; that it is the minis
try of angels put by the Holy Ghost into the hands
of mortal men ; and therefore a priest ought to be
pure and .holy, as being placed in heaven itself in
the midst of those heavenly powers. He presses
likewise the danger and prevalency of a bad ex
ample.4 Subjects commonly form their manners
by the pattern of their princes. How then should
a proud man be able to assuage the swelling tumours
of others P or an angry ruler hope to make his peo
ple in love with moderation and meekness ? Bi
shops are exposed, like combatants in the theatre,
to the view and observation of all men ; and their
faults, though never so small, cannot be hid : and
therefore, as their virtuous actions profit many, by
provoking them to the hke zeal ; so their vices will
render others unfit to attempt or prosecute any thing
that is noble and good. For which reason their souls
ought to shine all over with the purest brightness,
that they may both enlighten and extimulate the
souls of others, who have their eyes upon them. A
priest should arm himself all over with purity of life,
as with adamantine armour : for if he leave any part
naked and unguarded, he is surrounded both with
open enemies and pretended friends, who will be
ready to wound and supplant him. So long as his
life is all of a piece, he needs not fear their assaults ;
but if he be overseen in a fault, though but a small
one, it will be laid hold of and improved to the pre
judice of all his former virtues. For all men are
most severe judges in his case, and treat him not with
any allowance for being encompassed with flesh, or
as having a human nature ; but expect he should
be an angel, and free from all infirmities. He can
not indeed (as the same father argues5 in another
place) with any tolerable decency and freedom dis
charge his office in punishing and reproving others,
unless he himself be blameless and without rebuke.
The priest's office is a more difficult province6 than
that of leading an army, or governing a kingdom,
and requires an angelic virtue. His soul ought to
be purer than the rays of the sun, that the Holy

1 Naz. Orat. 1. Apologet. de Fuga, t. 1. p. 5.
1 Naz. ibid. p. 31. a Chrys. de Saceidot. lib. 3. c. 4.

4 Chrys. de Sacerd. lil
s Chrys. ibid. lib. ti. ,..

3. c. II.

s Ibid. lib. 5. c. 3.

195

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

Spirit may never leave him desolate; but that he
may be always able to say, " I hve, yet not I, but
Christ that liveth in me." He there goes on to draw
the comparison' at large between the clerical and
the monastic life, and shows how much more diffi
cult it is to take care of a multitude of men immers
ed in secular business, than of a single person, that
lives retired and free from temptation. And upon
the whole matter he concludes,8 that as God requires
greater purity in those that serve at his altar, so he
will exact a more ample account of them, and more
severely punish their offences. By these and many
other such like arguments did those holy fathers
try to raise both in themselves and others a just
sense of that universal purity, which becomes the
sacred function. And to the strength of these argu-
church ' censures ments the church added the authority
more severe against „ . . . „ . , .
them than any 0f her sanctions, inflicting severer
others. penalties upon offending clergymen
than any others. For whereas all other offenders
were allowed, by the benefit of pubhc penance, to
regain the privileges of their order ; this favour was
commonly denied by the church to such of her sons
among the clergy as were notorious for any scan
dalous crimes, whereby they became a reproach to
their profession. For such delinquents were usually
deposed from their office, and sometimes excommu
nicated also, and obliged to do penance among the
laymen ; but with this difference, that though re
pentance would restore them to the peace of the
church, yet it would not qualify them to act in their
office and station again ; but they must be content
thenceforth to communicate only as laymen. Some
canons indeed did not oblige them to do pubhc
penance in the church, because they thought it
punishment enough to degrade them ; others requir
ed them to submit to that part of discipline also.
But still the result and consequence of both was the
same, that such persons for ever after were only to
be treated in the quahty of laymen. Those called
the Apostolical Canons are sometimes for the for
mer way; for one of them' says, If a bishop, pres
byter, or deacon is taken in fornication, perjury, or
theft, he shall be deposed, but not excommunicated ;
for the scripture saith, Thou shalt not punish twice
for the same crime. I do not now stand to inquire
whether there be any such scripture as these canons
refer to, but only observe what was the practice of

the Greek church when these canons were made;
which is also taken notice of in St. Basil's10 canons,
and those of Peter of Alexandria,11 and some others,
which show it to have been the customary practice
of their churches. Yet for simony,12 and some
other " crimes, the same Apostolical Canons order
both deposition and excommunication. And in the
African church both punishments were inflicted
also for one and the same crime, in the time of
Cyprian, as appears from his epistle11 to Cornehus,
where speaking of Novatus, who was guilty of
murder, in causing his own wife, by a blow, to mis
carry, he says, For this crime he was not only to be
degraded, or expelled the presbytery, but to be de
prived of the communion of the church also. From
whence we may collect the severity of the ancient
canons against such crimes of the clergy in general,
as were committed to the flagrant scandal of the
church. Hence also we may observe in par
ticular, what sort of crimes wrere what crimes pan.
. , -, . , ished with degrada-
thought worthy to be punished with tion:™. theft, mur.
° x der, perjury, &c,
degradation, namely, such as theft,
murder, perjury, fraud, sacrilege, fornication and
adultery, and such like gross and scandalous of
fences. For in this case they distinguished between
peccatum and crimen, httle faults and crimes of a
more heinous nature. For St. Austin observes," it
was not all manner of failings that hindered men's
ordination at first ; for if the apostle had required
that as a qualification in persons to be ordained,
that they should be without sin, all men must have
been rejected, and none ordained, since no man
lives without sin ; but he only requires that they
should be blameless in respect to criminal and
scandalous offences. And this was the rule the
church observed in canvassing the hves of hei
clergy after ordination, when they were actually
engaged in her service. It was not every lesser
failing or infirmity that was punished with degrada
tion ; but only crimes of a deeper dye, such as theft,
murder, fraud, perjury, sacrilege, fornication, and
adultery. Concerning the last of which there are
these two things further observable in some of the
ancient canons. First, That if any clergyman's wife
was convicted of adultery, he himself was obliged
to show his resentment and detestation of the fact
by putting her away, under pain of deposition, if
he continued to live with her. For so the council1

7 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 6. c. 3.
8 Ibid. lib. 6. c. 10 et 11. 9 Canon. Apost. c. 24.
'» Basil. Ep. Canon, c. 3, 32, 51.
11 Pet. Alex. Ep. Canon, u. 10. ap. Bevereg. Pandect, t. 2.
12 Canon, Apost. c. 28.
" Ibid. e. 29 et 50.
11 Cypr. Ep. 49. al. 52. p. 97. Propter hoc se non de pres
byterio tantum, sed et communicalione prohiberi pro certo
tenebat, &c.
15 Aug. Tract. 41. in Joh. t. 9. p. 126. Apostolus Paulus,

quando elegit ordinandos vel presbyteros vel diaconos, et
quicunque ordinandus est ad pra^posituram ecclesia?, non
ait, si quis sine peccato est ; hoc enim si diceret, omnis
homo reprobaretur, nullus ordinarelur; sed ait, si quis sine
crimine est, sicut est homicidium, adulterium, aliqua lin-
munditia foruicationis, f'urtum, fraus, sacrilegium, et caiteia
bujusmodi. 16 Cone. Neoca?s. c. 8. 'Eiv pet& ti)v XEtpoTov'tav pot-
Xev6ij, oepEtXEt iiroXvtrat al)Tr}V iiv Si ervXfi, oil SovaTtu
'ixEcrdai ttJs iyxEtpioVEiori]? aiiTto vir-npEtriai.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

199

of Neocsesarea words it : A man whose wife is
evidently convicted of adultery while he is a lay
man, shall not be ordained : but if she commit adul
tery after his ordination, he ought to put her away ;
and if he cohabit with her, he may not retain her
and his ministry together. The council of Eliberis 17
is still more severe in the case, denying communion
to such persons even at their last hour, who retain
ed wives guilty of adultery ; because, says the canon,
they who ought to be examples of good conversa
tion to others, do by this means teach others the
way to sin. Secondly, The other thing to be ob
served is, that if a bishop neglected to inflict the
censures of the chm-ch upon any of his clergy, who
were guilty of fornication, he made himself liable
to be deposed: as Socrates'" observes the Arians
themselves deposed Macedonius, bishop of Con
stantinople, for this reason among others, that he
had admitted a deacon to communion, who had
been taken in fornication. Another crime, which brought many
aiso lapsing in time clerks under this kind of ecclesiastical
of persecution. . ,
censure, was that of lapsing in time
of persecution. In which case repentance was al
lowed to restore them to the peace of the church
as laymen, if they pleased, but not to officiate or
communicate as ecclesiastics any longer. Thus
Trophirnus was treated in the time of Cornehus
and Cyprian ; he was admitted to communicate as
a layman,13 but not to retain his office of priest
hood. And this, Cyprian says,20 was then the rule
at Rome and over all the world, if bishops or any
other lapsed in time of persecution, to admit them
to do penance in the church, but, withal, to remove
them from the function of the clergy and honour
of the priesthood : as the African synod, in whose
name he writes to the Spanish churches, deter
mined, in the case of Basilides and Martial, two
Spanish bishops, who, when they had lapsed, thought
to qualify themselves by repentance to retain their
bishoprics ; but this, he tells them, was contrary to
the rule and practice of the universal church. He
repeats this in several other epistles,21 where he has
occasion to speak of persons in the same unhappy
circumstances with them. We find the same order
in the canons of Peter,22 bishop of Alexandria, and
the first council of Aries,23 where not only such as
fell by sacrificing, or open denial of their faith, but

also all traditors are included in the number of
lapsers, that is, all such as either gave up their
Bibles, or the holy vessels of the church, or the
names of their brethren to the persecutors ; and all
such who were of the clergy, are for ever excluded
from the exercise and benefit of their order and
function. Such was the disciphne of the ancient
church in reference to those guides, who set their
people an ill example by their apostacy in time of
persecution : it was not thought fit to trust them to
be guides and leaders for the future. Though I do
not deny, but that some exceptions may be found
to this general rule, either when the disciphne of
the church was not so strict, or when it was other
wise found more for the benefit of the church to
restore lapsers to their honours, than to degrade
and remove them wholly from them. For I have
noted before, that both lapsers, and heretics, and
schismatics, were sometimes more favourably treat
ed, when the church thought she might find her
account in showing favour to them.
But to proceed with the laws of the
church relating to other misdeamean- And dunking and
ors : as the life of a clergyman was
a continual attendance upon the altar, and con
stantly to be employed in the exercise of Divine
and heavenly things ; so upon that account the ut
most sobriety was required of him, together with a
strict care to spend his time aright, and lay it out
usefully ; so as might best answer the ends of his
calling, and those spiritual employments he was
daily to be engaged in. And for this reason drink
ing and gaming, those two great consumers of time,
and enemies of all noble undertakings and gener
ous services, were strictly prohibited the clergy un
der the same penalty of deprivation. For so the
Apostolical Canons word it,24 A bishop, presbyter, or
deacon, that spends time in drinking or playing at
dice, shall either reform, or be deposed. Where we
may observe this difference between this and the
former laws, that it does not make every single act
of these crimes, ipso facto, deprivation, but only con
tinuance therein without reforming. And by Jus
tinian's law,25 the penalty for playing at tables is
changed from deprivation to a triennial suspension,
and intrusion into a monastery for the performance
of repentance. Some perhaps will wonder at the
severity of these laws, in prohibiting the exercise

17 Cone. Eliber. c. 65. Si cujus clerici uxor fuerit mce-
chata, et sciat earn maritus suus moechari, et earn non statim
projecerit, nee in fine accipiat communionem : ne ab his
qui exemplum bonae conversationis esse debent, videantur
magisteria scelerum procedere.
18 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 42.
19- Cypr. Ep. 52. al. 55. ad Antonian. p. 106. Sic tamen
admissus est Trophirnus, ut laicus communicet — non quasi
locum sacerdotis usurpet.
20 Id. Ep. 68. al. 67. ad Pleb. Hispan. p. 174. Frustra
tales episcopatum sibi usurpare conantur, &c.

21 Cypr. Ep. 55. al. 59. ad Cornel, p. 133. It. Ep. 64. al.
65. ad Epictet.
22 Petr. Alex. Ep. Canon, c. 10. "Ote Si iirTatoav, o'vk
eti SvvavTai XEtTovpyEtv.
23 Conr. Arelat. 1. c. 13. De his qui Scripturas Sanctas
tradidisse dicuntur, vel vasa Dominica, vel nomina fratrum
suorum, placuit nobis, ut quicunque eorum ex actis publicis
fuerit detectus, non verbis nudis, ab ordine cleri amoveatur.
21 Can. Apost. 41. Ku/3ots erxoXdXpv Kal piOats, v irav-
adadm, r) Kadatpier6eo.
25 Justin. Novel. 123. c. 10.

200

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

of tables under such a penalty : but their wonder
will cease, when they are told, that it was equally
prohibited to the laity under pain of excommunica
tion. For the council of Eliberis26 orders, that a
Christian playing at dice or tables shall not be ad
mitted to the holy communion, but after a year's
penance and abstinence, and his total amendment.
And there was good reason for the church to make
such a law in those times, because this kind of
gaming was prohibited both by the old and new
civil law27 among the Romans, and many other na
tions, of which the reader may find a particular ac
count in our learned Bishop Taylor,28 together with
the reasons of the prohibition, viz. the evils that
commonly attended this sort of play, blasphemies,
and swearing, and passion, and lying, and cursing,
and covetousness, and fraud, and quarrels, and in
temperance of all sorts, the consumption of time,
and ruin of many families ; which excesses had
made it infamous and scandalous among all nations.
So that what was so universally prohibited at that
time by the laws of all nations, the church could
not but in decency prohibit by her own laws to
the laity, and more especially to the clergy, to pre
vent scandal, and obviate those objections, which
might otherwise have justly been raised against her.
Not that the thing was simply unlawful in itself,
when used only as an innocent recreation ; but the
many evil appendages that commonly attended the
use of it, had made it scandalous, and consequently
inexpedient ; and the spending of time upon it did
much alter the nature of it, and make it so much
the more unlawful. Another crime for which a clergy-
And negotiating man was liable to be deposed, was the
upon usury. The , x
in 'uTred'irito9 c"me taking °f usurT! which by the ancient
canons is frequently condemned as a
species of covetousness and cruelty, and upon that
score so strictly prohibited to the clergy, who were
rather to study to excel in the practice of the con
trary virtues, charity, mercifulness, and contempt
of the world and all filthy lucre. The laws con
demning this vice are too many to be here tran
scribed : it will be sufficient to repeat the canon of
the council of Nice, which contains the sum, and
speaks the sense of all the rest. Now the words of

that canon are these : Forasmuch29 as many clerks,
following covetousness and filthy lucre, and forget
ting the Holy Scriptures, (which speak of the right
eous man as one that hath not given his money
upon usury,) have let forth their money upon usury,
and taken the usual monthly increase : it seemed
good to this great and holy synod, that if any one
after this decree shall be found to take usury, or de
mand the principal with half the increase of the
whole, or shall invent any other such methods for
filthy lucre's sake, he shall be degraded from his
order, and have his name struck out of the roll of
the church. The reader will find the same practice
censured by those called the Apostolical Canons,8"
the council of Eliberis,31 the first and second of
Aries,32 the first and third of Carthage,33 the council
of Laodicea,31 and Trullo,85 not to mention private
writers, Cyprian,38 Sidonius ApoUinarius,37 St. Je
rom,33 and many others. Nor need this seem strange
to any one, that usury should be so generally con
demned in the clergy ; since it is apparent, that the
practice of it was no less disallowed in the laity :
for the first council of Carthage39 condemns it in
them both, but only makes it a more aggravating
crime in the clergy. The council of Eliberis also,*"
that orders clergymen to be degraded for it, makes
it a high misdemeanor in laymen ; which, if they
persisted in the practice of it after admonition, was
to be punished with excommunication. We are
here therefore in the next place to inquire into
the nature of this practice, and the grounds and
reasons upon which it was so generally condemned
both in clergymen and laymen. As to the nature
of the thing, we are to observe, that among the
ancient Romans there were several sorts or de
grees of usury. The most common was that which
they called centesimcs : the council of Nice" calls
it ticaroo-rat, and the council of Trullo42 uses the
same word, which signifies the hundredth part of
the principal paid every month, and answers to
twelve in the hundred by the year. Por the Ro
mans received usury by the month, that is, at the
kalends or first day of every month. Whence St.
Basil43 calls the months the parents of Usury. And
St. Ambrose™ says, the Greeks gave usury the
name of tokoc, upon this account, because the

28 Cone. Eliber. c. 79. Si quis fidelis alea, id est, tabula
luserit, placuit eum abstinere : et si emendatus cessaverit,
poterit post annum communione reconciliari.
27 Digest, lib, 11. Tit. 5. de Aleator. It. Cod. Justin, lib.
3. Tit. 43. de Aleator.
28 Taylor, Duct. Dubitant. lib. 4. c. 1. p. 776.
25 Cone. Nic. c. 17. » Can. Apost. ,,. 43.
" Cone. Eliber. c. 20.
32 Cone. Arelat. 1. c. 12. Arelat. 2. c. 14.
33 Cone. Carthag. 1. c. 13. Carthag. 3. c. 16.
34 Cone. Laodic. c. 4. « Cone. Trull, c. 10.
36 Cypr. de Lapsis, p. 124. 3' Sidon. lib. 1. Ep. 8.
36 Hieron. in Ezek. cap. 18.

39 Cone. Carth. 1. e. 13. Quod in laicis reprehenditur, id
multo magis in clericis oportet pr&odamnari.
40 Cone. Eliber. c. 20. Si quis etiam laicus accepisse
probatur usuras — si in ea iniquitate duraverit, ab ecclesia
sciat se esse projiciendum. Vid. Chrysost. Horn. 56. inMat.
41 Cone. Nic. c. 17.
42 Cone. Trull, c. 10. Chrysost. Horn. 56. in Mat.
43 Basil, in Psalm xiv. t. 3. p. 137. 4>o/3EtTat toiis p^vtii
oos tokwv iraTEpas.
44 Ambr. de Tobia, c. 12. Tokovs Graeci appellaverunt
usuras, eo quod dolores partus animru debitoris excitare vi-
deantur. Veniunt kalendae, parit sors centesimam. Veni-
unt menses singuli, generantur usurae.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

201

kalends bring forth one in the hundred, and every
month begets new usury. And hence, as the poet
acquaints us,45 it became a proverb among the Ro
mans, to say, A man trembles like a debtor, when
the kalends are a coming ; because that was the
time of paying interest. Now this sort of usury is
generally proscribed by the laws of the church, be
cause it was esteemed great oppression. Though
the civil law allowed the practice of it : for Con
stantine, anno ^25, the same year that the council
of Nice was held, published a law, stating the rules
and measures of usury, wherein46 the creditor is
aUowed to take this centesimal usury, or one in the
hundred every month, and no more. For it seems
the old Roman laws granted a greater hberty be
fore this regulation of Constantine. Afterward a
new regulation was made, and it was only allowed
in some certain cases, as where the creditor seemed
to run some hazard, as appears from the laws of
Justinian,4' where he settles the business of interest
and usury in his Code. For in trajectitious con
tracts, as the law terms them, that is, when a cre
ditor lent money, -suppose at Rome, to receive in
terest for it only upon condition of the debtor's
safe arrival with it at Constantinople ; because in
that case the creditor ran a great hazard, he was
aUowed to receive a centesimal interest upon that
account. Secondly, Another sort of usury was that
which the canons call r)ptoXiai, or sescuplum, the
whole and half as much more. St. Jerom takes
notice48 of this kind of usury, and condemns it.
For men, he says, were used to exact usury for the
loan of corn, wine, oil, millet, and other fruits of
the ground ; lending ten bushels in winter, on con
dition to receive fifteen in harvest, that is, the whole
and half as much more. Which sort of usury,
being a very grievous extortion and great oppres
sion, is condemned not only in the clergy by the
councils of Nice49 and Laodicea,50 under the name
of ripwXiai ; but also in laymen by the law of Jus
tinian,5' which allows nothing above centesimal in
terest to be taken by any person in any case what
soever. Though Justinian intimates that formerly

the laws allowed it. And it is evident from the law
of Constantine still extant in the Theodosian Code,
which determined, That if any creditor lent to the
indigent any fruits of the earth,52 whether wet or
dry, he might demand again the principal, and half
as much more by way of usury : as, if he lent two
bushels, he might require three. Thirdly, Another
sort of usury is called by the civil law, bessis cente-
simes, which is two-thirds of centesimal interest, and
the same as eight in the hundred. And this the
law allowed masters53 of workhouses and other
tradesmen to take in their negociations with others.
Fourthly, All other persons were only allowed to
receive half the centesimal interest by the same
law of Justinian :M which is the same as six in the
hundred. Fifthly, Persons of quality were bound
to take no more but a third part of the centesimal
which is only four in the hundred. Sixthly, and
lastly, Interest upon interest was absolutely forbid
den56 by the Roman laws to all persons in any case
whatsoever, as is evident from an edict of Justini
an's, which both mentions and confirms the ancient
prohibition of it by the laws of the emperors that
were before him. So that several of these kinds
of usury being prohibited to the laity in general
by the laws of the state, it was no wonder that
they should be more severely forbidden to the
clergy by the laws of the church. Then for the
other sorts of usury, which the state allowed, the
church had two reasons for discouraging the prac
tice of them in the clergy. First, Because usury
was most commonly exacted of the poor, which
the church reckoned an oppression of them, who
were rather to be relieved by the charity of lending
without usury, as the gospel requires. Secondly,
The clergy could not take usury of the rich and
trading part of the world, but that must needs en
gage them in secular business and worldly con
cerns, more than the wisdom of the church in those
times thought fit to allow. And this I take to be
the true state of the case, and the sum of the rea
sons for prohibiting the clergy the practice of usury
in the primitive church. Usury was generally a

45 Horat. lib. 1. Sat. 3. Odisti et fugis, ut Drusonem de
bitor aeris — quum tristes misero venere kalendae.
46 Cod. Th. lib. 2. Tit. £3. de Usuris, Leg. 1. Pro pecunia
ultra singulas centesimas creditor vetatur accipere.
47 Cod. Just. lib. 4. Tit. 32. de Usuris, Leg. 26. In trajecti-
tus autem contractibus, vel specierum foenori dationibus,
usque ad centesimam tantummodo licere stipulari, nee earn
excedere, licet veteribus legibus hoc erat concessum.
48 Hieron. Com. in Ezek. xviii. p. 537. Solent in agris
frurnenti et milii, vini et olei, caeterarumque specierum
usuras exigi. — Verbi gratia, ut hyemis tempore demus decern
modios, et in messe recipiamus quindecim, hoc est, amplius
partem mediam.
49 Cone. Nic. c. 17. M Cone. Laod. c. 4.
81 Cod. Just, ubi supra. It. Novel. 32, 33, 34.
62 Cod. Th. lib. 2. Tit. 33. Leg. 1. Quicunque fruges,

aridas vel humidas, indigentibus mutuas dederint, nsurae
nomine tertiam partem superfluam consequantur : Id est, ut
si summa crediti in duobus modiis fuerit, tertium modium
amplius consequantur.
53 Cod. Just. lib. 4. Tit. 32. de Usuris, Leg. 26. Illos, qui
ergasteriis praesunt, vel aliquam licitam negotiationem ge-
runt, usque ad bessem centesimas, usurarum nomine, in quo-
cunque contractu suam stipulationem moderari.
54 Cod. Just. ibid. Caeteros omnes homines dimidiam tan
tummodo centesimae usurarum nomine posse stipulari.
55 Ibid. Jubemus illustribus quidem personis, sive eas prae-
cedentibus, minime licere ultra tertiam partem centesimae
in quocunque contractu stipulari.
56 Cod. Just. lib. 4. Tit. 32. Leg. 28. Ut nullo modo usurae
usurarum a debitoribus exigantur, veteribus quidem legibus
constitutum fuerat, &c

202

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book vl.

great oppression to the poor, as the ancient writers
who speak against it 57 commonly complain : or else
it was thought to argue, and proceed from, a covet
ous and worldly mind ; which made men forsake
their proper employment, and betake themselves to
other business, which was beside their calling, and
could not then be followed without some reproach
and dishonour to it. Therefore Cyprian, speaking
of some bishops who were the reproach of his age,
in enumerating their miscarriages, joins all these
things together ; That they who ought to have been
examples and encouragers to the rest, had cast off
the care of Divine service58 to manage secular affairs ;
and leaving their sees, and deserting their people,
they rambled into other provinces, to catch at busi
ness that would bring them in gain : meanwhile the
poor brethren of the church were suffered to starve
without relief, whilst their minds were set upon
hoarding up silver in abundance, and getting estates
by fraudulent arts, and exercising usury to augment
their own treasures. When usury was ordinarily
attended with such concomitants as these, it was no
wonder it should be utterly proscribed by the holy
fathers of the church. Besides, St. Chrysostom53
plainly intimates, that in his time all senators and
persons of quahty were absolutely forbidden to take
usury by the laws of the commonwealth. And that
consideration probably so much the more inclined
the fathers of the church to forbid it to the clergy,
lest they should seem to be outdone by men of a
secular life ; and it might be objected to them, that
the laws of the church in this respect were more
remiss than the laws of the state.
Indeed the necessities of the poor
or the'hospit'aiity of and fatherless, and strangers and wi-
the clergy. . °
dows, in those early times, were so
importunate and craving in every church, that their
revenues would seldom answer all their demands.
The church, as St. Austin says,60 had very rarely
any thing to lay up in bank. And then it did not be
come a bishop to hoard up gold, and turn away the
poor empty from him. They had daily so many

poor petitioners, so many in distress and want con
tinually applying to them, that they were forced to
leave some in their sorrows, because they had not
wherewith to reheve them all. Now, in this case,
where there was need of greater charities than they
had funds or abilities to bestow, there could be no
room for usury, but with great neglect and un-
charitableness to the poor. And therefore, instead
of lending upon usury, they were obliged to be ex
emplary in the practice of the contrary virtues,
hospitality and charity ; which the ancients call
lending upon Divine usury, not to receive61 one in
the hundred, but a hundred for one from the hands
of God. It was then one of the glories of a bishop,
St. Jerom tells us,62 to be a provedore for the poor;
but a disgrace to the holy function, to seek only to
enrich himself. And therefore he gives this direc
tion to Nepotian, among other good rules which he
prescribes him, that his table should be free to the
poor and strangers, that with them he might have
Christ for his guest. St. Chrysostom speaks nobly"
of his bishop Flavian upon the account of this vir
tue : he says, his house was always open to strangers,
and such as were forced to fly for the sake of re
ligion; where they were received and entertained
with that freedom and humanity, that his house
might as properly be called, the house of strangers,
as the house of Flavian. Yea, it was so much the
more his own, for being common to strangers ; for
whatever we possess, is so much the more our pro
perty for being communicated to our poor brethren :
there being no place where we may so safely lay up
our treasure, as in the hands and belhes of the poor.
Now, the better to quahfy them to Secl 8.
perform this duty, every clergyman an^contLp^fti'.e
was required to lead a frugal hfe ; that
is, to avoid profuseness, as well in their own private
concerns, as in giving great entertainments to the
rich ; which is but a false-named hospitality, and a
great usurper upon the rights and revenues of the
poor. We may judge of the simplicity of those times
by the character which Ammianus Marcellinus,"4

67 Vide Chrysost. Horn. 56. in Mat. Basil. Horn, in Psal.
xiv. p. 136, &c.
58 Cypr. de Lapsis, p. 123. Episcopi plurimi, quos et
hortamento esse oportet caeteris et exemplo, Divina pro
curation contempta, procurators rerum saecularium fieri,
derelicta cathedra, plebe deserta, per alienas provincias
oberrantes, negotiationis quaestuosae nundinas aucupari, esu-
rientibus in ecclesia fratribus non subvenire, habere ai-o-en-
tum largiter velle, fundos insidiosis fraudibus rapere, usuris
multiplicantibus fcenus augere.
59 Chrys. Horn. 56. in Mat. Tous yovv iv dgtuipaatv cWcts,
Kal si? Ti)v psydXriv TeXovvTas (3ovXi)V, i]v avyKX]]Tov
KaXoiia-iv, oil Sipts toiovtovs KEpSEcrtv KaTaieTX"VEcr2rai.
Honorius, an. 397, published a law which implies the same.
Cod. Theod. lib. 2. Tit. 33. de Usuris, Leg. 3. though by a
following law, an. 405, he allowed senators half the cen
tesimal interest.
00 Aug. Serm. 49. de Diversis sive de Vita Clericor. t. 10.

d. 520. Enthecam nobis habere non licet. Non enim est
episcopi servare aurum, et revocare a se mendicantis ma
num. Quotidie tarn multi petunt, tarn multi gemunt, tarn
multi nos inopes interpellant ; ut plures tristes relinquamus, .
quia quod possimus dare omnibus, non habemus.
61 Pet. Chrysolog. Serm. 25. p. 269. Usura mundi cen
tum ad unum, Deus imum accipit ad centum. Vid. Chry
sost. Horn. 56. in Mat. xvii. p. 507. ed. Commelin.
82 Hieron. Ep, 2. ad Nepotian. Gloria episcopi est pau-
perum opibus providere : ignominia omnium sacerdotum
estpropriis studere divitiis.
83 Chrys. Ser. 1. in Gen. t. 2. p. 886. ed. Front. Ducau.
64 Ammian. lib. 27. p. 458. Antistites quosdam provin-
ciales tenuitas edendi potandique parcissime. Vilitas etiam
indumentorum, et supercilia humum spectantia, perpetuo
numini verisque ejus cultoribus, ut puros commendaut et
verecundos.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

203

the heathen historian, gives of the Italian bishops,
as it is probable, from his own observation: he
says, then- spare diet and frugal way of living,
their cheap clothing and grave deportment, did
recommend them to God and his true worshippers,
as persons of pure and modest souls. This made
those country bishops more honourable, in his
opinion, than if they had lived in the riches, and
state, and splendour of the bishops of Rome. By a
canon of the fourth council of Carthage,65 all the
African bishops were obhged to hve after this man
ner ; not to affect rich furniture, or sumptuous en
tertainments, or a splendid way of hving, but to
seek to advance the dignity and authority of their
order by their faith and holy hving. Some indeed
were for that other sort of hospitality, for enter
taining the rich, and especially the magistrates, on
pretence that they might keep an interest in them,
and be able to intercede with them for poor crimi
nals when they were condemned. But St. Jerom
particularly considers and answers this pretence in
his instructions to Nepotian. You must avoid, says
he,66 giving great entertainments to secular men,
and especiaUy those that are in great offices. For
it is not very reputable to have the lictors and
guards of a consul stand waiting at the doors of a
priest of Christ, who himself was crucified and
poor; nor that the judge of a province should dine
more sumptuously with you than in the palace. If
it be pretended, that you do this only to be able to
intercede with him for poor criminals, there is no
judge but will pay a greater deference and respect
to a frugal clergyman than a rich one, and show
greater reverence to your sanctity than your riches.
Or if he be such a one as will not hear a clergy
man's intercessions but only among his cups, I
should freely be without this benefit, and rather
beseech Christ for the judge himself, who can more
speedily and powerfully help than any judge. St.
Jerom, in the same place,67 advises his clerk not to
be over-free in receiving other men's entertainments
neither. For the laity, says he, should rather find
us to be comforters in their mournings than com
panions in their feasts. That clerk will quickly
be contemned, that never refuses any entertain
ments, when he is frequently invited to them. Such
were the ordinary rules and directions given by the
ancients for regulating the hospitality and frugality
of the clergy. But many bishops and others far
exceeded these rules in transcendent heights of ab
stinence, and acts of self-denial, freely chosen and
imposed upon themselves, that they might have
greater plenty and superfluities to bestow upon

others. Gregory Nazianzen68 gives us this account
of St. Basil, that his riches was to possess nothing;
to hve content with that little which nature requires ;
to despise delicacies and pleasures, and set himself
above the slavery of that cruel and sordid tyrant
the belly : his most dehcious and constant food was
bread, and salt, and water; his clothing but one
coat and one gown ; his lodging upon the ground ;
not for want of better accommodations, for he was
metropohtan of Cassarea, and had considerable re
venues belonging to his church ; but he submitted to
this way of hving in imitation of his Saviour, who
became poor for our sakes, that we through his
poverty might be made rich. And therefore both
the same author,69 and the church historians also,™
tell us, that when in the time of the Arian per
secution under Valens he was threatened by one
of the emperor's agents, that unless he would com
ply, he should have aU his goods confiscated ; his
answer was, that no such punishment could reach
him, for he was possessed of nothing, unless the
emperor wanted his threadbare clothes, or a few
books, which was all the substance he was master
of. St. Jerom gives the like character of Exuperius,
bishop of Thoolouse, who made other men's wants
always his own ; and, like the widow of Sarepta,
pinched and denied himself to feed the poor, be
stowing all his substance upon the bowels of Christ.
Nay, such was his frugality, that he ministered the
body of Christ in a basket of osiers, and the blood
in a glass cup : but nothing, says our author,71 could
be more rich or glorious than such a poverty as this.
It were easy to give a thousand instances of the
same nature in the Cyprians, the Austins, the Nazi-
anzens, the Paulinuses, and other such like generous
spirits of the age they lived in, who contemned the
world with greater pleasure than others could ad
mire or enjoy it. But as such heights of heroic
virtues exceeded the common rule, they are not pro
posed as the strict measures of every man's duty,
but only to excite the zeal of the forward and the
good. It may be said of this, as our Saviour says
of a parallel case, " All men cannot receive this say
ing, save they to whom it is given ; but he that is
able to receive it, let him receive it."
Some indeed would fain turn this
prudential advice into a law, and whether the cier-
gy were anciently
attempt to prove that anciently the obliged by any imv
A x * to part with their
clergy were under an obligation to ternporai posses-
quit their temporal possessions, when
they betook themselves to the service of the church.
But this is to outface the sun at noon-day. For as
there is no just ground for this assertion, so there

Cone. Carth. 4. c. 15. Ut episcopus vilem supellectilem
et mensam ac victum pauperem habeat, et dignitatis suae
auctoritatem fide et meritis vita? quaeral.
68 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian.
7 Ibid. Facile contemnitur clericus, qui, saepe vocatus ad

prandium, ire non recusat.
63 Naz. Orat. 20. de Laud. Basil, p. 357.
69 Naz. ibid. p. 349. ™ Sozom. lib. 6. c. 16.
71 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Nihil illo ditius, qui corpus
Domini canistro viinineo, sanguinem portat in vitro.

204

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

are the plainest evidences to the contrary. Among
those called the Apostolical Canons,72 there is one
to this purpose : Let the goods of the bishop, if he
has any of his own, be kept distinct from those of
the church ; that when he dies he may have power
to dispose of them to whom he pleases, and as he
pleases, and not receive damage in his private effects
upon pretence that they were the goods of the
church. For perhaps he has a wife, or children, or
relations, or servants : and it is but just both before
God and man, that neither the church should suffer
for want of knowing what belonged to the bishop,
nor the bishop's relations be damaged by the church,
or come into trouble upon that account, which
would be to the scandal and reproach of the de
ceased bishop. Many other canons both of the
Greek and Latin church73 are to the same effect.
Nor can it be pretended, that this is to be under
stood only of such estates as they got in the service
of the church. For St. Ambrose plainly intimates,
that the law left the clergy in the full possession of
their patrimony, or temporal estates, which they had
before. For he brings in some malcontents among
the clergy thus complaining : What advantage74 is
it to me to be of the clergy, to suffer injuries, and
undergo hard labour, as if my own estate would not
maintain me ? This implies, that men of estates
were then among the clergy. And, indeed, there
was but one case, in which any clerk could be
compelled to quit his possessions, and that was
when his estate was originally tied to the service
of the empire, of which I have given a full ac
count before. In all other cases it was matter of
free choice, and left to his liberty, whether he would
dispose of his estate to any pious use or not. Only
if he did not, it was expected he should be more
generous in his charities, and less burdensome to
the church, his needs being supplied another way.
Though neither was this forced upon him by any
law, but only urged upon reasons of charity ;75 leav
ing him judge of his own necessities, and not for
bidding him to have his dividend in the church, if
in his own prudence he thought fit to require it.
Socrates76 commends Chrysanthus, a Novatian bi
shop, upon this account, that, having an estate of
his own, he never took any thing of the church,
save two loaves of the eulogies, or offerings on Sun-

72 Can. Apost. c. 40. "EaTto epaVEpi Ti Uta tov iirto-KO-
irov irpiypaTa {fiyE Kal ISta e'xEI) Ka' epavEpi xd kv-
piaKi, &c
73 Cone. Antioch. c. 24. Cone. Agathen. c. 48. Cone
Carth. 3. c. 49.
74 Ambr. Ep. 17. Quid mihi prodest in clero manere,
subire injurias, labores perpeti, quasi non possit ager meus
m& pascere.
75 Vide Can. Apost. c. 41. Cone. Antioch. c. 25.
78 Socrat. lib. 7. c. 12.
77 Prosper, de Vit. Contempl. lib. 2. c. 12. Noverint esse
deformius, possessores de eleemosynis pauperum pasci.

day ; though he does not once intimate, that there
was any law to compel him to do so. As neither
does Prosper, who speaks most of any other against
rich men's taking their portion in the charities of
the church. He reckons it, indeed,'7 a dishonour
able act and a sin in them, because it was to deprive
others of the church's charity, who stood more in
need of it : and he thinks, though a rich clergyman
might keep his own estate without sin, because
there was no law but the law of perfection to oblige
him to renounce it ; yet it must be upon condition
that he required none of the maintenance of the
church :re but he only delivers this as his own pri
vate opinion, and does not signify that there was
then any such standing law in the church. In
Africa they had a peculiar law against covetousness
in the time of St. Austin, which was, that if any
bishop, presbyter, or deacon, or any other clerk,
who had no estate when they were ordained, did
afterward79 purchase lands in their own name, they
should be impleaded as guilty of invading the Lord's
revenue, unless upon admonition they conferred the
same upon the church. For in those times the
church-revenues being small, no one's dividend was
more than a competent maintenance : and therefore
it was presumed, that he who could purchase lands
in such circumstances, must have been some way
injurious to the public revenues of the church.
But in the same law it was provided, that if any
estate was left them by donation or inheritance, they
might dispose of it as they pleased themselves : for
the church made no rules, but only gave her advice,
in such cases as these ; exhorting her wealthy clergy
to greater degrees of liberality, but not demanding
their estates to have them at her own disposal. On
the other hand, when clergymen, who had no visible
estates of their own, and were single men, and had
no poor famihes to provide for, were busily intent
upon growing rich out of the revenues of the church ;
this was always esteemed a scandalous covetousness,
and accordingly prosecuted with sharp invectives
by St. Jerom80 and others of the ancient writers.
So much of the laws of charity, which concerned
the ancient clergy.
I might here give a character of sectio.
their meekness, modesty, gravity, hu- toTitSvT6
mility, and several other virtues, which with th'" tongua'

78 Ibid. Illi qui tam infirmi sunt, ut possessionibus suis
renunciare non possint ; si ea quae accepturi erant, dispensa-
tori relinquant, nihil habentibus conferenda, sine peccato
possident sua.
79 Cone. Carthag. 3. c. 49. Placuit, ut episcopi, presby
teri, diaeoni, vel quicunque clerici, qui nihil habentes ordi-
nantur, et tempore episcopatus vel cleriaatus sui, agros vel
quaecunque praedia nomine suo comparant, tanquam rerum
divinarum invasionis crimine teneantur obnoxii, nisi admo-
niti ecclesiae eadem ipsa contulerint,
80 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian. Nonnulli sunt ditiores
monachi, quam fuerant saeculares : et clerici qui possidcant

,,UP. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

205

Nazianzen describes in the person of his own fa
ther: but I shall but take notice of two things
more which concerned the conduct of their lives,
and those are the laws relating, first, to their words,
and secondly, to their fame and reputation. For
their words, they who were to teach others the most
difficult part of human conduct, the government of
the tongue, were highly concerned to be examples
to the people as well in word as action. And to
this purpose the laws were very severe against all
manner of licentious discourse in then- conversation.
The fourth council of Carthage has three canons
together upon this head ; one of which forbids scur
rility,8' and buffoonery, or that foolish talking and
jesting with obscenity, which the apostle calls,
(SoipoXoyia, under the penalty of deprivation. An
other threatens such with excommunication,82 as
use to swear by the name of any creature. And a
third canon83 menaces the same punishment to such
as sing at any pubhc entertainments. St. Jerom
particularly cautions his clerk against detraction,
because of the temptation he may lie under either
to commit the sin himself, or give way to it in
others, by hearkening to and reporting false sugges
tions after them. Which is much the same thing ;
for no slanderer teUs his story to one that is not
willing to hear him.84 An arrow, says he, never
fixes upon a stone, but often recoils back, and
wounds him that shoots it. Therefore let the de
tractor learn to be less forward and busy, by your
unwilhngness to hear his detraction. St. Chrysos
tom85 takes notice of this vice, as most incident to
inferiors, whom envy and emulation too often prompt
to detract from the authority and virtues of their
bishop ; especiaUy when they are grown popular,
and admired for their own eloquent preaching ; then,
if they be of a bold and arrogant and vain-glorious
temper, their business is to deride him in private,
and detract from his authority, and make them
selves every thing by lessening his just character
and power. Upon this hint our author also takes
occasion to show, what an extraordinary courage
and spirit, and how divine and even a temper a
bishop ought to have, that by such temptations, and
a thousand others of the like nature, he be not
overwhelmed either with anger or envy on the one
hand, or insuperable sorrow and dejection of mind
on the other. St. Jerom recommends another virtue
of the tongue to his clerk, which is of great use in
conversation ; and that is, the keeping of secrets,
and knowing when to be sUent, especially about the

opes sub Christo paupere, quas sub locuplete et fallace dia-
bolo non habuerant : ut suspiret eos ecclesia divites, quos
mundus tenuit ante meudicos.
1 Cone. Carth, 4. c. 60. Clericum seurrilem, et verbis tur-
pibus joculatorem, ab officio detrahendum.
Ibid. c. 61. Clericum per creaturas jurantem acerrime
objurgandum. Si perstiterit in vitio, excommunicandum.

affairs of great men. Your office, says he, requires
you to visit the sick, and thereby you become ac
quainted with the famihes of matrons and their
children,86 and are intrusted with the secrets of
noble men. You ought therefore to keep not only
a chaste eye, but also a chaste tongue. And as it
is not your business to be talking of the beauties of
women, so neither to let one house know from you
what was done in another. For if Hippocrates ad
jured his disciples, before he taught them, and made
them take an oath of silence ; if he formed them
in their discourse, their gait, their meekness and
modesty, their habit, and their whole morals ; how
much more ought we, who have the care of souls
committed to us, to love the houses of all Christians
as if they were our own ! He means, that the clergy
should be formed to the art of silence, as carefuUy
as Hippocrates taught his scholars ; that the peace
and unity of Christian famihes might not be dis
turbed or discomposed by revealing the secrets of
one to another ; which it is certain no one will do,
that has the property which St. Jerom requires, of
loving every Christian family as his own.
Secondly, As they were thus taught Sect n
to be inoffensive both in word and gi'againTsn^
deed, and thereby secure a good name plc">n of e,lL
and reputation among men ; which was necessary
for the due exercise of their function : so, because
it was possible their credit might be impaired not
only by the commission of real evil, but by the
veiy appearance and suspicion of it; the laws of
the church upon this account were very exact in
requiring them to set a guard upon their whole de
portment, and avoid all suspicious actions, that
might give the least umbrage or handle to an ad
versary to reproach them. It was not enough in
this case, that a man kept a good conscience in the
sight of God, but he must provide or forecast for
honest things in the sight of men. And this was
the more difficult, because men are apt to be que
rulous against the clergy, as St. Chrysostom ob
serves, some through weakness and imprudence,
others through mahce, easily raising complaints and
accusations without any just ground, and difficultly
hearkening to any reasons or apologies that they
can offer in their own defence. But the more que
rulous and suspicious men are, the more watchful it
becomes the clergy to be against unjust surmises,
that they may cut off occasion from them that de
sire occasion to accuse or reproach them. To this
end they are to use the utmost diligence and pre-

83 Ibid. c. 62. Clericum inter epulas cantantem supra-
dk-tae sententiae severitate coercendum.
ei Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepot. Neque vero ilia justa est
excusatio, referentibus aliis, injuriam facere non possum.
Nemo invito auditori libenter refert, &c.
85 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 5. c. 8.
88 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian.

23G

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

caution to guard against the ill opinions of men, by
avoiding all actions that are of a doubtful or sus
picious nature. For, says St. Chrysostom,87 if the
holy apostle St. Paul was afraid lest he should have
been suspected of theft by the Corinthians ; and
upon that account took others into the administra
tion of their charity with himself, that no one might
have the least pretence to blame him ; how much
more careful should we be to cut off all occasions
of sinister opinions and suspicions, however false or
unreasonable they may be, or disagreeable to our
character ! For none of us can be so far removed
from any sin, as St. Paul was from theft : yet he
did not think fit to contemn the suspicions of the
vulgar : he did not trust to the reputation, which
both his miracles and the integrity of his life had
generally gained him : but, on the contrary, he ima
gined such suspicions and jealousies might arise in
the hearts of some men, and therefore he took care
to prevent them ; not suffering them to arise at aU,
but timely foreseeing, and prudently forestalling
them : providing, as he says, for honest things not
only in the sight of God, but also in the sight of
men. The same care and much greater should we
take, not only to dissipate and destroy the ill opi
nions men may have entertained of us, but to foresee
afar off from what causes they may spring, and to
cut off beforehand the very occasions and pretences
from whence they may grow : which is much easier
to be done, than to extinguish them when they are
risen, which will then be very difficult, perhaps im
possible : besides that their being raised will give
great scandal and offence, and wound the consci
ences of many. Thus that holy father argues upon
this point, according to his wonted manner, nerv
ously and strenuously, to show the clergy their
obligations to use their utmost prudence to foresee
and prevent scandal, by avoiding all actions of a
doubtful and suspicious nature. St. Jerom88 gives
his clerk the same instructions, to guard against
suspicions, and take care beforehand to minister no
probable grounds for raising any feigned stories
concerning him. If his office required him tc
visit the widows or virgins of the church, he should
never go to them alone, but always take some other
persons of known probity and gravity with him,

from whose company he would receive no defa
mation. Nor was this only the private direc
tion of St. Jerom, but a public rule of Laws relating to
the church. For in the third council
of Carthage this canon was enacted, that neither
bishop,89 nor presbyter, nor any other clerk should
visit the widows and virgins alone, but in the com
pany and presence of some other of the clergy, or
some grave Christians. And in the first council of
Carthage99 and the councU of Epone91 there are
canons to the same purpose.
The great council of Nice made
another order upon the same grounds, An account or
to prevent all sinister opinions, that oweTuKTo..*"a
, . ¦ t r i • , the laws of the
none ot the unmarried clergy, bishop, <*urchmadeagairat
presbyter, deacon, or any other,92
should have any woman that was a stranger, and
not one of their kindred, to dwell with them ; save
only a mother, a sister, or an aunt, or some such
persons, with whom they might hve without suspi
cion. They who hence conclude, that the clergy
were forbidden to cohabit with their wives, which
they had married before ordination, are sufficiently
exposed by Gothofred,93 as ignorant of the true im
port of the original word, ervveitratcTog, which never
denotes a wife, but always a stranger, in opposition
to those of one's kindred : and it is evident, the
canon was made not upon the account of the mar
ried clergy, but the unmarried, to prevent suspicion
and evil reports, that might easily arise from their
familiar conversation with women that were not of
their kindred or near relations. We may be satis
fied of this from a law of Honorius and Theodosius
junior, which was made in pursuance ofthe Nicene
canon, and is still extant in both the Codes,91 where
first having forbidden the clergy to cohabit with
any strange women, who by some were taken in
under the title and appellation of sisters; and
having named what persons they might lawfully
entertain in their houses, viz. mothers, daughters,
and sisters, because natural consanguinity would
prevent all suspicion of these : lest the not excepting
of wives might seem to exclude them also, a parti
cular clause is added concerning them, that such as
were married before their husbands were ordained,

97 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 6. c. 9.
88 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepot. Caveto omnes suspiciones;
et quicquid probabiliter fingi potest, ne fingatur, ante de-
vita, &c.
89 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 25. Nee episcopi aut presbyteri soli
habeant accessum ad hujusmodi fcemina's, nisi aut clerici
prasentes sint, aut graves aliqui Christiani.
90 Cone. Carth. 1. c. 3.
91 Cone. Epaunens. c. 20.
92 Cone. Nicen. c. 3. Mr) i^Elvat ervvE'tcraKTov exeiv, irXliv
ei pi] apa p-rjTEpa, r) dStXcpiiv, f; Qtiav, ike.
93 Gothofred. Not. in Cod. Theodos. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de
Episc. Leg. 44.

94 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 44. It. Cod.
Just. lib. 1. Tit. 3. Leg. 19. Eum qui probabilem seculo dis-
ciplinam agit, decolorari consortio sororiae appellationis non
decet. Quicunque igitur cujuscunque gradus sacerdotio ful-
ciuntur, vel clericatus honore censentur, extranearum sibi
mulierum interdicta consortia cognoscant : hac eis tantum
facultate concessa, ut matres, filias, atque germanas intra
domorum suarum septa contineant. In his enim nihil ssevi
criminis existimari foedus naturale permittit. Illas etiam
non relin qui castitatis hortatur affectio, quae ante sacerdotium
maritorum legitimum meruere conjugium. Neque enim
clericis incompetenter adjunctae sunt, quae dignos sacerdotio
viros sua conversatione fecerunt.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

207

should not be relinquished upon pretence of chas
tity, but rather be retained upon that account ; it
beino- but reasonable that they should be joined to
their husbands, who by their conversation made
their husbands worthy of the priesthood. The
oweio-aKToi then, or strangers, who in these laws are
forbidden to cohabit with the clergy, are not their
lawful wives, but others who were taken in under
the name of sisters, as that law of Honorius, and
other ancient writers,95 intimate they were called by
those that entertained them. St. Jerom96 and Epi
phanius97 teU us, they were also known by the name
oiagapetes, dya^r/rui, that is, beloved. So that all
these several names signify but that one sort of per
sons, most commonly called strangers, extranees,
and irvviio-aKToi, whose conversation was suspicious,
and therefore so often prohibited by the laws ofthe
church. They were commonly some of the virgins
belonging to the church, whom they that entertained
pretended only to love as sisters with a chaste love.
But their manner of conversing was sometimes so
very scandalous, that it justly gave great offence to
all sober and modest persons ; and had not the
church always interposed with her severest cen
sures, it must have made her liable to as great re
proach. For it appears from the complaints of St.
Cyprian,93 St. Jerom,99 and others, that the practice
of some was very intolerable : for they not only
dwelt together in the same house, but lodged in the
same room, and sometimes in the same bed ; and
yet would be thought innocent, and caUed others
uncharitable and suspicious, that entertained any
hard thoughts of them. But the church did not
regard vain words, but treated them as they justly
deserved, as persons that used a scandalous and in
decent liberty, and who were the very pests and
plagues of .the church. Cyprian100 commends Pom-
ponius for excommunicating a deacon, who had been
found guilty in this kind. And the council of An
tioch101 alleged this among other reasons for their
deposing Paulus Samosatensis from his bishopric.
In the following ages, besides the councils of Nice
and Ancyra already mentioned, we meet with many
other canons made upon this account, as in the se
cond council of Aries,102 the first, third, and fourth
councils of Carthage,103 the council of Eliberis,101
and Lerida,105 and many others, prohibiting the

clergy to entertain any women, who were strangers,
and not of their near relations, under pain of de
privation. The intent of all which canons was to
oblige the clergy not only to live innocently in the
sight of God, but also unblamably, and without suspi
cion and censure, in the sight of men. It being more
especiaUy necessary for men of their function to main
tain not only a good conscience, but a good name ;
the one for their own sake, the other for the sake
of their neighbours : 106 that men might neither be
tempted to blaspheme the ways of God, by suspect
ing the actions of holy men to be impure, when they
were not so ; nor be induced to imitate such prac
tices, as they at least imagined to be evil : either of
which would turn to the destruction of their souls.
So that it was cruelty and inhumanity, as St. Aus
tin concludes, for a man in such circumstances to
neglect and disregard his own reputation.
But it might happen, that a man,
after the utmost human caution and Malevolent' and
. unavoidable suspi-
prudence that could be used, might sons to be con-
r . ° termed.
not be able to avoid the malevolent
suspicions of ill-disposed men : for our blessed Lord,
whose innocence and conduct were both equally
Divine, could not in his converse with men wholly
escape them. Now, in this case the church could
prescribe no other rule, but that of patience and
Christian consolation given by our Saviour to his
apostles : " Blessed are ye, when men shall revile
you, and persecute you, and shall say aU manner of
evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and
be exceeding glad ; for great is your reward in hea
ven." 107 When we have done, says St. Austin,108 all
that in justice and prudence we could to preserve
our good name ; if after that some men notwith
standing will endeavour to blemish our reputation,
and blacken our character, either by false sugges
tions or unreasonable suspicions ; let conscience be
our comfort, nay, plainly our joy, that great is our
reward in heaven. For this reward is the wages of
our warfare, whilst we behave ourselves as good
soldiers of Christ, by the armour of righteousness on
the right hand and on the left, by honour and dis
honour, by evil report and good report. So much
of the laws of the church, relating to the life and
conversation of the ancient clergy.

95 Vid. Cone. Ancyr. c. 19.
86 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. p. 138.
97 Epiphan. Haer. 63. Origen. n. 2.
99 Cypr. Ep. 6. al. 14. Ep. 7. al. 13. Ep. 62. al. 4.
" Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch.de Virgin. Servand. Unde
in ecclesias agapetarum pestis introiit? Unde sine nuptiis
aliud nomen uxorum? Imo unde novum concubinarum
genus? Plus inferam: unde meretrices univirae? Quae
eadem domo, uno cubiculo, saepe uno tenentur et lectulo ;
et suspiciosos nos vocant, si aliquid existimamus.

m Cypr. Ep. 62. al. 4. ad Pompon.
101 Epist. Synod, ap. Euseb. lib. 7. u. 30.
102 Cone. Arelat. 2. c. 3.
103 Cone. Cartb. 1. c. 3 et 4. Carth. 3. c. 17. Carth. 4.
u. 46.1M Cone. Eliber. c. 27.
105 Cone. Ilerdens. c. 15.
106 Aug. de Bono Viduitat. c. 22. t. 4. Nobis necessaria
est vita nostra, aliis fama nostra, &c.
">7 Matt. v. 11, 12. 109 Aug. ibid.

203

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

CHAPTER III.
OF LAWS MORE PARTICULARLY RELATING TO THE
EXERCISE OF THE DUTIES AND OFFICES OF THEIR
FUNCTION. Sect , I come now to speak of such laws as
«i?„!caCa"ltu°„iouSs more immediately related to their
1,re- function, and the several offices and
duties belonging to it. In speaking of which, be
cause many of these offices will come more fully to
be considered hereafter, when we treat ofthe liturgy
and service of the church, I shall here speak chiefly
of such, duties as were required of them by way of
general qualification, to enable them the better to
go through the particular duties of their function.
.Such was, in the first, place, their obligation to lead
a studious life. For since, as Gregory Nazianzen1
observes, the meanest arts could not be obtained
without much time, and labour, and toil spent there
in ; it were absurd to think, that the art of wisdom,
which comprehends the knowledge of things human
and Divine, and comprises every thing that is noble
and excellent, was so light and vulgar a thing, as
that a man needed no more but a wish or a will to
j obtain it. Some indeed, he complains,2 were of this
fond opinion, and therefore, before they had well
passed the time of their childhood, or knew the
names of the books of the Old and New Testament,
or how well to read them, if they had but got two
or three pious words by heart, or had read a few of
the Psalms of David, and put on a grave habit,
which made some outward show of piety, they had
the vanity to think, they were qualified for the go
vernment of the church. They then talked nothing
but of Samuel's sanctification from his cradle, and
thought themselves profound scribes, and great rab
bles and teachers, sublime in the knowledge of Di
vine things, and were for interpreting the Scripture
not by the letter, but after a spiritual way, pro
pounding their own dreams and fancies, instead of
the Divine oracles to the people. This, he com
plains, was for want of that study and labour, which
ought to be the continual employment of persons
who take upon them the offices of the sacred func
tion. St. Chrysostom pursues this matter a little
further, and shows the necessity of continual labour
and study in a clergyman, from the work and busi
ness he has upon his hand, each part of which re-
? quires great sedulity and application. For, first, he
ought to be qualified to minister suitable remedies
to the several maladies and distempers' of men's
souls ; the cure of which requires greater skill and
labom-, than the cure of their bodily distempers : and

' Naz. Orat. 1. de Fuga. t. 1. p. 22. 2 Ibid. p. 21.
3 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 4. c. 3. 4 Ibid. lib. 4. c. 4.

this is only to be done by the doctrine of the gospel,
which therefore required that he should be inti-
.mately acquainted with every part of it. Then, .
again, he must be able to stop the mouths of all
gainsayers,4 Jews, Gentiles; and heretics, who had
different arts and different weapons to assault the
truth by ; and unless he exactly understood aU their
fallacies and sophisms, and knew the true art of
making a proper defence, he would be in danger not
only of suffering each of them to make spoil and
devastation of the church, but of encouraging one
error, whilst he was opposing another. For nothing
was more common, than for ignorant and unskilful
disputants to run from one extreme to another ; as
he shows in the controversies which the church had
with the Marcionites and Valentinians on the one
hand, and the Jews on the other, about the law of
Moses ; and the dispute about the Trinity between
the Arians and Sabellians. Now, unless a man
was well skilled and exercised in the word of God,
and the true art and rules of disputation, which
could not be attained without continual study and
labour, he concludes, it would be impossible for him
to maintain his ground, and the truth, as he ought,
against so many subtle and wily opposers. Upon
this he inculcates5 that direction of St. Paul to
Timothy, 1 Tim. iv. 13, " Give attendance to read
ing, to exhortation, to doctrine : meditate upon these
things ; give thyself wholly to them ; that thy pro-
. thing may appear to all men." Thirdly, he shows'"
how difficult and laborious a work it was to make
continual homilies and set discourses to the people,
who were become very severe judges of the preach
er's composures, and would not allow him to rehearse
any part of another man's work, nor so much as to
repeat his own upon a second occasion. Here his
task was something the more difficult, because men
had generally nice and delicate palates, and were
inclined to hear sermons as they heard plays, more
for pleasure than profit : which added to the preach
er's study and labour ; who though he was to con
temn both popular applause and censure, yet was
he also to have such a regard to his auditory, as
that they might hear him with pleasure to their
edification and advantage. And the more famed
and eloquent the preacher was, so much the more
careful7 and studious ought he to be, that he may
always answer his character, and not expose himself
to the censures and accusations of the people.
These and the like arguments does that holy father
urge, to show how much it concerns men of the sa
cred calling to. devote themselves to a studious and
laborious hfe, that they may be the better qualified
thereby to answer the several indispensable duties
of their functions.

5 Chrys. ibid. lib. 4. c. 8.
7 Ibid. lib. 5.

« Ibid. lib. 5. c. I.
c.5.

Chap. III.

.ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

209

sect. 2 Some indeed, St. Chrysostom says,
as^oiogiest were ready to plead even the apos-'
the contrary. ^ authority for tneir ignorance, and
almost value themselves for want of learning, be
cause the apostle says of himself, that he was rude
in speech. But to this the holy father justly re
plies, that this was a misrepresentation of the great
apostle, and vainly urged to excuse any man's sloth
and negligence8 in not attaining to those necessary
parts of knowledge which the clerical life required.
If the utmost heights and perfections of exotic elo
quence had been rigidly exacted of the clergy ; if
they had been to speak always with the smoothness
of Isocrates, or the loftiness of Demosthenes, or the
majesty of Thucydides, or the sublimity of Plato j
¦then indeed it might be pertinent to allege this
testimony of the apostle : but rudeness of style, in
comparison of such eloquence, may be allowed,
provided men be otherwise qualified with know
ledge, and ability to preach and dispute accurately
concerning the doctrines of faith and rehgion ; as
St. Paul was, whose talents in that kind have made
him the wonder and admiration of the whole world ;
and it would be unjust to accuse him of rudeness of
speech, who, by his discourses, confounded both
Jews and Greeks, and wrought many into the
opinion that he was the Mercury of the Gentiles.
Such proofs of his power of persuasion were suf
ficient evidence that he had spent some pains in
this way, and therefore his authority was fondly
abused to patronize ignorance and sloth, whose ex
ample was so great a reproach to them. Others, ¦
again, there were who placed the whole of a minis
ter in a good hfe, and that was made another excuse
for the want of knowledge, and study, and the art
of preaching and disputing. But to this St. Chry
sostom" also replies, that both these qualifications
were required in a priest ; he must not only do, but
teach the commands of Christ, and guide others by
his word and doctrine, as well as his practice : each
of these had their part in his office, and were neces
sary to assist one another in order to consummate
men's edification. For otherwise, when any con
troversy should arise about the doctrines of religion,
and Scripture was pleaded in behalf of error, what
would a good hfe avail in this case ? What would it
signify to have been dihgent in the practice of vir
tue, if, after aU, a man, through gross ignorance and
unskilfulness in the word of truth, fell into heresy,
and cut himself off from the body of the church ?
as he knew many that had done so. But admit a
man should stand firm himself, and not be drawn
away by the adversaries, yet when the plain and

8 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 4. c. 6.
9 Ibid. lib. 4. c. 8 et 9.
° Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian. Nee rusticus et tamen
simplex frater ideo se sanctum putet, si nihil noverit: nee
peritus et eloquens in lingua aestimet.sanctitatem. Mul-
P

simple people, who are under his care, shall observe
their leader to be baffled, and that he has nothing
to say to the arguments of a subtle opposer, they
will be ready to impute this not so much to the
weakness of the advocate, as the badness of his
cause: and so by one man's ignorance a whole -
people shall be carried headlong to utter destruction,
or at least be so shaken in their faith, that they
shaU not stand firm for the future. St. Jerom gives
also a smart rebuke to this plea, telling his clerk, 10
that the plain and rustic brother should not value
himself upon his sanctity, and despise knowledge ;
as neither should the artful and eloquent speaker
measure his hohness by his tongue. For though, j
of two imperfections, it was better to have a holy
ignorance than a vicious eloquence; yet, to con
summate a priest, both qualifications were neces
sary, and he must have knowledge as well as
sanctity to fit him for the several duties of his
function. Thus did those holy instructors plead
against ignorance in the clergy, and urge them
with proper arguments to engage them upon a
studious life, which was the only way to furnish
them with sufficient abilities to discharge many
weighty duties of their function.
But it was not all sorts of studies
that they equally recommended, but Then-chief studies
i t ..iTTir-i' to be the Holy Scrip- <
chiefly the study of the Holy Scrip- tures, and the aP-
* _ * * *¦ proved writers and
tures, as berner. the fountains of that «jnons of the
' C3 church.
learning which was most proper for
their calling, and which upon all occasions they
were to make use of. For, as St. Chrysostom ob
serves," in the way of administering spiritual physic
to the souls of men, the word of God was instead of
every thing that was used in the cure of bodily dis
tempers. It was instrument, and diet, and air ; it
was instead of medicine, and fire, and knife; if
caustics or incisions were necessary, they were to
be done by this; and if this did not succeed, it
would be in vain to try other means. This was it
that was to raise and comfort the dejected soul, and
take down and assuage the sweUing, tumours and
presumptions of the confident. By this they were
both to cut off what was superfluous, and supply
what was wanting, and do every thing that was
necessary to be done in the cure of souls. By this
all heretics and aliens were to be convinced, and
aU the plots of Satan to be countermined; and
therefore it was necessary that the ministers of God
should be very diligent in studying the Scriptures,
that the word of Christ might dwell richly in them.
This was necessary to qualify them especially for
preaching ; since, as St. Jerom rightly notes,12 the

toque melius est e duobus imperfectis rusticitatem sanctam
habere, quam eloquentiam peccatricem.
11 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 4. u. 3 et 4.
12 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepot. Sermo presbyteri Scriptu-
rarum lectione conditus sit. Nolo te declamatorem esse,

210

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

best commendation of a sermon was to have it sea
soned well with Scripture rightly apphed. Besides,
the custom of expounding the Scripture occasion
ally many times as it was read, required a man to
be well acquainted with all the parts of it, and to
understand both the phrase, and sense, and doc
trines and mysteries of it, that he might be ready,
upon all occasions, to discourse pertinently and
usefully upon them. And to this purpose some
canons 13 appointed, that their most vacant hours,
the times of eating and drinking, should not pass
without some portion of Scripture read to them ;
partly to exclude all other trifling and unnecessary
discourse, and partly to afford them proper themes
and subjects to exercise themselves upon to edifica
tion and advantage. St, Jerom commends his friend
Nepotian for this, that at all feasts " he was used
to propound something out of the Holy Scripture,
and entertain the company with some useful dis-
X quisition upon it. And next to the Scriptures, he
employed his time upon the study of the best eccle
siastical authors, whom, by continual reading and
frequent meditations, he had so treasured up in the
library of his heart, that he could repeat their words
upon any proper occasion, saying, Thus spake Ter
tullian, thus Cyprian, so Lactantius, after this man
ner Hilary, so Minucius Felix, so Victorinus, these
- were the words of Arnobius, and the hke. But
among ecclesiastical writings, the canons of the
church were always reckoned of greatest use; as
containing, a summary account, hot only of the
church's discipline, and doctrine, and government,
but also rules of life and moral virtues : upon which
acceunt, as some laws directed that the canons
should be read oyer at eyery man's ordination ; so
others required the clergy ls afterward to make them
part.of their constant study, together with the Holy
< Scriptur-e, For the canons were then a sort of di
rections for the pastoral care, and they had this
advantage of any private directions, that they were
the publie voice and rubrics of the church, and so
mueli the more carefully to be read upon that ac
count. In after ages, in the time of Charles the
Great, we find sorae laws obliging the clergy ls to
read together with the canons, Gregory's book de
Cura Petstorali. As to other books and writings,

Sect. 4,
nv far t
of heathen

the hS they were more cautious and sparing

in the study and use of them. Some tied booiuwu .1.,.
. -, lowed.
canons 17 forbade a bishop toj-ead hea
then authors : nor would they aUow him to read.
heretical books, but only upon necessity, that is,
when there was occasion to confute them, or to
caution others against the poison of them. But the
prohibition of heathen learning, though it seem to
be more peremptory, was to be understood likewise
with a little qualification. For men might have
very different views and designs in reading heathen
authors. Some might read them only for pleasure,-
and make a business of that pleasure, to the neglect
of Scripture and more useful learning : and aU such
were highly to be condemned. St. Jerom18 says of
these, that when the priests of God read plays in
stead of the Gospels, and wanton bucolics instead of
the prophets, and loved to have Virgil in their
hands rather than the Bible ; they made a crime of
pleasure, and turned the necessity of youthful exer
cise into a voluntary sin. Others could not relish -
the plain and unaffected style of Scriptures, but
conversed with heathen orators to bring their lan
guage to a more polite or Attic dialect. And these
also came under the censures of the church. It is
remarkable what Sozomen18 tells us of TriphyUius,
a Cyprian bishop, (who was one of these nice and
delicate men, who thought the style of Scripture
not so elegant as it might be made,) that having oc
casion in a discourse before Spiridion, and some
other Cyprian bishops, to cite those words of our
Saviour, dpov aov to Kpdfifiarov Kal mpnedra, " Take
up thy bed and walk," he would not use the word
KpdfifiaTov, but instead of it put miiiiroSa, as being a
more elegant word in his opinion. To whom Spi
ridion with a holy indignation and zeal rephed,
Art thou better than Him that said updfifSaTov, that
thou shouldst be ashamed to use his words ? There
by admonishing him to be a httle more modest, and
not give human eloquence the preference before the
Holy Scriptures. Another sort of rrien conversed-
with heathen authors rather than the Scriptures,
because they thought them more for their turn, to
arm them with sophistry to impose their errors
upon the simphcity of others. As the anonymous
author in Eusebius,20 who writes against the Theo-
dotian heretics, observes of the leading men of that
party, that leaving the Holy Scriptures, they gener
ally spent their time in Euclid and Aristotle, Theo-

et rabulam, garrulumque sine ratione, sed mysteriorum pe-
ritum, &c.
13 Cone. Tolet, 3. c. 7. Quia solent crebro mensis otiosae
fabulae interponi, in omni sacerdotali convivio lectio Scrip-
turarum Divinarummisceatur : per hoc enim et animae aedi-
ficantur in bonuna, et fabulae non necessariae prohibentur.
14 Hieron. Epitaph. Jfepot. Ep. 3. ad-Heliodor. Sermo
ejus et (leg. ner) -omne convivium de Scripturis aliquid
proponere, &e.
15 Cone. Tolet. 4. <-. 25. Sciant sacerdotes Scripturas
Sanctas, et canones meditentur — ut aedificent cunctos tam

fidei scientia, quam operum disciplina.
18 Concil. Turon. 3. c. 3. Concil. Cabillon. 2. c. 1.
17 Cone. Carth. 4. u. 16. Ut episcopus Gentiliurn libros
non legat; haereticorura autem pro necessitate et tempore.
18 Hieron. Ep. 146. ad Damasum de Filio Prodigo. t. 3. p.
129. Sacerdotes Dei omissis evangeliis et prophetis, vide-
mus comcedias legere, amatoria bucolicorum versuum verba
canere, Virgilium tenere ; et id quod in pueris necessitatis
est, crimen in se facere voluptatis.
19 Sozom. lib. 1. c. 11.
20 Euseb. lib. 5. c. 28.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

211

phrastus and Galen ; using the quirks and sophisms
of infidel writers to palliate then- heresy, and cor
rupt the simphcity of the Christian faith. Now, in
all these cases, the reading of heathen authors for
such unworthy ends was very disaUowable, because
it was always done with a manifest neglect and con
tempt of the Holy Scriptures, and therefore upon
such grounds deservedly forbidden by the canons of
*• the church. But then, on the other hand, there
were some cases, in which it was very allowable to
read Gentile authors, and the church's prohibition
- Jid not extend to these. For sometimes it was ne
cessary to read them, in order to confute and expose
their errors, that others might not be infected there
by. Thus St. Jerom observes of Daniel,21 that he
was taught in the knowledge of the Chaldeans ; and
Moses, in all the wisdom of the Egyptians : which
it was no sin to learn, so long as they did not learn
it to foUow it, but to censure and refute it. St. Am
brose22 says, he read some books that others might
not read them ; he read them to know their errors,
and caution others against them. This was one
reason why sometimes heathen writers might be
read by men of learning, in order to set a mark
• upon them. Another reason was, that many of them
were useful and subservient to the cause of rehgion,
either for confirming the truth of the Scriptures,
and the doctrines of Christianity, or for exposing
and refuting the errors and vanities of the heathen
themselves. Thus St. Jerom observes,23 that both
the Greek and Latin historians, such as Diodorus
Siculus, Polybius, Trogus Pompeius, and Livy, are
of great use as well to explain as confirm the truth
of Daniel's prophecies. And St. Austin24 says the
same of the writings of Orpheus and the Sibyls,
and Hermes, and other heathen philosophers, that
as they said many things that were true, both con
cerning God and the Son of God, they were in that
respect very serviceable in refuting the vanities of
the Gentiles. Upon which account not only St.
Austin and St. Jerom, but most of the ancient
writers of the church, were us»aUy weU versed in
the learning- of the Gentiles, as every one knows
that knows any thing of them. St. Jerom in one
short epistle25 mentions the greatest part of those
that lived before his own time, both Greeks and
Latins, and says of them aU in general, that their

books are so filled with the sentences and opinions
of philosophers, that it is hard to say which is most
to be admired, their secular learning, or their know
ledge in the Scriptures. And herein is comprised
the plain state of this matter: the clergy were
obhged in the first place to be very diligent in stu
dying the Scriptures, and after them the canons, and
approved writers of the church, according to men's
abilities, capacities, and opportunities : for the same
measures could not be exacted of all. Beyond this, /
as there was no obligation on them to read human
learning, so there was no absolute prohibition of it;
but where it could be made to minister as a hand
maid to divinity, and not usurp or encroach upon
it, there it was not only allowed, but commended
and encouraged ; and it must be owned, that though
the abuse of secular learning does sometimes great
harm, yet the study of it rightly applied did very
great service to rehgion in the primitive ages of the
church. From their private studies pass we .
on next to viewthem in theirmore pub- or their piety and
r devotion hi their
he capacities, as the people's orators gjjj'fc addresses to
to God, and God's ambassadors to the
people : in regard to which offices and character, 1 |
have showed before26 they were esteemed a sort of
mediators in a qualified sense between God and
men. In all their addresses to God as the people's
orators, their great care was to offer all their sacri
fices and oblations of prayer and thanksgiving in
such a rational, decent, and becoming way, as best
suited the nature of the action ; that is, with aU
that gravity and seriousness, that humility and re
verence, that application of mind and intenseness
and fervency of devotion, as both became the great
ness of that Majesty to whom they addressed, and
was proper for raising suitable affections in the
people. This is the true meaning of that famous
controverted passage in Justin Martyr's Second
Apology, where describing the service ofthe church,
and the manner of celebrating the eucharist, he says,
The bishop sent up prayers and praises, oar] Svvaptg,27
with the utmost of his abilities to God. Some mis
construe this passage, and interpret the abilities of
the minister officiating so as if they meant no
more but his invention, expression, or the like ;
making it by such a gloss to become an argument

21 Hieron. Com. in Dan. c. I. Nunquam acquiescerent
discere quod non licebat. Discunt autem non ut sequantur,
sed ut judicerrt atque convincant.
22 Ambros. Procem. in Luc. Evang. Legimus aliqua, ne
legantur; legimus, ne ignoremus; legimus, non ut teneamus,
sed ut repudiemus.
23 Hieron. Prolog, in Daniel. Ad intelligendas extremas
partes Danielis, multiplex Graecorum historia necessaria
est, &c. Et si quando cogimur literarum saecularium re-
cordari, et aliqua ex his discere quae olim omisimus; non
nostrae est voluntatis, sed ut ita dicarri, gravissimae necessi
tatis: ut probemus ea quae a Sanctis prophetis ante multa
p 2

saecula praedicta sunt, tam Graecorum quam Latinorum et
aliarum Gentium Uteris contineri.
24 Aug. cont. Faust, lib. 13. c. 15. Sibyllae et Orpheus, et
nescio quis Hermes, et si qui alii Vates, vel theologi, vel
sapientes, vel philosophi Gentium, de Filio Dei, aut de Patre
Deo vera prsedixisse seu dixisse perhibentur; valet quidem
aliquid ad paganorum vanitatem revincendam.
25 Hieron. Ep. 81. ad Magnum. In tantum philosophorum
doctrinis atque sententiis suos referciunt libros, ut nescias
quid in illis primum admirari debeas, eruditionem saeculi, an
scientiam Scripturarum.
29 Book II. chap. 19. sect. 16. M Justin. Apol. 2. p. 98.

212

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

. against the antiquity of public liturgies, or set forms
of prayer ; whereas, indeed, it signifies here a quite
different thing, viz. that spiritual vigour, or intense-
ness and ardency of devotion, with which the min
ister offered up the sacrifices of the church to God ;
being such qualifications as are necessary to make
our prayers and praises acceptable unto Him, who
requires them to be presented with all our soul and
might ; which may be done in set forms, as well as
any other way: and so Gregory Nazianzen and
Justin Martyr himself use the phrase, oo-i) Svvapig,
where they speak of set forms of praising and
serving God ; of which more hereafter in its proper
place. St. Chrysostom is very earnest'8 in recom
mending this same duty to the priests of God, un
der the name of airovSi) and evXd(3ua, care and re
verence. With what exact care, says he, ought he
to behave himself, who goes in the name of a whole
city, nay, in the name of the whole world, as their
orator and ambassador to intercede with God for
the sins of all ! But especially when he invocates
the Holy Ghost, and offers up rrjv fipucwcWarrjv
Svtriav, the tremendous sacrifice of the altar : with
what purity, with what reverence and piety should
his tongue utter forth those words ! whilst the an
gels stand by him, and the whole order of the hea
venly powers cries aloud, and fills the sanctuary in
honour of Him, who is represented as dead and
lying upon the altar. Thus that holy father argues
with a warmth and zeal suitable to the subject, and
such as is proper to raise our devotion, and kindle
our affections into a holy flame, whenever we pre
sent the supplications of the church on earth to the
sacred Majesty of heaven.
And this ardency of devotion was
The censure of continually to be cherished and pre-
such as neglected .
the daily service of served. 1 o which purpose the church
the church. L J-
had her daily sacrifices, wherever it
was possible to have them ; and on these every
clergyman was indispensably obliged to attend;
and that under pain of suspension and deprivation,
whether it was his duty to officiate or not. For so
the first council of Toledo determined for the
Spanish churches, that if any presbyter, or deacon,
or other clerk, should be in any city or country
where there was a church, and did not come to
church to the daily sacrifice or service,29 he should no
longer be reputed one of the sacred function. The
¦council of Agde orders such to be reduced to the

communion of strangers,80 which at least implies
suspension from their office. And the law of Jus
tinian punishes them with degradation,'1 because
of the scandal they give to the laity by such neg
lects or contempts of Divine service. So careful were
the ancient lawgivers of the church to cut off all
indecencies and abuses of this nature, and make the
clergy provoking examples of piety to the people.
Next to their office in addressing
God as the people's orators, we are Rules about prea*.
. , „ ,, , - ing to edfficaUon.
to view them as Gods ambassadors,
addressing themselves in his name to the people,
Which they did by public preaching and private
application ; in both which their great care was to
perform the duty of watchmen 'over God's flock,
and of good stewards over his household. In
their preaching their only aim was to be, the edifi- '
cation of the people. To which purpose the great
masters of rules in this kind, Gregory Nazianzen,
Chrysostom, and St. Jerom, lay down these few di
rections. First, That the preacher be careful to »
make choice of a useful subject. Gregory Nazian
zen82 specifies the rule in some particular instances,
such as the doctrine of the world's creation, and the
soul of man ; the doctrine of providence, and the
restoration of man ; the two covenants ; the. first
and second coming of Christ, his incarnation, suf
ferings, and death ; the resurrection, and end of the
world, and future judgment, and different rewards
of heaven and hell ; together with the doctrine of
the blessed Trinity, which is the principal article of
the Christian faith. Such subjects as these are
proper for edification, to build up men in faith and
holiness, and the practice of all piety and virtue.
But then, secondly, They must be treated on in a -
suitable way ; not with too much art or loftiness
of style, but with great condescension to men's ca
pacities, who must be fed with the word as they
are able to bear it. This is what Gregory Nazian
zen so much commends in Athanasius,88 when he
says, he condescended and stooped himself to the
mean capacities, whilst to the acute his notions and
words were more sublime. St. Jerom also observes"'
upon this head, that a preacher's discourse should
-always be plain, intelligible, and affecting; and
rather adapted to exeite men's groans and tears
by a sense of their -..sitis, than their admiration
and applause, by speaking to them what neither
they, nor he himself perhaps, do truly understand.

28 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 6. c. 4.
29 Cone. Tolet. 1. c. 5. Presbyter, diaconus, &c. qui intra
civitatem fuerit, vel in loco in quo ecclesia est, si in eccle
siam ad sacrificium quotidianum non veuerit, clericus non
habeatur. 30 Cone. Agathens. c. 2. Clericis qui ecclesiam frequen-
tare, vel officium suum implere neglexerint, peregrina com
munio tribnatur.
31 Cod. Just. lib. I. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 42. ... 10.

¦ 82 Naz. Orat. 1. de Fuga, t. 1. p. 15.
83 Naz. Orat. 21. de Laud. Athan. 1. 1. p. 396.
34 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian. Docente te in ecclesia,
non clamor populi, sed gemitus suscitetur ; lachrymae audi-
torum laudes tuae sint. — Celeritate dicendi apud imperitum
vulgus admirationem sui facere indoctorum hominum est.
Attrita frons interpretatur sacpe quod nescit; et cum alus
persuaserit, sibi quoque usurpat scientiam.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

213

For it is ignorant and unlearned men chiefly, that af
fect to be admired for their speaking above the capa
cities of the vulgar. A bold forehead often inter
prets what he himself does not understand ; and yet
he has no sooner persuaded others to they know not
what, but he assumes to himself the title of learn
ing upon it : when yet there is nothing so easy as
to deceive the ignorant multitude, who are always
most prone to admire what they do not understand.
Upon this account St. Chrysostom spends almost
a whole book in cautioning the Christian orator
against this failing ; that he should not be intent on
popular applause, but with a generous mind raise
himself above it j85 seeking chiefly to advantage his
hearers, and not barely to delight and please them.
To this purpose, he concludes, it would be neces
sary for him to despise both the applauses and
censures of men, and aU other things that might
tempt him rather to flatter his hearers, than edify
them. In a word, his chief end,36 in aU his com
posures, should be to please God : and then if he
also gained the praise of men, he might receive it ;
if not, he needed not to court it, nor torment him
self that it was denied him. For it would be con
solation enough for aU his labours, that in adapting
his doctrine and eloquence he had always sought
•«¦ to please his God. Thirdly, A third rule given in
this case was, that men should apply their doctrine
and spiritual medicines according to the emergent
and most urgent necessities of their hearers. Which
was the most proper duty of a watchman, to per
ceive with a quick eye where the greatest danger
lay ; which was men's weakest and most unguarded
side; and then apply suitable remedies to their
maladies and distempers. St. Chrysostom, in speak
ing of this part of a minister's duty, says, he should
be vt]d,d\ioe, Kal Sioparuebg, watchful and perspicaci
ous,3' and have a thousand eyes about him, as hving
not for himself alone, but for a multitude of people.
To live retired in a ceU is the business of a monk ;
but the duty of a watchman is to converse among
men of all degrees and callings ; to take care of the
body of Christ, the church, and have regard both
to its health and beauty ; curiously observing, lest
any spot or wrinkle or other defilement should sully
the grace and comeliness of it. Now, this obliged
spiritual physicians to apply their medicines, that
is, their doctrines, as the maladies of their patients
chiefly required; to be most earnest and frequent
in encountering those errors and vices which were
most reigning, or which men were most in danger
of being infected by. And this is the reason why,
in the homilies of the ancients, we so often meet.
with discourses against such heresies, as the world
now knows nothing of; such as those of the Mar-

85 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 5. c. 1. 8S Ibid.
87 Chrys. ibid. lib. 3. c. 12. lib. 4. c. 2 et 3.
88 Theod. Ep. 113. ad Loon.

c. 7.

cionites, and Manichees, and many others, which it
would be absurd to combat now in popular dis
courses ; but then it was necessary to be done, be
cause they were the prevailing heresies of the age,
and men were in danger of being subverted by
them. And it is further observable, that the most
formidable heresies, and prevailing factions, such
as that of the Arians, when armed with secular
power, could never either force or court the catholic
preachers into silence, to let the wolves devour the
sheep by such a tame and base compliance. In
this, case no worldly motives could prevail with
them, when they saw the danger, not to give warn
ing of it. They thought they could not otherwise
answer the character of watchmen, and stewards
of the mysteries of God, since it was required in
stewards that a man be found faithful.
But their fidelity was not only ex
pressed in their pubhc discourses, but or fidelity,' diu-
. . gence, and prudence
also in their private addresses and ap- >« private addresses
A £ and apphcations.
plications to men, who had either cut
themselves off from the body of Christ by heresies
and schisms, or by their sins made themselves un
sound members of the body, whilst they seemed to
continue of it. With what fidelity, and meekness,
and diligence they addressed themselves to the for
mer sort, we may learn from the good effects which
their applications often had upon them. Theodoret38
tells us of himself, in one place, that he had con
verted a thousand souls from the heresy of the
Marcionites, and many others from the heresies of
Arius and Eunomius, in his own diocese. And in /
another place39 he augments the number of con
verted Marcionites to ten thousand, whom, with in
defatigable industry, in a diocese of forty miles in
length and breadth, containing eight hundred
churches in it, he had reduced from their strayings
to the unity of the cathohc church. What wonders
also St. Austin wrought in Africa upon the Donat
ists and others in the same way, by private letters.
and conferences and collations with them, the reader
may learn from Possidius,40 the author of his Life,
who frequently mentions his labours in this kind,
and the great advantage that accrued to the church,
by this means. For he lived to see the greatest
part of the Manichees, Donatists, Pelagians, and
pagans, converted to the cathohc chm-ch. They
were no less careful to apply themselves in private
to persons within the church, as occasion required.
And here great art and prudence, as well as fidelity
and diligence, was necessary to give success to their
endeavours. For mankind, as Nazianzen41 observes,
is so various and uncertain a sort of creature, that
it requires the greatest art and skiU to manage him.
For the tempers of men's minds differ more than

89 Id. Ep. 145. p. 1026.
» Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 9, 13, 18.
41 Naz. Orat. 1. de Fuga, p. 14

214

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

the features and lineaments of their bodies : and as
all meats and medicines are not proper for all bodies,
so neither is the same treatment and discipline pro
per for all souls. Some are best moved by words,
others by examples ; some are of a dull and heavy
temper, and so have need of the spur to extimulate
them ; others, that are brisk and fiery, have more
need of the curb to restrain them. Praise works best
upon some, and reproof upon others, provided each
of them be ministered in a suitable and seasonable
way ; otherwise they do more harm than good. Some
men are drawn by gentle exhortations to their duty ;
others by rebukes and hard words must be driven to
it. And even in the business of reproof, some are
affected most with open rebuke, others with private.
For some men never regard a secret reproof, who
yet are easily corrected if chastised in pubhc.
Others, again, cannot bear a pubhc disgrace, but
grow either morose, or impudent and implacable
upon it ; who perhaps would have hearkened to a
secret admonition, and repaid their monitor with
their conversion, as presuming him to have accosted
them out of mere pity and love. Some men are to
be so nicely watched and observed, that not the
least of their faults are to be dissembled ; because
they seek to hide their sins from men, and arrogate
to themselves thereupon the praise of being politic
and crafty : in others it is better to wink at some
faults, so that seeing we will not see, and hearing
we will not hear, lest by too frequent chiding we
bring them to despair, and so make them cast off
modesty, and grow bolder in their sins. To some
men we must put on an angry countenance, and
seem to contemn them, and despair of them as lost
and deplorable wretches, when their nature so re
quires it : others, again, must be treated with meek
ness and humility, and be recovered to a better hope
by more promising and encouraging prospects.
Some men must be always conquered, and never
yielded to, whilst to others it will be better some-
1 times to concede a little. For all men's distempers
are not to be cured the same way, but proper medi
cines are to be applied, as the matter itself, or occa
sion, or the temper of the patient, will admit 'of.
• And this is the most difficult part of the pastoral
office, to know how to distinguish these things
nicely with an exact judgment, and with as exact, a
hand to minister suitable remedies to every dis
temper. It is a masterpiece of art, which is not to
be perfectly attained but by good observation, joined
with experience and practice. What our author
thus here at large discourses by way of rale and
theory, he in another place sums up more briefly in
the example of the great Athanasius, whose pattern
he proposes to men's imitation, as a living image of

this admirable prudence and dexterity in dealing
with men according to this great variety of tem
pers ; telling us,42 that his design was always one
and the same, but his methods various; praising
some, moderately correcting others ; using the spur
to some duU tempers, and the reins to others of a
more hot and zealous spirit; in his conversation
master of the greatest simplicity, but in his govern
ment master of the greatest artifice and variety of
skill ; wise in his discourses, but much wiser in his
understanding, to adapt himself according to the
different capacities and tempers of men. Now, the
design of all this, was not to give any latitude or
licence to sin, but by all prudent and honest arts to.
discourage and destroy it. It was not to teach the
clergy the base and servile arts of flattery and com
pliance ; to become time-servers and men-pleasers,
and soothe the powerful or the rich in their errors
and vices ; but only to instruct them in the different
methods of opposing sin, and how, by joining pru
dence to their zeal, they might make their own au
thority most venerable, and most effectuaUy promote
the true ends of religion. St. Chrysostom puts in
this caution, in describing this part of a bishop's
character : He ought to be wise, as well as holy ; a
man of great experience, and one that understands
the world : and because his business is with all sorts
of men, he should be muKiXoc, one that can appear
with different aspects, and act with great variety of
skill. But when I say this, I do not mean, says he,,!
that he should be a man of craft, or servile flattery,
or a dissembling hypocrite ; but a man of great free
dom and boldness, who knows notwithstanding how
to condescend and stoop himself for men's advan
tage, when occasion requires, and can be as well
mild as austere : for aU men are not to be treated in
the same way : no physician uses the same method
with all his patients. The true mean and decorum,
he thinks, which a bishop should observe in his
converse and applications to men, is to keep between
too much stiffness and abjectness. He must be
grave without pride;44 awful, but courteous; ma
jestic, as a man of authority and power, yet affable
and communicative to all : of an integrity that can
not be corrupted, yet officious and ready to serve
every man ; humble, but not servile ; sharp and re
solute, but yet gentle and mild. By such prudence
he will maintain his authority, and carry any point
with men, whilst he studies to do every thing with
out hatred or favour, only for the benefit and edi
fication of the church. We must reduce to this
head of prudence in making proper address and ap
plication to offenders, that direction given by St.
Paul, and repeated in several ancient canons, that a
bishop be no smiter, pr) irXi)Krtiv, which the twenty-

42 Naz. Orat. 21. de Laud. Athan. p. 396.
43 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 6. c.4. TIoikiXov aijTov Etvat Se7,

ttoikiXov Si Xiyta, &x virttXov, e KoXaxa, ex virOKptTtjv, &C.
44 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 3. c. 16.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

215

seventh of those called the Apostolical Canons thus
paraphrases : If any bishop, presbyter, or deacon
smite either an offending Christian, or an injurious
heathen, we order him to be deposed. For our
Lord did not teach us this discipline, but the con
trary ; for he was smitten, but did not smite any ;
when he was reviled, he reviled not again ; when
he suffered, he threatened not. Justinian forbids45
the same in one of his Novels, as a thing unbe
coming the priests of God, to smite any man with
their own hands. The word ¦n-Xt)o-o-tiv signifies also
smiting with the tongue, by reproachful, bitter, and
contumelious language, as St. Chrysostom, St. Je
rom, and others understand it. In which sense also
it was forbidden, as a thing indecent, and unbecom
ing the gravity and prudence of the Christian clergy.
sect. 9 * St. Chrysostom enlarges upon se-
caruiooTUdi'nlcecZ1- veral otrier parts of prudence, which
SovSTthe I need not here insist upon, because
they have either already been men
tioned, or wiU hereafter be considered in other
places; such as prudence46 in opposing heresies;
prudence47 in managing the virgins and widows,
and the revenues of the church; prudence48 in
hearing and determining secular causes ; and pru
dence ™ in the exercise of disciphne and church cen
sures, which last will be spoken to under another
head. I shall here therefore only add one instance
more of their prudence in allaying unnecessary dis
putes, which rose among cathohcs and men of the
same opinion in the church. Which indeed was
rather a complication of many noble virtues, pru
dence, candour, ingenuity, moderation, peaceable-
ness, and charity, joined together, which, hke a con
stellation of the brightest qualities, always shined
with the greatest lustre. This is what Gregory
Nazianzen chiefly admired in .the conduct of Atha
nasius, and therefore he gives it the highest com
mendation, and preference before all his other vir
tues, as thinking there was no one thing whereby
he did greater service to the church of God. It
happened in the time of Athanasius, that the catho
lics were hke to be divided about mere words ; a
warm dispute arising about what names the three
Divine Persons were to be caUed by : some were
for calling them only rpia tepdaunra, three persons, to
avoid Arianism ; others called them rpetc inroard(7ugt
three hypostases, to avoid Sabellianism. Now
they aU meant the same thing, but not understand
ing each other's terms, they mutually charged one
another with the heresies of Arius and Sabellius.
The one party, in the heat of disputation, could un
derstand nothing by three hypostases but three
substances or essences, in the Arian sense ; for they
made no distinction between hypostasis and es-

Just. Novel. 123. c. 11. Sed neque propriis manibus
bceat episcopo quenquam percutere : hoc enimalienum est
a sacerdotibus.

sence, and therefore charged their opposites with
Arianism. The other party were afraid that rpia
Trpoounta signified no more than nominal persons, in
the sense of Sabellius, (who himself had used those
very terms in an equivocal sense to impose upon
the vulgar,) and therefore they inveighed against
their adversaries as designing to promote Sabellian
ism. And so, says Nazianzen,59 this httle difference
in words making a noise as if there had been differ-
-ence in opinion, the love of quarrelling and con
tention fomenting the dispute, the ends of the earth
were in danger of being divided by a few syllables.
Which, when Athanasius, the true man of God, and
great guide of souls, both saw and heard, he could
not endure to think of so absurd and unreasonable
a division among the professors of the same faith,
but immediately applied a remedy to the distemper.
And how did he make his application P Having con
vened both parties with all meekness and humility,
and accurately weighed the intention and meaning
of the words on both sides, after he found them
agreeing in the things themselves, and not in the
least differing in point of doctrine, he ended their
dispute, allowing the use of both names, and tying
them to unity of opinion. This, says our author,
was a more advantageous act of charity to the
church, than all his other daily labours and dis
courses : it was more honourable than all his watch-
ings and humicubations, and not inferior to his ap
plauded flights and exiles. And therefore he tells
his readers in ushering in the discourse, that he could
not omit the relation without injuring them, espe
cially at a time when contentions and divisions
were in the church ; for this action of his would
be an instruction' to them that were then alive, and
of great advantage if they would propound it to
their own imitation ; since men were prone to di
vide not only from the impious, but from the ortho
dox and pious, and that not only about little and
contemptible opinions, (which ought to make no
difference,) but about words that tended to one and
the same sense. The caution is of use in all ages,
and had it always been strictly observed it would
have prevented many wild disputes and fierce con
tentions about words in the Christian church.
But now we are to observe, on the Sect ,0
other hand, that as they were emi- Co°fageTnT-feruu
nent for their candour and prudence mg
in composing unnecessary and verbal disputes ; so
where the cause was weighty, and any material
point of religion concerned, they were no less
famous for their zeal and courage in standing up in
the defence of truth against all opposers. It was
neither the artifice and subtlety, nor the power and
malice of their enemies could make them yield,

46 Chrys. de Sacerd. lib. 4. u. 4. 47 Ibid. lib. 3. c. 16.
48 Ibid", lib. 3. c. 18. 48 Ibid. lib. 3. c. 18.
50 Naz. Orat. 21. de Laud Athan. t. 1 p. 396.

216

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

where they thought the faith was in danger to be
destroyed. In other cases, says Nazianzen,5' there
is nothing so peaceable, so moderate as Christian
bishops ; but in this case they cannot bear the
name of moderation, to betray their God by silence
and sitting still ; but here they are exceeding eager
warriors, and fighting champions that are not to be
overcome. He does not mean that the weapons of
their warfare were carnal, that they used any pious
frauds, or plotted treasons, or rebellions, or took up
arms in defence of religion ; but that with an un
daunted courage and brave resolution they stood up
firm in defence of truth, and mattered not what
- names they were called by, (contentious, unpeace-
able, immoderate, factious, turbulent, incendiaries,
or any thing of the like nature,) nor yet what they
suffered, in any kind, whilst I hey contended for
that faith which was once delivered to the saints.
Church history abounds with instances of this na
ture ; but it will be sufficient to exemphfy the prac
tice of this virtue in a single instance, which Gre
gory Nazianzen52 gives us in the Life of St. Basil,
where he relates a famous dialogue that passed be
tween Modestus, the Arian governor under Valens,
and that holy man. Modestus tried all arts to bring
him over to the party, but finding all in vain, he at
last threatened him with severity. What, said he,
dost thou not fear this power which I am armed
with? Why should I fear ? said Basil; what canst
thou do, or what can I suffer ? What canst thou
suffer ? said the other ; many things that are in my
power : confiscation of thy goods, banishment, tor
ment, and death. But thou must threaten me with
something else, said Basil, if thou canst, for none of
these things can touch me. As for confiscation of
goods, I am not liable to it ; for I have nothing to
lose, unless thou wantest these tattered and thread
bare garments, and a few books, which is aU the
estate I am possessed of. For banishment, I know
not what it means, for I am tied to no place ; I
shall esteem every country as much my own, as that
where I now dwell; for the whole earth is the
Lord's, and I am only a pilgrim and a stranger in
it. As for torments, what can they do to him, who
has not a body that can hold out beyond the first
stroke ? And for death, it will be a kindness to me,
for it will but so much the sooner send me unto
God, to whom I live and do the duty of my station ;
being in a great measure already dead, and now of
a long time hastening unto him. The governor
was strangely surprised at this discourse, and^aid,
No man ever talked at this free and bold rate to
Modestus before. Perhaps, said Basil, thou didst
never meet with a bishop before : for if thou hadst,
he would have talked just as I do, when he was put

to coiitend about such matters as tfiese. In other
things we are mild and yielding, and the humblest
men on earth, as our laws oblige us to be ; we are so
far from showing ourselves supercilious or haughty
to magistrates in power, that we do not do it to per
sons of the meanest rank and condition. But when
the cause of God is concerned, or in danger, then
indeed we esteem all. other things as nothing, and
fix our eyes only upon him,' Then fire and sword,
wild beasts and instruments of torture to tear off
our flesh, are so far from being a terror, that they
are rather a pleasure and recreation to us. There
fore reproach and threaten us, do your pleasure,
use your power to the utmost, and let the emperor
know all this : yet you shall never conquer us, or
bring us to assent to your impious doctrine, though
you threaten us ten thousand times more than all
this. The governor hearing this, and finding him
to be a man of invincible and inflexible courage,
dismissed him now not with threatenings, but with
a sort of reverence and submission, and went and
told the emperor, that the bishop of that church
was too hard for them all ; for Iris courage was so
great, his resolution so firm, that neither promises
nor threatenings could move him from his purpose.
Nor was it only open violence they thus bravely .
resisted, but also the more crafty attempts of the
enemies of truth, who many times went artificially
to work against it ; partly by blackening the cha
racters of its champions and defenders, and repre
senting them as base and intolerable men; and
partly by. smoothing their own character, and pre
tending unity in faith with the orthodox, and that
their designs were only designs of peace, to remove
unscriptural words and novel terms out of the way,
that all men might be of the same Opinion. These
were the two grand .artifices of the Arian party,
whereby the leading and pohtic men among them,
Eusebius of Nicomedia, Valens, Ursacius, and
others, always laboured to Overthrow the truth.
Upon this account Athanasius was forced to un- *
dergo a thousand calumnies and slanderous re
proaches. He was accused to Constantine, as one
that assumed to himself imperial authority to impose
a tax upon Egypt: as one guilty of murder, in cutting
off the hand of Arsenius, a Meletian bishop ; as
giulty of treason, in siding with Philumenus the
rebel, and furnishing him with money ; as an enemy
to the public, for attempting to hinder the transport
ation of corn from Egypt to Constantinople ! which
accusation so far prevailed upon the ernperor, that
he banished him to Triers upon it. In the next
reign he was accused again of repeated murders ;
and of sacrilege, in diverting Constantine's liberality
to the widows of Egypt and Libya, to other uses ;

51 Naz. Orat. 21. de Laud. Athan. p. 388. Oi k'iv TtiWa
euatv ElprjviKoi te Kal pirptoi, tovto ye ov epipovertv
iirutKE~t^ Elvai, Qeov irpoSlSovat Sti Tr,s ijo-ux'as' dXXi

Kal Xiav eIo-Iv ivTavda iroXEplKoi te Kal Svapaxot.
62 Naz. Orat. 20. de Laud. Basil, p. 349.

Chap. lit.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

217

of treason, in joining interest with Magnentius the
tyrant ; and many other such charges were spite
fully and diabolically levelled against him. St.
Basil was likewise variously accused both by pro
fessed enemies and pretended friends ; who, as is
usual in such cases, brought charges against him
directly contrary to one another. Some accused him
of Tritheisnij for defending the doctrine of three hy
postases against the Sabellians ; others, of Semi-
arianism, or heterodoxy in the article about the Di
vinity of the Holy Ghost, because in his church he
sometimes used a different form of doxology from
what was used in other chufches. Some, again, ac
cused him of Arianism, because he had received
Eustathius of Sebastia into communion upon his
professing the catholic faith ; others said he com
municated with Apollinaris the heretic, because
upon some occasions he wrote letters to him. Thus
were two of the greatest and best of men maliciously
traduced and wounded in their reputation ; both in
deed for the same cause, but with this difference,
that the one was prosecuted by open enemies with
out the church, the other chiefly by secret enemies
within ; of whom therefore he had reason to take
up the prophet's complaint, and say, " These are the
wounds with which I was wounded in the house of
my friends." And these were such temptations as
might have unsettled any weak and wavering minds,
and made them turn their backs upon religion : but
true zeal is above temptation, and can equally de
spise the wounds of the sword and the wounds of
the tongue ; having always the consolation, which
Christ gives in his gospel, ready at hand to support
it; "Blessed are ye when men shall revile you, and
persecute you, and shaU say aU manner of evil
against you falsely for my sake : rejoice, and be ex
ceeding glad ; for great is your reward in heaven."
Such examples show us, that innocence itself cannot
always exempt men from calumny, but sometimes
is accidentally the occasion of it : but then it has
this advantage, that being joined with a suitable
zeal, it never sinks under the weight and pressure
of its burden, but always comes offconqueror at the
last, as we see in the instances now before us.
The other artifice, which I said the Arians used
to destroy the faith, was the specious pretence of
peace and unity. The politic and crafty men among
them in the time of Constantius, pretended that they
had no quarrel with the catholic doctrine of the
Trinity itself, but only were aggrieved at the novel
and. unscriptural words, such as the ouooienov, con-
substantial, &c, which the council of Nice had used

to express it by : these, they said, were dividing
terms, and the cause of all the quarrel and combus
tion : and therefore they still urged the removing
these terms, as the great stumblingblock, out of the
way, that the peace and unity of the church might
follow upon it. But Athanasius and other wise
catholics easily perceived whither this sly stratagem
tended ; being very sensible that their design was
not against the bare terms, but the faith itself, and
therefore they always stoutly and zealously opposed
it. Nor could the Arians ever gain this point upon
the catholics, till at last in the council of Ariminum,
anno 359, by gi'eat importunity, arid clamours for
unity and peace, they were prevailed upon to sink
the word consubstantial, and draw tip a new creed
without it, yet, as they thought, containing the very
same doctrine, and in as full terms as could be ex
pressed, save that the word consubstantial was not
in it. But here it must be owned, these catholic1
bishops were wanting in their zeal, as they them
selves were quickly after convinced. For no sooner
was this concession made, but the Arians immedi
ately gave out and boasted over all the world, that
the Nicene faith was condemned, and Arianism
estabhshed in a general council, though nothing was
less intended by the catholic bishops that were pre
sent at it. But now they were sensible they had
made a false step, by suffering themselves thus to be
imposed upon by designing men : they now saw that
they ought to have stuck to the Nicene terms, as
well as the faith, since the faith itself so much de
pended on them. They now began to complain of
the fraud, and asked pardon of their brethren for
their want of foresight and caution in a case so
tender and material. St. Jerom, who gives us this
account of the whole transaction, from the acts of
the synod and other records extant in his time,
brings them in making this apology for themselves :
The bishops, says he,53 who had been imposed upon
by fraud at Ariminum, and who were reputed here
tics without being conscious to themselves of any
heresy, went about every where protesting by the
body of Christ, and all that is sacred in the church,
that they suspected no evil in their creed-: they
thought the sense had agreed with the words, and
that men had not meant one thing in their hearts,
and uttered another thing with their lips. They
were deceived by entertaining too good an opinion
of base and evil men. They did not suppose the
priests of Christ could so treacherously have fought
against Christ. In short, they lamented their mis
take now with tears, and offered to condemn as well

53 Hieron. Dial. cont. Lucif. t. 2. p. 143. Concurrebant
episcopi, qui Ariminensibus dolis irretiti, sine conscientia
haretici ferebantur, contestantes corpus Domini, et quic-
quid in ecclesia sanctum est, se nihil mali in sua fide suspi-
catos. Putavimus, aiebant, sensum congruere cum verbis ;
nee in ecclesiis ubi simplicitas, ubi pura confessio est, aliud

in corde clausum esse, aliud in labiis proferri timuimus.
Decepit nos bona de malis existimatio. Non sumus arbi-
trati sacerdotes Christi adversus Christum pugnare multaque
alia quae brevitatis studio praetereo, flentes asserebant, pa-
rati et subscriptionem pristiuam et omnes Arianorum hlas-
phemias condemnare.

218

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

their own subscription, as all the Arian blasphemies.
Any one that reads St. Jerom carefully, wUl easily
perceive, that these bishops were no Arians, nor
ever intended to subscribe an Arian creed; but
their fault was want of zeal in parting with the Ni
cene creed, to take another instead of it without the
word consubstantial ; which though they subscribed
in the simphcity of their hearts as an orthodox
creed, (and indeed the words, as Jerom describes
them, in their plain sense are sound and orthodox,
as St. Jerom says in their excuse,) yet the Arians
put an equivocal and poisonous sense upon them ;
giving out after the council was ended, that they
had not only abolished the word consubstantial,
but with it condemned the Nicene faith also.
Which was strange, surprising news to the bishops
that had been at Ariminum. Then, says St. Jerom,
Ingemuit totus orbis, et Arianum se esse miratus est,
The whole world groaned, and was amazed to think
she should be reputed Arian. That is, the cathohc
bishops of the whole world (for there were three
hundred of them present at that council) were
amazed to find themselves so abused, and repre
sented as Arians, when they never intended in the
least to confirm the Arian doctrine. But now by
this the reader will be able to judge, what kind of
zeal the catholic church required then in her clergy,
viz. that they should not only contend for the
faith itself, but also for those catholic forms and
ways of expressing it, which had been prudently
composed and settled in general councils, as a bar
rier against heretics ; the giving up of which to sub
tle and dangerous adversaries, would always give
them advantage to make fiercer attacks upon the
faith itself, and prove destructive to the cathohc
cause ; as those bishops found by woeful experience,
who were concerned in the concession made at Ari
minum. It is candour indeed, when good catholics
are divided only about words, to bring them to a right
understanding of one another, which will set them
at peace and unity again : but it is tameness to give
up the main bulwarks of the faith to fallacious ad
versaries and designing men, whose arts and aims,
however disguised, are always known to strike at
the foundation of religion. And therefore, though
no man was ever more candid than Athanasius to
ward mistaken catholics, yet neither was any more
zealous in opposing the arts and stratagems of the
Arian party; always sticking close to the defini
tion of the Nicene council, and never yielding that
any tittle or syUable of that creed should be erased
or altered.

54 Cypr. Ep. 62. p. 197. Si qui presbyteri aut diaeoni qui
vel in ecclesia catholica prius ordinati fuerint, et postmodum
perfidi ac rebelles contra ecclesiam steterint, vel apud haere-
ticos a pseudo-episcopis et antichristis contra Christi dis-
positionem profana ordinatione promoti sunt — eos quoque
hac conditione suscipi cum revertuntur, ut communicent

Whilst I am upon this head, I can
not but take notice of the obligations or £', 0Mim-
the clel'try lay under to maintain the unity of uie church;
° , , , , ,, . ... andofthecemureol
unitv of the church, both in faith Bu* «¦ '§ into b...
J _ reBy or achinm.
and discipline, and what penalties
were inflicted on such as made a breach therein,
whether by falling into heresy or schism themselves,
or giving encouragement to them in others. I shall
not need to state the nature of chm-ch unity and
communion in this place any further, than by say
ing, that to maintain the purity of the cathohc faith,
and live under the discipline and government of a
cathohc bishop, who himself lived in communion
with the catholic church, were then, as it were, the
two characteristic notes of any man's being in the
communion of the church : and therefore, as every
member was obliged to maintain the unity of the
church in both these parts ; so much more the
clergy, who were to be the chief guardians of it :
and if they failed in either kind, that is, if they «
lapsed either into heresy or schism, by the laws of
the church they were to be deposed from their
office; and though they repented and returned to
the unity of the church again, yet they were not to
act in their former station, but to be admitted to
communicate only in the quality of laymen. This
was the rule of the African church in the time of
Cyprian, as appears from the synodical epistle5* of
the council of Carthage, to which his name is pre
fixed. For, writing to Pope Stephen, they tell him,
their custom was to treat such of the clergy as were
ordained in the catholic church, and afterward stood
up perfidiously and rebelliously against the church,
in the same manner as they did those that were first
ordained by heretics ; that is, they admitted them
to the peace of the church, and aUowed them the
communion of laymen, but did not permit them
to officiate again in any order of the clergy. And
this, he says, they did to put a mark of distinction
between those that always stood true to the church,
and those that deserted it. Yet if any considerable *
advantage accrued to the church by the return of
such a heretic or schismatic; as if he brought
over any considerable part of the deluded people
with him, or if he was generaUy chosen by the
church, or the like ; in such cases the rule was so
far dispensed with, that the deserter might be ad
mitted to his pristine dignity, and be allowed to
officiate in his own order again. Upon this account,
Cornehus, bishop of Rome, received Maximus the
presbyter to his former honour upon his return from
the Novatian schism.55 And in after ages both the

laici, et satis habeant quod admittuntur ad pacem, qui hostea
pacis extiterint, &c.
55 Cornel. Ep. 46. al. 49. ad Cypr. p. 93. Maximum pres-
by terum locum suum agnoscere jussimus. See other instances
in Socrates, lib. 7. u. 3.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

219

Novatians and Meletians were particularly favour
ed with this privilege by the councU of Nice, and
the Donatists by the African fathers in the time of
St. Austin, as I had occasion to note more than
once before.56 But if they continued obstinate in
their heresy or schism, then many times an ana
thema was pronounced against them, as in the
second councU of Carthage. If a presbyter, says
the canon,57 that is reproved or excommunicated by
his bishop, being puffed up with pride, shall pre
sume to offer the oblation in a separate assembly,
or set up another altar against him, let him be
anathema. The council of Antioch,58 and those
called the Apostolical Canons,59 have several decrees
of the hke nature. Yea, so careful were the clergy
to be of the unity of the church, that they were not
to give any encouragement to heretics or schismatics,
or excommunicated persons, by communicating with
them in prayer or other holy offices of the church,
or so much as frequenting their society, feasting
with them, or the like. But I do not enlarge upon
these things here, because, being matters of disci
phne, they wUl come again to be considered under
that head in another place.
I have now gone through some of the chief ge
neral duties, which more immediately concerned the
office and function of the clergy ; and by mixing
public rules with private directions and great ex
amples, have made such an essay towards the idea
and character of a primitive clerk, as may (I hope)
in some things excite both the emulation and curi
osity of many of my readers, who may be concern
ed to imitate the pattern I have been describing.
If here it be not drawn so full, or so exactly to the
hfe in all its beauties, as they could wish, they will
find their account in satisfying their curiosity, by
having recourse to the fountains themselves, from
whence these materials were taken. For many
things, that might here have been added, were pur
posely omitted, for fear of drawing out this part of
the discourse to a greater length than would consist
with the design and measures of the present under
taking: and I had rather be thought to have said
too httle, than too much, upon this head, that I
¦ might not cloy, but leave an edge upon the appetite
of the inquisitive reader.

53 Book IV. chap. 7. sect. 7 and 8.
57 Cone. Carth. 2. c. 8. Si quis forte presbyter ab epis
copo suo correptus vel excommunicatus, tumore vel superbia
inflatus, putaverit separatim Deo sacrificia offerenda, vel
ahud engendum altare-anathema sit.
58 Cone. Antioch. c. 4 et 5. 3» Canon. Apost. u-. 32.
Book III. chap. 1. sect. 5.
t 1 Ha™enoPiUi1- EP!t- c™- ap. Leunclav. Jus Grac. Rom.
• -P- 11. ITapci tov^ iKKXnatacrTiKovs SEorpovs, t6 Xtf3iX-
°tre icapaiTrjtsEmv irpoadyEiv Ttvii tuiv Upovpyoiv, &c.

CHAPTER IV.
AN ACCOUNT OF SOME OTHER LAWS AND RULES,
WHICH WERE A SORT OF OUT-GUARDS AND FENCES
TO THE FORMER.
Having thus far discoursed both of Serf ,
such laws as related to the life and J&?J'lKari£
conversation of the primitive clergy, vr?.tutjuh.tgro™d"
and of those that more immediately
concerned the duties and offices of their function ; I
come now to speak of a third sort of laws, which
were like the Jews' sepimenta legis, a sort of by-laws
and rules, made for the defence and guard of the two
former. Among these we may reckon such laws as
were made to fix the clergy to their proper business
and calling ; such as that which forbade any clergy
man to desert or relinquish his station, without just
grounds or leave granted by his superiors. In the
African church, as has been showed before,1 from
the time that any man was made a reader, or en
tered in any of the lower orders of the church, he
was presumed to be dedicated to the service of God,
so as thenceforth not to be at liberty to turn secular
again at his own pleasure. And much more did
this rule hold for bishops, presbyters, and deacons.
Therefore Cyril of Alexandria, as he is cited by
Harmenopulus,2 says in one of his canons, that it
was contrary to the laws of the church for any
priest to give in a libel of resignation : for if he be
worthy, he ought to continue in his ministry ; if he
be unworthy, he should not have the privilege of
resigning, but be condemned and ejected. The
council of Chalcedon orders3 aU such to be ana
thematized, as forsook their orders to take upon
them any military office or secular dignity, unless
they repented and returned to the employment,
which for God's sake they had first chosen. The
council of Tours4 in like manner decrees, that who
ever of the clergy desert their order and office, to
follow a secular life and calling again, shall be
punished with excommunication. The civil law
was also very severe upon such deserters. By an
order of Arcadius and Honorius,5 they are condemn
ed to serve in curia all their lives, that they might
never have the privilege of resuming the clerical
life again. And by a law of Justinian's,6 both monks
and clerks so deserting, were to forfeit whatever

3 Cone. Chalced. u. 7. Totrs i'-n-aff iv KXvpw TETaypivovs,
priTE iirl aTpaTEiav pr)TE iirl d^iav KotrptKr)v 'ipXEoSat, &c.
4 Cone. Turon. c. 5. Si quis clericus, relicto officii sui
ordine, laicam voluerit agere vitam, vel se militias tradiderit,
excommunicationis pcena feriatur.
s Cod. Th. lib. 16. tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 39. Si qui pro-
fessum sacrae religionis sponte dereliquerit, continuo sibi
eum curia vindicet: ut liber illi ultra ad ecclesiam recursus
esse non possit.
' Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 55. Quod si

220

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

estate they were possessed of, to the church or
monastery to which they belonged.
sect 2 Bivt this rule, as it was intended for
a ™£SC™ the benefit of the church, to keep
alloweS of. ^ dergy tQ thei]. duf.y ( g0 when the
benefit ofthe church, or any other reasonable cause,
required the contrary, might be dispensed with :
and we find many such resignations or renuncia
tions practised, and some allowed by general coun
cils. For not to mention the case of disability by
reason of old age, sickness, or other infirmity, in
which it was usual for bishops to turn over their
business to a coadjutor ; of which I have given a
full account in a former book ;7 there were two other
cases, which come nearer to the matter in hand.
One was, when a bishop, through the obstinacy,
hatred, or disgust of any people, found himself in
capable of doing them any service, and that the
burden was an intolerable oppression to him; in
that case, if he desired to renounce, his resigna
tion was accepted. Thus Gregory Nazianzen re
nounced the see of Constantinople, and betook him
self to a private life, because the people grew factious,
and murmured at him, as being a stranger. And
this he did with the consent and approbation of the
general council of Constantinople) as not only the
historians, Theodoret" and Socrates," but he him
self- testifies 10 in many places of his writings. After
the same manner, Theodoret says,11 Meletius, the
famous bishop of Antioch) when he was bishop of
Sebastia in Armenia, was so offended with the re
bellious temper and contumacy of a perverse and
froward people, that he abandoned them, and retired
likewise to a private life. So Theodorus Lector tells
us,12 how Martyrius, bishop of Antioch, being offend
ed at the factiousness of his people and clergy, upon
the intrusion of Peter Fullo, renounced his church
with these words : " A contumacious clergy, a re
bellious people, a profane church, I bid adieu to
them all, reserving to myself the dignity of priest
hood." Another case was, when in charity a bishop
resigned, or showed himself willing to resign, to
cure some inveterate schism. Thus Chrysostom13
told his people, that if they had any suspicion of
him, as if he were a usurper, he was ready to quit
his government when they pleased, if that was
necessary to preserve the unity of the church. And
so Theodoret14 tells us, that in the dispute between
Flavian and Evagrius, the two bishops of Antioch,
when Theodosius the emperor sent for Flavian, and
ordered him to go and have his cause decided at

Rome ; hfe bravely answered, " Great sir, if any
accuse my faith as erroneous, or my life as unquali
fying me for a bishopric, I will freely let my ac
cusers be my judges, and stand to their sentence,
whatever it be : but if the dispute be only about the
throne, and government of the church, I shall not
stay for judgment, nor contend with any that has a
mind to it, but freely recede, and abdicate the throne
of my own accord. And you, sir, may commit the
see of Antioch to whom you please." The emperor
looked upon this as a noble and generous answer,
and was so affected with it, that instead of obliging
him to go to Rome, he sent him home again, and
bade him go feed the church committed to his care :
nor would he ever after hearken to the bishops of
Rome, though they often solicited him to expel
him. There is one instance more of this nature
which I cannot omit, because it is such an example
of self-denial, and despising of private interest for
the public good and peace and unity of the church,
as deserves to be transmitted to posterity, and to be
spoken of with the highest commendations. It was
the proposal which Aurelius, bishop of Carthage,
and St. Austin, with the rest of the African bishops,
made to the Donatists at the opening of the confer
ence of Carthage ; that to put an end to the schism,
wherever there was a cathohc and a Donatist bishop
in the same city, they should both of them15 resign,
and suffer a new one to be chosen. For why, say
they, should we scruple to offer the sacrifice of such
an humility to our Redeemer ? Did he descend
from heaven to assume our nature, and make us his
members ? And shall We make any doubt to de
scend from our chairs, to prevent his members be
ing torn to pieces by a cruel schism ? We bishops
are ordained for the people of Christ. What there
fore is most conducive to the peace of Christian
people, we ought to do in reference' to our episco
pacy. If we be profitable servants, why should we
envy the eternal gain of our Lord for our own tem
poral honours ? Our episcopal dignity will be so
much the more advantageous to us, if by laying it
aside we gather together the flock of Christ, than if
we disperse his flock by retaining it. And with
what face can we hope for the honour which Christ .
has promised us in the world to come, if our honours
in this world hinder the unity of his church ? By
this we see there were some cases, in which it was
lawful for men to renounce even the episcopal
office, and betake themselves to a private life ; the
grand rule being, in these and all other cases, to do

illi monasteria aut ecclesias relinquant, atque mundani fiant :
omne ipsorum jus ad monasterium aut ecclesiam pertinet.
7 Book II. chap. 13. sect. 4. 6 Theod. lib. 5. c. 8.
9 Soc. lib. 5. c. 7. '° Naz. Orat. 32. it. Carm. de Vita Sua.
" Theod. lib. 2. c. 31. 12 Theodor. Lect. lib. 1. p. 555.
13 Chrys. Horn. 11. in Ephes. p. 1110. "Eroipoi irapaxoi-
pt)trat T7/s dpxv1^ pdvov EKKX-neria eo-tco pia.

14 Theod. lib. 5. u. 23.
15 Collat. Carthag. Die 1. c. 16. Utrique de medio sece-
damus — Quid enim dubitemusredemptorinostrosacrincium
istius bumilitatis offerre ? An vero ille de cordis in membra
humana descendit, ut membra ejus essemus ? Et nos, ne
ipsa ejus membra crudeli divisione lanientur, de cathedra
descendere formidamus ? &c.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

221

what was most for the benefit and edification of the
church, and sacrifice private interest to the advan
tage of the pubhc. In these cases, a bishop, after he
And' Snonical had renounced, was not to intermed
iated' m such die with the affairs of the church, to
ordain, or perform any offices of the
like nature, unless he was called to assist by some
other bishop, or was commissioned by him as his
delegate : yet he was allowed the title and honour
and communion of a bishop, as the general council
of Ephesus 16 determined it should be, in the case of
Eustathius, bishop of Perga, and metropolitan of
Pamphylia, who had renounced his bishopric, be
ing an aged man, and thinking himself unable to
discharge the duties of it. In such cases likewise,
when any one receded with the approbation of a
councU, he was sometimes allowed to receive a
moderate pension out of the bishopric for his main
tenance. As it was in the case of Domnus, bishop
of Antioch, who having been ejected, though un
justly, by Dioscorus in the second synod of Ephesus,
yet quietly resigned the bishopric to Maximus :
upon which account, Maximus desired leave of the
council of Chalcedon, that he might allow him an
annual pension out of the revenues of the church,
which the council of Chalcedon17 readily comphed
with. And this, as Richerius18 ingenuously owns,
was the ancient design and meaning of canonical
pensions, which were not used to be granted but by
the authority or approbation of a synod, and only
to such as, having spent the greatest part of their
hfe in the service of the church, desired to be dis
burdened of their office by reason of their age. For
the reserving a pension out of a bishopric, which a
man only resigns to take another, was a practice
whoUy unknown to former ages.
Secondly, Another rule, designed
Sect. 4. . . ,, ' ' ° .
no clergyman to to keep all clergymen strictly to their
removefroinouedio- ° J
ce« to another ivith- duty, was, That no one should re
mit the consent and J
hu'olnbuhop? °f move froln nis own church or diocese,
without the consent of the bishop to
whose diocese he belonged. For as no one at first
could be ordained dwoXtXvpkvwg, but must be fixed to
some church at his first ordination ; so neither, by the
rules and disciphne of tiie church* then prevailing,
might he exchange his station at pleasure, but must
have his own bishop's licence, or letters dimissory,

to qualify him to remove from one diocese to an
other. For this was the ancient right, which every
bishop had in the clergy of his own church, that
he could not be deprived of them without his own
consent ; but as well the party that deserted him,
as the bishop that received him, were liable to be
censured upon such a transgression. If any pres
byter, deacon, or other clerk, say the Apostolical
Canons,10 forsake his own diocese to go to another,
and there continue without the consent of his own
bishop : we decree, that such a one shall no longer
minister as a clerk, (especially if after admonition
he refuse to return,) but only be admitted to com
municate as a layman. And if the bishop, to whom
they repair, still entertain them in the quality of
clergymen, he shall be excommunicated as a mas
ter of disorder. The same rule is frequently re
peated in the ancient councils, as that of Antioch,™
the first and second of Aries,21 the first and fourth
of Carthage,22 the first of Toledo,23 and the council
of Tours,24 and Turin,25 and the great council of
Nice,26 to whose canons it may be sufficient to refer
the reader. I only observe, that this was the an
cient use of letters dimissory, or, as they were then
called, dieoXvTiKai, tlpiiviKul, ovrariKat, and concesso-
ries, which were letters of licence granted by a bi
shop, for a clergyman to remove from his diocese
to another ; though we now take letters dimissory
in another Sense : but the old canons call those
dimissory letters, which were given upon the occa
sion that I have mentioned. The council of Car
thage gives them only the name of the bishop's
letters,57 but the council of Trullo28 styles them ex
pressly, dimissory; when, reinforcing all the an
cient canons, it says, No clergyman of what degree
soever shall be entertained in another church, itcrbg
rrjc tov o'tKiiov iTeusKOTrov iyypdpov diroXvTtKrjg, without
the dimissory letters of his own bishop ,- which he
might grant or refuse as he saw proper occasion
for it. For there was no law to compel him to
grant it, whatever arts any clerk might use to gain
a dismission any other way. St. Austin mentions a
pretty strange case of this nature, that happened in
his own diocese. One Timotheus, a subdeacon of
his church, being desirous to leave his post under
St. Austin, and go to Severus, a neighbouring bi
shop, protests upon oath to Severus that he would
be no longer of St. Austin's church : upon this

16 Cone. Ephes. Act. 7. in Epist. ad Synod. Pamphy-
bae. Habeat episcopi nomen et honorem ac communionem,
sic quidem ut neque ipse ordinet, neque in ecclesiam pro
pria auctoritate ordinaturus veniat, nisi forte coassuma-
tur, &c.
17Couc. Chalced. Act. 7. al. Act. 10. edit. Labbe. t. 4.
p. 681.
18 Richer. Hist. Concil. par. I. c. 8. n. 30. p. 218. Nihil
antiquitus consuetum fieri nisi synodice comprobatum ;
hincque jus pensionum canonicarum potest confirmari ; quae
ns tantum tribui consueverant. qui magnam vitae partem in

ministerio consumserant, et propter aitatem se exonerabant
episcopatu. i» Canon. Apost. c. 15 et 16. Vid. Cone. Chalced. can. 20.
2» Cone, Antioch. c. 3. 21 Arelat. 1. c. 21. Arelat. 2. c. 13.
22 Cone. Carth. 1. u. 5. Carth. 4. c. 27.
" Cone. Tolet. 1. u. 12. 24 Cone. Turon. c. 11.
25 Cone. Taurin. c, 7. 2° Cone. Nic. c. 16.
V Cone. Carth. 1. c. 5. Non licere clericum alienum ab
aliquo suscipi sine Uteris episcopi sui, neque apud se re-
tinere. w Cone, Trull, c. 17.

222

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

Severus, pretending a reverence for his oath, writes
to St. Austin, and tells him he could not return
him his clerk for fear of making him guilty of per
jury. To which St. Austin replied, That this
opened a way to licentiousness, and there was an
end2" of all ecclesiastical order and discipline, if a
bishop would pretend to keep another man's clerk
upon such a scruple, for fear of being accessory to
his perjury. This evidently implies, that there was
no law then to compel a bishop to grant letters di
missory to his clerk ; for if there had been any
such, Timotheus needed not to have used the stra
tagem of an oath, but might have compelled St.
Austin to have granted them. But the church then
did not think fit to put it in every man's power
to remove from one diocese to another at his own
pleasure, but left every bishop sole judge in this
case, as best knowing the necessities and circum
stances of his own church, and whether it were ex
pedient to part with the clergy which were ordained
for her service.
sect 5 The laws were no less severe against
/3a«TT.a|oi?s'orhe all wandering clergymen, whom some
wandering clergy. Qf ^ ancientg ca]I pasclVT,0ol3<> or
vacantivi, by way of reproach. They were a sort of
idle persons, who having deserted the service of
their own church, would fix in no other, but went
roving from place to place, as their fancy and their
humour led them. Now, by the laws ofthe church
no bishop was to permit any such to officiate in his
diocese, nor indeed so much as to communicate in
his church ; because, having neither letters dimis
sory nor letters commendatory from their own bi
shop, (which every one ought to have that travel
led,) they were to be suspected either as deserters,
or as persons guilty of some misdemeanor, who fled
from ecclesiastical censure. Therefore the laws
forbade the admitting of such either to ecclesiastical
or lay-communion. A presbyter or deacon, says
the council of Agde,3' that rambles about without
the letters of his bishop, shall not be admitted to
communion by any other. The council of Epone32
repeats the decree in the same words. And the
council of Valentia33 in Spain orders such wander
ing and roving clerks, as will not settle to the con
stant performance and attendance of divine offices
in the church, whereto they were deputed by the
bishop that ordained them, to be deprived both of

the communion and the honour of their order, if
they persisted in their obstinacy and rebellion. So
strict were the laws of the ancient church in tying
the inferior clergy to the service of that church to
which they were first appointed, that they might
not upon any account move thence, but at the dis
cretion of the bishop that ordained them.
Nor were the bishops so arbitrary
in this matter, but that they them- Lawfatainst the
, ¦, ,., , . • translations of bi-
selves were under a hke regulation, shops from one see
and liable to laws of the same nature. °e limited' and un
derstood.
For as no clerk could remove from
his own church without the licence of his bishop,
so neither might any bishop pretend to translate or
move himself to another see without the consent
and approbation of a provincial council. Some
few there were who thought it absolutely unlawful
for a bishop to forsake his first see and betake him
self to any other, because they looked upon his con
secration to be a sort of marriage to his church,
from which he could not divorce himself, nor take
another without incurring the crime of spiritual
adultery. To this purpose they wrested that passage
of St. Paul, " A bishop must be the husband of one
wife," taking it in a mystical and figurative sense,
as St. Jerom34 informs us. But this was but the
private opinion of one or two authors, which never
prevailed in the cathohc church ; whose prohibition
of the translation of bishops was not founded upon
any such reasons, but was only intended as a cau
tionary provision to prevent the ambition of aspiring
men, that they might not run from lesser bishop
rics to greater, without the authority of a provincial
synod, which was the proper judge in such cases.
Some canons indeed seem to forbid it absolutely
and universally, as a thing not to be allowed in
any case. The council of Nice,35 and Sardica,15
and some others, prohibit it without any exception
or limitation. But other canons restrain it to the
case of a bishop's intruding himself into another
see by some sinister arts, without any legal authority
from a provincial synod. So those caUed the Apos
tolical Canons37 distinguish upon the matter : It shall
not be lawful for a bishop to leave his diocese, and
invade another, though many of the people would
compel him to it ; unless there be a reasonable
cause, as that he may the more advantage the
church by his preaching ; and then he shall not do

29 Aug. Ep. 240. ad Severum. Aditus aperitur ad dissol-
vendum ordinem ecclesiasticae disciplinae, si aiterius eccle-
siie clericus cuicunque juraverit, quod ab ipso non sit reces-
surus, eum secum esse permittat: ideo se facere affirmans,
ne author sit ejus perjurii, &c.
30 Synes. Ep. 67.
31 Cone. Agathen. c. 52. Presbytero sive diacono sine
antistitis sui epistolis ambulanti communionem nullus im-
pendat. 32 Cone. Epaunens. c. 6.
33 Cone. Valentin, c. 5. Vagus atque instabilis clericus,

si episcopi, a quo ordinatus est, pr&eceptis non obedient,
ut in delegata sibi ecclesia officium dependat assiduum,
quousque in vitio permanserit, et communione et honore pn-
vetur. 34 Hieron. Ep. 83. ad Oceanum. t. 2. p. 321. Quidam
coacte interpretantur uxores pro ecclesiis, viros pro episco
pis debere accipi, &c.
35 Cone. Nic. c. 15.
30 Cone. Sardic. c. 1 et 2. Cone. Antioch. can. 21. Cone.
Carthag. 3. c. 38.
37 Canon. Apost. c. 14.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

223

it of his own head, but by the judgment and en
treaty of many bishops, that is, a provincial synod.
The fourth council of Carthage distinguishes33
much after the same manner : A bishop shall not
remove himself from an obscure to a more honour
able place out of ambition, but if the advantage of
the church require it, he may be translated by the
order and decree of a provincial synod. Schel
strate39 and some other learned persons think, that
these canons were a correction of the former, the one
allowing what the other had positively forbidden.
But this is not at aU probable : it is more reason
able to think, that though, in the Nicene and Sar
dican canons, these exceptions are not expressed,
yet they are to be understood : because the council
of Nice itself translated Eustathius, bishop of Be-
rtEa, to Antioch, as Mr. Pagi40 rightly observes out
of Sozomen,41 and other historians of the church ;
which had been to break and affront their own rule
at the very first, had it meant, that it should not be
lawful in any case to translate a bishop from one
see to another. We must conclude, then, that the
design of all these canons was the same, to prevent
covetousness, ambition, and love of pre-eminence in
aspiring men, who thrust themselves into other
sees by irregular means, by a faction, or the mere
favour of the people, without staying for the choice
or consent of a synod; which was the common
practice of the Arian party in the time of Constan
tine and Constantius, and occasioned so many laws
to be made against it. But when a synod of bishops
in their judgment and discretion thought it necessary
to translate a bishop from a lesser to a greater see
for the benefit and advantage of the church, there
was no law to prohibit this, but there are a thousand
instances of such promotions to be met with in an
cient history, as Socrates42 has observed long ago,
who has coUected a great many instances to this
purpose. Those that please may see more in Cote
lerius43 and Bishop Beveridge,44 for in so plain a case
I do not think it necessary to be more particular in
my account of them, but proceed with other laws of
the church which concerned the clergy.
sect. 7. The next laws of this nature were
the residence™ uu such as concerned the residence of the
clergy; the design of which was the
same as aU the former, to bind them to constant

38 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 27. Ut episcopus de loco ignobili ad
nobilem per ambitionem non transeat. — Sane si id utilitas
ecclesiae fiendum poposcerit, decreto pro eo clericorum et
laicorum episcopis porrecto, per sententiam synodi trans
ferable 39 Schelstrat. de Concil. Antioch. can. 21. p. 614.
" Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 324. n. 22.
41 Sozom. lib. 1. c. 2, « Socrat. lib. 7. c. 36.
43 Coteler. Not. in Can. Apost. c. 14.
44 Bevereg. Not. in eundem Canon.
45 Cone. Sardic. c. 8.
45 Just. Novel. 6. u. 2.

attendance upon their duty. And these laws equal
ly concerned bishops and all the inferior clergy.
The council of Sardica has several canons relating
to this matter. The seventh decrees, that no bi
shop should go etc TpriroTrstW, to the emperor's court,
unless the emperor by letter called him thither.
The next canon45 provides, that whereas there might
be several cases, which might require a bishop to
make some application to the emperor in behalf of
the poor, or widows, or such as fled for sanctuary
to the church, and condemned criminals, and the
like : in such cases the deacons or subdeacons of
the church were to be employed to go in his name,
that the bishop might fall under no censure at court,
as neglecting the business of his church. Justinian46
has a law of the same import with these canons,
That no bishop should appear at court upon any
business of his church without the command of the
prince : but if any petition was to be preferred to
the emperor, relating to any civil contest, the bishop
should depute his apocrisarius, or resident at court,
to act for him, or send his ceconomus, or some other
of his clergy, to solicit the cause in his name ; that
the church might neither receive damage by his ab
sence, nor be put to unnecessary expenses. Another
canon47 of the council of Sardica limits the absence
of a bishop from his church to three weeks, un
less it were upon some very weighty and urgent oc
casion. And another canon48 allows the same time
for a bishop, who is possessed of an estate in another
diocese, to go and coUect his revenues, provided he
celebrate Divine service every Lord's day in the
country church where his estate lies. And by two
other canons49 of that council, presbyters and dea
cons are limited to the same term of absence, and
tied to the forementioned tules in the same manner
as bishops were. The council of Agde50 made the
hke order for the French churches, decreeing, That a
presbyter or deacon, who was absent from his church
for three weeks, should be three years suspended
from the communion. In the African churches,
upon the account of this residence, every bishop's
house was to be near the church,51 by a rule of the
fourth council of Carthage. And in the fifth coun
cil there is another rule,52 That every bishop shall
have his residence at his principal or cathedral
church, which he shall not leave, to betake himself

47 Cone. Sardic. c. 11.
48 Ibid. u. 12. 49 Ibid. c. 16 et 17.
50 Cone. Agathen. u. 64. Diaconus vel presbyter, si per
tres hebdomadas ab ecclesia sua defuerit triennio a com-
munione suspendatur.
51 Cone. Carthag. 4. c. 14. Ut episcopus non longe ab
ecclesia hospitiolum habeat.
62 Cone. Carthag. 5. c. 5. Placuit ut nemini sit facultas,
relicta principali cathedra, ad aliquam ecclesiam in dioecesi
constitutam se conferre : vel intro propria diutius quam
oportet constitutum, curam vel frequentationem propriae
cathedrae negligere.

224

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

to any other church in his diocese ; nor continue
¦upon his private concerns, to the neglect of his cure,
and hinderance of his frequenting the cathedral
church. From this it appears, that the city church
was to be the chief place of the bishop's residence
and cure : and Cabassutius,53 in his remarks upon
this canon, reflects upon the French bishops, as
transgressing the ancient rule, in spending the
greatest part of the year upon their pleasure in the
country. Yet there is one thing that seems a diffi
culty in this matter ; for Justinian54 says, no bishop
shall be absent from his church above a whole year,
unless he has the emperor's command for it. Which
imphes, that a bishop might be absent from his bi
shopric a year in ordinary cases, and more in ex
traordinary. But I conceive the meaning of this
is, that he might be absent a year during his whole
life ; not year after year ; for that would amount to
a perpetual absence, which it was not the intent of
the law to grant, but to tie them up to the direct
contrary, except the prince, upon some extraordi
nary affair, thought fit to grant them a particular
dispensation. sect. s. Another rule, grounded upon the
ti^iaKsmaiiSbou't same reasons with the former, was the
inhibition of pluralities ; which con
cerned both bishops and the inferior clergy. As to
bishops, it appears plainly from St, Ambrose, that
it was not thought lawful for a bishop to have two
churches. For speaking of those words of the
apostle, " A bishop must be the husband of one
wife," he says, If we look55 only to the superficies of
the letter, it forbids a digamist to be ordained bi
shop ; but if we penetrate a little deeper to the pro-
founder sense, it prohibits a bishop to have two
churches. That is, wherever there were two dio
ceses before, it was not lawful for one bishop to
usurp them both, except where the wisdom of the
church and state thought it most convenient to join
them into one. And it is remarkable, that though
there be many instances of bishops removing from
lesser sees to greater, yet there is no example in all
ancient history, that I remember, of any such bi
shops holding both together ; no, not among the
Arians themselves, who were the least concerned in
observing rules of any other. As to the case of the
inferior clergy, we must distinguish betwixt diocesan
and parochial churches, and between the office and
the benefit in parochial churches. The circum
stances and necessities of the church might some

times require a presbyter or deacon to officiate in
more than one parochial church, when there was a
scarcity of ministers; but the revenues of such
churches did not thereupon belong to him, because
they were paid into the common stock of the city
or cathedral church, from whence he had his
monthly or yearly portion in the division of the
whole, as has been noted before. And this makes
it further evident, that in those early ages there
could be no such thing as plurality of benefices, but
only a plurality of offices in the same diocese,
within such a district, as that a man might person
ally attend and officiate in two parochial churches.
But then, as to different dioceses, it being ordinarily
impossible that a man should attend a cure in two
dioceses, the canons are very express in prohibiting
any one from having a name in two churches, or
partaking of the revenues of both. The council
of Chalcedon aG has a peremptory canon to this pur
pose : It shall not be lawful for any clergyman to
have his name in the church roll or catalogue of
two cities at the sanie time, that is, in the church
where he was first ordained, and any other to which
he flies out of ambition as to a greater church ; but
all such shall be returned to their own church,
where they were first ordained, and only minister
there. But if any one is regularly removed from
one church to another, he shall not partake of the
revenues of the former church, or of any oratory,
hospital, or alms-house, belonging to it. And such
as shall presume, after this definition of this great
and oecumenical council, to transgress in this mat
ter, are condemned to be degraded by the holy synod.
And that none might pretend, under any other no
tion, to evade this law, the same rule was made for
monasteries, that one abbot should not preside over
two monasteries at the same time. Which provi
sion is made by the council of Agde5' and Epone,
and confirmed by the imperial laws of Justinian,58
who inserted it into his Code. Now, the design of
all these laws was to oblige the clergy to constant
attendance upon their duty in the church where
they were first ordained ; from which if they once
removed, whether with licence or without, to any
other diocese, they were no longer to enjoy any
dividend in the church or diocese to which they
first, belonged. And this rule continued for several
ages after the council of Chalcedon, being renewed
in the second councU of Nice,59 and other later
councils.

53 Cabassut. Notit. Concil. c. 44. Huic canoni contra-
veniunt episcopi, qui magna parte anni rare versantur et
deliciantur. 54 Just. Novel. 6. c. 2. Et illud etiam definimus, ut ne
mo Deo amabilium episcoporum foris a sua ecclesia plus
quam per totum annum abesse audeat, nisi hoc per imperi-
alem fiat jussionem.
55 Ambros. de Dignit. Sacerd. c. 4. Si ad superficiem
tantum literae respiciamus, prohibet bigamum episcopum

ordinari : si vero ad altiorem sensum conscendimus, inhibet
episcopum duas usurpare ecclesias.
58 Cone. Chalced. c. 10. Mi) i%E~tvai KXrjptKov iv Slio iro-
Xeoov KaT avTov KaTaXiyEaQat iKKX}]criats, &c.
57 Cone. Agathen. t. 57. Unum abbatein duobus monas-
teriis interdicimus praesidere. Vid. Cone. Epaunens. c. 9.
58 Cod. Just. lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 40. Non sit
vero abbas duorum monasteriorum.
59 Cone. Nic. 2. c. 15.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

2.25

In pursuance of the same design,
Laws"prohibiting to keep the clergy strict and constant
upo/tnem iccuiar to their duty, laws were also made to
business, and offices. *
prohibit them from following any
secular employment, which might divert them too
much from their proper business and calling. Among
those called the Apostolical Canons, there are three
to this purpose. One of which says,60 No bishop,
presbyter, or deacon, shall take upon him any
worldly cares, under pain of degradation. Another
says,61 No bishop or presbyter shall concern himself
in any secular offices or administrations, that he
may have more time to attend the needs and busi
ness of the church ; and this under the same penalty
of degradation. The last says,62 A bishop, presby
ter, or deacon, that busies himself in any secular
office, and is minded to hold both a place in the
Roman government and an office in the chm-ch,
shall be deposed. For the things of Caesar belong
to Ceesar, and the things of God to God. Balsamon
and Zonaras take this canon to mean only the pro
hibition of holding military offices, because it uses
the word arpartia : but I have showed before, out of
Gothofred and others, that the word arpaTiia and
militia are used by the Romans in a' larger signifi
cation, to denote all kinds of secular offices, as well
civil as mihtary : and therefore they more rightly
inteipret this canon,63 who understand it as a pro
hibition of holding any secular office, civil as well
as military, with an ecclesiastical one, as things in
compatible and inconsistent with one another. Eu
sebius 81 informs us, from the epistle of the council
of Antioch that deposed Paulus Samosatensis, that
among other crimes alleged against him, this was
one, that he took upon him secular places, and pre
ferred the title of ducenarius before that of bishop.
The ducenarii, among the Romans, were a sort of
civil officers, so called from their receiving a salary
of two hundred sestertia from the emperor, as Vale
sius observes * out of Dio. And this makes it plain,
that the intent of the canons was to prohibit the
clergy from meddling with civil offices, as well as
mihtary. Only in some extraordinary cases, where
the matter was a business of great necessity or
charity, we meet with an instance or two of a bishop's
joining an ecclesiastical and civil office together
without any censure. As Theodoret66 notes of the
famous Jacobus Nisibensis, that he was both bishop

Can. Apost. c. 7. ICocrpiKas cppovTiias pi] avaXap-
flaviru, eISe pi}, KaVaipiaSeo.
Ibid. c. 81, "Oti pi] xph iieiaKineov n irpEafivTEpov
Kaoiivat iavTov eU Sripotrias StoiKriaEis, &c.
Ibid, c. 83. "LTpaTEia dxoXdX^eov, Kal fiovXopEvos
aptpoTEpa KaTEXEiv, 'PojpaiKijv apxhv Kal upaTtKrjv Sto't-
Krio-tv, KadatpierQio.
63 Bevereg. Not. in Can. Apost. c. 83.
DiUseb. lib. 7. c. 30. H.oerpiKi dfcttopaTa viroSvopevos,
kim cWrii/aptos pdXXov fi iirierKoiroi 0A.au/ KaXE~to6ai.
valesius in loc. Ducenarii dicebantur procurators,

and prince, or governor, of Nisibis, or Antioch in
Mygdonia, a city in the confines of the Persian and
Roman empires. Theodoret represents him as a
man of great fame in his country for his miracles,
by which he sometimes relieved the city when be
sieged by the Persians. And it is probable, in re
gard to this, the emperors Constantine and Con
stantius pitched upon him, as the properest person
to take the government of the city upon him, being
a place in great danger, and very much exposed to
the incursions of the Persians. But such instances
are but rarely met with in ancient history.
In some times and places the laws
of the church were so strict about Laws prohibiting
i . , -, , n. lhp cler"y to be tu-
tms matter, that they would not suffer '»" and guardians,
how far extended.
a bishop or presbyter to be left trustee
to any man's will, or a tutor or guardian in pursu
ance of it : because it was thought this would be
too great an avocation from his other business.
There is a famous case in Cyprian relating to this
matter. He tells us, it had been determined by an
African synod, that no one should appoint any of
God's ministers a curator or guardian by his will,
because they were to give themselves to supplica
tions and prayer, and to attend only upon the sacri
fice and service of the altar. And therefore, when
one Geminius Victor had made Geminius Faustinus,
a presbyter of the church of Furni, guardian or
trustee by his last will and testament, contrary to
the decree ofthe foresaid council; Cyprian67 wrote
to the church of Furni, that they should execute
the sentence of the council against Victor, which
was, That no annual commemoration should be
made of him in the church, nor any prayer be offer
ed in his name (according to the custom of the
church in those times) in the sacrifice of the altar.
This was a sort of excommunication after death, by
denying to receive such a person's oblations, and
refusing to name him at the altar among others
that made their offerings, and neither honouring
him with the common prayers or praises that were
then put up to God for all the faithful that were
dead in the Lord. This was the punishment of
such as transgressed this rule in the days of Cy
prian. And in the following ages the canon was
renewed, but with a little difference. For though
bishops were absolutely and universally forbidden53
to take this office upon them, both by the ecclesi-

qui ducenta sestertia annui salarii nomine accipiebant a
principe. Ex Dione, lib. 53.
™ Theod. lib. 2. c. 30.
87 Cypr. Ep. 66. al. 1. ad Cler. Furnitan. p. 3. Ideo Vic
tor cum contra formam nuper in concilio a sacerdotibus
dalam, Geminium Faustinum presbyterum ausus sit tutorem
constituere, non est quod pro dormitione ejus apud vos fiat
oblatio, aut deprecatio aliqua nomine ejus in ecclesia fre-
quentetur. 68 Cone. Carthag. 4. c. 18. Ut episcopus tuitionem testa-
mentorum non suscipiat. .

226

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

astical and civil law ; yet presbyters and deacons,
and all the inferior clergy, were allowed to be tutors
and guardians to such persons as by right of kin
dred69 might claim this as a duty from them. But
still the prohibition stood in force against their
being concerned in that office for any other, that
were not of their relations, as appears from one of
Justinian's Novels, which was made to settle this
matter in the church. By other laws they were prohibited
Lawsuit their from taking upon them the office of
pffi,.src.arf pleaders at the bar in any civil con-
thcmscivcsbor 'their test, though it were in their own case,
or the concerns of the church : nei
ther might they be bondsmen or sureties for any
other man's appearance in such causes : because it
was thought, that such sort of encumbrances might
bring detriment to the church, in distracting her
ministers from constant attendance upon Divine
service, as appears both from the foresaid Novel™ of
Justinian, and some ancient canons,71 which forbid
a clergyman to become a sponsor in any such cause
under the penalty of deprivation.
Now, as all these offices and em-
LawsagauX't their ployments were forbidden the clergy
following secular „ ,
trades aSdmerchan- upon the account oi being consumers
of their time, and hinderances of Di
vine service ; so there were some others prohibited,
not only upon this account, but also upon the no
tion of their being generally attended with covet
ousness and filthy lucre. Thus, in the first council
of Carthage72 we find several prohibitions of clergy
men's becoming stewards or accountants to laymen.
The third council73 forbids both that, and also their
taking any houses or lands to farm, and generally
all business that was disreputable and unbecoming
their calling. The second council of Aries'1 like
wise forbids their farming other men's estates, or
following any trade or merchandise for filthy lucre's
sake, under the penalty of deprivation. The general
council of Chalcedon75 has a canon to the same
purpose, That no monk or clergyman shall rent any
estate, or take upon him the management of any
secular business, except the law called him to be
guardian to orphans, (in the case that has been

69 Just. Novel. 123. c. 5. Episcopos et monachos ex nulla
lege tutores aut curatores cujuscunque personae fieri con-
cedimus. Presbyteros autem et diaconos etsubdiaconos, si
jure ac lege cognationis ad tutelam aut curam vocentur, ejus-
modi munus suscipere concedimus. Vid. Concil. Chalced.
c. 3.
70 Just. Novel. 123. c. 6. Sed neque procuratorem litis,
aut fidejussorem pro talibus causis episcopum, aut alium
clericum, proprio nomine, aut ecclesiie sinimus : ne per
hanc occasionem sacra ministeria impediantur.
" Canon. Apost. c. 20. KXtipixos iyyvas StBovs KaSrat-
os'o-3-to. Vid. Constitut. Apost. lib. 2. c. 6.
'2 Cone. Carth. 1. c. 6. Qui serviunt Deo, et annexi sunt
clcro, non accedant ad actus seu administrationem vel pro-

spoken of before, as being their next relation,) or
else the bishop made him steward of the church
revenues, or overseer of the widows, orphans, and
such others as stood in need of the church's care
and assistance. And here the reason given for
making this canon is, that some of the clergy were
found to neglect the service of God, and hve in lay
men's houses as their stewards, for covetousness and
filthy lucre's sake. Which was an old complaint
made by Cyprian76 in that sharp invective of his
against some of the bishops of his own age, who
were so far gone in this vice of covetousness, as to
neglect the service of God to follow worldly busi
ness ; leaving their sees, and deserting their people,
to ramble about in quest of gainful trades in other
countries, to the provocation of the Divine venge
ance, and flagrant scandal of the church. So that
these being the reasons of making such laws, we
are to judge of the nature of the laws themselves by
the intent and design of them ; which was to correct
such manifest abuses, as covetousness and neglect
of Divine service, which either as cause or effect too
often attended the clergy's engagement of themselves
in secular business.
But in some cases it was reasonable
to presume, that their engagements of anK,p'j
this nature were separate from these
vices. For in some times and places, where the
revenues of the church were very small, and not a
competent maintenance for all the clergy, some of
them, especially among the inferior orders, were
obliged to divide themselves between the service of
the church and some secular caUing. Others, who
found they had time enough to spare, negociated out
of charity, to bestow their gains in the relief of the
poor, and other pious uses. And some, who, before
their entrance into orders, had been brought up to
an ascetic and phUosophic life, wherein they wrought
at some honest manual calling with their own
hands, continued to work in the same manner,
though not in the same measure, even after they
were made presbyters and bishops in the church,
for the exercise of their humility, or to answer some
other end of a Christian life. Now, in all these
cases, the vices complained of in the forementioned

Sect. 13.
What limitations lonsthcse
admitted of.

curationem domorum. Ibid. c. 9. Laicis non liceat cleri
cos nostras eligere apothecarios vel ratiocinatores.
73 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 15. Clerici non sint conductors,
neque procuratores, neque ullo turpi vel inhonesto negotio
victum qucerant.
74 Cone. Arelat. 1. al. 2. c. 14. Siquis clericus conductor
alienee rei voluerit esse aut turpis lucri gratia aliquod genus
negotiations exercuerit, depositus a. clero, a commumone
alienus habeatur.
75 Cone. Chalced. c. 3.
76 Cypr. de Lapsis, p. 123. Episcopi plurimi Divina pro-
curatione contempta, procuratores rerum saecularium fieri,
derelicta cathedra, glebe deserta, per alienas provincias
oberrantes, negotiationis quaestuosae nundinas aucupan, &c.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

227

laws, as the reasons of the prohibition, had no share
or concern: for such men's negociations were neither
theeffectsof covetousness, nor attended properly wTith
any neglect of Divine service ; and consequently not
within the prohibition and censure of the laws. For
first, both the laws of church and state allowed the in
ferior clergy to work at an honest calling in cases of
necessity, to provide themselves of a liberal mainten
ance, when the revenues of the church could not do it.
In the fourth council of Carthage77 there are three
canons immediately following one another to this
purpose, that they should provide themselves of food
and raiment at some honest trade or husbandry,
without hindering the duties of their office in the
church : and such of them as were able to labour,
should be taught some trade and letters together.
And the laws of the state were so far from hinder
ing this, that they encouraged such of the clergy to
foUow an honest calling, by granting them a special
immunity from the chrysargyrum, or lustral tax,
which was exacted of all other tradesmen, as I have
showed more at large in another place.78 Secondly,
It was lawful also to spend their leisure hours upon
any manual trade or calling, when it was to answer
some good end of charity thereby: as that they
might not be overburdensome to the church; or
might have some superfluities to bestow upon the
indigent and needy ; or even that they might set the
laity a provoking example of industry and diligence
in their callings. Which were those worthy ends,
which the holy apostle St. Paul proposed to himself
in labouring with his own hands at the trade of
tent-making : after whose example many eminent
bishops of the ancient church were not ashamed to
employ their spare hours in some honest labour, to
promote the same ends of charity, which the apos
tle so frequently inculcates. Thus Sozomen ob
serves79 of Zeno, bishop of Maiuma in Palestine,
that he lived to be a hundred years old, all which
time he constantly attended both morning arid
evening the service of the church, and yet found
time to work at the trade of a linen weaver, by
which he not only subsisted himself, but relieved
others, though he lived in a rich and wealthy church.
Epiphanius makes a more general observation
against the Massalian heretics, (who were great en
couragers of idleness,) that not only all those of a
monastic hfe, but also many of the priests of God,80
imitating their holy father in Christ St. Paul,
wrought with their own hands at some honest trade,

that was no dishonour to their dignity, and con
sistent with their constant attendance upon their
ecclesiastical duties ; by which means they had both
what was necessary for their own subsistence, and
to give to others that stood in need of their relief.
The author of the Apostolical Constitutions81 brings
in the apostles recommending industry in every
man's calling from their own example, that they
might have wherewith to sustain themselves, and
supply the needs of others. Which though it be
not an exact representation of the apostles' practice,
(for we do not read of any other apostle's labouring
with his own hands, except St. Paul, whilst he
preached the gospel,) yet it serves to show what
sense that author had of this matter ; that he did
not think it simply unlawful for a clergyman to
labour at some secular employment, when the end
was charity, and not filthy lucre. And it is ob
servable, that the imperial laws for some time grant
ed the same immunity from the lustral tax to the
inferior clergy, that traded with a charitable design
to relieve others, as to those that traded out of ne
cessity for their own maintenance ; of both which I
have given an account in another place. Thirdly,
We have some instances of very eminent bishops,
who, out of humility and love of a philosophical and
laborious life, spent their vacant hours in some
honest business, to which they had been accustomed
in their former days. Thus Ruffin,92 and Socrates,83
and Sozomen84 tell us of Spiridion, bishop of Tri-
mithus in Cyprus, one of the most eminent bishops
in the council of Nice, a man famous for the gift of
prophecy and miracles, that having been a shepherd
before, he continued to employ himself in that call
ing, out of his great humility, all his life. But then
he made his actions and the whole tenor of his life
demonstrate, that he did it not out of covetousness.
For Sozomen particularly notes, that whatever his
product was, he either distributed it among the poor,
or lent it without usury to such as needed to borrow,
whom he trusted to take out of his storehouse what
they pleased, and return what they pleased, without
ever examining or taking any account of them.
Fourthly, I observe, that those laws which were
most severe against the superior clergy's negociating
in any secular business, in cases of necessity aUowed
them a privilege, which was equivalent to it : that
is, that they might employ others to factor for them,
so long as they were not concerned in their own
persons. For so the council of Eliberis85 words it :

77 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 51. Clericus quantumlibet verbo
Dei eruditus, artificio victum quairat. Ibid. c. 52. Clericus
victumet vestimentum sibi, artificiolo velagricultura, absque
officii sui duntaxat detrimento, praeparet. Ibid. c. 53. Om
nes clerici, qui ad operandum validi sunt, et artificiola et
literas discant.
78 Book V. chap. 3. sect. 6. '9 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 28.
80 Epiphan. Hser. 80. Massalian. n. 6.
81 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 63.
Q 2

92 Ruffin. lib. 1. u. 5. Hie pastor ovium etiam in episco-
patu positus permansit.
83 Socrat. lib. 1. c. 12. Ati Si aTvepiav iroXXiiv, ixdpE-
vos tt/s iirto-KOiri]l iiroipaiVE Kal Ti irpofiaTa.
84 Sozom. lib. 1. c. 11.
85 Cone. Eliber. c. 19. Episcopi, presbyteri, et diaeoni, de
locis suis negotiandi causa non discedant. nee circumeuntes
provincias, quaestuosas nundinas sectentur. Sane ad victum
sibi conquirendum, aut filium, aut Hbertum, aut mercena-

223

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

Bishops, presbyters, and deacons shall not leave
their station to follow a secular calhng, nor rove
into other provinces after fairs and markets. But
yet, to provide themselves a livelihood, they may
employ a son, or a freeman, or a hired servant, or a
friend, or any other ; and if they negociate, let them
negociate within their own province. So that all
these laws were justly tempered with great wisdom
and prudence ; that as, on the one hand, the service
of God and the needs of his ministers and servants
might be supplied together ; so, on the other, no en
couragement should be given to covetousness in the
clergy, nor any one be countenanced in the neglect
of his proper business, by a licence to lead a wan
dering, busy, distracted life, which did not become
those that were dedicated to the sacred function. It
is against these only, that all the severe invectives
of St. Jerom,83 and others of the ancients,67 are le
velled, which the reader must interpret with the
same limitations, and distinction of cases, as we
have done the public laws : the design of both be
ing only to censure the vices of the rich, who, with
out any just reason or necessity, immersed them
selves in the cares of a secular life, contrary to the
rules and tenor of their profession.
Secl jj Another sort of laws were made re-
thIirTuiwSdCcon- specting their outward behaviour, to
guard them equally against scandal
in their character, and danger in their conversation.
Such were the laws against corresponding and con
versing too familiarly with Jews and Gentile phi
losophers. The council of Eliberis88 forbids them
to eat with the Jews under pain of suspension.
The council of Agde89 has a canon to the same pur
pose, forbidding them to give, as well as receive, an
entertainment from the Jews. And those called
the Apostolical Canons,90 not only prohibit them to
fast or feast with the Jews, but to receive rrjg ioprijg
ttvta, any of those portions or presents, which they
were used to send to one another upon their festi
vals. And the laws against conversing with Gen
tile philosophers were much of the same nature.
For Sozomen01 says, Theodotus, bishop of Laodicea
in Syria, excommunicated the two Apollinarii, fa
ther and son, because they went to hear Epiphanius
the sophist speak his hymn "in the praise of Bac
chus ; which was not so agreeable to their charac
ter, the one being a presbyter, the other a deacon

in the Christian church. It was in regard to their
character likewise, that other canons restrained
them from eating or drinking in a tavern, except
they were upon a.journey, or some such necessary
occasion required them to do it. For among those
called the Apostolical Canons,92 and the decrees of
the councils of Laodicea03 and Carthage,91 there are
several rules to this purpose ; the strictness of which
is not much to be wondered at, since Julian re
quired the same caution in his heathen priests, that
they should neither appear at the pubhc theatres,
nor in any taverns, under pain of deposition from
their office of priesthood, as may be seen in his let
ter to Arsacius, high priest of Galatia, which Sozo
men"5 records, and other fragments of his writings.
To this sort of laws we may reduce
those ancient rules, which concerned l«ws relating to
, i , , ¦ i. , • their habit.
the garb and habit of the ancient
clergy ; in which such a decent mean was to be ob
served, as might keep them from obloquy and cen
sure on both hands, either as too nice and critical,
or too slovenly and careless in their dress : their
habit being generally to be such, as might express
the gravity of their minds without any superstitious
singularities, and their modesty and humility with
out affectation. In this matter, therefore, their
rules were formed according to the customs and
opinions of the age, which are commonly the stand
ard and measure of decency and indecency in things
of this nature. Thus, for instance, long hair, and
baldness by shaving the head or beard, being then
generally reputed indecencies in contrary extremes,
the clergy were obliged to observe a becoming me
diocrity between them. This is the meaning of
that controverted canon of the fourth council of
Carthage, according to its true reading, that a cler
gyman shall neither indulge long hair, nor shave
his beard : Clericus nee comam nutriat33 nee barbam
radat. The contrary custom being now in vogue
in the church of Rome, Bellarmine97 and many other
writers of that side, who will have all their ceremo
nies to be apostolical, and to contain some great
mystery in them, pretend, that the word radat
should be left out of that ancient canon, to make it
agreeable to the present practice. But the learned
Savaro08 proves the other to be the true reading, as
well from the Vatican, as many other manuscripts.
And even Spondanus himself"" confesses as much,

rinm, aut amicum, aut quemlibet mittant: et si voluerint
negotiari, intra provinciam negotientur.
88 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian. Negotiatorem clericum
quasi pestem fuge, &c.
87 Sulpic. Sever. Hist. lib. 1. p. 30. Tanta hoc tempore
animos eorum habendi cupido veluti tabes incessit : inhiant
possessionibus, praedia excolunt, auro incubant, emunt, ven-
duntque quaestui, per omnia student, &c.
88 Cone. Eliber. c. 50. Clericus qui cum Judaeis cibum
sumpserit, placuit eum a communione abstinere, ut debeat
emendari.

89 Cone. Agathen. c. 40. Omnes clerici Judaeorum con-
vivia evitent. Nee eos ad convivia quisquam excipiat.
99 Canon. Apost. c. 70. 91 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 25.
92 Canon. Apost. c. 53. 93 Cone. Laodic. u. 21.
91 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 27.
95 Sozom. lib. 5. i>. 16. Vid. Julian. Fragment. Epist
p. 547.
96 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 44.
97 Bellarm. de Monach. lib. 2. c. 40.
99 Savaro, Not. in Sidonium, lib. 4. Ep. 24. p. 306.
90 Spondan. Epit. Baron, an. 58. n. 58.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

229

and thereupon takes occasion to correct Baronius
for asserting, that in the time of Sidonius Apolli
naris it was the custom of the French bishops to
shave their beards : whereas the contrary appears
from one of Sidonius his epistles,100 that their custom
then was to wear short hair and long beards, as he
describes his friend Maximus Palatums, who of a
secular was become a clergyman : he says, his habit,
his gait, his modesty, his countenance, his dis
course were all religious ; and agreeably to these,
his hair was short, and his beard long. Custom, it
seems, had then made it decent and becoming ; and
upon that ground the ancients are sometimes pretty
severe against such of the clergy as transgressed in
this point, as guilty of an indecency in going con
trary to the rules and customs of the church, which
were to be observed, though the thing was other
wise in itself of an indifferent nature.
The Romanists are generally as
Thetons'ure'ofthe much to blame in their accounts of
ancients very differ- .
ent from that of the the ancient tonsure of the clergy ;
Romish church. °-^
which they describe in such a man
ner, as to make parallel to that shaving of the
crown of the head by way of mystical rite, which
is now the modern custom. Whereas this was so
far from being required as a matter of decency
among the ancients, that it was condemned and
prohibited by them. Which may appear from that
question, which Optatus puts to the Donatists,
when he asks them, where they had a command101 to
shave the heads of the priests ? as they had done
by the cathohc clergy in order to bring them to
do pubhc penance in the church. In which case,
as Albaspinaeus rightly notes,102 it was customary
to use shaving to baldness, and sprinkling the head
with ashes, as signs of sorrow and repentance. But
the priests of God were not to be thus treated.
Which shows, that the ancients then knew nothing
of this, as a ceremony belonging to the ordination
or hfe of the clergy. Which is still more evident
from what St. Jerom says upon those words of
Ezekiel xliv. 20, " Neither shall they shave their
heads, nor suffer their locks to grow long ; they shall
only poll their heads." This, says he,103 evidently
demonstrates, that we ought neither to have our
heads shaved, as the priests and votaries of Isis and
Serapis ; nor yet to suffer our hair to grow long,

after the luxurious manner of barbarians and sol
diers ; but that priests should appear with a vener
able and grave countenance : neither are they to
make themselves bald with a razor, nor poll their
heads so close, that they may look as if they were
shaven ; but they are to let their hair grow so long,
that it may cover their skin. It is impossible now
for any rational man to imagine, that Christian
priests had shaven crowns in the time of St. Jerom,
when he so expressly says they had not, and that
none but the priests of Isis and Serapis had so.
But the custom was to poll their heads, and cut
their hair to a moderate degree ; not for any mys
tery that was in it, but for the sake of decency and
gravity : that they might neither affect the manners
of the luxurious part of the world, which prided itself
in long hair; nor fall under contempt and obloquy by
an indecent, baldness ; but express a sort of venerable
modesty in their looks and aspects, which is the rea
son that St. Jerom assigns for the ancient tonsure.
From hence we may further con
clude, that the ancient clergy were of the ion'na ac-
. . ricalis, and why the
not called coronati from their shaven clergy called coro-
nati.
crowns, as some would have it, since
it is evident there was no such thing among them :
but it seems rather a name given them, as Gotho
fred104 and Savaro105 conjecture, from the form of
the ancient tonsure ; which was made in a circular
figure, by cutting away the hair a little from the
crown of the head, and leaving a round or circle
hanging downwards. This in some councils 10s is
called circuli corona, and ordered to be used in op
position to some heretics, who it seems prided them
selves in long hair and the contrary custom. But
I am not confident that this was the reason of the
name, coronati; it might be given the clergy in
general out of respect to their office and character,
which was always of great honour and esteem : for
corona signifies honour and dignity in a figurative
sense, and it is not improbable but that the word
was sometimes so used in this case, as has been
noted before107 in speaking of the form of saluting
bishops, per coronam.
As to the kind or fashion of their
apparel, it does not appear for several whether it* cier-
A gy were distinsuish-
ages, that there was any other distmc- «• ineu aPPard
° * from laymen.
tion observed therein between them

100 Sidpn. lib. 4. Ep. 24. Habitus viro, gradus, pudor,
color, sermo religiosus : turn coma brevis, barba prolixa, &c.
101 Optat. cont. Parmen. lib. 2. p. 58. Docete, ubi vo
bis mandatum est radere capita sacerdotum, cum e contra
ry sint tot exempla proposita, fieri non debere.— Qui parare
debebas aures ad audiendum, parasti novaculam ad delin-
quendum. 102 Albasp. in loc. p. 141.
103 Hieron. lib. 13. in Ezek. cap. 44. p. 668. Quod autem
sequitur, capita sua non radent, &c. perspicue demonstra-
tur, nee rasis capitibus, sicut sacerdotes, cultoresque Isidis
atque Serapis, nos esse debere ; nee rursum comam demit-

tere, quod proprie luxuriosum est, barbarorumque et mili-
tantium ; sed ut honestus habitus sacerdotum facie demon-
stretur ; nee calvitium novacula esse faciendum, nee ita ad
pressum tondendum caput, ut rasorum similes esse videa-
mur; sed in tantum capillos esse demittendos, ut operta
sit cutis.
194 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Theod. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de
Episc. Leg. 38.
]°5 Savaro, Not. in Sidon. lib. 6. Ep. 3.
196 Cone. Tolet. 4. c. 41. Omnes clerici, detonso superius
capite toto, inferius solam circuli coronam relinquaut, &c.
107 Book II. chap. 9. sect. 5.

230

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

and the laity, save that they were more confined to
wear that which was modest and grave, and becom
ing their profession, without being tied to any certain
garb or form of clothing. Several councils require
the clergy to wear apparel suitable to their profession,
but they do not express any kind, or describe it other
wise, than that it should not border upon luxury or
any affected neatness, but rather keep a medium be
tween finery and slovenliness. This was St. Jerom's
direction to Nepotian,103 that he should neither wear
black nor white clothing ; for gaiety and slovenliness
were equally to be avoided, the one savouring of
niceness and delicacy, and the other of vain-glory.
Yet in different places different customs seem to
have prevailed, as to the colour of their clothing.
For, at Constantinople, in the time of Chrysostom
and Arsacius, the clergy commonly went in black,
as the Novatians did in white. Which appears
from the dispute which Socrates speaks of100 be
tween Sisinnius, the Novatian bishop, and one of
Arsacius's clergy : for he says, Sisinnius going one
day to visit Arsacius, the clergyman asked him,
why he wore a garment which did not become a
bishop ? And where it was written, that a priest
ought to be clothed in white ? To whom he re
plied, You first show me where it is written that a
bishop ought to be clothed in black ? From this it
is easy to collect, that by this time it was become
the custom at Constantinople for the clergy to wear
black, and that perhaps to distinguish themselves
from the Novatians, who affected, it seems, to ap
pear in white. But we do not find these matters as
yet so particularly determined or prescribed in any
councils. For the fourth council of Carthage110
requires the clergy to wear such apparel as was
suitable to their profession, but does not particu
larize any further about it, save that they should
not affect any finery or gaiety in their shoes or
clothing. And the council of Agde111 gives the
very same direction. Baronius,112 indeed, is very
earnest to persuade his reader, that bishops, in the
time of Cyprian, wore the same habit that is now
worn by cardinals in the church of Rome, and such
bishops as are advanced from a monastery to the
episcopal throne. As if Cyprian had been a monk
or a cardinal of the church of Rome. But as the
learned editor 113 of Cyprian's Works observes, there

is scarce any thing so absurd, that a man who is
engaged in a party cause cannot persuade himself
to believe, and hope to persuade others also. For
is it likely that bishops and presbyters should make
their appearance in public in a distinct habit, at a
time when tyrants and persecutors made a most
diligent search after them to put them to death ? Do
the clergy of the present church of Rome use to ap
pear so in countries where they hve in danger of
being discovered and taken ? But what shaU we say
to the writer of Cyprian's Passion, who mentions
Cyprian's114 lacerna or birrus, and after that his tu
nica or dalmatica, and last of all his linea, in which
he suffered ? of which Baronius makes the linea to
be the bishop's rochet ; and the dalmatica or tunica,
that which they now call the loose tunicle; and
the lacerna or birrus, the red silken vestment that
covers the shoulders. Why, to all this it may be
said, that these are only old names for new things.
For besides the absurdity of thinking that Cyprian
should go to his martyrdom in his sacred and pon
tifical robes, (which were not to be worn out of the
church,) it is evident these were but the names of
those common garments which many Christians
then used without distinction.
As to the birrus, it is evident that Sect 19
it was no peculiar habit of bishops, coitpor"„e s',™
no, nor yet of the clergy. That it »¦"""*"<»'¦
was not peculiar to bishops, appears from what St.
Austin says of it, that it was the common garment
which aU his clergy wore, as well as himself. And
therefore if any one presented him with a richer
birrus than ordinary, he would not wear it. For,115
though it might become another bishop, it would
not become him, who was a poor man, and born of
poor parents. He must have such a one as a pres
byter could have, or a deacon, or a subdeacon. If
any one gave him a better, he was used to sell it ;
that since the garment itself could not be used in
common, the price of it at least might be common.
This shows plainly that the birrus was not the bi
shop's pecuhar habit, but the common garment of
all St. Austin's clergy. And that this was no more
than the common tunica, or coat worn generally by
Christians in Africa and other places, may appear
from a canon of the council of Gangra, made
against Eustathius the heretic, and his followers,

103 Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepot. Vestes pullas aeque devita,
ut Candidas. Ornatus et sordes pari modo fugiendae sunt;
quia alterum delicias, alterum gloriam redolet, &c
199 Socrat. lib. 6. c. 22.
1,9 Cone. Carth. 4. c. 45. Clericus professionem suam et
in habitu et in incessu pvobet : et ideo nee vestibus nee
calceamentis decorem qucerat.
111 Cone. Agathen. c. 20. Vestimenta vel calceamenta
etiam eis, nisi quae religionem deceant, uti aut habere non
liceat. 112 Baron, an. 261. n. 44.
113 Vide Fell, Not. in Vit. Cypr. p. 13.

114 Passio Cypr. p. 13. Cyprianus in agrum sexti pro-
ductus est, et ibi se lacerna birro expoliavit.  Et cum se
dalmatica (al. tunica) expoliasset, et diaconibus tradidis-
set, in linea stetit, et ccepit spiculatorem sustinere.
115 Aug. Serm. 50. de Diversis. t. 10. p. 523. Offeratur
mihi birrum pretiosum, forte decet episcopum, quamvis non
deceat Augustinum, id est, hominem pauperem, de paupe
ribus natum.  Talem debeo habere, qualem potest habere
presbyter, qualem potest habere diaconus et subdiaconus.
 Si quis meliorem dederit, vendo, quod et facere soleo,
ut quando non potest vestis esse communis, pretium vestis
sit commune.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

231

who condemned the common habit,116 and brought
in the use of a strange habit in its room. Now
this common habit was the birrus, or /3r}poc, as they
call it in the canon made against them, which runs
in these words : If any man uses the pallium™ or
cloak, upon the account of an ascetic life, and, as if
there were some holiness in that, condemns those
that with reverence use the birrus, and other gar
ments that are commonly worn, let him be ana
thema. The birrus, then, was the common and
ordinary coat, which the Christians of Paphlagonia
and those parts generally wore: and though the
ascetics used the mpifioXatov, the philosophic pallium,
or cloak, yet the clergy of that country used the
common birrus, or coat. For Sozomen,118 in relating
this same history, instead of /3>jpoe, uses the word
yiToiv, which is a more known name for the Latin
tunica, or coat : and he also adds, that Eustathius
himself, after the synod had condemned him, changed
his philosophic habit, and used the same garb that
the secular presbyters wore. Which plainly evinces,
that as yet the clergy in those parts did not dis
tinguish themselves by their habit from other Chris
tians, though the ascetics generally did. In the
French churches, several years after this, we find
the clergy still using the same secular habit with
other Christians : and when some endeavoured to
alter it, and introduce the ascetic or philosophic
habit among them; Celestine, bishop of Rome,
wrote a reprimanding letter to them, asking, Why
that habit, the cloak, was used in the French
churches,119 when it had been the custom of so many
bishops for so many years to use the common habit
of the people ? From whom the clergy were to be
distinguished by their doctrine, and not by their
garb; by their conversation, not their habit; by
the purity of their souls, rather than their dress.
But yet I must observe, that in some places the
ascetics, when they were taken into the ministry of
the church, were allowed to retain their ancient
philosophic habit without any censure. Thus St.
Jerom120 observes of his friend Nepotian, that he
kept to his phUosophic habit, the pallium, after he
was ordained presbyter, and wore it to the day of
his death. He says the same of Heraclas,121 presby

ter of Alexandria, that he continued to use his phi
losophic habit when he was presbyter. Which is
noted also by Eusebius out of Origen, who says,
that when Heraclas entered himself in the school
of philosophy under Ammonius, he then laid aside
the common garb, and took the philosophic habit,122
with which he sat in the presbytery of Alexandria.
Upon which Valesius 123 very rightly observes, that
there was then no peculiar habit of the clergy, for
asmuch as Heraclas always retained his philosophic
pallium ; which was the known habit of the ascetics,
but as yet was very rarely used among the clergy,
who wore generally the common habit, except when
some such philosophers and ascetics came among
them. For here we see it was noted as something
rare and singular in Heraclas: but in after ages,
when the clergy were chiefly chosen out of the
monks and ascetics, the philosophic habit came in
by degrees with them, and was encouraged, till at
last it became the most usual habit of the clergy of
all sorts : but this was not till the fifth or sixth
century, as may be collected from what has been
said before on this subject.
But some, perhaps, may think the
clergy had always a distinct habit, be- of the coiioiiium,
. dalmatica, caraeal-
cause some ancient authors take no- ia,iiemip/io,ium,and Unea.
tice of the collobium, as a garment
worn by bishops and presbyters in the primitive
ages. For Epiphanius,124 speaking of Arius, while
he was presbyter of Alexandria, says, he always
wore the collobium or hemiphorium. And Pius, bishop
of Rome, in his epistle to Justus, bishop of Vienna,
(which by many is reckoned genuine,) speaks of
Justus 125 as wearing a collobium also. But this was
no more than the tunica, of which there were two
sorts, the dalmatica and collobium, which differed
only in this respect, that the collobium was the short
coat without long sleeves, so called from tco\o/36c,
curtus ; but the dalmatica was the tunica manicata
et talaris, the long coat with sleeves. Both which
were used by the Romans, though the collobium was
the more common, ancient, and honourable garment.
As appears from Tully, who derides Catiline's 126
soldiers, because they had their tunices manicatce
et talares ; whereas the ancient Romans were used

116 Cone. Gangr. in Praefat. Eiva dpeptdo-paTa iirl Ka-
Tairruio-Et ttjs koiv6ti]toi Ttov dptpiao-paTtov avvdyovTES.
Cone. Gangr. c. 12. Et tis dvipeov Sii voptX,opivr]v
aoKT}tTiv irEpifsoXaito xpiJTat, Kal (is av 'ek tovtov ti)V StKat-
otrvvinv exuiv KaTayjnjipio-oiro Ttov pET EvXaftEtas tov? fiv-
pous tpopovvTiov, Kal tij aXXt] Kotvy Kal iv ervvuBEia overr)
«o-8iiTi KEXpnpivmv, ivddEpa ecttu.
111 Sozom. lib. 3. c. 14.
1,9 Celestin. Ep. 2. ad. Episc. Gall. c. 1. Unde hie ha
bitus in ecclesiis Gallicanis, ut tot annorum, tantorumque
pontificum in alterum habitum consuetudo vertatur ? Dis-
cernendi a plebe vel caeteris sumus doctrina, non veste ; con-
versatione, non habitu ; mentis puritate, non cultu.
120 Hieron. Epitaph. Nepotian.

121 Hieron. de Scriptor. u. 54. Heraclam presbyterum,
qui sub habitu philosophi perseverabat, &c.
122 Orig. ap. Euseb. Lib. 6. c. 19. XipoTEpov Kotvy
£o-07jTt xpwptvos, diroSverapEvos Kal eptXoaotpov dvaXajSeov
erxvpa pEXpl tov SEvpo TijpEi.
123 Vales. Not. in loc. Ex his apparet, nullum etiam
turn peculiarem fuisse vestitum clericorum, quandoquidem
Heraclas philosophicum pallium semper retinuit.
124 Epiph. Hser. 69. Arian. n. 3. 'Bptepoptov yap b
toiovtos act, Kal KoXofiicuva iuSiSvoKopevos. ,
125 Pius, Ep. 4. ad Just. Vien. Tu vero apud senatoiiam
Viennam — collobio episcoporum vestitus, &c.
129 Cicero, Orat. 2. in Catilin. n. 22.

232

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

to wear the collobiu, or short coats without long
sleeves: as Servius127and St. Jerom128 after him ob
serve from this place of Tully. So that a bishop
or a presbyter's wearing a collobium means no more
(when the -hard name is explained) but their wear
ing a common Roman garment. Which is evident
from one of the laws of Theodosius the Great, made
about the habits which senators were allowed to
use within the walls of Constantinople, where they
are forbidden to wear the soldier's coat, the chlamys,
but allowed to use the collobium and penulaf13 be
cause these were civil habits, and vestments of
peace. The dalmatica, or as it was otherwise called,
XtipoSorog, or tunica manicata, because it had sleeves
down to the hands, was seldom used among the
Romans : for Lampridius 13° notes it as a singular
thing in the Life of Commodus the emperor, that he
wore a dalmatica in public, which he also131 cen
sures in Heliogabalus, as Tully had done before in
Catiline. And that is a good argument to prove,
that the clergy of this age did not wear the dalma
tica in public, since it was not then the common
garment ofthe Romans. And the conjecture of a
learned man132 is well grounded, who thinks that in
the Life of St. Cyprian, where the ancient copies
have, tunicam tulit, some officious modern tran
scribers changed the word tunica into dalmatica, as
being more agreeable to the language and custom
of their own time, when the dalmatica was reckoned
among the sacred vestments of the church, though
we never find it mentioned as such in any ancient
author. The caracalla, which some now call the
cassock, was originally a Gallic habit, which Anto
ninus Bassianus, who was born at Lyons in France,
first brought into use among the Roman people,
whence he had the name of Caracalla, as Aurelius
Victor 133 informs us. It was a long garment, reach
ing down to the heels, which Victor says the Roman
people put on, when they went to salute the empe
ror : but whether it was also a clerical habit in those
clays, may be questioned, since no ancient author
speaks of it as such : but if it was, it was not any
peculiar habit of the clergy ; since Spartian,134 who
lived in the time of Constantine, says, they were then
used by the common people of Rome, who called
them caracalles Antoninianes, from their author. The

'27 Servius in Virgil. 9. iEneid. vers. 616. Et tunicae ma-
nicas, et habent redimicula mitrte.
128 Hieron. Quaest. Hebraic, in Genes, xxxvii. 32. t. 3. p.
222. Pro varia tunica Symmachus interpretatus est tunicam
manicatam ; sive quod ad talos usque descenderet, sive quod
haberet manicas; antiqui enim magis collobiis utebantur.
129 Cod. Theodos. lib. 14. Tit. 10. de Habitu quo uti opor
tet intra Urbem, Leg. 1. Nullus senatorum habitum sibi
vindicet militarem, sed chlamydis terrore deposito, quieta
colioborum ac penularum induat vestimenta, &c.
139 Lamprid. Vit. Commodi, p. 139. Dalmaticatus in pub
lico processit.
131 Id. Vit. Heliogab. p. 317. Dalmaticatus in publico

iiptebopiov, which Epiphanius joins with the collobium,
was either but another name for the same garment,
or one like it : for it signifies a short cloak or coat,
as Petavius135 and other critics explain it: ijpav
ipariiag, or dimidium pallium, which answers to the
description of the collobium given before. As for
the linea, mentioned in the Life of Cyprian, which
Baronius calls the bishop's rochet, it seems to have
been no more than some common garment made of
linen, though we know not what other name to give
it. Baronius says pleasantly, it was not his shirt,
and therefore concludes it must be his rochet: which
is an argument to make a reader smile, but carries
no great conviction in it. And yet it is as good as
any that he produces to prove, that bishops in Cy
prian's time appeared in public differently habited
from other men. That the clergy had their par
ticular habits for ministering in Divine service, at
least in the beginning of the fourth century, is not
denied, but will be proved and evidenced in its pro
per place : but that any such distinction was ge
nerally observed extra sacra in their other habits in
that age, is what does not appear, but the contrary
from what has been discoursed. It was necessary
for me to give the reader this caution, because some
unwarily confound these things together, and al
lege the proofs or disproofs of the one for the other,
which yet are of very different consideration.

CHAPTER V.

SOME REFLECTIONS UPON THE FOREGOING DIS
COURSE, CONCLUDING WITH AN ADDRESS TO THE
CLERGY OF THE PRESENT CHURCH.
Having thus far gone over, and as it t ,
were brought into one view, the chief ^Ssotthe
of those ancient laws and rules, which ^S^'be It
concerned the elections, qualifications, serTdiurch'™/'6'
duties, and general offices of the pri- c"m'
mitive clergy ; reserving the consideration of par
ticular offices to their proper places, I shall close
this part of the discourse with a few necessary re-

post ccenam saepe visus est.
132 Bp. Fell, Not. in Vit. Cypr. p. 13.
133 Victor. Epit. Vit. Caracalles. Cum e Gallia vestem
plurimam devexisset, talaresque caracallas fecisset, coegis-
setque plebem ad se salutandum indutam talibus introire, de
nomine hujus vestis, Caracalla cognominatus est.
134 Spartian. Vit. Caracal, p. 251. Ipse Caracalli nomen
accepit a vestimenlo, quod populo dederat, demisso usque ad
talos, quod ante non fuerat; unde hodieque Antoninianffi
dicuntur caracallae hujusmodi, in usu maxime Romanae ple
bis frequentatee.
135 Petav. Not. in Epiphan. Haer.69.n. 3. Suicer. Thesaur.
Eccles. t. I. p. 1334.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

233

flections upon it, in reference to the practice of the
clergy of the present church. And here first of all
it will be proper to observe, that all the laws and
rules of the primitive church are not obligatory to
the present clergy, save only so far as they either
contain matters necessary in themselves, or are
adopted into the body of rules and canons, which
are authorized and received by the present church.
For some laws were made upon particular reasons,
peculiar to the state and circumstances ofthe church
in those times : and it would neither be reasonable
nor possible to reduce men to the observance of all
such laws, when the reasons of them are ceased, and
the state of affairs and circumstances of the church
are so much altered. Other laws were made by par
ticular churches for themselves only, and these never
could oblige other churches, tUl they were received
by their own consent, or bound upon them by the
authority of a general council, where they them
selves were represented, and their consent virtually
taken : much less can they oblige absolute and in
dependent churches at the distance of so many ages;
since every such church has power to make laws and
rules about things of an alterable nature for herself,
and is not tied to the laws of any other. Nor, con
sequently, are any of the members of such a church
bound to observe those rules, unless they be revived
and put in force by the church whereof they are
members. As this is agreeable to the sense and
practice of the cathohc church ; so it was neces
sary here to be observed, that no one might mis
take the design of this discourse, as if it tended to
make every rule, that has been mentioned therein,
become necessary and obligatory; or designed to
reflect upon the present church, because in all
things she does not conform to the primitive prac
tice : which it is not possible to do, without making
all cases and circumstances exactly the same in all
ages. Sect2 But, 2. Notwithstanding this, I
ancSraLirSd may, I presume, without offence take
n revived by iusuu- leave to observe in the next place, that
thority. r '
some ancient rules would be of excel
lent use, if they were revived by just authority in
the present church. What if we had a law agree
able to that of Justinian's in the civil law, that every
patron or elector, who presents a clerk, should de
pose upon oath, that he chose him neither for any
gift, or promise, or friendship, or any other cause,
but because he knew him to be a man of the true
catholic faith, and good hfe, and good learning ?
Might not this be a good addition to the present
laws against simoniacal contracts ? What if the
order of the ancient chorepiscopi were reduced and
settled in large dioceses ? And coadjutors in case
of infirmity and old age ? Might not these be of

great use, as for many other ends, so particularly
for the exercise of discipline, and the easier and
constant discharge of that most excellent office of
confirmation? The judicious reader will be able
to carry this reflection through abundance of other
instances, which I need not here suggest : and I for
bear the rather, because I am only acting the part of
an historian for the ancient church ; leaving others,
whose province it is, to make laws for the present
church, if any things are here suggested, which
their wisdom and prudence may think fit to make
the matter of laws for the greater benefit and ad
vantage of it.
3. It may be observed further, that Seet 3
there were some laws in the ancient a3^L't''itva sSSj
church, which, though they be not toougri°notdiaws*f
.,,.-,-,, .. , , ., , the present church,
established laws of the present church,
may yet innocently be complied with; and perhaps
it would be for the honour and advantage of the
clergy voluntarily to comply with, them, since there
is no law to prohibit that. I will instance in one
case of this nature. It was a law in the ancient
church, as I have showed,1 that the clergy should
end all their civil controversies, which they had one
with another, among themselves, and not go to law
in a secular court, unless they had a controversy
with a layman. Now, though there be no such law
in the present church, yet there is nothing to hinder
clergymen from choosing bishops to be their arbi
trators, and voluntarily referring all their causes to
them, or any other judges whom they shall agree
upon among themselves ; which must be owned to
be the most Christian way of ending controversies :
whence, as I have showed, it was many times prac
tised by the laity in the primitive church, who took
bishops for their arbitrators by voluntary compro
mise, obliging themselves to stand to their arbitra
tion. And what was so commendable in the laity,
must needs be more reputable in the clergy, and
more becoming their gravity and character ; not to
mention other advantages, that might arise from
this way of ending disputes, rather than any other.
From this one instance it will be easy to judge, how
far it may be both lawful and honourable, for the
clergy to imitate the practice of the ancients in
other cases of the like nature.
4. The last observation I have to Sec, 4
make upon the foregoing discourse, is inKcc1„Igr?.ft'eh>':
„ -ii „ . i_ amples, and laws of
in reference to such laws or tne an- perpetual obiiga-
cient church, as must be owned to be
of necessary and eternal obligation. Such are most
of those that have been mentioned in the second
and third chapters of this book, relating to the life
and duties of the clergy : in which the clergy of all
churches will for ever be concerned, the matter of
those laws being in itself of absolute and indispens-

' Book V. chap. 1. sect. 4.

234

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

able obligation. The practice of the ancients, there
fore, in compliance with such laws, will be a con
tinual admonition, and their examples a noble provo
cation to the clergy of all ages. There is nothing
that commonly moves or affects us more than great
and good examples : they at once both pleasantly
instruct, and powerfully excite us to the practice of
our duty ; they show us that rules are practicable,
as having already been observed by men of like
passions with ourselves ; they are apt to inflame our
courage by a holy contagion, and raise us to noble
acts by provoking our emulation ; they, as it were,
shame us into laudable works, by upbraiding and
reproaching our defects in falling short of the pat
terns set before us ; they work upon our modesty,
and turn it into zeal ; they raise our several useful
passions, and set us to work by exciting those in
bred sparks of emulation, and principles of activity,
that are lodged within us. And for this reason,
whilst others have done good service by writing of
the pastoral office and care in plain rules and direc
tions, I have added the examples of the ancients to
their rules ; the better to excite us to tread those
paths which are chalked out to us, by the encou
ragement of such instructive and provoking exam
ples. Who can read that brave defence and an
swer2 which St. Basil made to the Arian prefect,
without being warmed with something of his zeal
for truth upon any the like occasion ? How resolute
and courageous will it make a man, even against
the calumnies of spite and malice, to contend for
the faith, when he reads * what base slanders and
reproaches were cast upon the greatest luminaries
of the church, and the best of men, Athanasius and
Basil, for standing up in the cause of religion against
the Arian heresy ! Again, how peaceable, how can
did, how ingenuous and prudent will it make a
man in composing unnecessary disputes that arise
among catholics in the chm-ch, always to have be
fore his eyes that great example of candour and
peaceableness, which Nazianzen describes in the
person of Athanasius,4 who by his prudence recon
ciled two contending parties, that for a few sylla
bles, and a dispute about mere words, had hke to
have torn the church in pieces ? To instance but
once more, who that reads that great example of
charity and self-denial in the African fathers at the
collation of Carthage,5 and considers with what a
brave and public spirit they despised their own pri
vate interest for the good, and peace, and unity of
the church, will not be inspired with something of
the same noble temper, and ardent love of Christ ;
which will make him willing to do or suffer any
thing for the benefit of his church, and sacrifice

his own private interest to the advantage of the
pubhc ; whilst he persuades himself, with those holy
fathers, that he was made for the church of Christ
and not the church for him ? As it is of the utmost
consequence to the welfare of the church, to have
these and the like virtues and graces planted in the
hearts of her clergy ; so, among other means that
may be used for the promoting this end, there is
none perhaps more hkely to take effect, than the
recommending such virtues by the powerful provo
cation of such noble examples. And he that offers
such images of virtue to pubhc view, may at least
be allowed to make the apology, which Sulpicius
Severus8 makes for his writing the Life of St. Mar
tin : Etsi ipsi non viximus, ut aliis exemplo esse pos-
simus : dedimus tamen operam, ne illi laterent, qui es-
sent imitandi.
But whilst I am so earnest in re- „ , ,
Sect 5.
commending the examples of the an- ruf™eec£2»
cients, I must not forget to inculcate Kti™!X>.£
some of their excellent rules. Such S'„mgeuhp0jp™,
, , ¦ , , . . ¦ . for the ministry.
as their laws about training up young
men for the ministry under the magister disciplines,
whose business was to form their morals, and inure
them to such studies, exercises, and practices, as
would best qualify them for higher offices and ser
vices in the church. This method of education be
ing now changed into that of universities and
schools of learning, it highly concerns them on
whom this care is devolved, to see that the same
ends however be answered, that is, that aU young
men who aspire to the sacred profession, be rightly
formed both in their studies and morals, to qualify
them for their great work and the several duties of
their caUing. And they are the more concerned to
be careful in this matter, because bishops now can
not have that personal knowledge of the morals of
such persons, as they had formerly, when they were
trained up under their eye, and liable to their in
spection : but now, as to this part of their qualifica
tion, they must depend first upon the care, and then
upon the testimony, of thbse who are intrusted with
their education. Besides, a late eminent writer,7
who inquires into the causes of the present corrup
tion of Christians, where he has occasion to speak
of the pastoral office, and the ordinary methods now
used for training up persons to it, makes a double
complaint of the way of education in several of the
universities of Europe. As to manners, he com
plains that young people live there licentiously, and
are left to their own conduct, and make public pro
fession of dissoluteness : nay, that they not only
live there irregularly, but have privileges, which give
them a right to commit with impunity all manner

2 See Book VI. chap. 3. sect. 10.
4 See chap. 3. sect. 9.
5 See chap. 4. sect. 2.

1 Ibid.

8 Sever, de Vita S. Martin, in Prologo.
7 Ostervald's Causes of the Corruption of Christians, part
2. c. 3. p. 333.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

235

of insolericies, brutalities, and scandals, and which
exempt them from the magistrate's jurisdiction.
Now, such universities as are concerned in this ac
cusation, (which by the blessing of God those of
our land are not,) have great reason to consider how
far they are fallen from the primitive standard, and
what a difference there is between the ancient way
of educating under' the inspection of a bishop, and
the conduct of a master of disciphne in every church,
and the way of such academies, where, if that learn
ed person say true, " the care of masters and pro
fessors does not extend to the regulating of the
manners of their disciples." The other complaint
he makes, is in reference to the studies which are
pursued at universities, in which he observes two
faults. One in reference to the method of teaching.
" Divinity is treated there, and the Holy Scripture
explained, altogether in a scholastical and specu
lative manner. Common places are read, which
are full of school terms, and of questions not very
material. This makes young men resolve all reli
gion into controversies, and gives them intricate and
false notions of divinity.'' The other fault, he
thinks, is more essential : " Little or no care is taken,
to teach those who dedicate themselves to the ser
vice of the church, several things, the knowledge of
which would be very necessary to them. The study
of history and of church antiquity is neglected : mo
rality is not taught in divinity schools, but in a su
perficial and scholastic manner ; and in many aca
demies it is not taught at aU. They seldom speak
there of discipline, they give few or no instructions
concerning the manner of exercising the pastoral
care, or of governing the church. So that the
greater part of those who are admitted into this
office, enter into it without knowing wherein it con
sists ; aU the notion they have of it is, that it is a
profession which obliges them to preach and to
explain texts." I cannot think all universities are
equally concerned in this charge, nor shall I inquire
how far any are, but only say, that the faults here
complained of were rarely to be met with in the
methods of education in the primitive church;
where, as I have showed, the chief studies of men
devoted to the service ofthe church, both before and
after their ordinations, were such as directly tended
to instruct them in the necessary duties and offices
of their function. The great care then was to
oblige men carefully to study the Scriptures in a
practical way, and to acquaint themselves with the
history and laws and disciphne of the church, by
the knowledge and exercise of which they became
expert in all the arts of curing souls and making
pious and holy men, which is the business of spi
ritual physicians, and the whole of the pastoral
office-: in which therefore their rules and examples
are proper to be proposed to all churches for their
imitation.

Another sort of rules worthy our . . „
J Sect. 6.
most serious thoughts and consider- for2dley,;alS„ti»ruthe
ation, were those which concerned §ida!MfM°!h°mi£
the examination of the candidates for 1"17'
the ministry. For by these such methods were pre
scribed, and such caution used, that it was scarce
possible for an unfit or immoral man to be admitted
to an ecclesiastical office, unless a bishop and the
whole church combined as it were to choose unwor
thy men, which was a case that very rarely happened.
It was a peculiar advantage in the primitive church,
that by her laws ordinarily none were to be ordained
but in the church where they were personally known ;
so that their manners and way of hving might be
most strictly canvassed and examined ; and a vi
cious man could not be ordained, if either the bishop
or the church had the courage to reject him. Now,
though this rule cannot be practised in the present
state of the church, yet the main intent of it is of
absolute necessity to be answered and provided for
some other way ; else the church must needs suffer
greatly, and infinitely fall short of the purity of the
primitive church, by conferring the most sacred of
all characters upon immoral and unworthy men.
The only way which our present circumstances will
admit of, to answer the caution that was used in
former days, is to certify the bishop concerning the
candidates' known probity and integrity of hfe, by
such testimonials as he may safely depend upon.
Here therefore every one sees, without my observing
it to him, that to advance the present church to the
purity and excellency of the primitive church, there
is need of the utmost caution in this matter ; that
testimonials in so weighty an affair be not promis
cuously granted unto all ; nor to any but upon rea
sonable evidence and assurance ofthe things testified
therein : otherwise we partake in other men's sins,
and are far from consulting truly the glory of God
and the good of his church, whilst we deviate so
much fiom the exactness and caution that is showed
us in the primitive pattern.
The other part of the examination of candidates,
which related to their abilities and talents, was
made with no less diligence and exactness. The
chief inquiry was, whether they were well versed in
the sense and knowledge of the Holy Scriptures ;
whether they rightly understood the fundamentals
of rehgion, the necessary doctrines of the' gospel,
and the rules of morality as delivered in the law of
God ; whether they had been conversant in the his
tory of the church, and understood her laws and
discipline ; and were men of prudence to govern, as
¦ well as of ability to teach, the people committed to
their charge. These were things of great import
ance, because most of them were of daily use in the
exercise of the ministry and pastoral care; and
therefore proper to be insisted on in examinations
of this nature. These were the qualifications, which,

236

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

joined with the burning and shining light of a pious
life, raised the primitive church and clergy to that
height of glory, which we all profess to admire in
them : and the very naming that is a sufficient pro
vocation to such as are concerned in this matter, to
express their zeal for the welfare and glory of the
present church, by keeping strictly to the measures,
which were so successfully observed in the ancient
church ; and without which the ends of the ministry
cannot be fully attained in any church, whilst per
sons are ordained that want proper qualifications.
Sect 7 I shall not now stand to inculcate
abo'utJ,pTrWaterUaS any other rules about particular du-
ci"eSSof "private'dis- ties, studying, preaching, or the like,
but only beg leave to recommend the
primitive pattern in two things more. The one
concerns private pastors, the other is humbly offer
ed to the governors of the church. That which
concerns private pastors, is the duty of private ad
dress, and the exercise of private discipline toward
the people committed to their charge. Some emi
nent persons,8 who have lately considered the duties
of the pastoral office, reckon this one of the prin
cipal and most necessary functions of it ; which
consists in inspecting the lives of private persons,
in visiting families, in exhortations, warnings, re
proofs, instructions, reconciliations, and in all those
other cares, which a pastor ought to take of those
over whom he is constituted. " For," as they rightly
observe, " neither general exhortations nor public
discipline can answer all the occasions ofthe church.
There are certain disorders, which pastors neither
can nor ought to repress openly, and which yet
ought to be remedied by them. In such cases, pri
vate admonitions are to be used. The concern of
men's salvation requires this, and it becomes the
pastoral carefulness to seek the straying sheep, and
not to let the wicked perish for want of warning."
But now, because this is a nice and difficult work,
and requires not only great diligence and applica
tion, but also great art and prudence, with a pro
portionable share of meekness, moderation', and
temper, to perform it aright ; it is often either
wholly neglected, or very ill performed ; whilst some
think it enough to admonish sinners from the pul
pit, and others admonish them indiscreetly, which
tends more to provoke than reclaim them. To re
medy both these evils, it will be useful to reflect
upon that excellent discourse of Gregory Nazianzen,
which has been suggested in the third chapter of
this book,9 where he considers that great variety of
tempers that is in men, and the nicety of all matters
and occasions, that a skilful pastor ought to con
sider, in order to apply suitable remedies to every
distemper. And there the reader will also find

" Ostervald's Causes of the Corrupt, of Christians, p. 318.
See also Bishop Burnet's Pastoral Care, c. 8. p. 96.

some other excellent cautions and directions given
by Chrysostom and others upon this head, with ex
amples proper to excite him to the performance of
this necessary duty.
The other thing I would humbly
offer to the consideration of our supe- , *wy, Their miei
* lor exercising pub-
riors, who are the guardians of public oSfti„tMi "pon
discipline, and inspectors of the be- S' „*!££;
haviour of private pastors, is the ex- ° e"°"'
ercise of discipline in the ancient church. By
which I do not now mean that general disciphne,
which was exercised toward all offenders in the
church ; but the particular discipline that was used
among the clergy ; by virtue of which, every clerk
convict of immorality, or other scandalous offence
was liable to be deposed, and punished with other
ecclesiastical censures ; of which, both crimes and
punishments, I have given a particular account in
the three foregoing chapters of this book. It is a
thing generally acknowledged by all, that the glory
of the ancient church was her discipline ; and it is
as general a complaint of the misfortune of the pre
sent church, that corruptions abound for want of
reviving and restoring the ancient discipline. ' Now,
if there be any truth in either of these observations,
it ought to be a quickening argument to aU that sit
at the helm of government in the church, to bestir
themselves with their utmost zeal, that discipline,
where it is wanting, may at least be restored among
the clergy; that no scandals or offences may be
tolerated among them, whose lives and practices
ought to be a light and a guide to others. As there
is nothing to hinder the free exercise of it here, so
it is but fitting it should be exemplified in them ; as
for many other reasons, so particularly for this :
that the laity may not think they are to be tied to
any discipline, which the clergy have not first ex
ercised upon themselves with greater severity of
ecclesiastical censures. And if either rules or ex
amples can encourage this, those of the primitive
church are most provoking : her rules of discipline
were most excellent and exact in themselves, and
for the most part as exactly managed by persons
intrusted with the execution of them.
After these reflections made upon
the laws and practice of the primitive „JK°thedhSm
clergy, it will be needless to make oPftte^i£"
any long address to any orders of the to"rovSe3™"i
clergy of the present age. I will mtheprae
therefore only observe one thing more, that Julian's
design to bring the laws of the primitive clergy into
use among the heathen priests, in order to reform
them, as it was then a plain testimony of their ex
cellency, so it is now a proper argument to provoke
the zeal of the present clergy, to be more forward

See Book VI. chap. 3. sect. 8.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

237

and ambitious in their imitation. I have already,
in part, recited Julian's testimony and design, out
of his letter to Arsacius, high priest of Galatia : I
shall here subjoin a more ample testimony from a
fragment of one of his epistles 10 printed among his
works, where, speaking of the Gentile priests, he
says, It was reasonable they should be honoured, as
the ministers and servants of the gods, by whose-
mediation many blessings were derived from hea
ven upon the world : and so long as they retained
this character, they were to be honoured and re
spected by ah, but if wicked and vicious, they
should be deposed from their office,1' as unworthy
of their function. Their lives were to be so regu
lated, as that they might be a copy and pattern of
what they were to preach to men. To this pur
pose they should be careful in all their addresses
to the gods, to express all imaginable reverence
and piety,12 as being in their presence and under
their inspection. They should neither speak a
filthy word, nor hear one ; but abstain as well from
all impure discourse, as vile and wicked actions,
and not let a scurrilous or abusive jest come from
their mouths. They should read no books tending
this way, such as Archilochus and Hipponax, and
the writers of loose, wanton comedies ; but apply
themselves to the study of such phUosophers as
Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, Ckrysippus, and Zeno,
whose writings were most likely to create piety in
men's minds. For aU sorts of books were not fit to
be read by the priests : even among philosophers,
those of Pyrrho and Epicurus were wholly to be re
jected by them ; and instead of these they13 should
learn such divine hymns, as were to be sung in
honour of the gods, to whom they should make
their supplications publicly and privately thrice a
day, if it might be ; however, twice at least, morn
ing and evening. In the course of their public
ministrations in the temples,14 which at Rome
commonly held for thirty days, they were to reside
aU the time in the temples, and give themselves to
philosophic thoughts, and neither go to their own
houses, nor into the forum, nor see any magistrate
but in the temple. When their term of waiting
was expired, and they were returned home, they
might not converse or feast promiscuously with all,
but only with their friends and the best of men ;
they were but rarely then to appear in the forum,
and not to visit the magistrates and rulers, except
it were in order to be helpful to some that needed
their assistance. While they ministered in the
temple, they were to be arrayed with a magnificent
garment; but out of it, they must wear common
apparel, and that not very costly, or in the least
savouring of pride and vain-glory. They were in

10 Julian. Fragment. Epist. p. 542.
12 Ibid. p. 547.

" Ibid. p. 513.
" Ibid. p. 551.

no case 15 to go to see the obscene and wanton
shows of thejmblic theatres, nor to bring them into
their own houses, nor to converse familiarly with
any charioteer, or player, or dancer belonging to
the theatre. After this he signifies, out of what
sort of men the priests should be chosen. They
should be the best that could be found in every
city, persons that had true love for God and man,
and then it mattered not whether they were rich
or poor ; there being no difference to be made be
tween noble and ignoble in this case : no one was
to be rejected upon other accounts, who was endued
with those two qualities, piety to God and humanity
to men. Whereof the former might be evidenced
by their care to make all their domestics as devout
as themselves ; and the latter, by their readiness to
distribute liberally to the poor, out of that little
they had, and extending their charity to as many
as was possible. And there was the more reason
to be careful in this matter, because it was mani
festly the neglect of this humanity in the priests,
which had given occasion to the impious Galileans
(by whom he means the Christians) to strengthen
their party by the practice of that humanity, which
the others neglected. For as kidnappers steal away
children, whom they first allure with a cake ; so
these begin first to work upon honest-hearted Gen
tiles with their love-feasts, and entertainments, and
ministering of tables, as they call them, till at last
they pervert them to atheism and impiety against
the gods.
Now from this discourse of Julian, I think, it is
very evident, that he had observed what laws and
practices had chiefly contributed to the advance
ment of the character and credit of the Christian
clergy, and of the Christian religion by their
means : and therefore he laboured to introduce the
like rules and discipline among the idol-priests, and
intended to have made many other alterations in
the heathen customs, in compliance with the en
vied rites and usages of the Christian religion, as is
observed both by Gregory Nazianzen18 and Sozo
men,1' who give us a particular account of his in
tended emendations. The very mentioning which,
if I mistake not, is a loud call to us, to be at least
as zealous as Julian was, in copying out such excel
lencies of the primitive clergy, as are proper for our
imitation. It is the argument which the apostle
makes use of in a like case : " I will provoke you to
jealousy by them that are no people, by a foolish
nation will I anger you," Rom. x. 19. I must
needs say, it will be but a melancholy consideration
for any man, to find hereafter, that the zeal of an
apostate heathen shall rise up in judgment against
him and condemn him.

» Ibid. p. 553.
16 Naz. Invert. 1. in Julian.

'= Ibid. p. 555.
17 Sozom. lib. 5. u. 16.

23 3

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VI.

The conclusion

ivay of address to
the clfrgry of "
present church.

We all profess (as it is our duty to
by do) a great zeal for the honour and

the' cwgry of' the welfare ofthe present church. Now,

if indeed we have that zeal which we
profess, we shall be careful to demonstrate it in all
our actions; observing those necessary rules and
measures which raised the primitive church to its
glory. We are obliged, in this respect, first to be
strict and exemplary in our lives ; to set others a
pattern of sobriety, humility, meekness, charity,
self-denial, and contempt of the world, and all such
common graces as are required of Christians in
general to adorn their profession : and then to add
to these the pecuhar graces and ornaments of our
function, diligence, prudence, fidelity, and piety in
the whole course of our ministry ; imitating those
excellencies of the ancients which have been de
scribed ; confining ourselves to the proper business
of our calhng, and not intermeddling or distracting
ourselves with other cares ; employing our thoughts
and time in useful studies, and directing them to
their proper end, the edification of the church;
performing all divine offices with assiduity and con
stancy, and in that rational, decent, and becoming
way, as suits the nature of the action ; making our
addresses to God with a serious reverence, and an
affecting fervency of devotion ; and in our discourses
to men, speaking always as the oracles of God, with
Scripture eloquence, which is the most persuasive :
in our doctrine showing uncorruptness, gravity,
sincerity, sound speech that cannot be condemned :
in our reproofs, and the exercise of public and pri
vate discipline, using great wisdom and prudence,
both to discern the tempers of men, and to time
the application to its proper season, mixing charity
and compassion with a just severity, and endea
vouring to restore fallen brethren in the spirit of
meekness ; showing gentleness and patience to them
that are in error, and giving them good arguments
with good usage in order to regain them ; avoiding
all bitter and contumelious language, and never
bringing against any man a raihng accusation;
treating those of our own order, whether superiors,

inferiors, or equals, with all the decency and respect
that is due to them, since nothing is more scandal
ous among clergymen, than the abuses and con
tempt of one another; endeavouring here, as well
as in all other cases, to keep the unity of the Spirit
in the bond of peace ; showing ourselves candid
and ingenuous in moderating disputes among good
catholics, -as well as resolute and prudent in oppos
ing the mahcious designs of the professed enemies
of truth ; briefly, employing our thoughts day and
night upon these things, turning our designs this
way, and always acting with a pure intention for
the benefit and edification of the church ; even neg
lecting our own honours, and despising our own
interest, when it is needful, for the advantage of
the public. Such actions will proclaim our zeal
indeed, and draw every eye to take notice of it.
Such qualities, joined with probity and integrity of
hfe, will equal our character to that of the primi
tive saints; and either give happy success to our
labours, or at least crown our endeavours with the
comfort and satisfaction of having discharged a
good conscience in the sight of God. The best
designs indeed may be frustrated, and the most
pious and zealous endeavours be disappointed. It
was so with our Lord and Master himself, and no
one of his household then is to think it strange if
it happen to be his own case. For though he spake
as never man spake, though he had done so many
miracles among the Jews, yet they believed not on
him. This seems to be written for our comfort,
that we should not be wholly dejected, though our
endeavours fail of success, since our Lord himself
was first pleased to take his share in the disappoint
ment. It will still be our comfort, that we can be
able to say with the prophet ls in this case, Though
we have laboured in vain, and spent our strength
for nought, yet surely our judgment is with the
Lord, and our work with our God : and then, though
Israel be not gathered, yet shaU we be glorious in
the eyes of the Lord, and our God shaU be our
strength. >8 Isa. xlix. 4, 5.

BOOK VII.

OF THE ASCETICS IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FIRST ASCETICS AND MONKS, AND OF THE FIRST ORIGINAL
OF THE MONASTIC HFE.

sect 1 They who are conversant in the
the=hS,fS„S writings of the ancients, will very
often meet with the name, ao-icijrai,
ascetics, applied -to some Christians by way of
distinction from others. The generality of writers
in the Romish chm-ch, wherever they meet with
this word, lay hold of it as an argument to prove
the antiquity of monks in the church ; whereas, in
deed, there was a very wide difference between them :
for though, in the writers of the fourth and fifth
ages, when the monastic life was fully established,
ascetics and monks often signify the same persons ;
yet for the greatest part of the three first centuries,
it was otherwise : for there were always ascetics in
the church, but not always monks retiring to the
deserts and mountains, or living in monasteries and
cells, as in after ages.
This difference is freely confessed
Sect. 2. , , J n .
Tiusciffcrenccac- by some of the more frank and mgenu-
knowledgedbysome -
ingenuous vmters in ous writers of the Romish church ; as
the Romish church. . '
Valesius ' and Mr. Pagi,2 who correct
the mistakes of Baronius, Christopherson, and others
in this matter. Eusebius, speaking of Philo Judeeus
his description of the Egyptian therapeutee, says,
he therein exactly described the life of the Chris
tian ascetics' that lived in those times. Where,
by ascetics, Christopherson and Baronius under
stand monks and religious, as they speak in the
modern style : but Valesius rightly observes, that
there were no monks in the time of Philo, but both
the name and institution of them was of much later
date. Ascetic was a more general name than that
of monk : for though every monk was an ascetic,
yet every ascetic was not a monk ; but anciently
every Christian that made profession of a more
strict and austere life, was dignified with the name

of ascetic ; which is a name borrowed by the Chris
tians from the ancient philosophers, as Valesius
shows out of Arian, Artemidorus, and Philo ; and
signifies, as the word imports, any one that exer
cises himself by the severe rules of abstinence and
virtue ; of which kind there were always ascetics,
without being monks, from the first foundation of
the church by the apostles.
Such were all those that inured
V 1 io, Spct- 3-
themselves to greater degrees of ab- what the primi-
° ° live ascetics were.
stinence and fasting than other men.
As those mentioned by Origen,4 who abstained from
flesh and living creatures, as well as the Pythago
reans, but upon very different principles and de
signs : the Pythagoreans abstained upon the fond
imagination of the transmigration of souls, lest a
father should kill and eat his own son in the body
of a living creature ; but the ascetics, says he, among
us do it only to keep under the body, and bring it
into subjection ; to mortify their members upon
earth, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, and
all inordinate passions and affections. Such absti
nence the Apostolical Canons call demno-tg? the ex
ercise of an ascetic life, saying, If any bishop,
presbyter, or deacon, or any other of the clergy,
abstain from marriage, flesh, or wine, ov Sid doicri-
atv, ciXXd Siei /3tSeXupiai>, not for exercise' sake, but
as abominating the good creatures of God, &c.,- let
him either reform himself, or be deposed and cast
out of the church. So that all who exercised
themselves with abstinence from flesh, only for
mortification, and not out of an opinion of its un
cleanness, (as some heretics did,) were reckoned as
cetics, whether they were of the laity or clergy.
Some of these not only abstained from flesh, but
often continued their fasts for two or three days

1 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 2. c. 17.
2 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 62. n. 4.
, ^useb. lib. 2. c. 17. Tov fiiov toiv irap' rip'tv do-Kr)Tuiv
MS evi paXio-Ta dKpifHo-TaTa laToptov, &c.

4 Oiig. cont. Cels. lib.' 5. p. 261. "Opa ti'iv Suttpopav tu
dlTtov -rijs ip^vxeov diroxn?, ™» died tov livdayopov,
Kal Twv iv hpiv ao-KUTuiy.
6 Canon. Apost. c. 51.

240

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

together without taking any food at all ; of which
there are frequent instances in Ireneeus,8 and Dio
nysius of Alexandria,' and Epiphanius,9 and others :
and such again were called ascetics5 from the severe
exercise of fasting, to which they accustomed them
selves. Secondly, In like manner, they who were
more than ordinary intent upon the exercise of
prayer, and spent their time in devotion, were justly
thought to deserve the name of ascetics. Whence
Cyril of Jerusalem,1" speaking of Anna the pro
phetess, (who departed not from the temple, but
served God with fasting and prayer, night and day,)
styles her daKi]Tpia ivXafit^dTri, the religious ascetic,
which the common translations, not so correctly,
render, monialis, as if she had been confined to a
monastery or a cloister, of which we read nothing
in those times in Jerusalem. Thirdly, The exercise
of charity and contempt of the world in any extra
ordinary degree, as when men gave up their whole
estate to the service of God or use of the poor, was
another thing that gave men the denomination and
title of ascetics. In this respect St. Jerom calls
Pierius " a wonderful ascetic, because, among other
things, he embraced a voluntary poverty, and lived
an austere and philosophic hfe. And perhaps, for
the same reason, he gives Serapion, bishop of Anti
och, the same title,12 as having freely given up his
whole estate to the service of the church upon his
ordination ; which was a practice very common in
those days, as appears from the examples of Cy
prian, Paulinus, Gregory Nazianzen, and many
others. Fourthly, The widows and virgins of the
church, and all such as confined themselves to a
single life, and made themselves eunuchs for the
kingdom of heaven's sake, were reckoned into the
number of ascetics, though there was then neither
cloister nor vow to keep them under this obliga
tion. Thus Epiphanius 13 obseryes of Marcion, that
before he fell into his heresy he lived an ascetic life,
professing celibacy under his father, who was bishop
of Sinope in Pontus, by whom he was excommuni
cated for corrupting one of the virgins of the church.
Origen, in like manner, alludes to this name, when
he says, the number of those who exercised them
selves in perpetual11 virginity among the Christians,
was great in comparison of those few who did it
among the Gentiles. And hence, in after ages, the
word ascetriee, in the civil law,15 is commonly put to
signify the widows and virgins of the church.

6 Iren. ap. Euseb. lib. 5. u. 24.
7 Dionys. Ep. Canon, ap. Bevereg. Pandect, t. 2.
8 Epipban. Expos. Fid. n. 22.
9 Antioch. Homil. 7. in Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 2. p 1037
10 Cyril. Catech. 10. n. 9.
11 Hieron. de Script. Eccles. c. 76. Constat hunc mira
do-Krio-Etosr appetitorem et voluntariic paupertatis.
¦- Ibid. c. 41. Leguntur ejus breves epistolce, auctoris sui
acrKntTEt et vita? congruentes.
"Epiphan. Hra-. 12. n. 1. TtV Si irpwTov avrov jiiov

Lastly, All such as exercised themselves with un
common hardships or austerities for the greater
promotion of piety and religion, as in frequent
watchings, humicubations, and the like, had the
name of ascetics also. In allusion to which Atha
nasius, or whoever is the author of the Synopsis
Scripturce among his works, styles Lucian the mar
tyr, pkyav do-KiiTTjv,"' the great ascetic, because of the
hardships he endured in prison; being forced to
lodge on sharp potsherds for twelve days together,
with his feet and hands so bound in the stocks that
he could not move ; and being denied all sustenance,
except he would eat things sacrificed to idols ; rather
than pollute himself with which he chose to die
with famine, as the acts of his martyrdom relate the
story. Now, from this account that has been given
of the primitive ascetics, it plainly appears, that
originally they were not monks, but men of all
orders, that freely chose such a way of living as en
gaged them upon some austerities, without desert
ing their station or business in the world, whether
it were ecclesiastical or secular, that they were
otherwise engaged in : and therefore, wherever we
read of ascetics in the writers of the three first ages,
we must not with Baronius dream of monks and
regulars, but take them for persons of another cha
racter, agreeable to this description. Valesius"
makes this observation upon several passages in
Eusebius his book of the martyrs of Palestine, who
suffered in the beginning of the fourth century in
the Diocletian persecution. There he terms one of
them Peter the ascetic,13 and another called Seleucus,
a follower ofthe religious ascetics,19 whose chief ex
ercise was to take care of the fatherless and widows,
and minister to the sick and the poor. These were
no monks, as Valesius rightly observes: for St.
Jerom says, there were no monks in Palestine be
fore Hilarion, who brought the monastic life into
use in that country, not till about fifty years after
the death of those martyrs. Cotelerius20 makes the
like remark upon the author of the Apostolical
Constitutions, who speaks 21 of ascetics among
other orders of Christians, but never of monks:
whence he concludes, not without some proba
bility, that that author wrote before the monastic
life was settled in the church ; else it is hardly to
be imagined that he should not some where in his
collections have taken notice of monks as well as
others.

irapd eviav Sijdsv jiitkei, povdX^eov yip virrjpXE, &c.
11 Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 7. p. 365. 'Ao-kouo-i t!]v irav-
teXtj irapGEvtav, Sec.
15 Justin. Novel. 123. c. 43.
16 Athan. Synop. t. 2. p. 157.
" Vales. Not. in Euseb. de Martyr. Palaest. u. 11.
18 Euseb. de Mart. Pal. c. 10.
19 Ibid. t. 11.
20 Coteler. Not. in Constit. Apost. lib. 8. u. 13.
21 Constit. Apost. ibid.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

241

Ascetics, then, there were always
when the monastic in the church : but the monastic hfe,
life first hegao. - .
neither name nor thing, was not known
till toward the fourth century. Mr. Pagi22 fixes its
original to the time of Constantine, and he cites
Holstenius23 and Papebrochius24 for the same opi
nion. The rise of it was* thus : In the Decian per
secution, which was about the middle of the third
century, many persons in Egypt, to avoid the fury
of the storm, fled to the neighbouring deserts and
mountains, where they not only found a safe re
treat, but also more time and hberty to exercise
themselves in acts of piety and Divine contempla
tions ; which sort of life, though at first forced upon
them by necessity, became so agreeable to some of
them, that when the persecution was over they
would not return to their ancient habitations again,
but chose rather to continue in those cottages or
cells, which they had made themselves in the wil
derness. The first and most noted of these were
Paul and Antonius, two famous Egyptians, whom
therefore St. Jerom caUs25 the fathers of the Chris
tian hermits. For though some deduced them from
John the Baptist and Elias, yet they who under
stood the matter best, reckoned Paul the Thebeean
the first author, and Antony the great encourager
of that way of hving among the Christians : to
which opinion, as the truest, St. Jerom himself ffl
subscribes. But as yet there were no bodies or
communities of men embracing this life, nor any
monasteries buUt, or any regular societies formed
into any method of government; but only a few
single persons scattered here and there in the deserts
of Egypt, till Pachomius, in the peaceable reign of
Constantine, when the persecutions were ended,
procured some monasteries to be built in Thebais
in Egypt, from whence the custom of living as re
gulars in societies was followed by degrees in other
parts of the world in the succeeding ages. This is
evident, from what Papebrochius and Pagi2' have
observed out of the ancient writer of the Acts of
Pachomius, where the author brings in Antony the
hermit thus comparing the different states of mo
nachism together. When I first became a monk,
says he, there was as yet no monastery28 in any
part of the world, where one man was obhged to

take care of another ; but every one of the ancient
monks, when the persecution was ended, exercised
a monastic hfe by himself in private. But after
ward your father Pachomius, (he speaks to one of
Pachomius's disciples,) by the help of God, effected
this. That is, he brought the monks to live in
communities, and under rules, which they had not
done before. So that here we see at once the rise
and progress of the monastic hfe. Till the year
250, there were no monks, but only ascetics in the
church : from that time to the reign of Constantine,
monachism was confined to the Anchorets hving in
private cells in the wilderness : but when Pacho
mius had erected monasteries in Egypt, other coun
tries presently followed the example, and so the
monastic life came to its full maturity in the church.
Hilarian, who was scholar to Antonius, was the first
monk that ever lived in Palestine or Syria: for St.
Jerom29 says plainly, there was neither monastery
nor monk before he came there, but he was the
founder and beginner of that sort of life in those
provinces. Not long after Eustathius, bishop of
Sebastia, brought it into the regions of Armenia,
Paphlagonia, and Pontus, as Sozomen30 informs us :
but as yet there were no monasteries in Thrace, or
Illyricum, or amongst the Europeans, as the same
author testifies. Baronius31 owns there were no
monasteries in Italy or Rome, till Athanasius came
thither, anno 340, and taught the Anchorets to live
in societies, after the example of Pachomius and
the Egyptian monks : which is confirmed by St.
Jerom,32 who says, MarceUa was the first noble wo
man that embraced the monastic life at Rome, and
that she was instructed by Athanasius, and Peter
his successor, who fled to Rome for shelter against
the Arian persecution. It was some time after this
that St. Martin, bishop of Tours, fixed his cell in
France, and eighty other monks33 followed his ex
ample : from whence, some learned men34 think,
Pelagius brought the monastic hfe first into Britain
in the beginning of the fifth century ; beyond which
period I think it needless to carry the present in
quiry. They who would know the rise and dis
tinction of the several later orders, may consult
Hospinian, Cfeccelius, and others, who pursue this
histoiy through all ages. Vid. Hospinian. de Origin.

22 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 318. n. 12. Initium mona
chatus aetati Constantini imputandum.
23 Holsten. Praef. ad Regulas Veter. Monachor.
24 Papebroch. Corn, in Acta Pachomii, Maii 14.
25 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 16. Hujus vitae auctor
Paulus, illustrator etiam Antonius.
20 Id. Vit. Pauli, 1. 1. p. 237. Affirmant Paulum quon
dam Thebceum principem istius rei fuisse : quod non tam
nomine quam opinione nos quoque comprobamus.
27 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 318. ... 12.
23 Acta Pachomii, c. 77. ap. Papebroch. die 14 Maii.
Quo ego primum tempore rnonachuin ccepi agere, nullum
uspiam extabat coenobium, in quo de aliorum salute cura aut
R

metus cuiquam erat : sed quisque antiquorum monachorum,
persecutione jam finita, privatim in vita sese raonastica ex-
ercebat. Postea vero pater vester (Pachomius) tantum
bonum, Deo adjuvante, effecit.
29 Hieron. Vit. Hilarion. c. 11. Necdum enim tunc mo-
nasteria erant in Palaestina, nee quisquam monachos ante
sanctum Hilarionem in Syria noverat. Ille fundator et eru-
ditor hujus conversationis et studii in hac provincia fuit.
30 Sozom. lib. 3. u. 14.
81 Baron, an. 3-10. n. 7.
32 Hieron. Ep. 16. Epitaph. MarceUa;.
83 Sever. Vit. Martin, c. 7.
31 Sutlif. de Monacb. Institut. u. 6.

242

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

Monaehor. Creccelii Collectanea de Origine et Fun-
dat. Ordinum Monastic. Sec.
sect. 5. But lt; may now lbe ProPerly m"
oel,!cs,d'ulcre'u,efrom quired, since monks are of so much
'n°nk9' later date than ascetics, how the an
cient ascetics differed from them? To which it
may be rephed, Chiefly in these three things: 1.
That the monks were men that retired from the
business and conversation of the world, for they
either lived in private cells singly by themselves,
or if in monasteries and societies, yet those were
remote from cities, in some far distant mountain or
a desert wilderness ; but the first ascetics, as their
name implies, were always men of an active life,
living in cities, as other men, and in nothing differ
ing from them save only in this, that they were
more intent and zealous in attempting greater
heights and heroical acts of Christian virtue. 2.
The monks, by their first institution, as we shall
see hereafter, were to be no more than laymen ;
for being confined to the wilderness, the clerical
and monastic hfe were, upon that account, incom
patible states, and for almost one whole age they
were scarce ever joined together : but the ancient
ascetics were indifferently persons of any order of
men, clergy as well as laity, because the clerical
and ascetic hfe were then consistent with each
other ; the business of each being to converse with
men, and exercise themselves in acts of piety and
charity among them. 3. The monks, at least such
as lived in monasteries and societies, were always
brought under certain private rules and laws of dis
cipline : but the ancient ascetics had no laws but
those of the gospel, and the church where they
lived, to be governed by ; their exercises were freely
chosen, and as freely pursued, in what manner, and
to what degree, they pleased, without any binding
laws or rules of compulsion. And these things are
a further proof that the first ascetics were no monks,
however some writers unwarily confound them to
gether. The reader may take notice of one
Sect. G. ' . ...
whatothernames thing more concerning the primitive
they were called by. ^ ° *¦
ascetics, that they were sometimes
called by other names. Eusebius35 calls them o-7row-
rWot, and Epiphanius 3B uses the same appellation ;
meaning persons more eminent for their sanctity, and
diligence in the exercises of fasting, and prayer, and
almsdeeds, and the like. Clemens Alexandrinus3'
styles them sVXekt-Si/ sKAt-KTtVEpoi, the elect of the
elect; for all Christians, as has been observed in
another place,88 were called the elect, and therefore
the ascetics are termed the elect of the elect, because

they were the more eminent or choice part of Chris
tian professors.

CHAPTER II.
OF THE SEVERAL SORTS OF MONKS, AND THEIR
WAYS OF LIVING IN THE CHURCH.
Having hitherto showed the differ
ence between the first ascetics and several" .oru of
.... monks distingjuBh-
monks, 1 come now to speak a httle ed °y their different
r ways of hving.
more particularly of the monks alone,
so far as may be necessary to inform the reader
of the true state of the monastic life at its first ap
pearance and settlement in the church. And here
we are to observe, that the ancient monks were not
like the modern, distinguished into orders, and
denominated from the authors and founders of
them; but they had their names either from the
places where they inhabited, as the monks of Mount
Scethis, Tabennesus, Nitria, Canopus in Egypt,
&c, or else they were distinguished by their differ
ent ways of living, some in cells, others on pillars,
others in societies, and others by a roving and
rambling kind of life, which were always reckoned
a dishonour and reproach to the church.
The first sort were commonly known Sed 4
by the name of Anchorets, from their ArSoreuraMox^
retiring from society, and living in P"T<"'
private cells in the wilderness. Such were Paul,
and Antony, and Hilarion, the first founders of the
monastic life in Egypt and Palestine ; from whom
other monks took their model. Some of these
lived in caves, iv enrnXaioig, as Chrysostom says1
the monks of Mount Casius, near Antioch, did;
and others in little tents or cells, uUioKoi, Evagrius2
calls them, and Chrysostom, o-Ki)vai, tabernacles. _
"When many of these were placed together in the
same wilderness at some distance from one another,
they were all called by one common name, laura,
which, as Evagrius3 informs us, differed from a
ccenobium or community in this, that a laura was
many cells divided from each other, where every
monk provided for himself; but a coenobium was
but one habitation, where the monks lived in so
ciety, and had all things in common. Epiphanius4
says, Laura or Labra- was the name of a street or.
district where a church stood at Alexandria ; and it
is probable, that from thence the name was taken,
to signify a multitude of cells in the wilderness,
united as it were in a certain district, yet so divided

35 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 11.
35 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. n. 22.
37 Clem. Alex. Homil. Quis dives salv. n. 3G. ap. Com
befis Auctar. Novissirn. p. 181.

38 Book I. chap. i. sect. 1.
1 Chrysos. Horn. 17. ad Pop. Antioch. p. 215.
2 Evagr. lib. i. c. 21. ' Evagr. ibid.
1 Epipb. Haer. 69. n. 1.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

243

as to make up many separate habitations ; whereas
a cainobium was more hke a single house for many
monks to dwell in.And hence arose a second sort of
The sSnufcomo- monks, who from their different way
of living were commonly called Coeno
bites; and their habitations, ccenobia, Koiv6(3ta, be
cause they lived in common. In the Theodosian
Code 'they are also called Synoditee; which does
not signify the attendants of monks, as some civili
ans6 by mistake explain the word, deriving it from
oiv and bSirng, viator; but it denotes the monks
themselves, who were so called from their living iv
trovoSotg, in communities, or convents. And in this
they differed from Anchorets, as has been noted be
fore. Gennadius' applies these two names indiffer
ently to this second sort of monks, when he says,
Evagrius wrote a book concerning Coenobites and
Synodites, containing rules and directions for lead
ing a hfe in common. St. Jerom8 says, the Egyp
tians caUed this sort of monks, Sauches, in their
proper tongue, which signifies the same as C ceno
bites in the Greek and Latin church ; and that the
Anchorets were of a different order from them, and
had their name from hving in solitude, or singly by
themselves in the wilderness.
There was another sort, he says,
The third, Sara- whom the Egyptians called Remboth,
Soils. , „ , ,
who were a sort of monks that would
live as they listed themselves, only two or three9 to
gether, under no rule or government. These did
not resort to the wilderness as the others, but lived
chiefly in cities and castles, where every thing they
did might be seen and valued by men, which was
the only end they aimed at. For they turned re
ligion into an art, and made a real gain of pretended
godliness. Whatever they sold of the work of their
own hands, was at a higher price than any others.
And this made them very turbulent and contentious :
for hving upon their own labour, they would be
subject to no superiors. They fasted to an extra
ordinary degree; but then they made that which
should have been a private exercise, matter of strife
and pubhc victory and triumph. Every thing about

them was affected, loose sleeves, wide stockings,
coarse clothes, often sighing, making frequent visits
to the virgins, and always bitterly inveighing against
the clergy. But if ever there came a feast-day, they
would indulge themselves even to riot and excess.
These therefore St. Jerom justly brands as the pests
and banes of the church. He that would see more
of their character, may consult Cassian10 among
the ancient writers, who exposes them under the
name of Sarabaitce; and Spalatensis" among the
moderns, who draws the parallel between them and
the Minorites, Dominicans, Carmelites, Servites,
and Minims of the Romish church.
Another sort of monks in the an
cient church (of which there were but of the statu*, or
. , ,. Pillansts.
a very few) were the Stylites, or Pil-
larists, so called from their taking up a singular way
of living perpetually upon a pillar. Simeon, sur-
named Stylites, who lived about the time of the
council of Chalcedon, was the first, Evagrius12 says,
that introduced this sort of life among the monastic
orders. And Theodorus Lector" observes, that the
novelty of it at first was so offensive to the Egyp
tian monks, that they sent anathematizing letters
against him ; but upon better information, coming
to understand the worth and conversation of the
man, they afterward communicated with him. The
severity of this way of living was not very inviting,
and therefore it made but few proselytes. Theo
dorus Lector14 mentions one Daniel, a disciple of
Simeon's, and Evagrius 15 speaks of another Simeon,
in the time of Mauricius, who lived sixty-eight years
upon a pUlar, and is commonly called Simeon Sty
lites junior, to distinguish him from the former.
Johannes Moschus16 gives an account of two or
three more of this way in the same age. Surius also,
among his catalogue of saints, has the hfe of one Ali-
pius, bishop of Adrianople, who renounced his see
to live upon a pillar ; where, if the story say true,1'
he continued seventy years ; having two quires of
virgins and one of monks attending him, with whojn
he sang psalms and hymns alternatively night and
day. Beside these we scarce meet with any other
of this way in ancient history. An argument that

s Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 30. de Appellat. Leg. 57. Addictos
supplicio, nulli clericorum vel monachorum, eorum etiam
quos Synoditas vocant, per vim atque usurpationem vindi-
care liceat, &c. It. Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 4. de Episco-
pali Audientia, Leg. 6.
6 Lexicon Juridic. voce Synoditae, Genev. 1615.
' Gennad. de Scriptor. in Evagrio. Composuit de Cceno-
bitis ac Synoditis doctrinam aptam vitas communis.
3 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 15. Tria sunt in iEgypto
genera monachorum: primum Coenobitse,"quod illi Sauches
gentili lingua vocant ; nos, in commune viventes, possumus
appellare. Secundum Anaehbritae, quod soli habitant per
deserta, et ab eo quod procul ab hominibus recesserint, nun-
cupantur. Tertium genus est quod Remboth dicunt, deter-
rimum atque neglectum.
9 Ibid. Hi bini vel trini nee multo plures simul habitant,
K 2

suo arbitratu ac ditione viventes.  Habitant autem quam-
plurimi in urbibus et castellis : et quasi ars sit sancta, non
vita, quicquid vendiderint majoris est pretii. Inter hos
saipe sunt jurgia, quia suo viventes cibo, non patiuntur se
alicui esse subjectos. Revera solent certare jejuniis, et
rem secreti victoriae faciunt. Apud hos affectata sunt om
nia, laxae manicae, caligae follicantes, vestis crassior, crebra
suspiria, visitatio virginum, detractio clericorum. Et si
quando dies festus venerit, saturantur ad vomitum, &c.
10 Cassian. Collat. 18. c. 7.
» Spalat. de Rep. Eccl. lib. 2. c. 12. n. 77.
12 Evagr. lib. 1. c. 13. 13 Theodor. Lect. lib. 2. p. 565.
» Ibid. lib. 1. p. 554. ls Evagr. lib. 6. c. 23.
16 Mosch. Prat. Spir. c. 36, 57, 129.
17 Surius, t. 6. Vid. Hospin. de Monach. lib. 2. u. 5.
p. 22.

214

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

it was not of any great esteem, when it was first
invented in the primitive church.
Beside these sorts of monks, who
Sect. 6. .
of secular monks. ren0Unced the world, and lived in
perpetual celibacy, Spalatensis13 thinks there was
another order, which did neither of those things,
but lived in a married state, and enjoyed their own
property and possessions, only they exercised them
selves in acts of austerity and religion, as the primi
tive ascetics were used to do, of whom we have
given an account in the former chapter. Thus
much is certain from the express words of Athana
sius and St. Austin, that in their time some went
by the name of monks, who were married men, and
possessed of estates. For Athanasius, writing to
Dracontius, a monk, to persuade him to accept of a
bishopric, (to which he was averse, because he
thought it would not consist with his ascetic way of
living,) uses this argument to him : You may still,
says he, after you are made a bishop,19 hunger and
thirst with Paul, and abstain from wine with Timo
thy, and fast frequently as St. Paul was wont to do.
Let not therefore your counsellors throw such ob
jections in your way. For we know many bishops
that fast, and monks that eat and drink ; we know
bishops that drink no wine, and monks that do ;
we know bishops that work miracles, and monks
that work none. Many bishops are not married ;
and on the other hand, many monks are fathers of
children : you may also find bishops that are fathers
of children, and monks that are not so ; clergy that
eat and drink, and monks that fast. For these
things are at liberty, and no prohibition laid upon
them : every one exercises himself as he pleases ;
for it is not men's station, but their actions, for
which they shall be crowned. From these words
of Athanasius it seems plain, that as yet the rules
of the monastic life obliged no man to renounce
either his possessions or a married state, but he
might use both, if he pleased, without any ecclesi
astical censure. And though the case was a little
altered with some monks before St. Austin's time,
yet others reserved to themselves their ancient pri
vilege : for St. Austin, writing against the heretics
who called themselves Apostolics, says, They20 arro
gantly assumed to themselves that name, because
they rejected all from their communion, who had
either wives or estates, of which sort the catholic
church had many both monks and clergy. So that
at least some monks were still at liberty to enjoy
both a conjugal state and possessions of their own,

without any impeachment of apostacy or breach of
vow in the cathohc church. For which reason I
have given this sort of monks the distinguishing
name of seculars.
Though, to avoid ambiguity in terms, Sec(
it must be observed, that all monks at ^no3i°tt
first might properly be called secu- ,oyme°¦
lars, as that name is opposed to ecclesiastics. For
monks in their first original were generaUy laymen,
nor could they well be otherwise by their proper
constitution, and the general laws of the catholic
church. For the first monks were generally her
mits, that is, persons confined by their own rules
to some desert or wilderness, where solitude was
thought to help forward the exercises of contempla
tion and repentance, and they had none to take care
of but their own souls : but the clerical hfe required
men to live in towns and cities, where crowds of
people afforded them proper occasions to exercise
the offices of the clerical function; and it was
against the rules of the catholic church, as I have
showed21 in another place, for any clerk to be or
dained without a proper cure or title in some church,
wdiere he might do the duties of his function. For
this reason it was a thing impracticable in itself, as
well as against the rules of the two different states
of the clerical and monastic hfe, that the generality
of monks should be clergymen ; which, to the con
fusion of ancient rules and disciphne, has been the
unwarrantable practice of later ages, especially since
the time of Clement V., anno 1311, who obliged22
aU monks to take holy orders, that they might say
private mass for the honour of God, as he esteemed
it ; which was in truth a manifest trampling on the
laws of the ancient church, and an affront to her
practice. For anciently monks were put into the
same class with laymen, as they generally were, and
considered only as such. St. Jerom gives us at
once both the rule and the practice, when he says,
the office of a monk is not23 to teach, but to mourn :
and that the case of the monks and clergy is very
different from each other : the clergy are those that
feed the sheep, but the monks (among whom he
reckons himself) are those that are fed. It is true,
St. Jerom was not only a monk, but a presbyter
likewise ; but being ordained against his will, and
resolving to continue a monk, he refused to officiate
as a presbyter : which shows, that he had no great
opinion of joining the monk and the clerk together,
much less of making all monks in general become
clerks, according to the modern practice. The

18 Spalat. de Rep. lib. 2. c. 11. u. 22.
,,J Athan. Ep. ad Dracont. t. 1. p. 958.
20 Aug. de Haeres. c. 40. Apostolici se isto nomine ar-
rogantissime vocaverunt, eo quod in suam communionem
non reciperent utentes conjugibus, et res proprias possi-
dentes ; quales habet catholica ecclesia et monachqs et cle
ricos plurimos.

21 Book IV. chap. 6. n.2.
22 Vid. Clementin. lib. 3. Tit. 10. c. 1,
23 Hieron. Ep. 55. ad Ripar. Monachus non docentis, sed
plangentis habet officium. Id. Ep. I. ad Heliodor. Alia mo
nachorum est causa, alia clericorum: plerici pascunt oves,
ego pascor.

Chap. LL

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

215

councU of Chalcedon once or twice very expressly
distinguishes the monks from the clergy, and reckons
them with the laymen. In one canon it says,24
Whoever are instrumental in getting others ordained
or promoted to any office in the chm-ch for money
or filthy lucre; 'such transactors, if they be clergy
men, shall be deposed ; if laymen or monks, excom
municated. And another canori23 forbids monks to
meddle with ecclesiastical affairs. Both which ca
nons plainly imply, that the monks then were not
of the clergy, but merely laymen. Pope Leo26 at
the same time speaks of them as such, teUing Max
imus, bishop of Antioch, that he should not permit
monks or laymen, however learned, to usurp the
power of teaching or preaching, but only the priests
of the Lord. And therefore when any monk was
to be ordained presbyter or bishop, he was obhged
first to go through all other orders of the church, as
it was then customary for laymen to do, before the
superior orders were conferred upon them. This
we learn from a decree of Pope Gelasius,27 which or
ders, that if a monk of good life and learning was
minded to be ordained a priest, he should first be
made a reader, or a notary, or a defensor, and after
three months an acolythist, after six months a sub
deacon, after nine months a deacon, and at the
year's end a presbyter. So that the difference be
tween a monk and any other layman was only this,
that a monk by virtue of his education in a school
of learning and good discipline (such as monas
teries then were) was supposed to be a better
proficient than other laymen, and therefore allow
ed the benefit of a quicker passage through the
inferior orders than other candidates of the priest
hood. All which shows, that anciently the ge
nerahty of monks were only laymen, or at most
but in a middle state betwixt common laymen
and the clergy ; as the learned men of the Romish
church, Habertus,28 Lindanus,29 and others, scruple
not to confess, though they are willing to de
fend the modern practice. Nay, even Gratian him
self,30 who is most concerned for the moderns,
owns it to be plain from ecclesiastical history, that
to the time of Pope Siricius and Zosimus the an
cient monks were only simple monks, and not of
the clergy.

But though monks did not anciently
aspire to be ordained ; nor was it con- in wiiat cases the
sistent with the rules of the church tic ii'fe ' might"0™
, ,, conjoined together.
that all of them should be so ; yet in
several cases the clerical and monastic hfe was in
some measure capable of being conjoined. As, first,
when a monastery happened to be at so great a dis
tance from its proper episcopal or parochial church,
that the monks could not ordinarily resort thither
for Divine service ; which was the case of the mo
nasteries in Egypt and other parts of the East,
where the monks lived in great deserts sequestered
from the rest of mankind ; then some one or more
of the monks were ordained for the performance of
Divine offices among them. Thus Cassian often
speaks of the churches of the monasteries of Scethis
or Scythia in the deserts of Egypt, one of which
had two presbyters, Paphnutius 31 and Daniel ; and
three others, single presbyters, residing, and per
forming Divine offices in them : these were the ab
bots or fathers of the monasteries, and presbyters of
the churches together ; whom Cassian mentions
with this remarkable circumstance,82 that all of them,
except Paphnutius', being overrun with the heresy
of the Anthropomorphites ; when Theophilus, bishop
of Alexandria, sent one of his paschal letters among
them, (to give notice of Easter according to custom,)
and therein made some sharp reflections on that
absurd heresy, they would not so much as suffer
his epistle to be read in their churches. Sozomen
likewise tells us,33 that Prines the monk, whom the
Arians made use of as their instrument to conceal
Arsenius, while they accused Athanasius of his
murder, was a presbyter of one of the monasteries
in the deserts of Thebais. Where it seems the mo
nasteries were vastly great: for Cassian3' assures
us, that one of them had no less than five thousand
monks in it : and it cannot be thought strange, that
such monasteries in remote deserts should have
their proper churches, and presbyters to officiate in
them. But it was not only in the deserts that mo
nasteries were allowed presbyters in them, but in
some places the city monasteries (as soon as they
began to get footing there) had the same privilege
likewise. For Eutyches the heretic was not only
archimandrite, but presbyter also of his monastery

24 Cone. Chalced. c. 2.
23 Ibid. c. 4.
Leo, Ep. 60. al. 62. IUud quoque convenit praecavere,
ut prater eos qui sunt Domini sacerdotes, nullus sibi jus
docendi et praedicandi audeat vendicare, sive sit ille mona-
chus, sive laicus, qui alicujus scientiae nomine glorietur.
27 Gelas. Ep. 9. ad Episc. Lucan. o. 3. Si quis de reli-
gioso proposito, et disciplinis monasterialibus eruditus, ad
clericale munus accedat  continuo lector vel notarius,
aut certe defensor effectus, post tres menses existat acoly-
thus: sexto mense subdiaconi nomen accipiat; nonomense
diaconus, completoque anno sit presbyter.
28 Habert. Archieratic. p. 601.

29 Lindan. Panopl. lib. 4. u. 75.
30 Gratian. Cans. 16. qu. 1. post cap. 39. Monachos vero
usque ad tempus Eusebii, Zosimi et Siricii monachos simpli-
citer, et non clericos fuisse, ecclesiastica testatur historia.
si Cassian. Collat. 3. c. 1. Collat. 4. c. 1.
32 Collat. 10. c. 2. Ita est haec epistola refutata ab his, qui
erant in eremo Scythi commorantes, ut prater abbatem
Paphnutium nostra congregationis presbyterum, nullus
earn caeterorum presbyterorum, qui in eadem eremo aliis
tribus ecclesiis prasidebanc, nee legi quidem ac recitari in
suis conventibus prorsus admitterent.
33 Sozom. lib. 2. c. 23.
31 Cassian. de Institut. Renunciant. lib. 4. u. 1.

246

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

at Constantinople, as Liberatus35 and other ancient
writers style him. And that this was no unusual
thing, appears from hence, that both the civil and the
canon law allows the practice. Justinian in one of
his NoveL36 has a proviso both for such monas
teries as had churches of their own, and such as
had not : for those which had none of their own, it
is ordered, that the monks should repair to the parish
church with their abbot, and after Divine service
immediately return to their monastery again ; but
such monasteries as had churches in them, might
have four or five of their own body ordained, pres
byters, or deacons, or of the inferior orders, as
there was occasion. And before this the council
of Chalcedon37 speaks of churches in monasteries,
and clergy belonging to them ; allowing a deputa
tion to any such church to be a sufficient title to
qualify a man for holy orders. So that in these
circumstances there is no question to be made but
that the clerical and monastic hfe were often joined
together. 2. Another case in which the same thing was
practised, was when monks were taken out of
monasteries by the bishops, and ordained for the
service of the church. Which thing was frequently
done, and not only allowed, but encouraged, both
by the imperial and ecclesiastical laws : when once
monasteries were become schools of learning and
pious education, they were thought the properest
nurseries for the church. Therefore Arcadius made
it an instruction to the bishops, that if at any time
they needed to augment their clergy,38 they should
do it out of the monks. Gothofred, in his learned
observations on this law, has abundantly showed
the church's practice from the testimonies of Atha
nasius,39 St. Jerom,40 St. Austin,41 Epiphanius,42 Pal
ladius,43 St. Basil,44 Marcellinus Chronicon, and the
code of the African church.45 To which may be
added the letters of Siricius,43 Innocent, and' Gela
sius, alleged by Gratian, and the councils of Agde47
and Lerida, which allow a bishop to take any monk
out of a monastery with the consent and appro
bation of the abbot, and ordain him for the service
of the church. And in this case they usually con
tinued their ancient austerities and ascetic way of
living, and so joined the clerical and monastic hfe
together. Upon which account both these and the
former sort were by the Greeks styled lepopovaXoi

35 Liberat. Breviar. c. 11.
30 Justin. Novel. 133. c. 2. 37 Cone. Chalced. c. 6 et 8.
38 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 32. Si quos
forte episcopi deesse sibi clericos arbitrantur, ex monacho
rum numero rectius ordinabunt.
29 Athanas. Ep. ad Dracont. 40 Hieron. Ep. 3 et 4.
41 Aug. Ep. 67, 76, 81. 42 Epiphan. Expos. Fidei'
43 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 21.
4 ' Basil. Ep. 403. ad Amphiloc. « Cod. Afric. c. 80. al. 83.
46 Gratian. Caus. 16. qu. 1. c. 20, 22, 28.
47 Cone. Agathen. u. 27. Cone. Herd. t. 3.

clergy-monks, to distinguish them from such as
were only laymen.
3. It happened sometimes, that a bishop and
all his clergy chose an ascetic way of hving, by a
voluntary renunciation of all property, and enjoy
ing all things in common, in imitation of the first
church under the apostles. St. Ambrose48 seems to
say, that Eusebius Vercellensis was the first that
brought in this way of living into the Western
church. For before his time the monastic life was
not known in cities ; but he taught his clergy to
hve in the city after the rules and institution of
monks in the wilderness. Which must be under
stood chiefly, I conceive, of their austerities, and
renouncing their property, and having aU things in
common, as the other had. St. Austin set up the
same way of living among the clergy of Hippo, as
we learn from his own words, who says,49 he made
the bishop's house a monastery of clergymen,
where it was against the rule for any man to enjoy
any property of his own, but they had ah things
in common. Which is also noted by Possidius in
his Life, That his clergy50 lived with him in the
same house, and eat at the same table, and were
fed and clothed at a common expense. And so
far as this was an imitation of the Coenobites' way
of living and having all things common, it might
be called a monastic as well as clerical hfe, as Pos
sidius and St. Austin caU it. But as yet there was
no monastery in the world, where aU the monks
were ordained only to say private mass, without be
ing fixed to any certain cure, where they might
perform the several offices of the clerical function.
The monastery of St. Austin consisted only of such
as had public offices and business in the church,
and were not men confined to a cloister.
Therefore the hermits of St. Aus
tin, and many other modern orders The original of
. canons regular.
which assume his name, do but falsely
pretend to derive their original from him ; who, it
is certain, never was a hermit himself, nor wrote
any rules for them, though a great many sermons
are fathered on him as preached to the hermits in
the wilderness. They who count the rise of canons
regular from him, as Duarenus51 and others, have
something more of probabihty on their side: be
cause, as I have showed, the clergy of Hippo were
under some of the exercises of a monastic hfe, which

48 Ambros. Ep. 82. ad Eccles. Vercel. p. 254. Heec enim
primus in Occidentis partibus diversa inter se Eusebius sanc-
tae memoriae conjunxit, ut et in civitate positus instituta
monachorum teneret, et ecclesiam regeret jejunii sobrietate.
49 Aug. Serm. 49. de Diversis, t. 10. p. 519. Volui habere in
ista domo episcopimeum monasterium clericorum. Ecce quo
modo vivimus. Nulli licetin societate habere aliquid proprium.
50 Possid. Vit. Aug. u. 25. Cum ipso semper clerici, una
etiam domo ac mensa, sumptibusque communibus alebantur
et vestiebantur.
51 Duaren. de Minist. et Benefic. lib. 1. c. 21.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

247

made them a sort of canons regular : and yet Onu-
phrius,52 and Hospinian,53 who have inquired very
nicely into these matters, make Gelasius the first
founder of them under that name in the Lateran
church, where they continued to the time of Boni
face VIII., who expelled them thence. How soon
the name or order came into other churches, Hos
pinian wUl inform the curious reader.
sect 10 About the beginning of the fifth
caaedEsJor century, or, as Baronius54 thinks, to-
watchers. ward the mirldie 0f itj at Constanti
nople, under Gennadius the patriarch, one Alexan
der set up an order of monks, whom the writers of
that and the following ages commonly style 'Akoi-
pr\Tal, that is, Watchers : the reason of which name
is taken from their manner of performing Divine
offices day and night without intermission. For
they divided themselves into three classes, and so
one succeeded another at a stated hour, and by that
means continued a perpetual course of Divine ser
vice without any interval, as weU by night as by
day, whence they had the name of "Watchers given
them. The piety of this order procured them great
esteem and veneration, and many monasteries were
builded for their use at Constantinople. Among
others, one Studius, a nobleman of Rome, and a
man of consular dignity, renounced the world, and
became one of their order ; erecting a famous mo
nastery for them himself, which from the founder
was55 called Studium, and the monks of it Studites.
And this, perhaps, is the first time we meet any
monks that took their denomination from any
founder. But these monks in a httle time sunk in
their credit, because they were many times found to
be favourers of the heresy of Nestorius, for which
they are frequently reflected on56 by ecelesiastical
writers. In the regions of Syria and Meso-
of those called potamia, Sozomen57 takes notice of
Boo-Kot, or Grazers. r
another sort of monks, who, from their.
peculiar way of hying, were commonly called Boo--
a-ot, the Grazers. For they lived after the same
manner as flocks and herds upon the mountains,
never dweUing in any house, nor eating any bread
or flesh, nor drinking wine, but continuing instantly
in the worship of God, in prayers and hymns, ac
cording to the custom of the church, till eating time
was come ; and then every man went with his knife
in his hand to provide himself food of the herbs of
the field, which was their only diet and constant
way of hving.

52 Onuphr. Annot. in Platin. Vit. Gelas. p. 62. Gelasius
canonicos, ut vocant, regularis ordinis Sti. Augustini Late-
ram primus collocavit, qui ibidem usque ad Bonifacium
viii., a quo expulsi sunt, permanserunt. Ex Archivis
Basilicas Lateranensis.
53 Hospin. de Orig. Monachat. lib. 3. c. 6. p. 72.
54 B. ron. an. 459. ex Actis Marcelli ap. Surium, Dec. 29.

I take no notice here of those called Sect I2
by some the monks of St. Basil and H„°^e"±£
St. Jerom; for it is certain those fa- mltaly-
thers never set up any distinct orders of their own,
though both of them were promoters of the monas
tic life in general. The Rule, which goes under the
name of St. Jerom, is known to be a forgery of some
later writer: and the ascetics commonly ascribed
to St. Basil, are by some learned men58 rather
thought to be the offspring of Eustathius of Sebas-
tia. But admitting them to be his, as most learned
men do, they do not argue him the author of any
new order, but only a director of those which were
already founded. Therefore passing by these, I
shall only take notice of two orders more, the Be-
nedictins in Italy, and the Apostolics in Britain.
The Benedictins had their rise from Benedict, a fa
mous Italian monk in the time of Justinian, about
the year 530. His first settlement was at Subla-
queum, in the diocese of Tibur in Italy, where he
erected twelve monasteries of twelve monks apiece
in the neighbouring wilderness ; one of which, in
after ages, grew so great, that, it was not- only ex
empt from episcopal power, against all ancient rules,
but, as a modern writer 59 observes, had no less than
fourteen villages under its own proper jurisdiction.
From this place he removed to Mount Cassin, where
he erected another monastery, from whence he pro
pagated his order into other countries with so great
success, that for six hundred years after the great
est part of the European monks were followers of
his rule ; and so, whatever other names they went
by, Carthusians, Cistercians, Grandimontenses, Pree-
monstratenses, Cluniacks, &c, they were but dif
ferent branches of the Benedictins, tiU about the
year 1220 the Dominicans and Franciscans took
new rules from their leaders. Hospinian60 reckons
up twenty-three orders that sprang from this one,
and observes out of Volateran, that in his time it
was computed that there had been of the order two
hundred cardinals, sixteen hundred archbishops,
four thousand bishops, fifteen thousand seven hun
dred abbots, by which it is easy to judge of the
prodigious increase of this order. I shall not con
cern myself to give any further account of them,
but only observe one thing out of the rule of Bene
dict himself, that he never intended his monks
should be called after his own name, or reckoned a
new order; much less that so many new orders
should be derived from it. For he professes only
to write in general for the use of the Coenobites and

« Niceph. Hist. lib. 15. c. 23. 5S Vid. Nicephor. ibid.
67 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 33. Vid. Evagr. lib. 1. u. 21. Mos-
chus, Prat. Spir. c. 19.
59 Hospin. de Orig. Monacb. p. 69. Sutclif. de Monachis,
c-. 7. Vid. Sozomen. lib. 3. c. 14.
69 Baudrand. Lexic. Geograph. voce Sublaqueum.
«• Hospin. de Monach. lib. 4. c. 5. p. 116 et 132.

249

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

Anchorets of the primitive church, which in his
time were the only two standing orders that the
churches of Italy allowed. He says, indeed, there
were four sorts of monks in all, Coenobites, Ancho
rets, Sardbaitcs, and Oyrovagi: but the two last
were only scandals and reproaches to the church.
Of the Sardbaitcs he gives much the same account
that St. Jerom and Cassian do before him.6' And
the Oyrovagi he thus describes : That they were a
sort of rambling monks, that spent their whole life K
in running about from one province to another, and
getting themselves well entertained for three or four
days together at every cell they came at, being
arrant slaves to their bellies, and wholly addicted
to their pleasures, and in all things worse than the
very Sardbaitcs themselves. So that he professes
to pass over their miserable conversation in silence,
and to write only for the instruction and use of the
ancient Coenobites of the church. By which it is
plain, that in the time of St. Benedict, the monks
had not distinguished themselves into very many
different orders aUowed in the Western church.
sect. 13: About the year 596, the Bendictins
m™ !thaei„AaPiu'£ came with Austin the monk into Bri
tain, and so all the monasteries which
the Saxons built were for monks of that order.
But the ancient Britons had long before this en
tertained the monastic life. Some say Pelagius63
first brought it out of the East into Britain: others
make him also abbot of the college of Bangor, and
speak of two thousand monks under him : but this
is justly censured by learned men64 as a mere fable
of modern authors. However, it is certain, from
Bede, that there was a monastery at Bangor (who
ever was the first founder of it is not very material
to inquire) before Austin and his monks came into
England; and here wras such a number of monks,65
that the monastery being divided into seven parts,
each part had a rector, and no less than three hun
dred persons in it : all which were wont to live by
the labour of their own hands. Hospinian and
Bale give this the name of the Apostolic order ; but
whether upon good grounds I cannot say. In one
thing it is certain they make a great mistake, in
that they confound this monastery of Banochor,
or Bangor, with that of Benchor in Ireland ; which
was another famous monastery founded by Congel-

lus about the year 520. Out of this monastery sprang
many thousand monks, and many other monasteries
in Ireland and other nations also. St. Bernard™
says; Luanus, one of the monks of this congrega
tion, himself alone founded a hundred monasteries.
And Bishop Usher has observed67 of Brendanus, one
of Congellus his first disciples, that he presided over
three thousand monks, who by their own labours
and handy-work did earn their own living. Columba
was another of his disciples, who, having first found
ed the monastery of Deermach in Ireland, went
and converted the Northern Picts to the Christian
faith, anno 565, and builded a monastery in the isle
of Hy, from whence many other monasteries, both
in Britain and Ireland, as Bede63 observes, were
propagated by his disciples. Columbanus and Gal
lus were also monks under Congellus, the latter of
which is famous for founding the monastery of St.
Gall, in Helvetia, which is since become an emi
nent city ; and the other for founding that of Lexo-
vium, or Lisieux, in Normandy, where the monks
(like the Acoemetce, or Watchers, of Constantinople,
mentioned before) were used to divide themselves
into several quires, to succeed one another, and
continue Divine service day and night without in
termission, as St. Bernard69 informs us. I have
been the more particular in giving a distinct ac
count of these two famous monasteries, Benchor
and Bangor, not only because they were the most
ancient in Ireland and Britain, but because they
are so unhappily by Hospinian and Bale confound
ed into one.
I will shut up this chapter with a
few remarks upon the different names or some uncom-
. . . , . mon names of
which the ancients gave to some, or monkB in the an-
° cient church.
all kinds of monks in general. Be
side the names of monks and ascetics, we find them
frequently styled by other titles, respecting some
particular act of their profession. In regard to
.their retirement and quiet way of hving, some are
styled by Justinian,70 in one of his Novels, 'Hcifxas-ai,
Uesychastce, Quietists. Suicerus'1 and Habertus72
take it to be only another name for Anchorets. But
according to Justinian's account, it seems rather to
mean persons who lived among the Coenobites, but
for greater exercise were allowed to retire from the
community, and live (though within the bounds of

61 Vid. sect. 4.
62 Benedict. Regul. Monachor. c. 1. Quartum genus est
monachorum, quod nominatur Gyrovagum, qui tota vita sua
per diversas provincias ternis aut quaternis diebus per di-
versorum cellas hospitantur ; semper vagi et nunquam sta
biles ; propriis voluptatibus et gulae illecebris servientes, et
per omnia deteriores Sarabaitis : de quorum omnium miserri-
ma conversatione melius est silere quam loqui. His ergo
omissis, ad Ccenobitarum fortissimum genus disponendum
adjuvante Domino, veniamus.
63 Hospin. de Monach. lib. 4. c. 3. p. 115.
64 Cave, Hist. Liter, vol. 1. p. 291.

65 Bede, Hist. Anglor. lib. 2. c. 2. In monasterio Bancor
tantus fertur fuisse numerus monachorum, ut cum in septem
portiones esset cum praepositis sibi rectoribus monasterium
divisum, nulla harum portio minus quam trecentos homines
haberet, qui omnes de labore manuum suarum vivere solebant.
66 Bernard. Vit. Malachiae, n. 5. p. 1934.
67 Usher, Relig. of the Ane. Irish, c. 6. p. 46.
68 Bede, lib. 3. c. 4.
69 Bernard, ibid. Vit. Malachiae, u. 5.
70 Justin. Novel. 5. c. 3.
71 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce rprvxarii*.
72 Habert. Arcbierat. p. 588.

CHAP; IL

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

249

a cainobium) in particular cells by themselves, and
those cells were called ijo-uxa^*JPta upon that ac
count. Otherwhiles monks are styled continentes,
because of their great abstinence and continent life ;
as in the third council of Carthage, which forbids
the clergy, and persons78 professing continence, to
go to the virgins or widows without the leave of the
bishops or presbyters. So also in a law of Valen
tinian in the Theodosian Code,'4 and other places.
Sometimes, again, they are noted by the names
amTaldpivoi, and renunciantes, renouncers, from re
nouncing the world and a secular life ; as in Pal
ladius,''' and Cassian,76 who particularly entitles one
of his books, De Institutis Renunciantium. Some
times they are termed philosophers, as by Isidore
of Pelusium," PaUadius,78 Theodoret '9 and others,
because their way of hving seemed to resemble the
philosophic hfe more than others. The author un
der the name of Dionysius the Areopagite seems to
give them the name of therapeutee^' though that
was once a common name of Christians in Egypt,
if the accounts of Eusebius and St. Jerom may be
trusted.81 Palladius sometimes uses the term 0tXo-
Siia for the monastic hfe,82 because they made a
profession of renouncing all for the love of God :
and upon this account Theodoret83 gives one of his
books the title of Philotheus, or Religious History,
because it contains the hves of the most famous
ascetics of his time. The reader will sometimes
also meet with the name of Silentiarii, given to some
monks in ancient history : but this was not a name
of any particular order, but given to some few for
their professing a more than Pythagorean silence ;
such as Johannes Silentiarius, who was first bishop
of Colonia in Armenia, but renounced his bishopric
to become a monk in Palestine, where he got the
name of Silentiarius, from his extraordinary silence,
as Cyril84 of Scythopolis, the writer of his Life, in
forms us. Though it must be noted, that the name
Silentiarii is more commonly given to another sort
of men, who were civil officers in the emperor's
palace, and served both as apparitors to execute
pubhc business, and as guards to keep the peace
about him, whence they had the name of Silentiarii,
under which title they are spoken of in the Theo
dosian Code,85 which joins them and the Decuriones
together, where in Gothofred's learned notes the
curious reader may find a further account of them.

Another name which the historians give to some
Egyptian monks, who were deeply concerned in the
disputes between Theophilus and Chrysostom, is
the title of Mas-pot, or Longi ; but this was peculiar
to four brethren, Dioscorus, Ammonius, Eusebius,
and Euthymius, who were noted by this name for
no other reason, as Sozomen86 observes, but only
because they were tall of stature. In Sidonius
ApoUinaris they are sometimes called cellulani,
from their living in cells,87 and insulani, islanders,
because the famous monastery in the isle of Lerins
was the place where most of the French bishops
and learned men in those ages had their education.
So this was a peculiar name for the monks of Lerins.
The monasteries, beside the common names of po-
vasripia and poval, were also sometimes termed enp.-
viia, as Suicerus shows out of Balzamon, and
Methodius, and Suidas, though that anciently in
Eusebius and Philo signified a church. They were
also called t)yovptvtiia and puvSpm, whence hegu-
menus and archimandrita are names for an abbot,
who is the chief father of a monastery, or governor
of it. And they ate sometimes styled tjpovriTijpia,
places of education and schools of learning, because,
as I show in the next chapter, they were anciently
made use of to that end, and had their <ppov-trai, or
curatorSj particularly designed for that purpose.

CHAPTER III.

AN ACCOUNT OP SUCH ANCIENT LAWS AND RULES, AS
RELATE TO THE MONASTIC LIFE, CHIEFLY THAT
OF THE COENOBITES.
Having thus far taken a view of the Secl ,
several sorts of monks and their se- aiiowedToTurf. "°
veral titles, I proceed to give a short
account of the principal laws and rules, made partly
by the joint concurrence of the civil and ecclesi
astical power, and partly by the authority of private
superiors, for the government of the Coenobites, or
such monks as lived in communities, which were
chiefly regarded in the church. And here we must
first look to the laws relating to their admission : for
all men were not allowed to turn monks at pleasure,

73 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 25. Ut clerici vel continentes, ad
viduas vel vn-gines, nisi jussu vel permissu episcoporum et
presbyterorum, non accedant. Vid. Cod. Can. Afric. c.
38. al. 41.
74 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episcop. Leg. 20. Qui con-
tinentium se volunt nomine nuncupari, &c.
75 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 15.
78 Cassian. lib. 4. de Institut. Renunc.
77 Isidor. lib. 1. Ep. 1. ™ Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 8.
79 Theodor. lib. 4. c. 28.
*° Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccl. c. 6. p. 386.

81 See Book I. chap. 1. sect. 1.
62 Pallad. Lausiac. c. 12. ra Theodor. tpiXo^eoi, t. 4.
84 Apud Papebroch. Acta Sanctorum, Maii 13. t. 3. p. 23-1.
65 Cod. Th. lib. 6. Tit. 23. de Decurionibus et Silentiariis.
86 Sozom. lib. 7. c 30. Oi paKpol Si 'ek tov cruipaTo? wvo-
pat\oVTO. 87 Sidon. lib. 9. Ep. 3. ad Faustum. Precum peritus in-
sulanarum, cjuas de senatu Lyrinensium cellulanorum in
urbem transtulisti. So Eucherius ad Salon, lib. 1. Insulani
Tyrones. And Faustus de Natali S. Maximi Stadium In-
sulanum. Vid. Savaro, Not. in loc. Sidonii.

250

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH

Book VII.

because such an indiscriminate permission would
have been to the detriment both of church and
state. Upon this account the civil law forbids any
of the curiales to become monks, unless they parted
with their estates to sorrie others, that might bear
the offices of their country in their stead. To this
purpose is that law of Valentinian and Valens in
the Theodosian Code,1 which taking notice of some
curiales, who pretended to associate themselves with
the monks in Egypt, only to avoid bearing the
offices of their country, orders them to be fetched
back from the monasteries by force, and to be com
pelled to do their duty in their civil station, or else
to part with their estates to others that should offi
ciate for them. This was agreeable to all those
ancient laws, which forbade any of the curiales to be
ordained among the clergy, except upon the same
condition of quitting their estates to others to bear
the offices of their country in their stead : and yet
Baronius2 is so offended at this law, that he reckons
it was but the prcsludium to a severe persecution,
which Valens, shortly after the death of Valentinian,
brought upon the monks in the East, when, as St.
Jerom3 and Orosius inform us, he by another law
obliged them to turn soldiers, and ordered such as
refused to be bastinadoed to death. Gothofred,4
by mistake, reckons this law the very same with
the former ; but Mr. Pagi5 corrects both him and
Baronius together, and shows them to be distinct
laws, and plainly to refer to different times and things ;
the one being made while Valentinian was alive,
the other by Valens alone after his death ; the one
a very severe law, raising a great persecution against
the monks, the other laying no greater burden on
them than was always laid upon the clergy by
other laws, which prohibit the curiales to be Or
dained, unless they found proper substitutes to bear
the offices of their country in their room. And the
reason of these laws, as they referred both to the
monks and clergy, was one and the same, that men,
who by their estates were tied to the service of their
country, might not exempt their estates from that
service under pretence of entering into a religious
life.

For the same reason, the most ati- SecL
cient laws both of church and state ou^'E^S
forbid any servant to be admitted into ™meat-
any monastery without his master's leave, because
that was to deprive his master Of his legal right of
service, which by the original state and condition
of his servants was his due. To this purpose Va
lentinian III. has a law at the end of the Theo
dosian Code, which equally forbids servants to be
come either clerks ot monks6 against their master's
will, to evade the proper bonds and duties of their
station. Baronius' has a sour reflection upon this
law also ; for he says, nothing ever prospered with
Valentinian after the making of it: and yet he
could not but know, that the same thing had been
before determined by the councU Of Chalcedon,8 and
that at the instance of the emperor Marcion, who
himself drew up the law, and desired the fathers in
synod to make a canon Of it) as appears from the
acts 9 of that council. The words of the canon are.
That no one shaU be received into any monastery,
to continue there as a monk, without the consent of
his own master. So httle reason was there to
charge Valentinian with an innovation in this mat
ter, when an emperor and a general council had de
termined the same before him. But Justinian can
celled all these former laws by a new edict of his
own, which first set servants at hberty10 from their
masters, under pretence of betaking themselves to a
monastic life. So that what innovation was made
in this matter is justly to be ascribed to him as its
proper author.
Another caution which the ancients
. Sect. s.
prescribed to be observed in this mat- Norhushandaand
A wiveB without mu
ter was, that married persons should tuai consent or each
never betake themselves to a monas
tic life without mutual consent of both parties.
Thus Animus and his wife acted by consent, as
Socrates and Palladius '¦ relate the story. And so
Martinianus and Maxima, mentioned by Victor ;"
Paulinus, bishop of Nola, and Therasia his wife,
by mutual consent. But Paulinus inveighs severely
against the contrary practice, blaming Celantia and
others, who indiscreetly dissolved their marriage

1 Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Decurion. Leg. 63. Quidam
ignaviae sectatores, desertis civitatum muneribus, captant
solitudines ac secreta, et specie religionis cum ccetibus mo-
nazonton congregantur. Hos igitur atque hujusmodi intra
.rEgyptum deprehensos, per comitem Orientis erui e latebris
consulta praeceptione mandavimus, atque ad munia patri-
arum subeunda revocari, aut pro tenore nostrae sanctionis
familiarium rerum carere inlecebris : quas per eos cen-
suimus vindicandas, qui publicarum essent subituri munera
functionum. 2 Baron, an. 375. p. 369.
3 Hieron. Chronic, an. 376. Valens lege data, utmonachi
militarent, nolentes fustibus jussit interfici. Oros. Hist. lib.
7. c. 33. Tribuni et milites missi, qui sanctos et veros Dei
milites alio nomiue persecutionis abstraherent, interfecerunt
ibi agmina multa sanctorum.

4 Gothofred. Not. in Cod. Th. lib. 12. Tit. 1. de Decurion,
Leg. 63.
5 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 375. n. 12 et 13.
6 Valent. 3. Novel. 12. Nullus oviginarius, inquilinus,
servus, vel colonuSj ad clericale munus accedat, neque mo-
nachis et monasteriis aggregetur, ut vinculum debitae con-
ditionis evadat.
7 Baron, an. 452. p. 179.
8 Cone. Chalced. c. 4. MrfSiva irpoerSixEoSat iv roU
pova<TTt]ptois iirl Tf> povdaai irapi yveop]]V tov ISiov OEff-
ttotov. 9 Cone. Chalced. Act. 6. p. 609.
10 Justin. Novel. 5. c.2.
11 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 23. Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 8.
12 Vict. Uticens. de Persec. Vandal, lib. 1.

Chap. Ill

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

251

vow, and thereby exposed their husbands to the sin
of adulteryj making themselves partakers in their
guilt,13 by acting against the rule of the apostle,
which says, " The wife hath not power of her own
body, but the husband ; and likewise also the hus
band hath not power of his own body) hut the wife."
St. Austin 14 argues upon the same ground, that such
engagements are not to be made but by mutual
consent; and if either party inconsiderately enter
into any such vow, they are rather to repent of
their rashness, than perform their promise. This
was his constant sense, as appears from other places
of his writings:15 and herein St. Jerom,16 St. Basil,17
and aU the ancients agree, except Theonas in Cas
sian,18 who, having forsaken his wife to turn monk,
is said to have done it with the approbation of the
fathers in Scethis, though Cassian himself dares
not undertake to excuse it, as knowing it to have
been against the general sense and practice of the
cathohc church. Justinian, indeed, gave some en
couragement to this unwarrantable practice by a
law, wherein he authorizes the deserting party, man
or woman, to claim their own fortune again,19 and
not be liable to the least punishment for their de
sertion. But the church never approved of this law ;
and it is remarked even by BeUarmine M himself, that
Gregory the Great wrote agamst it.
sect. 4. ^ was anciently also thought un-
ou?°1iehconsent'of Treasonable to admit children into the
«ir parents. monastic life without or against the
consent of their parents. The councU of Gangra21
seems to reflect on this practice, as encouraged by
Eustathius the heretic, in a canon which decrees,
That if any chUdren, under pretence of rehgion,
forsook their parents, and did not give them the
honour due to them, they should be anathematized.
St. Bash's directions are conformable to the rule of
that councU, that children should not be received
into monasteries,22 unless they were offered by their
parents, if their parents were alive. But Justinian
a Httle enervated the force of this ancient rule by a

new law,23 forbidding parents to hinder their chil
dren from becoming monks or clerks, and evacuat
ing then- wills, if they presumed to disinherit them
upon that account. And this seems to have been
the first step toward the contrary practice ; which
some learned writers24 of the Romish church have
been so far from approving, that they have with
the utmost zeal and vehemence declaimed against
it, as repugnant to the laws of reason and Scripture,
and the general practice of the primitive church.
Nor was it only the parents' right Sect 5
that was to be considered in this case, JSi?'^!1^-
but also the right that every person Sk^sainsuhelr
-, . -i ... ,* j. own consent.
is presumed to have in himself: for
if a parent offered a child before he was capable of
giving his own consent, the act was of no force,
unless the chUd confirmed it voluntarily, when he
came to years of discretion : which the second
council of Toledo reckons to be about the age of
eighteen, decreeing, That aU such as were entered
in their infancy by their parents25 into the clerical
or monastic state, should be instructed in the bi
shop's house till they came to that age, and then
they should be interrogated, whether they intended
to lead a single life or marry, that accordingly they
might now resolve either to continue in their pre
sent state, or betake themselves to a secular life
again ; which, by the decree of this council, they
had still liberty to do. And virgins had the same
hberty till forty, by an edict of the emperors Leo
and Majorian,28 at the end ofthe Theodosian Code.
But the fourth council of Toledo27 was more severe
in this respect to infant monks : for there it was
decreed, anno 633, that whether their parents' de
votion or their own profession made them monks,
both should be equaUy binding, and there should be
no permission to return to a secular life again. This,
as Spalatensis28 rightly observes, was the first canon
that ever was made to retain children in monasteries,
who were only offered by their parents, without re
quiring theu- own consent at years of discretion.

13 Paulin. Ep. 14. ad Celant. inter Epist. Hieronymi.
Multa jam per hujusmodi ignorantiam et audivimus et vidi
mus scissa conjugia; quodque recordari piget, occasione
castitatis adulterium perpetratum, &c.
14 Aug. Ep. 45. Armentario et Paulinae. Vovenda talia
non sunt a conjugatis, nisi ex consensu et voluntate com
muni. Et si prapropere factum fuerit, magis est corrigenda
temeritas quam persolvenda promissio.
15 Aug. Ep. 199. ad Ecdiciam.
Hieron. Ep. 46. ad Rusticum. De non divellendo ma-
trimonio sine utriusque consensu.
" Basil. Regul. Major, qu. 12. » Cassian. Collat. 21. c. 9.
19 Cod. Just. lib. 1. Tit. 3. Ae Episcop. et Cler. Leg. 53.
20 Bellarm. de Monachis, c. 38.
21 Cone. Gangren. c. 16. Et xti/a TEKva yovimv, piXierTa
«a~rtoi/, dvaxeopoiri irpoepda-Et 0£ocrE/3£t'cts, Kal pi] t)]v Ka-

0r}<

Koverav Ttpe)v toIs yovEvatv dirovipoi  dviUipa eo-rto.
22 Basil. Regul. Major, qu. 15.
23 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 55. Ut non

liceat parentibus impedire, quo minus liberi eorum volentes
monachi aut clerici fiant, aut earn ob solam causam exhaere-
dare, &c.
24 jErodius de Patrio Jure ad Filium, &c.
25 Cone. Tolet. 2. c. 1. De his, quos voluntas parentum
a primis infantiae annis in clericatus officio vel monachali
posuit, pariter statuimus observandum, ut mox cum detonsi
vel ministerio electorum contraditi fuerint, in domo eccle
siae sub episcopali praesentia a praeposito sibi debeant
erudiri. At ubi octavum decimum aetatis suae compleverint
annum, coram totius cleri plebisque conspectu, voluntas
eorum de expetendo conjugio ab episcopo perscrutetur, &c.
26 Leo, Novel. 8.
27 Cone. Tolet. 4. c. 48. Monachum aut paterna devotio
aut propria professio fatit. Quicquid horum fuerit alliga-
tum, tenebit. Proinde his ad mundum revertendi inter-
cludimus aditum, et omnes ad seculum interdicimus re-
gressus. 28 Spalat. de Repub. lib. 2. <--. 12. n. 29.

252

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

Sect. 6.
Of the tonsure
and hahit of monks.

The manner of admission was ge
nerally by some change of their habit
and dress, not to signify any religious
mystery, but only to express their gravity afid con'
tempt of the world.- And in this the sober part of
them were always careful to observe a decent mean
betwixt vanity and lightness on the one hand, and
hypocritical affectations on the other. Long hair
was always thought an indecency in men, and sa
vouring of secular vanity ; and therefore they poll
ed every monk at his admission, to distinguish him
from the seculars ; but they never shaved any, for
fear they should look too like the priests of Isis.
This, then, was the ancient tonsure, in opposition to
both those extremes. Long hair they reckoned an
effeminate dress, and against the rule of the apostle :
therefore Epiphanius29 blames the Mesopotamian
monks for wearing long hair against the rule of the
catholic church; and St. Austin30 censures such
under the name of criniti fratres, the long-haired
brethren. St. Jerom, according to his custom,
expresses himself with satire and indignation
against them ; for, writing to Eustochium,31 he bids
her beware of such monks as affected to walk in
chains, and wear long hair, and goats' beards, and
black cloaks, and go barefoot in the midst of winter.
For these were but arguments and tokens of a devil.
From which invective it may be easily collected,
that such sort of affectations in habit and dress
were not approved then by wise men in the church.
But, on the other hand, the ancient tonsure was not
a shaven crown; for St. Jerom,32 St, Ambrose,33
and others, equally inveigh against this as a cere
mony of the priests of Isis : it was only an obliga
tion on the monks and clergy to wear decent and
short hair, as it is evident from all the canons that
appoint it-.34 As to their habit and clothing, their
rules were the same, that it should be decent and
grave, as became their profession; not light and
airy, nor slovenly and affected. The monks of Ta-
bennesus in Thebais, which lived under the institu

tion of Pachomius, seem to have been the only
monks in those days which were confined to any par
ticular habits : Cassian95 has a whole book among
his Institutes to describe them ; where he speaks of
their cingula, cucullij collobia, redimicula, palliola or
mqfortes, melotes, their sheep-skins, and caliga, their
sandals ; all which) they that are curious in this
matter may find there particularly described. But
he owns, these habits were not in use36 among
the Western monks ; and some of them, particu
larly the cowl and the sheep-skins, would have
exposed them only to derision to have worn them.
St. Jerom often speaks of the habit of monks, but
he never once intimates that it was any particu
lar garb differing from others, save only in this,
that it was a cheaper, coarser, meaner raiment17
than others wore, expressing their humility and
contempt of the world, without any singularity
or affectation; For as to the affecting of black
cloaks, and appearing in chains, we have heard
him already express himself severely against them.
And he is no less satirical39 against those who
wore cowls and sackcloth for their outward gar
ment : because these were vain singularities, which
religious persons ought to avoid, and rather ob
serve a becoming mean in their habit59 between
gaiety and slovenliness, without any notable dis
tinction to draw the eyes of the world upon them.
PaUadius takes notice of some who loved to walk
in chains, but he says,40 Apollo, the famous Egyptian
monk, was used to inveigh severely against them.
And Cassian justly blames some others, as having
more zeal than knowledge, because they, literally
interpreting that saying of our Saviour, " He that
taketh not up his cross and foUoweth me, is not
worthy of me," made themselves wooden crosses,
and carried them continually about their necks ;
which, as he rightly observes,4' was not to edify,
but raise the laughter of all spectators. Such af
fectations were generally condemned by the an
cients, and it was only the ignorant or superstitious

29 Epiphan. Hair. 80. u. 6.
30 Aug. de Oper. Monach. c. 31. Vereor in hoc vitio
plura dicere propter quosdam crinitos fratres, quorum pra
ter hoc multa et pene omnia veneramur.
31 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustochium, c. 12. Viros fuge,
quos videris catenates ; quorum fceminei contra apostolum
Paulum crines, hircorum barba, nigrum pallium, et nudi
in patientia frigoris pedes. Haec omnia argumenta sunt
diaboli. 32 Id. Com. in Ezek. c. 44.
83 Ambros. Ep. 36. ad Sabin.
34 Vid. Cone. Carthag. 4. <;. 44. Cone. Agath. u. 20.
Cone. Tolet. 3. c. 12. Tolet. 4. can. 40.
35 Cassian. lib. 1. de Habitu Monachor.
36 Cassian. ibid. t. 11. Nam neque caligis nos Ueque col-
lobiis seu una tunica esse contentos hyemis permittit aspe-
ritas ; et parvissimi cuculli velamen vel melotis gestio de-
risum potius quam a;dificationem ullam videntibus com-
parabit.

37 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Sordidee vestes Candidas
mentis indicia sunt. Vilis tunica contemptum sseculi prai-
bet. Id. Ep. 13. ad Paulin. Tunicam mutas cum animo,
nee pleno marsupio gloriosas sordes appetis, &c. Id. Ep.
15. ad Marcellam de Laud. Asellae. Tunica fusciore induta
se repente Domino consecravit
38 H ieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustochium, u. 12. Sunt quae ciliciis
vestiuntur et cucullis fabrefactis : ut ad infantiam redeant,
imitantur noctuas et bubones.
39 Ibid. Vestis sit nee satis munda, nee sordida, et nulla
diversitate notabilis : ne ad te obviam praetereuntium turba
consistat, aut digito d«monstreris.
40 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 52. in Bibl. Patr. G. Lat. t.
2. p. 985.
41 Cassian. Collat. 8. u. 3. Quod quidam districtissimi
monachorum, habentes quidem zelum Dei, sed non secun
dum scientiam, simpliciter intelligentes, fecerunt sibi cruces
ligneas, easque jugiter humeris circumferentes, non aednua-
tionern, sed risum cunctis videntibus intulerunt

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

•253

that approved them. So that upon the whole mat
ter it appears, that the Western monks used only
a common habit, the philosophic pallium, which
many other Christians in those times did ; whence,
as I have noted42 in another place, the heathens
called Christians, Greeks and impostors ; and some
times the looser sort of Christians gave monks the
same name for the same reason, as St. Jerom43
seems to intimate, when he says, If a man did not
wear silk, he was reckoned a monk ; if he did not
appear in gay clothing, he was presently termed a
Greek and impostor. And Salvian44 reflects on the
African people, and especially those of Carthage,
for the same treatment of them : for he says, They
could scarce ever see a man with short hair, and a
pale face, and habited in & pallium, that is, a monk,
without bestowing some reviling and reproachful
language on him. These words of Salvian I take
to be an exact description of their ancient habit
and tonsure.
Sat , As to any solemn vow or profession
prefiS'oTre'o.oired required at their admission, we find
1 !" no such thing : for it was not yet the
practice of those ages ; but whatever was done in
that kind, was only a private transaction between
God and themselves. St. Basil45 says plainly, that
there was no express promise of celibacy taken of
any, but they seemed only to promise it tacitly by
becoming monks. He advises, indeed, that a pro
fession should be required of them for the future :
but that implies, that as yet no such promise had
been exacted before. There were some monks that
lived in a married state, as appears from what has
been alleged from Athanasius and St. Austin in the
foregoing chapter:46 and it is certain a promise of
cehbacy could not be exacted of them. And for
others that lived in communities, their way of ad
mission was not upon any explicit promise, but a
triennial probation, during which time they were
inured to the exercises of the monastic life in the
greatest severity; and if, after that term was ex
pired, they liked to continue the same exercises,
they were then admitted without any further cere
mony or solemnity into the community, to cohabit
as proper members of it. This was the method
prescribed by the rule of Pachomius, the father of
the monks of Tabennesus, from which all others
took their model, as the reader may find in Palladius "
and Sozomen,48 where the rule is at large recited.

42 Book I. chap, 2. n. 4,
Hieron. Ep. 23. ad Marcellam. Nos quia serica veste
non utimur, monachi judicamur.— Si tunica non canduerit,
statim illud de trivio, impostor et Graecus est.
44 Salvian. de Gubern. lib. 8. p. 295. Inter Africa? civi-
tates, et maxime intra Carthaginis muros, palliatum et. pal-
bdium, et recisis comarum fluentinm jubis usque ad cutem
tonsum videre, tam infelix ille populus quam infidelis sine
convicio atque execratione vix potcrat.
5 Basil. Ep. Canon, u. 19. Kcrrd to criunrtipEvov So-

There was as yet no solemn vow of s e e
poverty required neither : though it ,hSh rCSa'tion'
was customary for men voluntarily to of tl,e """'d'
renounce the world, by disposing of their own
estates to charitable uses, before they entered into a
community, where they were to enjoy all things in
common. Thus Hilarion divided all his substance
between his brethren and the poor, reserving no
thing to himself, as St. Jerom40 and Sozomen report
of him. And Paulinus, a rich senator's son, with
his wife Therasia, by mutual oonsent disposed of
both their estates (whieh were very great) to the
poor, and then betook themselves to a monastic life
at Nola, where Paulinus, after he was made bishop
of the place, continued the same voluntary poverty
still; insomuch that St. Austin50 says of him, that
when the Goths were ravaging and plundering the
town, he made this prayer to God, Domine, ne ex-
crucier propter aurum et argentum : ubi enim sint
omnia mea, tu scis : Lord, let not the barbarians
torture me for my silver or gold, for thou knowest
where all my treasure is. Such instances of volun
tary poverty are every where obvious in ancient
history. But then one thing they were very careful
to avoid in those early times, that is, that when
they had once renounced their own estates, they
did not afterward seek to enrich themselves or their
monasteries by begging or accepting the estates of
others. It was a remarkable answer to this pur
pose, which Isaac Syrus, bishop of Ninive,51 is said
to have given to his monks, when they desired him
to receive some lands that were offered him for the
use of his monastery : he replied, Monachus qui in
terra possessiones qucerit, monachus non est, A monk
that seeks for possessions in the earth, is not a
monk. The Western monks were not always pre
cise to this rule, as appears from the complaints of
St. Jerom 5? and Cassian,53 and some imperial laws,54
made to restrain their avarice : but the monks of
Egypt were generally just to their own pretensions :
their monasteries had no lands or revenues belong
ing to them, nor would they have any, nor suffer
any monk to enjoy more than was necessary for
his daily subsistence. For they thought it a con
tradiction to their profession, that men who made a
show of renouncing the world, should grow rich in
monasteries, who perhaps were poor before they
came thither. And therefore if ever they received
any donation, it was not for their own use, but the

kovo-i irapaSeSix^at ti)v dyapiav, &c.
48 See chap. 2. sect. 6.
« Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 38.
« Sozom. lib. 3. c. 14.
« Hieron. Vit. Hilar, c. 3. Sozom. lib. 3. c. 14.
50 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 1. u. 10.
51 Vid. Cave, Hist. Liter, vol. 2. p. 185.
52 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian.
53 Cassian. Instit. lib. 4. c. 15.
84 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 20.

254

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

use of the poor. Nay, they would not suffer any
monk to enjoy any thing to call it his own ; but in
a community they would have all things in com
mon. And therefore St. Jerom55 tells a remarkable
story of one of the monks of Nitria in Egypt, how
he was punished for hoarding up but a hundred
shillings as his own property, which he had saved
out of his daily labour. At his death, when the
thing came to be discovered, a council of all the
monks was called, to advise what" should be done
with the money ; and they were about five thou
sand who met at this consultation : some said it
should be distributed among the poor ; others, that
it should be given to the church; and others, that
it should be remittee! to his parents, But Macarius,
and Pambo, and Isidore, and the rest of those called
fathers among them, decreed that it should be
buried with him in his grave, saying, Thy money
perish with thee. So little regard had those ancient
monks for any thing more than what was necessary
for their daily sustenance. Some indeed did not thus renounce
of thf difference all property, but kept their estates
between the re- , , - , , -,
nouncing and the in their own hands, and yet enjoyed
communicative life. no more of them than if they had
actually passed them over to others : for they dis
tributed their whole yearly revenue constantly to
the poor, and such charitable uses as men's daily
needs required. Of this sort Palladius56 and Sozor
men57 mention one ApoUonius, who kept his estate
in his own possession, but expended the annual
income in providing physic and other necessaries
for the sick monks, as there was occasion. PaUa
dius also speaks of two brothers,58 Pacesius and
Esaias, sons of a rich merchant, who betaking
themselves to a monastic life, disposed of their
estates in these different ways : the one gave away
his whole estate at once to churches and prisons,
and such monasteries as needed relief, and then be
taking himself to a small trade for his own sub
sistence, he spent the rest of his life in labour and
prayer ; but the other kept his estate in his own
possession, and therewith first building a monas
tery, and taking to himself a few associates, he
entertained all strangers travelling that way, took

care of sick, entertained the aged, relieved the poon
and on every Saturday and Lord's day spread three
or four tables for the refreshment of such as needed.
Palladius calls this rightly, Koivoiviiebv fiiov, the com
municative life, and the other, dieoraKapivov j&W, the
life of a renouncer : and adds, that the question
being put by some brethren to Pambo, the famous
Egyptian, concerning these two brothers, Whether
of them took the better course ? he replied, They
were both equally perfect and acceptable in the
sight of God ; the one imitating the hospitality of
Abraham, and the other the zeal of Elias.
Hence it appears that the ancient Sect 10
monks had no regard to estates and ctauJ^bLa
possessions; for one way or other b'''J"li'»™ ""><»»•
they discharged themselves of the burden of them.
And then, since monasteries had no standing re
venues, aU monks whatever were obliged to ex
ercise themselves in bodily labour, partly to main
tain themselves without being burdensome to others,
and partly to keep their souls well guarded, and, as
it were, out of the way of Satan's strongest tempta
tions. For Cassian notes it59 as a very wise saying
of the old Egyptian fathers, That a labouring monk
was but tempted with one devil, but an idle one
was exposed to the devastation of a legion. And
therefore St. Jerom, writing to his friend Rusticus
the monk, bids him be sure to exercise himself in
some69 honest labour, that the devil might always
find him employed. This, he tells him, was the
custom of the Egyptian monasteries, to admit none
without working with their own hands, as well to
supply their bodily wants, as to preserve their souls
from danger. They had then no idle mendicants
among them, as Duarenus himself61 rightly observes.
They looked upon a monk that did not work, as no
better than a covetous defrauder. For so Socrates"'
tells us the Egyptian fathers were used to express
themselves concerning such as eat other men's bread
for nought. We have already heard out of Bede65
how the monks of Bangor, two thousand in number,
maintained themselves with their own labour. And
Bishop Usher has collected64 a great many other
instances of the same nature in relation to the first
monasteries of Ireland and Britain. It would be

55 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 14. Quod ante non
plures annos Nitriae gestum sit, referamus. Quidam ex
fratribus parcior magis quam avarior, nesciens triginta ar-
genteis Dominum venditum, centum solidos, quos lina tex-
endo acquisierat, moriens dereliquit. Initum est inter mo
nachos consilium (nam in eodem loco circiter quinque inillia
divisis cellulis habitabant) quid hinc facto opus esset. Alii
pauperibus distribuendos esse dicebant : alii dandos eccle
sia; ; nonnulli parentibus remittendos. Macarius vero et
Pambo et Isidores, et caeteri quos patres vocant, sancto in
eis loquente Spiritu, decreverunt infodiendos esse cum
eodem, dicentes, pecunia tua tecum sit in perditionem.
50 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 14.
" Sozom. lib. 6. c. 29. » Pallad. ibid. t. 15.

59 Cassian. Instit. lib. 10. c. 23. Haec est apud .cEgyptum
antiquis patribus sancta sententia, operantem monachum
uno dcemone pulsari ; otiosum vero innurneris spiritibus
devastari. 60 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Fac et aliquid operis, utte
semper diabolus inveniat occupatum.  .rEgyptiorum mo-
nasteria hunc morem tenent, ut nullum absque operis labore
suscipiant, non tam propter victus necessaria, quam propter
animae salutem.
61 Duaren. de Minister, et Benefic. lib. 1. c. 20. Nee ita
otio erant dediti, more pseudomonachorum nostri tempons.
62 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 23. Movaxos, e'i pi] ipyiXfiiTo, iv'unfl
-rto ttXeovektii KpivETat. *** Bed. lib. I. c. /¦
64 Usher, Relig. ofthe Ancient Irish, u. 6.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

255

endless to produce passages of ancient writers that
relate to this matter : therefore I shall content my
self to refer the reader to the places themselves
cited65 in the margin, and only observe one thing
further, That anciently monks by the labour of their
hands did not only provide themselves of sufficient
maintenance, but had superfluities also to relieve
the necessities of others. Sozomen66 says, Serapion
presided over a monastery of ten thousand monks
near Arsinoe in Egypt, who aU thus laboured with
their own hands, going to reap in the fields in the time
of harvest, so that they had enough and to spare for
the use of the poor. Which is confirmed by St.
Austin,67 who, speaking of the labour of the monks
of his own time, assures us, they many times sent
away whole ships laden with necessaries, to supply
the needs of such countries as were exceeding bar
ren and poor. He means the deserts of Libya, of
which Cassian speaks, telling us, that the fathers
in Egypt would never suffer their monks to receive
any thing by way of maintenance68 from others, but
they had sufficient out of their labour not only to
entertain strangers and travellers that came to visit
them, but also to send abundance of provisions into
the famished parts of Libya, and to supply the wants
of men in prison in other places ; reckoning that
hereby, they offered a reasonable and true sacrifice
to God of the fruit of then- own hands by such an
oblation. It seems they did not then think that
working was inconsistent with the other duties of a
monk, but one necessary part of his office and sta
tion. And St. Austin wrote a whole book69 to prove
this to be their duty, wherein he takes occasion to
answer aU the plausible objections that have ever
been made to the contrary.
sect. u. Now, the better to promote this and
PoTn™Emonasate- all their other duties, the monasteries
riesforthis purpose, , -,. • -, -, . , ,
m.dectmi,cimtena- were commonly divided into several
parts, and proper officers appointed
over them. Every ten monks were subject to one,

who was called the decanus, or dean, from his presid
ing over ten ; and every hundred had another officer,
called centenarius, from presiding over a hundred.
Above these were the patres, or fathers of the mo
nasteries, as St. Jerom and St. Austin commonly
term them ; which in other writers are called ab-
bates, abbots, from the Greek dfSfiaq, a father ; and
hegumeni, presidents; and archimandrites, fromrofm-
dra, a sheepfold ; they being, as it were, the keepers
or rulers of these sacred folds in the church. The
business of the deans was to exact every man's
daily task, and bring it to the ceconomus, or steward
of the house, who himself gave a monthly account
to the father of them all, as St. Jerom'0 and St.
Austin" inform us.
The fathers were commonly of the - SecL ]2
order of presbyters, both for the per- faS>er,poorcr °ob'0hd
formance of Divine offices, and the ex- of SscTpUne'over'th'
ercise of discipline among them. And
their power was very considerable: for though it
was not absolute and unlimited, yet it was seldom
or never disputed by their inferiors ; it being, as St.
Jerom observes,72 a prime part of their confeder
ation to obey their superiors, and do whatever they
commanded them. And in case of wilful trans
gression, they had power to inflict both spiritual and
corporal punishments on them. Their spiritual
punishments were the censures of the church, sus
pension from the eucharist, and excommunication.
For these powers were lodged in their hands, as ap
pears from several passages in Cassian, who often
speaks73 ofthe abbots casting the monks out of the
church, and forbidding the rest to pray with them,
till they had done a very submissive penance pros
trate upon the ground, and had been reconciled and
absolved by the abbot publicly before all the bre
thren. He particularly notes of Paphnutius, abbot
of Scethis,74 that he struck out a monk's name out
of the diptychs of the church, and could scarce be
prevailed with to let him be mentioned in the obla-

65 Epiphan. Hm. 80. u. 6. Chrysost. de Compunct. Cor
dis, lib. 1. c. 6. Hieron. Ep. 77. ad Marcum Celedensem.
Cassian. Instit. lib. 10. c. 22. Id. Collat. 15. c. 4. Justin.
Novel. 133. c. 6. Id. Cod. lib. 11. Tit. 25. de Mendicantibus
Validis. Pallad. Histor. Lausiac. cap. 7, 10, 20, 28, 30, 39,
76, 89, 96, 112. lVJoschus, Prat. Spir. cap. 22, 114, 160, 161,
183, 194.
66 Sozom. lib. 6. u. 28.
67 Aug. de Morib. Eccles. c. 31. Usque adeo ut oneratas
etiam naves in ea loca mittant, qua? inopes incolunt, &c.
68 Cassian. Instit. lib. 10. c. 22. Non solum a nullo quic-
quam ad usum victus sui accipere patiuntur, sed etiam de la-
boribus suis non tantum supervenientes et peregrinos refici-
unt, verurn etiam per loca Libyae, quae sterilitate ac fame
laborant, nee non etiam per civitates his qui squalore car-
cerum contabeseunt, immanem conferentes dirigunt alimo
nies victusque substantiam, de fructu manuum suarum ra-
tionabile ac verurn sacrificium Domino tali oblatione se
offerre credentes.
69 Aug. de Opere Monachor. c. 17, &c.

70 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 15. Opus diei statum
est, quod decano redditum, fertur ad ceconomum, qui et ipse
per singulos menses patri omnium cum inagno tremore red-
dit rationem.
71 Aug. de Morib. Eccles. Cathol. c. 31.
72 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 15. Prima apud eos
cpnfcederatio est, obedire majoribus, et quicquid jusserint
facere. 73 Cassian. Instit. lib. 2. c. 16. Si quis pro admissoquo-
libet delicto fuerit ab oratione suspensus, nullus cum eo
prorsus orandi habet licentiam, antequam submissa in ter
rain puenitentia, reconciliatio ejus et admissi venia coram
fratribus cunctis publice fuerit ab abbate concessa. Id. lib.
4. c. 16. Tamdiu prostratus in terram veniam postulabit,
donee orationum consummetur solennitas, impetraturus earn,
cum jussus fuerit abbatis judicio de solo surgere. Vid. ibid.
v. 20. It. Collat. 18. c. 15.
71 Cassian. Collat. 2. c. 5. Vix a presbytero abbate Paf-
nutio potuit obtineri, ut non inter byothanatos reputatus,
etiam memoria et oblatione pausantium judicaretur indignus.

256

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

tion for those that are at rest in the Lord, because
he had murdered himself at the instigation of Satan,
who appeared to him in the form of an angel of
light, persuading him to throw himself into a deep
well, with confidence that no harm could befall him
for the great merit of his labours and virtues. So
crates75 speaks of the hke power in Arsenius, who
used it, he says, with this discretion, that he never
excommunicated the junior monks, but only the
seniors, because the juniors were likely to become
more refractory by it, and contemn his discipline,
but the seniors were quickly amended by it. The
reader may find some other instances in Palladius75
to the same purpose. As to their corporal punish
ments, Cassian'7 teUs us they were these two, whip
ping and expulsion; and he particularly enumer
ates the crimes for which they were inflicted. Pal
ladius also mentions the fiagellum monachorum : for
he says,'8 in the chm-ch of Mount Nitria, there were
three whips hanged upon three palm trees, one for
the offending monks, another for the correcting of
thieves, and a third for the punishment of strangers,
whom they entertained in an hospital adjoining.
But as yet we read nothing of voluntary whipping of
themselves by way of exercise : that is a later in
vention of the modern monks, whom Spondanus78
and Prateolus80 themselves cannot forbear ranking
among heretics, and a late French writer81 has more
fiiDy exposed them in a discourse on purpose, en
titled Historia Flagellantium, to which I refer the
curious reader.
sect 13 The abbots or fathers were also of
pecuuartriJuele^n great repute in the church. For many
the church. times they were cayje(j to councils> ana
allowed to sit and vote there in the quality of presr
byters. As Benedict in the council of Rome under
Boniface II., anno 531. Which Prelate upon the
authority of Dr. Cave,82 who has it from Antonius
Scipio in his Elogium Abbatum Cassinensium. The
like privilege we find allowed in the council of
Constantinople under Flavian, anno 448, where
twenty-three archimandrites subscribe with thirty
bishops to the condemnation of Eutyches, as appears
from the fragments of that council related in the
council of Chalcedon.63 But it is justly noted by
learned men84 as a new thing, to find abbesses, as
well as abbots, subscribing in the council of Becan-
feld in Kent, anno 694, and that before both pres

byters and temporal lords, as the author of the
Saxon Chronicle85 reports it. For this is the first
time we meet with any such thing in the records of
the ancient church.
But though such power and privi- Sfct
leges were granted to abbots, yet dSetZptl,
neither they nor their monasteries ofbuh0'*-
were as yet exempt from the jurisdiction of bishops.
For by the ancient laws, both ecclesiastical and civil
no monastery was to be erected in any place with
out the leave of the bishop ofthe diocese. This was
one of those things which the emperor Marcian
proposed to the councU of Chalcedon, and at his
request it was there enacted into a canon, that no
one should build "6 either monastery or oratory with
out the consent of the bishop of the city or coun
try where it was to be erected. And by Justinian's
law,87 the bishop was to make a sort of consecration
of the ground before they went to building. It is
further provided in the forementioned canon, that
all monks shall be subject to the bishop of the dio
cese, and give attendance to their own proper duties
of fasting and prayer, not intermeddling themselves
either in ecclesiastical or secular affairs, except
upon great and urgent necessity, and that by the
permission of the bishop of the city or diocese to
which they belonged. But I have already had oc
casion to speak of this matter more fully in another
place :B I shall therefore here only observe two or
three mistakes committed by some modern authors
in their descants upon the words of Bede, which are
commonly alleged to prove the contrary. In one
place Bede,89 speaking of the isle of Huy, and the
monastery founded there by Columba, says, The
island was always governed by a presbyter abbot,
under whose power the whole province, and the bi
shops also, were subjected after an unusual manner,
pursuant to the example of the first founder, who
was not a bishop, but only a presbyter and a monk.
Carolus a Sancto Paulo90 unluckily mistakes this
island for Hibernia, and so makes all the bishops
of Ireland subject to one abbot : others mistake the
province for all Scotland, and so make the same
false deduction in reference to that : whereas in truth
Bede is speaking only of one small part of Scotland,
the country of the Northern Picts, who were con
verted by Columba, in the time of King Bridius,
who gave him the isle of Huy to build a monastery

75 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 23. 7S Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. u. 40.
77 Cassian. Collat. 2. c. 16. Vel plagis emendantur, vel
expulsione purgantur.
78 Pallad. Hist. Laus. c. 6.
79 Spondan. an. 1349. n. 2.
80 Prateol. Elench. Haeret. lib. 6. c. 8.
81 Historia Flagellantium, Paris. 1700. 8vo.
82 Cave, Hist. Liter, vol. 1. p. 402.
83 Cone. Chalced. Act. 1. t. 4. p. 230.
84 Cave, Hist. Liter, vol. 2. p. 240.
85 Chron. Saxon, an. 694.

80 Cone. Chalced. can. 4. *ESo£ev pnSiva piv pijSapoi
otKoSopElv, pi]Si ervvtcrTav povaerTrtptov i) EVKTt)piov otKOV
irapa yvtitp-nu tov Tfis ttoXews iirterKoirov.
87 Justin. Novel. 5. c. 1. Novel. 131. c. 7.
68 Book II. chap. 4. sect. 2.
89 Bed. Hist. lib. 3. c.4. Habere autem solet ipsa insula
rectorem semper abbatem presbyterum, cujus juri et omDis
provincia et ipsi- etiam episcopi ordine inusitato debeant
esse subjecti, juxta exemplum primi doctoris illius, qui non
episcopus, sed presbyter extitit et monachus.
90 Carol, a S. Paulo, Geogr. Sacr. lib. 6. p. 170.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

257

in, whence that province of the Northern Picts be
came subject to the abbot of that monastery : but
that this subjection was in spirituals Bede says not,
but it seems to have been an acknowledgment of
some civil jurisdiction over the bishops, which may
very well consist with their superiority in spirituals,
as the learned bishop of Worcester'1 shows at large
in his discourse of the Culdees among his antiquities
of the British church. Another passage in Bede,
which has been grossly mistaken, is where he
speaks of the council of Herudford, anno 673. In
one of the canons of this council, according to some
corrupt printed copies of Bede, there is this decree,
That the bishops92 who are monks, shaU not wander
from one monastery to another without leave of
their abbot, but continue in that obedience which
they promised at the time of then- conversion. But
this is nothing but a mere mistake of the first editors
of Bede, who not minding the abbreviations of the
manuscript, read episcopi monachi, instead of ipsi
monachi, as some later editions rightly have it. So
that there is nothing said in this place either for
the exemption of monasteries, or in derogation of
the episcopal power, as some seem wilfully to have
mistaken. Yet I deny not but that before this time
there might be some monasteries exempt. For Ha
bertus is of opinion,93 that the third council of Aries,
anno 455, granted an exemption to Faustus, abbot
of the monastery of Lerins, which he thinks was
the first that was ever granted. But from that time
the bishops of Rome took occasion to exempt mo
nasteries in the West, as other patriarchs did in the
East, whence such monasteries by the later Greeks
are caued patriarchal monasteries, as being exempt
from episcopal visitations, and only subject to pa
triarchal jurisdiction. But I return to the ancient monks ;
Sret- 15- i <¦
erS ^moni?1' a navmg given an account of their
pMancei.rl'e'ua' re" bodily exercises, I proceed to speak of
those that were spiritual. For the
improvement of the spiritual life was the thing ori
ginally aimed at by men's retiring from the world.
Here they thought they should have more leisure
and better opportunities for the great business of
repentance. Upon which account the life of a monk

91 Bp. Lloyd's Historical Account of Church Govern
ment, chap. 7. p. 180.
Bed. Hist. lib. 4. c. 5. Ut episcopi monachi non mi
grant de loco in locum, hoc est, de mpnasterio in monaste-
"um, nisi per dimissionem proprii abbatis, sed in ea per-
maneant obedientia, quam tempore suae conversionis pro-
miserunt. 93 Habert. Archierat. p. 595.
94 Hieron. Ep. 53. ad Ripar. Monachus non docentis,
sed plangentis habet officium.
95 Hieron. Prolog, in Regul. Pachomii. In monasterio
Metanoeas, quod de Canobo in poenitentiam felici nominis
convernone mutatum est, &c. Bibl. Patr. 1. 15.
Vales. Not. in Sozomen. lib. 3. v. 14.

is, by St. Jerom94 and others, so often styled the life
of a mourner. And in aUusion to this, the isle of
Canobus near Alexandria, formerly a place of great
lewdness, was upon the translation and settlement
of the monks of Tabennesus there, called Insula
Metanoecs, the Isle of Repentance ; as may be col
lected from St. Jerom, who speaks of its changing
its name upon the building of a monastery there :™
and so both Valesius and others understand it.™
To their extraordinary repentance
they usually joined extraordinary secondly, 'Kxiraor-
i. t, , « . dinary fasting.
fasting. For the Egyptian monks
kept every day a fast tiU nine o'clock, that is, till
three in the afternoon, except on Saturdays and the
Lord's day, and the fifty days of Pentecost, or other
days when any brother came to visit them. For
then they had their relaxations, as we learn from
Cassian and St. Jerom. The fifty days of Pentecost
they kept always festival in compliance with the
pubhc rules and practice of the cathohc church,
whose custom was, as Tertullian says,97 to keep all
the time between Easter and Whitsuntide festival
in memory of our Saviour's resurrection. Therefore
St. Jerom,99 speaking of their daily fasts, says, They
fasted every day alike throughout the year, except
in Lent, when their fasts were a little more strict,
that is, not only till nine o'clock, but till evening ;
and in Pentecost, when they turned their suppers
into dinners, in compliance with the custom of the
church. Cassian99 often speaks of their daily fasts
till nine, but then he excepts likewise the time of
Pentecost 10° for the same reason assigned by St. Je
rom; and Saturdays and Sundays also,101 because
both these days were always festival in the Eastern
church, being days of solemn assembly, on which
they received the eucharist at morning service.
Some indeed exercised themselves with greater aus
terities, fasting two, three, four, or five days together :
but these were not generally approved. St. Jerom 102
and Cassian103 both express themselves against such
immoderate fasts ; and Cassian 104 particularly notes
it as a wise saying of Macarius, the famous Egyp
tian, That a monk should so fast and keep under his
body, as if he were to live a hundred years ; but so
kiU and mortify the . affections of his soul, as if he

97 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c. 3.
08 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 15. Jejunium totius
anni aequale est, excepta quadragesima, in qua sola conce-
ditur strictius vivere. A Pentecoste ccenae mutautur in
prandia, quo et traditioni ecclesiasticae satisfiat, et ventrem
cibo non onerent duplicato.
99 Cassian. Collat. 2. c. 25 et 26. Collat. 19. c 16. Collat.
21. c. 23.
100 Ibid. 21. c. 11 et 20. 101 Ibid. 3. c. 1.
1021 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rusticum. Ep. 7. ad Lcetam.
103 Cassian. Instit. lib. 5. c. 9.
101 Ibid. lib. 5. c. 41. Ita, inquit, debere monachum,
jejuniis operam dare, ut centum annis in corpore duratu-
rum, &c.

25SI

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

were to die the next moment. By which it appears,
that they did not think excessive abstinence of any
use, but rather a disservice to religion. And there
fore St. Austin observes, that the ancient rules105
imposed no absolute necessity in this matter upon
them, but left it to every man's power and every
man's will to fast at discretion ; no one condemning
others, that could not imitate his own austerities,
but always remembering that the Scriptm-e had
above all things recommended charity to men. The
Rule of Pachomius was said to be given him by an
angel, and there one of the angel's directions to him
was, that he should permit every man to eat and
drink and labour according to his strength,106 and
neither forbid them to fast nor to eat. Accordingly
Palladius tells us,107 there were among his monks in
Tabennesus some that eat at seven o'clock, others
at nine, others at ten, others not till even ; some
after two days, others after three, four, or five days :
but all was matter of choice, not compulsion.
Their fas tings were accompanied with
Thirdiy,e<Extraordi- extraordinary and frequent returns
of devotion. The monks of Palestine
had six or seven canonical hours of prayer, so those
in Mesopotamia and other parts of the East. These
were morning prayer at the first hour of the day,
then the third, sixth, and ninth hours, and after
that the eleventh hour, which Cassian1''8 calls the
lucernaris hora, or evening prayer. Besides which
they had their constant vigils, or nocturnal meetings,
of which Cassian gives a particular account in one
whole book109 of his Institutions. But he says the
monks of Egypt were not tied to all these canonical
hours, but only met twice a day for public devotion,
that is, in their night assemblies, which was their
morning prayer; and at nine o'clock, which was
their evening prayer : but then the whole day was
spent in devotion notwithstanding ; for in their pri
vate cells,110 whilst they were at work, they were
always repeating the psalms and other parts of the
Holy Scripture, and intermixing prayers and suppli
cations continually with their labour. Which Cas
sian prefers before the observation of so many ca

nonical hours, as being a more free and voluntary
oblation. Some observed a course of constant de
votion without intermission, as has been noted be
fore111 concerning the monks of Constantinople, and
those of Lisieux112 founded by Columbanus, who
were used to divide themselves into several classes
or quires to succeed and relieve one another in their
continued stations.. And Cassian tells us' that the
first monks113 of Egypt were used to observe such a
perpetual watch, to guard themselves against the
assaults and incursions of midnight devils : for they
durst not all betake themselves to sleep at once,
but while some slept, others kept watch by turns,
and exercised themselves in singing psalms, read
ing, and prayer. Whence we may infer, that though
all monks then did not observe precisely the canon-
• ical hours, yet they were no less constant to their
devotions than those that did ; and their intermix^
ing prayers with their labour, or worshipping by
turns, was equivalent to so many canonical hours,
or rather did exceed it. St. Jerom seems also to
say114 that the Egyptian monks had a sermon made
by the abbot every day after evening prayer: for
thus he describes their devotions : At nine o'clock
they meet together, then the psalms are sung, and
the Scriptures are read ; and prayers being ended,
they all sit down, and the father begins to discourse
to them, whom they hear with the profoundest si
lence and veneration. His words make a deep im
pression on them, their eyes overflow with tears,
and the speaker's commendation is the weeping of
his hearers. Yet no one's grief expresses itself in
any indecent strain; but when he comes to dis
course of the kingdom of Christ, and future happi
ness, and the glory of the world to come, then one
may observe, how each of them, with a moderate
sigh, and eyes lift up to heaven, says within him
self, Oh that I had wings like a dove, for then would
I flee away and be at rest ! This was their con
tinual exercise of pubhc devotion every day. Their
private vacancies and intervals of labour were also
spent in reading and prayer ; for they daily learned
some portion of Scripture, and more especiaUy

'°5 Aug. de Morib. Eccles. Cathol. c. 33. Inter haec ne
mo urgetur in aspera, quae ferre non potest ; nulli.quod r£.-„
cusat imponitur; nee ideo condemnatur a caeleris, quod in
eis se imitandis fatetur invalidum, &c.
106 Pachom. Reg. apud Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. u. 38.
107 Pallad. ibid. c. 39.
108 Cassian. Instit. lib. 3. c. 3. In his horis etiam evan-
gelicus ille paterfamilias operarios conduxit in vineam suam.
Ita enim et ille primo mane conduxisse describitur, quod
tempus designat matutinam nostram solennitatem : deinde
tertia, inde sexta, post haec nona, ad extremum undecima,
in qua lucernaris hora signatur.
109 Ibid. lib. 2.
110 Ibid. lib. 3. c. 2. Apud illos haic officia, quae Do
mino solvere per distinctiones horartim et temporis inter-
valla cum ailmonitione compulsoris adigimur, per totum
diei spucium jugiter cum operis adjectione spontanea cele-

brantur.  Quamobrem exceptis vespertinis horis ac noc-
turnis congregationibus, nulla apud eos per diem publica
solennitas absque die sabbati vel Dominica celebratur, in
quibus hora tertia sacra? communionis obtentu conveniunt.
111 Chap. 2. sect. 10.
112 Chap. 2. sect. 13.
113 Cassian. Collat. 7. c. 23. Ita damionum atrocitas gras-
sabatur, et frequentes ac visibiles sentiebantur aggressus, ut
non auderent omnes pariter noctibus obdormire, sed vicis-
sim aliis degustantibus somnum, alii vigilias celebrantes,
psalmis et orationibus seu lectionibus inbaerebant.
"* Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 15. Manent separati,
sejunctis cellulis, usque ad horam nonam. Post horam no-
nam in commune concurritur, psalmi resonant, Scriptural
recitantur ex more. Et completis orationibus, cunctisque
residentibus, medius quem patrem vocant, incipit dispu.
tare, &c.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

259

made it their meditation on the Lord's day, as St.
Jerom observes of them in the forementioned
place:115 insomuch that many of them became so
expert and well versed in the Holy Scripture, that
they could repeat it by heart : which is particularly
noted of HUarion by Sozomen and St. Jerom,116 and
of Ammonius, Marcus junior, Eros, Serapion, Solo
mon, and some others by Palladius.117 And by this
means they were qualified to entertain their souls
with spiritual exercises, singing of David's Psalms,
and repeating other parts of Scripture, even at their
bodUy labours. Which practice is often mentioned
with great commendation by PaUadius,118 Cassian,119
and St. Jerom, who takes occasion upon this account
to extol the quiet retirement of Christ's httle village
of Bethlehem above the noisy pomp and ambitious
greatness of Rome, where so much time was spent
in seeing and being seen, in receiving visits and
paying them, in praises and detractions, things dis
agreeable to the hfe of a monk : whereas, at Beth
lehem120 there was nothing to be heard but psalms :
one could not go into the field, but he should hear
the ploughman singing his hallelujahs, the sweating
mower solacing himself with hymns, and the vine
dresser tuning David's Psalms. Thus the ancient
monks joined their bodUy and spiritual exercise to
gether, and made their common labour become acts
of devotion to God. Their times of eating and re
freshment were managed after the same manner.
In some places they had the Scriptures read at
table ; which, Cassian says, was first brought up 121
in the monasteries of Cappadocia, to prevent idle
discourse and contentions : but in Egypt they had
no need of that remedy, for they were taught to eat
their meat in silence. But when supper was ended,
St. Jerom122 says, they sung a hymn, and so return
ed to their ceUs. St. Chrysostom123 also takes no
tice of this, and recommends it to secular men, as
proper for their imitation ; reciting the hymn which
they used, which is in these words : " Blessed God,
that hast fed me from my youth, that givest food
-unto all flesh, fill our hearts with joy and gladness,
that we, having always what is sufficient for us,
may abound unto every good work, through Jesus
Christ our Lord ; to whom with thee and the Holy
Ghost be glory, honour, and power, for ever. Amen.
Glory be to thee, 0 Lord ; glory be to thee, O Holy ;

glory be to thee, O King, who hast given us food
for refreshment: fill our hearts with thy Holy Spirit,
that we may be found acceptable in thy sight, and
not be ashamed, when thou renderest to every man
according to his works.'' Thus their ordinary re
freshments, that is, their suppers, (for dinners, he
says, they had none,) were sanctified with the word
of God and prayer. And to express their humility,
and avoid all contention about precedency and
greatness, they served one another mutually at table,
all of them taking their weekly turns : whence in
Cassian124 and St. Jerom125 they are called hebdo-
madarii, week's-men, from their weekly service. On
the Lord's day they were more intent upon ,their
devotions, and spent it wholly upon reading and
prayer. For no other employment, St. Jerom126 says,
was ever allowed among them on that day. Then
every one received the communion, unless he was
under some censure and suspension from it. And
not only on Sundays, but on Saturdays also, it was
customary for the Egyptian monks and others of
the East to communicate. For the first and last day
of the week were so appointed by Pachomius, the
father of the Egyptian monks, to be communion
days among them, as appears from his Rule127 in
Sozomen and Palladius. And Cassian frequently 128
speaks of it as their constant practice. Some were
more strict, and let no day pass without receiving
the eucharist : Palladius 129 says the Egyptian monks
under Apollo observed this rule ; for Apollo was
used to instil this notion into his disciples, That a
monk, if he had opportunity, ought to communicate
every day ; and accordingly he with his fraternity
communicated every day at nine, or three o'clock
in the afternoon, which was the time of their so
lemn assembly, before they went to their ordinary
refreshment. PaUadius130 mentions one instance
more of their devotion, which was only occasional,
viz. their psalmody at the reception of any brethren :
for that, it seems, was the first entertainment they
gave them, to conduct them with singing of psalms
to their habitation. Which has no relation to the
processions of modern ages, but seems to be done in
imitation of our Saviour's entrance and reception
into Jerusalem.
These were the spiritual exercises sect. is.
Of laws excluding
of the ancient monks, whose life was monks from offices

llj Ibid. Dominicis diebus orationi tantum et lectionibus
vacant : quod quidem et omni tempore completis opusculis
faciunt. Quotidie aliquid de Scripturis discitnr.
116 Sozom. lib. 3. c. 14. Hieron. Vit. Hilarion. c. 7.
117 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 12, 21, 29, 83, 96.
1,8 Pallad. ibid. c. 39.
119 Cassian. Instit. lib, 11. c. 15.
120 Hieron. Ep. 18. ad Marcel. In Christi villa tuta rus-
ticitas est. Extra psalmos silentium est. Quocunque te
veneris, arator stivam retinens alleluia decantat, sudans
messor psalmis se advocat, &c.
121 Cassian. Instit. lib. 4. t. 17.
S 2

122 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. ... 15. Nullus in cibo
strepitus, nemo comedens loquitur.  Dehinc consurgunt
pariter, et hymno dicto ad pvaesepia redeunt.
123 Chrysost. Horn. 56. in Matth.
124 Cassian. Instit. lib. 4. c. 19.
i25 Hieron. Prolog, ad Reg. Pachom. It. Ep. 22. ad
Eustoch. c. 15.
126 Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 15. Dominicis diebus orationi
tantum et lectionibus vacant.
127 Sozom. lib. .3. c. 14. Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. u. 38.
128 Cassian. Collat. 18. c. 15. Collat. 23. u. 21.
'2S Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 52. p. 985. m Ibid. p. 984.

2(30

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

i.oth ecclesiastical a life of repentance, fasting, and de
votion, which, joined with continual
bodily labour, kept them always virtuously and
honestly employed : and their laws did not allow
them either to wander about as mendicants, or to
interest themselves in civil or ecclesiastical offices,
or any pubhc affairs relating to church or state.
There are three canons in the council of Chalcedon
to this purpose. One indifferently131 forbids both
clergymen and monks to take to farm any estate or
office, or involve themselves in secular affairs, ex
cept they be unavoidably required by the law to
take upon them the guardianship of minors. An
other132 obliges monks particularly to hve in their
retirement, and to give themselves only to fasting
and prayer, and not to leave their monasteries to
engage themselves either in ecclesiastical or secular
affairs, except the bishop of the city upon some
urgent occasion permit them so to do. And a
third canon133 forbids both monks and clergy to
take upon them any office, civil or military ; ana
thematizing such as are guilty, and do not return
to their first choice. So that monks were wholly
excluded then from secular offices : and though
some were called to ecclesiastial employments, yet
then they were obliged to quit their monastery, and
betake themselves wholly to a clerical hfe, only re
taining so much of the former as would consist
with the indispensable duties of the sacred function.
Of these cases I have particularly spoken134 in the
foregoing chapter. But of monks continuing in
their cloisters, and taking upon them at the same
time the offices of the church, which did not con
cern their own monastery, we have scarce any in
stance in ancient history. Pope Pelagius, as he is
cited by Gratian,135 would not permit a monk to be
a defensor, though that was but a low office in the
church ; because it was contrary to the state of a
monastic life, which was to be spent in retirement,
prayer, and bodily labour : whereas the office of a
defensor was wholly taken up in hearing of causes,
and other acts of a public and litigious nature,
which were things inconsistent with one another.
Till a monk therefore had first bid adieu to his
monastery, he was not to be promoted to any such
office in the church. Much less were they then permitted
Nomonks ancient- to encroach upon the duties, or rights
lv encroached on the . °
duties or rights of and privileges, of the secular clerav.
the secular clergy. *¦ " ci
For we find no complaints of this na
ture in ancient history, as too frequently in after
ages. For the generality of monks being only lay

men, and refusing any other subsistence or revenues
but what arose out of their own labour, (as I have
fully proved before,) they could have no temptation
then to intermeddle either with the business and
duties, or the maintenance and revenues of the
clergy. And for such of them as were ordained
presbyters or deacons, they were either only to
serve their own monastery, or else such were taken
out of monasteries by the bishops, and thence
forth reckoned among the secular clergy of the
church. Valesius indeed is willing to have it
thought otherwise : for he says,136 in the latter end
of the fourth century, it was very usual for monks
to perform the offices of the clergy ; and he alleges
for proof the example of Eusebius VerceUensis and
the church of St. Austin, which I have considered
before,137 and showed that they prove no more, but
that some bishops and their clergy took up a way
of living in common, in imitation of the monastic
life, which is nothing to monks in cloisters intrud
ing themselves into parochial cures. The only in
stance that looks any thing this way, is what Sozo
men138 relates of the church built by Ruffinus, the
great statesman under Arcadius, at a place called
Quercus, in the suburbs of Chalcedon, where, after
he had built his churcri, he says, he placed some
monks near it, whence the clergy of the church
were supplied. But this may mean no more, but
that when there wanted clergy in that church, they
were to be chosen out of that neighbouring monas
tery, which indeed was then no unusual thing in
the chm-ch : but that monks hving in a monastery
should perform Divine offices in other churches be
side that of their own monastery, is not agreeable
to ancient rules and practice. And therefore we
meet with no instances of that kind, nor of tithes
being received by monks, unless it was for the use
of the poor ; of which there is one instance in Cas
sian,139 and besides that I do not remember any
other. Their way of living upon their own labour
made them not solicitous to receive any thing from
other men, and therefore some of them would not
receive maintenance from their own parents, as
Cassian140 relates of Antony, lest they should seem
to live upon any thing that was not the work of
their own hands.
Beside all this, there was another
xl 1 , , v Secl- 20-
reason then why monks could not or- Not aiimved at
J first to dwell in
dmanly attend parochial cures, had £'»•• l^|1tdcrDJ"J"i
they been otherwise qualified for
them. For by the laws of their first institution, in
all parts of the East, their habitation was not to be

131 Cone. Chalced. can. 3. >32 Ibid. can. 4.
133 Ibid. c. 7. ™ Chap. 2. sect. 8.
135 Gratian. Caus. 16. Qurest. 1. c. 20. Omnimoda est il
lius habitus et istius officii diversitas. Illic enim quies,
oratio, labor manuum : at hie causarum cognitio, conven-
tiones, actus, publica litigia, &c.

136 Vales. Not. in Sozom. lib. 8. c. 17.
137 See chap. 2. sect. 8.
138 Sozom. lib. 8. c. 17. IlXijtriov Si povaxoiis aovaiKitriv,
ol tt}s £Kh:\rjo-ias KXrjpov EirXlipovv.
139 Cassian. Collat. 21. c. 2.
140 Ibid. 24. c. 12.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

2G1

in cities, or places of public concourse, but in de
serts and private retirements, where they might be
sequestered from the noise of the world, and live in
quiet and solitude, as their name seemed to imply.
Whence St. Jerom, writing to Rusticus the monk,
inveighs against those who were desirous 141 to hve
in cities, which was contrary to that singularity
they made profession of. And giving instructions
to Paulinus, he says, If you desire to be really, what
you are in name, that is, a solitary, or one that lives
alone, what have you to do in cities,142 which are
not habitations for solitaries, but the multitude ?
And it is observed both by him and Sozomen143 of
Antonius, that he was used to say, The wilderness
was as natural to a monk, as water to a fish ; and
therefore a monk in a city was quite out of his ele
ment, like a fish upon dry land. By which it ap
pears, that the monastic life in the first design was
to exclude men from having any thing to do in cities
and places of pubhc concourse. And there are laws
in both the Codes to the same purpose. Theodosius
enacted, that all that made profession of the mo
nastic life,144 should be obhged by the civil magis
trate to betake themselves to the wilderness and
deserts, as their proper habitation. Baronius, by
mistake, reckons145 this law a punishment, and next
to a persecution of the monks : but Gothofred146 and
Mr. Pagi147 with better judgment correct his error,
and observe with more truth, that it was so far from
being a punishment, that it was only obliging them
to hve according to the rules of their first institu
tion. Leo and Anthemius,148 and after them Jus
tinian, made laws to the same purpose, forbidding
the Eastern monks to appear in cities ; but if they
had any business of concern to be transacted there,
they should do it by their apocrisiarii or responsales,
that is, their proctors or syndics, which every mo
nastery was aUowed for that purpose.
sect. 21. Not but that in some extraordinary
thai ra\eraadmu°tcd cases they took hberty to dispense
with this rule, when a just occasion
required their appearance. As in times of common
danger to the faith, or great persecutions, or when
it seemed necessary for them to interpose with the
magistrate, and intercede for criminals in special
cases. Thus St. Jerom149 observes of Antonius,
that he came to Alexandria at the request of Atha
nasius, to give testimony and countenance to the
cathohc faith, and to confute the Arian heresy.
Theodoret makes the like observation150 upon the

behaviour of Aphraates and Julian, two Syrian
monks, who left their cells in the desert to live in
Antioch, when their presence was thought neces
sary to support the catholic doctrine and its pro
fessors in the time of the Arian persecution under
Valens. And of Aphraates he tells this remarkable
story : that Valens once observing him to pass the
streets in haste, though he was an old man, asked
him, Whither he was going with so much speed ?
To whom he replied, I am going, sir, to pray for
your empire. But, said Valens, it would more have
become you to do that at home in your retirement,
according to the laws of your solitary life. Yes,
sir, said Aphraates, you say very true, I ought so to
do, and I always did so, as long as my Saviour's
sheep were in peace : but now that they are dis
quieted and brought into great danger, very neces
sity compels me to take another course for their
safety, that they may not be torn in pieces by wild
beasts. Were I a virgin, confined to a single room,
it would not become me to sit stiU, when I saw my
father's house on fire, but to run abroad, fetch water,
and extinguish the flame. Now, this is our case.
You, sir, have set fire to the house of our common
Father, and we have left our cells with no small
concern, and are come abroad to put it out. Thus
bravely did Aphraates answer Valens, and apolo
gize for his appearing in the city in the time of
common danger, when Valens himself was the oc
casion of it. Nor was it only in defence of religion
they thus made a pubhc appearance, but sometimes
they thought it necessary to come and intercede
with the emperors and judges for condemned cri
minals. As Sozomen 151 observes of Antonius, that
he was frequently compelled by the complaints and
lamentations of the distressed, to come and inter
pose his good offices with the princes and magis
trates for them, and as soon as he had done, he re
turned to the wilderness again. The reader may
find a more remarkable instance of this kind in one
of St. Chrysostom's homilies152 to the people of An
tioch, where he relates how the city was delivered
from imminent ruin (being under the displeasure of
Theodosius for having demolished the imperial sta
tues, and committing other crimes of a high nature)
by the intercession of the neighbouring monks, who
left their tabernacles and caves in the mountains,
and came into the city, (when other philosophers
for fear were fled out of it,) and interceding with the
judges, prevailed with them to spare the criminals ;

141 Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Quid desideramus urbium
frequentiam, qui de singularitate censemur ?
142 Ep. 13. ad Paulin. Si cupis esse quod diceris, id est
6olus : quid facis in urbibus, quae utique non sunt solorum
habitacula, sed multorum ?
143 Sozom. lib. 1. c. 13.
144 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 3. de Monachis. Leg. 1. Qui
cunque sub professione monachi reperiuntur, deserta loca et
vastas solitudines sequi atque habitare jubeantur.

145 Baron, an. 390. n. 48.
»6 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 3. Leg. 1.
117 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 390. n. 10.
148 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episc. Leg. 29. It,
Novel. 123. c. 42.
1,9 Hieron. Ep. 33. ad Castruc.
™ Theodor. lib. 4. e. 26 et 27.
151 Sozom. lib. 1. c. 13.
152 Chrys. Horn. 17. ad Pop. Antioch. p. 215.

2G2

ANTIQUITIES OF .THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

telhng them, that the images of the emperor might
easily be restored to their pristine beauty, and be
set up again ; but if they slew the images of God, it
would be impossible to raise them up again, since
it was beyond the art of man to join body and soul
together : and if they would not hearken to their
intercession, they should execute them too ; for if it
must be so, they were resolved to die with them.
After this manner they were used to intercede with
the judges for criminals in some such special cases
as this before us. And they commonly did it with
such prevalency, that they seldom failed in their
petition, the magistracy expressing a particular
reverence to them upon such occasions. But after
ward this thing grew into abuse, and they would
not be content to petition, but would sometimes
come in great bodies or troops, per drungos, and by
force deliver criminals, after sentence of condemna
tion was passed upon them. To repress which tu
multuous way of proceeding, Arcadius the emperor
was forced to publish a law153 strictly forbidding
both the monks and clergy to attempt any such
thing, and commanding all bishops to prosecute the
authors of such disorders, if any monks happened
to be so engaged in their districts, under pain of his
royal displeasure. There remains but one inquiry more
whether rnonks to be made concerning this order of
might betalte them- . . °
selves to a secular men, which is, whether such as made
life again. profession of the monastic hfe, were
afterward at liberty to alter their state as they
thought convenient, and turn seculars again ? To
which it may be answered, that they were under no
public vow to the contrary : many men embraced
the life, who never intended to continue aU then-
days in it. Julian himself was once in the monastic
habit, to please his cousin Constantius, who began
to suspect his inclination toward the philosophy of
the Gentiles. Socrates says of him, that he assum
ed154 the tonsure, and feigned the life of a monk in
public, whilst he privately resorted to the lectures of
Libanius the sophist. And Orosius observes the
same155 of Constans the son of Constantine, who
usurped the empire in Britain in the time of Hono
rius, that he was first a monk before his father made
him CcEsar, and sent him into Spain to promote his
interest there. These men had no need of the pope's
dispensation to set them at hberty from their vow ;
for it does not appear they were ever under any such
obligation. Monasteries were anciently schools of

153 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 40. de Pcenis. Leg. 16. Addictos
supplicio, nulli clericorum vel monachorum, eorum etiam
quos ccenobitas vocant, per vim atque usurpationem vin-
dicare liceat ac tenere, &c.
154 Socrat. lib. 3. c. 1. 'Ev xp«jti KEtpipEvos, tov tw
povaxeov virEKpivETO (3iov.
155 Oros. Hist. lib. 7. u. 40. Constantinus Constantem fili-
um suum, proh dolor, ex monacho Caesarem factum  in
Hispaniasmisit.

learning, and places of pious and religious educa
tion of youth : which, though Bellarmine "" thinks
fit to deny it, is evidently proved from St. Chrysos
tom's third book157 against the defamers of the mo
nastic life, which is chiefly spent in advising parents
to send their children to be educated in monasteries,
as the safest places of good education ; not with a
design to oblige them always to continue in the
monastic life, but only to train them up and settle
them securely in the ways of virtue. And to the
same purpose it is observed by PaUadius, that the
monks of Mount Nitria159 had a xenodochium or hos
pital, where, for a week, they entertained any one
that came to them, without working; if he con
tinued longer, they set him either to work at some
bodily labour, or to study : and so employed he
might continue a year, or two or three, among them,
till he saw his own time to depart from them. This
Palladius 159 calls doKnoig ypatjuKi), the exercise of let
ters, in opposition to that of bodily labour. So that
men might enter a monastery for the sake of study,
and leave it again when they pleased, if they laid
upon themselves no further obligation. And they
who tied up themselves stricter, and entered the
monastic life with a design to continue in it, were
never under any vow, unless a private resolution
might be esteemed such, which might be altered at
pleasure, especially if any unforeseen case or acci
dent seemed to require a change in their way of
hving. As Cassian100 tells of one in Egypt, who
despairing to obtain the gift of continency, was
preparing to enter into a married state, and return
to a secular hfe again. The Rule of Pachomius, by
which the Egyptian monks were governed, has no
thing of any vow at their entrance, nor any punish
ment for such as deserted their station afterward :
and there was one piece of disciphne among the
Egyptians, which I have mentioned before, that
seems plainly to intimate that they were under no
solemn vow ; for one of their punishments was ex
pulsion out of the monastery, which is inconsistent
with a vow of continuing in a monastery for ever.
So that at firstthe monastic hfe seems to have been a
matter of free choice, not only at men's first entrance,
but in their progress and continuance also ; and men
might quit it without any other punishment, un
less it were a note of inconstancy fixed upon them.
However, this is certain, that monks Secl K
who betook themselves to a married aoS°,SnofZii'
state, were not anciently obhged by led'

156 Bellarm. de Monachis, lib. 2. c. 6.
157 Chrysost. advers. Vituperatores Vitae Monast. lib. 3,
t. 4. p. 499.
158 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 6.
159 Pallad. ibid. c. 14.
160 Cassian. Collat. 2. c. 13. Ut quia monachus esse non
posset, nee refraenare stimulos carnis, et impugnationis re-
media consequi praevaleret, uxorem duceret, ac relicto mo-
nasterio reverteretur ad sacculum.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

2G3

any law to dissolve their marriage, and put away
their wives, under pretence of any preceding obliga
tion, according to the new rules of the council of
Trent,161 which pronounces such marriages null and
void. In St. Austin's time some virgins and widows
were under the obligation of a vow ; yet if they
married after that, he says, they were not to be se
parated152 from their husbands as adulteresses : for
their marriage was true marriage, and not adultery,
as some falsely argued. He says, They offended
hi°hly in breaking their vow, but yet their mar
riage was valid ; and in that case to separate them
from their husbands, was only to make their hus
bands adulterers in marrying others whUe their
wives were hving. By parity of reason, then, the
marriage of monks must be esteemed valid also,
even supposing them under an equal obligation.
And upon this account we find no instances of dis
solving marriage in such cases left upon record in
ancient history.
sect 24 Yet ™ Process of time, because
rnrau'ordtaaliiy in monks were presumed to be under
flicted on deserters. some private obligation by assuming
this way of living, some punishments were thought
of, as proper to be inflicted on such as relinquished
their station and returned to a secular hfe again.
By the first council of Orleans, a monk that had
entered himself in a monastery,163 if he afterwards
married a wife, was for ever after incapable of
holy orders, but no other censure is passed upon
him. St. Austin was for inflicting the same punish
ment on such as left their monastery without their
own bishop's leave, as appears from his letter to
Aurelius,164 bishop of Carthage, upon that subject.
The civU law likewise excludes deserters from the
pririlege of ordination : for by a law of Honorius,165
they were to be delivered up to the curia, or civU
court of the city, there to serve aU their lives ; by
which means they were rendered incapable of any
office in the church, because curial and clerical
offices were inconsistent with one another, as has
been showed at large166 in another jlace. Justinian
added another punishment, that if they were pos
sessed of any substance, it should all be forfeited to
the monastery 167 which they deserted, while they
themselves should be obliged to serve personaUy

among the officials of the judge of the province
where they lived. For by this time monasteries be
gan to have estates and possessions in some places,
though the most exact rules of the Egyptian monks
were against it. The censures of the church were
likewise inflicted on deserting monks in the fifth
century. Spalatensis 168 thinks the first council that
ever decreed excommunication against them, was
the fourth council of Toledo 169 under Honorius,
anno 633. But did not advert to a former canon
of the council of Chalcedon, made near two hundred
years before, which decreed, that neither virgins
consecrated to God, nor monks,170 should marry ;
and such as did so, should be excommunicated :
only the bishop of the place might moderate the
censure. That is, if I rightly understand that canon,
which is by some mistaken, he might shorten the
term of their penance at his discretion ; which was
the only way of granting indulgences in the primi
tive church. And from hence again it appears,
that when it was thought a crime for a monk to
marry, yet they did not think it a nullity when
done, or presume to void it upon that score, but
only oblige him to do penance for such a term as
the bishop should think fit to impose upon him.
And I suppose the canons of St. Basil,171 and the
council of Trullo,172 which speak of a penance of
seven years or more, are to be understood with this
limitation. I have now put together all that I could think
material to be said upon this subject of the monastic
life : and some perhaps will think I have said too
much, and others too little upon it : but I content
myself to have said so much as seemed necessary
to my own design, which was to give an account of
ancient customs, and explain several laws and rules
of the church. They whose curiosity leads them
further, may easily have recourse to Cassian's In
stitutions and Collations, and Palladius's Historia
Lausiaca, and Theodoret's Philotheus or Religious
History, books written particularly upon this subject
by professed admirers of the monastic life. My
method now leads me to say something briefly of
the virgins and widows, that were also reckoned
among the ascetics of the church.

161 Cone. Trident. Sess. 24. can. 9.
162 Aug. de Bono Viduitat. c. 10. Qui dicunt talium nup-
tias, non esse nuptias, sed potius adulteria, non mihi viden-
tur satis acute ac diligenter considerare quid dicant. Fallit
eos quippe similitudo veritatis, &c.
163 Cone. Aurel. 1. c. 21. Monachus in monasterio con-
versus, si pellici postea vel uxori fuerit sociatus, tantae prae-
varicationis reus, nunquam ecclesiastici gradus officium
sortiatur. Aug. Ep. 76. ad Aurel. Ordini clericorum fit indig-
mssima injuria, si desertores monasteriorum ad militiam
clericatus eligantur, &c.

"* Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. Leg. 39. Si qui professum
sacrae religionis sponte dereliquerit, continuo sibi eum curia
vindicet, &c.
168 Book IV. chap. 4. sect. 4.
167 Justin. Novel. 5. c. 6. Si relinquens monasterium, ad
quandam veniat militiam, aut ad aliam vitae figuram : sub
stantia ejus in monasterio remanente, ipse inter officiales
clarissimi provincial judicis statuetur, &c. It. Cod. lib. 1.
Tit. 3. Leg. 56.
168 Spalat. de Repub. lib. 2. cap. 12. n. 48.
'» Cone. Tolet. 4. c. 55. 17° Cone. Chalced. can. 16.
"< Basil, can. 60. m C0110- Tru11- *•'• 41-

264

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII

CHAPTER IV.
THE CASE AND STATE OF VIRGINS AND WIDOWS
IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH.
As I have showed before that there
oi thf distinction were ascetics in the church long be-
cai and monastical fore there were any monks ; so it
must here be noted, that there were
virgins who made public and open profession of
virginity, before the monastic life or name was
known in the world. This appears from the writ
ings of Cyprian and Tertullian, who speak of virgins
dedicating themselves to Christ before there were
any monasteries to receive them. These for dis
tinction's sake are sometimes called ecclesiastical
virgins by the writers of the following ages, Sozo
men1 and others, to distinguish them from such as
embraced the monastic life, after monasteries be
gan to multiply in the world. The ecclesiastical
virgins were commonly enrolled in the canon or
matricula of the church, that is, in the catalogue
of ecclesiastics, as we learn from Socrates,2 who
speaks of them under that title : and hence they
were sometimes called canonices, canonical virgins,
from their being registered in the canon or books
of the church. They differed from the monastic
virgins chiefly in this, that they lived privately in
their fathers' houses, and had their maintenance
from their fathers, or in cases of necessity from the
church ; but the other lived in communities and
upon their own labour, as we learn from the third
council of Carthage3 and the writings of St. Austin.4
Spalatensis long ago observed this difference,5 and
it is since acknowledged by Albaspinseus,6 Valesius,7
Cotelerius,8 and other learned men of the Romish
church. So that it is now out of dispute, that as
the ascetics for the first three hundred years were
not monks, so neither were the sacred virgins of the
church monastical virgins, or nuns confined to a
cloister, as in after ages.
sect. 2. If it be inquired how these were
Whether they ^
were under any pro- distinguished from other virgins, that

were merely secular ; I conceive it fession of perpstmi
was by some sort of profession of their y'
intention to continue in that state aU their lives ;
but whether that was a solemn vow, or a simple pro
fession, is not agreed among learned writers. The
learned editor" of St. Cyprian reckons they were
under no obligation of any formal vow in the age of
Cyprian, but yet were some way bound by the re
solution and purpose of their own mind, -and the
public profession of virginity : and in this he seems
to speak not only the common sense of protestant
writers, but the sense of that ancient author,10 who
says, They dedicated themselves to Christ, yet so
as that if either they would not or could not per
severe, it was better for them to marry than to burn;
or to be cast into fire for their offences, as his words
may literally be translated. Prom whence it may
be collected, that then the profession of virginity
was not so strict, as to make marrying after be
thought a crime worthy of ecclesiastical censure.
But in the following ages the cen- Sect 3
sures of the church were inflicted on uaKt^LSe.
them. The council of Ancyra11 de- ma^g^t'0'
. ... .-, . ,. i_ their profession,
termined universally against all such
as, having professed virginity, afterward went
against their profession, that they should be sub-
j ected to the same term of penance as digamists were
used to be ; that is, a year or two, as we learn from
one of the canons of St. Basil.12 The council of
Chalcedon 13 orders them to be excommunicated if
they married, but leaves the term of their penance
to the bishop's discretion. The council of Valence
in France is still more severe, forbidding14 them to
be immediately admitted to penance ; and when
they were admitted, unless they made fuU and rea
sonable satisfaction to God, their restoration to
communion was still to be deferred. Now, from
these canons, to mention no more, it evidently ap
pears, that in the following ages next after the time
of Cyprian, that is, in the fourth and fifth centuries,
the censures of the church were severer against
the marriage of jjrofessed virgins than they were be
fore : and they seem to have risen in proportion to
the esteem and value which men began to set upon
celibacy and the monastic life.

1 Sozom. lib. 8. u. 23. IlapSrivoi iKKXiiertaTiKai.
2 Socrat. lib. 1. c. 17. T&s irapSivovs -rets dvayEypappi-
vas iv too toov iKKXr)artu~iv Kavovi, &c.
9 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 33. Ut virgines sacrae, si paren-
tibus, a quibus custodiebantur, privatae fuerint, episcopi
providentia vel presbyteri, si episcopus absens est, in mo
nasterio virginum gravioribus fec-minis commendentur, &c.
* Aug. de Morib. Eccles. c. 31. Lanilicio corpus exer-
cent, atque sustentant, vestesque ipsas fratribus tradunt, ab
iis invicem quod victui opus est resumentes.
6 Spalat. de Repub. lib. 2. c. 11. n. 25.
6 Albaspin. Not. in Cone. Eliber. can. 13.
7 Vales. Not. in Sozom. lib. 8. c. 23.
8 Coteler. Not. in Constitut. Apost. lib. 8. c. 13.
Fell, Not. in Cypr. Ep. 4. Animi proposito et publica

virginitatis professione, non voto astrictae.
10 Cypr. Ep. 62. al. 4. ad Pompon. Si ex fide se Christo
dicaverunt, pudice et caste sine ulla fabula perseverent; ita
fortes et stabiles praemium virginitatis expectent. Si autem
perseverare nolunt, vel non possunt; melius est nubant,
quam in ignem delictis suis cadant.
11 Cone. Ancyr. can. 19. "Oo-ot irap^Eviav iirayyEXXope-
vot, dSlETOvtji Ttjv iirayyEXiav, tov Ttov Siydpwv opov ek-
irXripovTeoaav. 12 Basil. Ep. Canon, u. 4. ls Cone. Chalced. can. 16.
14 Cone. Valentin, can. 2. De puellis, quae se Deo vove-
runt, si ad terrenas nuptias sponte transierint, id custodien-
dum esse decrevimus, ut pcenitentia his non statim detur:
et cum data fuerit, nisi plene satisfecerint Deo, in quantum
ratio poposcerit, earundem communio differatur.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

265

Yet two things are very observable
rota ™ aS °r amidst all the severity and rigour of
never declared null. faQBe ageg . first; jj,^ tnere nfiYeI wag
any church decree for rescinding, or pronouncing
nuU, such marriages. The emperor Jovian, indeed,
as Sozomen relates,15 made it a capital crime by law
for any one to commit a rape upon a devoted virgin,
or so much as to solicit her to forsake her present
state of hfe, and forego her resolution and purpose :
which law is still extant in both the Codes.16 But
then, as Valesius himself rightly observes, this law
was only made against ravishers, and such as soli
cited those virgins to marry against their own will :
but if a virgin did voluntarily quit her purpose and
station, and then marry after that, there was no
thing in this law17 to prohibit her, much less to
punish her for so doing. And for the laws of the
church, though they appointed a spiritual punish
ment, yet they did not cancel or disannul the act,
but confirmed and ratified such- marriages, though
done against the rules then prevailing in the church.
Of which the testimony of St. Austin,18 alleged be
fore in the last chapter, sect. 23, is abundant proof:
not to mention the silence of aU ancient laws in the
case, which speak of no other punishment beside
excommunication, and penance as the consequent
of that, in order to be received into the communion
of the church again. Epiphanius 19 is very express
and particular in the case, that if any professing
virginity feU from their state by fornication, they
had better marry publicly according to the laws,
and then submit themselves to a course of penance,
in order to obtain the communion of the church
again, rather than hve perpetually exposed to the
secret darts of the devil. Which, I think, he would
not have said, had it then been the custom of the
church to disannul the marriages of professed vir
gins, under pretence of any preceding vow or obli
gation. sect 5 The other thing proper to be con-
byllorn?K"to sidered in this case, is, that by the
coSratedleLforoe imperial laws great. liberty and in-
° *' dulgence was granted to all virgins
that were consecrated before the age of forty. For
though some canons20 allowed them to be conse
crated at twenty-five, and others21 at sixteen or

seventeen, which were reckoned to be years of dis
cretion ; yet time quickly showed, that neither of
those terms were so conveniently fixed as they
might be : and therefore other canons required vir
gins to be forty years old22 before they were veiled,
as may be seen particularly in the French and
Spanish councils of Agde and Saragossa. And the
imperial laws not only required that age in conse
crated virgins, but further decreed, That if any virgin
was veUed before that age, either by the violence
or hatred of her parents, (which was a case that
often happened,) she should have liberty to marry :
as appears from the Novel of Leo and Majorian23
at the end of the Theodosian Code, which says,
That no virgin in such circumstances should be
judged sacrilegious, who by her honest marriage
declared, that either she never intended to take upon
her any such vow, or at least was not able to fulfil
it : forasmuch as the doctrine and institutes of the
Christian rehgion have declared, that it is better for
a virgin to marry, than to burn, and forfeit her
virtue by leading an unchaste life, after she has
made profession of virginity. Now, if these two
things be rightly considered, first, that the conse
cration of a virgin was not to be reputed valid, till
she was forty years of age : and, secondly, that if
she married after her consecration at that age, yet
her marriage was then reputed valid, and never dis
annulled ; there will appear a very wide difference
between the practice of the ancient church, and
that of the church of Rome in this matter : for
which reason I have spoken distinctly of this pro
fession of virgins, both to explain the nature of
their vow, and show the measures of its obligation.
As to their consecration itself, it Secl 6
had some things very peculiar in it. fo™aInrd"aS£
For it was usually performed publicly 0f c°"»<™'1°"-
in the church, and that with some solemnity, by
the bishop himself, or at least some presbyter par
ticularly deputed by the bishop for that purpose.
For by the ancient canons, this act among others
was reserved to the office of the supreme minister
of the church, and therefore a presbyter without
his commission or leave was not to intermeddle in
it. The sixth canon in the African Code24 seems
universally to prohibit presbyters these three things,

15 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 3.
16 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. Leg. 5. Si quis non dieam
rapere, sed attentare tantum jungendi causa matrimonii sa-
cratissimas virgines ausus fuerit, capitali poena feriatur.
Vid. Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 25. de Raptu Sanctimonialium,
Leg. 2.
17 Vales. Not. in Sozom. lib. 6. c. 3. Lex Joviani ad
versus raptores virginum lata est; sed si sanctimonialis re-
licto proposito postea nubere voluisset, non prohibebatur
hac lege.
18 Aug. de Bono Viduit. c. 8, 9, 10.
19 Epiphan. Haer. 61. Apostolic.
20 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 4. 21 Basil. Ep. Canon, c. 18.

22 Cone. Agathen. can. 19. Sanctimoniales, quantum-
libet vita earum et mores probati sint, ante annum aetatis
suae quadragesimum non velentur. Cone. Caesaraugust.
can. 8. Non velandas esse virgines, quae se Deo voverunt,
nisi quadraginta annorum probata aetate, &c.
23 Leo et Majorian, Novel. 8. Neque enim sacrilega ju-
dicanda est, quae se hoc ante noluisse, aut certe non posse
complere adpetiticonjugii honestate prodiderit; cum Chris-
tianae religionis instituta atque doctrina melius esse censu-
erit virginem nubere, quam impatientiae ardore naturali
professae pudicitiae non servare virtutem.
24 Cod. Afric. e. 6. Kopwv Kadiipeocris died irpEo-f3vTEpeov
pi] yivryrai, &c.

266

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VII.

the making of chrism, the pubhc reconciliation of
penitents, and the consecration of virgins. But
this last point is to be interpreted by what is said
in the third council of Carthage, that a presbyter is
not to consecrate a virgin without25 the bishop's
leave. Which implies, that he might do it by his
direction. And so Ferrandus in his Abbreviation26
understands it So that this was one of those
things which bishops thought fit to reserve to
themselves in those times, and did not allow their
presbyters, without special direction, to perform it.
Whence I conclude, it was a thing esteemed of some
weight, and the bishop's character was concerned
in it, to use an exact caution in the consecrating of
virgins, as St, Ambrose " words it, that nothing
might be done rashly to the dishonour of the church.
Now, when a virgin had signified her purpose to
the bishop, and her desire of the usual consecra
tion, she was wont to come and make a public
profession of her resolution in the church ; and then
the bishop, or presbyter appointed at the altar, put
upon her the accustomed habit of sacred virgins,
by which they were known and distinguished from
all others. The matter is thus represented by St.
Ambrose, who, speaking of his sister Marcellina,
who was consecrated at Rome by Liberius, says,
that on Christmas day,28 in St. Peter's church, she
signified the profession of virginity by the change
of her habit, Liberius making an exhortation or
discourse of her, suitable to the occasion, contain
ing the duty of virgins, which the reader may find
there recorded. This change of habit is frequently29
mentioned in the ancient councils, and the civU law
also takes notice of it, forbidding30 all mimics and
lewd women the public use of such habit, as was
worn by virgins consecrated to God. Which implies
plainly, that such virgins were known by some par
ticular habit pecuhar to themselves. One part of
this was a veil, caUed the sacrum velamen, whence
the phrase, Velare virginem,3' To veil a virgin, is the
same as consecrating her to God, in some ancient
writers. Though I must note, that Tertullian's book
de Velandis Virginibus, is not so to be understood -.

for he writes not to devoted virgins, but to all virgins
in general, persuading them to use the grave habit
of matrons, that is, to go veiled, according to the
apostle's direction. Whence we must say, that the
veil of consecrated virgins had some note of dis
tinction from the common veil of others, and there
upon the name of sacred affixed to it, because it
was a token or indication of their resolution. Op
tatus particularly observes this of another part of
their habit, which he caUs their purple and golden
mitre. He says, they did not use it for any sacra
ment or mystery, but only as a badge of distinction,
and to signify to whose service they belonged, that
no one might pretend to ravish, or so much as court
them. And therefore he blames32 the Donatists for
their blind and mad zeal in making the virgins of
Christ do penance, and cast away their veils, and
change their mitres, which were only innocent
tokens of their profession. Eusebius takes notice
of the same habit under the name of coronet: for
speaking of one Ennathas, a virgin of Scythopolis
in Palestine, who suffered martyrdom in the Dio
cletian persecution, he says of her,33 that she was
adorned with the coronet of virginity ; alluding to
what Optatus calls their golden riband or httle
mitre ; unless he speaks metaphoricaUy, and means
the crown of virginity added to the crown of mar
tyrdom in another world, of both which great things
are often said in the ancient writers. Albaspiny31
thinks Optatus speaks of another custom, which,
he says, is still in use in the consecration of virgins,
which is untying the hair, as was customary in
secular marriages, in token of the woman's subjec
tion to her husband. But Optatus's words35 seem
only to be "a bare allusion to that secular custom :
for the marriage of virgins to Christ was only figur
ative, or, as he words it, spiritual and heavenly;
and, consequently, the custom referred to must be
understood to be of the same nature, that is, not
real and proper, but figurative only ; which seems
to be most agreeable to the mind of the author,
Baronius30 and Habertus37 express themselves pa
trons of another custom, which began to creep in

25 Cone. Carthag. 3. c. 36. Ut presbyter incousulto epis
copo virgines non consecret, chrisma vero nunquam con-
ficiat. 28 Ferrand. Breviat. Canonum, c. 91.
27 Ambros. de Virgin, lib. 3. p. 124. Neque ego abnuo,
sacerdotalis esse cautionis debere, ut non temere puella
veletur. 28 Ambros. de Virgin, lib. 3. p. 112. Cum in salvatoris
natali, ad apostolum Petrum, virginitatis professionem ves
tis quoque mutatione signares, &c. Vid. Ambros. ad Vir
ginem Lapsam, t. 5.
29 Cone. Carthag. 4. can. 12 et 104. Cone. Arausic. 1. c. 27.
30 Lex Arcadii in Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 4. de Episc.
Audient. Leg. 4. Mimee et quae ludibrio corporis sui quaes-
tum faciunt, publice habitu eamm virginum, quae Deo
dicatae sunt, non utantur. Vid. Cod. Th. lib. 15. Tit 17
Leg. 12.

31 Innoc. Ep. 2. ad Victric. c. 13. Hae vero quae necdum
sacro velamine tectae, &c. Gelas. Ep. 9. ad Episc. Luca-
niae, c. 12.
32 Optat. cont. Parmen. lib. 6. p. 96. Jam illud quam
stultum, quam vanum, ut virgines Christi agerent pceniten-
tiam, ut jamdudum professa? signa voluntatis capitibus,
postea vobis jubentibus, immutarent ; ut mitellas aureas
projicerent, alias acciperent, &c.
33 Euseb. de Martyr. Palaest. c. 9. HapSEvlas aTippari
Kal airri] KEKOerpr}pivr).
34 Albaspin. Not. in Optat. lib. 6. p. 159.
85 Optat. lib. 6. p. 97. Spiritale nubendi hoc genus est:
in nuptias sponsi jam venerant voluntate et professione sua,
et ut saecularibus nuptiis se renunciasse monstrarent, spin-
tali sponso solverant crinem, jam ccclestes celebraverant
nuptias. Quid est quod eas iterum crines solvere coegistis ?
36 Baron, an. 57. n. 93. 37 Habert. Archieratic. p. 598.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

267

among some, but was never allowed Or approved by
the cathohc church. Eustathius the heretic was
for having aU virgins shorn or shaven at their con
secration: but the council of Gangra immediately
rose up against him, and anathematized the prac
tice, passing a decree in these words, If any wo
man,33 under pretence of an ascetic life, cut off her
hair, which God hath given her for a memorial of
subjection, let her be anathema, as one that disan
nuls the decree of subjection. Habertus and Baro
nius pretend that this decree was made only against
married women and seculars, and not such as betook
themselves to a monastic life ; but the words of the
canon are positively against such as did it upon pre
tence that they were entered upon an ascetic, or, as
some caU it, a religious hfe ; and Valesius39 ingenu
ously confesses this to be the true sense of the ca
non, proving hence, that anciently the sacred virgins
were not shaven : as neither were they in France to
the time of Carolus Calvus, as he shows from other
canons, citing Hugo Menardus40 for the same opi
nion. But the councU of Gangra was not of suffi
cient force to repress this custom in all places : for in
St. Jerom's time it prevaUed in some monasteries of
Syria and Egypt, though upon another principle, of
cleanliness, not rehgion, as appears41 from his epis
tle against Sabinian the deacon : yet it did not pre
vail every where in Egypt in the days of Athanasius ;
for Sozomen,42 giving an account of the barbarous
usage which the holy virgins met with from the
heathen at Heliopolis, says, they added this indig
nity above aU, that they shaved them also. Which
plainly imphes, that it was not then any approved
custom of the church. Nor did it ever prevail
by any law; for Theodosius the Great added a
civil sanction43 to confirm the ecclesiastical decree
made against it, commanding all women, that un
der pretence of their profession cut off their hair,
to be cast out of the church, and not to be allowed
to partake of the holy mysteries, or make their
supplications at the altar ; and further laid the
penalty both of deposition and excommunication
upon any bishop that should admit such women
to communion. From aU which it manifestly ap
pears, that the pretended tonsure of virgins and

Cone. Gangr. can. 17. Et rts yvvaiKwv Sid ti)v vopt-
l,opEvt]v duK-no-tv diroKEipoiTO Til Kopa?, as iSuiKEv b Qeos
eiy viropvi)<rw rf/s viroTayrj?, ojs dvaXvovaa t6 irpoerTaypa
•rijs virorayiis, dvd&Epa iorio.
39 Vales. Not. in Sozomen. lib. 5. c. 10. Porro sciendum
est, sacras virgines olim intonsas fuisse, ut constat ex con-
cilio Gangrensi. Idque etiam in Gallia usitatum fuit tem-
poribus Caroli Calvi, ut docet canon. 7. Concilii in Verno
Palatio. 40 Menard. Not. in Sacramental. Gregor.
41 Hieron. Ep. 48. cont. Sabinian. Moris est in .fEgyptiis
et Syris monasteriis, ut tam virgo quam vidua, quae se Deo
aevoverint, et saeculo renunciantes omnes delicias saeculi
conculcarint, mundanum crinem monasteriorum matribus
offerant desecandum, &c.

Sect. 7.
Of some privileges
bestowed on them.

widows was anciently no allowed custom of the
church, but rather an abuse, which both the civil
and ecclesiastical laws endeavoured to correct and
exterminate, however it came to prevail in the con
trary practice of later ages. The Ordo Romanus
has also a long form of prayer, and the ceremony
of a ring and a bracelet at their consecration ; but
the ancient liturgies having nothing of this, their
silence seems to be an argument against the an
tiquity Of them. And lest any one should think
the virgins were ordained to some special office in
the church, as the deaconesses were, it is particu
larly remarked by the author of the Constitutions,4'1
that their consecration was not an ordination ; and
therefore imposition of hands, for aught that I can
find, was not any ancient ceremony belonging to it.
I must note further, that as the society of virgins
was of great esteem in the church, so they had some
particular honours paid to them.
Virgins and widows were common
ly excused capitation money together
with the clergy,45 by the imperial laws
of Valentinian and others. Their persons were
sacred; and severe laws were made against any
that should presume to offer the least violence to
them ; banishment, and proscription, and death, were
the ordinary punishments40 of such offenders. Con
stantine paid them a particular respect, by charging
his own coffers and exchequer with their main
tenance. And his mother, Helena,47 was used to
entertain them herself, and wait upon them at her
own table. The church gave them also a share in
her own revenues, and assigned them by way of re
spect a particular place or apartment in the house
of God, wdiither, as St. Ambrose says,48 the most
noble and religious matrons were to resort with
some earnestness to receive their salutations and
embraces. But of this I shall have occasion to dis
course further in the next book, when I come to
treat of churches, and the distinct places of every
order in them.
I have but one thing more to ob- Sect s
serve, which relates to an ancient ^™^K&
name of these virgins, iWc. and non- »,enfflcati°n-
nes, whence I presume comes our English name,

42 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 10. To teXevtuIov dvEKEtpov auras.
13 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 27. Fceminae
quae crinem suum, contra Divinas humanasque leges, in-
stinctu persuasac professionis, absciderint, ab ecclesiae fori-
bus arceantur : non illis fas sit sacra adire mysteria, neque
ullis supplicationibus mereantur veneranda omnibus altaria
frequentare. Adeo quidem, ut episcopus, tonso capite fes-
minam si introire permiserit, dejectus loco etiam ipse cum
hujusmodi contubemiis arceatur.
« Constit. Apost. lib. 8. u. 24. TiapBivos ov x"P°'TOVi'1--
Tat, &c.
45 Cod. Th. lib. 13. Tit. 10. de Censu, Leg. 4.
46 Cod. Tb. lib. 9. Tit. 25. de Raptu Sanctimon. Leg.2et3.
« Socrat. lib. 1. c. 17.
48 Ambros. ad Virgin. Lapsam, c. 6.

268

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VlJ.

nun. Moniales, and ascetrics, and sanctimoniales,
are common names for them in ancient writers. St.
Jerom once uses the name nonnes, and Palladius of
Meursius's edition,49 vovig, but in Fronto Duceeus's
edition it is ypauc, an old woman. Hospinian60
says it is an Egyptian name, and signifies a virgin ;
but St. Jerom51 seems to extend the signification a
little further, to denote indifferently widows pro
fessing chastity after a first marriage, as well as
virgins ; for he particularly applies it to women
hving in widowhood after their first husband's
decease. The names agapetcs and sorores I pass
over, as being rather names of reproach, and de
riving their original from a scandalous abuse and
unwarrantable practice of some vain and indiscreet
men in the church, of which I have given a full
account52 in another place.
Concerning the widows of the
some™ particular church we have not many things fur-
ooservations relat- . . . -,
to the widows of the ther to be observed distinctly, tney
church. , .
being generally under the same laws
and rules as the ecclesiastical virgins were, as to
what concerned their habit, consecration, profes
sion, maintenance, and the like ; the sum of which
is thus expressed in one of the canons53 of the first
council of Orange, That a widow having made pro
fession of continuing in her widowhood before the
bishop in the church, and having her widow's gar
ment put on by the presbyter, ought never after to
violate her promise. That which was particular in
their case, was, 1. That they must be such widows
as had a long time ago lost their husbands, and
lived many years a chaste, unblamable life, ruling
their own houses well, as the author a4 of the Con
stitutions expresses himself almost in the words of
the apostle: but such widows as had but lately
buried their husbands were not to be trusted, for
fear their passions should one time or other prove
too strong for their promise. 2. It may hence be
reasonably concluded, that the younger widows were
generally refused by the church, and not allowed to
make any solemn profession before they were forty
or fifty years old, though this term be no where

precisely fixed. For since, as I have showed be
fore, virgins in some ages were not allowed to make
their profession before forty, it is probable the same
term was generally observed in the case of widows, .
or perhaps sixty required, according to the rule of
the apostle. The widows that were chosen to be
deaconesses in the church, were to be fifty or sixty
years of age, as I have showed before55 in speaking
of their order ; who, though they were not the wi
dows we are now speaking of, yet being generally
chosen out of them, and thence termed widows also,
it may be presumed there was no great difference in
point of age betwixt them. 3. Widows were to be
such only as had been the wives of one man, that
is, only once married, as the ancients generally un
derstand it; though Theodoret gives a different
sense of the words, only excluding such as had
scandalously married a second time after having
divorced themselves from a former husband ; which
seems to be the true sense and meaning of the
apostle, as learned men now understand it." 4.
There was some difference between widows and
^ virgins in the ceremony of their consecration, at
least in the church of Rome in the time of Gela
sius. For in one of his canonical epistles,57 where
he speaks of veiling of virgins on certain hohdays,
and not at other times, except in case of sickness,
he peremptorily forbids the veiling of widows at
any time, as contrary to custom and law, for no
canon had prescribed it. Which seems to argue,
that this particular ceremony was not used in their
consecration. Though it came into use by the time
that the Ordo Romanus was written ; for there the
form58 of consecrating widows prescribes that they
shall be veiled by the presbyter, or else take a ved
consecrated by the bishop from the altar, and veU
themselves. But it is no wonder to find such a
change as this in the Roman church : a diligent in
quirer may find many other that are more consider
able, which I shall no further pursue, but here put
an end to the discourse concerning the ascetics of
the ancient church.

49 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 46. al. 86.
50 Hospin. de Monach. lib. 1. c. 1. p. 3.
51 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 6. Maritorum expertes
dominatu, viduitatis praeferunt libertatem. Castae vocantur
et nonnae, et post ccenam dubiam apostolos somniant.
62 Book VI. chap. 2. sect. 13.
63 Cone. Arausican. can. 27. Viduitatis servanda? profes
sionem coram episcopo in secretario habitant, imposita a
presbytero veste viduali, non esse violandam.
" Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 25.
55 Book II. chap. 22. sect. 4.

56 See Book II. chap. 22. sect. 5.
57 Gelas. Ep. 9. ad Episc. Lucan. Devotis virginibus,
nisi aut in Epiphaniarum die, aut in Albis Paschalibus, aut
in Apostolorum Natalitiis sacrum minime velamen impona-
tur, &c. Viduas autem velare pontificum nullus attentet,
quod nee authoritas Divina delegat, nee canonum forma
praestituit. Ibid. c. 15.
58 Ordo Roman, de Consecr. Viduae, p. 167. Vidua, si
seipsam vult Deo dare, debet et a presbytero velari, vel
etiam consecratum ab episcopo velamen de altari accipere,
et ipsa sibi, non episcopus, iUud debet imponere.

BOOK VIII.
AN ACCOUNT OF THE ANCIENT CHURCHES, AND THEIR SEVERAL PARTS, UTENSILS.
CONSECRATIONS, IMMUNITIES, ETC.

CHAPTEK I.
OF THE SEVERAL NAMES AND FIRST ORIGINAL OF CHURCHES AMONG CHRISTIANS.

sect. 1 Having hitherto given an account of
«rton^a°nd°e the persons, as well clergy as laity,
tono.oorw.ov. that made up the grga,. bodv of the
Christian church, I now proceed to speak of churches
in another sense; first, as taken for the material
buildings, or places of assembly set apart for Divine
worship, and secondly, as taken for certain divisions
or districts of dioceses, provinces, parishes, &c. into
which the church catholic was divided. In speak
ing of the first it will be proper to begin with their
names, and make a httle inquiry into the first
original of churches among Christians. One of the
most common names of churches, as taken for the
structures or buildings, is that of ecclesia ; which
yet among the ancient Greek writers often signifies
the assembly or convocation of people, met together
either upon sacred or civil affairs, and so it is some
times used in Scripture, Acts xix. 40 ; Matt, xviii.
17- And so Isidore of Pelusium uses it likewise, dis
tinguishing thus between eKKXijaia^ptov and kicXtjo-ia j
the siwXiitriaTfjpiov1 is the temple, or building made
of wood and stone, but the UXXnaia is the con
gregation of souls or people that meet therein. And
in this sense, as St. Cyril observes,2 there is a sort
of pheronymy in the name UuXrio-ia, which is so
caUed died rov eKnaXeiv, because it is a convocation
of men solemnly caUed together. But though this
be a very ancient and common signification, yet it
not less usually occurs in the other sense, denoting
the place or building itself8 where the congregation
met together; and in this acceptation it is com

monly opposed both to the synagogues of the Jews
and the temples of the Gentiles ; as appears from
that noted passage in the epistle of Aurelian 4 the
heathen emperor, where he chides the senate for
demurring about the opening of the Sibylhne books,
as if they had been upon a debate in a Christian
church, and not in the temple of all the gods ; and
from another passage in St. Ambrose,5 where plead
ing with Theodosius in behalf of a Christian bishop,
who had caused a Jewish synagogue to be set on
fire, he asks him, whether it was fitting that
Christians should be so severely animadverted on
for burning a synagogue, when Jews and heathens
had been spared, who had made havoc of the
churches ?
Another common name among the
Latins is, Dominicum, or domus Dei,
God's house, which answers to the
Greek tcvpiaxbv, whence with a httle J*^-' al»«"'°»'">
variation we have the Saxon name
kyrik, or hyrch, and the Scotch and English kirk
and church, which are all words of the same im
port, denoting a place set apart for the use and
service of God. The name Dominicum is at least
as old as Cyprian, but he applies it not only to the
church, but to the Lord's supper,6 and perhaps the
Lord's day. For as the learned editor' and others8
have observed, the word Dominicum signifies three
things in ancient writers : 1. The Lord's day. 2.
The Lord's supper. 3. The Lord's house. And
Cyprian's words may be construed to either sense ;

Sect. 2.
Of the names Do
minicum and Kopi*
quo*, (whence
conies kirk and

1 Isidor. Pelus. lib. 2. Ep. 246. "AXXo irlv EKKXvaia, Kal
a\\o iKKXtitria^npiov, &c.
2 Cyril. Catech. 18. n. 11. p. 270. 'EmcXtjo-ia Si KaXti-rcu
epEptavvptos, Sid to irdvTas iKKaXsTaSai, Kal opu avvdyEiv.
3 Vide Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce 'EkkX?io-i<x.
4 Apud Vopiscum, Vit. Aurelian. Miror vos, patres'sancti,
tamdiu de aperiendis Sibyllinis dubitasse libris ; perinde
quasi in Christianorum ecclesia, non in templo deorum om
nium, tractaretis.

° Ambros. Ep. 29. ad Theodos. Synagoga incensa est,
perfidiae locus.  Ecclesia non vindicata est, vindicabitur
synagoga? ' Cypr. de Opere et Eleemos. p. 203. Locuples et dives
es, et Dominicum celebrare te credis, quae corbonam omni
no non respicis ? quae in Dominicum sine sacrificio venis ;
quae partem de sacrificio, quod pauper obtulit, sumis ?
7 Bp. Fell in loc.
8 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 3. n. 2.

270

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

for he thus addresses himself to a rich matron : Do
you think you rightiy celebrate the Dominicum, the
Lord's day, or the Lord's supper, who have no re
gard to the corban? who come into the Lord's
house without any sacrifice, and eat part of the sa
crifice which the poor. have offered? The same.
name occurs frequently in other Latin writers, as in
Ruffin, who brings in the bishop who converted the
philosopher in the council of Nice, thus addressing
himself to his new convert, Arise and follow me to
the Dominicum3 and there receive the seal of your
faith, viz. baptism in the church. And St. Jerom10
tells us, that the famous church of Antioch, which
was begun by Constantine, and finished and dedi
cated by Constantius, had the name of Dominicum
aureum, the golden dome, for its richness and beauty.
The Greek name KvpiaKbv is frequently to be met
with in the councils of Ancyra," and Neocsesarea,12
and Laodicea,18 and Eusebius, who says,14 the perse
cuting emperor Maximinus restored the Christians
their churches under that appellation in his edicts.
And Constantine, having built several churches, gave
them aU the name of Kvptaxd, as being dedicated not
to the honour of any man,15 but him who is Lord of
the universe. This is a plain account of the name :
but whether we may hence conclude with a learned
man,16 that the Greeks, and not the Latins, were
the first planters of Christianity in Britain, because
of the near affinity between the names Kvpiaicbv and
kirk, is what I think not so plain ; but I leave it
to every reader's judgment to determine.
Tertullian once uses the name of domus columbcs,
the house of the dove, for a church. For writing
against the Valentinian heretics, who affected se
crecy in their doctrines, he compares them to the
Eleusinian mysteries, whose temple wras so guarded
with doors and curtains, that a man must be five
years a candidate, before he could be admitted to
the adytum of the deity, or secrets of the sanctuary.
Whereas, says he, the house of our dove" is plain
and simple, delights in high and open places, affects
the light, loves the figure of the Holy Ghost, (that
is, fire and light, as I think Junius rightly interprets
it,) and the orient, or morning sun, which is the
figure of Christ. The house of the dove seems here
to be the same as the house of Christ, who is pointed
out by the dove, as Tertullian words it in the same
place, Christum columba demonstrare solita est ; or
else, as Mr. Mede18 explains it, we may take it for

the house of the dove-like rehgion, or the dove-like
disciples of Christ. For every way it wiU be the
name of a church, as Tertullian plainly intended it.
There are two other names of near
affinity with the former, which some oi theVist'mct™
, , , -xii? hetween domus Dei,
readers may be apt to mistake for domm mdm, and
domus ecclesia.
names of churches, when they are not
always so ; and therefore I cannot let them pass in
this place without taking notice of them. The one
is domus Divina, and the other domus ecclesics. The
first of which is of frequent use in the civil law,
where it signifies not a church, but the emperor's
palace, or his house and family, according to the
style of those times, when every thing belonging to
them had the name of divine. As constitutiones
divines, divale presceptum, lex divalis, literal sacrce,
oraculum cceleste, and such other terms, do not sig
nify (as one would hastily imagine) the sacred in
spired writings, or the laws and oracles .of God, but
the edicts and constitutions of the emperors, who
themselves were called divi, and thence all things
related to them styled divine. Agreeably to this
style, when the emperor Theodosius junior decrees,1'
that no one, no, not of his own divine house, should
receive corn in specie out of the pubhc storehouses,
before it was made into bread by the public bakers :
it is plain, by his own divine house he does not mean
the house of God, the church, but his own family
of palatins, as Gothofred rightly explains it. The
other name, domus ecclesics, dlmg hicXrioiag, the house
of the church, is used by Eusebius in relating the
history of the heretic Paulus Samosatensis, who,
notwithstanding that he was deposed by the council
of Antioch, would not remove out of the house of
the church,20 and therefore the fathers appealed to
the emperor Aurelian against him, who determined,
that that party to whom the bishops of Italy and
Rome should write, should have the house delivered
up to them ; and so Paul was turned out of the
church with great disgrace by the secular power.
The question here is, what Eusebius means by the
house of the church. Mr. Mede21 takes it for the
church itself, and gives a very probable reason for
it, because Eusebius expounds himself, when he
says, Paul was turned out of the church : and he
uses the same expression in another place, where it
can signify nothing but the church, or house of sa
cred assembly. For speaking of the persecutor
Maximinus,22 he says, he neither allowed the Chris-

9 Ruffin. Hist. lib. 1. c. 3. Si haec ita esse credis, surge et
sequere me ad Dominicum, et hujus fidei signaculum suscipe.
10 Hieron. Cbron. Olymp. 276. an. 3. In Antiochia Do
minicum quod appellator aureum, aedificari cceptum.
" Cone. Ancyr. can. 15. 12 Cone. Neocaesar. c. 5.
'3 Cone. Laodic. c. 28. 14 Euseb. lib. 9. t. 10.
,5 Id. de Laud. Const, c. 17.
16 Beverege, Not. in Can. 15. Cone. Ancyr.
17 Tertul. contra Valentin, u. 3. Nostree columban domus
simplex, etiam in editis et apertis et ad lucem. Amat

figuram Spiritus Sancti, orientem Christi figuram, &c.
18 Mede, Disc, of Chur. p. 329.
10 Cod. Th. lib. 14. Tit. 16. de Frumento Urbis Constan-
tinop. Leg. 2. Nulli, ne divines quidem domui nostra, fru-
mentum de horreis publicis pro annona penitus praebeatur,
sed integer canon mancipibus consignetur, annonam in
pane cocto domibus exbibendo.
20 Euseb. lib. 7. tr. 30.
21 Mede's Disc, of Churches, p. 333.
22 Euseb. lib. 9. t. 9. Oil piv avvdSovs iirtKEXiiov iroii

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

271

tians to hold assemblies, nor build houses of assem
bly; which evidently refers to the building of
churches. But yet in other places domus ecclesics
seems to signify no more than the bishop's house, as
in the second council of Toledo,23 where it is decreed,
that such chUdren as were dedicated by their pa
rents in their infancy to a clerical or monastic life,
should be educated and instructed in the house of
the church, under the bishop's eye, by the provost
or governor that was set over them. This in other
canons is called domus sacerdotalis, the bishop's
house, to distinguish it from the church.
t But to proceed: as the temple of
crX^rtacls God at Jerusalem is frequently in
of prayer. Scripture styled the house of prayer;
so Christian churches, in regard that prayer was one
of the principal offices performed in them, were
usually termed TrpoerivnTripia, and oJsot iinerripioi, ora
tories, or houses of prayer ; of which there are in
numerable instances in Eusebius,24 Socrates,20 Sozo
men,26 and other ancient writers. But in some
canons the name, oratories, seems to be restrained
to private chapels, or places of worship set up for
convenience in private famihes, still depending up
on parochial churches, and differing from them in
this, that they were only places of prayer, but not
for celebrating the communion ; or if that was at
any time aUowed there to private famihes, yet at
least upon the great and solemn festivals, they were
to resort for communion to the parish churches.
Gratian27 cites a canon of the council of Orleans,
which allows such oratories, but forbids any one to
celebrate the eucharist there. The same privilege
is granted in one of Justinian's Novels,28 with the
same exception. And so I think we are to under
stand that canon of the council of Trullo,29 which
allows the clergy to use the public offices or liturgy
in such oratories, provided they did it with the con
sent and approbation of the bishop of the place.
For no mention is made there of administering the
sacraments in those places, though the Latin transla

tions put in the word baptizing, which is not in the
original, and is expressly forbidden in another ca
non80 of the same council, requiring all persons to
be baptized in the catholic, that is, public churches.
But the council of Agde81 in France allows the eu
charist to be administered in private oratories, ex
cept upon Easter-day, or Christmas, or Epiphany,
or Ascension, or Pentecost, or such other of the
greater festivals ; and upon these too, if they had
the bishop's licence and permission for it. So that
in those ages an oratory and a cathohc church seem
to have differed, as now a private chapel and a pa
rochial church, though the first ages made no dis
tinction between them.
Another common name of churches
is that of basilicce, which we may why called basilic*,
English, palaces of the Great King. """ """"'"""'¦
This name frequently occurs in St. Ambrose,82 St-
Austin,33 St. Jerom,34 Sidonius Apollinaris,35 and
other writers of the fourth and fifth ages, before
which time we scarce meet with it in any Christian
author. For originally the basilicce among the Ro
mans were the public halls or courts of judicature,
where the princes or magistrates sat to hear and
determine causes ; and other buildings of public
use, such as state-houses, and exchanges for mer
chants, &c, went by the same name among them.
But upon the conversion of Constantine many of
these were given to the church, and turned to an
other use, for Christian assemblies to meet in; as
may be collected from that passage in Ausonius,36
where speaking to the emperor Gratian, he tells
him, the basilices, which heretofore were wont to be
filled with men of business, were now thronged with
votaries praying for his safety. By which he must
needs mean that the Roman halls or courts were
turned into Christian churches. And hence, I con
ceive, the name basilices came to be a general name
for churches in after ages. Though I know Du-
rantus and Bona 37 have other reasons beside this
for the appellation, as that it was because churches

eiu-8(H, oils' oikovs iKKXt]tribiv o'tKoSopE~iv, &c. See lib. 8.
c. 13.
23 Cone. Tolet. 2. can. 1. De bis quos voluntas parentum
a primis infantiaa annis in clericatus officio vel monachali
posuit, pariter statuimus observandum, ut in domo ecclesiae
sub episcopali prsesentia a praeposito sibi debeant erudiri.
24 Euseb. lib. 10. c.3. It. de Laud. Constant, cap. 17. De
Vit. Const, lib. 3. c. 48.
25 Socrat. lib. 1. c. 18, 19.
26 Sozom. lib. 2. c. 5.
27 Gratian. de Consecrat. Dist. I. c. 33. Unicuique fide
lium in domo sua oratorium licet habere, et ibi orare : mis-
sas autem ibi celebrare non licet.
28 Justin. Novel. 58.
Cone. Trull. 0. 31. Toils iv tois tvKT-npiois oikois Iv-
Sov ^ oltcias Tvyxdvovcrt XsiTovpyovvTas kX^pikoIis, bird
yvuipt]v tovto wpaTTEtv tov KaTi tov tottov iirto-Koirov.
^ M Cone. Trull, c. 58. al. 59. MnSapuis iv EvKT-npiw o'Uw
ivSov okias TvyXdvovTi f3dirTia-pa iiriTEXEtaBu,, &c.

31 Cone. Agathen. can. 21. Si quis etiam extra paro-
cbias, in quibus legitimus est ordinariusque conventus, ora
torium in agro habuerit, reliquis festivitatibus ut ibi missas
teneat propter fatigationem familiae justa ordinatione per-
mittimus : Pascha vero, Natali Domini, Epiphania Domini,
Ascensione Domini, Pentecoste, et Natali S. Johannis
Baptistae, et si qui maximi dies in festivitatibus habentur,
non nisi in civitatibus aut in parochiis teneant, &c.
32 Ambros. Ep. 33. ad Marcellinam de tradendis Ba-
silicis. 33 Aug. de Diversis, Serm. 12 et 122.
34 Hieron. Ep. 7. ad Lactam. Ep. 53. ad Riparium.
35 Sidon. lib. 5. Ep. 17. Eusebius, in his Panegyric, u. 9,
uses the Greek name, dvaKTopov.
38 Auson. Gratiar. Actio ad Gratian. pro Consulatu, p.
190. Basilica olim negotiis plena, nunc votis, votisque pro
tua salute susceptis.
37 Durant. de Ritib. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 1. ... 9. Bona, Rer.
Liturg. lib. 1. c. 19. 11. 4.

272

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

were places where sacrifice was offered to God, the
King of all the earth ; or because they were only the
more stately and magnificent churches which had
the title ; which is not true in fact, for ever since it
came first into use, it appears to have been the com
mon name of all churches.
The hke observation is to be made
when first caUed upon the name temples, which for the
temples. . „ 1 .
three first ages is scarce ever* used by
any Christian writer for a church, but only for the
heathen temples, which were receptacles of idols,
and cloisters of their gods. But when idolatry was
destroyed, and statues every where demolished, and
temples purged and consecrated into Christian
churches, then the writers of the following ages
make no scruple to give them the name of temples.
As when St. Ambrose89 says, he could not deliver up
the temple of God, he certainly means the church,
arid not an idol temple. So does also Lactantius40
when he says, he taught oratory in Bithynia, when
the temple of God was destroyed ; meaning the
church of Nicomedia, which was the first that was
demolished in the Diocletian persecution. Eusebius,
speaking of the churches that were rebuilt after that
persecution was over, gives them41 the name of tem
ples, and particularly the church built by Paulinus
he calls the temple of Tyre.42 Not to mention other
passages of Chrysostom,43 Theodoret,44 Prudentius,45
St. Hilary,46 St. Austin,47 and a thousand more to
the same purpose, which show that they had no
aversion to the name temple, when they could safely
use it without ambiguity, and not be mistaken to
mean the temples of the heathen. But from the
name phanum they more religiously abstained, and
never used it unless it were by way of contempt, to
signify their resentments against some conventicle of
heretics, whom they usually put into the same class
with heathens. As we may observe in St. Ambrose,48
who having occasion to speak of a conventicle of
the Valentinians, will not vouchsafe it. the name of a
temple, or a church, but a phanum, a name always
appropriated to the idol temples of the heathens,
with whom he parallels the Valentinians, as no

better than a pack of idolatrous Gentiles met toge
ther, for they worshipped idols and images as the
heathen did.
There is one general name more
for churches, which I must not omit, , churches'' «omc.
because the ambiguity of the expres- »nr.!in,coiiAto.'
. , . - . la, conventicula.
sion has led some learned men into
strange mistakes about it. Constantine, in one of
his laws in the Theodosian Code,49 calls the church
sanctissimum catholices concilium, which Alciat, the
great lawyer, by mistake interprets an ecclesiastical
synod ; whereas, indeed, as Gothofred rightly ob
serves, it signifies there the church, as in many
other places of the ancient writers. For these words,
concilium, synodus, conventiculum, conciliabulum, and
the like, are words of various acceptation. For
though they commonly signify ecclesiastical synods
and councils, yet sometimes they denote other as
semblies, and particularly the ordinary assemblies
of the church for Divine service, and thence the
name was tranferred from the assembly to denote
the place of the assembly, or the church, as has
been observed before upon the word ecclesia. Thus,
when St. Jerom commends Nepotian for adorning
the concilidbula martyrumwith flowers and branches,
he cannot mean councils of martyrs, but churches
called by the names of martyrs.50 And so again
when he says, The persecutors' rage and barbarity
was so exceeding fierce against us, that they pro
ceeded to destroy our conciliabula, it is evident he
means the Christian churches.5' As Gaudeiitius
must be understood in one of his sermons upon the
dedication of a church,52 which is called Concilium
Martyrum. The church assembly itself is often call
ed by the same name, concilium. As in the Passion
of Cyprian, written by Pontius his deacon,58 The
Christians are commanded by the emperor to leave
off then- conciliabula, or meetings and assemblies in
the cemeteries for the worship of God. So the
word is used by St. Jerom,54 speaking of the monks
meeting in the church for Divine service ; and by
Tertulllian,55 for any church assembly, when he says,
the book of Hermes Pastor was reckoned to be

38 Ignatius, Ep. ad Magnes. u. 7, once uses the name with
some restriction, calling the church vadv Qeou, the temple of
God. 39 Ambros. Ep. 33. ad' Marcellin. Respondi quod erat or
dinis, templum Dei tradi a sacerdote non posse,
'" Lactant. lib. 5. c. 2. Cum ego in Bithynia literas ora-
tori,ts accitus docerem, contigissetque ut eodem tempore Dei
templum everteretur, &c.
41 Euseb. lib. 10. c. 2. News a53-ts ix ftaSrpwv eh CuVos
diretpov iyEipopivovs.
42 Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4. 'Ev Tvpai veuis, Sec.
43 Chrysost. Horn. 4. de Verbis Esuise, t. 3. p. 865.
44 Theodor. Hist. lib. 1. c. 31. «5 Prudent. Passio
Laurentii et Hippolyti. 4B Hilar. Com. in
Psalm, exxvi. 47 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 8. c. 27.
43 Ambros. Ep. 29. ad Theodos. Vindicabitur etiam Va-
lentinianorum phanum incensum ? Quid enim est nisi pha

num, in quo est conventus Gentilium?
40 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Episc. Leg. 4.
50 Hieron. Ep. 3. Epitaph. Nepotian. Quod basilicas ec
clesiae et martyrum conciliabula diversis floribus et arborum
comis, vitiumque pampinis adumbrarit, &c.
51 Hieron. Com. in Zechar. cap. viii. In tantam rabiem
persecutorum feritas excitataest, ut etiam conciliabula nostra
destruerent. 52 Gaudent. Serm. 17. in Dedicatione Basilica, Martyrum.
53 Pontii Pass. Cypr. Jussum est, ut nulla conciliabula
faciant, neque ccemiteria ingrediantur.
51 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 15. Post hoc concilium
solvitur, et unaquaeque decuria cuin suo parente pergit ad
mensam. 55 Tertul. de Pudicit. c. 10. Cederem tibi, si Scriptura
Pastoris-  non ab omni concilio ecclesiarum etiam vestra-
rum inter apocrypha et falsa judicaretur.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

273

apocryphal by the universal consent of every as
sembly of the Christian catholic churches. Now,
what the Latins caU concilia, the Greeks call ovvodot,
and therefore it is observable, that the style of the
imperial edicts, which in the Passion of Cyprian
forbids Christians conciliabula facer e, is in Eusebius56
awoSovv TomaSiai, which is a prohibition not of ec
clesiastical synods, but of all church assemblies.
For synodus and ecclesia, as Chrysostom observes,57
are words of the very same import and signification,
and therefore the one may denote a church or
church assembly as well as the other. And because
the Latin name conventiculum in its original notation
signifies no more than an assembly, it is frequently
used by ancient writers for a church. As by Lac-
tantius,50 who, speaking of the persecutors in the
time of Diocletian, says, They were eagerly set upon
shedding Christian blood, for one of them in Phrygia
burned a whole people, together with their conventi
culum, or church, where they were met together.
And Arnobius59 expresses himself in the same man
ner, making a like complaint : Why did our Bibles
deserve to be thrown into the flames ? Why did our
churches, om- conventicula, deserve to be so barbar
ously pulled down ? By which it appears, that the
name conventicula was not as yet appropriated to
heretical meetings, but when the ancients had occa
sion to speak of them, they commonly joined the
epithet of heretical to them, to distinguish them
from the cathohc churches, as may be seen in several
laws of Theodosius,60 and Arcadius, and Honorius,
in the Theodosian Code.
AU these were general names of
¦whysome'churches churches : but there were some which
called martyria.me- . .
merit, apostoitia, had particular appeUations given them
and propaeteia. c c r °
upon reasons whieh could not extend
to aU. And it wiU not be amiss in our passage to
take notice of them also. Such as wrere built over
the grave of any martyr, or caUed by his name to
preserve the memory of him, had usually the dis
tinguishing title of martyrium, or confessio, or me-
moria, given them for that particular reason. Thus
Eusebius" observes of Constantine, that he adorned

his new city of Constantinople with many oratories
and ample martyries, by which he at once did hon
our to the memory of the martyrs, and, as it were,
consecrated his city to the God of the martyrs. And
from this time, in all Christian writers of the fol
lowing ages, a martyry is always put to signify such
a church. Socrates speaks62 of the martyry of
Thomas the apostle at Edessa, and of Peter and
Paul63 at Rome, and of the martyry of Euphemia64
at Chalcedon, where the body of that martyr lay
buried, which was the church where the famous
council of Chalcedon was held, whence, in the acts
of that councU, it is so often styled paprvpwv Eiitptipiag,
the martyry of Euphemia. And upon the same
reason, because our Saviour Christ was the chief
sufferer, and great martyr of his own religion, there
fore the church which Constantine built at Mount
Golgotha in memory of his passion and resurrec
tion, is usually by Eusebius a and others styled mar
tyrium Salvatoris, the martyry of our Saviour, of
which the reader that pleases may find a more am
ple account given by the learned Valesius, in a par
ticular dissertation66 about it at the end of Euse-
bius's Ecclesiastical History. The Latins, instead
of martyrium, commonly use the name memoria
martyrum for such kind of churches. As in that
noted passage of St. Austin,67 where he says, We da
not build temples to our martyrs as gods, but only
memorials of them, as dead men, whose spirits still
live with God ; nor do we erect altars to them in
those memorials, or offer sacrifice thereon to our
martyrs, but to the only God, both theirs and ours. So
that when St. Austin in another place63 commends
Eradius his presbyter for building a memorial of a
holy martyr at his own expense, we are to under
stand, not a monument or a sepulchre, but a church.
And so the name is used by Optatus68 and several
others. But if the person, in memory of whom the
church was built, was either a prophet or an apos
tle, then the church respectively took the name of
aVoToXet'ov or irpotprjTiiov. As we may see in Sozo
men,70 who speaks of the apostoleum of Peter in
Rome, and again, ofthe apostoleum of Peter and Paul

56 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 11. Vid. lib. 9. c. 2 et 9.
57 Chrysost. Horn, in Psal. cxlix. t. 3. p. 632. 'EKKXnaia
cust/iia-ros Kal ervvdSov iflv bvopa.
58 Lactant. lib. 5. c. II. Aliqui ad occidendum prae-
cipitesextiterunt, sicut unus in Phrygia, qui universum po
pulum cum ipso pariter conventiculo concremavit.
58 Arnob. cont. Gent. lib. 4. p. 152. Nostra quidem
scnpta cur ignibus meruerunt dari? Curimmaniter conven
ticula dirui? in quibus summus oratur Deus, &c. Item
Ambrosiaster in Ephes. iv. p. 948. Ubi omnia loca circum-
plexaest ecclesia, conventicula constituta sunt, et rectores
et caetera officia in ecclesiis ordinata sunt.
60 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 5. de Haereticis, Leg. 10. A con-
venticulis suis haereticee superstitionis turba propulsetur. It.
lib. 16. Tit. 4. Leg. 4.
61 Euseb. de Vit. Constant, lib. 3. c. 48. EiiKTi)pion irXei-
oerw, papTvpiots te pEyifoiv.

62 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 18. ra Id. lib. 4. c. 23.
61 Id. lib. 6. c 6.
65 Euseb. lib. 4. de Vit. Constant, c. 40.
68 Valesii Epistola de Anastasi et Martyrio Hierosoly-
mitano. 67 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. c. 10. Nos martyribus nostris,
non templa sicut diis, sed memorias sicut hominibus mortuis,
quorum apud Deum vivunt spiritus, fabricamus: nee ibi
erigimus altaria, in quibus sacrificemus martyribus, sed uni
Deo et martyrum et nostro.
68 Aug. Horn. 50. de Diversis, t. 10. p. 522. De opera
ejus et expensa pecunia memoriam sancti martyris ha
bemus. 69 Optat. cont. Parmen. lib. 2. p. 1. Praesentes sunt ibi
duorum memoriae apostolorum, &c.
'"Sozom. lib. 9. c. 10. "Hyaye £is to JliTpov diro-70-
XeIov, &c.

274

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

at Quercus in the suburbs of Chalcedon, which
Ruffin, the great, statesman under Arcadius,. built to
the honour of the apostles, and called it71 an apos
toleum from them. So in the council of Constanti
nople, under Mennas, there is mention72 made of
the propheteum of St. Esaias the prophet, as also in
Theodorus Lector,73 who says, the relics of Samuel
the prophet were laid up iv rip 7rpo<pr]Tutp avrov, in
¦his propheteum ; which can mean nothing else but
churches called by their names, as Valesius rightly
expounds it.
sect. 9. Much the like account is to be given
terJa,7 lnddmaisi', of two other names, ccemiterium, and
mensa, which we find sometimes used
to signify churches. The Christians in times of
persecution were used to meet in private vaults or
burying-places, and especially at the graves or mo
numents of their martyrs ; as is evident both from
the canons of the council of Eliberis,74 which was
held in the heat of the Diocletian persecution, and
often speaks of their assembling in such places ; as
also from the edicts of the persecuting emperors,
forbidding Christians to hold assemblies in their
cemeteries, as has been noted75 before. Now, when
the persecutions were over, churches were actually
erected over the graves of the martyrs, and in the
places where the cemeteries were, and so a cemetery,
or a grave of a martyr, came to be used for the name
of a chm-ch. Thus, in the writings of St. Austin
there is frequent mention of a church called mensa
Cypriani, where St. Austin preached several76 of
.his sermons. This was the place where Cyprian
suffered martyrdom, which being the altar on which
Cyprian was offered a sacrifice to God, a church was
afterward built there, and an altar or communion
table erected therein for the Christian sacrifice
to be offered to God ; and both these being a me
morial of Cyprian's passion, they were jointly called
by his name,77 mensa Cypriani, Cyprian's altar, or
Cyprian's church. For though it primarily signi
fies the altar, yet it is plain it was extended to be
the name of the church also, where St. Austin

preached so many sermons on Cyprian's day to the
people of Carthage. The name cemetery continued
also to be used in after ages for a church ; as ap
pears from one of the canons of the council78 of
Laodicea, which forbids catholics to frequent the
cemeteries or martyries of heretics, upon pretence of
prayer or Divine service. St. Chrysostom often
uses the word rd^oi paprvpuv, sepulchres of martyrs,
for churches. As where he says79 one might see
whole cities running to the monuments of the
martyrs. And again,80 We depart not from their
sepulchres : here kings lay aside their crowns, and
continue praying for deliverance from dangers, and
for victory over their enemies. Nay, he triumphs
in this both over Jews and Gentiles, that the apos
tles in their deaths were more honourable than
the greatest kings upon earth : for even at Rome,81
the royal city, emperors, and consuls, and generals,
left all, and ran to the sepulchres of the fisherman
and tentmaker : and at Constantinople it was
thought honour enough by those that wore the
diadem, to lie buried, not with the apostles, but
before their porches, and kings themselves were the
fishermen's door-keepers. In all which places, it is
evident, he means churches by the sepulchres of
the apostles. And so Athanasius,82 and Socrates,
and others, take the word cemetery for a church.
And perhaps St. Jerom intends the same by .the
sepulchres of the martyrs, when he says83 it was
his custom, when he was a boy at school in Rome,
on Sundays to go about and visit the sepulchres of
the apostles and martyrs ; but I will not be positive
of this, because he joins the cryptce or subterraneous
vaults with them, which in his time were not
churches; though they were in Tertullian's time,
who caUs them arecs sepulturarum,"' telhng us, that
Hilarian the persecutor forbade them to hold as
semblies there ; but this was remarkably punished
by the providence of God ; for they who denied the
Christians the liberty of their arecs, had their own
arees, meaning their storehouses orbarnfloors, (which
is another signification of the word area,) taken

71 Sozom. lib. 8. c. 17. ' AttotoXeIov i£ aiiTwv divnpacrE.
72 Cone. Constant, sub Menna. Act. 3. t. 5. p. 67.
73 Theodor. Lector, lib. 2. p. 568.
74 Cone. Eliber. c. 34. Cereos in ccemiteriis per diem p}a-
.ctiit non incendi, &c. It. can. 35. Placuit prohiberi, ne
fceminec in ccemiterio pervigilent, eo quod saepe sub obtentu
orationis scelera latenter committant.
75 See sect. 7. Vid. Onupbrium de Ccemiteriis, cap. 11.
78 See Serm. 91 et 237. de Diversis, Serm. 26. ex Editis
.a Sirmondo. Ser. 38 et 80. in Psal., all preached ad men-
sam Cypriani.
* Aug. Ser. 113. de Diversis. Sicut nostis, quicunque
Carthaginem nostis, in eodem loco mensa Deo constructa
est, tamen mensa dicitur Cypriani, non quia ibi est uuquam
. Cyprianus epulatus, sed quia ibi est immolatus, et quia ipsa
immoiatione sua paravit hanc mensam, non in qua pascat
•sive pascatur, sed in qua sacrificium Deo, cui et ipse obla-
tus est, offeratur.

78 Cone. Laodic. can. 9. JjEpl tq!J pi] avyxtupElv e'is tA
K0tpi]Tijpta, T) Etff t« XeydpEva papTvpta irdvrwv Ttov
alpETtKwv Toils Tr}? iKKXi]a-iai, eti^i/s 77 ^EjoaTratas evekq,
dirtivai. 79 Chrys. Com. in. Psal. cxv. t. 3. p. 401. S/coVei /cat hi
twv papTvpeov Toils Tacpovs ras itoXeis crvvTpEXooaas.
80 Id. Horn. 1. in Psal. xlviii. .hid. p- 812. Oik duaxw
povpEV toiv Taepoov aiiTcov, &C
81 Chrys. Demonstr. quod Christus sit Deus, t. 5. p. 839.
82 Athan. Apol. 2. ap. Socrat. lib. 2. c. 28.
83 Hieron. Com. in Ezek. c. 40. Dum essem Romae puer,
et liberalibus studiis erudirer, solebam cum caeteris ejusdem
aetatis et propositi, diebus Dominicis sepulchra apostolorum
et martyrum pircuire, crebroque cryptas ingredi, &c.
84 Tertul. ad Scapul. u. 3. Sicut sub Hilariano preside,
cum de areis sepulturarum nostrarum adclamassent, areas
non sint : areae ipsorum non fuerunt: messes enim suas non
egerunt.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

275

from them ; for they had no harvest that year, by
the just judgment of God upon them. The reader
wUl meet with the name area for a place of prayer
in the Acts of Purgation of Cecilian,85 bishop of
Carthage, and other records of that86 age of perse
cutions, when they were forced to fly from their
churches above-ground to their vaults underneath,
and make a sort of temporary churches of them.
Casa is another name in the same
wb/cnja, ti-o- Acts of Purgation of Csscilian and
Felix, which I take to be the name
of a church also.87 For though it might be some
thing doubtful from that place alone, yet finding it
so used in other authors, I conclude it was one of
the ancient names of their churches. For Bede
tells us88 the town of St. Martin's, in Bernicia, a
province of Britain, came to be vulgarly caUed Can
dida Casa, Whitern, or Whitchurch, from the church
of stone which Bishop Ninyas built in it. And I
leave it as a query, whether Casa? Nigra? in Africa,
where Donatus was bishop, be not beholden to some
such circumstance for its denomination also ? But
why churches should be caUed cases, is not very easy
to conjecture. TiU a better reason can be found,
let us suppose it to be from the plainness and sim
plicity of them, of which we shaU have something
more to say in the next chapter. Mr. Mede has
observed another name for churches (which is not
very common) in Caius Romanus, an ancient writer
in Eusebius, who uses the term trophcsa apostolorum,
as Mr. Mede conjectures, to denote two churches
of St. Peter and St. Paul in Rome.89 But I confess
there is some reason to question, whether in that
place it means churches, and not rather the monu
ments or sepulchres of those apostles. For Euse
bius is only speaking of their bodies being buried
at Rome ; to confirm which opinion he quotes that
ancient writer in these words : We can yet™ show
the trophies of the apostles ; for whether you go to
the Vatican, or the Via Ostiensis, you may there
see the trophies of those who founded this church ;
meaning the church of Rome, which was founded
by St. Peter and St. Paul, whose sepulchres were
then to be seen, the former in the Vatican Hill, and

the other in the way from Ostia to Rome. However,
in after ages, when churches were built over their
sepulchres, then their trophies became a name for
those churches, as we may learn from those words
of St. Jerom91 to MarceUa, who lived at Rome:
You have there a holy church, you have there the
trophies of the apostles and martyrs. For now it
is certain their sepulchres were advanced into
churches, and both together called trophies, as being
manifest tokens and evidences of the victory which
they had gained over their enemies, by resisting
unto blood, and triumphing after death. There is
yet another name, of which it is not easy to give so.
exact an account : that is, why some churches had
the name of tituli given them peculiarly in Rome.
In the Pontifical in the Life of Marcellus,92 it is
said of him, that he appointed twenty-five tituli in
Rome, for the convenience of baptizing new con
verts. And in the same place one Lucina, a widow,
is said to have dedicated her house93 to be made a
titulus or church, where they worshipped Christ day
and night with prayers and hymns, till Maxentius
the tyrant, hearing of it, turned the church into a
stable, and forced Marcellus to be the keeper of
it. These are supposed to be the same as parish
churches, erected for the convenience of adminis
tering Divine offices, as the multitude of converts
increased in Rome. But why they were called tituli,
is not exactly agreed among learned men. Baro
nius64 will have them to be so called, because they
had the sign of the cross upon them, by which
sign or title they were known to belong to Christ, as
things which belonged to the emperor's exchequer
were known to be his by an appendant veil, which
had either his image or his name, by way of title,
inscribed upon it. But it does not appear that the
sign of the cross was so early fixed upon churches ;
or if it were, that it was the peculiar distinction of
a parish church ; for no doubt the cathedral or bi
shop's church had that sign as soon as any others-
Mr. Mede95 offers two other reasons, and leaves the
reader to determine whether they were so called,
because by their dedication the name of Christ our
Lord was, as it were, inscribed upon them, as the

85 Gesta Purgat. Caecilian. ad Calcem Optati, p. 272.
Cives in area martyrum fuerunt inclusi. Item, p. 277. Tol-
lataliquis de vestris in aream ubi orationes facitis.
85 Vide Acta Concilii Cirtensis, ap. Baron, an. 303. n. 24.
Fassio Cypriani. Ejus corpus positum est in areis Macrobii
Candidi. 87 Gesta Purgat. p. 272. Nunquid populus Dei ibi fuit?
Saturninus dixit, in casa majore fuit inclusus. It. p. 274.
Praesens'cum populo inclusus in casa majore.
Bed. Hist. lib. 3. c. 4. Qui locus ad provinciam Ber-
meiorum pertinens, vulgo vocatur, ad candidam casam, eo
quod ibi ecclesiam de lapide, insolito Britouibus more, fe-
cerit. 89 Mede's Discourse of Churches, p. 328.
¦fciiiseb. lib. 2. c. 25. 'Eyii Si to Tpdieaia tuiv airotr-
toXw Ixw 6£l£at, &c. T 2

81 Hieron. Ep. 18. ad Marcellam. Est quidem tibi sancta
ecclesia, sunt trophaeaapostolorum et martyrum. So Gildas,
de Excid. Britan., and Bede, Hist. Eccl. lib. 1. u. 8, call
them Signa victricia martyrum. Eusebius de Laud. Con
stant, c. 17. TpoVatct viKi)Tnpia.
82 Pontifical. Vit. Marcelli. Hie fecit coemiterium Via
Salaria, et viginti quinque titulos in urbe Roma constituit,
quasi dioeceses, propter baptismum et pcenitentiam multo-
rum, qui convertebantur ex paganis, et propter sepulturas
martyrum. 93 Pontifical, ibid. Lucina domum suam nomine tituli
beati Marcelli dedicavit. ubi die noctuque hymnis et ora
tionibus Domino Jesu Christo confitebantur, &c. Vid. Pii
Epist. 4. ad Justum Vien. Presbyter pastor titulum con-
didit, Sec.
94 Baron, an. 112. n. 5. °5 Mede's Disc, of Church, p. 328.

276

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII,

manner then was to set the names or titles of the
owners upon their houses and possessions ; and so it
would concur in notion with those other names of
Kvptatcbv and basilica, the Lord's, and the king's ; or
whether because they gave a title of cure, or deno
mination to the presbyters to whom they were com
mitted. This last I take to be the true reason of
the name, till one more probable can be thought of.
As to the fancy of Onuphrius, that the number of
these tituli33 was exactly the same with that' of
cardinal presbyters now, and never exceeding the
number of twenty-eight, it is an imagination with
out ground: for Optatus speaks of above forty
churches in Rome before the time of the last per
secution, as I shall have occasion to show more
fully in the next book.
There are several other less usual
m tabemacics.and names of churches in ancient writers,
minsters, and some
other less usual which I need not stand upon. Such
names of churches. x
as limina martyrum, the houses of the
martyrs, used by St. Jerom ;" orjueg and rkpivog,
words of the same import with temple, which we
sometimes meet with in Theodoret,98 Synesius,™ and
Evagrius.100 In Eusebius, domus synaxeos'01 some
times occurs in the rescripts of heathen emperors
for Christian churches, which signifies no more but
houses of assembly. Chrysostom styles them the
seat of doctrine,102 from the exercise of preaching
therein. And many such names are to be met with,
which need no explication. But there are two
names more used by Eusebius, which some learned
men have greatly mistaken. In one place, speak
ing of the Tlierapeutes in Egypt, whom he reckons
the first Christians converted by St. Mark, and de
scribed covertly by Philo-Judeeus, he gives their
churches the name of aipviia and povaariipia, which
some mistake for monasteries in the modern sense ;
whereas Eusebius 103 says expressly, it was the name
which Philo gave, not to their habitations, but their
churches. For, says he, Philo having described
their habitations, afterward speaks thus of their
churches in that region : In every one of their dwell
ings there is a sacred house or chapel, which they
call their semneum, or monastery, where they per
form the religious mysteries proper to their holy
life. For hither they bring nothing ever of meat, or
drink, or other bodily necessaries, but only their
laws and inspired oracles of their prophets, their
hymns, and whatever else tends to augment and
consummate a life of piety and knowledge. This is

not the description of a monastery in the modern
sense, but of a church ; and so we see the name was
first used, as it is at this day among the Germans,
who hence call some of their churches ministers, as
we do minsters, which were heretofore collegiate
churches and schools of learning, like St. Austin's
monastery-church, of which I have given an ac
count in the former book. This is further con
firmed, because Eusebius joins the name oeuvtiov to
monastery to explain it, which, by the best critics,
ancient and modern, Hesychius, Bud&sus, Suicerus,
and others, is reckoned to signify a temple or place
of Divine service. Eusebius has yet another name
for a church, which I mention only because it is
liable to the same mistake. He gives it the name of
tabernacle : which is only a private appellation, be
longing peculiarly to movable or tra veiling churches.
For Eusebius, speaking of Constantine's intended
expedition, against the Persians, says, that among
his other preparations for that war he erected him
self104 a tent or tabernacle in the form of a church,
in which he might continually make his supplica
tions to God the giver of victory, with the bishops
and clergy that were to attend him in his expedi
tion. Socrates,105 speaking of the same thing, com
pares it to the tabernacle that Moses set up in the
wilderness, and says, Constantine did it, that he
might have a decent and convenient oratory, (oWi,-
ptoi. ijvTpeirtopkvov, in the most desert and barbarous
places through which he was to travel. And from
this example, as Sozomen106 obseives, it became a
custom throughout the Roman army for every le
gion to have their tabernacle, and priests and dea
cons appointed to attend the service of it.
Whilst I am upon this head, it wiU Sect n
not be amiss to give the reader an bc?4ebn«crfSS
account of two other words, which '""^ ""'"""'
have some relation to this subject, and by their am
biguity are often mistaken and confounded, that is,
ecclesia matrix and dicecesana, which seem to be
words of the same importance, but are often veiy
different from one another. Ecclesia matrix, a
mother-church, is sometimes taken for an original
church planted immediately by the apostles, whence
others were derived and propagated afterward. So
TertuUian107 calls those churches, to which the apos
tles preached either viva voce, or by then- epistles, by
which all doctrines are to be judged. And in this
sense the church of Jerusalem is called the mother
of all churches in the world, by the second general

88 Onuphr. Interpret. Vocum Ecclesiastic, p. 91.
87 Hieron. Ep. 15. ad Marcellam.
83 Theodor. Ser. de Martyr. " Synes. Ep. 58.
100 Evagr. lib. 1. c. 14. lib. 6. c. 8.
101 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 8. Vid. Gesta Purgationis Caeciliani.
182 Chrysost. Horn. 2. in Joh.
103 Euseb. lib. 2. c. 17. EI6' i^i]s, tos o'iktio-eis avTuiv
biroiat tives ijcrav Staypdilsas, HEpl Ttov KctTtt X'^pav iKKXt]-
atuiv Tavra tpnaiv' iv iKaoTt] Si oiieia t'crTlf otKijpa 'tEpov,

ii KuXEtTai orEpvEiov Kal povacTrtp tov' iv to povovpsvoi ra
tov TEpvov (3iov pva-Tripia teXovvtoi, &c.
104 Euseb. de Vit. Constant, lib. 4. c. 56. Tf> s-Kiiyt,v ™
tt)s iKKXi]orias crxripaTi irposTi]v iKEtvov tov iroXipov iru-
paTa£tv aiiv TroXXfj eptXoTtpia KaTEipyd^ETO.
»»5 Socrat. lib. l.'c. 18. ' 106 Sozom. lib. 1. c. 8. '
107 Tertul. de Pracscript. c. 21. Constat proinde omnem
doctrinain, quae cum illis ecclesiis apostolicis matricibus et
originalibus fidei conspiret, veritati depulandam.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

277

council of Constantinople ;108 and Aries the mother-
church of France, because supposed to be planted109
by the apostle's missionary, Trophirnus, first bishop
1 of the place. At other times a mother-church de:
notes a metropolis, or the principal church of a
single province, as in some of the African Canons,110
where matrix is used sometimes for the primate's
see, to which other bishops were to have recourse
for judgment and decision of controversies. But
most commonly it signifies a cathedral or bishop's
church, which was usually termed the great church,
and the catholic church, and the principal see, in
opposition to the lesser tituli or parish churches
committed to single presbyters. Thus, in the Afri
can Code, the matter is plain, in one canon every
bishop is prohibited to ahenate or sell the goods of
the mother-church ;"' and presbyters, the goods be
longing to their titles. The Greek translation of
this canon is here imperfect and corrupt, as Sui
cerus"2 has rightly observed, and by it Cujacius and
others have been led into a mistake to expound
matrix by matricula, the catalogue or books of the
church, whereas it means the cathedral or bishop's
church. As also in another canon,113 which says,
If any bishop is negligent to deal with heretics in
the mother-church, he shall be admonished of his
fault by the neighbouring bishops, that he may
have no excuse. The mother-church is here the
bishop's church, or that which required both his
care and residence, as the principal church of the
diocese. This, by Fulgentius Ferrandus,1 14 is plainly
opposed to other inferior churches in the diocese,
upon which only presbyters resided, both when he
says, that the judgment of the mother-church shall
be sufficient in the election of a bishop ; and again,
that the bishop of the mother-church shall not
usurp any thing that is given to the churches in
the diocese. These churches in the diocese are the
same as we now call parish churches, though they
themselves are sometimes termed dioceses in the
Pontifical,115 and the African Canons;116 and in

some other canons,117 ecclesics dicecesanes, diocesan
churches ; as in the council of Tarraco, which
obliges all bishops to visit their dioceses once a
year, to see that no diocesan church, that is, no
church within the diocese, was out of repair. So
that a mother-church and a diocesan church in
that ancient style differed, as now a cathedral and
a parish church with us. The mother-church be
ing otherwise called the principal see,118 principalis
cathedra, where the bishop was obliged continually
to reside: and sometimes the catholic church, as
Valesius has observed119 out of Epiphanius120 and
Nicephorus,121 in opposition to the lesser churches
that were subject to it. Though, as I noted before,
the council of Trullo calls every baptismal church
a catholic church,122 in opposition to private orato
ries, where baptism was not allowed to be adminis
tered. It was necessary for me to be thus particu
lar about the names of churches in the entrance
upon this book, because some of them are curious,
and others ambiguous, that the reader might find
them explained at once, and not be at a loss about
terms upon every occasion in the following discourse.
Our next inquiry is into the original
of churches, that is, when Christians Proofs or churches
in the first century
began to set them apart for Divine 5°^c,ed bJ Mr-
service ? A very singular paradox
has been advanced by some learned men in these
last ages, that for the three first ages the Christians
had no such distinct places of worship ; grounding
upon some mistaken passages of Origen, Minucius
Felix, Arnobius, and Lactantius, who say, the
Christians had no temples; which they take for
a denial of their having any churches. Which
opinion, though advanced with some show of learn
ing by Vedelius,123 Suicerus,114 and others, is alto
gether without ground, contradicted by the authors
which they allege, and by themselves who assert
and maintain it. Mr. Mede has an elaborate dis
course in confutation of this opinion, wherein he
has learnedly collected the authorities of the an-

108 Epist. Synodic, ad Damasum. ap. Theodoret. lib. 5. c.
9. Tr/s Se y£ prvrpbs diraatbv tujv iKKXr)triiov tjJs iv 'Ispo-
aoXiipots, Sec.
109 Libellus Precum Episcopor. Gallor. ad Leon. ap.
Baron, an. 450. p. 125. Cujus honoris obtentu ecclesiam
Arelatensem omnes decessores, praedecessoresque nostri vel
ut man-era debito semper honore coluerunt, &c.
. j10 Cod. Afric. can. 119. al. 120. M>, wpoKptpaTiaSefi iv
Ttj uo-TptKt, non praejudicetur in matrice, &c. •
111 Cod. Afric. can. 33. Non habente necessitatem, nee
episcopo liceat matricis ecclesiae, nee presbytero rem tituli
sui usurpare.
112 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce MaTptg.
. 3 Cod. Afr. can. 123. Si in matricibus cathedris episco
pus negbgens fuerit adversus hacreticos, conveniatur a vici
nis episcopis, &c.
114 Ferrand. Breviat. Canon, c. 11. Ut adeligendum epis
copum sufficiat matricis arbitrium ex concil. Septimuni-
censi et concil. Macrianensi. Item, t. 38. Ut episcopus

matricis non usurpet quicquid fuerit donatum ecclesiis, quae
in dicecesi constitutae sunt. Ex, Concil. Hipponiregiensi.
115 Pontifical. Vit. Marcelli. Hie viginti quinque titulos
in urbe Roma constituit, quasi dioeceses, propter baptis
mum, &c.
118 Cod. Afric. can. 53 et 56.
1,7 Cone. Tarracon. can. 8. Reperimus nonnullas dicece-
sanas ecclesias esse destitutas. Ob quam rem hac constitu-
tione decrevimus, ut annuis vicibus ab episcopo dioeceses
visitentur. 118 Cone. Carthag. 5. c. 5. Placuit,ut nemini sit facultas
relicta principali cathedra, ad aliquam ecclesiam in dicecesi
constitutam se conferre*
118 Vales. Not. in Theodor. Lector, lib. 1. 553.
i28 Epiphan. Haeres. 69. n. 1.
'2I Niceph. lib. 15. c. 22.
™ Cone. Trull, c. 58. al. 59.
123 Vedel. Exercit. in Ignat. Ep. ad Magnes. c. 4.
121 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce Nads, p. 388.

278

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

cients, which for the three first ages prove the being
of Christian churches. I shall briefly, for the sake
of those who have not that author at hand, relate
the substance of his proofs, and add some others
to his coUections. In the first place, he shows that
the ancients, St. Austin,125 St. Basil,126 and the
author under the name of St. Jerom, St. Chrysos
tom, Sedulius, fficumenius, and Theophylact, in
their comments on that passage of St. Paul, 1 Cor.
xi. 22, " Have ye not houses to eat and drink in ?
or despise ye the church of God ? " took the word
church there not for the assembly, but for the
place set apart for sacred duties. And that the
apostles always met together in a certain place for
prayer and supphcation upon Mount' Sion, which
was the hyperoon or ccenaculum, the upper room so
often mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles ; where
the apostles were assembled when the Holy Ghost
came upon them, Acts ii. ; where our Saviour cele
brated his last supper ; where he appeared to his
disciples two Sundays, one after another, after his
resurrection, John xx. The place where the seven
deacons were elected and ordained, Acts vi. ; and
where the first council of Jerusalem was held, Acts
xv. Which place was afterward enclosed with a
goodly church, called the church of Mount Sion,
and the upper church of the apostles in the time of
Cyril,127 bishop of Jerusalem, and St. Jerom.128 That
this was the oZsoe, or house of assembly, mentioned
Acts ii. 46, where the apostles contmued breaking
of bread, that is, celebrating the eucharist after
their return from the temple. .For he thinks, with
many other critics, that the word iv owtp is not
to be translated, from house to house, but, in the
house, or place where the assembly was used to
meet together. His next argument is drawn from
what Eusebius129 observes of the BepaTrevTal in
Egypt, whether Essenes or Christians, that they
had their aipveia, or places appropriated for Divine
worship, from the days of St. Mark. And that
such places are to be understood in all those pas
sages of St. Paul which salute180 the churches in
such or such a house, that is, the congregations
that met in the houses of such pious Christians as
had bestowed some part of their dwellings to be an
oratory for the church to assemble in. Such a
ccenaculum is described by Lucian, or whoever was
the author of the dialogue called Philopatris, about
the time of Trajan, where he brings in one Critias
telhng how the Christians carried him into an

125 Aug. Quaest, 57. in Levitic.
126 Basil. Regul. Major, qu. 30. Regul. Minor, qu. 310.
127 Cyril. Catech. 16. 12s Hieron. Ep. 27. Epitaph. Paulas
129 Euseb. lib. 2. c. 17.
138 See Rom. xvi. 3, 5; 1 Cor. xvi. 19; Colos iv 15-
Philem. 1, 2.
131 Recognit. lib. 10. n. 71. 182 Clem. Ep. 1. ad Cor. n. 40.
133 Ignat. Ep. ad Magnes. n. 7.
134 Epist. ad Philadelph. u. 4.

hyperoon, the place of their assembly, with a de
sign to make him a proselyte to their rehgion. He
argues further from the tradition of the church de
rived from the ancient author of the Recognitions '
under the name of Clemens Romanus, which says131
that Theophilus, to whom St. Luke is supposed to
inscribe his Gospel, at Antioch, did convert his
house into a church. And the hke is reported of
the house of Pudens, a Roman senator and martyr,
in the Acta Pudentis, that it was turned into a
church after his martyrdom. He concludes this
first century with the testimony of Clemens Ro
manus, in his genuine Epistle to the Corinthians,
which says,192 that God had ordained as weU appro
priate places where, as appropriate times and persons
when and whereby, he would be solemnly served, that
all things might be done religiously and in order.
In the next age he shows that Ig
natius, in his epistle tO the Magne- Proofs in the second
iio i , -, century
sians, ' exhorts them to meet together
in one place, which he calls rov vabv Qtov, the tem
ple of God ; and in his epistle to the Philadelphians 1S4
he says, there was one altar to every church, and
one bishop with his presbytery and deacons. The
present Greek copies, indeed, read it a little different
from Mr. Mede, leaving out the word church, but
the mentioning one altar is sufficient to intimate
they had then a stated place for their ecclesiastical
assembly. In the same age, Pius, bishop of Rome,
wrote two short epistles to Justus, bishop of Vienna,
in France, in the first of which, one Euprepia,135 a
pious matron, is said to have consigned the title of
her house over to the church to celebrate Divine
offices in : and in the other, one Pastor, a presbyter,
is commended for erecting a titulus, that is, a church,
before his death.136 Clemens Alexandrinus, toward
the end of this century, uses the name ecclesia for
the place of the assembly, as weU as the congrega
tion. For, speaking of the church, he says, I call
not now the place,137 but the congregation of the
elect, the church. And so in his famous homily,
Quis dives salvetur, he brings in the Asian bishop,
to whom St. John committed the young man to be
trained up in the Christian discipline, complaining
that the youth was become a villain and a robber,
and now, instead of the church,133 had betaken him
self to the mountains, with a company like himself.
By this it is plain, that in his time the word ecclesia
was taken for a place of sacred assembly, as well
as for the assembly itself.

135 Pii Ep. 1. ad Justum. Soror nostra Euprepia titulum
domus suae pauperibus assignavit ; ubi nunc cum pauperibus
nostris commorantes, missas agimus.
138 Id. Ep. 2. Presbyter Pastor titulum condidit,et digne
in Domino obiit.
137 Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. Ov vvv tov tottov, iXXi to
dBpoto-pa Ttov ekXektwi/, EKKXriaiav KuXio.
138 Ap. Euseb. 1. 3. c. 23. et in Bibl. Patrum. Combefis.
Nun dvTi tJjs eV/cXijo-ias opos KaTeiXqepE, Sec.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

279

In the third century the testimonies
proofs h. the 'third are both more numerous and plain.
CM1 '"'¦ Tertulhan clearly intimates they had
churches, when complaining against Christians who
followed the trade of idol-making for the Gentiles,
only excusing themselves that they did not worship
them, he says, The zeal of faith m cannot but de
claim aU the day long upon this point, bewailing
that any Christian should come from among his
idols into the church, that he should come into the
house of God from the shop of his enemy, and lift
up those hands to God the Father, which were the
mothers or makers of idols.' In another place140
he caUs the church domus columbcs, the house of the
dove, meaning either Christ, or his dove-like reli
gion, as I have explained it before.141 And again he
expressly distinguishes between the baptistery and
the church, which in those days were places separate
one from another, saying, When we are come 142 to
the water to be baptized, we not only there, but also
somewhat before in the church, under the hand of
the minister, make a pubhc declaration that we
renounce the devil and his pomp and his angels.
Tertullian is followed by Hippolytus,143 who, describ
ing the signs of the coming of antichrist, says, The
temples of God shall be as common houses, the
churches shaU every where be destroyed. But I lay
no stress upon this passage, because the work is
spurious, and of later date than it pretends to be, as
Bishop Usher has proved, and Combefis confesses as
much, who pubhshed the genuine piece of Hippoly
tus de Christo et Antichristo, where no such passage
is to be found.114 But we have an authentic testi
mony, in the same age, from a heathen author. For
Lampridius, in the Life of Alexander Severus,145 re
ports of him, that there happening a dispute be
tween the Christians and the victuallers, about a
certain pubhc place, each party challenging it as
their own; the emperor's rescript determined it thus
in favour of the Christians, That it was better that
God should be worshipped there after any manner,
than that it should be given up to the victuallers.
About the middle of this age lived the famous Gre
gory of Neocaesarea, surnamed Thaumaturgus, who
himself built several churches in Neocaesarea, and

the adjacent parts of Pontus, as Gregory Nyssen118
reports in his Life; and also wrote a canonical epis
tle, wherein are described the several classes or sta
tions 147 of penitents in the respective parts of the
church : but because some learned men question
whether that part of his epistle be not rather a
comment and addition by some other hand, I Lay
no greater weight upon it than it will bear, but only
observe, that the same classes of penitents may be
collected from other canons in that epistle, which
are allowed to be genuine. About the same time
St. Cyprian speaks of the place of their assembly
under the name of Dominicum,"3 the Lord's house,
as has been noted before ; and in another place op
poses the church and the capitol, the altar of the
Lord and the altars of images and idol-gods, to one
another -. for speaking against some that had lapsed,
and without due penance were for intruding them
selves into the church again ; If this were once per
mitted, says he, what then remains 149 but that the
church should give way to the capitol, and the
priests withdraw, and take away the altar of the
Lord with them, and let the images and idol-gods
with their altars succeed, and take possession of the
sanctuary, where the venerable bench of our clergy
sit? About this time also Dionysius, bishop of
Alexandria, speaks of churches as appropriate to
the service of God, resolving this question, whether
a woman in the time of her separation might enter150
into the house of God? It appears further from
the rescript of Gallienus the emperor, recorded by
Eusebius,151 where he restores the Christians their
churches under the name of toitoi S-pticre'e/Jo-iitoi, wor
shipping places : and from what has been noted be
fore out of the letter of Aurelian,152 which chides the
senate for demurring about opening the Sibylline
books, as if they had been consulting, not in the
capitol, but in a Christian church : as also that
other rescript of his in Eusebius,153 which, at the re
quest of the council of Antioch, ordered Paulus
Samosatensis to be turned out of the house of the
chm-ch. But the testimony of Eusebius goes far
beyond all others: for speaking of the peaceable
times which the Christians enjoyed from the per
secution of Valerian to that of Diocletian, he ob-

m Tertul. de Idol. c. 7. Tota die ad hanc partem zelus
fidei perorabit, ingemens Christianum ab idolis in ecclesiam
venire, de adversaria ofEcina in domum Dei venire, attol-
lere ad Deum Patrem manus matres idolorum.
140 Tertul. adv. Valent. c. 3. "> See before, sect. 2.
142 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c. 3. Aquam adituri, ibidem,
sed et aliquanto prius in ecclesia, sub antistitis manu,
contestamur nos renunciare diabolo, et pompee et angelis
ejus, &c.
143 Hippolyt. de Consummat. Mundi. Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat.
t. I. p. 346. Ot vaol tov Qeov cos oIkol EtrovTat, Kal KaTaar-
rpotpal two EKKXtitrtiJi/ iravTaxov yEvriaovTai.
- ' Vid. Combefis. Auctuar. Novissim. p. 57.
145 Lamprid. Vit. Alex. <;. 49. Cum Christiani quendam

locum, qui publicus fuerat, occupassent, contra popinarii di-
cerent, sibi eum deberi; rescripsit imperator, Melius esse ut
quomodocunque illic Deus colatur, quam popinariis dedatur.
118 Greg. Nyss. Vit. Greg. Thaumatur. t. 3. p. 567.
147 Gregor. Thaumaturg. Epist. Canon, c. 11.
148 Cypr. de Oper. et Eleemos. See sect. 2.
148 Cypr. Ep. 55. al. 59. ad Cornel. Quid superest, quam
ut ecclesia capitolio cedat, et recedentibus sacerdotibus ac
Domini altare removentibus, in cleri nostri sacrum veneran-
dumque consessum simulacra atque idola cum aris suis trans-
eant? i88 Dionys. Ep. Canon, c. 2. 151 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 13.
152 gee before, sect. 1. Ex Vopisco Vit. Aurelian.
153 Eu3eb. lib. 7. c 30. cited sect. 3.

230

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

serves, that the number of Christians so grew and
multiplied in that fifty years, that their ancient
churches were not large enough to receive them,
and therefore they erected from the foundations154
more ample and spacious ones in every city.
sect 16 The onty objection against all this,
froT„hLcl'a„ti'un.'and made with any colour, is drawn from
Arnobius answered. some q{ ^ ancient apol0gists, Ori
gen,155 Minucius Felix,150 Arnobius,157 and Lactan
tius,158 who seem to say that the Christians in their
time had no temples nor altars, nor ought to have
any. But, as Mr. Mede shows at large, this is only
spoken against such temples as the heathens plead
ed for, in the notion of encloistering the Deity by
an idol. For otherwise the very authors from
whom the objection is drawn must strangely con
tradict themselves. For Arnobius 159 owns they had
their conventicula, houses of assembly, which he
complains were barbarously destroyed in the last
persecution. And Lactantius 16° says the same, giv
ing them also the name of the temples of God,
which Diocletian ordered to be demolished, when
he taught oratory in Bithynia. And Origen him
self speaks161 of adorning the Christian churches
and altars, in one of his homilies upon Joshua,
translated literally by Ruffin.
sect it Thus far Mr. Mede goes in his col-
co?iSnsdduponal lections and answer to this objection ;
""6head- to which I shall add a few things
which he has not observed. Lactantius, in another
place of his Institutions,102 speaks of one of the
Christian conventicula in a town in Phrygia, which
the heathen burnt with the whole assembly in it.
And in his book de Mortibus Persecutorum, pub
lished since Mr. Mede's death, he gives a more
particular account of the destruction of churches
throughout the world. For he not only mentions
the demolishing the stately church of Nicomedia,163
but intimates that the same fate attended the
churches over all the world. For even in France,
where the mild Constantius ruled, the persecution
went so far as to puU down the churches,164 though

the men, the true temples of God, were spared, and
sheltered under his gentle government. Lactantius
lived in France at this time, being tutor to Crispus
the son of Constantine, and grandson of Constan
tius, and therefore he could not be mistaken in his
relation. So that we must interpret Eusebius by
him, when he says,165 Constantius destroyed no
churches : that is, he gave no positive orders, as
the other emperors did, to destroy them, but he con
nived at such as pulled them down, in policy to
satisfy the other emperors, and make the walls com
pound for the hfe and safety of the persons. How
ever it was, both Eusebius and Lactantius agree
in this, that there were churches in France 'before
the last persecution. We have the like account of
the churches of Britain given by Gildas, who says"*1
in general of the last persecution, that it occasioned
churches all over the world to be destroyed, and
particularly in Britain ; for the Christians built them
new again from the ground when the persecution
was over,167 and founded others beside them, to be
as so many public monuments and trophies of their
martyrs. Optatus 168 takes notice of forty churches
in Rome before the last persecution, which being
taken from the Christians, were afterward restored
to them by the order of Maxentius, as St. Austin"19
more than once informs us. In Africa we read of
some churches that were demolished in this per
secution, as at Zama and Furni, mentioned in the
Gesta Purgationis 170 of Cecilian and Felix. Others
were taken away, and in the mean time, till they
were restored again, both councils and chm-ch as
semblies were held in private houses, as Optatus1'1
observes of the council of Cirta, and St. Austin
after him, who says, It was not to be wondered at,
that a few bishops should hold a council 17Z in a pri
vate house in the heat of persecution, when the
martyrs made no scruple in the like case to be bap
tized in prison, and Christians met in prison to
celebrate the sacrament with the martyrs. But not
to multiply instances of this nature, the very tenor
of the imperial edicts, which raised the last per-

151 Euseb. lib. 8. c. 1. . 15s Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 8. p. 389.
156 Minuc. Octav. p. 29.
157 Arnob. adv. Gent. lib. 6. lss Lactant. lib. 2. c. 2.
150 Arnob. lib. 4. p. 152. cited before, sect. 7.
168 Lactant. lib. 5. c. 2. cited sect. 6.
101 Origen. Homil. 10. in Josua. 162 Lact. 1. 5. c. 11.
183 Lact. de Mort. Persecut. t. 12. IUud editissimum
paucis horis solo adaequarunt.
184 Ibid. c. 15. Constantius, ne dissentire videretur a
majoribus praeceptis, conventicula, id est, parietes, qui re-
stitui poterant, dirui passus est, verurn autem Dei templum
quod est in hominibus, incolume servavit.
185 Euseb. lib. 8. c. 13. Mijte tovs oikovs Ttov E/c/cXtjo-iwi/
ko^eXiov. 186 Gildas de Excid. Britan. in initio. Ad persccutionem
Diocletiani tyranni novennem, in qua subversae per totum
mtindum sunt ecclesiae, &c.
167 Ibid. Renovant ecclesias ad solum usque destructas

basilicas sanctorum martyrum fundant, construunt, perfi-
ciunt, ac veluti victricia signa passim propalant. Vide
Bedae Hist. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 6 et 8, who speaks almost in the
words of Gildas.
163 Optat. lib. 2. p. 49. Quadraginta basilicas.
189 Aug. Brevic. Collat. die 3. c. 18. It. lib. post Collatio-
nem, c. 13.
170 Gesta Purgat. p. 276. Et Zamae et Furnis dirui basili
cas et uri Scripturas vidi.
171 Optat. lib. 1. p. 39. Apud Cirtam civitatem, quia ba
silicas- necdum fuerant restitutx, in domum Urbani Charisi
consederunt, &c.
172 Aug. Brevic. Collat. die 3. c. 17. Non esse incredibile
quod in privatam domum pauci illi episcopi persecutionis
tempore convenerunt, ut fervente persecutione etiam in car-
cere doceantur baptizali martyres, et illic a Christianis ce-
lebrata sacramenta, ubi Christiani propter eadem sacra-
menta tenebantur inclusi.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

2S1

secution, is undeniable evidence, that the Christians
in aU parts of the world had then their pubhc
churches, to which they resorted so long as they
' had opportunity to frequent them. For Eusebius 173
says, The edicts were sent over all the world, com
manding the churches to be levelled with the
ground, and the Bibles to be burnt. Which is also
noted by Theodoret,174 St. Jerom,175 and the Acts of
Purgation of Cecilian and Felix178 at the end of Op
tatus. So that a man might as well question whe
ther the Christians had Bibles, as whether they had
churches before the last persecution.- The defend
ers of the contrary opinion here always give up the
cause, and contradict themselves : for when they
have urged the authority of Arnobius and Lactan
tius, against Christians having any temples, they
are forced to confess from the foresaid evidences,
that they had churches whilst Arnobius and Lac
tantius lived, -that is, within the third century;
which is to grant and deny the same thing, and
load both themselves and those ancient authors
with a manifest contradiction. To the,testimonies
cited by Mr. Mede in the middle of the third cen
tury, the reader may add that remarkable story told
by Eusebius, concerning the martyr Marinus, anno
259, in the time of GaUienus. Marinus being a
candidate for a Roman office at Ccesarea, was in
formed against as a Christian by an antagonist, who
pleaded, that he ought not to have the office upon
that score : the judge upon examination finding it
to be so, gives him three hours' time to consider,
Whether he would quit his religion, or his hfe.
During this space, Theotecnus, bishop of Csesarea,
meets with him, and taking him by the hand, car
ries him to the church,177 and sets him by the holy
table, then offers him a Bible and a sword, and bids
him take his choice. He readily, without any de
mur, lays his hand upon the Bible ; whereupon the
bishop thus bespake him : Adhere, says he, adhere
to God, and in his strength enjoy what thou hast
chosen, and go in peace. With this he immediately
returns from the church to the judge, makes his
confession, receives his sentence, and dies a martyr.
Who that reads this story can question, whether
the worshipping-places which Gallienus is said a
httle before178 to have restored to the Christians,
were properly churches, with holy tables, or altars,
in them ? To the testimonies cited from Tertullian

may be added one more, where he plainly distin
guishes the parts of their churches, as the discipline
of their penitents then required. For, speaking of
the unnatural sins of uncleanness, he says, All such
monsters were excluded,179 not only from the nave
or body of the church, but from every part of it :
they were obliged to stand without-door in the
open air, and not allowed to come under the roof
of it. This discipline was in the church of Antioch,
in the time of Babylas, anno 247, when, according
to the account given by St. Chrysostom180 and Eu
sebius,181 Babylas excluded the emperor Philip from
the church, with all his guards about him, on Easter
eve, and would not suffer him to pray with the
faithful, till he had set himself in the place of the
penitents, piravoiag x^Pa> Eusebius calls it, and
there made confession of his crimes. I stand not
now critically to inquire into the truth of this his
tory, which some learned men 182 question, and others
defend : 193 it is sufficient to our present purpose, that
both Eusebius and St. Chrysostom give us such an
account ofthe ancient churches, as necessarily sup
poses them distinct from common habitations in the
middle of the third century. Nay, St. Austin,181 and
the author of the Comments under the name of St.,
Ambrose,185 say expressly, that as soon as the re
ligion of Christ was planted in the world, churches
were built, to pray for kings, and all that are in au
thority, &c, according to the apostle's direction, 1
Tim. ii. 1 ; upon which St. Austin founds the use
and building of churches. I lay no stress upon the
Martyrologies, nor such writers as Abdias Baby-
lonius and Anacletus, which speak of churches
built in Persia by Simon and Jude, and at Alex
andria by St. Mark, and at Rome by St. Peter, be
cause these are late and spurious writings : but yet,
if we may judge of the first conversions by those
that happened in the time of Constantine, we may
conclude, that as soon as any people were convert
ed, they provided themselves churches for Divine
service. As when Frumentius had converted the
Indians, Socrates166 says, he immediately built
churches among them ; which is confirmed by Ruffin,
who not only takes notice of that, but says further,
that before he had converted them, meeting with
some Roman merchants that were Christians, he
encouraged them to build themselves oratories in
all places, whither they might resort for prayer, after

173 Euseb. lib. 8. c. 2. '" Theodor. lib. 5. c. 39.
175 Hieron. Com. in Zecha. cap. 8.
178 Gesta Purgat. p. 277. Ubi Scripturae inveniuntur, ipsa
domus diruitur.
Euseb. lib. 7. c. 15. 'E7ri tt/i/ iKKX'no-iav Ttpodyet, eio-ui
te irprjs aiiTto Tfio-as tio dyiderpaTi, Sec.
178 Ibid. u. 13.
79 Reliquas autem libidinum furias impias, et in corpora
et in sexus, ultra jura naturae, non modo limine, verurn omni
ecclesiae tecto submovenrus, quia non sunt delicta, sed mon-
<ta. Tertul. de Pudicit. e. 4.

188 Chrysost. cont. Gentil. t. 1. p. 741. Tov PaeriXia t&v
tt/S E/c/cXrjo-tas irpoSvptov i^riXaorE, Sec. Vid. p. 741.
181 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 31. ,82 Cave, Prim. Christ, p. 46.
'83 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 247. n. 6. Huetius Orige-
nian. lib. 1. c. 3. n. 12.
184 Aug. cont. Faust, lib. 12. c. 36. Ex hoc quippe illis
credentibus constructa sunt domicilia pacis, basilicae Chris-
tianarum congregationum.
165 Ambros. in Ephes. iv. Ubi omnia loca circumplexa est
ecclesia, conventicula constituta sunt, &c.
188 Socrat. lib. 1. u. 19. EiiKTnpta iroXXi ISpvEi, &c.

282

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

the custom of the Romans.187 Theodoret,188 and So
crates, and Ruffin observe the same in the conver
sion of the nation of the Iberians by a captive
woman, who taught them to build churches after
the Roman form ; which they did) and then sent
ambassadors to Constantine (in whose time both
these conversions happened) to desire him to send
them priests, to carry on the work they had thus
begun, and to minister in their churches. Now, we
may reasonably conclude, that some such thing was
observed in all conversions from the very first, al
lowing for the difference betwixt times of persecu
tion and times of peaces For though they had not
such public and stately edifices at some times, as
they had at others ; yet they always had places pe
culiarly set apart for Divine worship, before the
peaceable reign of Constantine, as the evidences
produced above do undeniably prove.

CHAPTER It.
OP THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHURCHES IN THE
FIRST AGES AND THOSE THAT FOLLOWED: AND
OF HEATHEN TEMPLES AND JEWISH SYNAGOGUES
CONVERTED INTO CHRISTIAN CHURCHES.
sect. i. The only remaining objection against
vJvhe,frnspiehano'es what has been advanced in the last
E'""' chapter, is taken from a passage or two
ofthe ancients, which seem to imply, that there was
a great difference between the apostolical age and
those that followed, in reference to this business of
churches. Isidore of Pelusium, treating of this
matter, says, In the apostles' days there were1 no
churches, that is, buildings or temples, when spi
ritual gifts abounded, and a holy conversation was
the bright ornament of the church: but in our
days the buildings are adorned more than is' neces
sary, whilst the church is fallen into disgrace. And
therefore, were I at liberty to choose, I should rather
have wished to have lived in those days, when there
were no such beautified temples, but yet the church
was crowned with Divine and heavenly graces;
than in these days, when temples are adorned with
all kinds of marble, but the church is deprived of
all those spiritual gifts. These words, if they be

taken in the strictest senset may seem to import,
that in the age ofthe apostles there were no churches
builded ; for beyond the apostolical age he carries
not the comparison : but I rather take him to mean,
that the apostles had not such churches as they had
in his time, that isj so stately and magnificent, so
rich and beautiful, as many in after ages. Which is
certainly true : for in the first conversion of any
nation the churches were always answerable to the
state and condition the converts were in, which was
commonly a state of persecution, when not many
rich, not many noble were called. Nay, even in
those places, where kings gave encouragement to
the propagation of the faith, churches were another
thing from what they are now, as we may learn
from the history of our own nation. There was a
time, Bede tells us; when there was not a stone
church in all the land, but the custom was to build
them all of wood: and therefore, when Bishop
Ninyas built a church of stone, it was such2 a rarity
and unusual thing among the Britons, that they
called the place Candida Casa, Whitern, or Whit
church, upon it. The same author tells us,3 that
Finan, the second bishop of Lindisfarne or Holy
Island, since called the bishopric of Durham* built
a church in the island fit for a cathedral see, which
yet was not of stone, but only timber sawed, and
covered with reed ; and so it continued, till Eadbert,
the seventh bishop; took away the reed, and covered
it all over, both roof and sides, with sheets of lead.
No one after this will wonder at the account which
Sulpicius Severus4 gives of the churches of Cyrene
in the deserts of Libya, when he tells us, he went
with a presbyter into one of them, which was made
of small rods interwoven one with another, and not
much more stately and ambitious than his own
house, in which a man could hardly stand upright.
But the men who frequented these churches, were
men of the golden age and purest morals: they
neither bought nor sold any thing ; they knew not
what fraud or theft was ; they neither had, nor de
sired to have, silver or gold, which other mortals set
such a value upon. For, says he, when I offered
the presbyter ten pieces of gold, he refused them,
telling me with some greatness of mind, that the
church was not built with gold, but rather unbuilt
by it, Ecclesiam auro non strui, sedpotius destrui, atti-
ore consilio protestatus. These instances may serve
to explain Isidore's meaning, when he says, The

187 Ruffin. lib. 1. c. 9. Monere ccepit, ut conventicula per
loca singula facerent, ad quae Romano ritu orationis causa
confluerent. •
188 Theod. lib. 1. ... 24. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 20. Ruffin. lib. 1
c. 10.
1 Isidor. Pelus. lib. 2. Ep. 246. 'Eirl piv tuiv iiroo-ToXtov
iKKXr}aia<TTripla oiiK T]v, &c.
2 Bede, Hist. lib. 3. c. 4. Vulgo vocatur, ad candidam
casam, eo quod ibi ecclesiam de lapide, insolito Britonibus
more, fecerit.

3 Bede, lib. 3. c. 25. Finan in insula Lindisfarnensi fecit
ecclesiam episcopali sedi congruam. ,Quam tamen more
Scotorum, non de lapide, sed de robore secto, totam compo-
suit atque arundine texit.  Sed episcopus loci illius Ead
bert, ablata arundine, earn totam, hoc est, et tectum et ipsos
quoque parietes ejus plumbi laminis co-operire curavit.
4 Sulpit. Sever. Dial. 1. c. 2. Erat vilibus contexta vir-
gultis, non multo ambitiosior quam nostri hospitis taberna-
culum, in quo nisi incurvus quis non poterat consistere,
&c.

.Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

2S3

apostolical age had no chuf ches, or not such rich
and noble structures, as the peace, and affluence, and
emulation of after ages commonly produced.
Indeed there were many visible rea-
Keasom' fir en- sons, why the state of the structures
Slufof ecciesf- must needs alter in proportion to the
advancement of <he state of religion
itself. For times of peace and persecution looked
with a very different aspect, and had a very different
influence upon the affairs of the church. Persecu
tion was always attended with poverty, paucity of
believers, and unsettled hopes : so that either they
needed not stately and sumptuous buildings, or they
were not able to erect them ; or at least they had
no invitation and encouragement to do it, whilst they
were under daily apprehensions of seeing them
plundered or demolished almost as soon as they had
erected them. But in times of peace great multi
tudes of converts forsook the temples, and came
over to the church, and those many times persons
of fortune and quahty ; and in some of the heathen
reigns the church enjoyed a more serene and unin
terrupted gale of tranquillity, as in that happy in
terval of near fifty years, between the death of St.
Cyprian and the last persecution : and then there
was a necessity to build more ample and stately
churches, and they had ability to do it, and were
not without hopes of continuing to enjoy their works
of piety in a settled and lasting peace. So that
then, in that promising interval, as Eusebius5 ob
serves, when Diocletian's court and family were al
most all become Christians, and great multitudes of
believers in all cities came over daily to the faith ;
their ancient fabrics could not contain them, but
they built them more ample and spacious churches
in every city from the foundation. And when many
of these had been destroyed in the long decennial
persecution, they were again rebuilt from the ground
more lofty and beautiful than they were before, as
the same Eusebius words it,8 as soon as Constantine
had revived the Christians' hopes, by publishing his
edicts in favour of their rehgion.
sect. 3. But now there were two other rea-
mSSceof'118 sons concurred, after the emperors
contributeTKrd were become Christians, which contri
buted much toward the state and mag
nificence of Christian churches. Which were, first,
the great liberality and munificence of the emperors
themselves, who were at great expense in erecting
many noble fabrics in several cities to the honour of
Christ; and, secondly, their orders for converting
heathen temples into churches. Constantine spared
no charge to erect, beautify, and adorn churches in

5 Euseb. lib. 8. c. 1. 6 Ibid. lib. 10. c. 2.
7 Euseb. de Vita Constant, lib. 3. c. 50 et 51. Socrat.
"»¦ 1. e. 16, 17, 18.
8 Eu8eb. de Vit. Const, lib. 4. c. 58.

all parts of the East, as at Jerusalem, Antioch, Ni
comedia, Mambre, Hehopolis in Phoenicia; and
many other places, of which the reader that pleases
may find a particular account in Eusebius and So
crates:7 but especially at Constantinople, where
among others he built the beautiful church called
ecclesia Constantiniana, to the memory of the twelve
apostles; which, as Eusebius describes it,8 was vastly
high, and yet had all its walls Covefed with marble,
its roof overlaid with gold, and the outside) instead
of tiles, covered with gilded brass. He also laid the
foundation of the famous temple called Sancta So
phia, and Magna, which was finished and dedicated
thirty-four years after by his son Constantius, anno
360, who joined the temple of Peace to it, (which
was another church built by Constantine,) including
them both in one, as Socrates9 and the author of
the Chronicon Alexandrinum inform us.10 Con
stantine's example was followed by the succeeding
emperors, but more especially by Justinian, who,
among many other works of this nature, rebuilt the
church of S. Sophia, which had been burnt down in
the time of Anastasius. And now it became the
glory of the world for its greatness, curious archi
tecture, richness, and beauty ; insomuch that Justi
nian himself, having finished it, was heard to say,
NtvtK/jKa ere, SoXottioy, I have outdone thee, Solomon.
They who are desirous to read the particular descrip
tion of this church, may find it briefly delineated in
Evagrius,1' Procopius,12 and Agathius,13 but more
fully and exactly by Paulus Silentiarius, and his
learned commentator Du Fresne, whose accurate
knowledge in these matters exceeds all that ever
came before him. I have extracted out of him such
observations as I thought necessary to my own de
sign, but they that please to peruse the whole may
find it at the end of Johannes Cinnamus, among the
Byzantine historians, pubhshed at Paris, 1670.
The other reason, which I said con
tributed toward the magnificence of as also their or-
„ ders for converting
Christian churches, was the orders ot heathen temples into
churches,
several emperors for converting hea
then temples into churches. At first indeed, whilst
the reformation from heathenism was in its infancy,
no idol-temples were made use of as churches, but
they were either permitted to the heathen for some
time, or else shut up, or demolished. Till the 25th
year of Constantine, i. e. anno 333, the temples were
in a great measure tolerated ; but in that year he
published his laws, commanding temples, altars, and
images to be destroyed, which laws are sometimes
referred to in the Theodosian Code.14 And pursu
ant to these laws, a great many temples were defaced

9 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 16.
'» Chronic. Alex. an. 360. p. 085. " Evagr. lib. 4. c. 31.
12 Procop.de jEdific. Justin, lib. I.e. 1. 13 Agath.lib.5.
11 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 17. de Sepulchris violatis, Leg. 2.

2S4

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

in all parts of the world, and their revenues confis
cated, as appears not only from the Christian writers,
St. Jerom,15 and Eusebius,16 and others, but also
from the complaints of the heathen writers, Euna-
pius,17 Libanius,1" and Julian.19 In some of the fol
lowing reigns also the same method was taken, to
shut up or to deface the temples, as is evident from
the account which Ruffin™ gives of the general de
struction of them in Egypt by the order of ^alen-
tinian. But in the next reign, in the time of Theo
dosius, another method was taken with some of them.
For as Gothofred observes'" out of the Chronicon
Alexandrinum, anno 379, Theodosius turned the
famous temple of Hehopolis, called Balanium, into
a Christian church, i-n-oirjtrt avTbiiKieX^aiav xpiartavwv.
And about the same time, Socrates tells us, that
when Valens had banished the two Macarii, the
heads of the Egyptian monks, into a pagan island,
they converted all the inhabitants, and turned22
their temple into the form of a church. The hke
was done by the famous temple of the clea cae
lestis at Carthage, by Aurelius the bishop, in the
time of Honorius, anno 399, which the author of
the book de PrEedictionibus, under the name of Pros
per,23 tells with this remarkable circumstance, that
it had been dedicated before by one Aurelius, a
heathen high priest, with this inscription, Aurelius
pontifex dedicavit, which our author says was left in
the frontispiece, to be read by all the people, because
by God's providence it wras fulfilled again in Aurelius
the bishop, for whom it served as well as the former
Aurelius, when he had once dedicated it to the use
and service of the Christian religion, and set his
chair in the place of the goddess. Not long after
this, Honorius, anno 403, published two laws in the
Western empire, forbidding the destruction of any
more temples in cities, because they might serve for
ornament or public use,24 being once purged of all
unlawful furniture, idols, and altars, which he or

dered to be destroyed wherever they were found.
These laws, as Gothofred rightly observes, seem to
have been published at the instance of the African
fathers, who, as appears from one of the canons25 of
the African Code, petitioned the emperor, that such
temples as were in the country only and private
places, not serving for any ornament, might be de
stroyed. Arcadius published such another law for
the Eastern empire, which relates only to the de
struction of temples in country places,28 and not in
cities, where now there was no such danger of su
perstition, since they might be converted to a better
use. And upon this ground the author under the
name of Prosper27 commends Honorius for his piety
and devotion, because he gave all the temples with
their adjacent places to the church, only requiring
the idols to be destroyed. It is true, indeed, after
this we find a law of Theodosius junior,28 command
ing all temples to be destroyed. But, as Gothofred
seems rightly to interpret, it, the word destroying in
that law is to be understood only of despoiling them
of their superstition, because it follows in the same
law, that they were to be expiated by placing the
sign of the cross upon them, which was a token of
their being turned into churches. And his observ
ation may be confirmed further from what Evagrius2"
reports of Theodosius, that he turned the Tychseum,
or temple of Fortune, at Antioch, into a church,
called by the name of Ignatius. The like was done
by a great temple at Tanis in Egypt, as Valesius*1
has observed out of the Itinerary of Antoninus the
martyr. Cluver, also, in his description of Italy,
takes notice of a place in the Jerusalem Itinerary,
called Sacraria, betwixt Fulginum and Spoletum,
near the head of the river Clitumnus, which he
thinks81 was originally no other than the temple
of Jupiter Clitumnus; though another learned an
tiquary82 makes it something doubtful as to the pre
sent church now standing there. However, we

15 Hieron. Chronic, an. 332.
15 Euseb. de Vit. Const, lib. 3. c. 54.
17 Eunap. Vit. yEdesii.
19 Liban. Orat. pro Templis, p. 9. Et Orat. Apologetic.
26. p. 591.
19 Julian. Orat. 7. p. 424. 28 Ruffin. lib. 2. c. 28.
21 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 10. de Pagan
Leg. 25.
22 Socrat. lib. 4. c. 24. To Si erxnpa tou vaov eis ekkXi)-
trias tvitov pETairon'iaavTES, Sec.
23 Prosper, de Promission. lib. 3. c. 38. Antistes Aurelius,
ccelestis jam patriae civis, cathedram illic loco ccelesris et
habuit, et sedit. Ipse tunc aderam cum sociis et amicis
atque (ut se adolescentium aetas impatiens circumquaque
vertebat) dum curiosi singula quae pro magnitudine iuspici-
mus, mirum quoddam et incredibilenostro se ingessit aspcc-
tui, titulus eeneis grandioribusque literis in frontispicio templi
conscriptus, Aurelius pontifex dedicavit. Hunc legentes
populi mirabantur. Praesago tunc spiritu acta, quae prae-
scius Dei ordo certo isto fine concluserat.
24 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 10. de Pagan. Leg. 18. ^Edes
inlicitis rebus vacuas, ne quis conetur evertere. Decernimus

enim, ut aedificiorum quidem sit integer status. It. Leg. 19.
iEdificia ipsa templorum, quae in civitatibus vel oppidis,
vel extra oppida sunt, ad usum publicum vindicentur : arar
locis omnibus destruantur.
25 Cod. Afric. can. 58.
28 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 10. de Pagan. Leg. 16. Si qua in
agris templa sunt, sine turba et tumultu diruantur. His
enim dejectis, omnis superstitionis materia consumetur.
27 Prosper, de Promiss. lib. 3. c. 38. Honorius Christiana
religione ac devotione praeditus. Templa omnia cum suis
adjacentibus spatiis, ecclesiis contulit : simulque eorum si
mulacra confringenda in potestatem dedit.
28 Cod. Th. ibid. Leg. 25. Cuncta eorum fana, templa,
delubra, si qua nunc etiam restant integra, praecepto magis-
tratuum destrui, conlocationeque venerandau Christianas- re
ligionis signi expiari praecipimus.
29 Evagr. lib. 1. c. 16. Siikos tuayijs icai te/i£»os llyiov TtS
\yvaTtto to oraXat Tvxdiov yiyove.
30 Vales. Not. in Soaomen. lib. 5. c. 21. Immensum fuit
ibi templum, quod modo est ecclesia.
31 Cluver. Ital. Vetus, p. 702.
32 Holsten. Annot. in Cluver. p. 124.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

295

have seen instances enough of this practice ; and
Bede33 teUs us, That Gregory the Great gave Austin
the monk instructions of the same nature, about the
temples here among the Saxons in Britain, that if
they were well built, they should not be destroyed,
but only be converted from the worship of devils to
the service of the true God ; and so he observes it
was done at Rome, where, not long after, Boniface
IV. turned the heathen temple, called the Pantheon,
into the church of All Saints,34 in the time of the
emperor Phocas. Sometimes the temples were
pulled down, and the materials were given to the
church, out of which new edifices were erected for
the service of religion, as Sozomen35 and Ruffin38
particularly observe of the temples of Bacchus and
Serapis at Alexandria. I have ah-eady showed37
out of Ausonius, that the Roman halls, or basilicce,
were likewise turned into churches. The like is re
ported of some Jewish synagogues by the author of
the Chronicon Alexandrinum, who takes notice par
ticularly38 of a synagogue of the Samaritans in a
place caUed Gargarida, which Zeno the emperor
converted into a large Christian church.
And though it is not agreed by learned men,
whether the temples said to be built by Hadrian
were intended for the worship of himself, or the
worship of Christ; for Casaubon39 and Pagi40 think
he designed them for himself, whilst Huetius41 de
fends Lampridius his relation, who says he designed
them for the honour of Christ ; yet it is certain, that
after they had been used to other purposes, they
were at last some of them turned into Christian
churches. For Epiphanius says,42 there was a great
temple at Tiberias, called the Hadrianum, which
the Jews made use of for a bath, but Josephus
Conies, the converted Jew, in the time of Constan
tine, turned it into a church. And the like was
done by another of them by Athanasius at Alexan
dria, having before been the hall or palace of Lici
nius, as the same Epiphanius43 informs us. So that
now, partly by the munificence of the emperors,
building churches at then- own charge, and partly
by their orders for converting heathen temples into
churches, and partly by the great liberality and zeal
of private Christians in times of peace, churches
became another thing from what they were in former
ages, that is, more noble and stately edifices, more
rich and beautiful, under which advantage we are

83 Bede, lib. 1. c. 30. s* Ibid. lib. 2. c. 4.
35 Sozomen. lib. 7. c. 15.
88 Ruffin. lib. 2. u. 23.
17 See chap. 1. n. 5.
38 Chron. Alex. an. 10. Zenon. p. 757. 'Eiroino-E Tf> avv-
aytoyjiv aiiTtiiv, tt]U ierav ats to KaXovpEvov yapyapiSi]v,
EuKTrtptov oXkov piyav, &c.
" Casaubon. Not. in Lamprid. Vit. Alex. Sevcri, p. 170.
40 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 134. u. 4.
41 Huet. Demonstrat. Evangel. Propos. 3. p. 65.
4 Epiphan. Haer. 30. Ebionit. n. 12.

next to take a view of them in the following part of
this book.

CHAPTER III.

01? THE DIFFERENT FORMS AND PARTS OF THE
ANCIENT CHURCHES : AND FIRST, OF THE EX
TERIOR NARTHEX, OR ANTE-TEMPLE.
It may easily be collected from what
has been discoursed in the former churches' ancient-
. , . ly of different forms.
chapter, that anciently churches were
not all built precisely in one form or figure. For
since both heathen temples and public halls were
turned into churches, it can hardly be imagined,
that all these should happen to be built exactly in
the same form. Nor indeed was there any uni
versal rule among Christians about this matter.
The author of the Constitutions seems to intimate,
that they were generally oblong, in the figure of a
ship.1 This figure was otherwise called dromical,
SpoptKov, because, as Leo AUatius2 and Suicerus3
after him conjecture, churches built in this form
had void spaces for deambulation. And this is said
to be the figure of the famous church of Sancta
Sophia at Constantinople, by Paulus Silentiarius
and other writers. But this figure was not so general
but that we meet with churches in other forms.
For the church which Constantine built over our
Saviour's sepulchre at Mount Golgotha, was round,
as we learn from Eusebius,4 and Walafridus Strabo.5
That which he built at Antioch, Eusebius'' says,
was an octagon : and such was the church of Na
zianzum, built by Gregory the father of Gregory
Nazianzen, as we find in the son's funeral oration '
upon his father, who describes it as having eight
sides equal to one another. Other churches were
built in the form of a cross, as that of Simeon Sty
lites, mentioned by Evagrius.8 And the church of
the apostles built by Constantine at Constantinople (
was in this form likewise, as we learn from Gregory
Nazianzen in his Somnium Anastasiae, who thus
describes it : Carm. 9. tom. 2. p. 79.
2uf Tots Kal pEydXavxov eSos Xpt-roto paSi]Ttov,
TlXEvpals travpoTinrots TETpaxi TEpvdpEVOV.

43 Epiphan. Haer, 69. Arian. n. 2.
1 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57. '0 ot/cos tew iiripmins, otis
EOlKE V)]t.
2 Allatius, de Templis Graecorum.
3 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce Ncto's.
4 Euseb. Vit. Const, lib. 3. c. 38.
5 Strabo de Rebus Eccl. c. 4.
6 Euseb. Vit. Constant, lib. 3. u. 50. 'Ev oKTaiSpa oxn-
paTi. 7 Naz. Orat. 19. de Laud. Patr. p. 313.
8 Evagr. lib. 1. c 11.

2S6

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

ICHNOGRAPHIA TEMPLORUM ORIENTALIUM.
Jchnograpliia Tmplorum Beveregii. Ichnographia Leonis AJlatii.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

287

Among -these stood the stately church of the
Apostles of Christ, dividing itself into four wings in
the form of a cross. These were sometimes made
so by the addition of a wing of building on each
side, (which wings the Greeks call apsides,) as Ce-
drenus" and Zonaras observe in the Life of Justin
junior, who added two of these apsides to the church
of Blachernte, and so made it resemble the form of
a cross. Valesius has also observed 10 out of the
Itinerary of Antoninus the martyr, that the church
which Constantine built at Mambre, was in a qua
drangular or square figure, with an open court in
the middle, so as one part of it was made use of by
the Jews, and the other by the Christians. Some
churches were also called octachora, but, as Vale
sius rightly observes, those were the same with the
octagones, as appears from this ancient inscription
in Gruter:11 Octachorum sanctos templum sun-exit in usus,
Oetagonus fons est munere dignus eo.
Suicerus and Allatius take notice also of another
form of churches, which they call rpaXXwrd, kuXiv-
SptnTa, SoXtord, and KvnXouSij, that is, round, in the
figure of an arch, or sphere, or a cylinder, or a shield,
or a circle, as the Pantheon at Rome was said to
be. But this, properly speaking, was not so much
the form of a church, as the figure of one part of
some churches, as particularly that of Sancta So*
phia, the body of which was built in the form of a
trulla, that is, a great round arch or sphere, but yet
the whole was oblong, resembling the form of other
churches, as the reader may judge by comparing
the several figures in the following table, whereof one
is that of Sancta Sophia, taken from Du Fresne's
Constantinopolis Christiana, another from Dr. Be
verege in his Pandects, a third from Leo Allatius,
and a fourth from Goar ; all which being contracted
and put together by Schelstrate in his Concilium
Antiochenum, are here represented from his copy,
with the proper names referring to each part of
them. To these I have added another figure rer
presenting the stately church of Tyre, built by
Paulinus, and described by Eusebius12 in his pane
gyrical oration upon the church and the founder of
it, which the curious reader may see at large in the
tenth book of his Ecclesiastical History. I shall
here in a great measure foUow his description, as
one of the most ancient and authentic that we have,
only, intermixing such other things as are necessary

to explain the forms and parts of other churches,
since, as I have observed, they were not all alike,
but differed in form, in site, and in several parts
from one another.
To begin with their situation or s l>2
posture: they were commonly so tuttfnd£ne"ono"
placed, as that the front or chief en. aM*er'
trances were toward the west, and the sanctuary
or altar part toward the east : - yet in some churches
it was otherwise, as is evident from the observ
ation made by Socrates18 upon the church of An
tioch, that it stood in a different posture from other
churches; for the altar did not look toward the
east, but toward the west. Which observation is
also made by Paulinus Nolanus 14- upon one of his
own struotiires. And the temple of the other Pau
linus at Tyre seems to have stood the same .way.
For Eusebius describes the entrance to it, and not
the altar part, as fronting the rising sun. So that
though the author of the Constitutions,15 among.
other rules of this nature, gives directions for build
ing churches toward the east, yet it appears from
these instances, that the practice was not so univers
al, but that it admitted of exceptions, as necessity
or expediency required. Which observation has
been made not only by Bishop Usher,16 and Cardinal
Bona,17 but long before them by Walafridus Strabo,
who says,18 The ancients were not nicely t:urious
which way their churches stood, but yet the most
usual custom was for Christians to pray toward the
east, and therefore the greatest part of the churches
were built with a respect to that custom. But St.
Patrick in Ireland, as Bishop Usher observes 19 out
of Jocelin, the writer of his Life, varied from all
others : for he built a church in Sabul, hard by
Down in Ulster, which fronted neither east nor
west, but stood from north to south, ab aquilonali
parte versus meridianam plagam. So that ecclesias
tical history affords us instances, if we make a cu
rious inquiry, of churches standing in all postures.
Next, to consider the several parts
of the ancient churches, we are to ob- . commoni? divided
into three parts, and
serve, that as in the temple of God at ™™etimes four or
Jerusalem, not only the holy and the
most holy were reckoned parts of the temple, but
also the outward courts, and even the court of the
Gentiles, which is expressly called the house of God,
and the house of prayer ; so in Christian churches,
which were built with some regard to the Jewish
temple, the whole ambitus or circumference about

"Cedren. Vit. Justin, in Compend. Hist. p. 390.
10 Antonin. ap. Vales. Not. in Euseb. de Vit. Const, lib.
3. c. 53. Est ibi basilica aedificata per quadrum, et atrium
in medio discoopertum, &c.
11 Gruter. Thesaur. p. 1166. >2 Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4.
oocrat. lib. 5. c. 22. *H eV/cXrjo-ict dvTi^pocpov exei Ti]v
S-ttxo-tK- i yip irpos dvaToXi]V to Stvaia^piov, dXXi irpds
Siiaiv Spa.

14 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever. Prospectus basilica? non, ut
usitatior mosest, orientem spectat, sed ad Domini mei beati
felicis basilicam pertinet, memoriam ejus aspiciens.
15 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57.
16 Usher. Letter. 49. ad Selden.
17 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 20. n. 4.
18 Strabo de Rebus Eccl. c. 4.
» Usher's Letters, Ep. 49.

238

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII

THE PLAN OF AN ANCIENT CHURCH,
"WITH ITS EXEDIWE,
AS DESCRIBED BY EUSEBIUS AND OTHER WRITERS.

1 Propyltsum, or vestibulum magnum, the
great porch, or first entrance into the
area before the church.
2 The jueo-uiiAtov. atrium, or area, leading
from the porch to the church.
3 Cantkarus, or- phiala, the fountain of wa
ter in the middle of the square.
4 The porticos or cloisters about the area,
otherwise called the exterior narthex
of the church, and place of mourners.
5 The great gate into the church.
6 The two lesser gates on each side of the
other. a
7 The northern and southern gates.
8 The cloisters on the north and south side
of the church.
9 The ferula, or inner narthex, where the

catechumens and hearers stood with
Jews and Gentiles.
10 The place of the substrati, or third degree
of penitents, behind the ambon.
11 The ambon, or reading desk.
12 The ascent on both sides the ambon*
13 The inner porticos, or cloisters, for men
below,
14 The catechumenia, or Jiyperoa, upper
galleries for women, above the porticos
ofthe men, upon pillars.
L5 Cancelii bematis, the rails of the chan
cel.
16 The bema, or chancel.
17 The altar, or communion table.
18 The pyrgus, or cyborium, the arched
canop\ built round the altar.

19 The bishop's throne, with
20 The second thrones of presbyters, in a
semicircle about the altar.
21 Diaconicum minus, the inner vestry.
22 Prothesis, or paratorium.
23 Sceuophylacium, or diacomcum mag
num, the great repository or greeting
house.
24 Baptistery. * The porch.
25 The font in the middle of the bap
tistery. .
26 Pastophoria, dwelling-houses for tne
clergy, with schools, libraries, &c.( on
each side of the church.
27 Excdrm ecclesia, the outer buildings.
28 The Trcpi^oXor, or utmost bounds allowed
for refuge or saoctuary.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

289

them was esteemed in a large sense as part of the
church; and accordingly, when churches became
asylums, or places of refuge, under Christian empe
rors, not only the inner buildings, but the outer
courts and boundaries, were reckoned a sufficient
sanctuary, as we shall see in the latter part of this
book. Now, hence arose a twofold division of
churches, as taken in a stricter or a larger sense.
In the strictest sense, including only the buildings
within the walls, they were commonly divided into
three parts : I. The nartliex, or ante-temple, where
the penitents and catechumens stood. 2. The naos,
or temple, where the communicants had their re
spective places. And, 3. The bema, or sanctuary,
where the clergy stood to officiate at the altar. But
in a larger sense-, there was another ante-temple, or
narthex, without the walls, under which was com
prised the irpiievXav, or vestibulum, the outward
porch ; then the atrium, or area, the court leading
from that to the temple, surrounded with porticos
or cloisters, as we shall presently see in the temple
of Paulinus. There were also several exedrcs, such
as the baptistery, the diaconica, the pastophoria, and
other adjacent buildings, which were reckoned to
be either without or within the church, according
as it was taken in a stricter or a larger acceptation.
Eusebius, in describing the church
And'these'soodi- of Paulinus, takes it in the largest
video into oilier °
parte. The outward sense, and therefore he begins his de-
narthex, or ante- °
T^S^o'r' scription with the irtpiftoXov, or wall
Sh."'""' "* that enclosed the whole circumference
of the outward courts, which we may
call the ante-temple, or exterior nartliex, to distin
guish it from the narthex within the church. In
the front of this sacred enclosure toward the east,
at some distance from the church, the first building
that presented itself was a great and lofty porch,
which Eusebius and other Greek writers caU the
irpo-n-vXov pkya, and the Latins, vestibulum magnum,
the great porch, to distinguish it from the lesser
porches, which joined to the church. He calls it
also irpiiirnv ihoSov, the first entrance, to distinguish
it from the second, which were the gates of the
church. sCct. 5. Between this porch and the church
1. The atrium, or ...  1 , , n
he area, or court was a large area, or square plot of
before the church, , . , . , _ , . ,, f
surrounded with ground, which Eusebius calls atSrpiov,
portico., or cloisters. , -_ . . „, . ,
and Paulus bilentianus, avXijv, m his
description of Sancta Sophia ; the Latins term it
atrium and impluvium, because it was a court open
to the air, without any covering, save only on each
side of the square, which was surrounded with por-

" Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4. It. de Vit. Const, lib. 3. t. 35.
Paul. Silent, par. 2. ver. 174.
* Du presne, Com. in Paul. Silent, p. 536.
Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4. TtpuiTr] avTi) StaTpifSi], to~is two
Tpumov daayayiov |T1 SEopivots, KaTaXXi]Xov tvv povijv
irapEXopivn.

ticos or cloisters, aroai Eusebius calls them, and
these built upon columns, whence, as Du Fresne*2
observes, this place is called sometimes TtrpdoTvXov,
and quadriporticus, in modern authors. In this
place stood the first class of penitents, according to
Eusebius, 'who says23 expressly, it was the mansion
of those' who were not allowed to enter further into
the chm-ch. That is, they stood either in the porch
or the porticos, to beg the prayers of the faithful as
they went into the church. Or perhaps, if they
were more notorious criminals, they were cast out
of these also, and obliged to wait in the court or
open air, and stand there exposed to the weather,
as part of their penance : which seems to be inti
mated by Tertullian,24 when, speaking of some mon
strous sinners, he says, They were expelled not only
from the doors of the church, but from every place
that might afford them any shelter or covering. So
that the atrium was always an open place or court
before the church : and therefore those authors
who confound the atrium, or vestibulum, and portions
into one, wholly mistake the form of the ancient
churches ; for these, as I have showed, were dis
tinct parts of the ante-temple.
It is further to be noted, that in the
middle of*he atrium there was com
monly a fountain, or a cistern of wa- Sa^/VS m!
ter, for people to wash their hands Sw^i/S
and face, before they went into the ° mBOmeau ots-
church. Eusebius expressly mentions this in the
temple of Paulinus. He says, In the court over
against the church he placed Kprivag, fountains of
water, as symbols of purification, for such to wash
as entered into the church. Paulinus, bishop of
Nola, takes notice of the same thing, but gives it the
name of cantharus,23 which signifies any capacious
vessel that will hold much water, and sometimes a
statue made to spout out water at its mouth: as
Du Fresne has observed, that in some places the
fountain was surrounded with lions thus spouting
out water, whence this place has the name of leon-
tarium in some modern Greek writers.. It is also
called by some nymphcsum, ipfidrrig, and KoXvpfli'iov,
which all signify a fountain. Paulus Silentiarius, in
his description of Sancta Sophia, gives it the name
of tptdXn, phiala, which we may English, the basin.
And Socrates calls it 0pedp, the' spring. For speaking
of a skirmish that happened between the catholics
and Macedonian heretics in the church of Acacius
at Constantinople, he says, Such a slaughter was
made, that the avXr], the atrium or court of the
church, was filled with blood, insomuch that the

Sect. 6.
3. In the middle
of which stood a

24 Tertul. de Pudic-it. c. 4. Reliquas autem libidinum
furias — non modo limine, verurn omni ecclesias tecto sub-
movemus, quia non sunt delicta, sed monstra.
25 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever. Sancta nitens famulis inter-
luit atria lymphis cantharus, intrantuinque manus lavat
amne ministro.

200

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

t/iptdp, the fountain that stood in it, was overflowed26
therewith, and ran through the adjoining irrod, the
portico or cloisters, even into the street. St. Chry
sostom2' also speaks of these fountains, as of things
of common use in the atria, or courts before the
churches. And frequently, in his popular dis
courses, alludes to the custom of washing their
hands before they went into church.28 Which
is also done by TertuUian,29 who exposes the ab
surdity of going to prayers with washed hands,
whilst men retained a filthy spirit and polluted soul.
In like manner Synesius30 speaks of the cisterns, or
vessels of water, set for washing in their ante-
temples. c , , The writers of the church of Rome,
Sect. 7.
pe^SS 'uVo'f Baronius3' and others, commonly de-
rnJJta'oT bt„£ca„". rive and defend the use of their holy
water from this ancient custom : but
Du Fresne32 seems to speak more properly, when
he says, their lustral water rather succeeded in its
room. For the washing of the ancients had nothing
of expiation in it, but was only an indifferent cere
mony of corporal decency, or at most, but an ad
monishing emblem of that purity of soul, with
which men ought to enter the courts of the most
holy God. And therefore any one that*compares
these matters nicely together, must conclude, that
the latter custom is but a fond imitation or mere
corruption of the former ; if it owe not rather its
original to a worse fountain, the mptftpavTripia, or
sprinkling with holy water, so often spoken of
among the heathen. The things are so like one
another, that some modern transcribers of Sozomen
have mistaken them for one another. For whereas
Sozomen, speaking of Julian's going into a temple
to sacrifice in Gaul, with Valentinian to attend him,
says, The priest sprinkled them33 with water as they
Went in, according to the heathen custom ; Valesius
has observed, that in some copies it is read, accord
ing to ecclesiastical custom, instead of heathen cus
tom : which he imputes to some modern transcribers,
who were minded to make church holy water of it ;
whom he ingenuously chastises for their ignorance
or impudence in corrupting good authors, as they
justly deserved.
Sect 8 But to return to the business of the
p„T,ieo"'m",h'e.nd ancient churches : whilst we are
SeTrto',0"^! speaking of the ante-temple, it will
not be improper to observe, that for
many years after burying-places were allowed in

cities, they were still kept out of that which was
strictly and properly called the church, and only
allowed in those parts of the ante-temple, the atrium
and porticos, which we have been describing: as
appears from a canon ofthe council of Nantes, anno
658, which prohibits any to be buried31 in the
church, but allows of it in the atrium or porticos,
or exedrce of the church. "Which I note only to
show what use these parts of the ante-temple were
put to. But of this more when we come to treat
of cemeteries, and the funeral rites of the ancient
church.

CHAPTER IV.
OP THE INTERIOR NARTHEX, AND THE PARTS AND
USES OF IT.

Sect. 1.

Having taking a view of the exterior
narthex, or outward ante-temple, we or the lesser „po.
are next led by Eusebius into the in- Kore'the doors oi
.the church,
tenor narthex, or ante-temple within
the church. For in such stately structures as that
of Paulinus was, the narthex, or n-povaoc, which I
English ante-temple, was a name common to more
parts than one. And in some of the most magnifi
cent churches, as that of Sancta Sophia, as Du
Fresne has observed out of Procopius and Paulns
Silentiarius, there were no less than four distinct nar-
theces. The entrance into the interior narthex in
the church of Paulinus, was out of the porticos or
cloisters before the church, by three inner porches,
(ra ivSordroj irpoirvXa Eusebius calls them,) and as-
many gates opening out of them, the middle one
being the greatest and highest of the three, as we
commonly see in our modern cathedrals, only with
this difference, that those fronted to the east, and
ours to the west. It had also porticos adjoining on
the north and south,1 and as many porches and
doors to enter out of them. These porches in such
churches as had no other ante-temple served to re
ceive the first class of penitents, called the mourners,
which otherwise were -remitted to the atrium and
porticos before the church, as I have showed al
ready in the temple of Paulinus. And these things
are accurately to be observed by those who would
not mistake the ancients, when they seem to speak
differently of the place of the mourners. Du Fresne

26 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 38.
27 Chrysost. Homil. 57. t. 5. Edit. Savil. p. 390. Tcis
Kpnvas Eivai ivTais aiiXaXs Ttov EVKTi]pitov otietov VEv6pi=rat.
28 Chrys. Horn. 52. in Matth. Horn. 72. in Johan. Horn.
3. in Ephes. Horn. 36. ad Popul. Antioch. Horn, in Psal. cxl.
23 Tertul. de Orat. c. 11. Qua? ratio est, manibus quidem
ablutis, spiritu vero sordente, orationem obire ?
30 Synes. Ep. 121. Anastasio. Td iv to'is irpoTEpEviapUat

Xtpvtfia, &c. 31 Baron, an. 57. n. 107.
32 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 539.
33 Sozomen. lib. 6. c. 6. 'O UpEvs vdpto iXXr]viKto iriptip-
paivE Toils ELfTlOVTaS.
31 Cone. Namnetens. e. 6. In ecclesia nullatenus sepeli-
antur, sed in atrio, aut portion, aut in exedris ecclesia!.
1 See also Euseb. de Vita Const, lib. 3. c. 37. of the
church of Jerusalem.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

291

has also observed out of Paulinus Nolanus,2 that
these porches and gates are sometimes called arcus,
from the manner of their structure, which was arch-
work; and apsides for the same reason, for apsis
denotes any thing that is framed in the figure of an
arch or a convex, as the heavens : and therefore he
thinks the thirty-second canon of the third council
of Carthage is to be understood of this place, when
it says,3 That such penitents as had committed
very notorious and scandalous crimes, known to the
whole church, should have imposition of hands be
fore the apsis ; that is, before the porch or doors of
the church. Here it was also that the poor of the
church placed themselves both before and after Di
vine service, to ask alms of such as came from the
altar. Which custom is mentioned by Gregory
Nazianzen4 and St. Chrysostom,5 who elegantly,
after his manner, upon this account styles the poor,
and aged, and the lame, and the blind, the guards
of the royal palace, meaning the church.
Being entered by these gates into
oiaienarthex,pro- the church, the first place that occurs
noes, or ferula. . .
to our view, is the irpovdog, or ante-
temple, within the walls. This in the modern
Greek rituals is always called the narthex, and is
peculiarly allotted to the monks or women, and
used to perform the offices of rogations, and sup
plications, and night watches in : here also they
place dead corpses, whilst their funeral rites are
performing, as Suicerus " shows at large out of their
Triodion, Pentecostarium, and Typicum, and other
authors. Morinus thinks' the ancient churches
for above five hundred years had no narthex, but
were divided only into two parts, the sanctuarium
and aula laicorum, the place of the clergy and the
place of. the laymen, and that the narthex was first
introduced by the Eastern monks in the sixth cen
tury ; but in this he is evidently mistaken. For
though the name perhaps be not very ancient, yet
the thing itself is ; for this was always a distinct
and separate part of the church, as any one will
easily imagine, that considers the ancient use of it.
For the church, ever since she first
the^ecateh°ifmiena°t divided ner catechumens and peni-
Sforferf °nks tents int0 distinct orders and classes,
had also distinct places in the church
for them. And this lower part of the church was
the place of the energumens, and such of the cate
chumens and penitents, as were commonly called

dupoiipsvoi, or audientes, that is, hearers, because
they were allowed to stand here to hear the psalms
ana Scriptures read, and the sermon made by the
preacher, after which they were dismissed'without
any prayers or solemn benediction. As may be
seen in the author of the Constitutions8 and the
Canons of St. Basil,9 Gregory Nyssen,1" and several
others. Hither also both Jews, and hea
thens, and heretics, and schismatics AisotbrYemi.hea.
, . ,, n , thena. heretics, and
were sometimes allowed to come, to schismatics to hear
hear the Scriptures read, and the ser
mon preached, because this part of the service was
for their edification and instruction. The council
of Laodicea11 indeed prohibits heretics to come
within the church. But in Africa and other places
it was allowed. For in the fourth council of Car
thage " there is a canon express to this purpose,
That the bishop shall not prohibit any, whether
heathen, heretic, or Jew, to come into the church,
and stay there to hear the word of God, till the
time of the dismission of the catechumens. And it
appears further from several, both of St. Chrysos
tom's and St. Austin's homilies, that this was the
common practice. Now, then, it is reasonable to sup
pose, that all these had their station together in the
lower part of the church, called the narthex, or
whatever other name it went by.
Dr. Beverege and some others seem
here also to place the font or baptist- This nS the place
-, , -, -r, , 01 tne *°ntt °r bap-
ery, as m our modern churches. Rut tistery, as !n our
. modern churches.
there is nothing more certain, than
that for many ages the baptistery was a distinct
place from the body of the church, and reckoned
among the exedrcs, or places adjoining to the
church. For which reason I omit speaking any
further of it here, intending to do it more fully in
the latter part of this Book, when I come to the
exedrcs of the church.
If it be inquired, why this part of Sect s
the church was called narthex ; I an- ,h^lnlhiir^dli.
swer, because the figure of it was sup- 'a™' to several'''"
posed to resemble a. ferula, which was c °*° ''
the Latin name for it, that is, a rod or staff: for
any oblong figure, or dromical, as the Greeks called
it, was by them called a narthex, as Suicerus and
Du Fresne have observed out of Theodosius Zygo-
mala.13 And therefore this part of the church, being
a long, but narrow part, cross the front of the

2 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever. Alma domus triplici patet in-
gredientibus arcu.
"Cone. Carthag. 3. c. 32. Cujuscunque pcenitentis pub
licum et vidgatissimum crimen est, quod universa ecclesia
novent, ante apsidem manus ei imponatur.
4 Naz. Orat. 16. de Amore Pauperum, t. I. p. 246.
s Chrysost. Horn. 10. in 1 Thes. p. 1484.
s Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce Na/>eȣ.
7 Morin. de Poenit. lib. 6. c. 1.
u 2

s Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 5.
8 Basil, can. 75. 10 Nyssen. Ep. ad Letoium, c. 5.
11 Cone. Laodic. can. 6.
12 Cont, Carth. 4. c. 84. Ut episcopus nullum prohibeat
ingredi ecclesiam et audire verbum Dei, sive Gentilem,
sive heereticum, sive Judajum, usque ad missam catechu-
menorum. 13 Zygomal. ap. Crucium Turco-Grac. Hdv SpoutKov vdp-
$i]j£ KaXetTai.

292

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

church, was termed narthex, or ferula, upon that
account. And it is further to be observed, that some
churches had three or four nartheces, but those
without the walls : for the porticos or cloisters of
such churches as Sancta Sophia, which were built
to the, north, and west, and south of them, were
called nartheces; us Du Fresne14 shows out of Pro
copius and Paulus Silentiarius, and the sixth general
council, because these were long narrow buildings
in figure or shape of a narthex. And such churches,
he thinks, had no other narthex within the walls,
but these porticos were the proper station of the
penitents, and such others as were not allowed to
come within the nave of the church. But in such
churches as had no porticos adjoining to them, the
narthex was the lower part of the church within
the walls, which was made to answer the use of
porticos in other churches. And this seems to be
the true state of the matter, and the only way to
reconcile the different accounts that are given by
authors of the ancient narthex of the church.

CHAPTER V.
OF THE NAOS, OR NAVE OF THE CHURCH, AND
ITS PARTS AND USES.
Scct , After the narthex followed that part
an°f royli^aS1 which was properly called vdog, the
why so caiie<r. temple, and navis, the nave or body
of the church. This was separated from the nar
thex by certain rails of wood, as all other places in
the church were commonly distinguished. The en
trance into it from the narthex was by the gates,
which the modern rituals and Greek writers call
irvXai bipaXai and (Sao-iXucai, the beautiful and royal
gates : which seem to be so named in allusion to
the name basilica, as denoting the royal palace of
God, his house and temple. Though perhaps an
other reason might be assigned for it among the
modern Greeks, who might call it the royal gate,
because here their kings were used to lay down
their crowns, before they proceeded further into the
chm-ch. "Which is observed by Leo Grammaticus
in the Life of Michael1 the emperor, where he
notes it as an insolent and indecent thing in him,
that when he came to the royal gates, he did not lay
aside his crown, as kings were used to do. Some festi
vals among them were for a like reason called crown
days, lopi-ai Sio^eirrai, dies coronati, because the em

perors were used to go in their regalia to the great
church of Sancta Sophia on those days, which were
twelve particular days in a year. So that as these
days, so those gates of the temple might have their
denomination from some particular ceremony used
by the imperial powers at their entrance by them :
but I take the other reason to be more probable,
and had scarce mentioned this, had it not been to
explain a custom or two, which fall in our way upon
the mention of it.
This part of the church seems to Secl t
have been usually a square building, ch™h,'«v.ua5y'ae
in the middle between the sanctuary $w b»d»n£u,.
and the narthex; as we find it de- °latgrj °rl°rl°8"
scribed in a letter of Theodosius and Valentinian
at the end of the council of Ephesus,2 and inserted
also into the Theodosian Code,3 where, speaking of
churches as places of refuge, they divide them into
these three parts, 1. The Svoia^ijpwv, the altar part
or sanctuary; 2. The iiiKTriptov tov Xaov rtrpdyoivov,
the four-squared oratory of the people ; and, 3. The
remaining part from that to the outer doors of the
church. Now, as this last is a plain description of
the narthex forementioned, though it be not called
by that name, so is the second a description qf the
nave or middle of the church, called the people's
oratory, because the people chiefly filled this place,
having their different stations or apartments in it,
according to the difference of age, o» sex, or quality,
or state and condition, which distinctions were an
ciently observed in some, though perhaps not in all
churches. For here, first of all, at the very Slct 3
entrance of the royal gates, in the JlSief^iil
lowest station of this part, behind the "nts'of the°ihirdor-
ambo, stood the vTzoieiierovrtg, or sub-
strati, the penitents of the third order, so called
from the custom of prostrating themselves before
the bishop or priest as soon as the sermon was end
ed, to receive his benediction with the imposition of
hands, and be made partakers of those prayers
which the congregation particularly offered to God
for them; after which they were obhged immediately
to depart, before the communion service. "This sort
of penitents are mentioned in the council of Nice,
though no particular place is assigned them: but
we may collect from Tertullian and Sozomen, that
their station was in this part of the church. For
Tertullian,5 speaking of the Roman discipline, says,
Pope Zephyrin brought penitents into the church
in sackcloth and ashes, and prostrated them in the
midst before the widows and presbyters, to implore
their commiseration and excite their tears. This

" Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 534.
1 Leo Gram. Chronograp. p. 466. 2 Cone. t. 3. p. 1236.
3 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. de his qui ad Eccles. confugi-
unt, Leg, 4. p. 366.
4 Cone. Nicen. can. 11.

5 Tertul. de Pudieit. t. 13. Pcenitentiam raoechi ad exo-
randam fraternitatem in ecclesiam indueens, conciliatum et
concineratum cum dedecore et horrore compositum proster-
nis in medium ante viduas, ante presbyteros, omnium la-
chrymas suadentem, &c.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

293

must be a different station of penitents from those
called mourners, for their station (as we have seen
before) was without the church doors, but these be
fore the widows and presbyters in the middle of the
church. And so Sozomen6 plainly represents it,
when he says, The bishop fell prostrate with them,
and all the congregation wept with tears, and then
the bishop rising up, made the proper prayers for
them and dismissed them. These were exercises to
be performed in the church, and not at the church
door; and therefore this order of penitents are not
without reason placed by all expositors within the
royal gates, behind the ambo of the church.
The ambo itself was what we now
And the oinjo, or call the reading desk, a place made
reading desk. on purpose for the readers and singers,
and such of the clergy as ministered in the first
service, called missa catechumenorum. It had the
name of ambo, not, as Walafridus Strabo imagines,
ab ambiendo, because it surrounded them that were
in it ; but .from dvafiaivdv, because it was a place of
eminency, to which they went up by degrees or
steps. For the original name is dpfiuiv, which, as
Valesius and Habertus have rightly observed, in old
Greek writers, iEschylus and Eustathius, signifies
the ascent or height of a mountain, and thence it
comes to signify this place of eminency in the
church. Sozomen7 gives it the names of (Siipa upon
the same account; but to distinguish it from the
other bema, which was the sanctuary, or the altar,
he calls it firjpa yvioaTtav, the readers' bema, as the
other was more properly the bishop's and presby
ters'. In St. Cyprian it is called pulpitum, and tri
bunal ecclesics, and the use of it is also explained by
him to be a reading desk: for here it was the readers
stood to read the Gospels and Epistles, as we learn
from the account which he gives of Celerinus and
Aurelius, two famous confessors, whom he ordained
readers,8 that they who had made confession of
Christ's gospel from the rack, might read it also
from the pulpit or tribunal of the church. Here it
was also that the singers had their station, as is evi
dent from that canon of the council of Laodicea,"
which forbids all others to sing in the church, be
side the canonical singers, who went up into the
ambo, and sung by book. Here also the diptychs,
or books of commemoration, were read, as appears

from a noted passage in the council of Constantino
ple, under Mennas,1" where the people cry out, Td
S'nrTvxa rip- dpfSwvi, Let the diptychs be laid upon
the reading desk. Bona1' thinks the bishop and
presbyters here also made their sermons to the peo
ple. For which he cites Prudentius 12 and Sidonius
Apollinaris,13 from whose words he further con
cludes, that the ambo was sometimes called ara, or
altar. But this observation seems to be founded on
a mistake. For the bishops anciently did not use
to preach from the ambo, but more commonly from
the rising steps of the altar, as Valesius1' shows
that the custom continued in France to the time of
King Childebert. And therefore both Socrates 15
and Sozomen seem to speak of Chrysostom's preach
ing in the ambo as an unusual thing ; but he did
it for conveniency, Socrates says, that he might be
the better heard by the people. We cannot hence
therefore conclude, that the ambo was the ordinary
place of preaching, but rather the altar ; and that
when we read of bisnops preaching from the ascent
of the ara, it is rather to be understood of the altar
than the ambo. Yet in Africa St. Austin seems to
have made his discourses to the people from the
ambo, which he sometimes calls exedra,w and some
times apsis," which I the rather note, because these
words are of various signification among the an
cients, sometimes denoting the ambo, perhaps from
its orbicular form, and at other times the cross
wings and outer buildings of the church. Some
take the apsis for the ambo in that canon of the
third council of Carthage, which says, Notorious
and scandalous criminals la shall do penance before
the apsis. But Du Fresne, as I have noted10 before,
takes it in another sense, for the porch of the
church, and it is not always easy to determine ex
actly the meaning of it.
But to proceed : in this part of the
church, all the faithful, or such as And above this
, the communicants
were in the communion of the church, und fourth order of
penitents, ralli'd con.
had their place assigned them ; and J™'™'"5- had 'heir
among them the fourth order of peni
tents, whom they called eonsistentes, because they
were allowed to stay, and hear the prayers of the
church, after the catechumens and other penitents
were dismissed, but yet they might not make their
oblation, or participate of the sacrifice of the altar.

' Sozom. lib. 7. c. 16. ' Sozom. lib. 8. c 5. lib. 9. c. 2.
Cyprian. Ep. 33. Ad pulpitum post catastam venire,
«c. It. Ep. 34. Quid aliud quam super pulpitum, id est,
tribunal ecclesiae, oportebat imponi, &c.
9 Cone. Laodic. c. 15.
10 Cone. Constant. 5. Act. 5.
J1 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 2. c. 6. n. 3.
Prudent. Hymn, de Hippolyta. Fronte sub adversa
gradibus sublime tribunal tollitur, antistes pradicat unde
Deum. '
Sidon. Carm. 1G. ad Paustum. Seu te conspicuis gradi-
us venerabilis ara:, concionaturum plebs sedula circumsistit.

14 Vales. Not. in Socrat. lib. 6. c. 5.
15 Socrat. lib. 6. c. 5. Sozomen. lib. 8. t. 5.
18 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. u. 8. In gradibus exedrce,
in qua de superiore loquebar loco, feci stare ambos fratres,
cum eorum legeretur libellus.
" Aug. Ep. 225. Honoratiores et gravinres in apsidem
ascendentes, cum episcopo colloqiiiintur, &c. It. Ep. 203.
In future Christi judicio nee apsides gradatac nee cathedra;
velatao, &c.
18 Cone. Carth. 3. c. 32. Ante apsidem ei manus impo-
natur. 1S Chap. 4. u. 1.

294

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

In which respect they are said to stand and com
municate with the rest of the people, but in prayers
only, without the oblation, as the canons of Nice20
and St. Basil21 word it. Whether they were sepa
rate from other communicants in a distinct place by
themselves, I find not in any other author save only
Eligius Noviomensis, who lived about the year 640.
He, in one of his homilies K to the penitents, tells
them they were placed on the left side of the
church, because the Lord at the day of judgment
would place the sheep, that is, the righteous, on his
right hand, and the goats, that is, sinners, on his
left. But because this is a later writer, and learned
men23 are also doubtful about his homilies, whether
they be genuine or not, we can determine nothing
from this passage concerning the original custom
of the church. Only this is certain, from good au-
The places of men thors, that, anciently, men and women
and women usually
Mtnarate ftom na^ tnerr different places in this part
of the church. The author of the
Constitutions speaks of it as the custom24 of the
church in his time, when he gives directions about
it, that women should sit in a separate place by
themselves ; and accordingly makes it one part of
the office of deaconesses to attend25 the women's
gate in the church ; Let the door-keepers stand at
the gate of the men, and the deaconesses at the
gate of the women. St. Cyril26 also takes notice of
this distinction as customary in his own church at
Jerusalem, saying, Let a separation be made, that
men be with men, and women with women, in the
church. The like intimation is given us by St.
Austin, that each sex27 had their distinct places in
the church ; and he particularly mentions the
women's part, as distinct also in the baptistery28 of
the church. Paulinus2" takes notice of the same in
the Life of St. Ambrose, telling us how St. Ambrose
was once furiously assaulted in a church by an
Arian woman, who, getting up into the tribunal to
him, would needs have haled him by his garments
to the women's part, that they might have beat
him, and made him fly the church. This distinc
tion was so generally observed in the time of Con

stantine, that Socrates30 says his mother, Helena,
always submitted to the disciphne of the church in
this respect, praying with the women in the women's
part. And it was' usually made by rails, or wooden
walls, as St. Chrysostom terms them, who has
these remarkable words concerning the original of
this custom: Men ought to be separated31 from
women, says he, by an inward wall, meaning that
of the heart ; but because they would not, our fore
fathers separated them by these wooden walls. For
I have heard from our seniors, that it was not so
from the beginning. For in Christ Jesus there is
neither male nor female. Do we not read, that men
and women prayed together in their upper room ?
Yet Eusebius32 makes this distinction as ancient as
Philo Judffius and St. Mark, and many learned
men think it came from the Jewish church into the
Christian, not long after the days of the apostles.
Some are a little too curious in fixing this women's
part always precisely to the north or right side of
the church. For though this might be the custom
of the Western churches in later ages, when Ama
larius Fortunatus, and Radulphus Tungrensis, and
the authors of the Micrologus and Ordo Romanus
lived, which writers are cited by Durantus33 for it;
yet it appears to have been otherwise anciently in
many of the Greek churches. Nor does that fune
ral inscription, which some produce out of the Roma
Subterranea, prove the contrary, which speaks w of
persons lying interred sinistra parte virorum, on the
south or left side of the church, where the men sat.
For not to inquire into the antiquity of that inscrip
tion, it proves no more, but that the men sat on the
left side in the Roman churches : which does not
hinder the women from having their apartment on
that side too, if the same custom was at Rome which
was at Constantinople and other Greek churches,
which was for the men Jo sit below, and the women
in porticos or galleries above them, on the left side
of the church, if not on the right also. For thus
Gregory Nazianzen35 describes his temple of Anas-
tasia, making the men to stand by the rails of the
chancel, and the virgins and matrons to be hearken
ing from their upper galleries above the other. And

20 Cone. Nicen. e. 11.
21 Basil. Ep. Canon, u. 56. Cone. Ancyr. can. 8.
22 Eligius, Horn. 8. ad Pcenit. Bibl. Patr. t. 2. p. P9.
Cur ergo in sinistra parte ecclesice positi estis ? Non sine
causa usus ecclesiee hoc obtinuit, sed quia Dominus in ju
dicio oves, id est, justos, a dextris : hcedos vero, id est, pec-
catores, a sinistris ponet.
23 Vid. Albertin. de Euchar. lib. 3. p. 906.
2J Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57. Ai yvvalKEs Kzxiopiapi-
vtos Kal avTat KaBE^iorBtotrav.
25 Ibid. lib. 2. c. 57. lib. 8. c. 20 et 28.
2S Cyril. Preefat. in Catech. n. 8. AiEo-TaA.8w tA irpdy-
paTU, dvSpES pETCt dvSpwv, Kal yvvatKES jutxa yvvaiKtov.
27 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 2. c. 28. Populi confluunt ad
ecclesias casta celebritate, honesta utriusque sexus discre-
tione.

28 Ib. lib. 22. e. 8. Admonetur in somnio innocentia, ap-
propinquante pascha, ut in parte foeminarum observanti ad
baptisterium, qusecunque illi baptizata primitus occurrisset,
eundem locum signo Christi signaret.
20 Paulin. Vit. Ambros. p. 3. Tribunal conscendens, ap-
prehenso vestimento sacerdotis, cum ilium attrahere vellet
ad partem mulierum, &c.
30 Socrat. lib. 1. u. 17. 'Qs Kal avvEvxEfBat iv tio tow
yvvaiKtov TaypaTt.
81 Chrysost. Homil. 74. in Matth.
32 Euseb. lib. 2. c. 17.
33 Durant. de Ritib. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 18.
31 Roma Subterr*. lib. 2. c. 10. n. 23.
35 Nazian. Somnium de Templo Anastas. t. 2. p. 78. AY
S' dp' dtp' vi\n]Xuiv TEyitov EVKoapov dKovrjv dyvai irapjE-
vtKal kX'ivov lip' ioSXoydpois.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

295

so it was in the church of Sancta Sophia, and many
other churches. Upon this account, these places of
¦my ihese'piaces the women are, by such Greek writers
called KoTnxBtfe"' as speak of them, termed virip&a, up-
'  perrooms; as by Evagrius,36 in his de
scription of the temple of Sancta Sophia, and more
particularly by Paulus Silentiarius,37 who styles
them expressly StnXvTkptov vntpiiia, the upper galle
ries of the women. These were also called Kart]-
xaiuiva, as appears from an edict of the emperor
Leo,3" which makes these upper rooms and the cate-
chumena to be the same thing. Suicerus39 and
Hospinian, and many other learned men, mistake
these for the place where the catechumens stood,
and where the catechetical books were kept: but
Du Fresne'0 more truly observes, that they were so
called, because they were places of hearing, where
the women sat in their upper gaUeries to hear Di
vine service. In one of these the empress com
monly had her apartment, as Du Fresne observes
out of Evagrius. And by that one may easily un
derstand what Paulus Diaconus 41 means, when,
•speaking of the empress Eirene, he says, She went
up by the ascent of the brazen gate into the cate-
chumenia of the church, that is, into the place, of
hearing among the women's apartments in the
church. These galleries were sometimes also made
use of for councils to sit in, as Leo Allatius12 has
observed of the council of Constantinople, in the
time of Johannes Comnenus, anno 1165, that it was
held iv rdig -SeIuTiq KtxTnxovpkvoig, in the right-hand
galleries of the church of Alexius, and some others
are mentioned13 as held in the same place.
The inner parts of these porticos
Pmate ceiis for were sometimes divided into little
meditation, reading,
hiofftSe™ "" Ce^s or places °f retirement on the
walls of the church, and that not only
in the women's parts, but the men's also, as may be
collected from the account which Paulinus Nolanus
gives of them, who calls them cubieula, little cham
bers, and tells us, the use of them" was for people
to retire into, that were minded to give themselves
to reading, or meditation, or private prayer. These
were looked upon as parts of the catechumenia, and
were sometimes abused to profane uses instead of

pious : for as we may collect from the decrees of the
council of Trullo,15 and the emperor Leo,13 some
made use of them for lodgings instead of oratories,
and cohabited with their wives there: to correct
which abuse, it is ordered' in both those decrees,
that all such persons should be expelled from the
catechumenia of the church.
It is to be noted further, that not
only men and women had their dis- .The pitce'of the
, , , . . -. virgins and widow,
tmct places, but also virgins and wi- distinguished from
° others.
dows a peculiar apartment assigned
to them. Which we learn from St. Ambrose's dis
course to a lapsed virgin, telling her 17 that she ought
to have remembered that place in the church, railed
out from the rest, where she was used to stand, whither
the religious matrons and noblewomen came throng
ing to receive her salutations, which were more holy
and better than herself. This appears also from
the author13 of the Constitutions, who, speaking of
the order in which persons were appointed to sit
in the church, first places the virgins, widows, and
aged women in the highest rank; then married
women below them in a place by themselves ; then
their children, daughters with their mothers, and
sons with their fathers, or next behind them ; and
last of all young men, according to their age, in dif
ferent stations. This was the order in such churches
as had none of those hyperoa or galleries before
spoken of: for otherwise, as has been noted out of
Nazianzen, the virgins and matrons had their dis
tinct places in the porticos above. I do not here
allege Origen, after Durantus and Bona, because
they plainly mistake the sense of their author, who
speaks not of the Christian church, but of the Jew
ish temple, and that with such a formal story, that
it is a wonder any learned men could mistake him.
He tells us, he had it from an old tradition,10 that
•there was a place in the temple peculiar for virgins
to worship God in, whither no married woman was
allowed to come. But the Virgin Mary, after she
had brought forth our Saviour, went and stood to
worship there : which when they that knew she
had borne a Son would not allow of, Zacharias, the
father of St. John Baptist, stood up and said, She is
worthy to stand in the place of virgins, for she is
yet a virgin. Upon which they rose up against

33 Evagr. Hist. lib. 4. t. 31.
37 Paul. Silentiar. Descr. S. Soph. part. 1. ver. 256.
Leo, Novel. 73. 'Eo toXs Ttov iKKX-naiiov viTEptoots biirEp
o iroXvs dvSpwiros KaTi)xovpEVa koXeXv iyveo.
Suicer. Thesaur. Eccl. voce KaTtixoi'ipEva.
10 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 550.
11 Paul. Diacon. Miscel. lib. 23. Aseendit imperatrix
rJirene peracneai portas ascensum in catechumenia ecclesias.
12 Leo Allat. de Consensu Eccles. lib. 2. c. 11. p. 645.
13 Leo Allat. ibid. c. 12. p. 682.
Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever. Cubieula intra porticus qua-
terna longis basilicae lateribus inserta, secretis orantium,
in lege Domini meditantium, pratcrea memoriis religio-

sorum ac familiarium accommodatos ad pacis Geternae re
quiem locos praebent.
45 Cone. Trullan. can. 97.
16 Leo, Novel. 73.
17 Ambros. ad Virgin. Lapsam, c. 6. Nonne vel ilium
locum tabulis separatum, in quo in ecclesia stabas, recordari
debuisti? Ad quem religiosae matronae et nobiles certatim
currebant, tua oscula petentes, quae sanctiores et meliores
te erant.
<8 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57. A! irapSrivot Kal al xvpali
Kid irpEtrflvTiSES, irpbjTat iraeriov Tt]KETtoaav, ?; Ka^E^ior-
Steotrav. m Origen. Horn. 26. in Matth. p. 162.

206

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

Zacharias, as a breaker of the law, in permitting a
married woman to stand in the place of virgins, and
slew him between the temple and the altar. I
make no further reflection on this passage at pre
sent, but leave it, as I find it, to the judgment of
the reader. As to the place of virgins in the Chris
tian church, I have only this one thing more to re
mark out of St. Ambrose, which is, that usually
some profitable texts of Scripture50 were written
upon the walls of the church in this place, proper
to the virgin state, such as that of St. Paul, 1 Cor.
vii. 34, " There is difference between a wife and a
virgin : the unmarried woman careth for the things
of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and
in spirit." Which lesson, St. Ambrose tells the vir
gin he writes to, she ought to have remembered, be
cause it was written before her eyes upon the walls
of the church.
sect io There is one place more to be taken
souiT uia^u° ui™ notice of in some churches, before we
mlnl^part Innl leave this part of the temple to go into
the sanctuary, which is, what Codi-
nus51 and some other modern Greeks call the ouiXeiov,
a place of sorne note in the church of Sancta Sophia,
but uot exactly agreed upon by learned men, either
what or where it was, or what use it was put to.
Gretser, in his Notes upon Codinus,52 fancies it to be
nothing else but the pavement at the entrance of
the sanctuary, or some such thing adjoining to it.
Morinus53 and Allatius5'' say it was some place be
tween the bema and ambo. Schelstrate is a little
more particular,55 that it was the place before the
rails of the sanctuary, where the emperor had his
seat on the right hand, and the readers and sub
deacons on the left. But Suicerus 56 and Meursius
are more positive, that it was only the emperor's
¦ throne, and called atoXelov, from the Latin solium.
And Dr. Beverege57 inclines to the same opinion.
Du Fresne58 allows of this as probable likewise, but
he also fancies it might signify the limina cancello-
rum, the threshold or raised foundation upon which
the rails of the chancel were erected, and be so
called from solum, whence comes the French name
seuil, and the English sill, or groundsel. This was
usually adorned and beautified very richly, he thinks,
with gold and precious stones, and sometimes reve
renced with the kisses and salutations of the people ;
whence the phrases, Exosculari limina, et liminibus
martyrum affundi, in Sidonius and Prudentius, are
by him interpreted to this purpose. But I conceive
the former opinion most probable, which takes it

for the emperor's throne, which was toward the
east end of the church in the men's portico, over
against the altar, where now the sultan has his seat
among the Turks. For that place which Dr. Be.
verege calls the embolus, and others the circuities, or
side aisles on both sides, were in the temple of Sancta
Sophia porticos for men below, and women above.
And as the empress had her seat in the upper end
of the women's apartment, so the emperors had
theirs in the men's apartment next to the chancel,
from the time that Sozomen 59 tells us Theodosius
submitted to the reproof of St. Ambrose, who
blamed him for taking his seat within the rails
of the sanctuary (though it had been customary for
the emperors so to do) : after which admonition
both he and his successors always took their place
without the rails, whence that place seems to be
called the solium, the royal seat. Which is con
firmed a little by what Suicerus observes out of
Cedrenus and Codinus, that Justinian made the
solea of gold and onyx stone, which are proper ma
terials to adorn a throne, but not so proper to be
laid in the pavement of a church. Not far from
this Du Fresne60 observes in some modern churches
a place called the senatorium, which some take to
be only another name for the seats of the bishop
and presbyters, who were the senate of the church :
but Du Fresne thinks it was rather the seat of the
magistrates, called senators, whence their apartment
had the name of senatorium in the church.

CHAPTER VI.

OF THE BEMA, OR THIRD PART OF THE TEMPLE,
CALLED THE ALTAR AND THE SANCTUARY, AND
THE PARTS AND USES OP IT.
The third and innermost part of the Secl. ,,
ancient churches was that which we ciSfy caBl™"!
now call the chancel; but originally
it was known by many other names. One of the
most common names was that of jSij/ia, or tribunal,
which, as I have noted before, is a word of various
signification, denoting sometimes the ambo or read
ing desk, and sometimes the altar, and sometimes
the seats or thrones of the bishop and presbyters,
and sometimes the whole space where these thrones
and the altar stood. In which sense I understand
that canon of the council of Laodicea,1 which for-

50 Ambros. ad Virgin. Lapsam, e. 6. Nonne vel ilia prae-
cepta, quae oculis tuis ipse scriptus paries ingerebat, recor-
dari debuisti ? Divisa est mulier et Virgo, &c.
61 Codin. Origin. Constant, lib. 3. c. 12.
82 Gretser. Not. in loc.
53 Morin. de Ordinat. par. 2. n. 52.
"* Allat. de Templis Graicor. Dissert. 2.

55 Schelstrat. Concil. Antioch. p. 192.
56 Suicer. Thesaur. voc. awXias, et Meursius in Glossar.
57 Bevereg. Not. in Cone. Nicen. c. 11.
58 Du Fresne, Not. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 585.
50 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 25.
60 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 560.
1 Cone. Laodic. can. 56.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

297

bids presbyters to go into the bema and sit there
before the bishop comes. Suicerus has observed
it2 frequently to be thus used in the liturgies of St.
Chrysostom and St. Basil. And Chrysostom b in
one of his homilies more particularly describes it to
be the place whither the bishop went by an ascent
into it, to preach, to pray, to stand by the holy
temple, and offer the tremendous sacrifice for the
people. By which it is easy to understand, that he
takes it not barely for the altar alone, or the bishop's
throne, but for the whole place where they stood,
and where these several offices were performed.
And the reason of the name bema was what Chry
sostom also intimates, when he says, they went up
by an ascent into it. . For bema and ambo have both
the same original, from dvaf3aivnv, because they
were places exalted above the rest, and, like the tri
bunals of judges, had an ascent by steps into them.
Now, the bema was more peculiarly allotted to the
clergy, and upon that account, as I have noted be
fore 4 in a former book, the clergy were sometimes
styled oi tov iSij/iaroc, and rdi^ig tov (Hiparog, the order
of the bema, or the sanctuary.
For the name sanctuary was also
Abo i'7,0J, or appropriated to this part of the church.
S™,»°thehoiy,or The Greeks peculiarly styled it 'dyiov,
the sanctuary. the holy ; and from thence the altar
was called 'dyiov dyiuv, the holy of holies, which is
the term that Eusebius 5 uses in describing the tem
ple of Paulinus. In other places 6 he calls it dyiaer-
pa, which is the name whereby the Seventy call the
sanctuary in the Old Testament. The Latins called
it sacrarium, the sanctuary. As in the first council
of Bracara, which forbids laymen ' to' come into
the sanctuary to communicate. And the council
of Vaison, which8 speaks of the office of ordering
or disposing the things of the sanctuary. And the
fourth council of Carthage, which forbids the ob
lation of such as are at variance one with another,
to be received9 either in the treasury or the sanc
tuary. The Greeks also termed it SvaiaTri-
*nd Ooamail,- ptov, the altar part. For though that
pioi<. the altar part, ' r ° .
word commonly signifies the altar it
self, or the Lord's table, yet in some ancient canons
and ecclesiastical writers, as Habertus10 and Mr.
Mede11 have observed, it is used to denote the
whole sanctuary within the rails, where none but

2 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccl. voce THjpa.
3 Chrysost. Horn. 39. de Pentecost, t. 5. p. 553.
1 Book I. chap. 5. sect. 11. s Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4. p. 381.
8 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 18.
' Cone. Bracar. 1. c. 31. Ingredi sacrarium ad commu-
nicandum non liceat laicis, nisi tantum clericis.
9 Cone. Vasens. c. 3. Cujus officium est sacrarium dis-
ponere et sacramenta suscipere.
9 Cone. Carth. 4. can. 93. Oblationes dissidentium fra-
trura, neque in sacrario, neque in gazophylacio recipiantur.
10 Habert. Archierat. p. 663.

the clergy wer"e allowed. As in the councils of
Laodicea12 and Trullo,13 which forbid women and
laymen to come into the Svo-ta-ziipiov, it must mean
the whole altar part, or chancel. And so in Socra
tes," and Theodoret,15 and many others, who speak
of St. Ambrose excluding Theodosius the emperor
from within the rails of the sanctuary.
St. Cyprian, in his fifty-fifth epistle,
calls it consessus cleri, the presbytery, rresbuter'ium and
. 'I diaconicum.
And Forbesius, and some other learn
ed men, think it was also called diaconicum, from
the presbyters sitting, and the deacons ministering
there. Thus they understand the council of Laodi
cea,17 which forbids subdeacons to have any place
in the diaconicum, or to touch the sacred vessels of
the Lord's table. But I must note, that though the
name diaconicum in that canon may signify the
chancel or sanctuary, yet it more commonly means
the vestry, or repository of the sacred vessels, of
which we are to give a further account, when we
come to speak of the exedrcs of the church.
In some canons it seems also to SeC|. 6
have had the name of chorus, whence *>"° <*»¦»'".»' «•>!«¦
comes our English quire. As in the fourth council
of Toledo, which thus appoints18 the order and
manner of men's communicating in the church, so
as that the priests and deacons should communicate
before the altar, the inferior clergy in the quire, and
the people without the quire. Though some take
the chorus to signify rather the place of the singers
and readers in the other part of the church.
Eusebius, describing this part of the sfct e
temple of Paulinus, says it was divided „SfafriSHie'2X
from the rest by certain rails of wood,13 cJ«i,° wneCncedcomes
curiously and artificially wrought in
the form of net-work, to make it inaccessible to the
multitude. These the Latins call cancelli, whence
comes our English name chancel. In other Greek
writers they are termed KtyKXiSeg. Whence in Theo
doret20 rd ivSov tCjv KiyK/UtW, the place withm the
rails, is but another name for the altar part, or chan
cel. And to lay hold of the rails, in the phrase of
Synesius,21 is the same thing as to take sanctuary
at the altar.
Bv these rails, as Eusebius words it,
1 . Sect. 7.
this whole altar place was kept mac- .And kept macces-
r r sible to the multi-
cessible to all but the clergy in time ^hed ?<%(!>?' ''""
of Divine service. The council of

11 Mede, Comment. Apocalyp. p. 479.
i2 Cone. Laodic. c. 44. 13 Cone. Trull, can. 69.
" Socrat. lib. 1. c. 25. ,5 Theodor. lib. 1. u. 14.
18 Forbes. Irenic. lib. 2. c. 11. p. 221.
17 Cone. Laodic. can. 21.
18 Cone. Tolet. 4. c. 18.' Sacerdotes et LevitD3 ante altare
communicent, in choro clerus, extra chorum populus. Vid.
Cone. Turon. 2. can. 4.
19 Euseb. lib. 10. u. 4. p. 381. 'Os dv^ Ei-n toXs ttoAXo^
a/3aTa, died %6Xov irEplitppaTTE Siktvois, Sec.
20 Theodor. lib. 5. c. 18. 21 Synesii Catastasis, p. 303.

29S

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

Laodicea has one canon K particularly forbidding
women to come within the altar part. And another
in more general terms, allowing none but the 'upari-
koI to communicate there.23 In which canon some
take the word UpaTiteoi, to mean all the clergy, in
ferior as well as superior: but Habertus21 thinks it
means only the superior clergy, priests and deacons ;
and that all the inferiors, subdeacons, readers, &c,
were excluded from this part as well as the people.
However, it is agreed on all hands that the people
in that age had no place there. For St. Ambrose
would not permit the emperor Theodosius himself
to communicate in this part,25 but obliged him to
retire as soon as he had made his oblation at the
altar. Which custom continued for some ages after.
As appears from what Theodosius junior says of
himself in the Acts of the Council of Ephesus,26 that
he only went up to the altar to make his oblation,
and having done that, retired again to the exterior
court or atrium of the people. And so we find it
decreed, correspondent to this practice, in the coun
cil of Trullo,27 That no layman whatsoever should
come into the altar part, except only the emperor,
when he had made his oblation to the Creator,
according to ancient custom. And hence it was
that this part of the church was called afiaTa, and
dSvra, by Theodoret28 and Eusebius, and other Greek
writers, and adyta by the Latins, that is, inaccessi
ble ; because there was no place of access here for
the people, who were wholly excluded from it.
Though I must note, that according to the differ
ence of times and places, different customs seem to
have prevailed in this matter. For the most ancient
custom was both for men and women to come up to
the altar and communicate there, as it appears to
have been in the third century, in the time of Dio
nysius of Alexandria, who speaks both of men29
and women30 standing at the holy table, and reach
ing forth their hands to receive the eucharist there.
And so Valesius understands it.31 And the same
privilege was allowed the people in France in the
sixth century. For the second council of Tours,
anno 567, orders the holy of holies32 to be open both
for men and women to pray and communicate in at
the time of the oblation; though at other times,
when there was any other service without the com

munion, they were not allowed to come within the
chorus of the singers or rails of the chancel. By
which also we learn what part of the church in this
age in France was called the chorus, namely, that
which was immediately within the rails of the chan
cel, where the inferior clergy had their station in
the time of the oblation.
The modern Greeks call the en- Sect a.
trance into this part the holy gates, an'd1l;(.il50,l, f"1™.
because they open from the body of Ecd *& tllS
the church into the holy of holies. But res"*"" ""»*
there is httle mention made of these in ancient writers.
But they often speak of the use of veils or hangings
in this place to cover the prospect of the altar. Atha
nasius calls them j3i)\a 7-iJe iufXtjoiae, the hangings
of the church. For, speaking of the fury of the
Arians, and their ravaging a church in the time of
Constantius, he says, They took the bishop's throne,
and the seats of the presbyters,83 and the table which
was of wood, and the veils of the church, and what
ever else they could, and carried them out and burnt
them. In Synesius31 they are called naTairiTatrpa
pwztKov, the mystical veils. And in Chrysostom and
Evagrius, Aptpftvpa, from their opening in the mid
dle as folding doors. These were sometimes richly
adorned with gold, as that which Evagrius35 says
Chosroes gave to the church of Antioch. The use
of them was partly to hide the prospect of this part
of the church from the catechumens and unbeliev
ers, and partly to cover the sacrifice of the euchar
ist in the time of consecration, as we learn from
these words of Chrysostom, When the sacrifice is
brought forth, when Christ the Lamb of God is
offered, when you hear this signal given, let us all
join Jn common prayer; when you see the veils53
withdrawn, then think you see heaven opened, and
the angels descending from above. There were also
several other veils, to note this by the way, in other
parts of the church. For Paulinus37 speaks often
of veils before the doors of the church. And St.
Jerom commends Nepotian, for that among other
parts of his concern for the decency of the church,
as he took care that the altar, and the walls, and
the pavement should be kept clean, so also that the
doors should have their keepers, and the gates18
their veils. In like manner Epiphanius, speaking

22 Cone. Laodic. c. 44. "Oti ov SeX ywaXKas iv too 8uo-<-
aeTTtjpteo EtoripXEa-Bai.
23 Ibid. can. 19. Moyoir i£6v toXs lepaTtKoXs Eiaiivai eis
to Bvo-iaarfiptov Kal koivcoveXv.
24 Habert. Archieratic. par. 10. Obser. 9. p. 268.
25 Vide Theodoret, lib. 5. c. 18. Sozomen. lib. 7. c. 25.
28 Edict. Theodos. ad calcem Cone. Ephes. t. 3. p. 1237.
Tov dyttoTaTOv 6vo-iatrTi}piov Sid povrpi Tijy Ttov StopEtov
irpoartpopdv itpairTopEda.
27 Cone. Trull, can. 69. » Theodor. lib. 5. c. 18.
29 Dionys. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 9. Tpcnrt'jjrj irapao-Tdv-
TO, 85C.
80 Dionys. Epist. Canon, can. 2.
31 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 7. t. 9.

32 Cone. Turon. 2. can. 4. Ad orandum et communican-
dnm laicis et foeminis, sicut mos est, pateant sancta sanc
torum. 33 Athan. Ep. ad Solitar. 1. 1. p. 817.
31 Synes. Ep. 67. ad Theophil. p. 240.
35 Evagr. lib. 6. c. 21.
36 Chrysost. Homil. 3. in Ephes. p. 1052. "Orav tSns aveX-
KtipEva Ti iptplSvpa, &c. '
s? Paulin. Natal. Felic. 3. Aurea nunc niveis ornantur
limina velis. Id. Natal. 6. Pulchra tegendis vela ferant
foribus. 38 Hieron. Epitaph. Nepotian. Erat sollicitus, si nileret
altare, si parietes absque fuligine, si pavimenta tersa, si
janitor creber in porta, vela semper in ostiis, &c.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

299

of the church of Anablatha in Palestine, says,39 he
found a veil hanging before the doors of the chm-ch,
which he tore in pieces, not because it was a veil,
but because it had the image of Christ or some
saint painted on it, which was contrary to the rules
of the Christian church. He therefore ordered the
guardians of the church to bury some poor man in it,
and sent them at his own expense another plain one
in its stead. There were also veils between the pil
lars of the hyperoa, or women's galleries, to be drawn
in time of the oblation, as Du Fresne10 has observed
out of Paulus Silentiarius, and Amphilochius in the
Life of St. Basil. And some others of hke nature
will easily be observed by a curious reader.
At the upper end of the chancel
The highest part was commonly a semicircular building,
of the chancel called , . .. - ,
apsis, eredra, or which, from the figure and position of
tonckula bematis. . . . r"
it, is by some authors called apsis, and
exedra, and conchula bematis. For these are words
that signify any arched or spherical building, like
the canopy of heaven, to which St. Jerom applies
the name of apsis.4' It was called concha, because
in figure it resembled something the fashion of a
shell, as Du Fresne shows out of Procopius, and
Paulus Silentiarius, and Paulinus, and other writers.
Du Fresne12 thinks it is also called exedra by St.
Austin, who says the conference between the ca
tholics and Emeritus the Donatist bishop was held
in the exedra of the church ; which he interprets, the
place where the bishops and presbyters had their
usual residence, in the upper end of the bema, be
yond the altar. But Valesius13 and other learned
men take exedra here in the common sense for one
of the outer buildings of the church. And it is
not easy to determine so nice a controversy between
them. However, this is certain, that the
Sect, 10. .
This anciently the bishop's throne, with the thrones of
place of the thrones «* '
WsSresbyS a"d n^s presbyters on each side of it, were
always fixed in this part ofthe church,
in a semicircle above the altar. For, anciently,
the seats of the bishop and presbyters were joined
together, and all called thrones, as is evident from
Eusebius his description of the temple of Paulinus,
who says,11 he adorned it with thrones set on high for

the honour of the presidents or rulers of the people ;
that is, the bishop and presbyters together. Hence
it is that Nazianzen, speaking ofthe presbyters15 as
the rulers of the people, and venerable senate of the
church, calls their seats the second thrones. Con
stantine, in his letter to Chrestus bishop of Syracuse,
summoning him to the council of Aries, uses the
same phrase, bidding16 him bring with him two of
the second throne, that is, two presbyters. I know,
indeed, Carolus a Sancto Paulo17 by those of the
second throne understands bishops, in opposition
to primates or metropolitans, which he reckons to
be those of the first throne. But the use of the
phrase both in Eusebius and Nazianzen19 leads lis
rather to believe that he meant presbyters, who sat
with their bishop in the church upon thrones, as,
they style them, of the second order. For this, as
I have had occasion to show in another place,19 was
the difference between them, that the bishop's was
generally termed the high throne, and the presby
ters' the second throne ; or, as Athanasius 50 calls
them, the throne, and the joint chairs or seats ef the
presbyters. The bishop's throne was otherwise
called f3ijpa, the tribunal, as we may see in Euse
bius,5' where he relates the censure of the council
of Antioch, passed on Paulus Samosatensis, for
erecting his throne or tribunal too stately, with a
veil or secretum to it, in imitation of the tribunals of
secular judges, which they did not allow of in the
Christian church': and hence the whole chancel
was sometimes called the bema, as I have showed
before. The Latins more commonly use the names
of sedes and cathedra for a bishop's throne, whence
come our English names of cathedral and see, for
a church where the bishop's chair or seat is fixed.
The manner of their sitting is noted by Gregory
Nazianzen in his description of the church of Anas-
tasia, where he speaks of himself as bishop52 sit
ting upon the high throne, and the presbyters on
lower benches on both sides about him. And so it
is described by the author of the Constitutions,53
and Theodoret,51 who calls the bishop's throne the
middle seat upon this account. And there are
some learned persons55 who suppose all this to be
done in imitation of the Jewish synagogues, in

39 Epiphan. Ep. ad Johan. Hierosolym. Inveni ibi ve
lum pendens in foribus ejusdem ecclesiae, &c.
10 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 551.
11 Hieron. lib. 2. in Ephes. e. 4. p. 223. In summo cocli
lorriice, et ut ipso verbo utar, apside.
K Aug. de Gestis eum .Emerito. t. 7. p. 250. Cum deu-
tenus episcopus metropolitanus  una cum caeteris episco
pis in exedram processissent, praesentibus presbyteris et dia
conis et universo clero, ac frequentissima plebe, &c. Vid.
Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 565.
13 Vales. Not. in Euseb. de Vita Const, lib. 3. c. 50.
ciuseb. lib, 10, u. 4. Opdvots toXs dvoTuTui els ti)v
^viepolSptovTipi)v,Sec. Naz. Carm. Iambic. 23. TipeoTov piv ol TiSevTEpa Bpd-
vtov XEXoyxoTEs, Xaov TrpoESpol irpEO-fivTai, aEavi) yepovtria.

46 Ap. Euseb. lib. 10. c. 5. Avo yi Tivas iK tov Sevtepov
Spovov. " Carol, a S. Paulo, Geograph. Sacr. p. 47.
18 Vid. Naz. Carm. de Vita Sua. It. Somnium de Templo
Anastas. 49 Book II. chap. 9. n. 7. Book II. chap. 19. n. 5.
59 Athan. Ep. ad Solitar. t. 1. p. 817. Qpovov Kal avp-
\lriXXta. 5> Euseb. lib. 7. c. 30.
62 Nazian. Somn. Anastas. t. 2. p. 78. 'EJto-6ai Sokeectkov
viripBpovos,—oi Si pol dptpOTipco&EV vepESptdtovTO yEpaXdl
iroipvt]s wyepdvEs, Sec. ^
83 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57. 51 Theoaor. lib. 5. u. 3.
55 See Bishop Hooper, Disc, cf Lent, par. 2. chap. 6.
p. 219.

300

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

which, according to Maimonides, at the upper end
looking toward the Holy Land, the law was placed
in the wall in an arch, and on each side the elders
were seated in a semicircle. The bishop's seat was
usually covered with some decent covering, suitable
to the dignity of his office and person. As we
learn from Athanasius in his second apology56 to
Constantius, where he asks, how they could have
any concern for the throne episcopally covered, who
sought to kill the bishop that sat thereon. And
St. Austin57 seems plainly to allude to this, when
he tells Maximinus, the Donatist bishop, that when
bishops came to stand before the tribunal of Christ
at the last judgment, they themselves would then
have no tribunals, no lofty seats or covered chairs,
though such honours were exhibited, to them for a
time in this world, for the benefit and advantage of
the church. This doubtless was the posture an-
*nd or the aitar or ciently of the thrones of the bishop
communion table. J
and presbyters in the Christian church,
as they are represented in the several models of the
primitive structures. From which it will be easy
to observe further, that the place of the communion
table or altar was not close to the wall at the upper
end, but at some little distance from it ; so as that
the bishop's throne might be behind it, and room
enough left in a void space to encompass or sur
round the altar. This seems pretty plain from an
expression in Synesius,58 who, speaking of his being
forced to take sanctuary, says, he would fly into
the church, and encompass the altar. Which im
plies, that it was set in such manner, as that he
might go round it. And this is the meaning of
Eusebius, when, having first spoken of the thrones
of the bishop and presbyters in the church of Pau
linus, he then adds, that he set59 the holy of holies,
the altar, in the middle. Which is not to be inter
preted, as some have misunderstood it, of the altar's
being placed in the middle of the nave or body of
the church, but in the middle of the bema, or sanc
tuary, at such a distance from the upper end, as
that the synth^onus, the seats of the bishop and
presbyters, might be behind it. St. Austin seems
to refer to the same thing, when he says, The table

58 Athan. Apol. 2. t. 1. p. 736. Iluis ol Bpovov tov io-TO-
Xitrpivov iirieTKOiriKoos bSvpopEvoi, tov iv avTto Kadripsvov
iirio-KOlrov avEXziv XtfTOvo-tv.
57 Aug. Ep. 203. In futuro Christi judicio nee apsidae
gradatae, nee cathedrae velatae  quae pro tempore propter
ecclesiae utilitatem honori nostro exhibentur.
58 Synes. Catastasis. p. 303. KvKXtoeropat to Svo-tao-Tii-
ptov, &c.
50 Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4. To tow ayitav aytov SroaiaaTfipiov
iv picrtp 3"£ts.
60 Aug. Serm. 46. de Verbis Domini, t. 10. p. 68. Christus
quotidie pascit. Mensa ipsius est ilia in medio constituta.
61 Cone. Constantinop. act. 5. Cone. t. 5. p. 185. Tov
dyiov paSripaTos KaTa to o-vvi]Bis Xex^evtos, Katpto Ttov

of the Lord60 stood in the middle. And in the
council of Constantinople under Mennas61 it is re
presented in such a posture, as that it might be en
compassed round. For it is said, when the names
of Pope Leo and some others, which had been
struck out of the diptychs, were inserted again, the
people for joy at the time when the diptychs were
read, after the repetition of the creed, ran round
about the altar for to hear them. Dr. Hamond18
and some other learned men think, not improbably,
that this posture of the altar in Christian churches
was something in imitation of the altar in the
Jewish temple, to which the psalmist alludes, when
he says, " I will wash my hands in innocency : and
so will I compass thine altar," Psal. xxvi. 6 : from
whence they suppose the phrase TrtpucvuXovv fluo-treq-
piov, compassing the altar, in the ancient rituals to
be taken.
Great dispute has been raised in the
, . ., Sect. 12.
last age about the name ot the com- . Both these name.
° indifferently used in
munion table, whether it was to be ^j™"™
called the holy table, or an altar. And
indeed any thing will afford matter of controversy
to men in a disputing age ; but we never read of
any such dispute in the primitive church. For the
ancient writers used both names indifferently; some
calling it altar, others, the Lord's table, the holy
table, the mystical table, the tremendous table, &c,
and sometimes both table and altar in the same
sentence together. Mr. Mede thinks it was usually
called altar for the two first ages, and that the
name table63 is not to be found in any author of
those ages now remaining. Ignatius uses only the
name64 Bvviao-Tripiov, altar, in his genuine epistles,
three of which are alleged by Mr. Mede, to which
the reader may add another testimony out of his
epistle65 to the Magnesians, where he uses both
the name temple and altar. Ireneeus 65 and Origen"
use the same name, when they speak of the com
munion table. Tertullian frequently applies to it
the name of ara Dei and altare. Will not your station
or fast, says he,68 be more solemn, if you stand at the
altar of God ? that is, receive the communion on a
fast-day? So also in his book69 ad Uxorem and de
Castitate.™ But they are led into an error by the

SiTTTt/xeov avviSpapov aieav to nrXn^os kvkXio tov juo-i-
acrTr]piov. 62 Hamond. cont. JBlondel, Dissert. 1. c. 13. n. 8.
63 Mede, Disc, of Altars, p. 386.
« Ignat. Ep. ad Ephes. n. 5. Ep. ad Trallian. n. 7. Ep.
ad. Philad. n. 4.
65 Ignat. Ep. ad Magnes. n. 7.
66 Irense. lib. 4. c. 34. Nos quoque offerre vult mumis
frequenter ad altare, &c.
87 Origen. Horn. 10. in Num. t. 1. p. 207.
63 Tertul. de Orat. c. 14. Nonne solennior erit statio tua,
si et ad aram Dei steteris.
69 Tertul. ad Uxor. lib. 1. c. 7.
79 Tertul. de Exhort. Castit. c. 10.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

301

corrupt edition of Rhenanus, who cite his book de
Pcenitentia for the same thing ; for though in that
edition we find mention made71 of kneeling at the
altar, aris Dei adgeniculari ; yet better editions since
teach us to read it more truly, charis Dei adgeniculari,
kneeling down to the beloved of God ; alluding to
the custom of the penitents failing down at the
church doors, to beg the prayers of the faithful as
they went in. Cyprian, the disciple of Tertullian,
sometimes uses both names, table and altar, as
when he says, Those words of Solomon, Prov. ix. 2,
" Wisdom hath furnished her table," &c, typified
the Christian72 altar. But more commonly he uses
the name altar alone,73 which argues that to have
been at least a very usual name in his time in the
African and Latin churches. Mr. Mede cites also
Zeno Veronensis as an author of the third century,
contemporary with Cyprian, who is indeed one that
speaks plain enough both of the concetti11 and the
altar; but now learned men75 are agreed to thrust
him down a whole century lower, so that he is not
a competent witness for the third age, but he may
serve for- the fourth, in which age, one may venture
to say, there is scarce an author that speaks of the
Lord's table, but he also calls it altar. On the other
hand, it is certain they did not mean by the altar,
what the Jews and heathens meant ; either an altar
dressed up with images, that is, idol-gods, as the
heathens commonly had theirs adorned, or an altar
for bloody sacrifices, which was the use of them
both among Jews and Gentiles.
sect. 13. ln tne first sense they always re-
an'5e"thsa'»,rthe, jected altars, both name and thing.
For their altars had no images either
above, or about, or upon them, as the heathen
altars always had. And upon that account the
ancient apologists, Origen,70 Minucius Felix,77 Ar
nobius,78 and Lactantius,79 when the heathens ob
ject to them, that they had no altars, roundly and
freely confess it in the sense that the objection was
made; that is, that they had no altars furnished
with idol-gods, and fitted for idol-worship, such as
the heathen pleaded for. In like manner they de
nied that they had any altars in the Jewish sense,
for offering bloody sacrifices upon: but for their
own mystical unbloody sacrifice, as they called the

holy table, mystical
table, &c.

eucharist, they always owned they had an altar,
which they scrupled not to term indifferently Srvai-
aor-npiov, ara, altare, and sometimes fiuipbg : for
though Mr. Mede thinks they never used that
name, yet it appears that, with the addition of
dvaipatcrog, they sometimes did ; for Synesius,89
speaking of the holy table, expressly styles it dvai-
panrov (3uipbv, the unbloody altar.
Yet these same authors, to distin- Saot u
guish their notion more exactly, com
monly use the name table for the
altar, with the addition of some singular epithet,
implying the peculiar use of it in the Christian
church. In Chrysostom,81 it is most usually termed
TpdieiZa pvoTiKt), and <ppuer>), the mystical and tre
mendous table ; sometimes the spiritual, Divine,
royal, immortal, heavenly table ; of which the reader
may find instances enough collected by Suicerus82
out of that author. St. Austin83 usually gives it
the name of mensa Domini, the Lord's table ; whence
mensa Cypriani in that author, signifies either™ the
altar, or the church; erected in the place of St. Cy
prian's martyrdom. It were easy to add a thousand
other testimonies out of Athanasius, Synesius, So
crates, Sozomen, Paulinus, and the rest of that age,
where the altar is called the holy table, to signify to
us their notion of the Christian sacrifice and altar
at once, that it was mystical and spiritual, and had
no relation either to the bloody sacrifices of the
Jews, or the more absurd idolatries of the Gentiles,
but served only for the service of the eucharist and
oblations of the people.
If any is desirous to know the mat
ter and form of the ancient altars or Ai-aW generally
. made of wood till
tables ; St. Austin will inform him, <¦** t™« of con-
' Btantine.
that they were of wood in his time in
the African churches. For speaking of a great out
rage committed by the Donatists against a catholic
bishop, whilst he stood ministering at the altar, he
says, They beat him cruelly with clubs and such like
weapons, and at last85 with the broken pieces of the
timber of the altar. This is further confirmed by
the testimony of Optatus, who, objecting to the Do
natists their sacrilegious abuse of the catholic altars,
says, They broke them80 in pieces in such places, as
would afford them plenty of wood to make new ones

71 Tertul. de Poenitent. c. 9.
72 Cypr. Ep. 63. ad Csecil. It. Testimon. adv. Judasos,
lib. 2. c. 2.
73 Vid. Cypr. Ep. 40, 42, 55, 64, 70.
71 Zeno, Serm. 9. ad Neophyt. Ecclesia sacri altaris
fceliciter enutrita cancellis.
75 Cave, Hist. Literar. p. 176.
"Orig. cont. Cels. lib. 8. p. 489. 'Spas fitopoiis Kal
ayakpaia Kal vEtos ISpvaBal (pEvyEtv.
77 Minuc. Octav. Cur nullas aras habent, templa nulla,
nulla nota simulacra ?
78 Araob. cont. Gentes, lib. 6. Non altaria fabricemus,
non aras.

79 Lactant. lib. 2. e. 2. Quid sibi templa, quid ara? vo-
lunt, &c.
89 Synes. Catastatis, p. 303.
81 Chrysost. Horn. 21 . Quod oportet haereses esse, t. 5. p.
313. It. Horn. 39. de Pentecost, p. 553.
82 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce TpdireX,a.
83 Aug. Ep.59. ad Paulin. Horn. 26. de Verbis Domini.
8» Horn. 26. ex editis a Sirmondo, ad Mensam Cypriani.
85 Aug. Ep. 50. ad Bonifac. p. 84. Stantem ad altare,
fustibus et hujusmodi telis, lignis denique ejusdem altaris
effractis, immaniler ceeidcrunt.
86 Optat. lib. 6. p. 94. Alio loco eopia lignorum frangi
jussit; alio, ut altaria radereut, lignorum inopia iinperavit.

302

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

of; but in places where there was a scarcity of
wood, they contented themselves with scraping or
shaving them by way of pretended expiation. Nay,
the workmen who wrought in this egregious service,
had wine given them, heated with fires made of the
fragments of the altars. Athanasius has likewise
occasion to tell us, their communion tables were of
wood, in a parallel story upon the Arians, who, in
one of their mad humours, as he complains, went
into a church, and took the throne and seats of the
presbyters, and the table, which was of wood,87 and
the veils, and whatever other combustible matter
they could find, and carried them out and burned
them. So that there is no question to be made, but
that about this time the altars were only tables of
wood in Africa and Egypt, as these testimonies
plainly imply. Bona88 thinks they had stone altars
before, even in times of persecution, but he offers
no proof but his own opinion. Yet it is generally
thought, by Hospinian89 and other learned men,
that they began to come in from the time of Con
stantine, together with the stateliness and magnifi
cence of churches. The Pontifical speaks of silver
altars dedicated by Constantine : and Gerson and
others, alleged by Hospinian, make Pope Sylvester,
who lived in the time of Constantine, to be the au
thor of a decree, that all altars should be of stone :
but these authorities are of no weight, and the sto
ries contradict one another. What is certain in the
case is this : that about the time of Gregory Nyssen,
altars in some places began to be of stone ; for he,
in his discourse of baptism, speaks of a stone altar.
This altar, says he, whereat we stand90 is by nature
only common stone, nothing different from other
stones, whereof our walls are made and our pave
ments adorned : but after it is consecrated and de
dicated to the service of God, it becomes a holy
table, an immaculate altar, which may not be pro
miscuously touched by all, but only by the priests
in time of Divine service. In the next age, in
France, we find a general decree made in the coun
cil of Epone,91 anno 509, that no altars should be
consecrated, but such as were made of stone only.
And this seems to be the first public act of this
nature, that we have upon authentic record in an
cient history. And from the time of this change in
the matter of them, the form or fashion of them

changed likewise. For whereas before they were
in the form of tables, they now began to be erected
more like altars, either upon a single foot or pillar
in the midst, or upon an edifice erected like a tomb,
as if it were some monument of a martyr, as Bona
tells us there are some such now to be seen in the
catacombs of Rome"2 and other places.
It will perhaps be something more
material to remark here, that anciently But one aitar an.
, cienttyinachurch,
there was never above one altar in a
church. One bishop and one altar93 in a church,
is the known aphorism of Ignatius. And Eusebius
is supposed upon this account to call the altar in
the church of Paulinus at Tyre, povoytvig Stvoiavrii-
pwv, the single altar,01 as Habertus truly observes
upon it, who ingenuously confesses, that it has ever
been the constant custom of the Greek churches to
have but one altar in a temple ; in confirmation of
which he cites Athanasius, Nazianzen, Synesius,
Socrates, Theodoret, Evagrius, and many others.
Cardinal Bona also owns,95 he could find no foot
steps of the contrary practice till the time of Gre
gory the Great, and then only in the Latin church.
For the Greeks have always kept to the ancient
custom. He thinks indeed the contrary custom
was in the Latin church of old, but he only shows
his willingness to beheve it without proof; and
Schelstrate96 very justly censures him for it, show
ing out of Optatus and St. Austin, that the Latins,
as well as the Greeks, had then but one altar in a
church. For Optatus97 speaks of the altar of Cy
prian's church, as one only and no more, both in the
time of Cyprian and afterward, and thence concludes
that the Donatists were schismatics, because they
went from Cyprian's altar, and set up another altar
against it. And St. Austin argues agamst them*'
upon the same foundation, that there ought not to
be two episcopal altars in one city. This supposes
then but one altar in a church among the Latins, as
well as the Greeks ; and so Christianus Lupus" and
Pagi,100 the learned corrector of Baronius, aifirm it
to have been the constant practice of the primitive
church. Though now (to see what improvement
has be'en made in later ages) there are no less than
twenty-five altars, besides the great altar, in St
Peter's church at Rome : and the great altar itself
is no less than twenty-five feet square, with a cross

—Ibid. Calida de fragmentis iltarium facta est. Vid. p.
95. ibid.
67 Athan. Ep. ad Solitar. Vitam agentes, t. 1, p. 847.
' Apirdo-avTES Tri ervpxj/iXXia, Kal Bpovov, Kal tj)v TpdiTE-
%av, fcvXtvt] yip i]v, Sec.
88 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 20. u. 1.
89 Hospin. de Templis, lib. 2. cap. 6. p. 34.
90 Nyssen. de Baptismo Christi, t. 3. p. 369.
91 Cone. Epaunens. can. 26. Altaria, nisi lapidea, infu-
sione chrismatis non sacrentur.
92 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. e. 20. n. 1.
93 Ignat. Ep. ad Philadelp. u. 4. "Ei/ SrvaiatjTnpiov ledcrr)

ttj EKKX-ncrla, Kal eIs iiritTKoiros. Vid. Ep. ad Magnes. n. 7.
91 Habert. Archierat. p. 661. ex Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4.
95 Bona, Rer. Lilurg. lib. 1. c. 14. u. 3.
96 Sc-helstrat. Concilium Antiochen. p. 193.
97 Optat. lib. 1. p. 42. Erat cathedra episcopalis, erat
altare loco suo, in quo pacifici episcopi retro temporis obtu-
lerunt, Cyprianus, Lucianus et caeteri. Sicexitumestforas,
et altare contra altare erectum est.
98 Aug. Horn. 3. in 1 Johan. Si in unitate sumus, quidfa-
ciunt in hac civitate duo altaria ?
99 Lupus Concil. t. 3. Respons. ad Michael. Cerular.
wo Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 313. n. 15.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

303

of twenty-five inches long upon it, as Dr. Potter
observes out of Onuphrius, and Angelus Roccha, in
his ingenious book101 of the number six hundred
sixty-six. Some improve this observation, of
Sect.17. . r
And someumea one aitar in a church, a httle further,
but one in a city,
&hes,eSriinB and think that anciently there was
to some authors. but Qne ^^ in ft whole ^^ QT fa0_
cese and country region belonging to a bishop ;
though there might be many lesser churches, as
there were many synagogues among the Jews,
though but one temple and one altar. Mr. Mede102
is of opinion, that it was so when Justin Martyr
wrote his Second Apology, because of those words
of his, On Sundays all that live in the towns or in
the country meet together in one place for the cele
bration of the eucharist. And he concludes the
same from several of Cyprian's epistles,103 where bi
shop and altar are made correlatives. Christianus
Lupus and Pagi seem to think 1M it continued the
custom within the walls of Rome to the time of
Pope Innocent I. For he seems to say in one of
his epistles,105 that the presbyters of the several
tituli or lesser churches within the city had the sa
crament sent to them every Sunday from the bi
shop's altar : but the presbyters of the cemeteries,
or churches without the walls, had liberty to conse
crate the eucharist in them, because the sacraments
were not to be carried to places at too great a dis
tance. But Dr. Maurice106 and other learned men
think the Roman tituli had always communion ta
bles, and the communion administered in them from
the beginning, only the consecrated bread was sent
to them from the oblations made at the bishop's
altar. For the oblations, they think, at first were
only made at the bishop's altar, and always bless
ed at the bishop's altar, though not always con
secrated there. Upon which account the name of
altar might be appropriated to that of the bishop's
church. I shall not pretend to make any judgment
or decision in this dispute, being a matter involved
in great obscurity, but leave the reader to judge for
himself: Dr. Hamond heretofore passed the same
censure on it,107 thinking it too dark a point to be
over-boldly determined. All I shall say further
upon it is only this, that it makes nothing for the

congregational way, (as some pretend,) though it
were certain there was but one altar in a diocese at
the first. For there might notwithstanding be
many churches. Or if there was but one church in
a diocese, while the number of believers was very
small ; yet it does not follow that there ought to be no
more, when their number so increased in any city or
territory, that one church would not contain them.
But I return to the business in 0 . ,
Sect. 18.
hand. In some of the more stately or0canor./i6of''"he'
churches, as that of Sancta Sophia, aUar'
the altar was overshadowed with a sort of canopy,
which, from the fashion of it, is termed by Paulus
Silentiarius108 nipyog, the turret; by others,109 um-
braculum ; but among the Greeks most commonly,
Kijiupiov, which Durantus110 and other modern
ritualists usually mistake for the pyxis, where the
host is kept ; but Du Fresne m shows it to have been
anciently quite another thing, viz. an ornamental
canopy hanging over the altar. This was raised
in the form of a little turret upon fpur pillars at
each corner of the altar. The heads of the pillars
were adorned with silver bowls, which was a usual
ornament in those days, as is evident from the de
scription which Eusebius 112 gives of the twelve pil
lars in Constantine's church at Jerusalem. The
top of it was in the form of a sphere, adorned with
graven flowers, whence it has sometimes the name
of sphcsra, Mia, and malum. Above the sphere stood
the cross, as Paulus Silentiarius113 represents it.
And the several arches below between the pillars
were hanged with veils or curtains, called, as some
others, dptpiBvpa, which served also to cover or con
ceal the whole altar. I have been the more parti
cular in describing this ornamental structure about
the altar after Du Fresne, because the common
ritualists so generally apply the name ciborium only
to their pyx, whereas in the most ancient writers it
signifies this beautiful fabric about the altar.
In some places, after images and pic
tures began to be allowed in churches, of the p'ensierion,
, . or coluinbol.
the Holy Ghost was represented in
the effigies of a silver dove hovering over the altar •
and their baptisteries had the same, as we learn
from the complaint against Severus, bishop of An
tioch, in the council of Constantinople under Men-

'"' Vid. Synops. Criticor. in Apocal. xiii. 18.
m Mede, Disc, of Churches, p. 326.
103 Cyprian. Ep. 40, 72, 73.
101 Pagi, Crit. in Baron, an. 313. n, 15.
105 Innocent. I. Ep. 1. ad Decent, c. 5. De fermento, quod
die Dominica per titulos mittimus, superflue nos consulere
voluisti, cum omnes ecclesiae nostrae intra civitatem sunt con-
stitutae, Quarum presbyteri, quia die ipso propter plebem
sibi creditam, nobiscum convenire non possunt, id'circo fer
mentum a nobis confectum per acolythos accipiunt, ut se a
nostra communione, maxime ilia die, non judicent separates.
yuod per parochias fieri debere non puto, quia non longe
portanda sunt sacramenta. Nee nos per ccemiteria diversa

constitutis presbyteris destinamus, sed presbyteri eorum con-
ficiendorum jus habent atque licentiam.
ios Maurice, Dioces. Episc. p. 38. Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib.
1. u. 23. a. 9, differs in this, that he thinks every church had
her own oblations and the eucharist consecrated out of them.
19' Hamond. Dissert, cont. Blondel. 3. c. 8. a. 15. In
re incomperta non est audacter nimis pronunciandum.
198 Paul. Silent, par. 2. ver. 303. 109 Ordo Romanus.
110 Durant.de Ritib. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 16.
111 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silent, p. 569.
"2 Euseb. de Vit. Const, lib. 3. c. 38.
1,3 Paul. Silent, ibid. "Ti/'oBt S'avToii OTavpds inrepTlX-
Xwv dvatpdivETai.

304

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

nas, anno 536, wh.ere he is accused for diverting111
to his own use, among other treasures of the church,
the silver and golden doves that hanged over the
baptistery and the altar, as types or symbols of the
Holy Ghost. And this, I think, is the first time
we meet with any thing of this kind. For no credit
is to be given to the author of the Life of St. Basil,
under the name of Amphilochius, when he says,
St. Basil was used to reserve the eucharist in one
of these silver doves ; because he is known to be
a spurious writer. However, when the thing came
to be in use, the place over the altar where it
hanged, was called peristerion, from niptorepd, the
Greek name for a dove, as Du Fresne and others
have observed. If it be inquired where the eu
charist was reserved according to ancient custom ;
I answer, in times of persecution the priests seem
to have had it115 in their own private custody at
home, as may be collected from an epistle of Diony
sius in Eusebius, where he relates how Serapion
had the eucharist sent him in the night by a boy,
the presbyter being sick and not able to attend
upon him. At other times it was kept in one of
the pastophoria, which -were certainly places distinct
from the altar. For so the author of the Consti
tutions116 plainly informs us. In process of time
it came to be kept at the altar, either in those silver
doves we have been speaking of, or in an ark or
pyx at the foot of the cross, which by some canons
is ordered to be placed upon the altar. For in th'e
second council of Tours, anno 567, "¦ decree was
made,117 that the eucharist should not be kept in the
armarium, but under the figure of the cross upon
the altar. And so in process of time the pyx took
the name of ciborium, which originally is an Egyp
tian name for the husk of a bean, as Suicerus113
notes out of Hesychius, and thence used by the
Greeks to signify a large cup or bowl, broad at the
bottom and narrow at the top, and from that resem
blance perhaps it came also to be the name of this
turret or spiral structure about the altar.
sect. 20. Prom the forementioned canon of
e,roftifet,ot%c't the council of Tours it is plain, that
up„„ the aitar. in the Prench crmrches the figure of
the cross was another part of the ornament of the
altar, since the eucharist, or sacramental body of

Christ, is ordered to be laid under it. But when
crosses came first to be set up in churches is not so
easy to be determined. That they were not in use
for the three first ages, seems evident enough from
the silence of all the writers of those times, and from
Eusebius, who has frequent occasion to describe
minutely the churches of Constantine and others,
but never once mentions a cross erected in them,
though he speaks frequently of crosses set up in
other public places, as a learned writer119 has judi
ciously observed out of him, who thinks they began
not to be set up in churches till after the year 340.
Chrysostom120 speaks of the sign of the cross as
used at the Lord's table, in the consecration of
priests and celebration of the eucharist; but that
seems to be meant of the transient sign made in (he
forehead, (which St. Austin121 and the author of the
Constitutions122 speak of likewise,) and not of any
material cross set upon the altar. But Sozomen m
speaks of material crosses lying upon the altar;
though not in the time of Constantine, (as Gretser121
mistakes, whose error is justly corrected by Vale
sius,) but in his own time. And after him Evagrius
speaks of silver crosses given by Chosroes125 to one
of the churches of Constantinople to be fixed upon
the altar. So that the original of this custom is
not to be deduced from Constantine, as many sup
pose, but from the following ages of the church.
But it is more certain that the altars _, „

Of some other or-

were always covered with some decent ^mmts 
cloth, used for ornament, not for mys- 8ils ot Uw """'
tery, as in after ages. Optatus, pleading against the
Donatists, that the altars could not be polluted by
the catholics touching them, (as the Donatists vainly
pretended,) uses this argument to confute them, that
if any thing was polluted, it must be the coverings,
and not the tables ; for every one knew that the ,
tables 126 were covered with a linen cloth in time of
Divine service : so that while the sacrament was
administering, the covering might be touched, but
not the table. And for this reason they pretended to
wash the palls (as he calls them in another place) in
order to give them an expiation.127 Victor Uticensis
makes a like complaint of one Proculus, an agent of
King Geisericus, who, having plundered the catho
lic churches in Zeugitana, made himself a shirt and

3onc. Const. Act. 5. t. 5. p. 159.
115 Eflseb. lib. 6. c. 44.
116 CAnstit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57. lib. 8. u. 13.
117 CoW. Turon. 2. can. 3. Ut corpus Domini in all ari,
non in arrnario, sed sub crucis titulo componatur. So it is
read in Crab's edition. But others, instead of arrnario, read
it, in imaginario ordine, and explain it by ciborium. See
Du Fresne, p. 575.
118 Suicer. Thesaur. voce TLifluipiov.
119 DalliEus de Cultu Relig. lib. 5. c. 8. p. 773.
120 Chrysost. Demonstrat. Quod Christus sit Deus, c. 9,
t. 5. p. 810.
121 Aug. Horn. 118. in Joh. Quid est signum Christi nisi

crux Christi ? Quod signum nisi adhibeatur sive frontibus
credentium, sive ipsi aquae ex qua regenerantur, sive oleo quo
chrismate unguntur, sive sacrificio quo aluntur; nihil horum
rite perficitur.
122 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 12.
123 Sozom. lib. 2. c. 3, says of one Probianus, that he saw
in a vision, o-Tavpov aiipfioXov Ttov dvaKEipiveov to) Bvaia-tj-
Ti]pitO. 121 Gretser. de Cruce, lib. 2. c. 13. >» Evagr.lib.6. c. 21.
120 Optat. lib. 6. p. 95. Quis fidelium nescit in peragendis
mysteriis ipsa ligna linteamine cooperiri ? Inter ipsa sa
cramenta velamen potuit tangi, non lignum.
127 Optat. ibid. p. 98- Lavistis proculdubio pallas, &c.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

305

breeches of the palls of the altar.128 Isidore of
Pelusium takes notice also of the sindon,m or fine
linen, upon which the body of Christ was conse
crated. But sometimes they were of richer materials,
and more sumptuous. Palladius 13° speaks of some of
the Roman ladies, who, renouncing the world, be
queathed their silks to make coverings for the altar.
And Theodoret131 says of Constantine, that, among
other gifts which he bestowed upon his new-built
church of Jerusalem, he gave PuaiXued irapairiTdapa-
ra, a royal pall, or piece of rich tapestry for the altar.
But that may signify the curtains or hangings of
the ciborium, as well as the covering of the altar ;
and so every utensil or ornament about the altar
may be supposed to be rich and splendid in such
churches as were of a royal foundation. The holy
vessels which they made use of to administer the
eucharist in, were another part of the ornament of
4he altar. But the richness of these was not always
estimated from the materials they were made of, but
from the use they were put to. For the materials
were sometimes no better than plain glass or wood.
Ireneeus,132 and Epiphanius after him,133 speaking of
Marcus, the father of the Marcosian heretics, say,
he used a glass cup in the celebration of the eu
charist: which is not noted as any singular thing
in him; for both Baronius131 and Bona135 think it
was then the common custom of the church. And
it is evident it continued in some places to the time
of St. Jerom. For he, speaking of Exuperius, bi
shop of Tholouse, and commending his frugality,
tells us138 that he ministered the body of Christ in a
basket of osiers, and the blood in a glass cup. Ba
ronius and Bona will furnish the reader with a great
many other instances to the same purpose. I shall
only add, that in one of our own synods here in
England, the synod of Calcuth, anno 787, there is a
canon137 which forbids the use of horn cups in the
celebration of the eucharist ; which seems to imply
thatthey were in use before. But yet I must note,
that it was commonly necessity that drove the
church to use vessels of such ordinary materials ;
either when she laboured under extreme poverty, or
thought fit to dispose of her silver and gold plate
for the redemption of captives, or the relief of the
poor, of which I have given a great many instances

m Victor, de Persec. Vandal, lib. 1. p. 593. De pallis
altaris, proh nefas ! camisias sibi et femoralia faciebat. Qui
tamen Proculus frustatim sibi comedens linguam, in brevi
turpissima consumptus est morte.
129 Isidor. Pelus. lib. 1. Ep. 123.
'" Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 119.
1,1 Theodor. lib. 1. c. 31. i82 Irena;. lib. 1. c. 9.
m Epiphan. Hasr. 34. num. I. >81 Baron, an. 216.
135 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. n. I.
Hieron. Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Nihil illo ditius, qui corpus
Domini canistro vimineo, sanguinem portat in vitro.
137 Synod. Calehuthens. c. 10. apud Spelman. Cone. Brit.
t- 1, p. 291.

in another place,138 which show that the chm-ch
had her vessels of silver and gold, else she could
not have melted them down for such pious uses.
Nay, even in times of persecution, when there was
some danger of being plundered and despoiled, the
wealthier churches had their sacred vessels of silver
and gold. This is evident, from what Prudentius ob
serves in the Roman church in the time of Lauren
tius the martyr, who suffered in the persecution of
Valerian. It was part of his crime, that he would
not deliver up the golden plate,139 in which they were
used to celebrate their sacred mysteries. And that
we may not think he spake only with a poetical
flourish, we may see the same thing observed by
Optatus of the church of Carthage, in the Diocletian
persecution. For when Mensurius the bishop was
forced to go to Rome, to have his trial there, he was
at some loss110 what to do with the plate and other
silver and gold ornaments of the church, which he
could neither hide in the earth, nor carry with him.
At last he comes to this resolution, to leave them
with the elders of the chm-ch, first taking an in
ventory of them, which he gave to a deaconess,
with these instructions, that if he never returned,
she should, when times of peace returned, give it to
the person whom she found seated on the bishop's
throne. Which she did as soon as Ccecilian was
chosen bishop, who, calhng upon the elders to deli
ver up their trust, they, having embezzled the things,
denied that ever they had received them ; and to
be revenged of Ccecilian, they joined with his an
tagonists, Botrus and Celeusius, who were compe
titors with Caecilian for the bishopric, and the first
authors of the schism of the Donatists. What this
inventory contained we may judge by another about
the same time given up to the persecutors by Paul,
bishop of Cirta, who was one of those called tradi
tors upon that account. There we find two "' gold
cups, six silver cups, six silver water-pots, a silver
cucumellum, which I take to be a flagon or bowl,
seven silver lamps, &c. All which were vessels or
utensils belonging to the service of the church and the
altar. For as they had vessels for the wine, so they
had vessels also for the water, which in those days
was always mingled with the wine, and was used
also for washing their hands in the time of the ob-

139 Book V. chap. 6. sect. 6.
139 Prudent. irEpl o-TEtpaviiiv, Hymn. 2. Hunc esse vestris
orgiis moremque et artem proditum est, Hanc disciplinam
foederis, libent ut auro antistites. Argenteis Scyphis ferunt
fumare sacrum sanguinem, &c.
110 Optat. lib. 1. p. 41. Erant ecclesiae ex auro et argento
quamplurima ornamenta, quae nee defodere terra, nee secum
portare poterat.
111 Gesta Purgation. Cacciliani ad calcem Optati, p. 266.
Calices duo aurei : item calices sex argentei : urceola sex
argentea : cucumellum argenteum : lucerna, argenteaa sep
tem : cereofala duo, &c.

306

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

lation, of which customs it will be more proper to
speak in another place. These vessels we here see
were of silver in the church of Cirta as well as
others. Their candlesticks or lamps were of the
like precious substance, and some golden, as Pru
dentius'12 represents them, when he brings in the
tyrant demanding of Laurentius, the Roman deacon,
the golden lamps which they used in their night
assemblies. These are frequently mentioned by
Athanasius,113 and the Apostolical Constitutions,111
which allow oil to be offered for the lamps. Pau
linus also"5 and St. Jerom116 speak of them, and
seem to intimate that in their time they were light
ed by day as well as by night : which was an in
novation upon the old custom: for the first and
primitive use of them was owing to necessity, when
Christians were forced to meet in nocturnal assem
blies for fear of persecution. At which time they
did not allow or approve of lighting them by day.
Nor does St. Jerom say, there was any order of the
church, or so much as general custom, to authorize
it; but only it was tolerated in some places, to
satisfy the ignorance, and weakness, and simplicity
of some secular men : and all he pretends to offer
in justification of it, is only, that there was no idol
atry in it, as Vigilantius had heavily laid the charge
upon it. However, there was this difference between
the age of St. Jerom and those which went before,
that the former ages positively condemn it. For
not to mention what Lactantius117 and others say to
expose the hke custom among the heathens, the
council of Eliberis expressly forbids it in a very
plain canon,119 though the reason be something dark
that is given for the prohibition : Let no one pre
sume to set up lights in the day-time in any ceme
tery or church ; for the spirits of the saints are not
to be molested. I shall not now stand to inquire
into the meaning of this reason : it is sufficient
that the thing was then prohibited in plain terms :
from whence it is evident the contrary custom must
be new, though prevailing both in the East and
West in the time of Paulinus and St. Jerom. Some
also plead hard for the antiquity of censers and in
cense, deriving them down from apostolical custom
and practice. So Cardinal Bona119 and others of

the Romish church. But there are no footsteps of
these things in the three first ages of the church.
The Canons under the name ofthe Apostles indeed150
mention incense in the time of the oblation. But
it still remains a question, whether those Canons
belong to any of the three first ages. Hippolytus
Portuensis is another author produced by a learned
person lsl of our own church in this cause. But
besides that his authority is as questionable as the
former, all that he says may be interpreted to a
spiritual or figurative sense. For speaking of the
times of antichrist, and the desolations of the church
in those days, he says, The church shall mourn with
a very great mourning, because her oblation and
incense is not duly 152 performed. Which may mean
no more than that the liturgy or service of the
church will be abolished. For the prayers and
worship of the saints are called the Christian in
cense, Rev. v. 8 ; and so I think we are to under
stand those words of St. Ambrose also,153 who, speak
ing of the angel's appearing to Zacharias, standing
on the right side of the altar of incense, says, I wish
the angel may stand by us when we incense the
altar and offer our sacrifice. Yea, doubtless the angel
stands by us, at the time that Christ stands there
and is offered upon the altar. Here, I take it, the
sacrificing of Christ and the incensing of the altar
are both of the same nature, that is, spiritual and
mystical : and therefore hence nothing can be con
cluded for the use of incense and censers in the
most strict and literal sense as yet in the Christian
church. Neither do we find any mention made of
censers in any part of the Constitutions under the
name of the Apostles, which is an argument, that
when the author of those collections wrote, they
were not yet become utensils of the altar; as they
were when Evagrius151 wrote his history; for he
mentions golden censers, as well as golden crosses,
given by Chosroes to the church of Constantinople.
By which we may guess that crosses and censers were
the product of one and the same age, and came into
the church together. Images and rehcs upon the
altar are usages also of later ages. And so are
many utensils of the present Greeks, as the lancea,
asteriscus, dicerion, tricerion, and cochlear, which

1,2 Prudent, de Coron. Hymn. 2. Auroque nocturuis sa-
cris adstare fixos cercos.
113 Athanas. Ep. ad Orthodox, t. 1. p. 946.
1,4 Canon. Apost. c. 3.
145 Paulin. Natal. 3. S. Felicis. Clara coronantur densis
altaria lychnis : lumina ceratis adolentur odora papyris ;
nocte dieque micant, &c.
116 Hieron. Ep. 53. ad Ripar. Accensique ante eorum tu-
mulos cerei, idololatriae insignia sunt? &c. Id. cont. Vigilant.
t. 2. p. 123. Aliqui propter imperitiam et simplicitatem
saicularium hominum — hoc pro honore martyrum faciunt.
117 Lactant. lib. 6. e. 2. Accendunt lumina; velut in te-
ncbris agenti Deo, &c.
113 Cone. Eliber. l. 31. Cereos per diem placuit in ccemi-

terio non incendi. Inquietandi enim sanctorum spiritus
non sunt.
119 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. n. 9.
159 Canon. Apost. c. 3. Ovpiapa Tip Katpto tijs iyias
irpocrtpopas. 151 Bever. Cod. Canon. Vindic. lib. 2. c. 1. n. 5.
li2 Hippol. de Consum. Mundi, Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 2.
p. 357. Note, The words are not in the genuine Hippoly
tus published by Combefis Auctario Novissimo.
153 Ambros. Com. in Luc. i. 11. p. 599. Utinam nobis
quoque adolentibus altaria, sacrificium deferentibus, assis-
tat angelus, imo prsebeat se videndum. Non enim dubites
assistere angelum, quando Christus assistit, Christus immo-
latur. >s' Evagr. lib. 6. c. 21.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

307

Bona 15S says were never known in the Latin church,
much less in the ancient church. So I shall not
stand to explain them. Nor say any thing here of
the Bible, the Diptychs, and their ritual books,
which were both utensils and ornaments of the
altar, because these will be spoken of in other
places. The altare portatile, or movable altars, of
the Latins, and the antimensia, or consecrated cloths,
of the Greeks, to be used in places which have no
altars, I omit likewise, as being a modern invention
of later ages. Habertus,156 indeed, is very solicitous
to have their portable altars thought as old as St.
Basil, because St. Basil in one of his epistles speaks
of iSiai Tpditeleu, private tables, in some churches.
But he wholly mistakes his author's meaning -. for
he is only speaking of the rudeness of some heretics,
who, according to their usual custom, pulled down
the catholic altars, and set up their own altars, or
tables, in the room. So that it is not those portable
altars he is discoursing of, but heretical altars set
up in opposition to the catholics, which Habertus
would hardly own to be the altars of the Romish
church. Durantus157 and Bona158 do not pretend to
find them in any author before the time of Bede and
Charles the Great, and therefore we may conclude
they were a modern invention. But the bneiSia,
or glabella, are somewhat more ancient, being men
tioned by the author of the Constitutions,159 who
makes it one part of the deacon's office in the time
of the oblation, to stand on each side of the altar,
and with these instruments in their hands, (brushes
or fans, we may Enghsh them,) to drive away all
such little insects as might drop into the cups or in
fest the altar. The author of the Fasti Siculi, or
Chronicon Alexandrinum,160 calls them ripta pmiSia,
and reckons them among the holy utensils of the
altar, which were laid up among the rest in the sceu-
ophylacium, or vestry of the church. For which
reason I thought it not improper to mention them,
whilst we are speaking of the utensils of the altar.
In many churches, besides the com-
Sect. 22. . , , . . , ,
of the ouaiion- munion table, in one of the lesser re-
arwm, or prothesis. cesses or conchas of the bema, there
was a place where the offerings of the people were
received, out of which the bread and wine was taken
that was consecrated at the altar. In the liturgies
under the names of Chrysostom '" and St. James,182
and other modern Greek writers, this is called irpo-
&<ne and irapaTpdireZov, the side-table. In the Ordo
Romanus it has the name of oblationarium and pro-

thesis also, for the one is made the explication of
the other. And here also it is termed paratorium,
because, when the offerings were received, prepara
tion was made out of them for the eucharist. There
is little question to be made but that the ancient
churches had something answerable to this, but it
went under other names ; for we never meet with a
prothesis, or paratorium, or oblationarium, in express
terms in any ancient writer. But the thing itself
we often find. Cyprian163 seems to speak of it under
the borrowed name of the corban, rebuking a rich
and wealthy matron for coming to celebrate the
eucharist without any regard to the corban, and par
taking of the Lord's supper without any sacrifice
of her own, but rather eating ofthe oblations which
the poor had brought. In the fourth council161 of
Carthage this place goes by the general name of the
sacrarium, or sanctuary, as being that part of the
sanctuary where the oblations for the altar were
received. For they had two repositories for the
offerings of the people, the one without the church,
called the gazophylacium, or treasury, and the other
within the church, which was this sacrarium, or
corban. And therefore it is that that council for
bids the offerings of such Christians as were at va
riance one with another, to be received either in the
treasury or the sanctuary. Paulinus is more exact
in describing this place than any other ancient
writer, yet he gives it a different name, calling it one
of the secretaria of the church. For he tells us 165
there were two secretaria, one on the right hand,
and the other on the left hand of the altar. That
on the right hand was the same with the prothesis,
or paratorium, we are speaking of, and the use of it
he describes in these verses, which were set over it :
Hie locus est veneranda pemis qua conditur, et qua
Promitur alma sacri pompa ministerii.
This is the place where the holy food is reposited,
and whence we take provision and furniture for the
altar. That on the other side was the same with
the diaconicum bematis, the use of which he describes
in part, in these two other verses, set over it also :
Si quem sancta tenet meditandi in lege voluntas,
Hie poterit residens Sanctis intendere libris.
If any one, (that is, any of the priests, whose apart
ment this was,) is minded to meditate in the law of
God, here he has room to sit and read the holy
books. A little before la he makes the like descrip-

155 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. n. 6.
156 Habert. Archieratic. p. 664. Portatilia ilia altaria vi-
dentur dici a basilio ISiai Tpdire^at, Ep. 72.
157 Durant. de Ritib. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 25. .¦. 7.
159 Bona, Rev. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 20. u. 3.
150 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 12.
'" Chronic. Alexandr. p. 892.
161 Chrysost. Liturg. Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 2. p. 74.
152 Missa Jacobi, ibid. p. 21.
x 2

1,3 Cyprian, de Opere et Eleemos. p. 203. Locuples et
dives es, et Dominicum celebrare te credis, quae corbonam
omnino non respicis ; qua? in Dominicum sine sacrificio veil is ;
quae partem de sacrificio, quod pauper obtulit, sumis ?
161 Cone. Carthag. 4. can. 93. Oblationes dissidentium
fratrum, neque in sacrario, neque in gazophylacio recipi-
antur. 165 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever, p. 151.
loo Paulin. ibid. p. 152. Una earum immolanti hostias ju-

308

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

tion of these two secret apartments in prose, telling
us, that the one was the place which prepared the
host or oblation of joy for the priest : (whence doubt
less in after ages, as I noted before, it got the name
oi paratorium .-) and the other was a place, whither
the clergy retired, after the sacrifice was ended, and
the people were dismissed, to make their con
cluding prayers in private.
sect 23 This latter place was a sort of vestry
Z'^S,: within the church, whither the dea-
cumlematis. cong brought the vestments and ves
sels and utensils belonging to the altar, out of the
greater diaconicum, to be in a readiness for Divine
service. And in this respect it had also the name
of enetvotpvXaKtov, the repository ofthe sacred utensils,
because hither they were carried back immediately
by the deacons as soon as the service was ended, or
whilst the post-communion psalm was singing by
the people, as the author of the Chronicon 167 Alex-
andrinum represents it. Here the priests also put
on their robes they used to officiate in : and hither
they came again, when the public service was end
ed, to make their private addresses to God, as has
been noted already out of Paulinus ; and in the
liturgies ascribed to St. James, St. Mark, St. Chry
sostom,108 there are the forms of prayer appointed
to be used in this place, one of which particularly
in St. James's liturgy is ushered in with this title or
rubric,169 The prayer to be said in the sceuophylacium,
after the dismission of the people. The deacons
commonly had the care of this place, and thence it
is often called the diaconicum, and bematis diaconi
cum, to distinguish it from another diaconicum,
which we shall find in the next chapter among the
exedrcs, or outer buildings of the church. Du
Fresne 170 thinks also that the name diaconicum
was sometimes more peculiarly given to that part
of the bema or chancel, which was between the veils
of the chancel and the veils of the ciborium or altar ;
and that the place within the veils of the altar was
distinguished particularly by the name of presbyte-
rium, because it was the place of the presbyters, as
the other was the place of the deacons, alleging. for
this a canon of the council of Laodicea,171 which
others understand in a different sense,172 for the
whole chancel or sanctuary of the church.

CHAPTER VII.
OF THE BAPTISTERY, AND OTHER OUTER BUILDINGS,
CALLED THE EXEDRA OF THE CHURCH.
We have hitherto taken a view of the
several parts of the ancient churches Baptlwel'nn.
within the walls : it now remains that distinct Lm'Ss
church.
we consider a httle such buildings as
were distinct from the main body, and yet within
the bounds of the church taken in the largest sense,
which buildings are all comprised under one general
name of the exedrcs of the church. For Eusebius,
speaking of the church of Paulinus at Tyre, says,
When that curious artist had finished his famous
structure within, he then set himself about the
exedrcs, or buildings1 that joined one to another by.
the sides ofthe church : by which buildings, he tells
ns, he chiefly meant the place, which was for the
use of those who needed the purgation and sprink
ling of water and the Holy Ghost, that is, doubt
less, the baptistery of the church. He describes the
church of Antioch, built by Constantine, after the
same manner, telling us, that it was surrounded
with exedrcs2 and buildings that had lower and up
per stories in them. So that, as Valesius and other
critics have rightly observed, exedra is a general .
name for any buildings that stand round about the
church. And hence it is easy to conclude, that the
baptistery, which Eusebius reckons the chief of the •
exedrcs, was anciently a building without the walls
of the church. Which observation, because I find
it questioned by some, who place the font, after the
modern way, in the narthex of the ancient churches,
it will not be improper here to confirm by a few plain
instances out of other authors. Paulinus, bishop
of Nola, setting forth the great munificence of his
friend Severus, says, He built two churches and a
baptistery between them both.3 And so Cyril of
Jerusalem describes the baptistery as a building by
itself, which had first1 its TepoavXtov dlmv, that is, its -
porch or ante-room, where the catechumens made
their renunciation of Satan, and confession of faith ;
and then its io-iirtpov oIkov, its inner room,5 where
the ceremony of baptism was performed. Sidonius
Apollinaris also speaks of it as a distinct building;3
and St. Austin seems to intimate7 that there were .

bilationis patet (leg. parat). Altera post sacerdotem, (leg.
post sacrificium,) capaci sinu receptat orantes.
167 Chron. Alexand. p. 892. Vid. Coteler. Not. in Const.
Apost. lib. 7. c. 12.
188 Liturg. Marci, Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 2. p. 41. Liturg.
Chrysost. ibid. p. 88.
169 Liturg. Jacobi, ibid. p. 23. Ebxi] XeyopEvi] iv Tto ctkev-
ocpvXaKitp peTa Ti]v diroXvatv.
170 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 581.
171 Con. Laod. can. 21. 172 See before, sect. 4. of this chap.
1 Euseb. lib. 10. u. 4. p. 381. 'E7ri Ti 'ektos tov veto pE-

Tr]Et, i^iSpas Kal oXkovs tovs Trap iKaTEpa pEytiJTOVs Eiri-
o-KEvdltov, &c. 2 Euseb. de Vit. Constant, lib. 3. c. 50.
8 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever. Tu vero etiam baptisteriuin
basilicis duabus interpositum condidisti.
4 Cyril. Catech. Mystag. 1. n. 2. EEo-risi tj irpwTov e!s
tov irpoavXiov Too fiairTt07Tl]piou oXkov, &C.
5 Id. Catech. 2. n. 1.
6 Sidon. lib. 4. Ep. 15. Baptisterium quod olim fabrica-
bamini, scribitis, jam posse conseerari.
7 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. c. 8. In parte foeminarum ob-
servanti ad baptisterium, &c.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

309

distinct apartments in it for men and women like
wise. Which perhaps is the reason why St. Am
brose speaks of it in the plural, styling it8 the bap
tisteries of the church. In the time of Justin
Martyr and Tertullian we are not certain that the
church had any of these baptisteries ; but this is
past all doubt, however, from their authority, that
the place of baptism was not in the church, but
some where distinct from it. For Tertullian, speak
ing of the ceremonies of baptism, says, It was their
custom to renounce the devil and his pomp and his
angels first in the church, and then9 again when
they came to the water. Which implies, that the
place of baptism was without the church. And so
Justin Martyr10 represents it, when he speaks of
carrying the catechumen to the place where there
was water; which perhaps was unlimited in those
days; it being an indifferent thing, as Tertullian11
words it, whether a man was baptized in the sea or
in a lake, in a river or in a fountain, in Jordan or
in Tiber, as St. Peter and St. John baptized their
* converts. So that the first ages all agreed in this,
r /thatwhether they had baptisteries or not, the place
\f of baptism was always without the church. And
after this manner baptisteries continued to the sixth
age, as appears from what Durantus observes out
of Gregory12 of Tours, that he speaks of baptisteries
still without the walls of the church. Though some
now began to be taken into the church porch, as
that wherein he says,13 Remigius baptized King
Clodoveus, and thence they were afterward removed
into the chm-ch itself. Though now the baptistery
of St. John Lateran at Rome is still after the an
cient model, if Durantus rightly inform us.
These baptisteries were anciently
Sect. 2. . , _, - J
These ™rr capa- very capacious, because, as Dr. Cave
Clone, and why. truly observes,11 the stated times of
baptism returning but seldom, there were usually
great multitudes to be baptized at the same time.
And then the manner of baptizing by immersion, or
dipping under water, made it necessary to have a
large font likewise. Whence the author of the
Chronicon Alexandrinum 15 styles the baptistery,
whither Basilicus fled to take sanctuary, pkya fum-
Tijptov, the great iRuminary or school of baptism.

8 Ambros. Ep. 33. Symbolum aliquibus competentibus
in baptisteriis tredebam basilicae.
9 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c. 3. Aquam adituri, ibidem,
sed et aliquanto prius in ecclesia sub antistitis manu con-
testamur nos renunciare diabolo et pompae et angelis
ejus. 10 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 93.
11 Tertul. de Bapt. e. 4. Nulla distinctio est, mari quis
an stagno, flumine an fonte, lacu an alveo diluatur, nee
quicquam refert inter eos quos Johannes in Jordan e, et quos
Petrus in Tiberi tinxit.
12 Durant. de Ritib. Eccl. lib.l. c. 19. n. 4. Greg. Turon.
Hist, lib.6. ell.
13 Gregor. Turon. Histor. Franc, lib. 2. e. 31.

And in Venantius Fortunatus16 it is called aula
baptismatis, the large hall of baptism. Which was
indeed so capacious, that we sometimes read of
councils meeting and sitting therein, as Du Fresne 17
shows out of the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon,
and Suicerus has observed the same in the Acts of
the Council of Carthage,18 which speaks of a coun
cil at Constantinople held in the baptistery of the
church. We may observe also in the fore- Soct 3
mentioned authors, how the baptis- ,™y,p"aCCAfT&-
teries were commonly called tpton^ripia, lammation-
places of illumination, that is, baptism. For bap
tism itself in ancient writers is very usually styled
tjnoTttrpa ; and hence the place of baptism called
djuiTiTi'ipiov, from the administration of baptism there,
which was always attended with a Divine illumina
tion of the soul ; whence persons baptized were also
called, the illuminate, as has been observed19 in an
other place. But the baptisteries might also have •
this name for another reason, because they were
the places of an illumination or instruction preced
ing baptism. For here the catechumens seem to
have been trained up and instructed in the first
rudiments of the Christian faith. At least they
were here taught the Creed, as is evident from that
noted passage of St. Ambrose,20 where he says, that
after the Lessons and Homily he went into the bap
tistery of the church, to make the candidates of
baptism learn the Creed. Therefore from this illu
mination preceding baptism, as well as that which
was consequent to it, the baptisteries might reason
ably be called d,uiTi^i)pta, and, as some think, tppovri-
s-jjpia, schools of learning, or the illuminatories of
the church.
It will be easy now for the reader
to observe, from what has been said, or the 'difference
between a baptistery
what difference there was anciently «;d • ';"'; And
*- why the font called
between a baptistery and a font, though £'?£'"¦ aI"i "to
the names be sometimes confounded
together. For the baptistery, properly speaking,
was the whole house of building, in which the font
stoed, and' where all the ceremonies of baptism were
performed ; but the font was only the fountain or
pool of water, wherein persons were immersed or

» Cave, Primit. Christ, par. 1. c. 10. p. 312.
15 Chron. Alexandr. in Basilisco, p. 753.
19 Fortunat. de Baptister. Moguntin. Biblioth. Patr. t. 8.
p. 780.
17 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 592. Cone. Chal
ced. Act. 1.
18 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccl. voce 4>wriTf,(no«, ex Actis Con
cilii Carthag. p. 118. 'Eo Tto tpa>TiTi]pito Tr)V /cara KaiKTai/-
TlVBiroXtv dyitoTaTrjS Ka2roXlK7)S iKKXl]trias KaSrEaStVTtov
Ttov dyttoTUTtov iiriaKoirtov.
19 Book I. chap. 4. sect. 1.
20 Ambros. Ep. 33. ad Marcellin. Post lectiones atque
tractatum, dimissis calechumenis, symbolum aliquibus com
petentibus in baptisteriis tradebam basilicae.

310

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

baptized. This in the Greek writers is commonly
called21 KoXvpfoSpa, and by the Latins,22 piscina,
and is sometimes expressly distinguished from the
baptistery, as a part from the whole. For Socrates23
expressly styles it noXvpfiriSpav tov (3axTi<;npiov, the
pool of the baptistery. Which name Dr. Beve
rege21 thinks was given to the font by way of allu
sion to the pool of Bethesda. But Optatus25 has a
more mystical reason for it : he says, it was called
piscina, in allusion to our Saviour's technical name,
ixSbg, which was an acrostic composed of the initial
letters of our Saviour's several titles, Jesus Christ,
the Son of God, our Saviour, of which I have given
an account26 in another place. But whether either
of these reasons be true, or whether the font was
not rather so called, because piscina and tcoXvpfiriSpa
are common names of fountains, and baths, and
pools in Greek and Latin writers, I leave to the de
termination of the judicious reader. Du Fresne has
observed several other names,27 such as vreovopog,
lavacrum, natatoria, and cloaca, a term peculiar to
Gregory the Great : but these are modern names,
and so I pass them over, only remarking one thing
out of him, that whereas Procopius, in his Historia
Arcana, gives it the name of Stlaptvr), the recep
tacle, Suidas mistakes it for the communion table ;
which I note, only because it is easy for any one to
,be led into the hke mistake by the authority of that
celebrated writer.
Sect 5 What form the ancient baptisteries
ba?sleh;"lent- were built in, I find no where men-
iy adomed. tioned in any ancient writer; and
almost as little of their ornament, that may be de
pended on as genuine. Durantus indeed has a very
formal story out of the Pontifical, under the name
of Damasus, how Constantine gave a rich font to
the church, wherein he himself was baptized ; it was
made,28 the author says, of porphyretic marble,
overlaid with silver ; in the middle of it was a
marble pillar, and on it a vial of pure gold, filled
with balsam to burn as in a lamp. On the brim of
the font was a lamp of pure gold pouring out water.
On the right hand of that a silver image of Christ,
and on the left hand a silver image of St. John
Baptist, holding a label with this inscription, " Be
hold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins
of the world." Besides all these, there were seven
silver harts pouring out water into the fountain.
But now all this is a mere fabulous legend, and has

just as much truth in it as the story of Constantine's
leprosy, and his being cured by Pope Sylvester's
baptizing him in this font at Rome. And I only
mention it to show what sort of tales are urged by
the Romish ritualists many times for ancient his
tory. For every one now knows this mock-Dama-
sus to be a spurious author. Perhaps in the sixth
or seventh century, such "sort of ornaments might
be set up in the baptisteries of the church : for in
the acts of the council of Constantinople29 under
Mennas, anno 536, there is mention made of silver
and gold doves hanging in the baptistery, as well as
at the altar. But as no pictures or images were set
up in churches in the time of Constantine, so we
cannot suppose any Roman baptisteries to be adorn
ed by him according to the foresaid pretended de
scription : but if the garments of the ministers bap
tizing, or the white robes of persons newly baptized,
which were reserved in these baptisteries as monu
ments and tokens of their profession, or the vessels
of chrism used for unction in baptism, may be
reckoned ornaments of these places ; the baptisteries
had always these things from their first erection, as
will be showed more particularly when we come to
treat of the rites of baptism in its proper place.
All that I have further to add about
baptisteries here, is an observation Baptisterici an.
, n . cienlly more pecu-
made by some learned men, that an- iiar to the moii™
J church.
ciently there was but one baptistery
in a city, and that at the bishop's church. Vice-
comes30 thinks it was so even at Rome itself for
many ages. Dr. Maurice31 says no city had more,
unless where the magnificence of emperors or bi
shops made, as it were, many cathedrals. And
therefore, when the author32 of the Pontifical under
the name of Damasus says of Pope Marcellus, that
he made twenty-five titles in Rome, as so many
dioceses, for baptism and penance ; that learned
person thinks it imports, that those services indeed
belonged only to a cathedral; and therefore the
granting of those privileges to parishes made them
seem like dioceses. Some remains of this ancient
custom are yet to be observed in several great cities
of Italy. For both Durantus33 and Vicecomes31 tell
us, that at Pisa, Bononia, Orvieto, Parma, and even
at Florence itself, they have but one font or baptis
tery for a whole city at this day. Which is also
noted by Onuphrius35 and Du Fresne,36 and by Dr.
Maurice out of Leander Alberti, Mercator, Lassels,

21 Vid. Cyril. Catech. Mystag. 2. n. 4. Catech. 3. n. 1.
Chrysost. Horn. 64. t. 5. p. 970.
22 Optat. lib. 3. p. 62. a Socrat. lib. 7. t. 17.
21 Bevereg. Pandect. Not. in Concil. Nicen. c. 11.
25 Optat. lib. 3. p. 62. Hie est piscis qui in baptismate
per invocationem fontalibus undis inseritur, ut quae aqua
fuerat, a pisce etiam piscina vocitetur.
26 Book I. chap. I. sect. 2.
27 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 593.
28 Damas. Pontifical. Vit. Sylvestri.

29 Cone. Constant. Act. 5. t. 5. p. 159.
39 Vicecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 1. c. 8.
81 Maurice, Dioces. Episc. p. 41 et 43. .
32 Pontifical. Vit. Marcelli. Viginti quinque titulos in
urbe Roma constituit, quasi" dioeceses, propter baptismum
et poenitentiam multorum, &c.
38 Durant. de Ritib. Eccles. lib. 1. u. 19. n. 3.
31 Vicecomes de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 1. u. 8.
35 Onuphr. de Ecclesiis Urb. Roma,.
36 Du Fresne, Glossar. voce Baptisterium.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

311

and some other modern writers. I have observed37
before, that this distinction was anciently made be
tween a cathohc church and a private oratory, that
the one was a place of public baptism, and the other
not; which argues that every church had not a dis
tinct baptistery, but only such as were called bap
tismal churches. And this is the reason why an
ciently men commonly resorted for baptism to the
bishop's church, at the two great festivals, Easter
and Pentecost, which were the two solemn times of
its administration. In after ages, baptisteries were
set up in country parishes : for the council of Aux
erre38 speaks of baptizing in villages at Easter by
allowance; but this privilege was not granted to
every place, but only to such as the bishop appoint
ed, except in cases of necessity, as Vicecomes39 has
observed out of the synod of Meaux,10 and the coun
cil in Verno Palatio.41 Whence probably these got
the name of mother churches also, in respect of
such others as depended on them for the adminis
tration of baptism, as anciently all churches did on
- the bishop's church. Thus much of the baptisteries
of the ancient church. Another noted building, commonly
of the sedeta- reckoned among the exedrcs of the
riurn, or diaeoni- ...
cm magnum, Uis church, was that which is usually
vestry. _ J
called secretarium or diaconicum, con
cerning which learned men are not exactly agreed.
For Valesius takes it42 for a place within the
church ; Gothofred13 and others, for a place with
out; but Du Fresne" seems more justly to deter
mine the controversy between them, by distinguish
ing the diaconicum bematis within the chancel, which
we have spoken of before, from the diaconicum mag
num without the church, which is to be considered
here. It is of this Philostorgius is to be understood,
when he says, The Christians of Paneas, or Ceesarea-
Philippi, translated the statue of our Saviour, erect
ed by the woman whom he cured of an issue of
blood, into the diaconicum43 of the church, that is,
into the vestry or repository of the church. It was
so named, because all things here reposited were
under the care of the deacons, part of whose office
was to look after the vestments, vessels, and utensils
belonging to the altar, and all things of value given
to the church ; the chief overseer of which seems
generally to have been a presbyter, dignified with
the title of ceimeliarches, or sceuophylax, as I have
• showed before13 in another place. And kence the

diaconicum, or rather, as Du Fresne17 observes out of
an ancient Greek writer, the innermost part of it,
was the ceimeliarchium, or sceuophylacium, of the
church, the repository of the sacred vessels, and
such anathemata or presents, as were reputed among
the ehiefest treasures of the church. It was other
wise called secretarium, as Du Fresne48 conjectures,
because the consistory or tribunal of the church
was here kept ; the secretum or secretarium being a
known name for the courts of the civil magistrate,
whence this perhaps might take its denomination.
The whole building was large and capacious enough
to receive not only a private consistory, but a pro
vincial or general council, many of which we find
have been held in this apartment of the church, as
the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth councils of Car
thage are said to be kept in secretaria basilicce resti
tutes, with a great many others collected by Du
Fresne, who observes the sessions of councils to be
called secretaria upon this account, from the place
of their session or convention.
It was otherwise called receptorium Sect
and salutatorium, as we find in Sido- toriul°SfaiZa7*
nius Apollinaris,'"' Sulpicius Severus,50 "*'"'
the first council of Mascon,51 Theodoret, and many
others. Particularly Theodoret,52 speaking of The
odosius coming to St. Ambrose to petition for abso
lution, says, he found him sitting iv rtf oUtp daieaa-
riKtp, in the saluting house ; which Scaliger mistakes
for the bishop's house, where strangers were enter
tained ; whereas it was a place adjoining to the
church, where the bishop and presbyters sat to re
ceive the salutations of the people, as they came to
desire their blessing or prayers, or consult them
about important business. As appears from Sul
picius Severus, who, speaking of St. Martin, says,
He sat in one secretarium, and the presbyters53 in
another, receiving the people's salutes, and hearing
their causes.
Du Fresne thinks these secretaria, Sect g
or at least some part of them, were or°p7^/Tffi
also used as ecclesiastical prisons, or chun:h-
places of confinement sometimes for delinquent
clergymen ; and that then they were called decaneta,
or decanica ; which is a term used in both the Codes
and some councils, as Gothofred54 and some others
explain it, for a prison belonging to the church.
In the Theodosian Code there is a law of Arcadius,
which orders heretics to be expelled from all places

17 Book VIII. chap. 1. sect. 4.
83 Cone. Antissiodor. an. 578. can. 18.
39 Vicecom de Ritib. Eccles. 1. 1. t. 9.
10 Cone. Meldens. can. 4«.
11 Cone, in Verno Palatio, c. 7.
12 Vales. Not. in Philostorg. lib. 7. c. 3.
43 Gothofred. ibid.
11 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 593.
15 Philostorg. lib. 7. c. 3. « Book III. chap. 13. sect 3.
47 Passio SS. Patrum Sabaitarum ap. Du Fresne, Com. in

Paulum Silentiar. p. 597. 'EtrtoTEpov Si tov Siukovikov
KElpEXiapXEXoV r]TOl tTKEVOepvXdKLOV.
48 Du Fresne, ibid. p. 594. ex Gestis de nomine Acacii.
» Sidon. lib. 5. Ep. 17. 50 Sulpic. Dialog. 2. i-. 1.
51 Concil. Matiscon. 1. can. 2. 62 Theodor. lib. 5. c. 18.
93 Sulpic.-. Dial. 2. c. 1. Cum in alio secretario presbyteri
sederent, vel salutationibus vacantes, vel audiendis negotiis
occupati, &c.
81 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 5. de Haer.
Leg. 30.

312

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

which they possessed,55 whether under the name of
churches, or diaeonica, or decanica. Now, that the
decanica here means a place of custody or restraint
for delinquents belonging to the church, Gothofred
proves from another law among Justinian's Novels,58
which orders such delinquents to be shut up in the
decanica of the church, there to suffer condign pun
ishment. And by this we are led to understand
what is meant by the decanica spoken of in the Acts
of the Council57 of Ephesus, which the Latin trans
lator by mistake renders tribunal, whereas it should
be the prison of the church. Some take it to be no
more but another name for the diaconicum, or a cor
ruption of it; others derive it from SUri, and so
make it denote a tribunal : which are errors both
alike. For it seems to have been a more general
name than the diaconicum, including all such places
of the church, as were made use of to put offend
ing clerks into a more decent confinement, which
was not any one place, but several that were made
use of to that purpose, such as the catechumenia, as
well as the diaeonica, or secretaria, in which respect
they had all the name of decanica, or carceres, the
prisons of the church. Which seems pretty evident
from what Du Fresne58 has observed out of an epis
tle of Pope Gregory II. to the emperor Leo Isaurus,
where he says, When any one had offended, the bi
shops were used to confine him as in a prison in
one of the secretaria,33 or diaconia, or catechumena
of the church. Which implies, that all these
places were made use of upon occasion for the con
finement and punishment of delinquents, and then
they had peculiarly the name of decanica, or prisons
of the church. There is another name for a place
ofthe mitatormm, belonging to the church in Theodorus
or mesatorium. . , , .,
Lector, which has as much puzzled
interpreters as the former. That is piTariiiptov, or
ptTardipiov, as the modern Greeks call it. Goar, in
his Notes upon the Euchologium, thinks it should
be minsatorium, from pivoog, a dish, or mensa, a table j
• and so he expounds it, a place of refreshment for
the singers, where they might have bread and wine
to recreate them after service. Du Fresne61 deduces
it from metatum, which is a term of frequent use in

the civil law, and signifies a station in the cursus
publicus, where entertainment was given to those
that travelled upon public business. Suicerus makes
it62 to be the same with the diaconicum, or salutato-
rium, the saluting house, and thinks with Goar it
should be read minsatorium, from mensa, because
here was a table erected, not for entertainment, but
for receiving such things as were brought and laid
upon it. But I like best the conjecture of Musculus, -
who renders it mutatorium, as supposing it to be a
corruption of that Latin word, which signifies what
we call an apodyterium, or vfJSfry, where the minis
ters change their habit : and so it is agreed on all
hands, that it was a part of the diaconicum, or but
another name for it, though men differ so much in
their sentiments, when they come to account for the
reason of it.
The author of the Constitutions, in Slel u
his description of the chm-ch, men- aZ^l&t
tions also certain places63 called pas- ""'
tophoria, which, according to his account, were
buildings on each side of the church, toward the
east end of it. But what use they were put to we -*
can learn no further from that author, save only
that he tells us in another place, the deacons64 were
used to carry the remains of the eucharist thither
when all had communicated. Whence Durantus,
measuring ancient customs by the practice of his
own times, absurdly concludes, that the pastophoria
was the ark where the pyx and wafer were laid,"5
as if there was any similitude betwixt a pyx and a
building on each side of the temple. Bona,6" with
a httle more reason, thinks the pastophorium was
only another name for sceuophylacium, or diaconicum.
But, indeed, it seems "to have been a more general
name, including not only, the diaconicum, but also
the gazophylacium, or treasury, and the habitations
of the ministers, and custodes ecclesics,. or, as some
think they are otherwise called, paramonarii, mansi
onarii, and martyrarii, the mansionaries or keepers
of the church. For the word pastophorium is a
name taken from the Septuagint translation of the
Old Testament, Ezek. xl. 17, where it is used for the
chambers in the outward court of the temple. And
St. Jerom, in his comment07 upon the place, ob-

85 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 5. Leg. 30. Cuncti haeretici pro-
culdubio noverint, omnia sibi loca huj us urbis adimenda esse,
sive sub ecclesiarum nomine teneantur, sive quae diaeonica
appellantur, vel etiam decanica.
86 Justin. Novel. 79. c. 3. KaSrEtpyia^totrav iv toXs ra-
Xovpivots SEKaviKoXs, Troii/ds Ttis Ka5r}Kovo-as vtpifcovTES.
57 Libell. Basilii Diaeoni ad Theodos. in Cone. Ephes.
par. 1. c. 30. Cone. t. 3. p. 427. 'Ev tw StKaviKto tov Xaov
TVTTT1]$EVTOS StatpOptOS, &C.
58 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 594.
69 Greg. Ep. 2. ad Leon. Isaur. Concil. t. 7. p. 26. Pon
tifices ubi quis peccarit, eum tanquam in carcerem, in se
cretaria, sacrorumque vasorum aeraria conjiciunt, in ecclesiae
diaconia et in catechumena ablegant.

69 Theodor. Lector, lib. 2. p. 559.
61 Du Fresne, Com. in Paul. Silentiar. p. 595.
62 Suicer. Thesaur. voce MfTfiTaio-ioi/.
63 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 57. 'Eg iKaTEpiov Ttov ptptisv
Ta iratrToepdpia irpbs dvaToXfjv.
64 Ibid. lib. 8. c. 13. Aa/3oVr£s ol SiaKovoi Ta irEptts-
aevovTa, EletepEpETwaav eIs ra tratTTOtpopia.
65 Durant. de Ritib. Eccles. lib. 1. c. 16. n. 8.
68 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. I. c. 24. n. 2.
67 Hieron. Com. in Ezek. xl. 17. p. 640. Pro thalamis tri-
ginta quos vertere Septuaginta, sive gazophylaciis atque cel-
lariis, ut interpretatus est Aquila, Symmachus posuit ije-
Spas  quae habitationi Levitarum atque sacerdotum erant
praeparatse. Id. Com. in Ezek. xiii. 1. p. 652. Eductus est

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

313

serves, that what the Septuagint call pastophoria, and
the Latins from them cubieula, is in the translations
of Aquila and Symmachus rendered gazophylacium
• and exedra ; and he tells us they were chambers of
the treasury, and habitations for the priests and
Levites round about that court of the temple.
Therefore I think there is no question to be made,
but that the pastophoria in the Christian church
were places put to the same use as in the Jewish
temple, from which the name is borrowed. For
the church had her gazaphylacia, or treasuries, as
well as the temple ; which appears from a canon
of the fourth council of Carthage,68 which forbids
the offerings of persons at variance one with an
other to be received either in the treasury or the
sanctuary. So that the treasury was a distinct
place from the corban in the sanctuary, and there
fore most probably to be reckoned among the pas-
- tophoria of the chm-ch. Here all such offerings of
the people were laid up, as were not thought proper
to be brought to the altar, but rather to be sent to
the bishop's house, as some ancient canons give
direction in the case. Particularly, among those
called the Canons of the Apostles, we find two to
this purpose: That beside bread and wine, nothing69
should be brought to the altar, save only new ears
of corn, and grapes, and oil for the lamps, and in
cense for the time of the oblation : but all other
fruits should .be sent tig oIkov, to the repository, or
treasury, it may be, as first-fruits for the bishop and
presbyters, and not be brought to the altar, but be
by them divided among the deacons and other
* clergy. The pastophoria were also habitations for
the bishop and clergy, and the guardians or keepers
of the church, as Schelstrate70 rightly concludes
from another passage in St. Jerom,71 where he ex
plains pastophorium to be the chamber, or habitation,
where the ruler of the temple dwelt. So that it
seems to have been almost as general a name as
that of the oZkoi, or exedrcs of the church.
sect ii Whether the libraries belonging to
iih»,S ofthl3 and Aurches were any part of these pas
tophoria, is not easy to determine, but
thus much we are certain of, that there were such
places anciently adjoining to many churches, from
the time that churches began to be erected among

in gazophylacium, sive ut Symmachus et LXX. transtule-
runtexedram, vel ut Theodotio iracrToepdpiov, quod in tha-
lamum vertitur.
08 Cone. Carthag. 4. can. 93. Oblationes dissidentium fra-
trum, neque in sacrario, neque in gazophylacio recipiantur.
69 Canon. Apost. c. 4 et 5.
70 Schelstrat. Concil. Antiochen. p. 186.
71 Hieron. Com. in Esai. '2 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 20.
73 Hierun. Catalog. Scriptor. Eccles. c. 75.
" W. Ep. ad Marcel, t. 3. p. 113. It. Com. in Tit. u. 3.
Id. de Scriptor. c. 3. Ipsum Hebraicum habetur usque
hodie in Caesariensi bibliotheca, quam Pamphilus martyr
¦tudiosissime confecit.
'"Gesta Purgat. Caeciliani ad calcem Optati, p. 267.

Christians. Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, in the
third century, built a library for the service of that
church, where, Eusebius tells us,72 he found the best
part of "his materials to compose his Ecclesiastical
History. ¦ Julius Africanus founded such another
library at Ctesarea in Palestine, which Pamphilus
and Eusebius much augmented. St. Jerom says,73
Pamphilus wrote out almost all Origen's works for
the use of this library, which were reserved there
in his time. And he often mentions71 his own con
sulting it upon necessary occasions in his emenda
tions of the text of the Holy Scriptures ; telling us
further,75 that there was a copy of St. Matthew's
Gospel in the original Hebrew, as it was first written
by him, extant in his time. Another of these
libraries we find mentioned in the Acts of Purga
tion of Ceecilian and Felix, belonging to the church
of Cirta Julia, or Constantina, in Numidia,70 where
Paulus the bishop is accused as a traditor, for de
livering up the goods of the church in the time of
the Diocletian persecution. These were all founded
before the church had any settled times of peace.
In the following ages we find St. Austin making
mention of the library77 of the church of Hippo,
and St. Jerom78 commending Euzoius, the Arian
bishop of Caesarea, for his care in repairing the li
brary of Pamphilus, which was fallen to decay. St.
Basil79 speaks of the Roman libraries, or archives
at least. And the author of the Pontifical,80 if any
credit may be given to him, ascribes the building
of two to Pope Hilary, near the baptistery of the
Lateran church. But that which exceeded all the
rest, was the famous library of the church of S. t
Sophia, which Hospinian 81 thinks was first begun
by Constantine, but was afterward vastly augmented
by Theodosius junior, who was another Ptolemy,
in whose time there were no less than a hundred
thousand in books in it, and a hundred and twenty y
thousand in the reign of Basiliscus and Zeno,
when both the building and its furniture were all
unhappily consumed together by the firing of the
city in a popular tumult. He that would see a more
ample account of these foundations in other ages,
must consult Lomeier's Discourse de Bibliothecis,
where he pursues the history of libraries82 from first
to last, as well among Jews and heathens, as every

Postea quam perventum est in bibliothecam, inventa sunt
armaria inania, &c.
" Aug. de Haeres. u. 80. Audivi de haeresibus scripsisse
sanctum Hieronymum, sed ipsum ejus opusculum in nostra
bibliotheca invenire non potuimus.
78 Hieron. Catal. Scriptor. c. 113. Plurimo labore cor-
ruptam bibliothecam Origenis et Pamphili in membranis
instaurare conatus est.
79 Basil. Ep. 82. t. 3. p. 152.
89 Pontifical. Vit. Hilarii. Fecit oratorium S. Stephani in
baptisterio Lateranensi. Fecit autem et bibliothecas duas
in eodem loco.
81 Hospin. de Templis, lib. 3. c. 7. p. 101.
82 Lomeier. de Bibliothecis, Ultrajecti, 1680. 8vo.

314

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

age of Christians. It is sufficient to my present
purpose to have hinted here, briefly, a succinct ac
count of such of them as were anciently reckoned
• parts or appendants of the Christian churches. And
for the same reason I take notice of schools in this
> place, because we find them sometimes kept in the
churches, or buildings adjoining to the church:
which is evident from the observation which So
crates makes upon the education of Julian the apos
tate, that in his youth he frequented the church,83
where, in those days, the schools were kept. He
. speaks of the schools of grammar and rhetoric,
which, it seems, were then taught at Constantinople
' in some apartment belonging to the church. Here
also it is probable those famous catechetic schools
of Alexandria and Caesarea were kept. For Deme
trius, bishop of Alexandria, is said by Ruffin84 to
have authorized Origen to teach as catechist in the
chm-ch. Which, as I have noted in another place,85
cannot be understood of preaching publicly in the
church; for Origen was then but eighteen years
old, and not in orders, when he first entered upon
the catechetic school ; but it must mean his private
teaching in the school of the church. Which, whe
ther it was in the catechumenia within the church,
or in the baptisteria or pastophoria without the
church, is not very easy nor very material to be de
termined, since it appears to have been in some
place belonging to the church, but not precisely de
termined by any ancient writers. Whilst I am upon
this head, I cannot but take notice of a canon attri
buted to the sixth general council of Constantinople,
y which promotes the setting up of charity schools
' in all country churches. For among those nine
canons which are ascribed to this council in some
ancient collections, and published by Crab, there is
one to this purpose,88 that presbyters in country
towns and villages should have schools to teach all
such children as were sent to them, for which they
should exact no reward, nor take any thing, except
the parents of the children thought fit to make them
any charitable present by way of voluntary oblation.
And another of those canons61 speaks of schools in
churches and monasteries subject to the bishop's
care and direction. From which we may conclude,
that schools were anciently very common appen-
, dants both of cathedral and country churches ; and

therefore it was not improper to hint thus much of
them here, though a more full account of other
things relating to them will make a part in this
work hereafter in its proper place.
Eusebius, in his description of the ^ ]s
church of the twelve apostles, built ^K^Z,
by Constantine at Constantinople, SS^S
takes notice of some other buildings
and places belonging to the church. For that
church, he says, was surrounded with a large atrium,
or area, on each side of which were porticos or
cloisters, and along by them88 first oIkoi /3o<ri\.ioi,
which Valesius renders basilices, but I think Mus-
culus something better, domus basilicce; for they
seem not to mean royal palaces, but the houses of -
the clergy adjoining to the church. Then he adds
Xovrpd, which in this place neither signifies the bap
tistery, nor the fountain before the church, but
baths belonging to the church, which, in a law of
Theodosius,89 that speaks also of the several parts
of the church, where men should be allowed to
take sanctuary, is called more plainly balnea, and
in the Greek copy Xourpd, as well in the Code as in
the Acts of the Council of Ephesus, where the same
law is recited. Eusebius adds to these dvampirrripia,
which Musculus translates deambulatorii recessus,
taking them, I presume, for walks about the church :
but Valesius more properly renders them diverso-
ria ; for they seem to mean the httle hospitals, or •
houses of entertainment for the poor and strangers;
which are the cellules, the httle cells or lodgings, if
I mistake not, spoken of in the foresaid law of the
Theodosian Code. And perhaps they might serve
as lodgings also for such as fled to take sanctuary in
the church. For these might neither eat nor lodge
within the church, but only in some of these out
ward buildings, which, upon that account, were made
as safe a retreat as the very altar itself, by the fore-
mentioned law of Theodosius. And so were the
Karaytiyia, as Eusebius calls them, the habitations
of the porters, or keepers of the church ; and like
wise the gardens, and area, and cloisters enjoyed
the same privilege, being within the bounds of the
7repifloXog, or outward enclosure of the church. And
so far, as to what concerns the privilege of yielding
sanctuary, all these places were reckoned as parts
of the church. But of this, more in the last chap-

88 Socrat. lib. 3. c. 1. Els f3aciXiKr]v, ivda tote tcx irat-
SEVTljpta T)V, &c.
84 Ruffin. lib. 6. Hist. Euseb. c. 3. Demetrius catechi-
zandi ei, id est, docendi magisterium in ecclesia tribuit.
85 Book III. chap. 10. sect. 4.
86 Cone. 6. General, can. 5. ap. Crab. t. 2. p^ 415. Pres
byteri per villas et vicos scholas habeant. Et si quis fide
lium suos parvulos ad discendas literas eiscommendarevult
eos non renuant suscipere, &c. Nihil autem ab eis pretii
exigant, nee aliquid ab eis accipiant, excepto quod eis pa.
rentes eorum charitatis studio sua voluntate obtulerint.
87 Ibid. can. 4. Si quis ex presbyteris voluerit nepotem

s-.iuin aut aliquem consanguineum ad scholas mittere in ec
clesiis sanctorum, aut in ccenobiis, quae nobis ad regendum
commissa sunt, licentiam id fariendi concedimus.
88 Euseb. Vit. Constant, lib. 4. u. 59. OIkoi te /WX"°i
TaXs tTTOals, XovTpd te, Kal dvaKapiiTrjpia irapEfcETEtvETO,
SXXd te irXEXaTa KaTayeopta toXs tov tottov eppovpots, See.
89 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. De his qui ad ecclesias con-
fugiunt, Leg. 4. Ut inter templum quod parietum ilescnp-
simus cinctu, et januas primas ecclesiae, quicquid fuerit
interjacens sive in cellulis, sive in domibus, hortulis, bal-
neis, areis atque -porticibus, confugas interioris templi vice
tueatur.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

315

ter, which treats particularly of the laws relating to
the asyla, and the privilege of taking sanctuary in
the church. I should here have put an end to
Sect 14. r
caStobTuledhi this chapter, -but that some readers
the chorch. would be apt to reckon it an omission,
that I have taken no notice of organs and bells
¦ among the utensils, of the church. But the true
reason is, that there were no such things in use in
the ancient churches for many ages. Music in
• churches is as ancient as the apostles, but instru
mental music not so : for it is now generally agreed
by learned men, that the use of organs came into
the church since the time of Thomas Aquinas,
> anno 1250. For he in his Sums has these words,
Our church does90 not use musical instruments, as
harps and psalteries, to praise God withal, that she
may not seem to judaize. From which our learned
Mr. Gregory, in a pecuhar Dissertation91 that he
has upon this subject, concludes, That there was
• no ecclesiastical use of organs in his time. And
the same inference is made by Cajetan92 and Na
varre93 among the Romish writers. Mr. Wharton94
also has observed, that Marinus Sanutus, who lived
about the year 1290, was the first that brought the
use of wind organs into churches, whence he was sur-
named Torcellus, which is the name for an organ in
the Italian tongue. And about this time Durandus,
in his Rationale,95 takes notice of them as received in
the church, and he is the first author, Mr. Gregory
thinks, that so takes notice of them. The use of
the instrument indeed is much ancienter, but not in
church service; the not attending to which dis
tinction is the thing that imposes upon many
writers. In the East, the instrument was always
in use in the emperors' courts, perhaps from the
time of Julian, who has an epigram96 giving a
handsome description of it. But in the Western
parts the instrument was not so much as known
* till the eighth century. For the first organ that
was ever seen in France, was one sent as a present
to King Pepin by Constantinus Copronymus, the
Greek emperor, anno 766, as Bona himself97 shows
out of Sigebert98 and the ancient Annals of France,60
and Mr. Gregory adds Marianus Scotus, Martin
Polonus, Aventine, Platina, and the Pontifical, for

90 Aquin. 2da 2dae Quaest. 91. Artie. 2. Ecclesia nostra
non assumit instrumenta musica, sicut citharas et psalteria
m Divinas laudes, ne videatur judaizare.
91 Gregory, Discour. of the Singing of the Nicene Creed,
Inter Oper. Posthuma, p. 51.
Cajetan. in Loc. Aquin. et in summula.
93 Navar. de Orat. et Horis Canonicis, cap. 16.
91 Wharton, Append, ad Cave, Histor. Literar. p. 13.
Marinus Sanutus, cognomento Torcellus, Germani cujus-
dam artificis opera usus, organa ilia pneumatica, quae hodie
usurpantur, Italice Torcellos dicta, primus omnium in ec
clesiam induxit: inde datum ei Torcelli nomen.
95 Durand. Rational, lib. 4. c. 34. lib. 5. c. 2.

the same opinion. But now it was only used in
princes' courts, and not yet brought into churches.
Nor was it ever received into the Greek churches,
there being no mention of an organ in all their litur
gies, ancient or modern, if Mr. Gregory's judgment
may be taken. But Durantus, however, contends
for their antiquity both in the Greek and Western
churches, and offers 10° to prove it, but with ill suc
cess. First from Julianus Halicarnassensis, a Greek
writer, anno 510, whom he makes to say, that
organs were used in the church in his time. But
he mistakes the sense of his author, who speaks
not of his own times, but of the times of Job
and the Jewish temple. For commenting upon
those words of Job xxx. 31, " My harp is turned
to mourning, and my organ into the voice of them
that weep ;" he says, There was no prohibition to
use musical instruments, or organs,101 if it was
done with piety, because they were used in the
temple. By which it is plain, he speaks of the
Jewish temple in the singular, and not of Chris
tian temples or churches in the plural, as Duran
tus mistakes him. Next, for the Latin church he
urges the common opinion, which ascribes the in
vention of them to Pope Vitalian, anno 660. But
his authorities for this are no better than Platina
and the Pontifical, which are httle to be regarded
against clear evidences to the contrary. That
which some urge out of Clemens Alexandrinus,102 1
shall not answer as Suicerus m does, (who, with Hos
pinian 1M and some others, wholly decrying the use
of instrumental music in Christian churches, says,
it is an interpolation and corruption of that ancient
author,) but only observe, that he speaks not of what
was then in use in Christian churches, but of what
might lawfully be used by any private Christians,
if they were disposed to use it. Which rather ar
gues, that instrumental music, the lute and harp, of
which he speaks, was not in use in the public churches.
The same may be gathered from the words of St.
Chrysostom, who says105 it was only permitted to
the Jews as sacrifice was, for the heaviness and
grossness of their souls : God condescended to their
weakness, because they were lately drawn off from
idols. But now, instead of organs,106 we may use our
own bodies to praise him withal. Theodoret107 has

96 Vide Vitam Juliani per Morentinum, p. 11.
97 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 25. n. 19.
98 Sigebert. an. 766. " Annales Metenses, an. 757.
199 Durant. de Ritib. lib. 1. e. 13. n. 2.
101 Julian. Catena in Job xxx. p. 465. OvSi KEXpnaBai
dpydvois dirEipr]TO, pet' £uo-£/3tias ytvopivov, birovyE ev
TtO VatO TOVTOlS iKEXpi]VTO.
192 Clem. Alex. Paedag. lib. 2. c. 4.
108 Suicer. Thesaur. voce "Opyavov, p. 501.
m Hospin. de Templis, lib. 2. c. 11. p. 74.
105 Chrysost. in Psal. cxlix. t. 3. p. 634.
198 Id. in Psal. cxliv.
197 Theod. in Psal. xxxii. et cl.

316

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

many the like expressions, in his comments upon
the Psalms and other places. But the author under
the name of Justin Martyr is more express in his
determination, as to matter of fact, telling us plain
ly, that the use108 of singing with instrumental
music was not received in the Christian churches,
as it was among the Jews in their infant state,
but only the use of plain song. So that there
being no use of organs till the twelfth century, I
could not speak of them as utensils of the ancient
churches. For the same reason I reckon not
Sect. 15.
b or the^origmai of berjg am0ng the ancient utensils, be-
»erechcSmbefo8ro cause they are known to be a modern
their invention. invention- For £!„, first three hun
dred years it is certain the primitive Christians did
not meet in their assemblies by the notice of any
public signal : though Amalarius 109 fancies they had
some sounding instruments of wood for this pur
pose. But this is so absurd a fancy, and altogether
groundless dream, to imagine that in an age of per
secutions, when they met privately in the night, they
should betray themselves, as it were, and provoke
their enemies to destroy them, that neither Bona110
nor Baronius '" himself could digest it. But Baronius
has another fancy, which is not much better ground
ed. He supposes there was an order of men ap
pointed on purpose to give private notice to every
member, when and where the assembly was to be
held; and these, he says,112 are called cursores, or
BeoSpopoi, couriers, in the ancient language of the
church. His sole authority for this is Ignatius 113 in
his epistle to Polycarp, where he has indeed the
name, but in a quite different sense from what Ba
ronius explains it to be. For he speaks not of per
sons employed in calling together religious assem
blies, but of messengers to be sent from one country
to another upon the important affairs of the church,
as any one that looks carefully into Ignatius will
easily discern. These he in another place114 calls
BioirpteifivTag, divine ambassadors, as all learned men
agree that it ought to be read; and so the old Latin
translation has it, sacros legates, and Polycarp115
uses the same name when he speaks of those mes
sengers of the churches. These were commonly
some deacons, or others of the inferior clergy, whom
the bishop thought fit to send upon the embassies of
the church. But as to calling of religious assem

blies, we are not sure how it was then performed
save only that it was done in a private way : and
perhaps the deaconesses were the fittest persons to
be employed therein, as being least known or sus
pected by the heathen ; but for want of light we
can determine nothing about it. In the following-
ages we find several other inventions before bells to
call religious assemblies together. In Egypt theyt
seem to have used trumpets, after the manner of the
Jews. Whence Pachomius,116 the father of the
Egyptian monks, makes it one article of his Rule,
that every monk should leave his cell, as soon as he
heard the sound of the trumpet calhng to church.
And the same custom is mentioned by Johannes Cli-
macus,11' who was abbot of Mount Sinai in the sixth
century ; whence we may conjecture, that the old
usage continued till that time in Palestine also.
But in some monasteries they took the office by
turns of going about to every one's cell, and with
the knock of a hammer calhng the monks to church,
which custom is often mentioned by Cassian,118 and
Palladius,119 and Moschus,120 as used chiefly for their
night assemblies, whence the instrument is termed
by them the night signal, and the wakening mallet.
In the monastery of virgins, which Paula, the fa-.
mous Roman lady, set up and governed at Jerusa
lem, the signal was used" to be given by one going
about and singing halleluj ah : for that word was their
call to church, as St. Jerom121 informs us. In
other parts of the East they had their sounding in
struments of wood, as Bona122 shows at large out of
the Acts of the second Council of Nice, and Theo
dorus Studita, and Nicephorus Blemides, and se
veral other writers. And the use of bells was not
known among them, as he observes out of Baro
nius,123 till the year 865, when Ursus Patriciacus,
duke of Venice, made a present of some to Michael
the Greek emperor, who first built a tower to the
church of Sancta Sophia to hang them in. But
whether it be that this custom never generally pre
vailed among the Greeks, or whether it be that the
Turks will not permit them to use any bells, so it
is at present that they have none, but follow their
old custom of using wooden boards or iron plates
full of holes, which they call aiipavrpa, and ^tipoirt/-
pavrpa, because they hold them in their hands, and
knock them with a hammer or mallet to call the
people together to church, as we are informed by

108 Justin. Quaest. et Respons. ad Orthodox, qu. 107. 'Ev
Tats iKKXrjcriais irpoaipETat ek Ttov iapaTtov i) xprjerts rwv
toihtoov bpydvtov, Kal twv dXXtov Ttov vrjiriots ovtwv dppo-
Sitov, Kal bTroXiXEiirTat to aTai airXtos.
109 Amalar. de Officiis, lib. 4. c. 21.
119 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 22. n. 1.
111 Baron, an. 58. n. 108. "2 Ibid. n. 102.
118 Ignat. Ep. ad Polycarp, n. 7.
114 Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. n. 11.
115 Polycarp. Ep. ad Philip, n. 13.
116 Pachom. Regula, c. 3. Bibl. Patr. t. 15. p. 629. Cum

audierit vocem tubae ad collectam vocantis, statim egrediatur.
117 Climac. Scala Paradisi, Gradu 19. Bibl. Patr. t. 5.
p. 244.
118 Cassian. Institut. lib. 2. c. 17. lib. 4. c. 12.
119 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 104. 'EZvirvtarnptov atpvpioii.
120 Moschus, Prat. Spirit. Nocturnum pulsare signum, See.
121 Hieron. Ep. 27. Epitaph. Paulae, p. 178. Post alle-
luya cantatum, quo signo vocabantur ad collectam, nulh
residere licitum erat.
122 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 22. n. 2.
123 Baron, an. 865. t. 10. p. 310.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

31?

Allatius, and a late learned writer121 of our own,
who has been an eye-witness of their customs. Who
first brought bells into use in the Latin church, is
a thing yet undetermined ; some ascribing them
to Pope Sabinianus, St. Gregory's successor, anno
604, and others to Paulinus, bishop of Nola, con
temporary with St. Jerom. This last is certainly
a vulgar error, and seems to owe its rise to no other
foundation, but only that he was bishop of Nola in
Campania, (where bells, perhaps, were first invented,
and thence called nolce and campance,) and some
bold modern writer thence concluded that he was
therefore the author of them. And it might make
the story look a httle more plausible, because that
he also founded a church in Nola. But then it
happened unluckily for this fiction, that he him
self describes his church, and that very minutely,
in his twelfth epistle to Severus, but takes no no
tice of tower or bells, though he is exact in recount
ing all other lesser edifices belonging to his church.
Which, as Bona truly observes, is a shrewd argu
ment, joined with the silence of all other ancient
writers, to prove that he was not the inventor of
them. Yet Bona after all -would have it thought,
that they began to be used in the Latin church im
mediately upon the conversion of Christian empe
rors, because the tintinnabula, or lesser sort of bells,
had been used before by the heathens to the hke
purpose. Which is an argument, I think, that
has very httle weight in it, since there is no ancient
author that countenances his conjecture. For he
produces none before Audoenus Rothomagensis,
that mentions the use of the tintinnabula, nor any
before Bede, that uses the name campana .- both
which authors lived in the seventh century, and
that is an argument that these things were not come
into use among Christians long before, else we
might have heard of 'them in writers before them,
as we frequently do in those that follow after. I
need not now tell any reader, that the popish cus
tom of consecrating,- and anointing, and baptizing
of bells, and giving them the name of some saint, is
a very modern invention. Baronius carries it no
higher than the time of John XIII., anno 968, who
consecrated the great bell of the Lateran church,
and gave it the name of John,125 from whence he
thinks the custom was authorized in the church.
Menardus126and Bona127 would have it thought a
little more ancient, but yet they do not pretend to
carry it higher than one age more, to the time of
Charles the Great, in whose time some rituals, Me-
nardus says, had a form of blessing and anointing
bells, under this title or rubric, Ad signum ecclesics
benedicendum, A form for blessing of bells. And it

121 Dr. Smith's Account of the Greek Church, p. 70.
® Baron, an. 968. 1. 10. p. 810.
125 Menard. Not. in Sacramental. Gregor. p. 207.
Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. t. 22. n. 7.

is not improbable but that such a corruption might
creep into the rituals of those times, because, we
find among the Capitulars of Charles the Great, a
censure and prohibition of that practice, ut clocas
non baptizent,m that they should not baptize clocks,
which is the old German name for a bell. But what
was then prohibited, has since been stiffly avowed
and practised, and augmented also with some ad
ditional rites, to make bells a sort of charm against
storms and thunder, and the assaults of Satan, as
the reader that pleases may see the ceremony de
scribed by Sleidan129 and Hospinian130 out of the
old Pontificals of the Romish church. But I fear
my readers will begin to accuse me now, instead of
an omission, of making too long a digression upon
this subject, and therefore I return to the business
of ancient churches.

CHAPTER VIII.
OF THE ANATHEMATA, AND OTHER ORNAMENTS
OF THE ANCIENT CHURCHES.
After having taken a distinct sur
vey of the chief parts and buildings, what the undents
Jr meant by their ana-
and common utensils, of the ancient «»»»<» m
churches.
churches, it will not be amiss to cast
our eyes upon the ornamental parts thereof, and
consider a little after what manner the first Chris
tians beautified their houses of prayer. The rich
ness and splendour of some of their fabrics, and the .
value of their utensils belonging to the altar, many
of which were of silver and gold, I have already
taken notice of: what therefore I shall further add
in this place, concerns only the remaining orna
ments of the church, some of which were a little
uncommon, and but rarely mentioned by modern
writers. The general name for all sorts of orna
ments in churches, whether in the structure itself,
or in the vessels and utensils belonging to it, was
anciently anathemata ; which though it most com
monly signifies persons devoted or accursed hy ex
communication or separation from the church, yet
it sometimes also denotes things given to God, and
devoted to his honour and service. In which sense
all the sacred vessels and utensils of the church,
and all gifts and ornaments belonging to it, were
called anathemata, because they were set apart
from common use to God's honour and service.
Some of the Greeks distinguish thus between
dvairipaTa and dvaS/kpara, as Suicerus has ob-

128 Capitular. Caroli Magni, cited by Durantus de Riti-
bus, lib. 1. u. 22. ...2.
129 Sleidan. Commentar. lib. 21. p. 388.
180 Hospin. de Templis, lib. 4. t. 9. p. 113.

318

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

served1 out of Chrysostom,2 and Hesychius,3 andBal-
zamon,4 and Zonaras, making the first to signify or
naments of the church, or things devoted to God's
honour ; and the other, things accursed, or devoted
to destruction. But others of them do not so nicely
observe this distinction, but use the same word to
signify both things devoted to God's use, and things
devoted to destruction, as Suicerus shows in the
same place out of Theodoret, Cyril of Alexandria,
the author of the questions ad Orthodoxos under
the name of Justin Martyr, and some others. Here
I take both words only as signifying gifts or orna
ments of churches. In which sense dvaSti)para is
used by St. Luke, xxi. 5, for the gifts and orna
ments of the temple. And so Eusebius, describing
the hemisphere or altar part of the church of Jeru
salem, and the twelve pillars which supported and
surrounded it, says, The heads of the pillars were
adorned with silver bowls, which Constantine set
up as his beautiful avd^pa, that is, his gift or of
fering3 to his God. And a little after he says
again, He adorned it6 with innumerable gifts of
silver and gold and precious stones. So that all
the rich vessels and utensils of the altar, the rich
vestment which the bishop put on when he ad
ministered the sacrament of baptism, which was in
terwoven with gold, and which, as Theodoret7 and
Sozomen8 tell us, was one of Constantine's gifts to
the church of Jerusalem ; these, I say, and all other
such like ornaments belonging to the church, as
well as what contributed to the beauty and splen
dour of the fabric itself, were all reckoned among
the anathemata of the church. But in a more re
strained sense, the anathemata sometimes denote
more particularly those gifts, which were hanged
upon pillars and set in public view, as memorials of
some great mercy which men had received from
God. In allusion to which Socrates9 thinks the
term anathema is used for excommunication, be
cause thereby a man's condemnation is published
and proclaimed, as if it were hanged up upon a
pillar. St. Jerom also had his eye plainly upon
this custom, when he speaks of men's gifts 10 hang
ing in the church upon golden cords, or being set
in golden sockets or sconces. For the word funale
signifies both. And though he rather advises men
to offer their gifts to the true temples of Christ,
meaning the bodies and souls of the poor ; yet that
implies another way of offering their gifts to be in
common use, that is, hanging up their anathemata,

or donaria, (as he with other Latin writers calls
them,) in the material temples. Vide Sidon. Apol-
Knar. lib. 4. Ep. 18. et Paulin. Natali 6. Felicis.
Among these there was one par-
ticular kind of gifts, which they call- t,Sofite,taH
ed iKTviedipara, because they were a SKTaSt'S^u
sort of symbolical memorials, or hiero- lnl° churdMI-
glyphical representations ofthe kindness and favour
which in any kind they had received. When first
they began to be offered and set up in churches, is
not very easy to determine : but I think Bochart's
conjecture is very probable," that it was about the
middle of the fifth age, because Theodoret is one of
the first writers that takes notice of them. He
tells us in one of his Therapeutics, or Discourses to
the Gentiles,12 that when any one obtained the be
nefit of a signal cure from God in any member of
his body, as his eyes, or hands, or feet, &c, he then
brought his UrvTruipa, the effigies or figure of that
part in silver or gold, to be hanged up in the church
to God, as a memorial of his favour. This, Bochart
thinks, was done by way of emulation of the Gen
tiles, among whom it was customary for such as had
escaped any great peril or disaster, to consecrate
some monument of their by-past evils to their gods
that delivered them. As they that had escaped a
shipwreck, dedicated a tablet to Neptune or Isis,
representing the manner of their shipwreck. So
gladiators hanged up their arms to Hercules ; and
slaves and captives, when they got their liberty and
were made free, offered a chain to the lares. And
so we read, 1 Sam. vi. 4, that the Philistines sent
their golden emerods and mice, figures of the things
by which they had suffered, as an offering to the
God of Israel. I shall make no further observation
upon this practice, but only remark how far the
Romish church is degenerate in this matter from
the ancient^ who offer now to men more than they
do to God, and fill their churches with gifts, ac
knowledging some tutelar saints as their chief pa
trons and benefaotors.
But to proceed with the ancient gcA3
churches : another ornament, which wSomedw""^!-
-, j, -n t_ . Hone of Scripture
served lor use as well as beauty, was bitten upon the
their comely and pertinent inscrip
tions, many of which are preserved and still to be
read in ancient authors. These were of two sorts,
some taken out of Scripture ; others, useful compo
sitions of men's own inventing. The walls of the
church seem commonly to have had some select

1 Suicer. Thesaur. voce 'AvaSriipa.
2 Chrysost. Horn. 16. in Rom. 3 Hesych. Lexicon.
4 Balzamon et Zonar. in Can. 3. Concil. in Tcmplo Sophia?.
5 Euseb. de Vita Constant, lib. 3. u. 38. 'AvaSrnpa KaX-
Xi^ov ettoieXto Tip auTOv Oeoj.
6 Ibid. c. 40. 'EKoapEl S' aiirov dStr)yr)TOis kuXXeo-i dva-
SilpaTtov xpvcrov, Sec.
7 Theodor. lib. 2. <.-. 27. 6 Sozom. lib. 4. c. 25.

9 Socrat. lib. 7. c. 34.
10 Hieron. Ep. 27. ad Eustoch. in Epitaphio Paul*. Jac-
tent alii pecunias et in corbonara Dei aera congesta, funah-
busque aureis dona pendentia, &c. Id. Ep. 13. ad Paulin.
Verum Christi templum anima credentis est.  Illi offer
donaria. 11 Bochart. Hierozoie. part. 1. lib. 2. cap. 36. p. 368.
12 Theodor. Serm. 8. de Martyr, t. 4. p. 606.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

319

portions of Scripture written upon them, containing
some proper admonition and instruction for all in
general, or else more peculiar to that order of per
sons who had their station in such a particular part
or division of the church. Thus I have observed
before,13 out of St. Ambrose,11 that the place of the
vir°ins had that text of St. Paul sometimes written
by it on the walls, " There is difference between a
wife and a virgin ; the unmarried woman careth for
the things of the Lord, how she may please the
Lord," &c. And by this one place we may judge
how other parts of the church were embellished
and adorned with proper instructions out of the
Holy Scripture.
„ . But beside these lessons out of the
Sect. 4.
icriJtaoftnmS; inspired writings, it was very usual
compo.ii.on. to naye otner inscriptions of human
composure written on the several parts and utensils
of many churches. Of which I have already given
some instances out of Paulinus, speaking of the
catechumenia and secretarial of the church. And
the curious reader may find abundance more of the
same nature, upon the baptistery, and the altar, and
the frontispiece,16 too long to be here inserted. I
shall only here repeat two short distichs written
over the doors of the church, one on the outside,
exhorting men to enter the church with pure and
peaceable hearts, on this wise :
Pax tibi sit, quicunque Dei penetralia Christi
Pectore pacifico candidus ingrederis.
And the other on the inner side of the doors, re
quiring men, when they go out of the church with
their bodies, to leave at least their hearts behind
them. Quisquis ab aede Dei perfectis ordine votis
Egrederis, remea corpore, corde mane.
Many other the like inscriptions may be seen in
Sidonius Apollinaris,17 and other writers of that
age ; but I will only add one more, which, for the
curiosity of it, may deserve to be here inserted. It
is the inscription which the emperor Justinian is
said to have written round about the altar of the
church of Sancta Sophia. The altar itself, Cedrenus
tells us, was a most inimitable work : for it was
artificially composed of all sorts of materials that

13 Book VIII. chap. 5. sect. 9.
11 Ambros. ad Virgin. Lapsam. ls Chap. 6. sect. 22.
10 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad. Sever. >7 Sidon. lib. 4. Ep. 18.
_ 18 Cedren. Hist. Compend. an. 32. Justin, p. 386. Td ad
ek two aiov trot wpotrtpipopEV ol SovXo'i trov XpttrTi, Sec.
19 Isidor. Origen. lib. 19. Laquearia sunt qua; cameram
Bubtegunt et ornant : quae et lacunaria dicuntur, quod lacus
quosdarn quadratos vel rotundos, ligno vel gypso vel colori-
bus habeant pictos, cum signis intermicantibus.
20 Procop. de jEdificiis Justin, lib. 1. cited by Valesius,
Not. in Euseb. de Vit. Const, lib. 3. c. 36.
21 Euseb. lib. 3. de Vit. Const, c. 36 Td Si tT,s elam

either the earth or the sea could afford, gold, silver,
and all kinds of stones, wood, metals, and other
things. Which being melted and mixed together,
a most curious table was framed out of this univer
sal mass ; and about it was this inscription : " We
thy servants,18 Justinian and Theodora, offer unto
thee, O Christ, thy own gifts out of thy own, which
we beseech thee favourably to accept, O Son and
Word of God, who wast made flesh and crucified for
our sakes. Keep us in the true orthodox faith ; and
this empire which thou hast committed to our trust,
augment and preserve it to thy own glory, ¦npta^iiaig
Tr\g dyiag 6eot6kov, by the intercessions of the holy
mother of God and Virgin Mary." The reader will
not wonder at this last part of this inscription in
the sixth age, when the prayers of saints in hea
ven were thought available without directly praying
to them.
Another considerable part of the Sect 6
ornament of churches was the beauti- eaicworkVS^n'the
fying of the roof, or camera, as they a"cle 
then called it. This was done two ways, either by
Mosaic work, which they call musivum ; or by la-
cunary work, dividing the roof into several pannels,
by architects termed laquearia, or lacunaria, from .
lacus, some of which were round, and some square,
(as Valesius observes out of Isidore,19) and divided
either with wood, or plaster, or colours, from each
other, and then either gilded or painted, as men's
fancies led them. Both these were used to adorn
the ancient churches. The temple of Sancta Sophia
was curiously wrought in Mosaic or chequer work,
as Procopius20 relates; and Constantine's church at
Jerusalem was lacunary : for Eusebius21 says, the
whole roof was divided into certain carved tables or
panels, and all laid over with shining gold. And
this he calls a little before Kapdpav XaKtovapiav, a
lacunary roof adorned with gold. Some churches,
as that of Paulinus22 of Nola, were beautified both
ways. For Paulinus says, the roof of his apsis, or
altar part, was Mosaic work ; but the body of the
church, and the galleries on both sides the church,
were lacunary, that is, divided into panels, as we see
in many of our modern churches. The reader that
pleases may see a great deal more of this matter in
St. Jerom, who often speaks of their lacunary "
golden roofs, and walls adorned with crust of mar-

rr-rtyus yXvepaXs epaTveopaTwv diri]pTtcrpEva, Sec. Vid.
c. 32.
22 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever, p. 150 et 151. Apsidem solo
et parietibus marmoratam camera musivo illusa clarificat.
— Totum vero extra concham basilicae spatium alto et lacu-
nato culmine geminis utrinque porticibus dilatatur.
23 Hieron. lib. 2. in Zechar. viii. Non solum laquearia et
tecta fulgent ia auro, sed parietes diversi marmoris crustis
vestiti. Id. Ep. 2. ad Nepotian. Marmora nitent auro,
splendent laquearia, gemmis altare distinguittir, &c. It.
Ep. 30. Epitaph. Fabiolce, t. 4. Sonabant psalmi. et aurata
templorurn tecta reboans in sublime quatiebat Alleluya. It.

320

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

ble ; and pillars with their chapiters of shining gold;
and gates inlaid with ivory and silver ; and altars
distinguished and beset with precious stones and
gold. Though he was no great admirer of these
things himself, but a greater friend to charity.
„ . „ They of the Romish church, when
Sect. 6. •'
irrSgeraKdm they are describing the ancient
flSto/Cdred churches, commonly add to these
other ornaments that of pictures and
images, according to the modern custom : and no
thing will content them, but to have them as an
cient as churches themselves, that is, to be derived
from apostolical practice. To this purpose, they
have invented an apostolical council at Antioch,
wherein not only the use, but the worship of images
is pretended to be authorized by the apostles. And
the credit of this council is stiffly defended. by Ba
ronius,21 and Turrian, and Binius, and many such
over-zealous writers. But Petavius,25 and Pagi,26
and other writers of candour and judgment, give it
up as a mere forgery, and freely confess it to be a
fiction of the modern Greeks. Petavius also27 owns,
that for three or four of the first ages, there was
little or no use of images in churches. And indeed
the evidences are so plain, that none but they who
resolve to wink hard can deny them. The silence
of all ancient authors is good evidence in this case.
The silence of the heathen is further confirmation.
For they never recriminated, or charged the use of
images upon them. Nay, in the last persecution,
when they often plundered and pillaged their
churches, we never read of any images seized in
them, though we have several particular catalogues
or inventories of what they found there, left upon
record by the heathen. It is a very full one which
Baronius29 first pubhshed, and is since inserted
among the Collections29 at the end of Optatus.
There is a particular breviat of all things found by
the persecutors in the church of Paul, bishop of

Cirta in Numidia, where we find mention made of
cups, and flagons, and bowls, and water-pots, and
lamps, and candlesticks, and torches, and coats, and
other clothing for men and women, which in those
days seem to be laid up in store, either for the poor
or the ascetics of the church : but of images or pic
tures there is not a syllable, which is at least a good
negative argument that there was no such thing
then in their churches. Nay, there are positive
proofs in the fourth age, that in some places they
were not then allowed to be set up in churches. As
in Spain, in the time of the council of Eliberis, anno
305, there was a positive decree against them. For
one of the canons of that council runs in these words :
We decree30 that pictures ought not to be in churches,
lest that which is worshipped and adored be paint
ed upon the walls. And it was certainly so in Cy
prus to the end of this century, as appears from that
famous epistle of Epiphanius to John, bishop of Je
rusalem, translated by St. Jerom, where, speaking of
his passage through Anablatha, a village of Pales
tine, he says, he found there a veil hanging before
the doors of the church, wherein was painted31 the
image of Christ, of some saint ; for he did not well
remember whether it was : but seeing, however, the
image of a man hanging in the church against the
authority of Scripture, he tore it in pieces, and ad
vised the guardians of the church rather to make a
winding-sheet of it, to bury some poor man in.
Some storm against this passage, as an interpolation
of some modern Greek iconoclast; which is the
common evasion of Bellarmine32 and Baronius,93 and
the rest that follow them. But Petavius31 owns it
to be genuine, and says, images were not allowed in
the time of Epiphanius in the Cyprian churches :
which is certainly the truth of the matter, when
men have used all their arts and shifts to persuade
the contrary. The common writers of the Romish
church are as uneasy about the council of Eliberis.

Ep. 8. ad Demetriad. Virgin. Alii aedificent ecclesias;
vestiant parietes marmorum crustis; cblumnarum moles atl-
vehant, earumque deaurent capita, pietiosum ornatum non
sentientia ; ebore argentoque valvas, et gemmis aurata dis-
tinguant altaria. Non reprehendo, non abnuo. Unusquis
que in sensu suo abundet. Meliusque est hoc facere, quam
repositis opibus incubare. Sed tibi aliud propositum est
Christum vestire in pauperibus, &c.
24 Baron, an. 102. n. 19 et 20. Binius, Not. in Cone. An
tioch. Cone. t. 1. p. 62.
23 Petav. Dngmat. Theol. de Inearnat. lib. 15. ,.. ]4. n.
5. Quod ad ilium canonem apostolicum attinet, quem pri
mus edidit in lucem Franciscus Turrianus, eum putosuppo-
sititium esse, &c.
26 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 56. n. 3.
27 Petav. ibid. t. 13. n. 3. Pagi, ibid. Certuin est, ima
gines Christi, et maxime statuas, primis ecclesiae saeculis
non fuisse substitutas loco idolorum, nee fidelium venerationi
expositas. 28 Baron, an. 303. n. 12.
29 Gesta Purgation. Caecilian. ad calcem Optati, p. 266.

In brevi, sic: calices duo aurei: item calices sex argentei:
urceola sex argentea : cucumellum argenteum : luccrnae
argenteae septem : cereof'ala duo : candelae breves aeneie
cum lucernis suis septem: Item lucei-nac acneee undecim
cum catenis suis. Tunicae muliebres 82 : mafortea38: tu-
nicae viriles 1 6 : caligae viriles paria 13 : caligae muliebres
paria 47 : coplee rusticanae 19.
30 Cone. Eliber. c. 36. Placuit picturas in ecclesia esse
non debere, ne quod colitur aut adoratur, in parietibus de-
pingatur. 31 Epiphan. Ep. ad Johan. Hierosol. Inveni ibi velum
pendens in furibus ejusdem ecclesiae tinctum atque depictum,
et habens imaginem quasi Christi vel sancti cujusdam. Non
enim satis memini cujus imago fuerit. Cum ergo hoc vi-
dissem in ecclesia Christi contra autoritatem Scripturarum
hominis pendere imaginem, scidi illud, et magis dedi con
silium custodibus ejusdem loci, ut pauperem mortuum eo
obvolverent et efferrent.
82 Bellarmin. de Imagin. lib. 2. c. 9.
33 Baron, an. 392. p. 668.
34 Petav. de Inearnat. lib. 15. t, 14. n. 8.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

321

Baronius flies to the old refuge of imposture in that
single canon ; others say, they are all of the same
stamp. Others, who think this a httle too crude and
bold, soften the matter by saying, images were only
prohibited for fear the Gentiles should think Chris
tians worshipped stocks and stones ; or it was only
images painted upon the walls that were prohibited,
because these were liable to be abused by the per
secutors, which others, that might be removed, were
not liable to. So Sylvius, in his notes upon this
canon. Others fly to the new notion of disciplina
arcani, and tell us it was only the images of God
and the Trinity that are here prohibited, (not the
images of saints and martyrs,) and that only for fear
the catechumens and Gentiles should be let into
the secrets of their religion, and understand the
mystery of the Trinity before their time. Which
pleasant notion was first invented by Mendoza,35
approved by Cardinal Bona,36 and highly magnified
by Schelstrate,37 and Pagi,38 as a clear solution to
the protestants' argument against the worship of
images drawn from this canon. But yet this . does
not satisfy either Albaspiny or Petavius. For Al
baspiny thinks the images39 of God and the Trinity
were prohibited for fear the catechumens and new
converts should entertain wrong notions and dis
honourable thoughts of the majesty of God, when
they saw him, whom they were first taught to be
lieve invisible, and immaterial, and incomprehensi
ble, afterward circumscribed in visible lines and
colours. Which is a reason that will always hold
against making images of the Deity, though it does
not give the full sense of this canon, which cer
tainly prohibits the use of images in general, and
not only those of the Trinity, in churches. And
therefore Petavius10 gives a more general reason
for the prohibition of all images whatsoever at that
time, because the remembrance of idolatry was yet
fresh in men's minds, and therefore it was not ex
pedient to set up images in the oratories and tem
ples of Christians. So that, in fact, now the case is
clear, that Christians for near four hundred years
did not allow of images in churches. Tertullian41
indeed once mentions the picture of a shepherd
bringing home his lost sheep, upon a communion
cup in some of the cathohc churches. But as this
is a singular instance only of a symbohcal represent-

,s Mendoza, Not. in Cone. Eliber. c. 36. Cone. 1. 1. p. 1240.
86 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 16. n. 2.
37 Schelstrat. Disciplina Arcani, e. 6. art. 3.
38 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 55. u. 5.
" Albaspin. Not. in can. 36. Concil. Eliber.
10 Petav. de Inearnat. lib. 15. u. 14. n.8. Recentem ad-
hue idololatriae memoriam fuisse: ob idque nondum expe-
disse Christianorum in oratoriis ac templis imagines statui.
11 Tertul. de Pudicit. c. 10. Si forte patrocinabitur pas
tor, quem in calice depingis— At ego ejus pastoris Scrip-
turam haurio, qui non potest frangi.
42 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 21 . v

ation, or emblem, so it is the only instance Petavius
pretends to find in all the three first ages. In the
middle of the fourth age, the Christians of Paneas,
or CcEsarea-Philippi, showed a little respect to the
statue of Christ, which the Syrophcenician woman,
who had been cured of an issue of blood, was sup
posed to have erected in honour of our Saviour.
For when Julian had removed it, to set his own in
the room, and the heathen out of hatred to Christ
had used it contumeliously, and broken it in pieces
by dragging it about the streets ; Sozomen42 tells us,
the Christians gathered the fragments together,
and laid them up in the church, where they were
kept to his own time. Philostorgius,13 in telling the
same story, adds one circumstance, which well ex
plains Sozomen's meaning : for he says, they were
laid up in the diaconicum or vestry of the church,
and there carefully kept indeed, but by no means
worshipped or adored. So that it was not a statue
set up in a church, but only the fragments of it laid
up in the repository of the church ; and there not
to be worshipped, but only to be kept from violence,
and that the heathen might offer no more such
barbarous indignities to it. Which was so far a
commendable act, but yet no proof of images being
set up publicly in churches.
Yet it is not denied, but that in
' Sect. 7.
some places, about the latter end of . First,b,'ol'BhSJ."
r ' by 1 aulinussind hia
the fourth century, pictures of saints ™°i™H'rby Pd.-
and martyrs began to creep into SdeV"theefoorth
churches. Paulinus, bishop of Nola, ce" ury'
to keep the country people employed, and prevent
their running into riot and excess, when they met
together lo celebrate the anniversary festival of the
dedication of the church of St. Felix, ordered the
church to be painted with the images of saints and
Scripture histories, such as those of Esther, and
Job, and Tobit, and Judith, as he himself44 ac
quaints us in his writings. And some intimations
are given of the beginnings of the same practice in
other places by St. Austin, who often speaks of the
pictures 15 of Abraham sacrificing his son, and of
the pictures16 of Peter and Paul, and of some wor
shippers of pictures17 too, but they have not his
approbation. Nor had they the approbation of the
catholic church : for he says, the church con
demned them, as ignorant, and superstitious, and

43 Philostorg. lib. 7. c. 3. Tov dvSptdvTa pETao-Tnerd-
pEvot iv Tto Tr}i iKKXr)trias SlaKovtKto, T« irpilrovTa iBEpd-
itevov, trEfSoVTES piv t) irpotrKvvov vtes ovSapios.
" Paulin. Natal. 9. Felicis, p. 615. Propterea visum
nobis opus utile, totis Felicis domibus pictura illudere sancta.
Id. Natal. 10. p. 617. Martyribus mediampictis pia nomina
signant, &c.
45 Aug. cont. Faust, lib. 22. c. 73. t. 6.
46 Id. de Consensu Evangel, lib. 1. c. 10.
47 Id. de Morib. Eccl. Cathol. lib. 1. c. 34. Novi multos
esse sepulchrorum et picturarum adoratores — quos et ipsa
ecclesia condemnat, et tanquam malos filioscorrigere studet.

322

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

self-willed persons, and daily endeavoured to correct
them, as untoward children.
Sect 8 From which any rational and un-
ki„Tise llTsnopI prejudiced person will easily conclude,
cffrSi" a»„„° [he that the first design of bringing pic-
same time. tures jnto churches, was only for or
nament or history, and not for worship and adora
tion, as St. Austin and Philostorgius have declared.
And this may be further confirmed from what Pau
linus himself and other writers assure us of, that at
first the pictures of the hving had their place in the
church, as well as the dead, and bishops and kings
were joined with the saints and martyrs. Paulinus
his own picture was set with St. Martin's in the
baptistery of the church built by Severus, and Pau
linus himself19 wrote two epigrams by way of in
scription to be set by them, to teach men not to
worship, but to imitate them, the one as a saint,
the other as a penitent sinner. Baronius thinks19
Acacius, bishop of Constantinople, was the first that
had this honour done him, anno 488. But Valesius50
judiciously corrects his error, and observes it to have
been customary long before. And the instance I
have given in Paulinus sufficiently confirms his ob
servation. Theodorus Lector " speaks of the same
honour done to Macedonius, bishop of Constantino
ple, in the remark that he makes upon Timctheus
his successor, that whatever church he went into,
he would never begin Divine service, till the images
of Macedonius were first pulled down. Suidas
takes notice of the picture of Gennadius, patriarch
of Constantinople, being joined with that of Christ,52
and Christ speaking to him in these words, " De
stroy this temple, and in thy successor's days I will
raise it up again." Damascen, a great advocate for
images,53 pretends to carry this practice as high as
Constantine, telling us from Socrates, that Con
stantine ordered his own images to be set up in
temples : but, as Mr. Spanheim51 has observed, there
is something of fraud in the relation : for Socrates
speaks not of Christian churches, but of heathen55
temples, in which having demolished their idols, he
caused his own images to be placed in their room.
But admitting it had been as Damascen pretends,
it makes nothing to the purpose for which he alleges
it, which was to prove the worship of images in
churches.

For now, I presume, no one will
suspect that the pictures of bishops But neither PiC.
f , . . . , , , tures of the lmng
and kings were set up in churches to or d«d designed &
° x worship.
be worshipped, while (hey were living
among other men, but only designed to be an orna
ment to the church, or a civil honour to the per
sons. And the same must be concluded of the pic
tures ofthe dead, since the first introducers of them
intermixed their own pictures with them. Rut it
must be owned, that this superstition presently fol
lowed upon the setting up of pictures in churches :
yet it was never approved, till the second council of
Nice, anno 787. made a decree in favour of it. Se-
renus, bishop of Marseilles, ordered all images to be
defaced, and cast out of all the churches of his dio
cese : and though Gregory the Great blamed him
for this, and defended the use of pictures in churches
as innocent, and useful for instruction of the vul
gar,66 yet he equally condemns the worship and
adoration of them. And when the council of Nice
had established it, in opposition to the council of
Constantinople of three hundred and thirty-eight
bishops, held anno 754, who had before condemned
it, the decrees of Nice were rejected by all the
Western world, the popes of Rome only excepted.
The council of Frankfort in Germany, the council
of Paris in France, and some other councils in Bri
tain, agreed unanimously to condemn them, and for
some hundred years after the worship of images
was not received in any of the three foresaid na
tions. But it is as much beyond my design to pur
sue this history any further, as it is needless, there
being so many excellent discourses on this particu
lar subject, especially those of Mr. Daille,57 Bishop
Stillingfleet,58 and Spanheim,59 who have omitted
nothing on this head that was necessary to answer
the cavils of their Romish antagonists, or give sa
tisfaction to a curious reader.
All I shall add further, therefore, Sec, 10
upon this subject, is only two observa- „r^heTr°nf"j°aitow.
tions, which Petavius himself60 has anerVe»°econdw-
made for us. The first is, that the an
cients never allowed any pictures of God the Father,
or the Trinity, to be set up in their churches. For
this he produces the testimonies of Origen,6' St.
Ambrose,62 and St. Austin,63 who particularly pro
nounces it to be an impious thing for any Christian

48 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever, p. 142. Adstat perfectee Mar-
tinus regula vitae: Paulinus veniam quo mereare docet.
Hunc peccatores, ilium spectate beati: exemplar Sanctis
ille sit, iste reis.
49 Baron, an. 488. p. 438. Ex Suida, voce Acacius.
50 Vales. Not. in Theodor. Lector, lib. 2. p. 167.
51 Theodor. Lector, lib. 2. p. 563.
52 Suidas Lexicon, voce Acacius.
63 Damascen. Orat. 3. de Imagin.
64 Spanheim. Histor. Imagin. sect. 1. p. 14.
55 Socrat. lib. 1. e. 19. E'tKovas Si i-iis ISias iv toXs vaoXs
airiStETO.

M Gregor. lib. 9. Ep. 9. Quia sanctorum imagines ado-
rari vetuisses, omnino laudavimus : fregisse vero reprehendi-
mus, &c. Vid. lib. 7. Ep. 110.
57 Dallseus de Imaginibus.
58 Stillingfl. Defence of the Discourse of Idolatry, &c.
59 Spanheim. Historia Imaginum, Lugdun. Bat. 1686. 8vo.
60 Petav. de Inearnat. lib. 15. c. 14. n. 1.
61 Origen. cont, Cels. lib. 6.
62 Ambros. in Psal. cxviii. Octonar. 12.
83 Aug. de Fide et Symbolo, c. 7. Tale simulacbrum
nefas est Christiano in templo collocare, multo magis in
corde nefarium est.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

323

to set up any such image in the church, and much
more to do it in his heart. Nay, Pope Gregory II.,
who was otherwise a great stickler for images, in
that very epistle64 which he wrote to the emperor
Leo to defend the worship of them, denies it to be
lawful to make any image of the Divine nature.
And the second council of Nice itself was against
it, as is evident from the epistles of Germanus,
bishop of Constantinople,65 and John, bishop of
Thessalonica, which are recited with approbation in
the Acts of that council. And Damascen, following
the doctrine of the same council, says, It is as great
impiety as it is folly,55 to make any image of the
Divine nature, which is invisible, incorporeal, in-
circumscriptible, and not to be figured by the art of
man. And therefore in all ancient history we never
meet with any one instance of picturing God the
Father, because it was supposed he never appeared
in any visible shape, but only by a voice from hea
ven. Upon this account Paulinus, where he de
scribes a symbolical representation of the three Di
vine Persons, made in the painting of a church,
makes a lamb to be the symbol of Christ, and a
dove the symbol of the Holy Ghost, but for God
the Father67 nothing but a voice from heaven. And
this they did in compliance with that text in Deut.
iv. 12. " The Lord spake unto you out of the midst
of the fire : ye heard the voice of his words, but
saw no similitude, only ye heard a voice." By which
we see how much the present church of Rome has
outgone the first patrons even of image worship it
self, by allowing pictures of the Deity commonly in
their temples, which the ancients reckoned to be
impious and absurd, and is acknowledged to be an
abuse fit to be corrected by Cassander,68 though
Petavius, after all his concessions and acknowledg
ments of the novelty ofthe thing, and its contrariety
to ancient custom, endeavours to find out some
colour for the present practice.
His other acknowledgment of a dif-
Noru>oaitjBtatues ference between the practice of the
or massy images,
>nd "plLrer'ald ancient church, and that of his own at
inerthrany^S: this <%> is> that the ancients did not
approve of massy images, or statues of
wood, or metal, or stone, but only pictures or paint
ings to be used in churches. This he proves from the
testimonies of Germanus, bishop of Constantinople,09
and Stephanus Bostrensis, both alleged in the Acts

61 Gregor. 2. Ep. 1. ad Leon, in Act. 4. Cone. Nicen. 2.
65 German. Ep. ad Leon. Act. 4. Cone. Nic. 2.
06 Damascen. de Fide Orthodox, lib. 4. c. 17. Hapa-
eppotrvvns aKpas Kal iaE^Eias to axripaTtQEiv to BeXov, Sec.
Id. Orat. 1 et 2. de Imagin. passim.
"Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever, p. 150. Pleno coruscat
Tnnitas mysterio; stat Christus agno; vox Patris ccelo to
nal : et per columbam Spiritus Sanctus fluit.
69 Cassand. Consultat. Sect, de Imagin. p. 179. Illud
quoque inter abusus ponendum est, quod etiam Divinitati in
1 mutatis deformatione simulachrum effingitur, quod veteres
Y 2

of the second Council of Nice : which shows, that
massy images or statues were thought to look too
much like idols even by that worst of councils. But
some plead the authority of Gregory Nazianzen70
for statues in churches, to whom Petavius answers,
that he speaks not of statues in temples, but of
profane statues in other places. Which is a very
just and true observation. For it is most certain
from the writings of St. Austin71 and Optatus,72 that
there were no statues in that age in their churches,
or upon their altars, because they reckon both
those to be mere heathenish customs. And Cas
sander observes 73 the same out of the writings of
Gregory the Great. He also notes, that till the
time of the sixth general council, the images of
Christ were not usually in the effigies or figure of
a man, but only symbolically represented under the
type of a lamb : and so the Holy Ghost was repre
sented under the type or symbol of a dove : but
that council forbade 71 the picturing of Christ any
more in the symbol of a lamb, and ordered it only
to be drawn in the effigies of a man. I presume, by
this time the worship of images was begun, anno 692.
And it was now thought indecent to pay their de
votions to the picture of a lamb, and therefore they
would no longer endure it to be seen in the church.
I have been the more particular in recounting and
explaining these things distinctly, that the reader
might have in one short view the rise and progress
of that grand superstition, which has so overspread
the church and defaced its worship in the matter of
images, which were introduced at first only for his
torical use, to be laymen's books, and a sort of orna
ments for the church, though, as the event proved,
the most dangerous of any other.
There was one way more of adorn- Sect ]2
ing churches, which I should not ch°Uw„h'rgw™
have thought worth mentioning, but i""i b"mc"es-
for its innocency and natural simplicity ; that is,
the custom of garnishing and decking them with
flowers and branches. Which was not done at any
certain times for any pretended • mystery, but only
to make them more decent and fit for a body of
men to meet in. St. Austin takes notice of the
custom, speaking of one75 who carried away with
him some flowers from off the altar. And Paulinus,
in his poetical way, refers to it likewise.76 But St.
Jerom does it the greatest honour, to give it a place

absurdum et nefarium judicassent.
69 German. Ep. ad Thom. Claudiopol. in Act. 4. Cone.
Nic. 2. Stephan. Bostren. ibid. Act. 2.
'9 Nazian. Ep.49. 71 Aug. in Psal.cxiii. 72 Optat. lib. 2.
78 Cassand. Consult, de Imagin. p. 165.
« Cone. Trull, c. 83.
75 Ail", de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. c. 8. Abscedens aliquid de
altari florum, quod occurrit, tulit, &c.
78 Paulin. Natal. 3. Felicis, p. 541. Ferte Deo pueri
laudem, pia solvite vota: spargite flore solum, praetexite
limina sertis.

324

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

in his panegyric upon his friend Nepotian, making
it a part77 of his commendable character, that he
took care to have every thing neat and clean about
the church, the altar bright, the walls whited, the
pavement swept, the gates veiled, the vestry clean,
and the vessels shining ; and so far did his pious
solicitude about these matters extend, that he made
flowers, and leaves, and branches of trees contribute
to the beauty and ornament of the churches. These
were but small things in themselves, St. Jerom
says, but a pious mind devoted to Christ is intent
upon things great and small, and neglects nothing
that may deserve the name of the very meanest of
fice in the church. And it is plain St. Jerom had
a greater value for such sort of natural beauty and
comeliness in churches, than for rich ornaments of
costly pictures and paintings, and silver, and gold,
and precious stones. And therefore, as I observed
before,78 he rather advised his rich friends to lay
out their wealth upon the living temples of God,
the backs and bellies of the poor, and commended
the rich lady Paula for so doing,79 rather than for
hanging up needless and superfluous gifts, as others
did, upon the pillars of the temple. And it is no
wonder then he should commend Nepotian's frugal
care, who had divested himself of all his estate to
relieve the poor, and left himself no ability to adorn
the church any other way, but that which was most
to St. Jerom's liking and approbation.

CHAPTER IX.
OF THE CONSECRATION OF CHURCHES.
Spct , Anciently, when churches w-ere fin-
mranu^he ™"e- ished and adorned, it was then usual
eration of chorches. . -, . -, -,. ,.
to proceed to a dedication or consecra
tion of them ; which was a thing that was some
times performed with a great deal of pious solemnity,
and therefore it will be proper in the next place to
make a little inquiry into the nature and circum
stances of it. Now, I must observe first of all, that
by the consecration of the church, the ancients al
ways mean the devoting or setting it apart pecuharly
for Divine service : but the manner and ceremony
of doing this was not always exactly one and the
same ; therefore we are chiefly to regard the sub
stance of the thing, which was the separation of any

building from common use to a religious service.
Whatever ceremony this was performed with, the
first act of initiating and appropriating it to a Di
vine use was its consecration. And therefore, in
allusion to this, the first beginning of any thing is
many times called its dedication. As when Cyprian,
speaking of Aurelius the confessor, whom he had
ordained a reader, says, he dedicated1 his reading,
he means no more but that he performed the first
act of his office in the church, which, in his phrase,
was its dedication. Whether churches had any
other ceremony besides this in their dedication for
the three first ages, is not certain ; though it is
highly probable they might have a solemn thanks
giving and prayer for a sanctified use of them also,
over and besides the usual liturgy of the church,
because this was in use among the Jews ; who thus
dedicated not only their temple, 1 Kings viii., but
also their private houses and walls of their cities,
when they were finished, as appears from the title
of the 30th Psalm, which is inscribed, " A Psalm or
Song at the dedication of the house of David;" and
from the account which is given by Nehemiah, xii.
27, of the dedication of the walls of Jerusalem. It
is further probable, from the constant practice of
Christians in consecrating their ordinary meat by
thanksgiving and prayer, before they begin to use
it ; and from the manner of consecrating churches
in the following ages after the time of Constantine:
all which make it highly probable, that the Chris
tians of the three first ages used the same ceremony
of particular prayers and thanksgiving to God in
the dedication of their churches. But having no
express testimonies for this, I will not pretend posi
tively to assert it. Durantus2 and Bona8 are in
deed very confident it was always so from the time
of the apostles : but they build upon no better found
ation than the feigned epistles of Clemens Romanus,
Evaristus, and Hyginus, and the Acts of St. Cecilia
in Simeon Metaphrastes, which are writings of no
authority, when the question is about matters of fact
in the first and apostolical ages.
Therefore leaving this matter, for
., , . Sect. 2.
want of better evidence, as a thing The first authen-
tic accounts of this
only probable, but not certain, I pro- {°ebro„^t^
ceed to consider it as practised in the
next age, when, in the peaceable reign of Constan
tine, churches were rebuilt over all the world, and
dedicated with great solemnity. Then it was a de
sirable sight, as Eusebius4 words it, to behold how

77 Hieron. Ep. 3. Epitaph. Nepotian. Erat sollicitus si
niteret altare, si parietes absque fuligine, si pavimenta
tersa, si janitor creber in portis, vela semper in ostiis, si
sacrarium mundum, si vasa luculenta, et. in omnes ceremo-
nias pia sollicitudo disposita. — Basilicas ecclesiae et mar
tyrum conciliabula diversis floribus et arborum comis, vi-
tiumque pampinis adumbravit. 78 See before, sect. 5.
79 Hieron. Ep. 27. Epitaph. Paulae. Nolebat in his lapi-
dibus pecuniam effundere, qui cum terra et sacculo transituri

sunt: sed in vivis lapidibus, qui volvuntur super terram.
1 Cyprian. Ep.37. al. 38. ad Cler. Carthag. Dominico le
git interim nobis, id est, auspicatus est pacem, dum dedicat
lectionem. 2 Durant. de Ritib. Eccles. lib. 1. c. 24. u. I.
3 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 20. n. 3.
4 Euseb. lib. 10. c. 3. To irdertv evktuXov Sriapa, iyicat-
vitov iopTal KaTa ttoXeis Kal Ttov dpTl VEOirayiov irpoffEVK-
Tripitov aepiEpdiarEts. Vide Euseb. de Laud. Constant, c. 1/.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

325

the consecrations of the new-built churches and the
feasts of the dedications were solemnized 'in every
city. That which made these solemnities the more
august and venerable, was, that commonly a whole
synod of the neighbouring or provincial bishops
met at the dedication. The church of Jerusalem
which Constantine built over our Saviour's sepulchre,
was consecrated in a full synod of all the bishops
of the East, whom Constantine called first to Tyre,
and then to Jerusalem, anno 335, for this very pur
pose, as Eusebius5 and all the other historians in
form us. In like manner Socrates observes,6 that
the council of Antioch, anno 341, was summoned
on purpose to dedicate the famous church there,
called Dominicum aureum, which was begun by Con
stantine and finished by Constantius. And there
are many examples of the like nature to be met
with in ancient history. Now, the solemnity was
usually begun with a panegyrical oration or sermon,
consisting chiefly of praise and thanksgiving to
God, and sometimes expatiating upon the com
mendation of the founder, or the glory of the new-
built church. Such as that oration in Eusebius,7
made at the dedication of the church of Paulinus
at Tyre, and others8 in Gaudentius and St. Am
brose upon the like occasion. Sometimes they had
more than one discourse upon it: for Eusebius,
speaking of the dedication of churches in the time
of Constantine, says, Every bishop that was pre
sent9 made a speech in praise of the convention ; so
that the panegyric which he there records, was but
one of many that were spoken. In another place,
describing the dedication of the church of Jeru
salem, he says, Some made speeches by way of
panegyric 10 upon the emperor and the magnificence
of his building ; others handled a common place in
divinity adapted to the present occasion ; and others
discoursed upon the lessons of Scripture that were
read, expounding the mystical sense of them : and
he bore a part in each of these himself, being pre
sent at that solemnity. When this part of the
ceremony was over, they then proceeded to the mys
tical service, or the offering of the unbloody sacri
fice, as he there terms it, to God ; praying for the
peace of the world, the prosperity of the church,
and a blessing upon the emperor and his children.
Among these prayers they seem to have had a par
ticular prayer for the church then dedicated, as

some understand St. Ambrose, who is thought11 to
have a form upon such an occasion; which, be
cause we have not many such in the writings of
the ancients, I will here insert in his own words :
" I beseech thee now, 0 Lord, let thine eye be con
tinually upon this house, upon this altar, which
is now dedicated unto thee, upon these spiritual
stones, in every one of which a sensible temple is
consecrated unto thee : let the prayers of thy serv
ants, which are poured out in this place, be always
accepted of thy Divine mercy. Let every sacrifice,
that is offered in this temple with a pure faith and
a pious zeal, be unto thee a sweet-smelling savour
of sanctification. And when thou lookest upon
that sacrifice of salvation, which taketh away the
sins of the worffl, have respect to these oblations of
chastity, and defend them by thy continual help,
that they may be sweet and acceptable offerings
unto thee, and pleasing unto Christ the Lord :
vouchsafe to keep their whole spirit, soul, and body,
without blame, unto the day of thy Son Jesus Christ
our Lord. Amen." I do not deny, but that this
prayer, in some parts of it, may seem to look more
hke a consecration of virgins than a consecration
of churches : perhaps it might serve for both, the
spiritual and the material temples of God together .
but if any thinks it means only the former, I will
not contend about it, seeing it is already proved out
of Eusebius, that at least panegyrical orations, and
praises of God, and prayers for the church, were al
ways part of the solemnity and ceremony of these
dedications. And till a solemn day was appointed
for the performance of these, it was not according
to rule for any one to use a new-built church as a
place of worship, unless a great necessity compelled
him to it. Which is evident from the apology that
Athanasius makes for himself to Constantius, for
using the great church of Alexandria on the Easter
festival, before it was finished and dedicated by the
emperor its founder. He says,12 the multitude was
so great, that the lesser churches would not con
tain them without hazard of their lives, and there
fore they importuned the bishop that they might
assemble in the great church, otherwise threaten
ing that they would meet in the open fields : upon
which he consented to have prayers in this church ;
but this did not go for its dedication ; for he tells
the emperor, they still expected a day, when he

5 Euseb. lib. 4. de Vit. Const, c. 43. Socrat. lib. 1. e. 28.
Sozomen. lib. 2. c. 26. Theodor. lib. 1. c. 31.
3 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 8. 7 Euseb. lib. 10. c. 4.
"Gaudent. Serm. 17. in Dedieat. Basilicae. Ambros.
Sem- 89. s Euseb. lib. 10. e. 3.
10 Euseb. de. Vit. Constant, lib. 4. c. 45.
11 Ambros. Exhort, ad Virgines, in fine. Te nunc, Do
mine, precor, ut supra hanc domum tuam, supra haec altaria
quae hodie dedicantur, supra hos lapides spirituales, quibus
sensibile tibi in singulis templum sacratur, quotidianus prae-
sul intendas, orationesque servorum tuorum, quae in hoc

loco funduntur, Divina tua suscipias misericordia. Fiat tibi
in odorem sanctificationis omne sacrificium, quod in hoc
templo fide integra, pia sedulitate offertur. Et cum ad il-
lam respicis hostiam salutarem, per quam peccatum mundi
hujus aboletur, respicias etiam ad has piae hostias castitatis,
et diuturno eas tuearis auxilio, ut fiant tibi in odorem sua-
vitatis hostiae acceptabiles, Christo Domino placentes, et in
tegrum spiritum eorum, animam et corpus, sine querela)
loco usque in diem Domini Jesu Christi Filii tui servare
digneris. Amen.
12 Athan. Apol. 1. ad Constant. 1. 1. p. 682 et 684.

325

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

himself should give the orders for its enccenia, or
feast of dedication, and then solemnly give his
thanks to God for the finishing of it, as had been
done in the time of his predecessor Alexander, when
the church of Theonas was building, and as he
had seen it done at Triers, and Aquileia, and other
places, where churches were sometimes used for
prayer upon such urgent and pressing necessities
before they were finished ; but the using them for
Divine service upon such occasions was not their
dedication ; but that always came after, and was a
proper and solemn eucharistical service, or thanks
giving to God for the accomplishment of the holy
structure. So that this' evidently makes out the
observation that has been made out of Eusebius
before, That the common prayers of the church
were not looked upon as a formal dedication, with
out special panegyrical orations, and forms of adora
tion and praise more peculiar to that occasion.
And this also confutes the opinion of those, who
think the setting up the sign of a cross, or placing
a communion table in a church, was its dedication.
For these things might be done without any dedica
tion. Which appears not only from this discourse
of Athanasius, but from a case related in Synesius,
where some pretended that a certain place was conse
crated into a church, because it had been used for
prayer and administration of the sacrament in a time
of hostile invasion ; against which Synesius positive
ly determines,13 that such a use in time of necessity
was no consecration ; for otherwise mountains, and
valleys, and private houses would be churches.
It is evident from what has been
The bishop' in already said, that these consecrations
everv diocese llieor- .
dina'i; minister of beinEr generally performed in a synod
these consecrations. ° ° J x *
of bishops, the bishops were the min
isters always employed in this service. But it
might happen that none but the bishop of the
diocese could be there, and then it was his business
peculiarly to perform the office of consecration,
which, by some ancient canons, is so specially re
served to the office of bishops, that presbyters are
not allowed to perform it. The first council of
Bracara, anno 563, makes it deprivation11 for any
presbyter to consecrate an altar or a church, and

says the canons of old forbade it likewise. Among
our British councils collected by Sir Henry Spel-
man, there is one under St. Patrick, anno 450,
where we have a canon to this very purpose, That
a presbyter,15 though he builds a church, shall not
offer the oblation in it, before he brings his bishop
to consecrate it, because this was regular and de
cent. And ancient history affords no approved ex
amples to the contrary.
This will receive a little further Scct4
confirmation from our observing two buafrtKti&S
or three other things, which have a l,1"'I", lM-"-
near relation to this matter. As, first, that no
church regularly could be builded without the
licence or consent of the bishop in whose diocese it
was erected. This is expressly provided in one of
the canons of the council of Chalcedon, which
subjects both monasteries and churches so to the
bishop's care, that neither of them might18 be
founded without his consent and approbation.
And by the laws of Justinian no Sfd s
church was to be begun, before the J'S^
bishop had first made a solemn prayer, j,™" Jfg* j" "*
and fixed the sign of the cross in the to bE 1""1'M'
place where a new church was to be erected. Which
we have over and over again repeated in that em
peror's Novels, both with relation to monasteries
and churches.17 And Gothofred, not without rea
son, thinks the same custom was observed in expi
ating the temples of the heathen, when they were
to be consecrated into Christian churches. For so
he understands that law18 of Theodosius, which
orders the temples to be expiated by placing in
them the sign of the Christian religion, that is, the
sign of the cross. And whereas some monks, and
other orders of men, would sometimes presume to
set up the sign of the cross in public buildings, and
other places erected for the divertisement of the
people ; which was, in effect, a pretending to make
them churches without the bishop's leave ; therefore
the emperor Leo made a decree,19 that nothing of this
nature should be done by usurpation for the future,
but whether it was to erect a cross, or bring the
relics of a martyr into any place, both these should
be done by the direction of the bishops, and not

13 Synes. Ep. 67. p. 238. Ev^aaBat TuvaytcaXa, tovto
tov toitov ov KaBiepoX, Sec.
11 Cone. Bracar. 1. c. 37. Si quis presbyter post hoc in-
terdictum ausus fuerit cbrisma benedicere, aut ecclesiam
aut altarium consecrare, a suo officio deponatur. Nam et
antiqui canones hoc vetuerunt.
15 Cone. Hibernicum, Cone. t. 1. p. 1480. can 23. Si
quis presbyterorum ecclesiam aedificaverit, non onerat ante-
quam adducat suum pontificem, ut eum consecret, quia sic
decet. 16 Cone. Chalced. can. 4. "ESogz pi)Siva piv pnSapov
OtKoSopEXv, ptiSE GVVltTTaV pOVatTT rjplOV ', l] EVKTllptOV OiKOV,
irapa yvwpijs tov tijs itoXeios iirio-Koirov.
17 Justin. Novel. 131. c. 7. Si quis voluerit fabricare vene-

rabile oratorium autmonasterium, praacipimusnon aliterm-
choandam fabricam, nisi locorum episcopus orationem ibi
fecerit et venerabilem fixerit crucem. Vid. Novel. 67. c. 1.
Novel. 5. c. 1.
19 Cod. Theod. lib. 1. Tit. de Paganis, Leg. 25. Con-
locatione venerandae Christianae religionis signi expian
prfficipimus. 19 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 3. deEpisc. Leg. 26. Decerni-
mus, ut posthac neque monachi, neque quicunque alii in
sedes publicas, vel in quaecunque loca populi voluptatibus
fabricata, venerabilem crucem et sanctorum martyrum reii-
quias illicito inferre conentur, vel occupare audeant ea, quss
vel ad publicas causas, vel ad populi oblectamenta, constructa
sunt, &c.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

327

otherwise. And hence it is probably conjectured,
both by Suicerus and Meursius, that a bishop's dio
cese is sometimes called ravpoiri)yiov, that is, the dis
trict wherein he had power to fix the cross within
his own bounds for the building of churches. So
the word will signify both the act of making a cross,
and the limits wherein he had power to make_it.
For it is to be observed further, that
Sect. 6. '
1»erateiSahcLtren°i'n though bishops had the power of con-
ce™lnnecessuye": secrating churches, yet that was li
quid it mited to their own diocese, and they
might not exceed their own bounds, unless called to
assist another, or to minister in the vacancy of an
other bishopric. Which is so strictly insisted on by
the council of Orange, that it forbids a bishop, who
builds a church himself at his own expence, in
another man's diocese, to assume to himself the
consecration20 of it, but to leave that to the bishop
in whose territory the church is erected. The third
council21 of Orleans and others have decrees of the
like nature. But in case a church was built in a
vacant diocese, then any neighbouring bishop might
be called to consecrate it, as Sidonius Apollinaris
was called to consecrate the church of Ruteni, or
Rhodez, in France, though he was bishop of another
diocese: but the reason22 was, as Savaro rightly
observes, because Rhodez at that time had no
bishop of its own to officiate in the consecration.
Now, all these things show, that the bishop in every
diocese was the proper minister of this service ; for
he was to be consulted before the work was begun,
he was to come also and pray at the place before
the foundation was laid, and when the building was
finished, he was to be called to consecrate it, or else
some other bishop in his stead. But if presbyters
could regularly have done it, there had been no
need to have sent for a bishop out of another diocese
to perform it. But perhaps it will be asked, What
if a presbyter did take upon him to do the thing, did
his act stand good, or did the bishop proceed to a
new consecration ? To which I answer, this being
a thing reserved to bishops only by ecclesiastical
law and custom, (for the Scripture has nothing
about it,) we do not find any new consecrations
practised in such cases ; but because it was a schis
matical act in a presbyter so to go against rule and
canon in contempt of his bishop, therefore he was to
be punished23 with deposition or degradation, as ap
pears from the forecited canon of the council of
Bracara. And even a bishop that pretended to
consecrate a church in another man's diocese, was
for his offence to be suspended a year from his

office24 as a transgressor of the canons, in the French
churches. Some pretend, that a bishop in his Scct 7
own diocese could not, according to v^c^'tl°\,l
ancient canons, consecrate a church Soi>'o^n«'™te
without the bishop of Rome's hcence '" °"™a as"'
to authorize him to do it. This is one of Gratian's
doctrines to magnify the pope's power25 in the canon
law. Which the new Roman correctors are so far
from altering or censuring, that they bring Socrates
in as a further evidence to vouch for it. Socrates
indeed, speaking of the council of Antioch, which
Constantius summoned under pretence of dedicating
his new church there, (though the true design was
to have Athanasius condemned in a general council,)
excepts against it upon this ground, because the
bishop of Rome was not there, whose consent was
necessary, by the ecclesiastical canon, to make laws
or rules for the church.26 Which was a privilege
equally belonging to all patriarchs, that no general
council should be held, nor general rules made for
the whole church, without their presence and ad
vice first taken in such public deliberations. But
this has nothing to do with the consecration of
churches in every private bishop's diocese, of which
there is no instance in all ancient history, of any
bishop's being obliged to send to the bishop of Rome
for his licence to consecrate a church within his
own diocese. But that which seems to have im
posed upon these censors, was their misunderstand
ing those Greek words, teavoviZttv rag iKKXtjoiag,
which does not signify dedicating of churches,
(though Musculus so translates it, and Hospinian
follows him in the same error,) but the church's
making laws or canons for her own government :
in which the bishop of Rome was allowed to have
a patriarchal privilege, but not in the consecration
of churches, though that now be insisted on by
some, who would have every thing flow from the
immense plenitude of power in the bishops of
Rome. Next to the minister consecrating, Scct 8_
it will be proper to say something of aS0,.''?.!;
the object, to whom churches were °£t$\ ,„0„"f„S

20 Cone. Arausican. can. 10. Si quis episcoporum in aliena?
civitatis territorio ecclesiam eedificare disponit  permissa
licentia redificandi, non praesumat dedicationem, quae illi
omnimodo reservatur, in cujus territorio ecclesia assurgit.
21 Cone. Aurelian. 3. c. 15.
22 Sidon. lib. 4. Ep. 15. et Savaro in locum.

distinguished by
their names for c
memorial of tlicin.

dedicated ; which anciently was solely their"'
to God and his service. Of which
custom St. Austin is a most irrefragable witness,
who, disputing with Maximinus, the Arian bishop,
uses this argument to prove the Divinity of the
Holy Ghost, That he must be God, because temples
were builded and dedicated to him, which it would
be sacrilege to do to any creature. If, says he, we

28 Cone. Bracar. 1. c. 37. z4 Cone. Aurelian. 3. c. 15.
28 Gratian. de Consecrat. Dist. 1. c. 6 et 27. Edit. Roma;
Jussu Gregor. 13. 1582.
26 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 8. Kavovos EKtcXnaiaaTiKov keXevov-
tos, pi) SiXv irapi yvtopt]V tov iirterKoieov tt]S 'Poo/xijs
Kavovt^Etv Tis iKKXr]aias.

323

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

should make a temple of wood and stone to any
holy angel, though never so excellent, should we
not be anathematized by the truth of Christ and the
church of God, for exhibiting to the creature that
service which is only due to the Creator ? Since,
therefore, we should be sacrilegious in building a
temple to any creature,27 how can he be otherwise
than the true God, to whom we not only build tem
ples, but are ourselves his temples? In another
place, he rejects with scorn the false imputation of
Faustus the Manichee, who charged the catholics
with erecting temples to their martyrs, and offering
sacrifice and other acts of worship to them therein.
To this he replies, That they never offered sacrifice
to any martyr, but only to the God of the martyrs,
though they erected altars in the memorials of the
martyrs.28 For what bishop, when he stands by the
altar in any place where the holy bodies lie, ever
says, We offer unto thee, Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian?
But what is offered, is offered unto God, (who crowns
the martyrs,) in the memorials of the martyrs who
are crowned by him. He often repeats it in other
places,29 that they did not so honour their martyrs,
by erecting temples or altars to them, but only unto
God. The same place, indeed, was often a monu
ment or memorial of a martyr, and a temple of God,
because churches were commonly built over the
sepulchres of the martyrs, or in the places where
they suffered, or else the relics of the martyrs were
translated into them : and hence they were called
by the martyrs' name, because they were memorials
of them. The church and the altar that was built
at Carthage, in the place where St. Cyprian suf
fered martyrdom, was, upon that account, called
Mensa Cypriani, Cyprian's Altar, not because it was
built or dedicated to him or his worship, (for St.
Austin says30 it was erected only to God and his
service,) but because it was a memorial of his mar
tyrdom, being built in the place where Cyprian
himself was offered a sacrifice unto God.

And from hence it is veiy plain, s^ j
that the naminsr a church by the name ,i,!rh.'"'0'"!* .*T*
o j timie named fiom
of a saint or martyr was far from Shiv cKSJ.,«
dedicating it to that saint or martyr, to "lcir b"'ldl"6-
though it served for a memorial of him amon"
the living, and so far was an honour to his me
mory, though dedicated only to God and his ser
vice. And this is further evident from this con
sideration, that churches were sometimes named
from their founders, who certainly did not intend
to dedicate churches to themselves. Thus Sir-
mond31 has observed three churches in Carthage to
be so denominated from their founders, Basilica
Fausti, Florentii, and Leontii. And Sozomen32 tells
us, that the temple of Serapis, when it was turned
into a church, was called by the name of Arcadius.
As some in Rome and Antioch bare the name of
Constantine and Justinian. Sometimes they had
their name from a particular circumstance of time,
or place, or other accident in the building of them.
The church of Jerusalem was called Anastasis and
Crux, not because it was dedicated to any St. Anas
tasis or cross, but because it was by Constantine
built in the place of our Saviour's crucifixion and
resurrection, as Valesius33 and others have rightly
observed. So the church of Anastasia at Constan
tinople was so termed, not from any saint of the
same name, but because it was the , church where
Gregory Nazianzen by his preaching gave a sort of
new life or resurrection to the catholic doctrine of
the Trinity, after it had been long oppressed by the
Arian faction, as he himself34 accounts for the rea
son of the name in several places of his writings.
And upon the like ground one of the churches of
Carthage was called Basilica Bestituta, from its be
ing rescued out of the hands of the Arians. One of
the churches of Alexandria was commonly called
Ccesareum,33 which Valesius36 thinks was for no
other reason but because the place before had been
called Cmsareum, or the temple of the Caesars. As a

27 Aug. cont. Maximin. lib. I. t. 6. p. 288. Nonne si
templum alicui sancto angelo excellentissimo de lignis et
lapidibus faceremus, anathematizaremur a veritate Christi
et ab ecclesia Dei, quoniam creaturae exhiberemus earn ser-
vitutem, quae uni tantum deberetur Deo ? Si ergo sacrilegi
essemus faciendo templum cuicunque creaturae, quomodo
non est Deus verus, cui non templum facimus, sed nos ipsi
templum sumus?
28 Aug. cont. Faust, lib. 20. t. 21. Nulli martyrum, sed
ipsi Deo martyrum sacrificamus, quamvis in memoriis mar
tyrum constituamus altaria. Quis enim antistitum in locis
sanctorum corponim assistens altari, aliquando dixit, OfFeri-
mus tibi Petre, aut Paule, aut Cypriane ; sed quod offertur,
offertur Deo, qui martyres coronavit, apud memorias eorum
quos coronavit.
29 Aug. de Vera Kelig. c. 55. Honoramus eos charitate,
non servitute. Nee eis templa construimus. Nolunt enim
sic se honorari a nobis, &c. It. de Civit. Dei, lib. 22. c. 10.
Illi (ethnici) talibus diis suis et templa aidificaverunt, et
statuerunt aras, et sacerdotes instituerunt, et sacrificia fece-

runt. Nos autem martyribus nostris non templa sicut diis,
sed memorias sicut hominibus mortuis fabricamus: nee ibi
erigimus altaria, in quibus sacrificemus martyribus, sed uni
Deo et martyrum et nostro.
30 Aug. Ser. 63. de Diversis, 1. 10. p. 592. Ut mensa ilia
quae Dei est, etiam Cypriani vocetur, haec causa est: quia
ut ilia modo cingitur ab obsequentibus, ibi Cyprianus cinge-
batur a persequentibus, &c. Item. Mensa Deo constructa
est, tamen mensa dicitur Cypriani — quia ibi est immolattis,
et quia ipsa immolatione sua paravit hanc mensam, non in
qua pascat sive pascatur, sed in qua sacrificium Deo, cui et
ipse oblatus est, offeratur.
31 Sirmond. Not. in Aug. Serm. 37. a se Edit. t. 10. p. 753.
82 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 15.
33 Vid. Vales. Epist. de Anastas. ad Calcem Eusebii.
31 Naz. Orat. 32. ad 150 Episcopos, t. 1. p. 527. It.
Carm. 9. de Somnio Anastasis, t. 2. p. 78.
35 Socrat. lib. 7. c. 15. Liberat. Breviar. e. 18.
36 Vales. Not. in Evagr. lib. 2. c. 8.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

329

church of Antioch was called Palcsa, because built
in that part of the city which they termed waXatdv,
or the old city. So St. Peter's at Rome was an
ciently called Triumphalis, because it stood in Via
Triumphali, or the triumphal way leading to the
capitol. And we are assured from St. Jerom,37 that
the Lateran church had its name from Lateranus
the heathen, who was slain by Nero, because it
had formerly been that nobleman's palace in Rome.
A thousand observations of the like nature might
be made ; but these few are sufficient to show,
that there were different reasons for giving names
to churches ; and that it was no argument of
churches being dedicated to saints, because they
bare the names of saints ; it being otherwise ap
parent, that they were consecrated only to God,
and not to any creature. Whathasbeen observed of churches
wiifncaitan first is equally true of altars, that they
ticuiar conrecratSn were always dedicated to God alone,
with new eeremo-
nies distinct Hon and not to any other being whatever,
churches. J °
even after they began to have a par
ticular consecration with some new ceremonies dis
tinct from churches : which seems to have begun
first of all in the sixth century. For the council of
Agde, anno 506, is the first pubhc record that we
meet with, giving any account of a distinct con
secration of altars : and there we find the new
ceremony of chrism38 added to the sacerdotal bene
diction. And not long after we find a hke decree
in the council of Epone, anno 517, That no altars
but such as were made of stone, should be con
secrated with39 the infusion of chrism upon them.
Which implies, that at least some altars, if not
all, had then the ceremony of chrism in their con
secration. But as this ceremony was new, so was
the consecration of altars, as distinct from churches,
a new thing also; and much more the consecra
tion of communion cloths, and cups, and images,
and crosses, and paschal tapers, and holy water,
and beads, and bells, of which the reader may find
a particular account in Hospinian,40 with all the
new rites of consecrating churches in the Romish
rituals, which it is none of my business here fur
ther to pursue.
sect. n. Concerning the ancient consecra-
Ko church to be °
built or consecrated tions we have further to observe, that

by the laws of Justinian no man was bEf0„ lt lvas en.
to begin to build a church, before he dowcd'
had given security to the bishop of a maintenance
for the ministry41 and the repairs of the church,
and whatever was otherwise necessary to uphold
Divine service in it. And by a rule of one of the
Spanish councils,42 a bishop was not to consecrate
a church, before the donation of its maintenance
was delivered to him in writing confirmed by law.
Which were necessary rules to preserve churches
from falling to ruin, and their ministry and service
from contempt and disgrace.
But beyond this suitable provision
and settlement for the service of the Tei bishops not to
demand any thing
church, the bishop was not to exact for c™5e«»ti''"-
or demand any thing further of the founder ; but it
being part of his ordinary office to consecrate
churches, he was obliged to do it without requiring
any reward for his service ; unless the founder
thought fit to make him any voluntary oblation, in
which case he was at liberty to receive it. So it is
determined in the foresaid Spanish council of Bra
cara,43 and for the French churches in the second
council of Chalons,44 and others in the time of
Charles the Great.
As to the time of consecration, they Sccl ]3
did not anciently confine themselves foSSInlffSy
to perform it only upon Sundays, but upon a"y d"y'
all days were at first indifferent both for this and
the ordinations of the clergy likewise. Which is
an observation frequently made by the learned Pagi45
in his critical remarks on the chronology of the an
cient church. Particularly he observes, that Con
stantine's famous dedication of the church of Jeru
salem in a full synod of bishops, anno 335, must
needs have been upon a Saturday : for all writers
agree, that it was upon the ides of September, that
is, upon the 13th day of September, which, accord
ing to the exact rules and method of the cycle, must
fall upon a Saturday that year. Whence Pagi
rightly concludes, that the custom had not yet pre
vailed, which confined consecration of churches to
the Lord's day.
I have nothing further to remark * Sect u
upon this head, save only that the day J^i^ST.
of consecration was in many churches nnntivers'a?y"fL'i-e'r
solemnly kept and observed among

"Hieron. Ep. 30. Epitaph. Fabiola!. Ut ante diem
paschae in basilica quondam Laterani, qui Caesariano trun-
catus est gladio, staret in ordine pcenitentium. Speaking
of Fabiola doing penance there.
38 Cone. Agathen. can. 14. Altaria placuit non solum unc-
tione chrismatis, sed etiam sacerdotali benedictione sacrari.
3 Cone. Epaunens, c. 26. Altaria nisi lapidea infusione
chrismatis non sacrentur.
40 Hospin. de Templis, lib. 4. c. 2, &c.
41 Justin. Novel. 67. c. 2. Non aliter quempiam eccle
siam denovo exacdificare, priusquam loquatur ad Deo ama-
bilein episcopum, et definiat mensuram quam deputat ad

luminaria, et ad sacrum ministerium, et ad domus custo-
diam, et ad alimenta ministrantium, &c.
12 Cone. Bracarens. 3. c. 5. Unusquisque episcoporum
mem merit, ut non prius dedicet ecclesiam, nisi antea dotem
basilicae et obsequium ipsius per donationem chartulae con-
firmatum accipiat. Vid. Cone. Tolet. 3. c. 15.
43 Cone. Bracar. 3. c. 5. Quoties ab aliquo fidelium ad
consecrandas ecclesias episcopi invitantur, non quasi ex
debito munus aliquod a fundatore requirant; sed si ipse
quidem aliquid ex suo voto obtulerit, non respuatur.
44 Cone. Cabillon. 2. c. 16.
15 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 335. n. 4.

330

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

their anniversary festivals. For Sozomen gives us
this account of the dedication of the church of Jeru
salem,'16 that in the memory of it they held a year
ly festival, which lasted for eight days together,
during which time both they of the church, and all
strangers, which flocked thither in abundance, held
ecclesiastical assemblies and met together for Divine
service. To this Gregory the Great seems to have
added a new custom here in England, which was,
that on the annual feast of the dedication the peo
ple might build themselves booths round about the
church, and there feast and entertain themselves
with eating and drinking, in lieu of their ancient
sacrifices while they were heathens : which is re
lated by Bede,47 out of Gregory's letters to Austin,
and Mellitus, the first bishop of the Saxons. And
from this custom, it is more than probable, came
our wakes, which are still observed in some places,
as the remains of those feasts of dedication of par
ticular churches.

CHAPTER X.
OF THE RESPECT AND REVERENCE WHICH THE PRI
MITIVE CHRISTIANS PAID TO THEIR CHURCHES.
Next to their adorning and conse-
ch.frcn'es 'never cration of churches, it will be proper
put to any profane .,
use, but only sacred t0 examine what respect and rever-
and religious service. x
ence they paid to consecrated places,
after they were once set apart for Divine service.
They then used them only as the houses of God,
for acts of devotion and religion, and did not allow
of any thing to be done there, that had not some
tendency towards piety, or immediate relation to it.
They might be used for religious assembhes, for the
elections of the bishops and clergy, for the sitting
of councils, for catechetic schools, for conferences
and collations about religion ; but not be put to the
use of common houses, to eat, or drink, or lodge in.
And therefore, though the law allowed men to take
sanctuary in the church, as we shall see in the next
chapter, yet it did not allow them to have their meat
and lodging there. When some abused the catechu
menia, (which I have showed before to be places
within the church for men and women to hear Di-

« Sozom. lib. 2. c. 26. « Bede, Hist. lib. 1. c. 30.
1 Cone. Eliber. c. 35. Placuit prohiberi, ne fceminae in
ccemeterio pervigilent, eo quod saepe sub obtentu religionis
scelera latenter committant.
2 Cone. Laodic. c. 28. "Oti ov SeX iv toXs KvpiaKoXs t?
iv TaXs iKKXi}triais, Tas XEyoptvas dydiras ttoieXv, Kal iv
Tip oiKto tov Qeov iaSrtEiv Kal aKOvfiiTa TptovvvEtv.
3 Cone. Carthag. 3. c. 30. Ut nulli episcopi vel clerici in ec
clesia conviventur, nisi forte transeuntes hospitiorum neces
sitate illic reficiantur. Populi etiam, quantum fieri potest, ab
hujusmodi conviviis prohibeantur. Vid. Cod. Afric. can. 42.

vine service in,) and turned them into rooms to lodge
in, the emperor Leo made a decree, that all such
should be expelled from their habitations in the
church. The case was different when men spent
whole nights in the church in watching and prayer;
as they did frequently both in their public and pri
vate vigils ; such pernoctations in the church were
allowed, because they were but necessary circum
stances of Divine service : only women were forbid
den by the council of Eliberis1 to keep private
vigils in the church, because many times, under pre
tence of prayer, secret wickedness was committed.
And for the like reason their agapes, or feasts of
charity, which were originally an apostolical prac
tice, and kept in the church, were afterwards pro
hibited, or at least discouraged, for the excess and
consequent profaneness that attended them. The
council of Laodicea2 peremptorily forbids them
under that name of charity feasts, and commands
that no one should eat, or prepare beds or tables
for that purpose, in the house of God. And the
third council of Carthage forbids all feasting in the
church3 in general to the clergy, except in case of
necessity, when they were upon a journey, and could
not otherwise be entertained ; and orders, that the
custom should be discountenanced as much as pos
sible also in the laity : for though they were forced
to tolerate it for some time, yet they did not approve
of it, as St. Austin tells Paustus4 the Manichee,but
endeavoured to correct both the excess that many
ran into upon such occasions, and the very custom
itself of feasting in the church, or at the graves of
the martyrs, because two errors crept into the church
by that means, intolerable excess, and a heathenish
superstition therewith : for men began, as he5 com
plains, in these riots to worship pictures and tomb
stones, and reckoned their feasts a sort of sacrifice
to the dead, placing even their voracities and drunk
enness to the account of religion ; so that it was
high time to lay aside all manner of banquetings in
the church, that the house of God might not be
profaned with such excesses of riot as were not to
be endured in private houses. And this was their
general rule in all cases, to lay aside all customs
that were not absolutely necessary, though innocent
and useful in their original, rather than suffer the
abuses and corruptions of them to end in the pro
fanation of churches.

4 Aug. cont. Faust, lib. 20. t. 21. Qui se in memoriis
martyrum inebriant, quomodo a nobis approbari possunt,
cum eos, etiam si in domibus suis id faciant, sana doctrma
condemnet ? Sed aliud est quod docemus, aliud quod sustine-
mus : aliud quod praecipere jubemur, aliud quod emendare
praecipimur, et donee emendemus, tolerare compellimur.
5 Aug. de Morib. Eccles. lib. 1. c. 34. Novi multos esse
sepulchrorum et picturarum adoratores : novi multos esse,
qui luxuriosissime super mortuos bibant, et epulas cadaveri-
bus exhibentos, super sepultos seipsos sepeliant, et voraci-
tates ebrietatesque suas deputent religioni.

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

331

The hke reverence and respect was
Sect 2. r
The hkerantion^ aiso snowefl to every sacred vessel and
XSis,orlL!md utensil belonging to the administra-
church. jjon 0j ^.ne sacraments and Divine
service : they might not be employed to any other
use, but only what was sacred, and answerable to
the designation and appointment of them. Upon
this account, they were kept in the sceuophylacium
of the church, and never removed thence, but when
the service of the altar required them. This cus
tom was so nicely observed, that when Athanasius
was accused for breaking the mystical cup, he clears
himself of the accusation by saying, That in the
place where it was pretended that he had broken it,
there was neither church nor minister,6 nor was it
the time of celebrating the eucharist : therefore,
since the cup was never in the custody of any but
the ministers of the church, nor ever used but in
the church in time of Divine service, he could not
be guilty of the crime laid against him, seeing there
were none but private men, in whose keeping the
cup could not be in that place. The vessels were
usually kept by the deacon; and the subdeacons
and other inferior orders are by the councils of La
odicea7 and Agde8 forbidden to touch them. There
was but one case in which it was lawful to put these
things to common use, and that was the case of ab
solute necessity, when no other method could be
found out to redeem captives, or reheve the poor in
times of extreme exigence : then it was thought that
mercy was to be preferred before sacrifice, and that
the hving and spiritual temples of God were to be
preserved at the expense of the material ones ; and
they never made any scruple to melt down their
communion plate or part with their ornaments
upon such occasions, of which I have given full
proof heretofore from the examples of St. Ambrose,
St. Austin, Cyril of Jerusalem, Acacius bishop of
Amida, Exuperius of Tholouse, and the laws 9 of
Justinian, which need not be repeated in this place.
But excepting this one extraordinary case, it was
esteemed the highest profanation and sacrilege, to
divert any thing to any other use which was given
to God's service : and there are some instances of
very remarkable* judgments that befell such profan-
ers, one or two of which it may not be amiss to
mention. Theodoret10 tells us, Julian the apostate
sent two of his officers, Felix and his uncle Julian,
to plunder the church of Antioch, called the golden
church, and bring the rich vessels, which Constan
tine and Constantius had dedicated, into his own

6 Athan. Apol. 2. 1. 1. p. 732.
7 Cone. Laodic. c. 21. » Cone. Agathen. e. 66.
" Book V. chap. 6. sect. 6. ¦» Theodor. lib. 3. u. 12.
11 Victor de Persecut. Vandal, lib. 1. p. 593.
Optat. lib. 2. p. 55. Ut omnia sacrosancta supra me-
morati vestri episcopi violarent, jusserunt eucharistiam
canibus fundi : non sine signo Divini judicii. Nam iidem

coffers. But they were not content barely to com
mit sacrilege, unless they could vent their spite also
in some unmannerly and profane abuses : therefore
Julian pissed upon the holy table, and Felix, seeing
the holy vessels, broke out into this rude expression,
Behold what fine vessels Mary's Son is served in !
But the impious wretches did not long go unpun
ished : for Julian was immediately seized with an
ulcer, which turned all his bowels into putrefaction,
and he died voiding his own excrements at his blas
phemous mouth; and Felix, by the same Divine
vengeance, voided blood at his mouth, without in
termission, day and night until he died. Victor
Uticensis11 gives us a like account of one Proculus,
an agent of one of the kings of the Vandals, who,
having ravaged and plundered the catholic churches,
made himself a shirt and breeches of the palls or
coverings of the altar. But not long after he fell
into a frenzy, which made him eat off his own
tongue, piece by piece, and so he breathed out his
last in a most ignominious death. It is no less re
markable, what Optatus reports of some Donatist
bishops, who, in their mad zeal against the catholics,
ordered the eucharist which the catholics had con
secrated to be thrown to their dogs ; but not with
out an immediate sign of Divine vengeance12 upon
them : for the dogs, instead of devouring the ele
ments, fell upon their masters, as if they had never
known them, and tore them to pieces, as robbers
and profaners of the holy body of Christ. Which
makes Optatus put them in mind of that admoni
tion of our Saviour, Matt. vii. 6, " Give not that
which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your
pearls before swine, lest they trample them under
their feet, and turn again and rend you." Other
instances might be added of the same nature, but I
choose rather to go on with the account of their
reverence, than to dwell any longer upon the pun
ishments of the profaners.
Let us next, then, observe the differ
ence that was made between churches
and private houses.
made very light of this distinction, as
the Eustathians, Massalians, and others. Against
the Eustathians we have two canons made in the
council of Gangra, from which we may learn their
errors, and what were the catholic tenets in oppo
sition to them. The first is, If any one13 teach, that
the house of God, and the assemblies held therein,
are to be despised, let him be anathema. And
the other, If any one14 hold assemblies privately

Sect. 3.
What difference
made between
OOme heretlCS churches and pri
vate bouses.

canes accensi rabie, ipsos dominos suos, quasi latrones,
sancti corporis reos, dente vindice, tanquam ignotos et ini-
micos laniaverunt.
13 Cone. Gangren. o. 5. Et tis SiSdcrKoi tov oikov tov
0£b Ei}KaTacpp6vr]Tov eivat, Kal ras iv avTto trvvd^Ets, ivt't-
%Epa ETOO.
14 Ibid. e. 6. Ei tis irapi Ttjv 4/c/cXijo-iay ISiei iiacXi]crid-

332

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

out of the church, and, despising the church, chooses
to perform ecclesiastical offices where there is no
presbyter appointed by the bishop, let him be ana
thema. These heretics seem to have contemned
both a regular ministry and the public churches,
and to have made no difference between the house
of God and other houses, but to have taught that
ecclesiastical offices might as well be performed at
home as in the chm-ch. Against which errors this
council rising up so severely, gives us to under
stand, that according to the sentiments of the catho
lic church, the public offices of the church were to
be performed in public, and not in private houses,
and that it was a contempt of the house of God to
perform them otherwise. At present I do not re
member any one allowed instance of the contrary
practice in all ancient history, except in cases of
necessity, which are above all laws. And therefore
I could not but reckon this difference, which was
so universally put between the house of God and
private houses, amongst the instances of respect
and reverence, which the ancients paid to their
churches. „ . , It will deserve here also to be re
sect. 4.
ra"™' toTe than membered, particularly to the praise
iflV proSied*'! of St. Ambrose, how. he acted with
the courage and resolution of a mar
tyr in defence of the churches, that they might not
be delivered up to the profanation of the Arians.
For when the younger Valentinian had, by the in
stigation of his mother Justina, an Arian empress,
first published a law, now extant in the Theodo
sian Code,15 allowing the Arians liberty to hold as
semblies; and afterwards sent his commands to
Ambrose to deliver up to them one of the churches
of Milan ; he returned him this brave and generous
answer: " If the emperor asks of me any thing18
that is my own, my estates, my money, I shall
freely recede from my right, though all that I have
belongs to the poor. But those things which are
God's, are not subject to the emperor's power. If
my patrimony is demanded, you may invade it ; if
my body, I will offer it of my own accord. Will
you carry me into prison, or unto death ? I will
voluntarily submit to it. I will not guard myself
with an army of my people about me ; I will not
lay hold of the altar, and supplicate for life, but
more joyfully be sacrificed myself for the altar."
He thought it absolutely unlawful for the emperor
to grant to the Arians, the enemies of Christ, those

£01, Kal KUTaeppoviov Tr)s iKKXl]aias, Ta ttjs £/oc\rjcnas iSi-
Xot irpaTTEiv, prj trvvovTos tS irpEatvTEpov KaTi yviopi]v
tu iirtcTKOirov, ivdStpa etoj.
n Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 1. de Fid. Cathol. Leg. 4.
18 Ambros. Ep. 33. ad Marcel, de Tradendis Basilicis. Si
a me peteret quod meum esset, id est, fundum meum, argen-
tum meum, jus hujusmodi meum me non refragaturum,
quanquam omnia quae mea sunt essent pauperum. Verum

temples which had been dedicated to the service of
Christ ; and that it did much less become a bishop,
the minister of Christ, to be accessory to so foul a
dishonour to his Lord : and therefore he rather re
solved to die at the altar, if it must be so, than give
his consent to so great a profanation. By this one
instance we may easily judge, what opinion the
ancients had of the sacredness of churches, as
God's propriety ; and that they would as soon de
liver up their Bibles to be burnt by the heathen, as
their churches to be profaned by heretical assem
blies, where impiety would be taught for true
religion, and blasphemy offered to God instead of
adoration. As to the ceremonies of respect used
by them when they entered into the The ceremony or
church, we find one of pretty general whenlSevTeiiTin!
' tf J a to the church.
observation, which was the custom .,
of washing their hands and their face, in token of
innocency and purity, when they went to worship
God at the holy altar. Which seems to be taken
from that of the psalmist, " I will wash my hands
in innocency, and so will I compass thy altar."
This custom is frequently mentioned by Chrysos
tom, Eusebius, Tertullian, Synesius, Paulinus, and
others, whose testimonies have been already alleged
in the former part " of this book, where I had also
occasion to show, that fountains and cisterns of
water were commonly set in the atrium or court
before the church for this very purpose.
Another ceremony used by some Sect a
few, (for it was no general custom,) pSg^Tufe0/
was putting off their shoes when they SrurT^'geSSai
went into the house of God. Cassian cus m'
observes of the Egyptian monks, that they always
wore sandals instead of shoes, and those they also
put off whenever they went18 to celebrate or receive
the holy mysteries, thinking themselves obliged to
do so, by interpreting literally that intimation of
reverence which was given to Moses and Joshua,
" Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place
whereon thou standest is holy ground." But others
did not understand this as an absolute command,
obliging all men precisely to use this ceremony of
respect, but only where the custom of any nation
had made it an indication of reverence, as it was
among the Eastern nations in the time of Moses
and Joshua. Whence we do not find it mentioned
as any general custom prevailing among the primi
tive Christians ; unless perhaps it may be thought

ea qua? Divina, imperatoriae potestati non esse subjecta, &c.
17 Chap. 3. sect. 6.
18 Cassian. Institut. lib. 1. c. 10. Nequaquam tamen
caligas pedibus inheerere permittunt, cum aecedunt ad cele-
bi-anda vel percipienda sacrosancta mysteria, illud aesti-
mantes etiam secundum literam custodiri debere, quod dici
tur ad Moysen vel ad Jesum filium Nave : solve corrigiain
calceamenti tui, locus enim in quo stas terra sancta est.

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

333

to have been so in the Ethiopian or Abyssin
churches, because, as Mr. Mede has observed19 out
of Zaga Zabo's account of them in Damiamis a
Goes, the same custom continues stiU among them
at this day. Which, whether it be derived from
ancient tradition of their churches, or be a practice
lately taken up among them, is not now very easy
to be determined. And I think the same resolution
whether 'he an- must be given to the question about
mony of uomns to- bowing toward the altar at their first
ward the altar at ° -a.--.*--,
their entrance into entrance into churches. Mr. Mede
the church. thinks there is no plain demonstration
of it in the ancient writers, but some probabihty of
such a custom derived from the Jews. For he
says, What reverential guise, ceremony, or wor
ship,20 they used at their ingress into God's house
in the ages next to the apostles, (and some I believe
they did,) is wholly buried in silence and oblivion.
The Jews before them, from whom the Christian
religion sprang, used to bow themselves down to
wards the mercy-seat. The Christians after them,
in the Greek and Oriental churches, have, time out
of mind, and without any known beginning there
of, used to bow in like manner, with their posture
toward the altar, or holy table, saying that of the
publican in the Gospel, " God be merciful to me a
sinner;" as appears by the liturgies of St. Chrysos
tom and St. Basil, and as they are still known to do
at this day. Which custom of theirs, not being
found to have been ordained or established by any
decree or canon of any council, and being so agree
able to the use of God's people of the Old Testa
ment, may therefore seem to have been derived
to them from very remote and ancient tradition.
Nothing therefore can be known of the use of
those first ages of the church, further than it shall
seem probable they might imitate the Jews. This is
spoken according to the wonted ingenuity of that
learned person, who never advances a probability
into a demonstration. I shall only add one thing
out of Chrysostom, to make his opinion seem the
more probable, which I note from the observation
of Mr. Aubertin,21 who, among some other instances
of reverence paid to God, at the reading of the
Gospel and reception of baptism, takes notice of
this, that when the candidates of baptism came
near the baptistery, which, in Chrysostom's lan
guage,22 is the bride-chamber of the Spirit and the
port of grace, they were then as captives to fall

19 Mede, Disc, on Eccl. v. 1. p. 348.
20 Id. on Psal. cxxxii. 7. p. 397.
21 Alhertin. de Euchar. lib. 2. p. 432.
22 Chrysost. in iUud, Simile est Regnum Ccelor. &c.
hiretSdv Elo-Spdpr)TE Ti]V irao-TaSa ttjs xdptTos, iiTEiSdv
leXnaiovyiviitrBETTis epofiEpds bpov KaliroBEiviis KoXvpfiri-
vpas, tis alxpdXtoToi leporsieEaiyrE too /3ao-i/UI, piifraTE
iravTEs a pottos iirl ydvaTa.

down before their King, and all to cast themselves
together upon their knees. Now, if such an act of
reverence was performed to God at their entrance
into the baptistery, it is riot improbable but that
some such reverence might also be used at their en
trance into the temple. But in matters which have
not a clear light and proof, it is not prudent to be
over-bold in our determinations.
It is more certain, that when kings t 8
and emperors went into the house of ftS^S itf
God, they paid this respect to the Kd£toth?„ou..
place, that they left not only their °f">eKi"6°f*ing».
arms and their guards, but also their crowns behind
them; as thinking it indecent to appear in their
regalia in the presence of the King of kings, or to
seem to want arms and guards when they were un
der the peaceable roof of the Prince of peace. St.
Chrysostom often spends his eloquence23 upon this
custom, and uses it as an argument to persuade all
inferiors to a profound reverence, humility, and
peace, when they came into the courts of God, be
cause they had such examples of their kings before
them. The emperor Theodosius junior also makes
use of the same topic in one of his laws,24 which
was made to regulate the abuses of some who fled
for sanctuary in the church with their arms about
them: which profanation was not to be endured
in any, since he himself always left his arms with
out doors, and first laid aside his diadem, the badge
of imperial majesty, before he went into the church.
Nay, Julian himself had regard to this custom, as
Sozomen truly observes ffi out of his epistle to Arsa
cius, high priest of Galatia, where one of the things
he would have them imitate the Christians in, was
this, that when they went into the temples of their
gods, no man of arms should appear among them-
And I have already20 noted out of Leo Gramma-
ticus, how Michael, the Greek emperor, in latter
ages, was censured for presuming to pass the beau
tiful or royal gates crowned, at which gates it had
ever been customary for his predecessors to lay aside
their crowns, when they went into the church.
Another very usual piece of respect
paid to the altar and the church, was The doors and pn-
. - . . . lars of the church
men s embracing, saluting, and kissing and altar often iiss-
° ° ° ed and embraced in
them, or any part of them, the doors, l*™t°fJS'ernandre"
threshold, pillars, in token of their
great love and affection for them. St. Ambrose
takes notice of this in the account he gives of the
great consternation they were in at Milan, when the

23 Chrysost. Orat. post Redit. ab Exilio, t. 4. p. 971. It.
Horn, in Psal. xlviii. t. 3. p. 812.
24 Edict. Theodos. ad calcem Cone. Ephes. et in Cod.
Th. lib. 9. Til. 45. Leg. 4. Nos qui legitimis imperii armis
semper circundamur  Dei templum higressuri,foris arma
relinquimus, et ipsum etiam diadeina, regiae majestatis iu-
signe, deponimus.
ffi Sozom. lib. 5. •;. 16. " See chap. 5. sect. 1.

334

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

emperor's orders came for delivering up the churches
to the Arians. The soldiers were the men who first
brought the welcome news into the church, that the
emperor had revoked his fatal sentence : and they
strove who should first get to the altar and kiss it,27
to signify, that all things now were in peace and
safety. He alludes, no doubt, to the osculum pacis,
the solemn kiss of peace, which the faithful anciently
were used to give mutually to each other in the
communion service, as a testimony of their cordial
love and affection for one another. And therefore
it cannot be supposed that such salutations of the
church or altar were intended as acts of religious
worship, but only as civil indications of their love
and respect for them. And by this rule we are to
interpret all other places of ancient authors, which
frequently speak of this custom, as Sidonius Apol
linaris,28 Paulinus,29 Prudentius,30Chrysostom,31 Atha
nasius,32 Cassiodore,83 and the author of the Eccle
siastical Hierarchy,3* under the name of Dionysius
the Areopagite, and several others, who wrote before
the superstitious adoration of images had gained
any credit in the church : the like respect to this
having been also showed to the book of the Gos
pels, without any suspicion of adoring the materials
of it. I think it not improper also to ob-
cburchesus'ed for serve under this head, that churches
private meditation
and prayer, as weii were many times chosen as the pro
as public. ^ .
perest places for private devotion and
prayer upon extraordinary occasions. Theodoret35
observes of Theodosius the emperor, that the night
before he was to engage Eugenius the tyrant, was
by him wholly spent in an oratory, which happened
to be in the place where he had pitched his camp.
Andin like manner both Athanasius,30 and Socrates,37
and the other historians, tell us of Alexander, bishop
of Constantinople, that when the faction of Euse
bius had threatened to oblige him upon a certain
day to receive Arius into communion, he betook
himself the night before to the church, and there,
prostrating himself before the altar, continued all
night in prayer, begging of God, that if the faith
which he held was truth, and the opinion of Arius
false, he would punish Arius as his impiety justly
deserved. Which was accordingly fulfilled : for the
the next day Arius, as he was going triumphantly
to church, having occasion to turn aside to go to
stool, voided his entrails with his excrements, and

so perished by a most ignominious death. I men
tion these things only to show, that the ancients
paid such a respect to their churches, that upon
special occasions they thought them the properest
places as well for private devotion as for public.
And I have already noted38 that many of then-
churches were so framed, as to have private cells or
recesses for men to retire to, and exercise themselves
at leisure times in private reading of the Scriptures
and meditation and prayer.
As to their public behaviour in the
church, it was generally such as ex- Their^u'iic be-
, . - ,, haviour in the
pressed great reverence for it, as the <-hurchc*pres»iicof
great reverence.
sanctuary of God, and the place of
his immediate presence. They entered it as the
palace of the Great King, where the angels attended,
and heaven opened itself, and Christ sat upon his
throne, and all was filled with incorporeal powers,
as Chrysostom words it39 in some of his elegant
descriptions. It is particularly remarked by Gre
gory Nazianzen,40 of his own mother Nonna, that
the zeal of her devotion was always so flaming and
fervent, that she never spake a word in the church,
but what was necessary to be done in joining in the
sacred service ; she never turned her back upon the
altar, nor ever allowed herself to spit upon the
pavement of the church. But I cannot say these
were necessary laws for all to observe; for Nazianzen
intimates she did something above the common
pitch, and consequently that it was choice and zeal,
and not any binding rules ofthe church, that obliged
her to it. We might here have considered further
their reverent postures of devotion, standing, kneel
ing, and prostration ; and have exposed the practice
of sitting at prayers and at the communion service,
which Perron and some others, for different reasons,
contend for, as a posture of devotion used in the
ancient church ; but I shall have a more proper oc
casion to speak of these things hereafter, when we
come to the particular offices and services of the
church. The last instance of their reverence gn.L R
for churches which I shall take notice safcKpository for
of, is, that the sacredness of them anonthe°be"tyreirea{
made them commonly the safest re
pository for things of value, and the best security
and retreat in times of common calamity and dis
tress. The church had not only her own private
archives, her treasury, and her cemeliarchium, for

27 Ambros. Ep. 33. Certatim hoc nunciare milites, ir-
ruentes in altaria, osculis sigmficare pacis insigne.
28 Sidon. Lib. 1. Ep. 5. Triumphalibus apostolorum li-
minibus affusus, &c.
29 Paulin. Natal. 6. Felicis, p. 569. Sternitur ante fores,
et postibus oscula figit.
30 Prudent. Hymn. 11. in S. Laurent. Apostolorum ac
martyrum exosculanlur limina.
31 Chrysost. Horn. 29. in 2 Cor. XlpoSivpa tpt\iipsv th van.
32 Athanas. Homil. adv. eos qui in homine spem figunt, t.

2. p. 304. Tlpoo-iovTEs too ayitp Srvtrta^^pito, Kal pETa
tpofiu Kal xapits do~lruXs6pEVOl.
33 Cassiodor. Hist. Tripart. lib. 9. c 30.
34 Dionys. Eccl. Hier. c. 2.
85 Theodor. lib. 5. u. 24.
88 Athanas. Epist. ad Serapion. p. 671.
37 Socrat. lib. 1. t.37. Ruffin. lib. 1. e. 12.
38 See chap. 5. sect. 8.
39 Chrysost. Horn. 3. in Ephes. et Horn. 15. in Hebr.
40 Naz. Orat. 19. in Fun. Patris, 1. 1. p. 292.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

335

preserving her own writings, her utensils, and her
treasures, but was a place of common tuition and
defence, both for things and persons, in many other
cases. Thus it is noted by Ruffin,41 and Socrates,42
and Sozomen, that the cubit wherewith they were
used to measure the increase of the waters of Nile,
when it overflowed, having been before usually kept
in the temple of Serapis, was by the order of Con
stantine laid up in the Christian church, where it
continued till Julian the apostate caused it to be
removed to the temple of Serapis again. But per
sons, as well as things, found a safe retreat and se
curity in the sacredness of churches, when many
times in barbarous invasions no other places would
protect them against the insolence and fury of a
conquering enemy. Nay, the very heathens them
selves often found their account in flying to the
Christian churches, as St. Austin glories over them,
beginning his famous book against the pagans, De
Civitate Dei, with this observation. There he tells
them what ungrateful wretches they were to the re
hgion of Christ, to clamour and inveigh so bitterly
against it, when yet, had it not been for the protec
tion of their hves in places dedicated to Christ, whi
ther they43 fled from the swords of their enemies,
they had never been able at that day to have moved
their tongues against it. For when Alaric the Goth
took and sacked Rome, he gave orders that all the
, churches should be inviolable, and whoever fled
thither should be spared ; the sanctity of the place
should be their protection: by which means the
heathens escaped as well as the Christians. For
the soldiers inviolably observed their general's com
mands, and when they had barbarously plundered
and murdered in all other places, they did not pre
tend to meddle with churches, or offer the least vio
lence to any who betook themselves thither for
safety and protection. Nay, they carried some into
churches themselves, whom they intended to spare,
and so secured them from the violence of others
that might have assaulted them. So great a vener
ation had even the barbarous Arian Goths for
churches, in the midst of all their anger and fury
against the Romans, as not only St. Austin, but
Orosius,44 and St. Jerom,45 and Cassiodore,46 and
Sozomen,47 with other ancient writers, relate the
story. And it can hardly be doubted, then, but that
the catholics had the same veneration for churches ;
especially when it is considered also, how both by
general custom and law under the Christian empe
rors, every church was invested with the privilege
of an asylum, or place of sanctuary and refuge, in

certain cases ; of the original of which, and the an
cient laws relating to it, (because some abuses have
been added in after ages by the canon law,) I will
give a particular account in the following chapter.

41 Ruffin. lib. 2. e. 30.
42 Socrat. lib. 1. c. 18. Sozom. lib. 1. c. 8.
43 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 1. L. 1. Hodie contra earn lin-
guas non moverent, nisi ferrum hostile fugientes, in sacratis
ejus locis vitam, de qua superbiunt, invenirent, &c.
41 Orgs. lib. 7. c. 39. « Hieron. Epist. 10. ad Principiam.

CHAPTER XI.

OF THE FIRST ORIGINAL OF ASYLUMS, Oil PLACES
OF SANCTUARY AND REFUGE, WITH THE LAWS
RELATING TO THEM, IN CHRISTIAN CHURCHES.
All that is necessary to be known of
this privilege, so far as concerns the The original of
. . ii- 'nis Pr'vileSe t0 be
use of it m the ancient church, ei- deduced from the
time ofConstantine.
ther relates to the original of the
custom, or the place itself where sanctuary might
be had, or the persons who were entitled to the be
nefit, or, lastly, the conditions they we're to observe
in order to obtain and enjoy it. And therefore under
these four heads we will briefly consider it. As to
the original of it, there is no dispute made by any
author, but that it began to be a privilege of churches
from the time of Constantine, though there are no
laws about it older than Theodosius, either in the
Justinian or the Theodosian Code. But the law of
Theodosius is sufficient evidence itself, that it was
the custom or practice of the church before ; for his
law was not made to authorize the thing itself, but
to regulate some points relating to it, which supposes
the thing to be in use before. But whether Con
stantine made any law to establish it, is very much
doubted by learned men. Baronius ' affirms it upon
the credit of the acts of Pope Sylvester : but those
are known to be spurious and forged writings, no
older than the ninth or tenth age, by the acknow
ledgment of Papebrochius and Pagi,2 who have ac
curately examined and refuted Baronius's vindica
tion of them. However, Gothofred allows what
seems to be the truth of the case, that practice and
custom established this privilege by degrees even
from the time of Constantine ; for before Theodosius
made any law about it, the thing was certainly in
use in the church, as appears from the account
which Gregory Nazianzen gives of it in the Life of
Basil,3 where he tells us how St. Basil protected a
widow, who fled to the altar, against the violence
that was offered to her by the governor of Pontus.
The like is reported of St. Ambrose in his Life,4 writ
ten by Paulinus ; and St. Ambrose himself speaks

46 Cassiodor. Variar. lib. 12. t. 20.
47 Sozom. lib. 9. cap. 10. ] Baron, an. 324. n. 61.
2 Papelu-och. Conatus Chronico-Histor. p. 49. Pag
Critic, in Baron, an. 315. n.4.
3 Naz. Orat. 20. de Laud. Basil, t. 1. p. 353.
4 Paulin. Vit. Ambros. p. 9.

336

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

ofthe custom in one of his epistles, where, in answer
to the emperor Valentinian junior, who had com
manded him to deliver up one of the churches of
Milan to the Arians, he tells him, that was a thing
he could never obey him in ; but if he commanded
him to be carried to prison or to death, that he would
voluntarily submit to, and neither use force to de
fend himself, nor fly to the altar to supplicate for
his life.5 These and some other such hke instances
show, that the churches enjoyed this privilege by
ancient custom, before Theodosius made any law
about it ; which he did first, anno 392, not to autho
rize the thing, but to explain and regulate some
things relating to it, of which more by and by in
their proper place. Here we are next to examine what
At fiSt 'only the part of the church was more peculiarly
altar and inner fa- ,
brio of the chureh assigned to be the place of sanctuary
the place of refuge : °
but afterwards any anci refuge. Gothofred thinks, that
outer buildings or D
Zhur°hL°'Jtel at first only the inner buildings and
Wiethe same pri- apartrrients 0f trle church, and espe
cially the altar, were the places of re
fuge : whence in Synesius6 and other ancient writ
ers the altar is so frequently called do-vXog rpdmX,a,
the table from which no one could be ravished or
taken away. But whether this was originally so or
not, it is certain that in the time of Theodosius
junior these limits for taking sanctuary were en
larged. For in one of his laws now extant in both
the Codes,7 not only the altar and the body of the
church, but all between the church and outward
walls, that is, houses and lodgings of the bishop
and clergy, gardens, baths, courts, cloisters, are ap
pointed to enjoy the same privilege of being a sanc
tuary to such as fled for refuge, as well as the
innermost part of the temple. Particularly the
baptisteries, which, as I have showed before, were
places without, the church, were invested with this
privilege equally with the altar : for Proterius, bi
shop of Alexandria, as Liberatus8 and Evagrius3 re
port, took sanctuary in the baptistery of the church,
to avoid the fury of the Eutychian faction headed
by Timotheus iElurus ; and though that was a
place which even the barbarians themselves had
some reverence for, yet, as the Egyptian bishops10
complain in their letter to the emperor Leo, the ma
lice of the Eutychians pursued him thither, and there
slew him, mangled his body, dragged it about the
streets, and at last burnt it to ashes, and scattered
his ashes in the wind ; for which unparalleled bar

barity committed against the laws of religion, the
emperor Leo deposed Timotheus jElurus, and sent
him into banishment all his hfe. There were a
great many other places, which had this privilege
of sanctuary also beside churches, as the statues of
the emperors, of which there is a particular title in
the Theodosian Code ; " also the emperor's standard
in the camp, the bishop's house, the graves and
sepulchres of the dead, together with the cross
schools, monasteries, and hospitals in after ages, of
which, being all foreign to the business of churches
I say nothing further, but refer the curious reader
to the elaborate treatise of Rittershusius 12 upon this
subject among the London critics, where each of
these and some other privileged places are particu
larly considered.
Next to the places of refuge, we are Scct 3
to consider the persons to whom this lom^'oCTanc'.
benefit extended, and in what cases 'u"y'
they were allowed to take sanctuary in their
churches. For this privilege anciently was not in
tended to patronize wickedness, or shelter men from
the due execution of justice, or the force of the laws
in ordinary cases ; but chiefly to be a refuge for the
innocent, the injured, and oppressed : or in doubt
ful causes, whether criminal or civil, only to give
men protection so long, till they might have an
equitable and fair hearing of the judges, and not be
proceeded against barbarously and rigorously, un- ,
der pretence and colour of justice ; or at most, only
to give bishops opportunity to intercede for crimi
nals and delinquents in such cases, as it was both
becoming and lawful for bishops to turn interces
sors. These were the sanctuaries which Basil13
pleaded for against the governor of Pontus, and
Synesius14 against Andronicus, governor of Ptole
mais, and Chrysostom against Eutropius, who had
prevailed with Arcadius to abrogate by law all
privileges 15 of this nature belonging to the church ;
but by God's providence, he was the first man that
wanted this privilege, being fallen under the em
peror's displeasure, and forced to fly to the altar for
that refuge which he had denied to others. This
gave Chrysostom occasion to make that eloquent
and curious oration upon his case, whereby he art
fully wrought the people into a tender compassion
for their bitterest enemy, that they might go and
supplicate the emperor for him, who now lay pros
trate at the altar, and by their supplications they
obtained his life, for the sentence of death was mi-

5 Ambros. Ep. 33. ad Marcellin. Nee altaria tenebo vitam
obsecrans, &c.
c Synes. Ep. 58. p. 193.
7 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. de his qui ad Ecclesias confu-
giunt. Leg. 4. Inter templum, quod parietum descripsimus
cinctu, et post loca publica et januas primas ecclesiae, quic-
quid fuerit interjacens, sive in cellulis, sive in dmuibus, hor-
tulis, balneis, areis atque porticibus, confugas interioris tem-
pli vice tueatur, &c. Vid. Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 12. Leg. 3.

8 Liberat. Breviar. ... 15. 9 Evagr. lib. 2. c. 8.
10 Epist. Episcoporum ^Egypt. ad calcem Conc.l. Chal
ced. n. 32. p. 894.
" Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 44. de his qui ad statuas Imperato
rum ennfugiunt.
12 Rittershus. de Asylis, c. 3.
13 Naz. Orat. 20. de Laud. Basil. " Synes. Ep. 58.
15 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. de his qui ad Eccl. coufuz
Leg. 3.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

337

tigated, and turned into confiscation and banish
ment only,16 though afterward by treachery he lost
his hfe. These were chiefly the cases which the
ancient privilege of sanctuary respected, and com
monly thirty days' protection was granted to men
in such pitiable circumstances, which term was
thought sufficient17 by the law to end any contro
versies that such men might have before the civil
judges. Though the Saxon law of King Alfred
allowed but three days' time for this, as both Ritter-
shusius and Gothofred have observed out of Lam-
bard's account of our ancient19 English and Saxon
laws. During this time they were maintained by
the church, if they were poor, out of the revenues
of the poor ; but if they were able to subsist them
selves, it was sufficient for the church to grant them
her protection, and that only in the forementioned
cases, and no other. Therefore, that no one might pre-
whatsort'of per- sume upon indemnity by virtue of
sons and crimes de- ,
Fost.PnbhcP?eWofl * S VY1Y^eSe' Wn0 rla<l n0t- a JUSt an^
legal title to it, several crimes and
cases were specified by the law, as excepted, for
which the church could grant no protection. As,
first, Pubhc debtors, who either embezzled or kept
back by fraud the pubhc revenues of the state. By
a law of Theodosius the Great, now extant in both
the Codes, such debtors, though they fled to the
church for sanctuary, were to reap no benefit by it,
but immediately to be taken thence by force :19 or if
they were concealed by the clergy, the bishop and
church in that case were liable to be called upon,
and made to answer the debt to the public. And
Baronius20 is of opinion, that it was by virtue of
this law that St. Austin was obhged to pay the debt
of one Fastius, who fled to the church for refuge.
not being able to answer the pressing demands of
the pubhc exactors ; and therefore St. Austin made
a public coUection for him in his church, because
he would not deliver him up to be tortured by his
creditors, as he himself informs us in one of his epis
tles.21 This was the reason, as I have observed in
another place,22 why St. Austin refused to accept the
donation of a man's estate, which was originally
tied to certain pubhc service in the corporation of
the navicukrii, or those who were bound to trans
port the pubhc corn from Africa to Rome. For it

might happen, that the men whom the church was
to employ in this service, might, by mischance of
shipwreck, or other means, become obnoxious to
the pubhc : and then the church must either deliver
up her servants to be tortured, or else pay the debt ;
for there was no refuge or sanctuary allowed in this
case but upon that condition. And therefore St.
Austin23 himself tells us, he refused such an estate,
because one way or other it might have involved the
church in great trouble. In private cases, Gotho
fred seems to think that the benefit of sanctuary
was allowed to poor debtors, that they might have
a little respite from torture, and either compound
with their creditors, or find some other method to
discharge their debt, whilst they were under the
shelter and protection of the church.
But then even this benefit was not „ .
Sect. 5.
universal ; for the Jewish converts „Aecomn/' iT .
' that pretended to
were particularly excepted from it. to™.uS™ther?
For by a law of Arcadius and Hono- l^'purushrrS""2
rius, extant in both the Codes, it was
provided, That all Jews, who, being either in debt,
or under prosecution as criminals, pretended to unite
themselves to the Christian religion, that thereby
they might have the privilege of taking sanctuary
in the church, and avoid the punishment of their
crimes24 or burden of their debts, should be reject
ed, and not received till they had discharged their
debts, or proved themselves innocent of the crimes
laid against them. Yet, in other cases, the Jews
were not denied this benefit, but had the common
privilege of sanctuary with other men, if Gotho
fred25 judge right, who cites Julius Clarus and Pe
trus Sarpus26 for the same opinion.
Rittershusius27 thinks the case of
heretics and apostates was something Thirdly, Heretics
and apostates.
worse in this respect than that of
Jews, because they who deserted the church were
wholly excluded from having any benefit of sanc
tuary in it. Covarruvias, and Panormitan, and Sar
pus collect the same before him, but not from any
express law about this matter, but only from a
general law of Theodosius and Valentinian, which
excludes apostates and heretics from all society,
and many other common privileges allowed to other
men.23 From whence they conclude, by parity of
reason, that they could lay no claim to the benefit

16 Vid. Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 40. de Pcenis, Leg. 17.
17 Vid. Ji.st;n, Novel .17 . e .6.
13 Larnbard. de Legibus Anglise, p. 28.
19 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. de his qui ad Eccles. confug.
Leg. 1. Publicos debitores, si confugiendum ad ecclesias
crediderint; aut illico extrahi de latebris oportebit, aut pro
"is ipsos, qui eos oceultare probantur episcopos exigi, &c.
20 Baron, au. 392, p. 661.
Aug. Ep. 215. Ne corporalem pateretur injuriam, ad
aiiMlium sancta, ecclesia; convolavit, Sec.
* Book V. chap. 3. sect. 5.
23 Aug. Horn. 49. de Diversis, 1. 10. p. 520. Naviculariam
z

nolui esse ecclesiam Christi, &c.
24 Cod. Th lib. 9. Tit. 45. Leg. 2. Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit.
12. Leg. 1. Juikei, qui reatu aliquo vel debitis fatigati, si
mulant se Christians Iegi velle conjungi, ut ad ecclesias
confugientes evitare possint crimina, vel pondera debito-
rum, arceantur, nee ante suscipiantur, quam debita universa
reddiderint. 25 Gothofred, t. 3. p. 361.
26 Sarpus de jure Asyli, c. 5. p. 58.
27 Rittershusius de Asylis, cap. 6.
28 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 7. de Apostat. Leg. 4. Hi qui
sanctam fidem prodiderunt, et sanctum baptisma haeretica

339

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

of sanctuary in any case, because deserters of reli
gion, which they had once owned in baptism, were
reckoned worse than Jews, who had never made
profession of it. And therefore, by another law of
Theodosius, their slaves were entitled to the favour
which the masters themselves were denied : for if
-the slave of an apostate or a heretic23 fled from his
master, and took sanctuary in the church, he was
not only to be protected, but to have his manumis
sion, or freedom, granted him likewise. There being
an equal design in the law to encourage orthodoxy,
and discourage heresy and apostacy, by respective
rewards and punishments aUotted to them.
sect 7 This was particularly determined
that°^yfromsltheir in the case of the Donatists for re-
masters. baptizing their slaves, to initiate them
into their own religion. But in other cases the
slaves of orthodox masters had not so large a privi
lege. For by a law of Arcadius and Honorius,
anno 398, slaves are put in the same condition with
public debtors, and the curiales, and other public
officers, whom no privilege of sanctuary30 was to
excuse from the proper duties of their station. And
therefore, though any such one fled to the church
for refuge, or was ordained a clerk in the church,
there was no legal protection allowed him, but he
might be reclaimed and fetched thence immediately
to his proper servitude or station again, by the au
thority of the civil judges. I know, indeed, Gotho
fred takes this to be that law of Arcadius, procured
by the instigation of Eutropius against the immuni
ties of the church, which is so much reflected on
by St. Chrysostom,31 and Prosper,32 and Socrates,33
and Sozomen,31 and some other ancient writers of
the church, and which Arcadius himself thought fit
to revoke within a year after, when Eutropius was
fallen under his displeasure : which, whether it be
that very law or not, is a thing I shall not now
nicely dispute ; for, admitting it to be so, I observe,
that it was never wholly revoked and disannulled,
but only in some particular instances. For that
part about the illegal ordination of the curiales was

left in a great measure in its full force, as has been
clearly demonstrated in another place : " and that
part which concerns slaves taking sanctuary in the
church, was with a very small variation renewed
and reinforced by Theodosius junior, son of Arca
dius, and compiler of the Theodosian Code. For
by one of his laws,36 which is the last upon this
head in that Code, No slave is allowed to have sanc
tuary or entertainment in any church above one
day, when notice was to be given to his master from
whom he fled for fear of punishment, that he might
reclaim him and carry him back to his own posses
sion, only giving a promise of indemnity and par
don for his faults, if they were not very great and
heinous. And Rittershusius37 cites a law of Theo
doric, king of the Goths, and some others, to the
same purpose.
Butin case men were guilty of crimes
of a more heinous nature, such as theft Fifthi.™ Robbers,
- . , t murderers, conspir-
and robbery, or treason and conspiracy ators, rumhers oi
virgins, adulterers,
agamst the government, or murder JJ! iolS|r aim™*1*
and bloodshed, or ravishing of vir
gins, or adultery, or any crimes of the hke nature ;
then it mattered not whether the criminals were
bond or free, there was not an hour's respite allowed
to such men, but they were to be taken immediately
by force of the civil magistrate, if need required,
even from the very altar ; or if they pretended to
make any resistance with arms, they might with in
demnity be slain there. This is undeniably evident
from the laws of Justinian, which specify these and
all such criminals as excepted universally from
all benefit of sanctuary ; it being33 wholly against
the intent and design of that privilege to give any
protection to murderers, adulterers, ravishers of vir
gins, or any the like, but rather to the innocent and
injured parties, who were exposed to their violence
and abuses : temples were never designed by law to
give sanctuary both to the passive and the aggress
ors : and therefore if any that were guilty of such
crimes fled to the altar for refuge, they should be
drawn thence, and punished according to law with

superstitione profanarunt, a consortio omnium segregati
sint, &c.
19 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 6. Ne sanctum baptisma iteretur.
Leg. 4. His qui fortisan ad rebaptizandum cogentur, refu-
giendi ad ecclesiam catholicam sitfacultas, ut ejus praesidio
adversus hujus criininis auctores attribute libertatis praesidio
defendantur. » Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. Leg. 3. Si quis in posterum
servus, ancilla, curialis, debitor publicus, procurator, muri-
legulus, quilibet postremo publicis privatisve rationibus in
volutes, ad ecclesiam confugiens, vel clericus ordinatus, vel
quocunque modo fuerit a clericis defensatus, nee statim con-
ventione presmissa pristinse conditioni reddatur, decuriones
quidem, et omne6, quos solita ad debitum munus functio
vocat, vigore et solertia judicantum ad pristinam sortem
revocentur. 31 Chrysost. Horn, in Eutrop. t. 4.
32 Prosper de Praedict. lib. 3. c. 38.

33 Socrat. lib. 6. c. 5. » Sozom. lib. 8. c. 7.
35 Book IV. chap. 4. sect. 4.
36 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. de his qui ad Eccles. confug.
Leg. 5. Si "quidem servus cujusquam ecclesiam, altariave,
loci tantum veneratione confisus, sine ullo telo petierit, is
non plus uno die ibidem dimittatur, quin domino ejus, vel
cujus metu pcenam imminentem visus est declinasse, a cleri
cis, quorum interest, nuntietur. Isque eum, impertita in-
dulgentia peccatorum, abducat.
37 Rittershus. de Asylis, t. 8. p. 284.
38 Justin. Novel. 17. c. 7. Neque autem homicidis, neque
adulteris, neque virginum raptoribus, vel talia delinquenti-
bus, terminorum custodies cautelam: sed etiam inde extra-
hes, et supplieium eis inferes. Non enim talia delinquentibus
parcere competit, sed hoc patientibus, ut non talia a pra?-
sumptoribus patiantur. Deinde templorum cautela non no-
centibus, sed laesis datur a lege, et non erit possibile utrurnque
tueri cautela sacrorum locorum, et laedentem et laesuiu.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

339

punishments suitable to their offences. This one
law of Justinian's shows us plainly the true intent
and meaning of all other ancient laws relating to
this privilege of sanctuary, that the design of them,
as I observed before, was chiefly to protect the in
nocent, the injured, and oppressed from violence,
and in some hard or dubious cases to grant a little
respite, till a fair hearing might be procured, or some
intercession made to the judges, by the bishop or
clergy, for such persons as might seem to want it.
And so Gothofred39 upon the whole matter deter-.
mines, that anciently legal refuge was no more but
the clergy's deprecation or intercession for men in
distress. And such as they might laudably and
decently intercede for, they might for some time
legally protect from violence and torture in the
church ; but not obstruct the due execution of jus
tice upon other sort of criminals, for which it was
scandalous to intercede. In which respect most of the mo-
a just 'reflection dern sanctuaries have been complain-
abuse of modem ed of by considering men, as guilty of
sanctuaries, in ex- " #~ .
emoting men from great abuses, in giving protection al-
legal punishment, o ' o o r
iSeTci»uial^c most to a11 sorts of criminals, and so
encouraging the practice of villany,
by exempting men from legal punishment, and
enervating the force of civil laws. For the canon
law of Gratian, and the pope's Decretals, grant pro
tection to all criminals, except night robbers, and
robbers on the highway, and such as commit enor
mous crimes in the church itself upon presumption
of its protection. But all other criminals have
liberty of taking sanctuary, and it is reckoned a
violation of the immunities of the church to take
them thence, unless a promise or an oath be first
given, that neither death,40 nor any other corporal
punishment, but only a pecuniary mulct, shall be
inflicted on them, as Pope Innocent III. determined
in one of his letters to the king of Scots, which
Gregory IX. inserted into the body of his Decretals.
The council of Orleans41 has some canons to the
same purpose, which, though contrary to all other
ancient laws, Gratian42 thought fit to adopt into his
own Collections. And so the modern canon law,
under pretence of ecclesiastical immunities, opened
a wide gap to licentiousness, by taking off those re

straints which the ancient laws had justly set upon
this matter, when they granted refuge to innocent
and injured men, but not to notorious criminals.
Which difference is not only noted and complained
of by all protestant writers, but also by some of the
Romish church. Polydore Virgil43 makes no scruple
to condemn them all over the Christian world, but
more especially here in England, where protection
was given, not to the innocent and oppressed, but
to all sorts of criminals, such as were guilty of trea
son and rebellion not excepted. Whence he thinks
it very apparent, that the thing, as then practised,
was not to be derived from Moses, who allowed re
fuge to none but such as killed a man unawares and
against their will, but from Romulus : which was
the cause that so many villains took heart and en
couragement to practise wickedness, there being
churches every where ready to receive and protect
them ; though nothing was more directly contrary
to the establishment of Moses, whose law was
guarded with this sanction, Exod. xxi. 14, " If a
man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to
slay him with guile, thou shalt take him from my
altar, that he may die." This was the difference, in
the opinion of that author, between the modern
sanctuaries and those of Moses and the ancient
church. There is one thing more to be ob-
° # t Sect. 10.
served concerning the privilege of ci^™*,"",^"',,,^
sanctuary in the laws of the ancient t, \^™.\%
church, which is, that such persons froms0n?„to WV^
as were allowed this benefit, were
obhged to observe certain conditions in taking re
fuge, otherwise they forfeited all their right and title
to it. As, first, They were not to fly with arms into
the church, nor into any place or building adjoining
to it, as the gardens, houses, courts, cloisters, to
which the privilege of sanctuary was annexed. This
is particularly specified and provided by a law 44 of
Theodosius junior, which has this sanction added
to it, That if any one pretended to act otherwise, and,
being admonished by the church, refused to lay
aside his arms, that then it should be lawful for the
magistrate, by the consent of the bishop, to send
his officers with arms into the church upon such an
exigence, and take him thence by force ; and if the

39 Gothofred. Com. in Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. Leg. 5. p.
373. Nihil ad ecclesiam perfugium erat, quam clericorum
deprecatio seu intercessio.
40 Decretal. Gregor. lib. 3. Tit. 49. de Immunit. Eccles.
e. 6. Quantumcunque gravia maleficia perpetraverit, non
est violenter ab ecclesia extrahendus : nee inde damnari
debet ad mortem vel ad poenam, sed rectores ecclesiarum
sibi obtinere debent membra et vitam. Super hoc tamen
quod inique fecit, est alias legitime puniendus.
41 Cone. Aurelian. 1. can. 3 et 4.
42 Gratian. Caus. 17. qu. 4. t. 36. It. Caus. 36. qu. 1.
43 Polydor. Virgil, de Inventor. Rerum, lib. 3. c. 12. Sunt
z 2

hodie in orbe nostro Christiano, pracsertim apud Anglos,
passim asyla, quae non modo insidias timeutibus, sed qui-
busvis sontibus, etiam majestatis reis patent: quod facit ut
manifeste appareat, nos id institutum non a Mose, qui illis
duntaxat qui nolentes hominem occidissent, asylum posuit,
sed a Romulo esse mutuatos. Quae nempe res haud dubie
in causa est, cur bene multi a maleticiis minus abstineant
manus, &c.
44 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. de his qui ad Eccles. confug.
Leg. 4. Si ecclesiae voce moniti, noluerint arma relinquere
— armatis, si ita res exegerit, intromissis, trahendos se ab-
str.ihendosque esse cognoscant, et omnibus casibus esse sub-
dendos, &c.

340

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book VIII.

refugee still persistedin his opposition, and chanced
to be slain in the engagement, it was to be reckoned
purely his own fault, and no violation of the church's
privilege in that case, because he refused to observe
this necessary condition of safety. The emperors
themselves laid aside their arms and crowns when
they entered into the church, and therefore Theo
dosius argues,45 that it was but reasonable all re
fugees should do the same, and trust only to the
laws and sacredness of the place for their protection.
A second condition to be observed
2ndis, No one to in this case was, That men should
raise a seditious ela- ...
rnoor or tumult, as betake themselves silently and mo-
he fled thither. '
destly to the church, and not by any
rude and indecent clamours endeavour to raise any
popular tumult. Learned men collect this from a
law in the Greek Constitutions, and the Justinian
Code,46 which forbids refugees to make any clamor
ous petitions to the emperor on such festivals as he
came to the great church, but if they had any re
quest to be preferred, they should do it privately by
the archbishop or defensors of the church : other

wise they should forfeit their privilege, and be cast
out of the church, and be delivered over to the city
magistrate to be punished.
Thirdly, Though refugees might fly
to the church, and even to the very eat'A?" hr'th"
altar; yet they were neither to eat SS^tH
nor lodge there; but the clergy were """"'"""""""s-
obliged to prohibit them from doing either of these
by an express law of Theodosius junior,47 who, to
cut off all pretences for the contrary practices, as if
men could not be safe but within the walls of the
church, made not only the church and the altar
places of refuge, but all other buildings and places
belonging to the church ; giving this reason for al
lowing such an ample space for the benefit of sanc
tuary, that men might not have the excuse of fear
to make them eat or lodge in the church, which he
thought to be things not so decent in their own na
ture, nor agreeable to the state of religion, and the
respect and reverence that was due to churches, as
places appropriated to God, and set apart for his

45 Edict. Theodos. ad calcem Concil. Ephesin. cited be
fore, chap. 10. n. 8.
46 Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 12. de bis qui ad Eccles. confug.
Leg. 8. Qui imperatore ad magnam ecclesiam in festo pro-
eedente, exclamatione usus fuerit, excidet re sperata, et per
praefectum ejectus castigabitur, &c.

47 Cod. Th. lib. 9. Tit. 45. de his qui ad Eccles. confug.
Leg. 4. Hanc autem spatii latitudinem ideo indulgemus,
ne in ipso Dei templo et sacrosanctis altaribus confugtentiuin
quenquam mane vel vespere cubare vel pernoctare liceat;
ipsis hoc clericis religionis causa vetantibus, &c.

BOOK IX.

A GEOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH, OR AN ACCOUNT OF ITS
DIVISION INTO PROVINCES, DIOCESES, AND PARISHES : AND OF THE FIRST ORIGINAL
OF THESE.

CHAPTER I.
OF THE STATE AND DIVISION OF THE EOMAN EMPIEE, AND OP THE CHTTECH's CONFOEMING
TO THAT IN MODELLING HEE OWN EXTEBNAL POLITY AND GOVEENMENT.

Having thus far spoken of churches,
The state 'of the as they signify the material buildings,
Homan empire in
thedaysoftheapos- or places of convention set apart for
Christian worship, I come now to
consider them in another notion, as they are put to
signify any number of Christian people within a
certain district, as in a parish, diocese, province,
patriarchate ; which are names that we frequently
meet with in ancient writers, though they are not
all equally of the same antiquity : and therefore I
shall here inquire both into the nature and original
of them. Something has already been said upon
this head, in speaking of the several officers of
the church that were placed in those districts, as
patriarchs, metropolitans, bishops, and presbyters,
so far as was necessary to explain the powers and
duties of those ministers in the church : yet there
are many things to be noted further, which could
not then come under consideration ; for which rea
son I now make them the subject of a peculiar in
quiry. And here, to understand the state and di
vision of the church aright, it will be proper to take
a short view of the state and division of the Roman
empire : for it is generally thought by learned men,
that the church held some conformity to that in
her external pohcy and government, both at her
first settlement, and in the changes and variations
that were made in after ages. In the time of the
apostles, every city among the Greeks and Romans
was under the immediate government of certain
magistrates within its own body, commonly known
by the name of /3o«\») or senatus, its common council
or senate, otherwise called ordo and curia, the states
and court of the city: among which there was
usually one chief or principal above the rest, whom
some call the dictator, and others, the defensor civi
tatis; whose power extended not only over the
city, but all the adjacent territory, commonly called

the Tcpod^tia, the suburbs, or lesser towns, belonging
to its jurisdiction. This was a city in the civil
account, a place where the civil magistrate and a
sort of lesser senate was fixed, to order the affairs
of that community, and govern within such a pre
cinct. Now, much after the same manner, . . „
' Sect 2.
the apostles in first planting and ch5cYcoa»U™b'ie
establishing the church, wherever *""•
they found a civil magistracy settled in any place,
there they endeavoured to settle an ecclesiastical
one, consisting of a senate or presbytery, a common
council of presbyters, and one chief president above
the rest, commonly called the irposruig, or the apostle,
or bishop, or angel of the church ; whose jurisdic
tion was not confined to a single congregation, but
extended to the whole region or district belonging
to the city, which was the irpodreia, or -irapoiicia, or, as
we now call it, the diocese of the church. Accord
ing to this model, most probably, St. Paul directed
Titus to ordain elders in Crete, teard ttoXiv, in every
city, that is, to settle an ecclesiastical senate and
government in every place where there was before
a civil one : which, from the subsequent history of
the church, we learn, was a bishop and his pres
bytery, who were conjunctly called the elders and
senate of the church. The cities of the empire had
also their magistrates in the territory or country
round them; but these were subordinate to the
magistrates of the city, and generally chosen by
them, as learned men1 have observed out of Fron-
tinus de Limitibus Agrariis, and other Roman anti
quaries. In like manner, every city church had
spiritual officers in all towns and villages belong
ing to the city region;, and these depending on
the mother church both for the exercise of their
power and their institution; they being both
subordinate and accountable to the city church,

' See Dr. Maurice, Dioces. Episc. p. 390.

342

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

as the subordinate magistrates were in the civil
disposition. Another division of the Roman em-
Thedirisionofthe pire was into provinces and dioceses.
Roman empire info . . ,, ... « i ,
provinces and dio- A province was the cities ot a wliole
region subjected to the authority of
one chief magistrate, who resided in the metropolis,
or chief city of the province. This was commonly
a praetor, or a proconsul, or some magistrate of the
like eminence and dignity. A diocese was still a
larger district, containing several provinces within
the compass of it : in the capital city of which dis
trict a more general magistrate had his residence,
whose power extended over the whole diocese, to
receive appeals, and determine all causes that were
referred to him for a new hearing from any city
within the district. And this magistrate was some
times called an eparchus, or vicarius of the Ro
man empire, and particularly a prcsfeetus Augusta
lis at Alexandria. When first this division was
made, it is not so certainly agreed among learned
men ; but it is generally owned, that the division of
provinces is more ancient than that of dioceses.
For the division into dioceses began only about the
time of Constantine. But the cantonizing of the
empire into provinces was long before ; by some re
ferred to Vespasian, by others reckoned still more
ancient, and coeval to the first establishment of the
Christian church.
Sect 4 However this was, it is very plain,
fo^xd'by'the"'"'81 that the church took her model, in
setting up metropolitical and patri
archal power, from this plan of the state. For as
in every metropohs, or chief city of each province,
there was a superior magistrate above the magis
trates of every single city ; so likewise in the same
metropolis there was a bishop, whose power ex
tended over the whole province, whence he was
called the metropolitan, or primate, as being the
principal bishop of the province. And in all places
therefore the see of the bishop was fixed to the
civil metropohs, except in Africa, where the primate
was commonly the senior bishop of the province, as
has been showed in another place. In like manner
as the state had a, vicarius in every capital city of
each civil diocese ; so the church in process of time
came to have her exarchs, or patriarchs, in many, if
not in all the capital cities of the empire.
.sect. 5. Tms wiu appear plainly from the
fro^'thfcmTnof.-- civil notitia of the empire, when com-
'"" 'heemp,re- pared with the ecclesiastical; which,
because it not only gives light in this matter, but is
of singular use in many other respects to all that
study ecclesiastical history, I will here insert it out
of the book called Notitia Imperii, said to be writ
ten about the time of Arcadius and Honorius,
where the whole empire is divided into thirteen
dioceses, under four presfecti-prestorio ; and about a

hundred and twenty provinces contained in them,
in the manner and form following.
The prcsfectus-prcstorio Orientis, and under him five
dioceses, viz. The Oriental, Egyptian, Asiatic,
Pontic, and Thracian dioceses.
I. In the Oriental diocese are contained fifteen pro
vinces. 1. Paloestina. 2. Phoenice. 3. Syria.
4. Cilicia. 5. Cyprus. 6. Arabia. 7- Isauria.
8. Palaestina Salutaris. 9. Palsestina Secunda.
10. Phcenice Libani. 11. Euphratensis. 12.
Syria Salutaris. 13. Osrhoena. 14. Mesopota
mia. 15. Cilicia Secunda.
II. In the diocese of Egypt six provinces. 1. Li
bya Superior. 2. Libya Inferior. 3. Thebais.
4. iEgyptus. 5. Arcadia. 6. Augustanica.
III. In the Asiatic diocese ten provinces. 1. Pam-
phylia. 2. Hellespontus. 3. Lydia. 4. Pisidia.
5. Lycaonia. 6. Phrygia Pacatiana. 7- Phry
gia Salutaris. 8. Lycia. 9. Caria. 10. Insula?
Cyclades.
IV. In the Pontic diocese eleven provinces. 1. Ga
latia. 2. Bithynia. 3. Honorias. 4. Cappadocia
Prima. 5. Paphlagonia. 6. Pontus Polemonia-
cus. 7- Hellenopontus. 8. Armenia Prima.
9. Armenia Secunda. 10. Galatia Salutaris.
11. Cappadocia Secunda.
V. In the diocese of Thrace six provinces. 1. Eu-
ropa. 2. Thracia. 3. Hsemimontis. 4. Rho-
dope. 5. Mtesia Secunda. 6. Scythia.
The prcsfectus-prcstorio of Illyricum, and under him
two dioceses, Macedonia and Dacia.
VI. In the diocese of Macedonia six provinces. I.
Achaia. 2. Macedonia. 3. Creta. 4. Thessa-
lia. 5. Epirus Vetus. 6. Epirus Nova, and pars
Macedonia? Salutaris.
VII. In the diocese of Dacia five provinces. 1.
Dacia Mediterranea. 2. Dacia Ripensis. 3.
Ma5sia Prima. 4. Dardania. 5. Pars Macedo
nia? Salutaris, and Pra?valitana.
The prcsfectus-prcstorio of Italy, and under him three
dioceses, viz. Italy or the Italic diocese, IUyricurn,
and Africa.
VIII. In the Italic diocese are contained seventeen
provinces. 1. Venetian. 2. iEmylia. 3. Ligu
ria. 4. Flaminia and Picenum Annonarium. 5.
Tuscia and Umbria. 6. Picenum Suburbicarium.
7. Campania. 8. Sicilia. 9. Apulia and Cala
bria. 10. Lucania and Brutii. 11. Alpes Cot-
tiae. 12. Rhaetia Prima. 13. Rhaetia Secunda.
14. Samnium. 15. Valeria. 16. Sardinia. 17-
Corsica.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

343

IX. In the diocese of Illyricum six provinces. I.
Pannonia Secunda. 2. Savia. 3. Dalmatia. 4.
Pannonia Prima. 5. Noricum Mediterraneum.
6. Noricum Ripense.
X. In the diocese of Africa six provinces. 1. By-
zacium. 2. Numidia. 3. Mauritania Sitifensis.
4. Mauritania Caosariensis. 5. Tripolis. 6. Afri
ca Proconsularis.
The prcefectus-prcstorio Galliarum, and under him
three dioceses, viz. Hispania, Gallia, Britannia.
XI. In the Spanish diocese seven provinces. 1.
Bcetica. 2. Lusitania. 3. Gallaecia. 4. Tarra-
conensis. 4. Carthaginensis. 6. Tingitania. 7-
Baleares.
XII. In the Gailican diocese seventeen provinces.
1. Viennensis. 2. Lugdunensis Prima. 3. Ger-
mania Prima. 4. Germania Secunda. 5. Bel-
gica Prima. 6. Belgica Secunda. 7-.AlpesMa-
ritima3. 8. Alpes Penninae et Graiae. 9. Max
ima Sequanorum. 10. Aquitania Prima. 11.
Aquitania Secunda. 12. Novem Populi. 13.
Narbonensis Prima. 14. Narbonensis Secunda.
15 Lugdunensis Secunda. 16. Lugdunensis Ter
tia. 17. Lugdunensis Senonia.
XIII. In the Britannic diocese five provinces.
1. Maxima Csesariensis. 2. Valentia. 3. Bri
tannia Prima. 4. Britannia Secunda. 5. Flavia
C&ssariensis. Thus far the notitia of the empire.
1
Now, though we have no notitia of
moJs7p Seta? lac- the church so ancient as this; (for
™„uf °pror!r!c«m that of Leo Sapiens, which is exhibit-
the church. ed hereafter) ig of later date .) yet by
comparing the broken fragments that remain in
the acts and subscriptions of the ancient councils,
with this notitia of the empire, and conferring both
with the later notitias of the church, it plainly ap
pears that the church was divided into dioceses and
provinces much after the same manner as the em
pire; having an exarch, or patriarch, in almost every
diocese, and a metropohtan, or primate, in every
province. The most probable account of which,
conformed to the foresaid civil notitia, is presented
in the following Table, according as the division of
the church seems to have stood in the latter end of
the fourth century.
I. In the Oriental diocese. Patriarch of Antioch.
PROVINCES. METROPOLES.

1. Palcestina Prima.
2. Phcenice.
3. Syria.
4. Cilicia Prima.
5. Cyprus.
6 Arabia.

1. Csesarea.
2. Tyrus.
3. Antiochia.
4. Tarsus.
5. Constantia.
6. Bostra.

PROVINCES.
7. Isauria.
8. Paleestina Salutaris.
9. Palaestina Secunda.
10. Phcenice Libani.
11. Euphratensis.
12. Syria Salutaris.
13. Osrhoene.
14. Mesopotamia.
15. Cilicia Secunda.

METROPOLES.
7. Seleucia.
8. Jerusalem, or iElia.
9. Scythopolis.
10. Emissa.
II. Hierapolis.
12. Apamea.
13. Edessa.
14. Amida.
15. Anazarbus.

II. In the diocese of Egypt. Patriarch of Alexandria.
PROVINCES. METROPOLES.

1. Libya Superior.
2. Libya Inferior.
3. Thebais.
4. iEgyptus.
5. Arcadia.
6. Augustanica.

1. Ptolemais.
2. Dranieon.
3. Antinoe, or Lycopolis.
4. Alexandria.
5. Oxirinchus.
6. Pelusium.

III. In the diocese of Asia. Exarch of Ephesus.

PROVINCES.
1. Pamphylia.
2. Hellespont.
3. Lydia.
4. Pisidia.
5. Lycaonia.
6. Phrygia Pacatiana.
7- Phrygia Salutaris.
8. Lycia.
9. Caria.
10. Insula? Cyclades.
11. Asia Proconsularis.

METROPOLES.
1. Perga, or Sida.
2. Cyzicus.
3. Sardes.
4. Antiochia.
5. Iconium.
6. Laodicea.
7. Synada.
8. Myra.
9. Amphrodisias, or
Stauropohs.
10. Rhodus.
11. Ephesus.

IV. Diocese of Pontus. Exarch of Ca?sarea.

PROVINCES.
1. Galatia. 1.
2. Bithynia. 2.
3. Cappadocia Prima. 3.
4. Cappadocia Secunda. 4.
5. Honorias. 5.
6. Paphlagonia. 6.
7. Pontus Polemoniacus. 7-
8. Helenopontus. 8.
9. Armenia Prima. 9.
10. Armenia Secunda. 10.
11. Galatia Salutaris. 11.

METROPOLES.
Ancyra. Nicomedia.
Csesarea.Tyana. Claudiopolis.
Gangra.Neoca?sarea. Amasea. Sebastia.
Melitine. Pessinus al. Justinian-
opolis.

V . Diocese of Thrace. Exarch of Heraclea first, af
terward Constantinople.

PROVINCES.

1. Europa.
2. Thracia.

1

METROPOLES.
Heraclea.

2. Philippopolis.

344 PROVINCES.
3. Haemi montis.
4. Rhodope.
5. Maesia Secunda.
6. Scythia.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

VI.

In the diocese of
Macedonia.

PROVINCES.
1. Achaia.
2. Macedonia.
3. Creta.
4. Thessalia.
5. Epirus Vetus.
6. Epirus Nova.

METROPOLES.
3. Adrianople.
4. Trajanople.
5. Marcianople.
6. Tomi. But the bishop
of Tomi is rather to be
reckoned an autoce-
phdlus than a metro
politan, because he
had no suffragan bi
shops under him.
The exarch of Thessa
lonica.
METROPOLES.
1. Corinthus.
2. Thessalonica.
3. Gortyna.
4. Larissa.
5. Nicopolis.
6. Dyrrachium.

VII. Diocese of Dacia. Exarch perhaps first at
Sardica, afterwards at A-
crida, or Justiniana Pri-
ma,erectedby Justinian.

PROVINCES.
1. Dacia Mediterranea.
2. Dacia Ripensis.
3. Maesia Prima.
4. Dardania.
5. Pravalitana.

METROrOLES.
1. Sardica.
2. The same.
3. The same.
4. Scupi.
5. Acrida.

VIII. The diocese of Italy is by some reckoned but
one diocese, by others divided into two, the diocese
of Italy, and prefecture of Rome.

Exarch of Milan.
METROPOLES.
1. Ravenna.
2. Aquileia.
3. Ravenna.
4. Mediolanum, Milan.
5. Milan.
6. Milan.
7. Milan,others Rheetio-
polis, called Augusta
Tiberii, now Ratis-
bon.

In the Roman prefecture. Patriarch of Rome.
PROVINCES. METROPOLES.
I. Picenum Subnrbica- 1. Rome.
rium.
2. Campania. 2. Rome, others Capua.

In the Italic diocese.
PROVINCES.
1. Flaminia and Picenum
Annon.
2. Venetia and Histria.
3. iEmilia.
4. Liguria.
5. Alpes CotticE.
6. Rhoetia Prima.
7. Rha?tia Secunda.

PROVINCES. METROPOLIS
3. Tuscia and Umbria. 3. Rome.
4. Apulia and Calabria. 4. Rome.
5. Brutii and Lucania. 5. Rome.
6. Samnium.
7. Valeria.
8. Sicilia.
9. Sardinia.
10. Corsica.

6. Rome.
7. Rome.
8. Syracuse.
9. Calaris.
10. Uncertain. Others say

Rome.
IX. Diocese of Illyricum Exarch of Sirmium.
Occidentale.

PROVINCES.
1. Pannonia Prima, or
Superior.
2. Pannonia Secunda.
3. Salvia.
4. Dalmatia.
5. Noricum Mediterra-
neum.
6. Noricum Ripense.

METROPOLES.
1. Laureacum.
2. Sirmium.
3. Sirmium. Others
Vindomana.
4. Salon a.
5. Some say, Saltzburg.
6. Somesay,Laureacum. Others leave these
two uncertain.

X. Diocese of Africa. Exarch of Carthage.

PROVINCES.

METROPOLES.

I. Africa Proconsularis. 1. Carthago.
2. Byzacium. 2. Civil metropolis,Adru-
metum. Buttheeccle-
siastical followed the
see of the senior bi
shop. So in all the rest.
3. Numidia. 3. Cirta Julia, or Con-
stantina.
4. Tripolis. 4. Tripolis.
5. Mauritania Sitifensis. 5. Sitifi.
6. Mauritania Caesari- 6. Csesarea.
ensis.
XI. Diocese of Spain. Exarch uncertain.

PROVINCES.
1. Bcetica.
2. Lusitania.
3. Gallicia.
4. Tarraconensis.
5. Carthaginensis.
6. Tingitana.
7. Insula? Baleares.

XII. Diocese of Gallia.

METROPOLES.
1. Hispalis.
2. Emerita Augusta.
3. Bracara.
4. Tarraco.
5. Carthago Hispanica.
6. See of the sen. bishop.
7. Uncertain; some say
Palma.
Exarch uncertain.

PROVINCES. METROPOLES.
1. Viennensis. 1. Arelate. Others say
Vienna.
2. Lugdunensis Prima. 2. Lugdunum.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

345

PROVINCES.
3. Germania Prima. 3.
4. Germania Secunda. 4.
5. Belgica Prima. 5.
6. Belgica Secunda. 6.
7. Alpes Maritima?. 7-
8. Alpes Pennina? and 8.
Graia?.
9. Maxima Sequanorum. 9.
10. Aquitania Prima. 10.
11. Aquitania Secunda. 11.
12. Novem Populorum. 12.
13. Narbonensis Prima. 13.
14. Narbonensis Secunda. 14.
15. Lugdunensis Secunda. 15.
16. Lugdunensis Tertia. 16.
16. Lugdunensis Senoniae. 17.

METROPOLES.
Treviris. Since Mentz.
Treveris. Since Colen.
Treveris. Rhemi.
Ebrodunum. Vienna.
Vesontio. Besancon.
Bituriges. Bourges.
Burdigala.Elusa, or Augusta Au-
sciorum.
Narbo. Aquae Sextiae. Aix.
Rothomagus. Rouen.
Turones. Tours.
Senonae. Sens.

XIII. Diocese of Britain.

Exarch of York, if any.
METROPOLES.
1. Eboracum. York.

PROVINCES.
I. Maxima Ca?sariensis,
which was at the first
all from the Thame s to
the northern borders.
2. FlaviaCsesariensis.ta- 2. York.
ken out of the form
er, and containing all
from the Thames to
the Humber.
3. Britannia Prima, all on 3. London.
the south of Thames.
4. Britannia Secunda, or 4. Caerleon.
all beyond Severn.
5. Valentia, beyond the 5. York.
Picts' wall.
This, in the main, was the state and division of
the church into provinces, and exarchates, or me
tropolitical and patriarchal dioceses, in the latter
end of the fourth century; from which it appears,
that a very near correspondence was observed be
tween- the church and state in this matter both in
the Western and Eastern empire.
o And this may be evidenced further
Sect. 7. .. J
lSi9frometneeraiS m ^ ^^ ^ Can0nS> and
ehict™"* °frU'h" tne known practice of the church in
this case. For when any provinces
were divided in the state, there commonly fol
lowed a division in the church also : and when any
city was advanced to a greater dignity in the civil
account, it usually obtained a like promotion in the
ecclesiastical: so when controversies arose about

_ Concil. ^Constant, c. 3. Tdv KtovaTavTivoviroXEtos
EtritrKoirov exew tcV irpEtj^Ela Tr)s Tipijs pETi tov Tr)s
Ptop-ns iiritTKOlrov, Sid to Etval ailTi]v viav Veopr)v.
* Concil. Chalced. c. 28. 4 Concil. Antioch. o. 9.
5 Concil. Taurin. c. 2. IUud inter episcopos urbium

primacy between two churches in the same pro
vince or district, the way to end the dispute was to
inquire, which of them was the metropolis in the
state, and order the same to be the metropohs in
the church. Of all which there are manifest proofs
in ancient history. It was by this rule that the
bishop of Constantinople was advanced to patri
archal power in the church, who before was not so
much as a metropohtan, but subject to the primate
of Heraclea in Thrace. And this very reason is
given by two general councils, which confirmed him
in the possession of this new-acquired power. The
first of Constantinople decreed,2 That he should
have the next place of honour after the bishop of
Rome, because Constantinople was New Rome.
"Which was thus again confirmed and ratified in the
council of Chalcedon, which says, Forasmuch as
we think it proper to follow the decrees of the holy
fathers, and allow the canon made by those hun
dred and fifty bishops assembled under the emperor
Theodosius in the royal city Constantinople, we
ourselves order1 and decree the same concerning
the privileges of the most holy church of the said
city, which is New Rome. For our forefathers gave
Old Rome her privileges in regard that she was
the royal city : and those hundred and fifty bishops
were moved with the same consideration to grant
equal privileges to the episcopal throne of New
Rome ; judging it but reasonable, that the city
which was honoured with the royal seat of the
empire and senate, and enjoyed the same privileges
with Old Rome in all matters of a civil nature,
should also be advanced to the same dignity in ec
clesiastical affairs, and be accounted the second in
order after her. Accordingly they determined now,
that the three whole dioceses of Asia, Pontus, and
Thrace, should be settled under the jurisdiction of
this new patriarch of Constantinople. Which plainly
shows, they had a particular regard to the model of
the state in settling the bounds and limits of juris
diction in the church. The council of Antioch
assigns this for the reason of paying deference to
metropohtan bishops in general, because they were
placed in the metropolis of the province,4 whither
all men that had business or controversies had
recourse. And therefore if any dispute happened,
as sometimes there did, between two bishops in the
same province about metropolitical power, each
laying a claim to it ; the way to end this contro
versy was to inquire, which of their sees was the
true metropolis in the state ? and adjudge the same
to have the true legal right and privilege in the
church. By this rule the council of Turin5 deter-

Arelatensis et Viennensis, qui de primatus apud nos honore
certabant, a sancta synodo definitum est, ut qui ex eis com-
probaverit suam civitatem esse metropoliin, is totius pro-
vinciee honorem primatus obtineat, et ipse juxta praceptum
canonum, ordinationum habeat potestatem.

346

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

mined the controversy about presidency betwixt
the two churches of Aries and Vienna, decreeing,
That that bishop should be the primate, who could
prove his city to be the metropohs of the province.
It sometimes happened that an ambitious spirit
would petition the emperor to grant him the honour
and power of a metropolitan in the church, when
yet the province to which he belonged had but one
metropolis in the state ; which was so contrary to
the foresaid rule of the church, that the great coun
cil of Chalcedon11 made it deposition for any bishop
to attempt it. But on the other hand, if the em
peror thought fit to divide a province into two, and
erect a new metropolis in the second part ; then the
church many times allowed the bishop of the new
metropolis to become a metropolitan in the church
also. By this means Tyana, in Cappadocia, came to
be a metropolitical see, as well as Ctesarea, because
the province was divided into two by imperial edict.
And the like happened upon the division of many
other provinces, Galatia, Pamphylia, &c. As may
be seen in the notitia of the church, which follows
in the end of this book. The canons of the church
were made to favour this practice in the erection of
new bishoprics also. For the council of Chalcedon7
has another canon, which says, That if the imperial
power made any innovation in the precincts or
parishes belonging to any city, then the state of the
church-precincts might be altered in conformity to
the alterations that were made in the political and
civil state. Which canon is repeated and confirmed
in the council8 of Trullo. So that if any place was
advanced to the privilege of a city, and governed by
a civil magistracy of its own, which was not so be
fore, it might then also be freed from the eccle
siastical jurisdiction of its former bishop, and be
governed by one of its own. Thus when Maiuma
in Palestine, a dependant on Gaza, was advanced
by Constantine to the privilege of a city, and
governed by a magistracy of its own; that was
presently followed with the erection of a new bi
shop's see, which continued ever after, notwith
standing that Julian, in spite to Christianity, dis
franchised the city, and annexed it to Gaza again.
Sozomen is om- author for this, and he adds fur
ther,9 that in his time the bishop of Gaza, upon a
vacancy of Maiuma, laying claim to it as only an
appendage of his own city ; and pleading, that one
city ought not to have two bishops ; the cause came
to a hearing before a provincial synod, which deter
mined in favour of the Maiumitans, and ordained

them another bishop. For they thought it not pro
per, that they who for their piety had obtained the
privilege of being made a city, and were only de
prived of their right by the envy of a pagan prince,
should lose their other rights, which concerned the
priesthood and the church. So it always continued
an episcopal see, and has its place among the rest
in the notitia of the church. The hke may be ob
served of Emmaus, which at first was but a village
belonging to the diocese and city of Jerusalem.
But being afterward rebuilt by the Romans, and
called Nicopolis, from their great victories over the
Jews, it became a city and a bishop's see, under
which character the reader may also find it in the
notitia of the church. These are evident proofs,
that in settling the limits of dioceses and other dis
tricts, and modelling the external polity of the
church, a great regard was had to the rules of the
state, and many things ordered in conformity to the
measure observed in the Roman empire.
Yet these being matters only of Sccl_g
conveniency and outward order, the Mu!ed%;Ell™5
church did not tie herself absolutely p'^Jt,lt^
to follow that model, but only so far mv"1"ns """'
as she judged it expedient and conducive to the
ends of her own spiritual government and disci
pline. And therefore she did not imitate the state
model in all things : she never had one universal
bishop, in imitation of a universal emperor; nor
an Eastern and a Western pontificate, in imitation
of an Eastern and Western empire ; nor four grand
spiritual administrators, answering to the four great
ministers of state, the prcsfecti-prestorio, in the civil
government; not to mention any other forms or
ministers of state affairs, multitudes of which may
be seen in the notitia of the empire. Nay, in those
things wherein she followed the civil form, her li
berty seems to have been preserved both by the laws
of church and state ; and nothing of this nature was
forced upon her, but as she thought fit to order it
in her own wisdom and discretion. This may be
collected from one of Justinian's Novels, where hav
ing divided the two Armenias into four provinces,
he adds,10 That as to what concerned the state of
the church, his intent was to leave every thing in
its ancient form, and make no alterations in the
rights of the old metropolitans, or their power of
ordaining their suffragans, &c. And this appears
further from the answer of Pope Innocent, bishop
of Rome, or one under his name, given to Alexander
of Antioch, who had put the question," Whether

"Concil. Chalced. c. 12.
7 Concil. Chalced. c. 17. Ei tis eV fiaa-iXiKris ifyvaias
iKatvitrdi) iroXts, toXs itoXitikoXs Kal Si]potriots tuttois Kal
Twv iKKXriertaerTlKtov irapolKtiov i] Tafcts aKoXovdEtTto.
8 Concil. Trul. t. 38, which instead of irapoiKimv, reads
irpaypaTtov. 9 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 3.

10 Justin. Novel. 31. Quae vero ad sacerdotia spectant,
ea volumus in pristina manere forma, ut neque circa jus
metropoliticum, neque circa ordinationes quicquam inno-
vetur. Vid. 28. c. 2.
11 Innocent. Ep. 18. ad Alex. Antioch. Quod sciscitaris,
utrum divisis imperiali judicio provinciis, ut duae metro
poles fiant, sic duo metropolitani episcopi debeant norm-

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

347

upon the division of a province, and the erection of
two civil metropoles in it by a royal decree, there
ought also to be two metropolitan bishops in the
church ? To this he answers, That there was no rea
son the church should undergo alterations upon
every necessary change that was made in the
civil state, or have her honours and dignitaries
multiplied or divided according to what the em
peror thought fit to do in his own affairs. This
shows, that the church was at hberty in this mat
ter, to follow the model and divisions of the civil
state or not, as she judged most expedient for
herself: and when any alterations of this nature
were made, they were generally done by the di
rection or consent of a provincial or general coun
cil, or the tacit consent and approbation of the
church. . . Whilst we are upon this head re
sect. 9. r
,ri?iiicc«»ou°4i'o- latmg to the ancient division of the
&\leandi5lril:' church, it comes properly to be in
quired, what the primitive- writers
mean by the term ecclesics suburbicarics, suburbicary
churches, in the district of the Roman church.
Ruifinus, in his translation and abstract of the Ni
cene canons, gives us the sixth of them in these
words,12 " The ancient custom of Alexandria and
Rome shall still be observed, that the one shall have
the care or government of the Egyptian, and the
other that of the suburbicary churches." A great
many questions have been raised by learned men
in the last age concerning this, which I shall not
clog tins discourse with, but only resolve two ques
tions, which are most material for a reader to know.
1. What was the extent of this district ? 2. Whe
ther it was the limits of his metropolitical or patri
archal power ? To know what was the extent of
this district, we cannot take a surer way, than to
consider what is meant by the suburbicary regions
in other places. For this is a term that often occurs
in the Theodosian Code,13 where Gothofred,14 and
our learned Dr. Cave,15 and many others take it to
signify the district of the prcsfeetus urbis, or juris
diction ofthe provost of Rome, which was a circuit
of about a hundred miles next to Rome ; as is evi
dent from the ancient law, which says, his govern
ment extended not only to Rome, but to a hundred
miles round it,16 where the limits of his jurisdiction
ceased. Which is noted also by Cassiodore,17 and
Dio,1" who instead of centesimus lapis, uses the phrase
of seven hundred and fifty stadia, or furlongs, which

is not much short of the legal computation. Others
reckon the regiones suburbicarics to be the same ten
provinces of the Italic diocese which were under the
vicarius urbicus, who with the other vicarius of Italy
divided the Italic diocese between them : so that
the Roman vicarius had seven provinces in Italy,
(mentioned before in the notitia,) and the three
islands of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica, under his
jurisdiction; which they reckon the suburbicary
provinces of Rome. So our learnedMr. Brerewood,19
and Sirmond,20 and Du Pin, and some others, who
extend the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the bishop
of Rome to all those ten provinces under the inspec
tion of the vicarius urbis. Either of these opinions
may be admitted, as having at least their arguments
of probability to defend them : whereas they who
confine the suburbicary churches to a single diocese,
or extend them so far as to include all the provinces
of the Western empire, run into contrary extremes,
for which there is no ground either in the Nicene
canon itself, or any other part of the history of the
church in that age. For it is evident the canon
speaks of the power ofthe three great bishops, Rome,
Alexandria, and Antioch, as extending further than
a single diocese : but that the authority of the bi
shop of Rome in those days extended over the whole
Western empire, is not once so much as hinted in
the Nicene canon, but is contrary to all the com
mon senses of suburbicary churches, and refuted by
the known distinction between Italic and Roman
churches or provinces, and the constant opposition
that was made by the African churches, and those
of Britain, Milan, and others, to the least pretences
of patriarchal power over them. From which it is
rational to conclude, that the notion of suburbicary
churches ought not to be extended beyond the limits
either of the prcsfeetus urbis, which was a hundred
miles about Rome ; and, as Dr. Cave and some
others think, was also the hmits of the pope's me
tropolitical power ; or at most not beyond the limits
of those ten provinces, which were immediately
subjected to the civil disposition and jurisdiction of
the vicarius urbis: viz. 1. Campania. 2. Tuscia
and Umbria. 3. Picenum Suburbicarium. 4. Va
leria. 5. Samnium. 6. Apulia and Calabria. 7-
Lucania and Brutii. 8. Sicilia. 9. Sardinia. 10.
Corsica. Which Dr. Cave21 supposes to have been
the exact and proper hmits ofthe pope's patriarchal
power, as he thinks the other were the bounds of
his metropolitical jurisdiction.

nari: non visum est ad mobilitatem- necessitatum munda-
narum Dei ecclesiam commutari, honoresque aut divisiones
perpeti, quas pro suis causis faciendas duxerit imperator.
12 Ruffin. Hist. lib. 1 . c. 6. Ut apud Alexandriam, et in
arte Roma, vetusta consuetudo servetur, ut vel ille JEgypti,
rel hie suburbicariartim ecclesiarum sollicitudinem gerat.
13 Cod. Th. lib. 11. Tit. 1. de Annona. Leg. 9. Vid. plura
apud Gothofred. in locum.
14 Gothofred. in loc.

15 Cave, Ane. Church Gov. u. 3. p. 115.
18 Digest, lib. 1. Tit. 12. Leg. I. Si quid intra centesi-
mum milliarium admissum sit, ad praefectum urbi per
tinet, &c.
17 Cassiodor. Form. lib. 6. p. 207.
"> Dio, lib. 52. p. 548.
19 Brerewood of Patriarch. Gov. qu. 1. p. 99.
20 Sirmond. Censur. Conjectur. lib. 1. c. 4.
21 Cave, Ane. Church Gov. c. 5. p. 256.

348

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

But it matters not much, I think,
Sect. 10. .
This most proba- whether we call this district of these
bly the true ancient
orRom'-s'tath'S ten provinces the bishop of Rome's
ac1haii„r£oieP-''' metropolitical or patriarchal dioceses
tl0°' or provinces. For after all the dis
putes that have been raised about this matter, these
seem to have been in a great measure the true an
cient limits both of his metropolitical and patri
archal power. Many, I know, will take this for a
paradox : but I have showed it to be true22 in the
case of the bishop of Alexandria, the bounds of
whose jurisdiction were the same, viz. the six pro
vinces of the Egyptian diocese, both when he was
a metropolitan and patriarch : and why then might
not the case be the same with the bishop of Rome,
whose privileges are prescribed as a model for the
bishop of Alexandria by the council of Nice, whose
words are these :23 Let ancient customs prevail ;
in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapohs, let the bishop of
Alexandria have authority over all, because the
same is customary with the bishop of Rome: in
like manner at Antioch, and in other provinces, let
the privileges be secured to the churches. Some
think the bishop of Rome was only a metropolitan
when this canon was made, as Launoy, Bishop
Beveridge, Bishop Stillingfleet, Dr. Cave ; accord
ing to whose sentiments it must follow, that the
suburbicary churches were the district or subject of
his metropolitical power. Mr. Brerewood21 and
Spalatensis, after St. Jerom, think he was properly
a patriarch ; and I have showed elsewhere,25 that
there are some reasons to countenance their opinion :
but then the limits of his patriarchal power were
still the same, (according as it was at Alexandria,)
and the ten provinces of the Roman diocese were
the legal bounds of his jurisdiction. And so Du
Pin™ amongst the Romanists makes no scruple in
genuously to confess ; exempting Germany, Spain,
France, Britain, Africa, Ilryricum, and seven of the
Itahc provinces, from any subjection to the juris
diction of the Roman patriarch in those first and
primitive ages. This is contrary to the general
someeiicient stream and current of the Romish
proofs of this. writers, one of which is so angry with
Du Pin upon this account, that he treats him with
all the scorn and bitterness imaginable for making
such a bold concession, and endeavours to answer27
both what he and Bishop Stillingfleet had advanced
against the pope's pretence to patriarchal power

over the whole Western empire : but with what suc
cess, the reader may easily judge from these few in
stances, which are evident proofs of the sense that
has been given of the extent and limits of the pope's
patriarchal jurisdiction. 1. Ruffinus, who was an
Italian, and presbyter of Aquileia, and therefore
could not be ignorant of the bounds of the pope's
patriarchal power, in interpreting the sixth canon
of the council of Nice, confines his jurisdiction to
the suburbicary provinces :2" and other ancient .ver
sions, published by Sirmondus and Justellus, agree
with his interpretation. 2. The other seven pro
vinces of Italy, which properly constituted the
Italic diocese, as distinct from the Roman pro
vinces, with Milan their metropohs at the head of
them, were not anciently subject to the jurisdiction
of the bishop of Rome. For Milan is frequently
styled the metropolis of Italy by Athanasius " and
Theodoret,80 taking Italy in its strict and peculiar
notion, as distinct from the provinces subject to
Rome. The bishop of Milan was never ordained
by the bishop of Rome, (which yet he must have
been, had he been subject to his patriarchal power,)
but by the bishop of Aquileia, as the bishop of
Aquileia and other places were ordained by Milan,
which is evident from the epistle of Pope Pelagius,11
and De Marca32 does not pretend to deny it. The
like has been observed by learned men concerning
Ravenna, and other places in Italy, which fre
quently contested the point of superiority and sub
jection with the bishops of Rome, of which Dr.
Cave33 gives the reader a particular historical ac
count for many ages successively, too long to be
here inserted. 3. For the African provinces (which
are pretended to be part of the pope's patriarchal
dominions) they had always an exarch or patriarch
of their own, the primate of Carthage, who was ab
solute and independent34 of any other, as Justinian
declares in one of his Novels. And it is plain the
African councils always thought so : for as they
never sent to Rome for ordinations, so they pro
hibited all appeals thither upon any account what
soever. Which is evident beyond all contradiction
from the council of Milevis,35 which orders every
African clerk, that appeals from the sentence of his
own bishop, or a synod of select judges, to appeal
to none but African synods, or the primates of the
provinces. And if any presumed to appeal beyond
seas, meaning to Rome, he should be excluded from
all communion in the African churches. This de-

22 Book II. chap. 17. sect. 11. a Cone. Nic. c. 6.
24 Brerewood of Patriarchal Power, qu. 1.
25 Book II. chap. 17. sect. 8.
26 Du Pin de Disciplin. Eccles. Dissert. 1. n. 14. p. 92.
27 Schelstrate's Dissertation of Metropolitical and Patri
archal Power against Stillingfleet, Lond. 1688.
28 Ruffin. Hist. lib. 1. c. 6. See before, sect. 9.
29 Athanas. Ep. ad Solitar. t. 1. p. 831.
80 Theod. lib. 2. c. 15.

31 Pelag. Ep. 17. Cone. t. 5. p. 805..
32 Marca de Concord. Sacerdot. lib. 6. c. 4. n. 7, 8.
83 Cave, Ane. Church Gov. c. 5.
34 Justin. Novel. 131. c. 4.
85 Cone. Milevit. u. 22. Quod si et ab eis appellandum
putaver-int, non provocent nisi ad Africana eonsilia, vel ad
primates provinciarum suarum. Ad transmarina autem qui
putaverit appellandum, a nullo intra Africam in commu-
nione suscipiatur.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

349

cree was further confirmed by several acts of their
general synods, made upon the famous case and
appeal of Apiarius, an African presbyter, whom Zo
simus, bishop of Rome, pretended to restore to com
munion, after he had been deposed by an African
council. Zosimus alleged for himself a pretended
decree of the council of Nice, giving him authority
to receive appeals : but this the African fathers
. proved to be a forgery, by sending for authentic
copies of the Nicene decrees from Constantinople,
Antioch, and Alexandria, where no such thing ap
peared. Upon this the African fathers write a very
sharp letter to Pope Celestine ; (for Zosimus and
Boniface his successor were both dead whilst this
controversy was depending;) where among other
things they desire him, that he would not for the
future give ear to any that came from Africa, nor
admit those to communion whom they had excom
municated, which he might easily perceive to be
prohibited by the council of Nice, according to
whose decrees both the inferior clergy and the
bishops themselves were committed to the judgment
of their own metropolitans : for the Nicene fathers
very justly and wisely conceived, that all controver
sies ought to be ended in the places where they
arose. And it was very unreasonable in itself to
think, that God should enable a single person to
examine the justice of a cause, and deny his
grace to a vast number of persons assembled in
council. Therefore, upon the whole matter, they
desire him henceforth to forbear sending any of his
clerks into Africa, to execute his sentence there,
lest they should seem to introduce the smoky pride
of the world into the church of Christ. With
abundance more to the same purpose, which the
reader may find at large inserted 3S among the ca
nons of the African Code. From which it is as
plain as the sun at noon-day, that in the time of
St. Austin the pope could lay no just claim to pa
triarchal power over any of the African churches.
.4. Baluzius has further demonstrated for the Gal
lican churches, (in his excellent preface to Antonius
Augustinus's book De Emendatione Gratiani,) that
for eight hundred years the French synods never
allowed of any appeals from their own determin
ations to the pope. They always ordained their
own metropolitans, as is evident from the second
synod of Orleans,37 anno 533. And many times
stoutly resisted the encroachments of the popes, for
which I refer the reader to the foresaid Baluzius
and Dr. Cave,38 the particulars being too long to be

33 Cod. Can. Afric. a cap. 135. ad cap. 138.
87 Cone. Aurel. 2. c. 7.
38 Cave, Ane. Church Gov. e. 5. p. 220.
33 Spelman. Concil. Britan. an. 601. t. 1. p. 108.
40 Bede, Hist. lib. 2. c. 2 et 19. lib. 3. e. 25. lib. 5. c. 16 et 22.
1 Malmsbur. de Gestis Pontine. Anglor. lib. 3.
42 Stcph. Heddius, Vit. Wilfrid, u. 12.

inserted here. 5. Lastly, For the Britannic churches,
it is evident, that for six hundred years they never
acknowledged any dependence upon Rome. When
Austin the monk came into England, and pleaded
with the British bishops (seven in number) for sub
jection to the bishop of Rome, and conformity to
the Roman rites in the observation of Easter, and
some other things; he was answered positively,89
That they owed no obedience to the pope of Rome,
but were under the government of the bishop of
Caerleon upon Uske, who was their overseer under
God. And for the business of the paschal contro
versy, they were so far from paying any deference
to the Roman custom, that they continued their
ancient practice of observing Easter on a different
Sunday from Rome for some ages after, notwith
standing all the arguments that the pope or his
party could urge against them. For which reasons
they were treated as schismatics by the agents and
emissaries of Rome ; which is an evident demon
stration, that they did not then acknowledge any
thing of the pope's patriarchal power over them.
All this is clear from Bede,40 who repeats it in
several places. And William of Mahnsbury,41 and
Stephen Heddius,42 and Eadmerus,43 and other
writers of the Life of Wilfrid, archbishop of York,
(a great zealot for the Romish cause against the
British customs,) tell us the very same story. For
they say, Wilfrid refused to receive ordination from
the Scottish or British bishops, or from any or
dained by them, because the apostolical see had
rejected their communion. So that, as Bishop
Stillingfleet has observed44 out of these authors, it
is plain, the British and Scottish churches stood
excommunicate at that time by the chm-ch of
Rome, because they would not submit to her rites
and customs about Easter, and her pretended power
over them. A great deal more has been alleged by
our learned antiquaries, Mr. Brerewood,45 Mr. Wat
son,48 Dr. Cave,47 and Bishop Stillingfleet,49 to show
the ancient liberty and independency of the Britan
nic churches, which I shall not here repeat, but
only consider an exception or two, which are made
by Schelstrate in his Dissertation concerning the
patriarchal power of the bishop of Rome, in answer
to Bishop Stillingfleet's Antiquities of the British
Church. He says,49 the manuscript set out Sect 12
by Sir H. Spelman, containing the cept^of'scUb"
answer of Dinothus to Austin, is £lBr't™n'rs ' '
spurious and forged ; for the style

church, considered.

«¦ Eadmer. Vit. Wilfrid.
" Stillingfleet's Answer to Cressy, p. 300.
45 Brerewood of Patriarch. Gov. qu. 3.
46 Watson De Eccles. Britan. Antiqua Libertate, Thes. 2
« Cave, Ane. Church Gov. e. 5. p. 241.
48 Stilling. Origin. Britan. u. 5.
49 Schelstrat. Dissert, c. 6. p. 130.

350

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

manifestly discovers it to be modern. Which is a
weighty argument indeed from a person who was
so competent a judge of the British style, in which
that manuscript was written, that he professes he
did not understand even the Enghsh tongue with
out the help of an interpreter. And how then
should he be able to judge of a British writing by
its style, without knowing a syllable of the language ?
But, he adds, the matter of it also discovers it to be
a forgery: for it is manifest there was no arch
bishop of Caerleon upon Usk at that time, as the
-writing pretends ; but that the metropolitan juris
diction had for above a hundred years before been
transferred to Menevia. As if it was not as manifest
to all the world, that the archbishop of Menevia or
St. David's might retain the title of Caerleon, though
the see was removed, because Caerleon was the
original seat ; as well as the bishop of the Isle of
Man now retains the title of episcopus Sodorensis,
because Sodora and all the Hebrides, or islands on
the west of Scotland, were once part of his diocese,
though now for many ages they have been separated
from it. Or to give an instance nearer Rome, we are
told by geographers,50 that Ostia and Porto still give
title to two bishops, one whereof is always a senior
cardinal, and the other dean of the college of cardi
nals, though both places are now in such ruins, that
there is scarce an inhabitant in either. We shall
see hereafter, in the fifth chapter of this book, that
many times three or four ancient Italian bishoprics
were united into one, as Holstenius51 has observed
of Tarquina, Cornetum, and Gravisca ; in which case
no absurdity is committed, whichever of the titles
the bishop of the united diocese was called by. Why
then must it be an objection against the validity of
this testimony, that it calls the bishop of Menevia
by the title of Caerleon, when that was the original
title ? But, secondly, he says, It appears from Bede,
that the question was not concerning the pri
macy of the Roman bishop, but about Austin's me
tropolitical jurisdiction over them. But how then
came the British bishops to be reckoned schismatics,
if the pope's authority was no ways concerned in
the dispute ? Would they be schismatics for reject
ing Austin's metropolitical jurisdiction, had he
unwarrantably usurped that power of his own head,
and without a legal commission from some superior
obtruded himself upon them? It is plain, therefore,
the one was included in the other, and the rejecting
Austin was rejecting the power that sent him.
But they also contested the pope's supremacy in
another respect, refusing to comply with the Romish
rites and usages in the observation of Easter, the
administration of baptism, St. Peter's tonsure, and
some other customs ; which was an argument, that

as they had no dependence upon the church of Rome
heretofore, nor much communication with her, but
rather with the Eastern churches ; so now they in
tended not to submit to her dictates, but to follow
their own ancient customs as a free church, and in
dependent of her. Can any one suppose, that had
the British bishops looked upon the pope as invest
ed with a legal supremacy over them, they would
have scrupled complying with directions in such
matters, as the observation of Easter and the hke,
when such things were but the smallest part of pa
triarchal jurisdiction? Even our author himself,
when he comes to consider the matter a httle fur
ther, is not so hardy as to stand by his own asser
tion, but comes to call them names at last, with
Baronius and others of his own party, telling us,M
that after the Saxons had broken in upon them,
they deserted the doctrines and rites of the catho
hc church, and receded as schismatics from the
centre of ecclesiastical communion : and that it
ought to be concluded, that God was willing to
show the falsehood of the schismatical church of
Britain, by the miracle which he wrought upon
Austin's intercession. This is home' to our point,
and gives up the cause in question, which is, whe
ther the British church owned the pope's supremacy
at the coming of Austin hither ? Which our author,
after some small bickerings with his learned adver
sary, is forced to deny, and join issue with him, and
then betakes himself to their last and common re
fuge, ill names and miracles ; which being no argu
ments in this case, I shall not stand to give them
any answer ; but only inquire into one thing more,
how it appears, that the Britons had deserted any
ancient doctrine relating to the pope's patriarchal
power, upon the coming of the Saxons ? To evi
dence this, our author must give us veiy plain
proofs, that before that time the British church al
ways owned the bishop of Rome's patriarchal juris
diction over them. And this, indeed, is the pretend
ed design of his whole Dissertation : but his proofs.
amount to no more than a few slight conjectures,
by which he would be thought to have demon
strated these four things : 1. That St. Peter was
the founder of the British church,59 which any one
that reads Bishop Usher de Primordiis,54 will as
readily attribute to St. Paul, or twenty others : so
little reason is there for grounding the pope's patri
archal power upon the first conversion of the Brit
ish church. 2. He argues from ancient tradition,
that patriarchal power is an apostolical institution,
and that thereby55 the British church was made
subject to the Roman, whoever was the first con
verter of it. But this tradition is involved in greater
obscurity, and proceeds upon more precarious

50 Ferrar. Lexicon. Geogr. voce Ostia, et Portus Au
gust i.
51 Ilolsten. Annot. in Geograph. Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 8.

52 Schelstrat. Dissert, c. 6. p. 106. K Ibid. c. 1 et 2.
54 Usser. de Antiquit. Eccles. Brit. c. 1.
55 Schelstrat. Dissert, c. 3.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

351

' proofs, than the former. 3. He says, The British
bishops in the council of Aries owned the pope's 50
patriarchal power over them, and all the Western
world. 4. And lastly, That this power, in this full
extent and latitude, is both acknowledged and con
firmed57 by the sixth canon of the council of Nice.
How far the council of Nice allowed, or confirmed,
this power, has been already showed, in discoursing
of the suburbicary churches. So that the only
thing remaining, is to examine what weight there
is in his argument from the council of Aries. This
council was summoned by Constantine, and not by
the pope, against the Donatists, anno 314. Here
were present three British bishops, Eborius, from
York, Restitutus, from London, and Adelphius,
from Lincoln, (Colonia Lindi,) as I shall show here
after it probably ought to be read. Now, in their
synodical epistle to Pope Sylvester, there is a pas
sage (but by all acknowledged to be a very corrupt
one) which speaks something of his holding the
greater dioceses.58 Which our author interprets to
mean his having a patriarchal power over all the
great dioceses of the western empire, Macedonia,
Dacia, Illyricum, Italy, Africa, Spain, France, and
Britain. But one question may be here asked, which
will spoil ah this flourish of a comment. Did the
African fathers, many of which were present at this
council, so understand the words, greater dioceses ?
If they did, how came it to pass, that within an
age after they so stiffly opposed three popes suc
cessively, and vindicated their own hberties in this
very point, (as we have seen before59 they did,) de
nying them absolutely all power of receiving ap
peals from any of the African churches ? Had St.
Austin, and all the rest of them, forgot what their
forefathers had so lately subscribed at Aries, that
Africa was one of the pope's larger dioceses ? Or
had they been harassed out of their senses', like the
poor Britons, by some Saxon invasion, and were
now ran into schism, as the other are reproachfully
and falsely said to have done ? Nothing of all this
can be pretended in the present case : and therefore
that is demonstration to me, that neither the African
fathers, nor the Britons, nor any others then pre
sent in council, took the words, greater dioceses, in
the sense which this author puts upon them. So
that whatever meaning they must have, it is plain
this cannot be their meaning : and then all the ar
gument, which our author has built upon this sup
position, in order to subject the Britons to the pope,
at once falls to the ground. I will not now stand
disputing with him, whether the word diocese was

M Schelstrat. Dissert, c. 4. " Ibid. u. 5.
58 Cone. Arelat. 1. Epist. Synod. Cone. t. 1. p. 1426.
flacuit etiam antequam a te, qui majores dioeceses tenes,
Per te potissimum omnibus insinuari. Schelstrate and Per
ron correct it thus : Placuit etiam hssc juxta antiquam con-
suetudinem a te, qui majores dioeceses tenes, et per te potis-

never about this time taken in any author for one
of the great dioceses of the Roman empire. He
says Constantine60 so uses it in one place, speaking
of the Asiatic and Pontic dioceses : and if that will
do him any service, I can help him to another ; for
Constantine also speaks of a civil officer, called,
KaSoXiicbg 5toiicr]o-eu>g, or rationalis of the diocese,61
where I agree with Valesius, we are to understand
one of the great dioceses of the Roman empire.
Nay, I have said before, that I think there were pa
triarchs too in the church at that time, and that
they had the great dioceses of the Roman empire
divided among them. But does it hence follow, that
because the word diocese is sometimes so used,
that therefore it must needs signify so in this place,
when there is plain demonstration to the contrary ?
All the world knows, that about the same time the
name diocese was given to single episcopal churches
also, and they too were called greater dioceses, in
opposition to the tituli or parishes, which were quasi
dioeceses, the lesser dioceses under them, as the Pon
tifical words it62 in the Life of Pope Marcellus, who
was one of Sylvester's predecessors. So that Syl
vester's holding greater dioceses, may mean no more
than his being a metropolitan, or having several
episcopal dioceses under his jurisdiction, to whom
he was to signify, according to custom, the time of
keeping Easter, and other things decreed in the
council. Or if we suppose him to have been a pa
triarch at that time, then his greater dioceses may
signify those ten suburbicary provinces, which were
the ancient bounds of his -patriarchal jurisdiction.
But whatever meaning they have, it is certain they
cannot be understood in our author's sense, of the
great dioceses of the Roman empire : because it
were absurd to think, that Africa should acknow
ledge itself to be one of the pope's dioceses, which
never was reckoned among the suburbicary pro
vinces, and what is more, always resolutely opposed
the pope's pretences to the least shadow of power
over it, claiming an absolute and independent power
within itself in all matters of ecclesiastical cogni
zance and jurisdiction. And the case of the Britan
nic church being the same with that of Africa, it
follows, that it was as independent of Rome as the
other was, notwithstanding any pretended confes
sion of subjection made by its bishops in the coun
cil of Aries, upon which our author lays the main
strength of his cause, though there is nothing in it
when fairly canvassed and examined, as I doubt not
I have made it appear to every unprejudiced reader.
I was the more willing to consider here some of the

simum omnibus insinuari.

59 See sect. 11.

"> Constant. Ep. ad omnes Ecclesias, ap. Euseb. de Vit.
Const, lib. 3. c. 19.
61 Ibid. lib. 4. c. 36.
62 Pontifical. Vit. Marcelli. Viginti quinque titulos id
| urbe Roma constituit, quasi dioeceses, &c.

352

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

chief exceptions of this celebrated writer against the
hberties of the Britannic chm-ch, because I know
not whether any one else has made a reply to them ;
and these strictures will serve to suggest at once to
the reader the true grounds upon which our ancient
liberties were founded, and the contrary pretences,
which would subject us to the power of the bishop
of Rome, as patriarch ofthe Western empire, though
the Britannic diocese had as just title to be inde
pendent at that time as Rome itself, or Africa, or
any other diocese in the empire. I make no further
inquiry here into the bounds of other patriarchs or
metropolitans, or their dioceses, because no such
momentous disputes have been raised about them,
and they may be easily learned from the notitia of
the church here subjoined in the latter part of this
book. Therefore I proceed in the next place to ex
amine the ordinary extent of the ancient episcopal
dioceses, or, as we now call them, diocesan churches.

CHAPTER II.
A MORE PARTICULAR ACCOUNT OP THE NUMBER,
NATURE, AND EXTENT OF DIOCESES, OR EPISCO
PAL CHURCHES, IN AFRICA, EGYPT, AND OTHER
EASTERN PROVINCES.
sect. 1. IT is evident from what has been dis-
caiwcerpo"rec."?y coursed in. the last chapter, that the
parwcaai. most ancient "and apostolical division
of the church was into dioceses, or episcopal
churches ; that is, such precincts or districts, as
single bishops governed with the assistance of their
presbyters. But yet we are to make a httle further
inquiry into the nature and extent of these, because
great errors have been committed by some late
writers about them. There are who pretend, that a
diocese for the three first ages was never more than
such a number of people as could meet, and ordi
narily did meet, in a single congregation. Others
extend the limits of ancient dioceses further than
this at first, to include a city and the whole region
about it : but then they reckon, that upon the
general conversion of heathens to Christianity, such
dioceses ought to have been divided into single con
gregations, and a new bishop and clergy set over
every one. There is no difference betwixt these
two opinions save only this, that the one wholly
mistakes the church's first and primitive model, and
the other quarrels with her practice. But the truth

1 Brerewood of Patriarch. Gov. qu. 1. p. 102.
2 Euseb. lib. 1. o". 1. lib. 2. u. 24.
3 Alex. Ep. Encyel. ap. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 6.
4 Epiph. Ep. ad Joh. Hierosol. Ad meae parichise vide-
bantur ecclesiam pertinere, &c.

of the matter was, that the church, in settling the
bounds of dioceses, went by another rule, not that
of single assembhes or congregations, but the rule
of government in every city, including not only the
city itself, but the suburbs, or region lying round
about it, within the verge of its jurisdiction. Which
seems to be the plain reason of that great and
visible difference which we find in the extent of
dioceses ; some being very large, others very small,
according as the civil government of each city hap
pened to have a larger or lesser jurisdiction. There
are two things, indeed, that commonly impose upon
unwary readers in this matter. One is, that the an
cient name of an episcopal diocese for three hun
dred years is commonly 7rapo«:ia, which they mis
take for a parish church, or single congregation :
whereas, as learned men ' have rightly observed, it
signified then not the places or habitations near a
church, but the towns or villages near a city, which,
together with the city, was the bishop's irapoima, or,
as we now call it, his diocese, the bounds of his or
dinary care and jurisdiction. That thus it was
appears evidently from this, that the largest dio
ceses, such as those of Rome, Antioch, and Alex
andria, which had many particular churches in
them, were called by the same name, as the reader
may find a hundred passages in Eusebius,2 where
he uses the word Trapoida, when he speaks of those
large and populous cities, which had many particu
lar churches in them. The city of Alexandria, in
the time of Alexander and Athanasius, was divided
into several districts, called laura, in every one of
which there was a church, with a presbyter fixed
upon it : and yet all these were but one irapoutia, as
Alexander calls it in his circular epistle8 against
Arius. The reader may see the word so used by
Epiphanius,4 St. Jerom,5 the councils of Antioch,"
Ancyra,7 and many others in after ages, when it is
certain episcopal dioceses were something larger
than parish churches, as those are taken to signify
single congregations. So that nothing can be
plainer than the use of the word napoiteia for a dio
cese to the fourth century.
And now about this time the name Sect 2
diocese began to be used hkewise. dihsee° b^Ssi
For the council of Aries, which was *° be u,e '
held in the beginning of the fourth century, writing
to the bishop of Rome, says, that he did majores
dioeceses tenere,8 possess greater dioceses; which
though Schelstrate and other Romish writers inter
pret patriarchal dioceses, to aggrandize the pope's
jurisdiction; yet it is more probable, as Dr. Cave"
observes, that it means only single bishoprics;

5 Hieron. Ep. 53. ad Ripar. Miror sanctum episcopum,
in cujus parochia esse presbyter dicitur Vigilantius, acqui-
escere furori ejus, &c. 6 Concil. Antioch. c. 9.
7 Concil. Ancyr. c. 18. August. Epist. 241. Basil, Ep. 204.
s Concil. 1. 1. p. 1429. » Cave's Ane. Ch. Gov. c. 3. p. 130.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

353

though 1 grant Constantine might have made the
division of the empire into civil dioceses, from
whence patriarchal dioceses took their name in the
following ages. The word is used frequently for a
single diocese in the African councils, as where it is
said,10 A bishop shall not leave his principal seat,
and betake himself to any other church in the dio
cese : so likewise often in the African Code, and the
Collation of Carthage. From which it appears, that
the words parochia and dicecesis were of the same
import in those times, and the calling of a diocese
by the name of parochia does not make it a single
congregation. Another thing that imposes upon
what meant by men ;n this matter, is the ambiguity
the irpoaffTein. or o j
suburosoucitj. 0f the names, jrpoarmia and suburbia,
the suburbs of a city ; which, in the modern ac
ceptation, signifies no more than the houses or
habitations next adjoining without the walls of a
city ; but anciently it denoted all the towns or vil
lages which lay round the city in, a certain district,
which were therefore reckoned as belonging to that
city, though many times at several miles' distance
from it. Thus, Canopus was twelve miles distant
from Alexandria, and yet, in the Acts of the Coun
cil of Chalcedon, we find it called by one Athana
sius," the Tepodaritov, or suburbs of that city. So
Sozomen12 calls Daphne the suburbs of Antioch,
though it was forty furlongs' or five miles' distance
from it. And Pancirol ls notes of the famous sub-
urbsofConstantinople,called"E^rJo/ioi',orSeptimum, that it was so denominated from its being seven
miles off from the city at first, though afterward, by
the strange growth and increase of that city, it came
to be reckoned a more immediate part of it. So
there was in the suburbs of Carthage a place call
ed Decimum, because it was ten miles distant from
the city, as Procopius informs us.14 And some think
the AgerSexti, in which Cyprian suffered martyrdom,
was so named from its being six miles off from the
city; for the Roman martyrology puts Sextum
Milliare instead of Ager Sexti. Now, in all such
suburbs as these there were particular assembhes,
distinct from those of the city churches ; as appears
from what Eusebius15 observes out of the epistle
of Dionysius of Alexandria, who says, when he was
banished to Colluthion, a place in the region of
Mareotes, that he should still hold particular as
sembhes, as they were used to do in those suburbs
that were something more remote from the city. So
that these ancient words, Tiapoueia and irpodsua,
when taken in their true ancient and primitive

™ Concil. Carthag. 5. c. 5. Nemini sit facultas, relicta
principali cathedra, ad aliquam ecclesiam in dicecesi con-
stitulam se conferre. Vid. Con. Can. Afric. c. 117, 118,
119, 123.
11 Concil. Chalced. Act. 3. t. 4. p. 408.
12 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 19. 2 A

sense, do not make a bishop's diocese to be only a
single parish in the modern sense, but a city with
all the towns or villages within the region or dis
trict to which the city magistrate extended his ju
risdiction. For that Justellus16 has showed, out of
good authors, is the difference between ttoAic and
Kiipri, a city and a village : a city is a place that is
governed by a magistracy and laws of its own, and
exercises authority over the region or territory that
lies about it ; but a village is a dependant only on
a city, and has no magistrates of its own, but such
as belong to the city whereof it is a dependant.
According to which notion, an episcopal church was
generally a city and a whole region, of the very
same extent with the power of the civil magistrate,
whose bounds for the most part were the bounds
of the bishop's diocese ; though the rule was not so
universal, but that it admitted of some particular
exceptions. And from hence it will appear, that
though there was great difference in the extent of
dioceses, as there was in city regions and districts,
and many of them were but small in comparison of
others ; yet they were generally so large as to ad
mit both of a bishop and a presbytery in the city
church, and presbyters and deacons in the country
regions. To clear this whole matter, (which Sect 4
is of great use upon several accounts n^S.,e,S k^e6?!!
towards understanding rightly the Sn'veT.ion.a.'i?"'
. . ' t, . i . i , -. t -n those converted in
state of the ancient church,) 1 will the middle ages of
here make a particular inquiry into the
extent both of the largest and narrowest dioceses,
and distinctly consider the state of each. For though
they differed much in extent, yet they all agreed
in the same species of government; the essence
of which consisted not in being confined precisely
to such or such hmits ; for that was but accidental
to the constitution : the same species of government
is still preserved in most parts of the church, and
yet any one that will allow himself the hberty of
making just observations, may easily discern a dif
ference between some of the first conversions, and
those that followed in the middle ages of the church :
for in the former, it is evident, dioceses were ge
nerally more numerous, and not so large as in the
latter. The whole extent of Asia Minor, from the
Hellespont to the river Euphrates, is estimated by
the best geographers at 630 miles ; the breadth from
Sinus Issicus in Cilicia to Trabezond at 210: yet
there were almost four hundred dioceses in this
tract of land, as the reader may satisfy himself from
the notitia of the church in the end of this book.

13 Pancirol. Com. in Notit. Imper. lib. 1. c. 72.
14 Procop. Vandalic. lib. 1. c. 17.
15 Euseb. lib. 7. c. 11. 'Qs iv irpoaTEtois woppcoTepw
KEipivois, KaTa pipos iaovTai trvvaytoyai.
16 Justel. Not. in Cod. Canon. &c. Concil. Antioch.
c. 9.

354

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

But now, if we look into any middle age conver
sions, we shall find the number of dioceses very
small in comparison of these, and their extent very
great. For in Germany, which is computed above
twice as large as Asia Minor, (being 840 miles in
length, and 740 in breadth,) there are but forty bi
shoprics ; in ah Belgium but eighteen ; in Den
mark but fifteen ; in Swedeland but ten ; in Russia
twenty-one ; in Poland thirty; as Dr. Heylin and other
geographers have computed them. And our number
in England, being also a later conversion, bears no
proportion to those of Asia Minor, though the isle
of Great Britain is not much inferior to it in big
ness. I leave the curious and the learned to in
quire into the reasons of this difference, whilst I go
on to show the different extent of dioceses in the
primitive church, where we shall meet with some
very large, others very narrow, but the same species
of episcopacy preserved in all, and none confined
absolutely to a single congregation.
Se(,t 5 I shall begin with the dioceses of
cntmSS"^; Africa, which some by mistake have
of Africa. reckoned the least bishoprics in the
world ; whereas upon a just computation they will
appear to be far larger than many others. The
whole extent of Africa (comprehending the six
Roman provinces, Tripolis, Byzacena, Africa Pro
consularis, Numidia, and the two Mauritanias) is
computed by Procopius17 to be ninety days' journey
in length: which, reckoning as he does, that a
day's journey was 210 stadia, or twenty-six miles
and a quarter, amounts to above 2360 miles : the
breadth was in some places 200, and in others 500
miles : which makes it by computation twice as
big as Germany or France. Now there were in this
compass, in St. Austin's time, about four hundred
and sixty-six bishoprics, as appears both from the
Collation of Carthage,19 and the Abstract of St.
Austin,19 and the notitia of the African church, made
about fifty years after St. Austin's death, and pub
lished by Sirmondus.20 The present dioceses in
France, if compared with these, will appear to be
as large again, and those of Germany much larger :
yet the African bishoprics, as a learned man2' right
ly calculates, might one with another, notwithstand
ing, be reckoned to contain each of them threescore

or fourscore towns and villages. It is certain, at
least, that many of them were of a very large extent.
St. Austin's diocese of Hippo was above forty miles
long : for he himself teUs us,22 that Fussala, a place
in his diocese, which he erected into a new bishop
ric, was forty miles distant from him. Some other
churches in his diocese are also mentioned in his
epistles,23 and other writings, which Bishop Stilling
fleet24 has collected together : to which the reader
may add other epistles,25 where he mentions the
churches of Subsana, Turres, Ciza, Verbahs, Fun
dus Strabonianensis, and Gippitanus, as parts of his
episcopal care also. In Hippo itself there were
several churches, three of which are occasionally
mentioned by St. Austin, one called Ecclesia Paris,23
another, Basilica Leontii" and a third, Ad viginU
Martyres, The Church of the twenty Martyrs,28 whose
memory was famous at Hippo,29 as being, in all
probability, African martyrs, and of that particular
church whereof St. Austin was bishop. In the
other Hippo, called Hippo Diaretorum for distinction
sake, the African canons30 speak of several churches-
And in the Collation of Carthage we often meet
with complaints of the catholic bishops, that the
Donatists had set up anti-bishops, not only in their
cities, but in other places of their dioceses :91 and
the Donatist bishops return the charge, telling the
catholics particularly, that at Constantina92 they
had not only set up a bishop in the city, but another
in the middle of the diocese : and that at Milevis
they had done the same, making one bishop in the
place, another at Tunca, a city in the same diocese,
and a third at Ceramussa. From which it is easy
to conclude, that those dioceses were then so large,
as not only to have a country region, but sometimes
more cities than one within their district. The
hke may be inferred from that canon of the Afri
can councils, which says,33 No bishop shall leave
his principal cathedral, and reside in any other
church of his diocese. That manifestly implies, that
their dioceses had other churches in the country,
beside the city cathedral in them. And, indeed, in
stances of this kind would arise without number, to
any one that would make a curious search into the
history and antiquities of the African church. I
shall only add two things more relating to it. 1.

" Procop. Vandalic. lib. 1. c. 2. p. 177.
13 Collat. Carthag. Die 1.
,9 Aug. Brevic. Collat. Die 1. c. 14.
20 Notit. Afric. ap. Sirmond. Miscellan.
21 Maurice's Defence of Dioces. Episc. p. 163.
22 Aug. Ep. 262. ad Cailestin.
23 Id. Ep. 74, 203, 212, 2-36. It. de Cura pro Mortuis, c. 12.
21 Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separat. part 3. n.
9. p. 251.
25 Aug. Ep. 236, 240. *» Aug. Ep. 110.
27 Ser. 11. de Divers. m Ser. 10. de Divers.
20 Id. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. c. 8. M Cod. Can. Afric. c. 78.
31 Collat. Carth. Die 1. c. 181. Alypius dixit, Scriptum

sit istos omnes in villis vel in fundis esse episcopos ordinatos,
non in aliquibus eivitatibus.
32 Collat. Carth. ibid. u. 65. Petilianus dixit, In plebe
mea, id est, civitate Constantinensi, adversarium habeo For-
tunatum. In medio autem dicecesis meae nunc institutum
habeo, imo ipsi habent nomine Delphinum — etiam in plebe
fratris mei Adeodati, id est in civitate Milevitana, ita com-
missa res est, ut unum ibidem habeat adversarium, alterum
in Tuncensi civitate, qui ad hujus plebem antiquitus perti
net. — Tertius vero sit in loco qui dicitur Ceramussa.
33 Concil. Carth. 5. c. 5. Nemini sit facultas, relicta prin
cipal! cathedra, ad aliquam ecclesiam in dicecesi constitutam
se conferre.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

355

That Carthage is weU known to have had a great
number of churches belonging to its diocese in the
fourth century. Mr. Sirmond,34 in his Notes upon
St. Austin's Sermons, gives us the names of seven
of them, which are mentioned in the titles of his
sermons, viz. the cathedral church, called Basilica
Major et Bestituta, Basilica Fausti, Basilica Leon-
tiana, Basilica Celerince, Basilica Novarum, Basilica
Petri, in the third region, and Basilica Pauli, in the
sixth region. To which Bishop Stillingfleet35 adds
two churches without the city, one where St. Cyprian
suffered martyrdom, and another where his body
was buried, at a place called Mappalia, both which
are mentioned by Victor Uticensis. Dr. Maurice,36
who examined a httle further, adds still to those
vrithin the city, the church called Florentia, and Ba
silica Gratiani, and Theodosiana, and Honoriana, and
Tricillarum: and, doubtless, there were many others
not mentioned, since Victor37 reckons about five
hundred clergy belonging to the church of Carthage.
The other thing I would note concerning the Afri
can church is, that in Tripolis, one of the six pro
vinces of the Roman Africa, there were but five
bishops, which we learn both from the canons of
the African councils,38 and the ancient notitia of
that church, which names their sees, Leptis Magna,
CEea, Tacapa, Sabrata, and Girberis ; from three of
which there were bishops in the council under
Cyprian at Carthage : and the presence of no more
was required, because of the paucity of them. But
now this was a large tract of ground, as Blondel39
himself proves out of Ptolemy, who names many
other cities, Chuzis, Sumucis, Pisinda, Sydedenis,
Azuis, Gerisa, Iscina, Amuncla, Butta, and others.
So that whether we compare the whole extent and
dimensions of Africa with the number of dioceses
contained therein, or consider any particular pro
vince or diocese by itself, it plainly appears, that
every bishop had a city, and a region or large terri
tory for his diocese ; some, two cities or more ; and
none so small a people, as to deserve the name that
some have bestowed upon them, of country parishes
or single congregations.
sect. e. Out of the African provinces let us
*gn>t, iiKaTaiJd Pass into those of the Egyptian dio-
Pentapolis. ... ,. , . , ...
cese, as it is called in the civil account
ofthe Roman empire, under which are comprehend
ed all the regions of Libya, Pentapolis, and Egypt,
from Tripolis to the Red Sea. These countries all
together are justly computed by a learned man 40 to
be three times as great as England ; yet they never
had above a hundred bishops in them all. For

Sirmond. Not. in Ser. 14. a se edit. t. 10. p. 851.
35 Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation, p. 219.
96 Maurice's Defence of Dioces. Episc. p. 51.
97 Victor, de Persec. Vandal, lib. 5. Bibl. Patr. t. 7-
p. 613.
38 Concil. Carth. 3. c. 39. In Tripoli, ut asseritur, epis-
2 A 2

Alexander and Athanasius, who were very compe
tent judges, reckon scarce so many. Athanasius41
says, there was iyyig harbv, near a hundred in
Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis ; and Alexander 42
uses the same expression in his circular epistle
against Arius, saying, That he and the rest of the
bishops of Egypt and Libya, being near a hundred
met together in council, had condemned Arius and
his followers. And after this the notitias of the
church reckon no more. That which the reader
will find at the end of this book, has but ninety-
seven, excluding those of Tripoli, which have been
spoken of before : and others in Carolus a Sancto
Paulo never exceed a hundred and one. So that
the number" of dioceses seems to have continued
near the same without alteration for several ages.
Carolus a Sancto Paulo has collected their names
out of the ancient writers, and subscriptions of
councils, and other monuments of the church,
which I shall here subjoin, as I shaU for all other
countries as we pass on, that such readers as please
to compare the names with the maps of ecclesiasti
cal geography, may the better understand the ex
tent of dioceses, and the true ancient state and
geography of the church. The Egyptian patri
archate was sometimes divided into three provinces,
sometimes into six, sometimes into nine, but the
limits of the whole were the same, including Egypt,
Libya, and Pentapolis : Carolus a Sancto Paulo
follows the largest division, and so makes seven
provinces in Egypt, reckoning the dioceses in this
order. In Egyptus Prima.
I. Alexandria. 2. Hermopolis Parva. 3. Me-
telis. 4. Coprithis. 5. Sais. 6. Letus, al. Lato-
polis. 7- Naucratia. 8. Andromena, or Andropohs.
9. Nicium. 10. Onuphis. 11. Taua. 12. Cleopa-
tris. 13. Mareotis. 14. Schedia and Menelaites.
15. Phthenegus, al. Phthenoti Nomus. 16. Nitria.
In Augustamnica Prima.
1. Pelusium. 2. Heraclea in Sethrsete Nomo.
3. Tanis. 4. Rhinocurura. 5. Thmuis. 6. Os-
tracina. 7- Phacusa. 8. Cassium. 9. Aphnteum,
which he thinks Antonine's Itinerary calls Daph-
nis. 10. Hepheestus. 11. Paneephysus. 12. Ge-
rus. 13. Thennesus. 14. Sela.
In Augustamnica Secunda.
1. Leontopolis. 2. Atribis. 3. Onium, al. Ili
um. 4. Babylon. 5. Bubastus. 6. Pharbtethus.

copi sunt quinque tantummodo. Vid. Cod. Can. Afric. u. 49.
al. 50.
33 Blondel. Apol. p. 165. ex Ptolem. lib. 4. c. 3
40 Maurice's Defence of Dioces. Episc. p. 71.
41 Athan. Apol. 2. p. 778,
42 Alex. Ep. Encycl. ap. Socrat. lib. 1. u. 6.

353

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

7. Hehopolis. 8. Scenee Mandrorum. 9. Thou.
10. Antithou. In Egyptus Secunda.
I. Cabasa. 2. Phragonea. 3. Pachneumonis.
4. Elearchia. 5. Diospolis. 6. Sebennythus. 7-
Cynopolis Inferior. 8. Busiris. 9. Paralus. 10.
Xoes. 11. Butus. In Arcadia.
1. Oxyrinchus. 2. Heraclea Superior. 3. Ar-
sinoe, al. Civitas Crocodilorum. 4. Theodosiopolis.
5. Aphroditopolis. 6. Memphis. 7- Clysma. 8.
Nilopolis. 9. Parallus. 10. Thamiate, now called
Damiata. 11. Cynopolis Superior ; which, as Hol
stenius observes, is in the notitia of Hierocles made
the metropolis of this province.
In Thebais Prima.
1. Antinoe. 2. Hermopolis Magna. 3. Cusa.
4. Lycopolis. 5. Oasis Magna. 6. Hypsele. 7-
Apollinis Civitas Parva. 8. Antteum. 9. Pano-
pohs. In Thebais Secunda.
I. Ptolemais. 2. Thinis. 3. Coptus. 4. Ten-
tyra. Holstenius corrects it, Teuchira, from the
Greek. 5. Maximianopolis. 6. Latopolis. 7-
Hermetes, al. Hermonthes. 8. Diospolis Magna,
al. Thebais Magna. 9, Therenunthis. 10. Phylae.
11. Thoi. 12. Ombi. 13. Tathyris: 14. Diospo
lis Parva.
In Libya Cyrenaica, otherwise called Pentapohs.
1. Ptolemais, where Synesius was bishop. 2.
Sozusa. 3. Lemandus. 4. Cyrene. 5. Teuchira.
6. Berenice. 7- Ticelia, al. Pisila. 8. Aptuchi
Fanum. 9. Erythra. 10. Barca. 11. Hydrax.
12. Disthis. 13. Paltebisca. 14. Olbia. To which
Holstenius adds Borauin.
In Libya Marmarica, al. Libya Secunda.
1. Darnis. 2. Par£etonium. 3. Antipyrgus. 4.
Antiphra. 5. Marmarica. 6. Zagula ; which Hol
stenius observes to be sometimes corruptly read Ga-
zula. 7- Zygris.
Beside these, Carolus » S. Paulo reckons seven
others in Egypt of uncertain position. Vantena,
Gaucea, Flagonita, Cotenopolis, Gazula,Elesma, and
Psynchus : but Holstenius rightly observes, that
five of these are but corruptions of others named
before. Vantena is put for Antinoe ; Flagonita for
Fragonita; Elesma for Clysma; Gazula for Zagula;
and Psynchus for Oxyrinchus. And I observe, that

Paralus, and perhaps one or two more, seem to be
named twice. So that we cannot reckon the whole
number of dioceses much above a hundred in these
nine provinces. Now, to make a tolerable estimate
of the largeness and extent of these dioceses, we
must consider a httle the state of these countries,
together with the extent of them. And by this
means we shall find this observation to be true,
(which I am also to make upon Palestine, Asia Mi
nor, and Italy,) that here were some of the largest
and some of the smallest dioceses in the world un
der the same form of episcopal government. In
Libya and Pentapolis, the dioceses seem to have
been very large ; for the whole nuinber in both pro
vinces was but twenty-two : and yet these provinces
were of great extent, as appears from what Pliny49
delivers out of Eratosthenes, that from Alexandria
in Egypt to Cyrene in Pentapolis was five hundred
and twenty-five miles, the greatest part of which
must be divided among these bishoprics ; which is
some ground to conjecture that they were of the
largest size. Beronice was the most western border
of Pentapolis, from whence to Arsinoe or Teuchira,
the next neighbouring seat, Pliny44 reckons forty-
three miles, and from Arsinoe to Ptolemais twenty-
two. And it is certain several others lay at greater
distances from each other. But some may fancy,
perhaps, they were small, inconsiderable dioceses for
all this, because Synesius,45 speaking of his own city
Ptolemais, the metropolis of Pentapolis, says it was
but a small city. To obviate this, I will note a few
things out of Synesius, concerning the cities and
dioceses of this region. That Ptolemais, where
Synesius was bishop, had a territory and country
churches in its diocese, is evident from Synesius
himself, who, writing to his presbyters upon his first
consecration, desires them to pray for him, and
enjoin the people, both in the city and country
churches,46 both publicly and privately, to pray for
him likewise. This is evident proof, that though
Ptolemais itself might not be a very large city, yet it
had a diocese of some extent, and village churches
in the circuit of it. In another place he complains,
that all the churches "of Ampelitis that were under
him, were burned down and destroyed. There were
two regions of this name in Pentapolis, one belong
ing to Cyrene, the other to Ptolemais: and it is
probable there were in both of them towns and
villages depending respectively upon those mother
churches. Indeed Carolus a Sancto Paulo, out of
Synesius, speaks of one or two dioceses in this pro
vince, which seem to be less. For Hydrax and
Palaebisca were but villages, once belonging to the
diocese of Erythros, from which they were separated
in the time of the emperor Valens, and had a dis-

43 Plin. lib. 5. c. 6. 44 Ibid. c. 5. 45 Synes. Ep. 58.
46 Synes. Ep. 11. Too te iv daTEt Sfiptp, Kal oaoi KaT'

dypovs, ri Ktopi]TiKis iKKXr)trias ailXi^oVTai, Sec.
47 Synes. Gatastas. p. 301.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

357

tinct bishop of their own. But there was none be
fore him, nor any after ; for it was united by The
ophilus, bishop of Alexandria,48 to Erythros again.
So that it rather proves the largeness of the dioceses,
that they were of such an extent as to admit of
others being taken out of them. In another place,
Synesius49 speaks of the Olbiatae, whom he styles
Sijpog iciopriTtig, a country people, and says they had
a bishop. But a learned man observes50 rightly,
that this may signify a people or nation living in
many villages, of which sort there were several in
the region of Pentapolis and other parts of Africa,
where there were but few cities : for, as he shows
out of Pomponius Mela and Pliny, these country
people generaUy inhabited in great numbers toge
ther, and were under the denomination of little na
tions, though they dwelt in cottages, or mapalia, as
they called them in the language of those countries.
So that though a bishop's seat was in a village, he
might have a large region for his diocese, as we shall
find in pursuing the history of other nations. In
the neighbouring province of Libya, Zygus was a
village, and a bishop's seat : yet, as the same learn
ed person51 observes out of Ptolemy,52 it was such a
village as had a territory along the sea-side ; and
the whole sea-coast of Libya was divided between
that and two or three other such villages or cities,
call them which you please. For there were but
seven dioceses in all this Libya, which extended
three hundred miles along the sea-shore, so that the
bishop's sees were at least fifty miles from each other.
And yet perhaps, being a desert country, and in
habited by very barbarous people, the dioceses might
be less than many others, if computed by the num
ber of Christians, rather than the extent of ground;
as if we compare them with some in Egypt, their
next neighbours. In Egypt, the dioceses cannot be
reckoned so large as those of Libya and Pentapolis,
because here were eighty bishoprics ; and yet the
extent of Egypt was not more than the other two,
but the countiy was infinitely more populous, and
so capable of more bishoprics in a less compass.
Dr. Heylin computes the length of it to be only
five hundred and sixty-two miles, and the breadth
one hundred and sixty : which comes pretty near
the computation of Pliny,53 who reckons it five
hundred and eighty-six miles long, and one hundred
and seventy broad from Pelusium to Canopus. This
divided into eighty dioceses, will allow above thirty
miles length and breadth to every diocese ; which
is a competent space for an episcopal diocese con
sisting of many towns or parishes, but too large for
any single congregation. We may judge of the ex-

49 Synes. Ep. 67. « Id. Ep. 76.
50 Maurice's Defence of Dioc. Episc. p. 60.
51 Maurice, ibid. p. 61.
52 Ptolem. lib. 4. ss pi;n lib 5 ,. 9
54 Epiph. Elsr. 68. Melet. n. 4. Haeret. 69. Arian. n. 2.

tent of some of these dioceses by that of Alexandria,
which had first a great many churches with pres
byters fixed upon them in the city itself, in the time
of Alexander and Athanasius, as Epiphanius54 more
than once informs us, naming oeside the great
church, commonly called Ctesarea, those of Diony
sius, Theonas, Pierius, Serapion, Dizyas, Mendidius,
Annianus, Abias, and Baucalis, where Arius was
presbyter. Then again it had the large region of
Mareotes belonging to it. For Athanasius55 says,
there never had been either bishop or chorepiscopus
in all that region, but only presbyters under the
bishop of Alexandria ; and that they were fourteen
in number, (besides thirteen deacons,) some of which
had two villages, and others more, within their re
spective parishes. Canopus also was once in this
diocese, being reckoned one of the suburbs of Alexan
dria, (as has been noted before,) though a large place,
and twelve miles distant from it. Nicopolis also
was in this diocese, which Strabo equals56 to a city.
So that there must be particular assemblies in the
remoter suburbs of this diocese, which could not
possibly meet with the mother-church. We have
not so particular an account of any other diocese in
Egypt, but from this we may make some estimate
of the rest, since it appears that a competent terri
tory of twenty or thirty miles might be allowed to
every diocese upon a rational computation. Nor is it
any just exception to this, that here were sometimes
bishops' seats in villages as well as cities. For
many villages were equal to cities, and had also large
territories belonging to them. As Strabo particu
larly notes of Schaedia, which was but a village in
his time,57 yet such a one as might compare with a
city ; and in Athanasius's time it seems to have been
advanced into a city, or was at least the head of a
nonius, or region, called Menelaites : for Athanasius
styles Agathodcemon,58 bishop of Schaedia and Me
nelaites together. So that though we find in the
Greek notitia of this province several bishoprics de
nominated from villages, as Vicus Psaneos, and Co-
trideos, Rhicomerium, Pariana, and Anassa ; yet we
are not to imagine the bishops of these places were
pastors only of a private village, but that they had
each a larger territory, after the example of Schtedia,
for their jurisdiction. In the diocese of Arsinoe, it
is plain, there were country parishes in the middle
of the third century : for Dionysius, bishop of Alex
andria, speaks of them in one of his epistles, where
he discourses of Nepos the Millenary ,who was bishop
ofthe place. After his death, he says, he went into
the region of Arsinoe, and having called together
the presbyters and teachers of the country villages,59

a5 Athan. Apol. 2. p. 802. 66 Strabo, lib. 17.
57 Strabo, lib. 17. M Athan. Ep. ad Antioch. p. 580.
59 Dionys. Ep. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 24. SvytcaXiaas
Toils irpEtrflvTipovs Kal StSatrKaXovs Ttov iv TaXs Ktopais
uSEXtpiov.

35S

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

he held a conference with them for three days to
gether about Nepos's opinions, which it seems had
infected some of their churches, and drawn them
into factions and schisms. The hke observation is
made by Cassian60 upon Pansphysus, in the pro
vince of Augustamnica Prima, that it had many
towns and villages under it, till they were swallowed
up with the inundation of the sea and an earth
quake. And Carolus a Sancto Paulo rightly ob
serves out of Athanasius,61 that Phragonea in iEgyp-
tus Secunda had the whole nomus of Elearchia for
its diocese. And excepting Thennesus, in the pro
vince of Augustamnica, which Cassian62 seems to
make an island, without any territory about it, it
may be generally affirmed of all the Egyptian cities,
that they had their irpod^ua, or country towns and
villages about them, some more, some less, where, as
Dionysius bishop of Alexandria words it,63 they had
their holy assemblies distinct from those of the
mother-churches. Yet, not to put a fallacy upon my readers, I must
observe one thing, which will much diminish the
largeness of those dioceses in one part of Egypt;
that is, that as it was the most populous country in
the world in some parts of it, so it was absolutely
desert and uninhabited in others. The cities were
generally placed pretty near the banks of the Nile,
but on both sides, within ten or twenty miles from
them, were vast mountains and deserts, where no
mortal dwelt, till, as Orosius observes,64 the monks
first took up their abode there, leaving the cities, to
inhabit those vast tracts of wildernesses and sands,
which for their barrenness and want of water, and
multitudes of serpents, had never before seen any
thing of human conversation. This account of the
Egyptian deserts is confirmed by Josephus,65 where
he speaks of Moses making an incredible expedition
with an army through them, to surprise and come
unexpectedly upon the Ethiopians. And the Chris
tian writers, who treat of the monastic life, give a
more particular description of them. Sulpicius Se
verus makes the entrance on these deserts in The
bais68 to be only twelve miles from the river Nile.
But the deserts themselves were vastly greater. For
Cassian, speaking of the wilderness of Scethis,
where Paphnutius was abbot, says, there was one
of the monks who had his cell67 eighteen miles from
church. But the desert of Porphyrion, he says,

was abundantly larger than this : for a man might
travel seven or eight days' journey in it™ without
coming near any house, or town, before he came to
the ceUs of the monks, which had their habitation
therein. So that by this account, it is probable
almost one half of Egypt was cut off in sands and
deserts, which could not be cultivated, and therefore
were not inhabited, till the monks, who found out a
new way of living, left the cities, to become here
and there scattered inhabitants of the wilderness.
And by this means the dioceses of Egypt, if we
speak properly of the habitable part of them, will
be reduced to a much narrower compass, and fifteen
miles may perhaps pass for a general measure of
their extent in this sense one with another. But as
Alexandria and others might be larger, so it is cer
tain Thennesus, and Pansephysus, and others, were
much less : which makes good the observation and
reflection I at first passed upon them, that here were
some of the largest and some of the smallest dio
ceses in the world, under the same species and form
of episcopal government, for any thing that we find
to the contrary.
Out of the patriarchate of Alex- Sect ,
andria, we should next have gone A°D£e "InT »h,'
into that of Jerusalem, but Arabia 'y'ln^XgeTthan
. >,, , i ¦ in other places.
coming between, we will take a view
of it here, though it belonged to the patriarch of
Antioch. Carolus a Sancto Paulo calls it by mis
take Arabia Petraea, which, as Holstenius observes,
was a distinct province under the patriarch of Je
rusalem, and commonly known in ancient church
records by the name of PalcBstina Tertia. But
Arabia here is taken only for that part which was
under the metropohs of Bostra, and sometimes
called Philadelphia in ancient writers. In this
province we have accounts of twenty-one ancient
dioceses, whereof eighteen are recounted by Car. a
S. Paulo. 1. Bostra. 2. Adra. 3. Medaba. 4.
Gerasa. 5. Nibe or Nive. 6. Philadelphia, whence
in Epiphanius and others the region is called
Arabia Philadelphiae. 7- Esbus. 8. Neapolis. 9.
Phihppopohs. 10. Constantine. 11. Dionysias.
12. Maximianopolis. 13. Avara. 14. Elana, al.
Neela. 15. Zerabena. 16. Erra. 17- Anitha,
or, as Holstenius reads it, Eutimia. 18. Parembola.
To which Holstenius adds three more, Canotha,
Pheeno, and Bacatha, mentioned by Epiphanius

60 Cassian. Collat. 11. c. 3.
61 Athan. Ep. ad Antiochenos.
62 Cassian. Collat. 11. u. 1 . Thennesi accolae ita vel mari
vel stagnis salsis undique circumluuntur, ut solis, quia terra
deest, negociationibus dediti, &c.
63 Dionys. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 11.
64 Oros. Hist. lib. 7. c. 33. Vastas illas tunc jEgypti soli-
tudines, arenasque diffusas, quas propter sitim ac sterilita-
tem, periculosamque serpentum abundantiam conversatio
hiimananon nosset; magna habitautium monachorum mul-
titudo compleverat.

65 Joseph. Antiquit. lib. 2. c. 5.
63 Sulpic. Dial. 1. c. 7. Ubi prima eremi ingressus sum,
duodecim fere a Nilo millibus, &c.
67 Cassian. Institut. lib. 5. c. 40. Decern et octo millibus
longe ab ecclesia commanebat.
68 Id. Collat. 24. c. 4. Calami et Porphyricnis eremus
longioris solitudinis intervallo ab universis urbibus et habi-
taculis hominum, quam eremus Scythii dividitur : septem
siquidem vel octo mansionibus vastissimas solitudinis deserta
penetrantes, vix ad cellularum suarum secreta perveniunt,
&c. Vid. Instit. lib. 10. c. 24.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

359

and Eusebius. In after-ages, when the notitia was
made which is pubhshed in the seventh chapter of
this book, the number of dioceses was augmented
to thirty-four, whereof twelve are called villages.
And it appears from Sozomen69 that this was no
new thing in this country ; for he takes notice that
it was usual in some provinces to consecrate bishops
in villages, and he particularly specifies Arabia and
Cyprus for it. But then we are not to imagine that
these dioceses were confined to a single village, as
some have vainly concluded, to favour the hypo
thesis of congregational episcopacy. For these
villages were what the ancients commonly called
metrocomics, mother-villages, which had many other
villages depending on them, so that they were the
chief villages of a certain district. This is evident
from Epiphanius,70 who, speaking of Bacathus, one
of the village bishoprics, styles it purpoKtopiav ' Apa-
|8iac, a mother-village in Arabia, which implies,
that there were others depending on it. So that
these dioceses might be as large as any other, having
not only that village, but whole tracts and regions
sometimes depending on them, as may be seen in
the foresaid notitia, where some of them are called
clima orientalium, and clima occidentalium, denoting
not only a particular village, but a httle people or
nation of such a combination or district, under a
mother-village, from which the whole diocese or
circuit had its denomination. The Arabians were
a people that chose rather to hve in villages, and
had but few cities in comparison of others ; and
that seems to be the reason why village bishops
were aUowed in this country, which otherwise were
forbidden by the canons of the church, as has been
showed in another place. "
Out of Arabia, our next step is into
oi the dioceses of Palestine, or the patriarchate of Jeru-
Palestine, or the pa- r ,
taarchate of jem- salem, which, being taken out of the
patriarchate of Antioch, had three
provinces assigned for the hmits of its jurisdiction,
which, in the ancient monuments of the church,
are commonly called Palaestina Prima, Secunda,
and Tertia, following the. civil account of the Ro
man empire. In these three provinces (comprised
within the borders of the land of Canaan and
Arabia Petraea) Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons
about forty-seven ancient dioceses.
In Palaestina Prima.
1. Hierusalem. 2. Csesarea. 3. Dora. 4. An-
tipatris. 5. Diospolis, in Scripture called Lydda.
6. Jamnia. 7. Nicopolis, which is Emmaus. 8.
Sozusa. 9. Maiuma. 10. Joppa. 11. Ascalon.
12. Gaza. 13. Raphia. 14. Anthedon. 15. Eleu-

69 Sozom. lib. 7. c. 19. ™ Epiphan. Epitom. Panarii.
" Book II. chap. 12. sect. 1.
72 Hieron. Ep. ad Dardan.
73 Cotovic. Itinerar. Hierosol. lib. 1. c. 1. p. 327.

theropolis, anciently some place about Hebron. 16.
Neapolis, or Sichem. 17. Elia. 18. Sebaste, or
Samaria. 19. Petra. 20. Jericho. 21. Libias.
22. Azotus. 23. Zabulon. 24. Araclia, al. He
raclea. 25. Baschat. 26. Archelais.
In Palaestina Secunda.
I. Scythopolis. 2. Pella. 3. Caparcotia, or Ca
pernaum. 4. Gadara. 5. Capitolias. 6. Maxi-
mianopolis. 7- Tiberias. 8. Mennith. 9. Hippus.
10. Amathus. In PalBestina Tertia.
1. Petra. 2. Augustopolis. 3. Arindela. 4. Arad.
5. Areopolis. 6. Elusa. 7- Zoara. 8. Sodoma. 9.
Phenon. 10. Pharan. 11. Aife. Holstenius, in
his corrections upon this catalogue, strikes two out
of the number, viz. Baschat, which he reckons to be
the same with Bacatha in Arabia Philadelphiae, and
Phenon, which he assigns to the same province.
But instead of these two, he has found out three
more in Palaestina Prima, viz. Sycamazon, Gerara,
and another Lydda, distinct from Diospolis afore
mentioned. So that the whole number of known
dioceses was forty-eight.
Now, if we look upon all these together, and com
pare them with the forty dioceses in Germany at this
day, they will appear very small indeed in compari
son of them. For whereas Germany is computed
eight hundred and forty miles in length, and seven
hundred and forty in breadth ; the whole extent of
these three provinces will not amount to a square
of one hundred and sixty miles. For the length
of all Palestine, or the land of Canaan, taking
in part of Phoenicia as far as Tyre and Sidon, which
yet is excluded from these provinces, is computed
by St. Jerom,72 Cotovicus,73 Masius,74 and others, to
be but a hundred and sixty miles ; and the breadth
from Joppa to Jordan not above sixty : to which if
we add about sixty more beyond Jordan, for the
breadth of Palaestina Tertia, to the borders of Ara
bia Philadelphiae and Bostra, we have then the com
plete dimensions of the three provinces together.
By which it appears, that two German dioceses of
one hundred miles length, are as large as all those
forty-eight dioceses put together. Yet there were
some dioceses among them of a competent bigness.
Eleutheropolis, a city much spoken of by St. Jerom,
not far from the place where Hebron stood, in the
borders of Dan and Judah, seems to have had a
pretty large territory. For St. Jerom speaks of vil
lages belonging to it at seventeen miles'75 distance
from it, and mentions a great many other villages in
the same territory, though he does not so exactly

14 Masius, Comment, in Joshuam xii. 24.
75 Hieron. de Locis Hebra. voce Duma. Duma vicus
grandis in finibus Eleutheropoleos, decern et septem ab ea
milliaribus distans.

360

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

tell us their distance from the city. Sozomen names
some others, as Besanduca,75 where he says Epipha
nius was born : and Ceila and Berathsatia," where
the bones of the prophets Micah and Habakkuk
were found. Near Besanduca Epiphanius built his
monastery, and the village had a church in it, where
Epiphanius ordained a deacon, as he himself in
forms us.'8 From all which it is very evident this
city had a large territory and considerable diocese,
with many country towns and churches belonging
to them. And there were several others, especially
in Palaestina Secunda and Tertia, equal in extent
to the diocese of Eleutheropolis. But a judicious
reader will easily conclude from the largeness of
these, that some others must needs therefore be very
small, since there *ere so great a number in so short
a compass. If we cast our eye upon the sea-coast
of Palestine, and reckon Tyre, and Sidon, and Ptole
mais, and Sycaminum, and Porphyria into the ac
count, (as being within the ancient bounds of the
land of Canaan, though they now belong to the
province of Phcenice and the patriarch of Antioch,)
we shall find seventeen or eighteen cities in a line
of one hundred and sixty miles, and some very near
neighbours to one another. Cotovicus™ reckons it
but four miles from Ptolemais to Porphyria ; and
Sycaminum and Zabulon were not further removed
from it. But Ferrarius reckons it twenty or twenty-
four ; so that the position of the two first is a little
doubtful, but the other three may be reckoned with
in five or six miles of one another. Baudrand ob
serves80 the like of Dora and Csesarea the metropo
lis, that they were but five miles distant from each
other. So Ferrarius computes Antipatris ten miles
from Csesarea, and Diospolis ten more from Anti-
patris. Diospolis is in the Scripture called Lydda,
and said to be nigh unto Joppa. Baudrand reckons
it but six miles, correcting Ferrarius, who computes
it ten. Jamnia was also about ten miles from Jop
pa, and but twelve from Lydda, as is collected out
of Antonine's Itinerary. So that these three cities
were not above twelve miles distant from each other.
But Gaza, Maiuma, and Anthedon were still nearer
neighbours, not above twenty furlongs or three miles
from each other, as Sozomen particularly"1 remarks
their distance. Maiuma, he tells us, was once only a
village belonging to Gaza, to which it was the sea
port, seated nearer the sea upon the river Besor :
but when Constantine, for its merit in readily em
bracing Christianity, had granted it the privilege of
a city, it presently, according to the ancient rule,
became a bishop's seat, and continued ever after so

76 Sozom. lib. 6. u. 32. 7' Ibid. lib. 7. c. 29.
78 Epiphan. Ep. ad Johan. Hierosol. Ecclesia villce quae
est juxta monasterium nostrum, &c.
79 Cotovic. Itiner. lib. 1. c. 20.
80 Baudrand. Lexic. Gengr. voce Dora.
81 Sozom. lib. 5. u. 3 et 9.

to be, notwithstanding some attempts made against
it, of which I have given an account in the forego
ing chapter. But though these cities lay so near
together, we are not to think they were of the con
gregational way, or their bishops only parish pastors.
While Maiuma was joined to Gaza, the church was
doubtless more than a single congregation. For
Eusebius, speaking of Silvanus, bishop of Gaza, who
suffered martyrdom in the time of the Diocletian
persecution, styles him82 bishop of the churches in
and about Gaza. Which implies that his diocese
was more than a single congregation. Nay, after
Maiuma was taken from it, Gaza had still many
other villages and a populous territory belonging to
it. Sozomen83 mentions three villages, one called
Thabaca, where Hilarion was born ; another So-
pharconbra, where Ammonius was born; and a third
named Bethelia, which he calls iroXvdvSpunrov mpnv
TaKaXav, a most populous village under the jurisdic
tion of Gaza ; which was also famous for the hea
then pantheon, beside other temples that were in it;
whence he conjectures it had the name of Bethelia,
which in the Syrian tongue is the same as domicilium
deorum, or the house of the gods. Now, a village
that had several heathen temples in it, had no doubt
upon its conversion some Christian churches also,
where they had presbyters to celebrate holy offices,
though in dependence on the church of Gaza. And
for Maiuma, when it became a distinct diocese, its
bishop was not a single parish pastor, but he had a
clergy under him, and all other things that the epis
copal church of Gaza had ; as Sozomen " particularly
notes in the case, saying, Each city had then- own
bishop and clergy, and their own proper festivals
for their martyrs, and commemorations of the bi
shops and priests that had lived among them, and
their proper bounds of the country lying round
about them. And that we may not wonder that
there should be such villages as these, it will not
be amiss to observe what Josephus reports of two
villages of Idumea not far from these, Begabri and
Caphartophan, where he says85 Vespasian slew
above ten thousand people, took a thousand cap
tives, and forced many others to fly away. He also
says 86 in another place, there were many villages
in Galilee so populous, that the least of them had
above fifteen thousand inhabitants in them. Now,
a few such villages as these, united under a metro-
comia, or mother-village, might quickly arise into
numbers enough to become a diocese, and have a
bishop and clergy of their own, which it would be
absurd to mistake for the pastor of a single congre-

82 Euseb. lib. 8. u. 13. 'Eirio-Koiros Ttov iptpl ti> Tdlav
EKKX-natiov. 83 Sozom. lib. 3. u. 14. lib. 5. u. 15. lib. 6. c. 32.
84 Id. lib. 5. c. 3.
95 Joseph, de Bello Jud. lib. 5. c. 4.
88 Idem, de Bell. Jud. lib. 3. c. 2

Chap II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

331

gation. And this was evidently the ease of the
smallest dioceses in this part of Palestine, where,
notwithstanding the narrowness of their limits,
they were under the same species of episcopal go
vernment with other churches.
The inland dioceses of Palestine were generally
larger; yet some of them were small. For Emmaus
was but sixty furlongs, or seven miles and a half,
from Jerusalem, as both the Scripture and travellers
inform us :87 yet when of a village it became a city,
being rebuilt by the Romans in the time of Adrian,
and by them called Nicopolis, in memory of their
victories over Jerusalem, as Sozomen,88 and Euse-
sebius,99 and St. Jerom90 inform us, it then also ad
vanced itself to an episcopal see, and according to
the rule of the church had the city territory for. its
diocese; under which denomination and quahty we
find it afterwards in the notitias of the church. This
perhaps brings the diocese of Jerusalem into nar
rower bounds one way than is commonly imagined ;
but stiU it was of sufficient extent to have many
particular churches in it. For the Jewish antiqua
ries commonly tell us, there were above four hun
dred synagogues in the city itself. Dr. Lightfoot91
reckons four hundred and fifty. Others,92 four
hundred and sixty; and some say,93 there were four
hundred and eighty for Jews and strangers there.
Optatus says, there were seven in a very small
plain upon the top of Mount Sion, where the Jews M
were used to meet and hear the law of Moses read.
And Epiphanius95 mentions the same, which he
says were also left standing after the destruction of
Jerusalem to the time of Adrian, and one of them
to the time of Constantine. Now, it would be very
strange, that a city which had so many synagogues,
should not afford above one church, after it was made
Christian, and so many thousand converts were in
it even in the time of the apostles. But it had also
a territory without the city, and churches at some
distance from it. For Bethlehem was in the diocese
of Jerusalem, six miles from the mother-church ; upon
which account it had a church and presbyters of its
own, but those subject to the bishop of Jerusalem, as
St. Jerom95 informs us, who charges John, bishop
of Jerusalem, for an extravagant abuse of his power,
in laying his injunctions on his presbyters at Beth
lehem, that they should not baptize the catechu
mens of the monastery, who stood candidates at

87 Cotovic. Itiner. lib. 2. c. 19. » Sozom. lib. 5. u. 21.
89 Euseb. Chron. an. 2237.
90 Hieron. de Locis Hebr. voce Emmaus.
91 Lightfoot, Hora, Hebr. in Matth. Protem.
92 Otho, Lexic. Rabbin, p. 627.
99 Sigon. de Republic. Hebr. lib. 2. c. 8. Goodwin, Mos.
et Aaron, lib. 2. c. 2.
Optat. lib. 3. p. 62. In cujus vertice est non magna
planities, in qua fuerant septem synagogae, ubi Judasorum
populus conveniens, legem per Moysem datam discere po-
tuisset

Easter, upon which they were sent to Diospolis for
baptism. St. Jerom mentions the chm-ch of Thiria w
in the same place, where the bishop of Jerusalem
ordained presbyters and deacons : and there is no
doubt but there were many other such parishes
within the precincts of his diocese, acknowledging
his jurisdiction. We cannot give so particular an
account of all the dioceses of Palestine ; but those
which some have thought the least, Lydda and
Jamnia, appear to have been cities, and to have had
their dependences in the neighbouring country
round them. So that except Maiuma, which was
disfranchised by Julian, there was no village in
Palestine that had a bishop of its own ; but the vil
lages were all as so many parishes to the neighbour
ing city in whose territory they lay : which made
these diocesan churches still of the same species
with the rest, that had a larger extent of jurisdic
tion. Josephus indeed calls Lydda a village, but
he says, it was a village not inferior to a city ; and
afterward it was made a city, and called Diospolis,
when it was a bishop's see : and though its diocese
could not extend very far one way, being it was but
six miles from Joppa toward the sea; yet other
ways it extended further, for St. Jerom98 speaks of
Bethsarissa, a village belonging to it, though it was
near fifteen miles' distance from it, in the region
called Regio Tamnitica, which seems to have been
the territory belonging to this city.
I have been the more particular in describing the
dioceses of Palestine, because here Christianity was
first planted, and the true model of ancient episco
pacy may best, be collected from them. They who
reckon these bishoprics no larger than country
parishes, are strangely mistaken on the one hand ;
and they who extend their bounds as wide as Ger
man dioceses, are no less extravagant on the other.
To make the right estimate, the reader must remem
ber that there were never quite fifty bishops in aU
the three Palestines. In the middle of the sixth
century there were but forty-five, who subscribed in
the council of Jerusalem, anno 536. And we do
not find, upon the nicest inquiry, they ever exceeded
forty-eight. So that it were the absurdest thing in
the world to suppose, as some have done, that these
dioceses were but parish churches, or single congre
gations. On the other hand, when it is remembered,
that the extent of the whole country was not above

95 Epiph. de Mensur. et Ponder.
96 Hieron. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. e. 16. Tu potiusscindis
ecclesiam qui prsecepisti Bethleem presbyteris tiiis, ne com-
petentibus nostris in pascha baptismum traderent. Vid.
Sulpic. Sever. Dial. 1. c. 4. Parochia est episcopi qui
Hierosolymam tenet.
97 Ibid. Theosobium Thirise ecclesiae diaconum facis pres-
byterum, et contra nos armas.
08 Hieron. Loc. Hebr. voce Bethsarissa. Est in finibus
Diospoleos villa, quindeciin ferme ab ea millibus distans con
tra aeptentrionem in regione Tamnitica.

362

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

a hundred and sixty miles, it is as evident these
dioceses could not be of the largest size, and, if
compared with some others, scarce be found to have
the proportion of one to twenty, which needs no
further demonstration. The next patriarchate is that of An-
a catalogue of the tioch, to which Carolus a Sancto Paulo
provinces and dio-
ceses under the pa- assigns these thirteen provinces : Syria
triarch of Antioch. ° jr .,
Prima. Syria Secunda. Theodorias.
Cilicia Prima. Cilicia Secunda. Isauria. Eu-
phratensis. Osrhoena. Mesopotamia. Phoenicia
Prima. Phoenicia Secunda. Arabia, and the isle
of Cyprus. One of these, Arabia Philadelphia?, has
been already spoken of; and three others, Isauria
and Cilicia Prima and Secunda, lying in Asia Minor,
shall be considered in the next chapter, among the
provinces of that country. For the rest,.I will here
give first a particular catalogue of the dioceses in
each province, and then make a few remarks upon
them and some other Eastern provinces not men
tioned by that writer. In Syria Prima.
1. Antiochia. 2. Seleucia Pieria. 3. Berraea, by
some called Aleppo. 4. Chalcis. 5. Onosarta, or
rather Anasarta. 6. Gabbus. To which Holstenius
adds another, called Paltus, which he thinks wrong
placed in Theodorias. In Syria Secunda.
1. Apamea, upon the river Orontes. 2. Arethusa.
3. Epiphania. 4. Larissa. 5. Mariama, or Ma-
riamne. 6. Raphanaea. 7. Seleucia juxta Belum,
al. Seleucobelus. To these also Holstenius trans
fers another, named Balanea, out of the province of
Theodorias, where he thinks it was wrong placed ;
but he is mistaken. In Theodorias.
1. Laodicea. 2. Gabala. 3. Paltos. 4. Balaneea.
In Euphratesia, or Comagene.
1. Hieropolis. 2. Cyrus. 3. Samosata. 4. Do-
liche. 5. Germanicia. 6. Zeugma. 7. Perre, by
some corruptly read Perga, and Pella, and Peria, as
Holstenius observes. 8. Europus, al. Amphipolis
and Thapsacum. 9. Urima. 10. Csesarea, other
wise called Neocaesarea Euphratensis. 11. Sergio-
pohs. 12. Sura. 13. Marianopolis, which some
place in Syria Secunda.
In Osrhoena, or Mesopotamia Inferior.
1. Edessa. 2. Carrse. 3. Circesium. 4. Nice-
phorium. 5. Batnse. 6. Callinicus, al. Leontopolis.
7. Marcopolis. 8. Himeria. 9. Dausara.

In Mesopotamia Superior.
1. Amida, now called Caramit. 2. Nisibis. 3.
Rhesina. 4. Martyropohs. 5. Caschara. To these
Holstenius adds two more, Cepha, and Mnisus or
Miniza. In Phoenicia Prima.
1. Tyrus. 2. Sidon. 3. Ptolemais, or Aeon. 4.
Berytus. 5. Byblus. 6. Tripohs. 7. Area. 8.
Orthosias. 9. Botrus. 10. Aradus. 11. Antaradus.
12. Porphyrium. 13. Paneas, or Csesarea Philippi.
14. Sycaminum, now called Capo Carmelo.
In Phoenicia Libani.
1. Damascus. 2. Laodicea Scabiosa. 3. Abyla.
4. Hehopolis. 5. Jabruda. 6. Palmyra. 7. Emesa.
8. Danaba. 9. Evaria, al. Euroia, al. Justinianopolis.
10. Comoara. 11. Corada. 12. Saracenoram Ci
vitas, which rather belongs to Arabia. Holstenius
adds one more, called Arlana.
In Cyprus.
1. Constantia. 2. Citium. 3. Amathus. 4. Cu
rium. 5. Paphos. 6. Arsinoe. 7. Lapithus. 8.
Thamassns. 9. Chytrus. 10. Tremithus. 11. Soli.
12. Ledra. 13. Tiberiopolis. Holstenius adds Cai-
teriopolis and Carpasia, where Philo was bishop,
who commonly, by a vulgar error, is called Carpa-
thius, as if he had been bishop of Carpathus, an
island in the Mediterranean Sea, whereas he was
bishop of this Carpasia, in the isle of Cyprus, as
Holstenius and Dr. Cave have both observed.
Now, to make some few remarks Secl ln
upon these dioceses distinctly, I ob- lh?b£±™, re
serve, that by the same reason that p"ls'
Carolus a Sancto Paulo places Cyprus under the
patriarch of Antioch, he might have brought As
syria, Persia, Babylonia, Adiabene, India, and the
nation of the Homerites in Arabia Felix, under
Antioch also. For there were bishops in all these
places, as I shall show, but independent of any
patriarch except their own metropolitans. And so
Cyprus was declared to be by the council of Ephe
sus ; whence it was always reckoned an autocepha-
lus, or independent province, as has been more fully
proved in another place.99 AU I have further to
observe of it here, is in reference to those fifteen
dioceses that we have found there, that they were
large ones, if compared with those of Palestine : for
Cyprus is computed by Ferrarius 170 miles long,
and by others 200 ; which is more than Palestine.
Baudrand reckons it 500 miles in compass ; which,
without inquiring any further into the particular
distance of places, or largeness of the cities or vil-

89 Book II. chap. 18. sect. 2.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

363

laees, is sufficient to show, that those dioceses were
none of the least size, though short of some that we
shall meet with in the continent, as we take a view
of the other provinces. That which lay next to Cyprus was
s0-rttprira°aMandOf Syria, which anciently comprehended
secunda. ^ tne COuntry betwixt the Mediter
ranean and Euphrates ; but the Romans divided it
into six provinces, Syria Prima and Secunda, Phoe
nicia Prima and Secunda, Theodorias, and Euphra-
tensis, otherwise caUed Hagiopolis and Comagene.
The six provinces together are computed by geo
graphers to be between three and four hundred
miles in length, and two hundred broad from the
Mediterranean to the Euphrates. And the whole
number of dioceses in aU the provinces was about
fifty-six, that is, but eight more than we found in
Palestine. By which the reader may easily make
a general estimate of the largeness of these in com
parison of the other in Palestine, by considering the
dimensions of each country, and comparing them
together. But I will speak a httle more particularly
of a few dioceses in these provinces. Syria Prima
had anciently but six dioceses, and in the later no-
titias we find only five. The metropohs was Anti
och, one of the largest cities in the world. Chry
sostom, who may be supposed to be a competent
judge of its greatness, speaks sometimes of ten or
twenty myriads,100 that is, a hundred or two hun
dred thousand people in it. And he makes this a
part of his panegyric upon Ignatius, that whereas
it is a difficult matter sometimes to govern a hun
dred or fifty men ; yet such was his wisdom and
virtue, that St. Peter doubted not to commit to his
care a city, which had two hundred thousand people
in it. The territory without the city was answer
able to its greatness within : for one way it reached
two days' journey, or fifty miles, to the territory of
Cyrus, where Theodoret was bishop : for Strabo
says,101 these two territories joined one to another.
There were many great -villages like cities in this
compass ; as Daphne, in the suburbs of Antioch ;
Gindarus, in the borders of the diocese toward Cy
rus : in Strabo's time it was a city102 belonging to
Cyrus, or Cyrrestica. But I must note, that there
seem to have been two places of that name, the one
a city, the other a village. For Strabo speaks of a
Gindarus in the Regio Cyrrestica, which he caUs a
city: and we find one Petrus Gindarensis sub
scribing among the bishops of Syria in the council
of Nice ; who was also among the bishops of the
council of Antioch which condemned Athanasius,
as Holstenius103 and Schelstrate have observed out

100 Chrys. Horn. 86. in Matth. It. Horn. 42. in Ignat.
1 1. p. 567.
191 Strabo, lib. 16. p. 751. m Id. ibid.
103 Holsten. Annotat. Geograph. p. 206. Schelstrat. de
Concil. Antioch. p. 93.

of the subscriptions of these councils. Whence we
may conclude, that Gindarus mentioned by Strabo,
was probably the same city whereof this Peter was
bishop, and that there was another Gindarus, a vil
lage, in the time of Theodoret, belonging to Antioch,
where Asterius the monk lived, of whom Theodoret >04
speaks in his Religious History; where he also men
tions other villages 105 near mount Amanus in the
territory of Antioch ; which must be at a great dis
tance from Antioch; for Mount Amanus was the
northern hmit of Syria. Ben-sea and Chalcis were
large cities, twenty miles from one another. In the
same province lay Selecia Pieria, sixteen miles from
Antioch down the river Orontes, and five miles from
sea ; which was compass enough to make a large
diocese, though much inferior to the former.
In Syria Secunda there were anciently seven bi
shoprics, and we find the same number in the later
notitias of the church. Of these Apamea was the
metropolis, a city which Theodoret 1M makes to be
seventy-five miles from Antioch: and that it had a
large territory and many villages, we learn from
Strabo 107 and other ancient writers. Larissa in this
province is computed by Ferrarius to be fourteen
miles from Apamea; Arethusa, sixteen from Epi-
phania ; Epiphania, eighteen from Larissa. So that
at least twenty miles will be allotted to every diocese
in the province.
In Phoenicia Prima some few cities, Sect 12
as I have observed before in speaking PhJJSaiSTaiiri
of Palestine, lay very near together, as ecl"' °"
Sycaminum and Porphyrium, whose dioceses could
not be very large upon that account. But Tyre
and Sidon and Berytus were both large cities and
at a greater distance. For Tyre was twenty-five
miles distant from Sidon on the one side, and as
much or more from Ptolemais on the other side.
Cotovicus109 reckons it but twenty, but Ferrarius
says it was two and thirty. And the city itself was
very large, if we take Strabo's account, for he says,109
it filled an island that was nineteen miles in com
pass. Pliny110 agrees as to the bigness ofthe island,
but makes the city only two and twenty furlongs.
Sidon was also a large city, and not within twenty-
five miles of any other. Baudrand makes it twenty-
five from Tyre, and thirty-five from Berytus. Be
rytus was famous for the study of the civil law, and
reckoned among the great and flourishing cities of
the East, and it had no nearer neighbours than
Sidon on the south, and Byblus on the north,
which Ferrarius sets at thirty-four miles' distance
from it. The dioceses in the other Phoenicia, to
ward Mount Libanus, were greater than the former.

'°4 Theod. Hist. Relig. Vit. Julian, p. 777.
135 Ibid. Vit. Simeon, c. 6. p. 808.
133 Theod. Ep. 113.
107 Strabo, lib. 16. I08 Cotovic. Itinerar. lib. 1. c. 20.
139 Strabo, lib. 16. ,10 Plin. lib. 5. c. 19.

364

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

For here were some larger cities and at a greater
distance from one another. Among these was the
great city Damascus, once the metropolis of the
province, the largeness of which may he collected
from what Josephus relates,111 how that the Damas
cenes slew there ten thousand Jews in one day.
Emissa, the new metropolis, is accounted also a large
city by Ammianus Marcelhnus,112 who equals it to
Tyre and Sidon and Berytus. And for their terri
tories, we must judge of them by their distance from
other places. Laodicea and Arethusa were the
nearest neighbours to Emissa, and Ferrarius makes
them sixteen miles distant from it. And we do not
find Damascus pent up in narrower bounds : for it
was surrounded with Abyla, and Jabruda, and Cse
sarea Philippi, the last of which Ferrarius reckons
twenty-six miles from it. Abyla was the head of a
region, thence called Abylene, which gave the de
nomination of a tetrarch to Lysanias, as St. Luke
informs us : whence we may collect there was a
considerable territory belonging to it. Here was
also the great city Palmyra, the head of another
region, thence called Palmyrene, of which it is rea
sonable to make the same conclusion ; though I
have nothing more particular to remark of the extent
of these regions, save that Abyla is reckoned thirty-
two miles from Hehopolis, another "noted city in
this province, and one of its nearest neighbours, as
Ferrarius out of Antonine's Itinerary computes their
distance. Vid. Ferrar. voce Heliopolis.
sect, 13, In the province of Theodorias, be
tween Syria Prima and Phoenicia on
the sea-coast, there were but three dioceses, Lao
dicea the metropolis, Balanea, and Gabala; and the
same are mentioned in Goar's notitia and others.
Now, the distance of these places may be seen in
Antonine's Itinerary. Balanea was twenty-four miles
from Antaradus in Phoenicia ; Gabala, twenty-seven
miles from Balanea, which Ferrarius calls twenty-
four, according to modern accounts ; and Laodicea
the metropolis was eighteen from Balanea. And
their territories extended further other ways.
In the province of Euphratesia, or
CorIco?r,™enf ' Comagene, there were anciently thir
teen dioceses, and but one more in
later notitias. Here were several large cities, as
Hierapohs the metropolis of the province, and Sa
mosata on the Euphrates, which both Josephus"3
and Ammianus Marcelhnus114 describe as a great
and magnificent city. But the largest diocese for
extent of territory in these parts was that of Cyrus,
where Theodoret was -bishop, who gives a most par
ticular account of it. He says in one place,115 it

was forty miles in length and forty in breadth; and
that there were above six myriads, or threescore
thousand £iya or juga of land in it. Now a jugum
of land was not a single acre, as some learned men
mistake ; but as much land as a yoke of oxen could
plough in a year ; and the Roman taxes were raised
by such proportions of land, whence the ordinary
tax upon land was styled jugatio in the civil law, as
I have had occasion to note 110 in another place. So
that threescore tkowscVciAjuga, according to this ac
count, will make a far greater diocese, than if we
should understand it of single acres only. And that
we may not think this was barren and unoccupied
land, Theodoret in another place specifies what
number of churches and parishes he had in his dio
cese, which he says117 were eight hundred: some
of which were overrun with the heresies of Marcion,
Arius, and Eunomius, when- he came to the diocese;
but he converted above ten thousand of one sect
only, viz. Marcionites,118 to the cathohc faith, and
of others some thousands more. AU which argu
ments agree to make it one of the largest dioceses
of the East, as Blondel119 ingenuously confesses it
to be, though some others would fain insinuate the
whole story to be a fiction, when yet all circum
stances concur to give it the clearest evidences of
truth. They who would see objections answered,
may consult Bishop Stillingfleet120 or Dr. Maurice,121
who have particularly considered the exceptions
that have been raised against it. As to the other
cities of this province, Doliche, Germanicia, Nico-
polis, Zeugma, Csesarea, &c, some of them were
but small cities, as Doliche, which Theodoret speaks
of122 with the diminutive title of iroXixvr) apucpd, a
very small city : but they might have large dioceses,
as Cyrus had, which itself was neither a great city
nor very well inhabited, but had a diocese larger
than many other cities which were ten times the
bigness of it.
In the Roman provinces beyond
the Euphrates (which some call by of osrhoena, and
Mesopotamia.
the general name of Mesopotamia,
because it lay between the two rivers Tigris and
Euphrates ; but the Romans divided it into two
provinces, Osrhoena on the banks of Euphrates, and
Mesopotamia toward the Tigris) there are so few
dioceses to be found in ancient records, that to me
it seems probable that our accounts are very im
perfect : for the whole number in both provinces is
but sixteen ; whereas in the later notitias there are
sixteen in Osrhoena alone, and in the other pro
vince thirty-five more; which makes it probable
that ancient accounts are here defective. Other-

111 Joseph, de Bell. lib. 2. c. 25. »2 Ammian. lib. 14. c. 8.
113 Joseph, de Bell. lib. 7. c. 27. '» Ammian. lib. 14 c 8
115 Theodor. Ep. 42 et 47. "» See Book V. c. 3. sect! 3.
117 Theod. Ep. 113. ad Leon. 'Ev oKTuKoaiats iKK\neriais
iXaxov irotpaivEtv. TotravTas yip b ICvppvs leapoiKias exei.

118 Id. Ep. 145. p. 1026. UXe'iovs ri pvpiovs, &c.
113 Blondel. Apol. p. 185.
120 Stillingfl. of Separat. p. 258.
121 Maurice's Defence of Dioc. Episc. p. 396.
122 Theod. lib. 5. «. 4.

Chap. IL

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

365

vrise we must say, that these dioceses were ex
tremely large. For Baudrand makes the country
four hundred and twenty miles long, and two hun
dred and seventy broad. Which divided into six
teen dioceses would make them all of great extent.
But the country seems not to have been all con
verted, for the Roman cities were only such as lay
by the banks of the rivers, and chiefly upon the
Euphrates. I shall therefore make no other esti
mate of them, than by the certain light we have of
them in ancient history. From which it is clear,
that some of them were at least such episcopal dio-
' ceses as were in all other parts of the world, that
is, cities with country regions and village churches.
This is evident from what Epiphanius observes of
Chascara, one of the cities of Mesopotamia, that
beside the bishop's see it had village churches, and
presbyters incumbent on them, in the third century.
For speaking129 of Manes the heretic, the first
founder of the Manichees, he says, When he had
been baffled at a pubhc disputation by Archelaus,
bishop of Chascara, and had like to have been stoned
by the people, he fled to Diodoris, a village belong
ing to Chascara, where one Tryphon was presbyter,
whom he challenged to a new disputation. And if
the lesser cities had such kind of dioceses, we may
readily conclude the same of Nisibis the metropohs,
which was so large a city as to be able to defend it
self sometimes against all the power of the Persian
empire ; being, as Sozomen observes of it,124 in a
manner all Christian in the time of the emperor
Julian. Edessa, the metropolis of the other pro
vince of Osrhoena, was also a very large city, and
the royal seat of Agbarus, who lived in our Sa
viour's time, and by whose means it is generaUy
thought to be converted very early to Christianity ;
and so it might perhaps from the very first have
several churches in it. However, in after ages we
are sure it had : for Sozomen, speaking of the per
secution under Valens the Arian emperor, says, He
took away all the churches within the city, among
which125 that of St. Thomas was one, so that the
people were forced to assemble in gardens without
the city for Divine service.
Beside these provinces mentioned
°'A'Tica!aPer" ^ Carolus a Sancto Paulo, there
were some other countries out of the
bounds of the Roman empire, which had the same
form of episcopal government ; upon which there
fore it will not be amiss to make a few strictures,
whilst we are speaking of the Eastern provinces.
That which we now caU Armenia Magna, was an
ciently called Armenia Persica, because it belonged

123 Epiph. Haer. 66. Manichae. n. 11.
124 Sozom. lib. 5. c. 3. ™ Sozom. lib. 6. c. 18.
125 Theodor. Ep. 77, ad Eulal. '"» Theod. Ep 78.
128 Otto Frising. lib. 7. c. 32. 129 Baron, an. 1195.

not to the Roman, but to the Persian empire.
Here were also bishops in the time of Theodoret, as
appears from some of his epistles. Por writing to
one Eulalius a bishop, he styles him,126 for distinc
tion sake, rijc ntpo-iKJjc 'Appiviag, bishop of the Per
sian Armenia. And another epistle127 is directed to
one Eusebius, a bishop of the same region. By
which it is plain there were bishops in that coun
try in Theodoret's time ; but how many we cannot
learn from him or any other ancient writer. Otho
Frisingensis,128 and Baronius,129 and some other mo
dern writers, talk much of the catholic of Armenia
that sent to submit himself to the pope in the
twelfth century, having a thousand bishops under
him. But, as Mr. Brerewood130 rightly observes, if
the whole story be not a fiction, Otho must needs
mistake obedience for communion : for the catholic
of Armenia might have a great number of the Ja
cobite bishops in his communion, but there could
not be so many in Armenia under his jurisdiction.
For the modern notitia mentions but nineteen bi
shops in this Armenia, as the reader will find in the
seventh chapter of this book. And it is not pro
bable they should multiply from twenty to a thou
sand in an age or two. However, this story has no
relation to the state of the church in the primitive
ages, about which the present inquiry is only con
cerned. We have some further account of Sect 17
the churches in other parts also of the ab°„e*7„da'c„£di
Persian dominions, beyond the river dlM'
Tigris, in Adiabene, which is a region of Assyria,
and in Babylonia or Chaldsea, in which we find two
large cities, Seleucia and Ctesiphon, under one
bishop. These were the royal seats of the Persian
kings, and but three miles from each other, as
Pliny131 and Ferrarius after him compute, though
others place them at a greater distance. Seleucia
is by some said to be the same as Mosul, the pre
sent seat of the patriarch of the Nestorians. But
anciently they were both but one diocese, as we
learn from Sozomen,132 who styles Simeon arch
bishop of Ctesiphon and Seleucia, under Sapores
king of Persia, who lived in the time of Constan
tine. There were other bishops also in these parts
at the same time, some of which suffered martyrdom
together with Simeon, as the same author informs
us.133 He also mentions one Acepsimas, a bishop
in the region of Adiabene, and twenty-three more,
whose names are there recorded, as suffering mar
tyrdom about the same time134 in several parts of
the Persian empire. And what sort of dioceses they
had, we may conjecture from what Sozomen135 says

130 Brerewood, Inquir. c. 21.
131 Plin. lib. 6. c. 26.
133 Ibid. c. 10.
135 Ibid. c. 13.

132 Sozom. lib. 2. c. 9.
134 Ibid. c. 13.

366

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

of one of them, named Bichor, that he suffered mar
tyrdom together with Maureandus his chorepiscopus,
and two hundred and fifty more of the clergy that
were under him. Such a number of clergy, and a
chorepiscopus among them, seem to bespeak a pretty
large diocese ; and if the rest were answerable to
this, we may conclude the bishops were all of the
same species as we have seen in all the Eastern
nations. Theodorus Lector136 speaks of an-
of the immireni other nation converted to Christianity
in Persia, and ,
iinmeritoj in Arabia m the time of Anastasius the emperor,
Felix. *
whom he names Immireni, and says,
they were subjects of the Persian empire, and dwelt
in the most southern parts of their dominions.
Whether they had above one bishop is not certain ;
for only one is mentioned as set over them upon
their conversion. And it might be with them, as it
was with some other barbarous people, Goths, Sa
racens, &c, that one bishop served the whole na
tion. Valesius confounds this people with the Ho-
meritse, whom Bochart and others more truly place
in Arabia Felix toward the South Sea. Baronius 137
supposes the Homerites first converted to the Chris
tian faith about the year 354, at the same time that
the Indians or Ethiopians were converted in the
reign of Constantius. But we have no account then
of what bishops were settled among them : but in
the beginning of the sixth age, we find the Chris
tian religion in a flourishing condition there, till
one Dunaan, an apostate Jew, having gotten the
kingdom, raised a great persecution against the
church, especially at Nargan, where one Arethas
was a petty king, subject, as many other small re-
guli were, to the kingdom of the Homerites, whom
he barbarously destroyed with all his people. But
this cloud quickly blowing over by the assistance of
Justin the Roman emperor, and Elesban king of
Ethiopia, who conquered Dunaan,138 the government
fell again into the hands of a Christian king, in
whose time Gregentius, archbishop of Tephra, the
royal city, is said to have had that famous disputa
tion with Herbanus the Jew, the result of which
was the conversion of an incredible number of Jews
in that region. Here I chiefly observe, that Gre
gentius is styled archbishop of Tephra, which im
plies, that he had suffragan bishops under him :
and in the relation of his death at the end139 of the
dispute, it is added, that both bishops, priests, and
deacons were gathered together to attend his fu
neral. By which it appears, that the state of that
church, so far as we have any account of it, was
conformable to other churches.

136 Theodor. Lect. lib. 2. p. 567.
137 Baron, an. 354. n. 14.
138 Acta Martyr. Homeritar. ap. Baron, an. 522 et 523.
133 Gregent. Disput. cum Herban. Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat
t. 1. p. 272.

We have some few intimations also „ .
Sect 19.
given us of churches planted anciently the^SSs*"""8
among the Saracens in Arabia, which ArabIa'
were never under the Roman empire. Hilarion is
said by some 14° to have begun the conversion of this
nation, but it was not completed till Mauvia, queen
of the Saracens, made it a condition of her making
peace with the Romans in the time of Valentinian,
that they should send her one Moses, a famous monk,
to be the bishop of her nation ; which was accord
ingly done, and so he became the first bishop of
that region of the Saracens, as Ruffin,141 and So
crates,142 and the other historians inform us. Sozo
men also adds, that one Zocomos, another regulus
or petty prince of another region of the Saracens,
being converted by a monk, brought over all his
subjects to the Christian faith. Theodorus Lec
tor143 likewise mentions another of these Saracen
princes, named Alamundarus, who embraced the
faith in the reign of the emperor Anastasius, anno
513. And Cyril of Scythopolis, who wrote the
Lives of Euthymius and Sabas, takes notice also of
a plantation of Saracens under the Roman govern
ment in Palestine,144 over whom one Peter, a convert
ed Saracen, who had before been their captain, was
made the first bishop by Juvenal, bishop of Je
rusalem, about the middle of the fifth century.
Now, we are to observe, that as these Saracens
were thus divided into httle nations, (after the man
ner of the Arabians,) and had each their regulus, or
petty prince ; so they seem each to have had their
proper bishop, one to a nation, and no more. And
therefore in councils we find them usually subscrib
ing themselves rather by the title of their nation,
Episcopus Centis Saracenorum, than any other way.
Which I take to be an indication, not that all the
Saracens in the world had but one bishop, but that
every petty nation had a bishop of its own, though
it is hard to distinguish sometimes which family or
tribe of them is meant by that general title. In
the second council of Ephesus,145 one Auxilaus is
styled Episcopus Saracenorum Foederatorum, among
the bishops of Palestine, whence it is easy to con
clude, there is meant the same Saracens that Cyril
speaks of, who were confederate with the Romans,
or under the Roman government. But in other
places we are left to guess what Saracens maybe
meant, since they were divided into several petty
nations, and more than one nation of them, as we
have seen, were converted to the Christian faith.
There is one Eastern country more, Serf. m.
famous for its conversion by JEdesius J5ta°p!r0 Miani
and Frumentius, in the time of Atha- bej00 B,p

140 Baron, an. 372. p. 344. >41 Ruffin. lib. 2. c. 6.
142 Socrat. lib. 4. u. 36. Theodor. lib. 4. v. 23. Sozom.
lib. 6. c. 38. ' 13 Theodor. Lector, lib. 2.
144 Cyril. Vit. Euthym. ap. Baron, an. 420. p. 481.
145 Cone. Ephes. 2. in Act. 1. Cone. Chalcedon. t. 4. p. 118.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

367

nasius, but yet learned men are not agreed where
to place it. The ancient historians, Ruffm,148 So
crates,147 and the rest that relate the story, commonly
call it India Ulterior, the Inner India : whence Ca
rolus a Sancto Paulo,148 and Baronius,149 and many
others take it for granted, that they mean India
within Ganges, the other part without Ganges hav
ing been converted before (as they think) by the
apostle St. Bartholomew. But Holstenius150 and
Valesius151 correct this mistake, and Bishop Pear
son152 has more fuUy proved that the India they
speak of was no part of the East Indies, but India
beyond Egypt, which was part of Ethiopia, whereof
Axumis was the metropohs. This lay not far from
the mouth of the Red Sea, over against the country
of the Homerites in Arabia, whence Constantius, in
one of his laws,153 joins these two nations together.
From which, and many other authorities, Bishop
Pearson unanswerably proves, that this India can
be understood of no other but the Ethiopic India,
whereof Axumis was the metropolis. This the
ancients caUed India as weU as the other : for Vir
gil says, the Nile flowed from the Blackamore
Indians ;151 and Procopius Gazensis styles the Red
Sea, the Indian Sea, because it bordered upon this
India beyond Egypt. Now, in this country Fru
mentius was the first bishop that we read of, being
ordained bishop of Axumis by Athanasius and a
synod of Egyptian bishops, and sent thither to con
vert the country and settle churches among them :
which therefore, we need not doubt, were of the
same species with those in Egypt and the rest of
the world. For Axumis was not the only place
that had a bishop. For PaUadius mentions one
Moses,155 bishop of Adulis, which was another city
of Ethiopia. And in his Life of St. Chrysostom,159
he also speaks of one of his own name, Palladius,
bishop of the Blemyes, which were a people of
Ethiopia, adjoining to Egypt, as Strabo, and Pliny,
and other geographers inform us. Bishop Pearson
gives some other proofs, out of Cedrenus and the
Arabic canons of the Nicene council, and their an
cient liturgies, that they had bishops in that coun
try ever since this their first conversion. But no
thing more particular occurring concerning their
dioceses, for want of better hght we can give no
further account of them. And for the same reason
I must omit several other Eastern nations, as the
Parfhians, and Indians about Ganges, which were
converted by St. Thomas the apostle; and the

Iberians and other nations lying upon the Caspian
Sea, which Ruffin 157 says were converted first by a
captive woman in the time of Constantine. Ancient
history affords us but slender accounts ofthe original
of these churches, and less of the constitution and
settlement of them. So that, taking our leave of
these far-distant regions, we will come next to a
part of the world which is better known, which is
the patriarchate of Constantinople, under which
were anciently comprehended aU the provinces of
Thrace and Asia Minor, except Isauria and Cilicia,
which always belonged to the patriarch of Antioch.
I shall first speak of Asia Minor, and then proceed
to the European provinces, taking each country as
they lie in their natural order.

149 Ruffin. lib. I.e. 9.
147 Socrat. lib. 1. c. 19.
148 Carol, a S. Paulo. Geogr. Sacr. p. 268.
149 Baron. Not. in Martyrol. Die 27. Octob.
150 Holsten. Not. in Carol, a S. Paulo. Geogr. p. 171.
151 Vales. Not. in Socrat. lib. 1. c. 19.
|M Pearson, Vind. Ignat. par. 2. c. II. p. 332.
59 Nullus ad gentem Auxumitarum et Homeritas ire pra-

CHAPTER III.
A CONTINUATION OF THIS ACCOUNT IN THE PRO
VINCES OF ASIA MINOR.
To understand the state of diocesan
churches in Asia Minor, it will be or th? extent of
, - - ., . Asia Minor and the
proper, before we descend to parti- number of dioceses
contained therein.
culars, to examine the extent of the
country in gross, and see how many dioceses are to
be found in the whole : for by this we may make
an estimate of them in general, allowing each dio
cese its proportion upon an equal distribution of the
country into so many parts as there were dioceses
in it. Not that they were really so equally divided ;
(for in summing up the particulars we shall find
here were some of the largest and some of the small
est dioceses in the world ;) but we may conceive
them as equal, in order to make a division of the
whole country at once among them. Now, Dr.
Heylin in his Geography ' reckons the length of Asia
Minor from the HeUespont to the river Euphrates
to be 630 miles ; and the breadth from Sinus Issicus
in Cilicia to Trabezond in Pontus to be 210 miles.
The ancient geographers, Strabo2 and Pliny,3 make
it almost 200 miles more in length. But then their
accounts are taken from some ancient periplus or
sea voyage, which never proceeds in a direct line,
but takes in the bendings and windings of the sea,
which may easily stretch 600 to 800 miles : so that
the accounts may be the same, when allowance is

ceptus, ultra annui temporis spatia debet Alexandria! de
caetero commorari.
im Virgil. Georg. 4. ver. 291. Usque coloratis amnis de-
vexus ab Indis.
155 Pallad. de Gentibus India?.
156 Pallad. Vit. Chrysost. e. 20. 157 Ruffin. lib. 1. «.-. 10.
1 Heylin, Cosmogr, lib. 3. p. 3.
2 Strabo, lib. 12. p. 547 et 548. 9 Plin. lib. 6. t. 2

368

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

made for the excesses of one way of measuring
above the other. As to the breadth, Pliny's account
is rather less : for he makes it but bare 200 miles4
from Sinus Issicus to the Euxine Sea. But then he
says, this was the narrowest part of it, where the
two seas almost made it a peninsula. And it is
certain in other parts it was much broader. For
Strabo5 reckons the breadth of Cappadocia only from
Pontus to Mount Taurus 1800 stadia, which is above
200 miles : and yet Casaubon" supposes, that by
Pontus he does not mean the Pontus Euxinus, but
the province of Pontus, which was to he added to
the breadth of Asia on one side of Cappadocia, as
Cilicia was on the other. So that we can hardly
suppose the breadth of Asia, taking one part with
another, to be less than 300 miles. Now, this was
divided by the Romans into two large civil dioceses,
the Asiatic and Pontic, each of which had ten
or eleven provinces in them, and every province se
veral cities and episcopal dioceses, beside those of
Isauria and Cilicia, which are reckoned to the Ori
ental diocese, and were under the patriarch of Anti
och. Christopherson, in his translation of Theodoret,
makes a strange mistake concerning these bishop
rics. For whereas Theodoret says, that Asia, or
the Asiatic diocese, was birb 'ivStiea dpxbvTtav, under
eleven civil prefects,7 he translates it, undecim antis
tites, as if there had been but eleven bishops in aU
the Asiatic diocese ; and only as many in the Pontic
diocese, because Theodoret says, it had ierapidpovg
r)yovpkvovg, the same number of governors : whereas
Theodoret is not speaking of ecclesiastical governors,
but civil governors of provinces ; whereof there was
the number Theodoret speaks of in each of those
dioceses: but bishoprics were abundantly more
numerous; for some single provinces had above
forty, and in the whole number they were, according
to Carolus a Sancto Paulo's reckoning, three hun
dred and eighty-eight, viz. in Asia forty-two, Helles
pont nineteen, Phrygia Pacatian aPrima twenty-nine,
Pacatiana Altera five, Phrygia Salutaris twenty,
Lydia twenty-four, Caria twenty-five, Lycia twenty-
eight, Pamphyha Prima twelve, Pamphylia Secunda
twenty-four, Pisidia nineteen, Lycaonia nineteen,
Cappadocia Prima six, Cappadocia Secunda six,
Cappadocia Tertia five, Armenia Prima five, Arme
nia Secunda ten, Galatia Prima seven, Galatia Se
cunda four, Pontus Polemoniacus six, Elenopontus
six, Paphlagonia five, Honorias five, Bithynia Prima
fourteen, Bithynia Secunda four, Cilicia Prima
seven, Cihcia Secunda nine, Isauria twenty-three.
In the latter notitia, which the reader will find at
the end of this book, the number is a little increased
to four hundred and three. For though some pro

vinces decreased, yet others increased in their num
bers, so that in the eighth century we find fifteen
dioceses more than were in former ages, which is
no great alteration in such a multitude, considering
what great additions have been made in some other
countries in comparison of this. Now then, sup
posing 400 dioceses to have been in a country 600
miles in length and 300 in breadth, let us examine
how much upon an equal distribution will fall to
every diocese. And it appears upon an exact com
putation, that supposing there had been 450 dio
ceses, there would have been 20 miles to each dio
cese ; and consequently, there being not so many
by 50, every diocese must have so much the more
upon an equal distribution. But then it must be
owned, that the distribution was generally unequal
in this country ; for the bishoprics of the Pontic
provinces were for the most part very large, and
those of the Asiatic provinces consequently the
smaller upon that account, and abundantly more
numerous : so that here the reader may view the
largest and smallest dioceses in the world together,
and yet the same species of episcopacy maintained
in all without distinction.
To begin with the Pontic provinces :
„ ° . , Sect. 2.
Cappadocia was a very large country, oi cappadocia
¦rr J b J I and Armenia Minor.
and had but few bishoprics. Strabo 8
reckons it 3000 stadia in length, that is, 375 miles :
but then he takes it in a larger sense than we do
now, as including all from the provinces of Lycaonia
and Phrygia to the Euphrates ; which takes in Ar
menia Minor as well as Cappadocia : for anciently
they were aU one kingdom, though afterwards di
vided into five provinces, three Cappadocias, and
Armenia Prima and Secunda. But nowin all these
five provinces there were not thirty dioceses at first,
and some of those were new erected in the fourth
century, as Sasima, where Gregory Nazianzen was
made bishop, which before belonged either to Cffi-
sarea, the metropohs of Cappadocia Prima, from
which it was 100 miles distant; or to Tyana, the
metropolis of Cappadocia Secunda, from which it
lay 32 miles,9 as Ferrarius computes. This shows
that these dioceses were of great extent: but we
have still more certain evidence of the thing; for
Gregory Nazianzen10 says, that St. Basil, who was
bishop of Caesarea, had fifty chorepiscopi under him;
and Basil himself often speaks of his clwrepiscopi"
and country presbyters and deacons under them :
which argues his diocese to be of great extent,
though we cannot precisely fix the hmits of it. And
the paucity of dioceses in this province argues the
same. For by Carolus a Sancto Paulo's account,
beside Caesarea, the metropolis of the first Cappa-

4 Plin. lib. 6. c. 2. 5 Strabo, lib. 12. p. 539.
6 Casaub. in loc. ' Theod. lib. 5. e. 28.
8 Strabo, lib. 12. p. 539.

9 Ferrar. Lexie. Geograph. voce Sasima.
10 Naz. Carm. de Vita Sua. " Basil, Ep. 181.
12 Ibid. Ep. 412.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

369

docia, there were but five bishoprics more in that
province, Nyssa, where Gregory Nyssen was bishop,
Thermae Regite, Camuliana or Justinianopolis Nova,
Ciscissa, and Theodosiopolis, at the time of the sixth
general council ; which are the same that are men
tioned in the later notitias, only Methodiopolis is
put for Theodosiopolis Armenia?, to which province
the council of Chalcedon ascribes it. So that there
were really never above five dioceses in this pro
vince, and two of those, Camuliana and Ciscissa,
erected after the council of Chalcedon. For in the
synodical epistle of this province to the emperor
Leo at the end of that council, there are but two
bishops subscribe beside the metropolitan of Cae
sarea, viz. the bishops of Nyssa and Thermae. So
zomen1" speaks of one Prapidius, governor of St.
Basil's hospital, (called Basilias from its founder,)
who was likewise a bishop that had several villages
under his jurisdiction. But whether his diocese
was in this Cappadocia is uncertain.
The second Cappadocia, which was made by a
division of the province in the time of St. Basil, had,
according to Carolus a Sancto Paulo's account, six
dioceses, Tyana the metropohs, Sasima, Justiniano
polis, Asuna, Faustinopolis, and Cybistra. But as
Holstenius14 has observed, two of these are mis
taken. For there never was any such city as
Asuna, which is only a corruption in the Latin
editions of the councUs for Sasima; it being in the
Greek, immoirog 'Satrlpviv, bishop of Sasima. And
Justinianopolis was only another name for Mocissus,
which Justinian having advanced to be a metro
polis in the third Cappadocia, styled it by his own
name, Justinianople. So that there were really no
more than four dioceses in this province, and one
of them, Sasima, but of late erection. This was
also but an obscure village, arkvov KupiSptov, Nazi
anzen15 himself caUs it. So that the three ancient
dioceses must be of very large extent, though we
have no further account of them, save that Pasa, a
village twelve miles distant from Tyana, is said to
be in that diocese16 by one Euphrantas in the fifth
general council, and Sasima was originally part of
the same diocese, though thirty-two miles distant
from the cathedral. Which sufficiently demon
strates the largeness of dioceses in this province.
The third Cappadocia had never above five
' bishoprics, Mocissus, Nazianzum, Colonia, Par
nassus, and Doara. Of these Mocissus was the
metropohs, which owed its honour to Justinian,
who dignified it with the title of a metropolis, and,

13 Sozom. lib. 6. c. 34.
14 Holsten. Annot. Geograph. p. 157.
15 Naz. Carm. de Vita Sua.
16 Cone. Gener. 5. Collat. 5. Cone. t. 5. p. 478.
17 Procop. de ^EdiBc. Justin, lib. 5. p. 48.
18 Concil, sub Menna. Act. 2.
19 Holsten. Annot. Geograph. p. 159. 20 Basil. Ep. 10.
2 13

as Procopius ,T informs us, gave it his own name,
Justinianople ; by which title Peter, bishop of the
place, subscribes himself18 in the council under
Mennas. Doara was but a village, as Holstenius l9
observes out of St. Basil, who styles it20 tewpnv
Aiaapa. And Nazianzus was but a small city, as
Gregory Nazianzen himself21 styles it: but they
must have large dioceses, else the other three must
be so much the larger for it. For geographers
place them at a considerable distance from one an
other. Nazianzus had its chorepiscopi, sometimes
mentioned in Gregory Nazianzen's epistles,22 which
is an argument that it had a large country region.
In Armenia Prima, Carolus a Sancto Paulo
could find but five bishoprics, Sebastea the metro
polis, Sebastopolis, Nicopolis, Satala, and Berisse.
And the later notitias add but one more, Colonia,
which is also reckoned to Cappadocia Tertia, unless
there were two of the same name in those provinces.
In the Second Armenia he augments the number
to ten, Melitene the metropolis, Area, Comana,
Arabissus, Cucusus, Ariarathia, Amasa, Zelona,
Sophene, Diospontum. But Holstenius, in his ani
madversions upon the place,23 observes, that four of
these are to be struck out of the account: for
Amasa, or Amasia, belonged to Hellenopontus ; and
Zelona was no other than Zela in the same pro
vince ; Sophene belonged to Armenia Major ; and
Diospontum was not the name of a bishopric, but
only an old name for the province of Hellenopontus.
And his conjecture is confirmed by the later no
titias, which name the six first of these dioceses,
but none of those four, under the title of Armenia
Minor. So that in all these five provinces, upon an
exact computation, there were not above twenty-
four dioceses in the whole : some of them, therefore,
must be very large in a country of three hundred
miles extent.
The next province to these upon
the Euxine Sea, was Pontus Polemo-
niacus, so called from Polemonium, a
chief city in the province ; beside which and Neo
caesarea the metropolis, there were but three other
bishoprics, Trapezus, Cerasus, and Comana : all
which lay at a great distance from one another.
Polemonium, Cerasus, and Trapezus, lay in a line on
the sea-coast : and by Pliny's reckoning,24 Polemo
nium and Trapezus were one hundred and fifty-five
miles distant from each other, and Cerasus lay in
the middle between them. Neocaesarea was a
hundred miles within land, and Comana sixty from

Sect. 3.
Of Pontus Pole-
moniacus.

21 Naz. Orat. 19. de Laud. Patris, t. 1. p. 310.
22 Naz. Ep. 88.
23 Holsten. Annot. Geograph. p. 161. Id. Annot. in Or-
telium, p. 172, observes out of Antonine's Itinerary, that
Sebastea and Sebastopolis were thirty-six miles distant
from each other.
21 Plin. lib. 6. t. 4.

370

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

it. Justinian25 mentions these five cities in one of
his Novels, and says, there were no more in the
province. For Pitius and Sebastopolis were not
cities, he says, but only castles : and, as Holstenius26
observes, they were not properly of this province,
but lay in Solo Barbarico, and were only appendages
to this province, because they could not constitute
a province of themselves. So that though Carolus
a Sancto Paulo make Pitius a sixth bishopric of
this province, yet the later notitias leave it out of
the number, and only retain the five first mentioned.
Which shows, that for eight hundred years there
never was any alteration made in this province, nor
more episcopal dioceses erected than there were
imperial cities, though they lay at so great a dis
tance from one another.
s,et.i. The next province to this on the
Heienopontus. gg^coag^ was Helenopontus, which
had only six bishoprics at the time of the council
of Chalcedon, Amasea the metropolis, Amisus, Si-
nope, Iborea, Zela, and Andrapa, as appears from
the synodical epistle of the bishops of this province27
to the emperor Leo ; and there was but one more
added in after ages. Of these Amisus and Sinope
lay upon the sea-coast, at a great distance from one
another. For Pliny says, Amisus lay in the way
between Polemonium and Sinope, one hundred and
twenty miles from Polemonium,28 and one hundred
and thirty from Sinope.29 Which comes pretty near
the account of Strabo, who reckons it nine hundred
stadia, or one hundred and twelve miles, from Ami
sus30 to Sinope. He also speaks of Armena, a vil
lage of Sinope,31 fifty stadia from it. And of Ama
sea, the place of his nativity, he gives a more
particular account, telling us, that it had a very large
territory one way, which for the number of villages
in it was called x^'OKoipov TeiSiov,32 the country of a
thousand villages. This was an inland city, reckon
ed by some a hundred miles from the sea. Zela
was as far from Amasea. So that without all doubt
these were dioceses of the largest size, since the
cities lay so remote from one another.
Next to Helenopontus on the sea-
°aru? ESS1'* coas t ky t^le Provmce °f Paphlagoniai
in which Carolus a Sancto Paulo
reckons five bishoprics, Gangra the metropolis, Sora,
Junopolis, Pompeiopolis, and Amastris. To which
Holstenius has added Dadibra, whose bishop Poly
chronius subscribed in the council of Chalcedon,33
by Peter the metropolitan of Gangra. In the fol
lowing ages the number decreased ; for there is no
mention of Pompeiopolis or Amastris in the later
notitias of the church. Among these Gangra is

25 Justin. Novel. 28. in Preefat.
26 Holsten. Annot. Geograph. p. 164.
27 Append. Concil. Chalced, cap. 53. Cone. t. 4. p. 963.
28 Plin. lib. 6. c. 4. » Ibid. c. 2
30 Strabo, lib. 12. p. 517. 3> Ibid. p. 545.

noted by St. Basil34 as a place that had several
churches and altars in it. Amastris was a large
city, which grew out of four others adjoining to it
Sesamus, Cytorus, Cromna, and Teius, as Ferrarius
observes, who35 makes it to be sixty-eight miles
from Heraclea in the next province of Honorias.
And all the rest seem to have been at as great dis
tances from each other.
On the south of Paphlagonia lay Galatia, an in
land country, having Cappadocia on the east, and
Phrygia on the west. This by the Romans was
divided into two provinces, Galatia Prima, and Se
cunda, or Salutaris. In the first there were seven
bishoprics, Ancyra the metropohs, Tabia, Hehopo
lis, or Juliopolis, Aspona, Cinna, Berinopolis, and
Anastasiopolis. The last of which seems to be
erected in the latter end of the seventh century
only : for there is no mention of it till the sixth
general councU of Constantinople, anno 681. The
Greek notitias add but one more, Mizzi, retaining
all the other old names ; which shows, that little
alteration was made in this province for the space
of eight 'ages in the church. The other Galatia
had originally but four dioceses, Pissinus, Orcistus,
Petenessus, and Trochmada, or Trochmi : but the
number was doubled in after ages, as appears from
the notitia at the end of this book, which adds, Eu-
doxias, Mericium, and Therma, or Germocolonia,
and Justinianopolis, otherwise caUed Spalea. Now,
Galatia was a large country, and the dioceses (even
when these four last mentioned were added) were
still of great extent. For Baudrand39 observes that
Pessinus was fifty miles from Ancyra, and thirty
from Therma, by which we may guess at the dis
tance of other places. Carolus a Sancto Paulo
places Cinna pretty near Ancyra ; but Baudrand re
moves it to the southern borders of Galatia, nearer
Synada in Phrygia.37 And Ferrarius computes As
pona to be sixty-four miles from Ancyra eastward.
Berinopolis and Juliopolis seem to have been almost
as much to the west. Which leaves room for the
territory of Ancyra to be sufficiently large, though
I find no particular account given of it, nor of some
other places in these two provinces of Galatia.
Next to Paphlagonia, on the sea- Secl. 6.
coast, lay the province of Honorias, °fH°"°ria-
or Pontus Honorii, so called by Theodosius the em
peror in honour of his son Honorius. This was
divided from Bithynia by the river Sangarius, and
from Paphlagonia by the river Parthenius. Here
were anciently five bishoprics, and the later no
titias have but six, Claudiopolis, Heraclea, Prusias,
Tium, Cratea, Adrianopolis, which last is not to be

32 Ibid. p. 561.
34 Basil. Ep. 73.
95 Ferrar. voce Amastris.
36 Baudrand. Lexic. voce Pessinus,
37 Baudrand. voce Cinna.

33 Concil. Chalced. Act. 6.

Chap. IN.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

371

met with in the subscriptions of any ancient coun
cil. Of these, Tium and Heraclea lay upon the
Euxine Sea, thirty-eight miles distant from each
other, as Pliny*1 informs us. Claudiopolis was at
as great distance from them in the middle of the
province; Baudrand99 says it was above thirty miles
from Heraclea. So that we may judge of Cratia,
otherwise caned Flaviopolis, and of Prusias, by
what we have discovered of the former. All these
cities are sometimes reckoned to Bithynia, because
Honorias was anciently part of Bithynia, till Theo
dosius made a'distinct province of it.
But after the separation was made,
or Bitbjnia prima Bithynia was again divided into two
provinces. In the first of which Ca
rolus a Sancto Paulo reckons fourteen dioceses. 1.
Nicomedia, the metropohs. 2. Chalcedon. 3. Prusa
ad Olympum. 4. Preenetum. 5. Helenopolis. 6.
Basilinopolis. 7- ApoUonias. 8. Hadriana. 9. Cae
sarea, al. Smyrdiana. 10. Arista. 11. Patavium.
12. Dablis. 13. Neocaesarea. 14. Cius. In the
other Bithynia only four. I. Nicaea, where the fa
mous council of Nice was held, the metropolis of
this province. 2. Apamea. 3. Linoe. 4. Gordus.
And the later notitia of Leo Sapiens makes but one
more in both provinces, though some new names of
places are inserted. Among these I observe the city
of Nice had a large diocese : for several regions
belonging to it are mentioned in the council of
Chalcedon, in a famous dispute between the two
metropolitans of Nicodemia and Nice, both laying
claim to the diocese of Basilinopolis, as one of their
suffragans. Anastasius, bishop of Nice, pleaded,
that Basilinopolis40 was once but a region belonging
to Nice, as Tacteus and Doris then were, till Julian,
or some other emperor, made it a city, setting up a
curia or civil magistracy therein, upon which it be
came also a bishop's see, according to the known
rule and practice of the church. So that the diocese
of Nice was once so large, as to have another diocese
taken out of it, and yet there remained several re
gions belonging to it. The hke may be collected
from its distance from other places. Pliny" says,
it was twenty-five miles from Prusa, and Ferrarius
reckons forty-four miles from Nicodemia, but sets
Helenopolis, or Drepanum, in the middle way be
tween them.42 Basilinopolis, by mistake, is set by
Carolus a Sancto Paulo at a greater distance from
it, between Nicodemia and Chalcedon ; but it must
be nearer, having been once a part of its diocese, as
was observed before. For other places, I find httle
account of them in particular, save only that Strabo
Makes it three hundred furlongs, or thirty-seven

miles, from Nicodemia to the mouth of the river
Sangarius, whereabout Cius stood; and Ferrarius
computes sixty from Nicodemia to Chalcedon, in all
which tract there were hut these three dioceses, and
one more, called Praenetum ; so that if we had a par
ticular account of Nicodemia and Chalcedon, we
might perhaps find them to have had dioceses of as
great extent as any other. But Apamea and Prusias,
Baudrand43 says, were but nine miles distant from
one another. For these lay in the southern parts
of Bithynia, and were some of the last in the Pontic
civil diocese toward the Asiatic diocese, where, as I
observed before, the cities were more numerous and
thicker set together, and, consequently, the episco
pal dioceses were generally less than in the other
provinces, as will appear by taking a distinct view
of them in order as they lay.
In the Asiatic diocese, the first pro- SscL
vince next adjoining to Bithynia was iSSiS im-
Hellespontus, so called from the straits le>po"tul-
of the sea named Hellespont, which was its western
border. It was anciently part of Mysia and Phry
gia Minor, bordering on Phrygia Major eastward,
and Asia to the south. In this province Carolus a
Sancto Paulo has observed nineteen dioceses in the
ancient councils. 1. Cyzicus, the metropohs. 2.
Germa. 3. Pcemanium. 4. Occa. 5. Bares. 6.
Adrianotherae. 7. Lampsacus. 8. Abydus. 9. Dar-
danum. 10. Ilium. 11. Troas. 12. Melitopolis.
13. Adriana. 14. Scepsis. 15. Pionia. 16. Prae-
conesus. 17. Ceramus. 18. Parium. 19. Ther
mae Regiae. But the last of them Holstenius thinks
is mistaken for Germa, by a corrupt reading of the
ancient subscriptions. The notitia of Leo Sapiens
has but thirteen of these, so that five of them were
sunk and united to others in the eighth century.
The greatest distance, that I can find, of any of
these cities, was not above twenty miles from one
another. Which was the distance between Cyzicus
and Parium, and Lampsacus and Abydus. But then,
Dardanum was but seventy furlongs, or eight miles,
from Abydus ; Ilium but thirteen miles from Darda
num; Troas but twenty-seven miles from Abydus,
though Pionia, Ilium, Bares, and Dardanum lay be
tween them. So Praeconnesus was but a very small
island, and Poemanium a castle once belonging to
the territory of Cyzicus, as Ferrarius has noted out
of Strabo, Stephanus, and other ancient writers.
The two next provinces I join to- g
gether, because we sometimes find ¦togv'
them under the common name of
Asia Lydiana, or Proconsularis, under which title
Bishop Usher has a most accurate dissertation44

33 Plin. lib. 6. c. 1.
19 Baudrand. voce Claudiopolis.
40 Cone. Chalced. Act. 13. ap. Crab. p. 918. Sicut Tac-
leus et Doris regiones sunt sub Nicaia, sic fuit ante hoc
Basilinopolis sub Nicsa, &c. 2 B 2

41 Plin. lib. 5. c. 32.
12 Ferrar. Lexic. voce Nicsea, et Drepanum.
43 Baudrand. Lexic. voce Apamea.
44 Usser. Disquisitio Geographica de Asia Lydiana sive
Proconsulari.

372

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

upon them, where he distinguishes the several ac
ceptations of the name Asia, either for the greater
Asia, or Asia Minor, or Asia proprie dicta ; which
was the Romans' first conquests in Asia, containing
the provinces of Phrygia, Mysia, Caria, and Lydia ;
or lastly, for Asia Lydiana or Proconsularis, which
was those two provinces which in Constantine's di
vision are called distinctly Asia and Lydia, as we
here now take them. In this sense, we may call the
former, Asia maxime proprie dicta, which is bounded
on the north by the province of Hellespontus, on
the east by Phrygia and Lydia, on the south by the
river Maeander, which separates it from Caria, and
on the west by the iEgean Sea. In it Carolus a
Sancto Paulo has found forty-two ancient dioceses.
1. Ephesus, the metropolis. 2. Hypaepa. 3. Trallis.
4. Magnesia ad Maeandrum. 5. Eleea. 6. Adra-
myttium. 7- Assus. 8. Gargara. 9. Mastaura.
10. Brullena, al. Priulla. 11. Pitane. 12. Myr-
rina. 13. Aureliopolis. 14. Nyssa. 15. Metro
polis. 16. Valentinianopolis. 17. Aninetum. 18.
Pergamus. 19. Anaea. 20. Priene. 21. Arcadi-
opolis. 22. Nova Aula. 23. iEgea. 24. Andera.
25. Sion. 26. FanumJovis. 27. Colophon. 28.
Lebedus. 29. Teos. 30. Erytra?. 31. Antandrus.
32. Pepere or Perpere. 33. Cuma or Cyme. 34.
Aulium, al. Aulii Come vel Vicus. 35. Naulochus.
36. Paleeopolis. 37- Phocaea. 38. Bargaza, al.
Baretta. 39. Thymbria. 40. Clazomenae. 41.
Magnesia. 42. Smyrna. To these Holstenius adds
four more, Evaza, Areopolis, Temnus, and Argiza.
And thirty-eight of these are the same that are men
tioned in the notitia of Leo Sapiens, in the seventh
chapter of this book. Now, this was but a very
small province for so many dioceses, if we examine
either the whole extent of it, or some particular
dioceses therein. The extent of it in length was
from Assus near Troas, to the river Maeander, or
the cities Bargasa and Sion. Which was anciently
the country of Ionia, iEolis, and part of Mysia,
about two hundred miles in length upon the iEgean
Sea. But the breadth was nothing answerable to
its length, being not above fifty miles, taking one
part with another. As to particular distances of
places, I find some of them thus noted by Ferrarius
and Baudrand. Assus in the most northern border
was fifteen miles from Gargara, and thirty from
Antandrus; but Anaea and Andera lay between, or
near unto them. From Antandrus to Adramyttium
is also reckoned thirty miles, but then Tremenothyra
in Phrygia, and Nova Aula in this province, come
between them. On the same shore we find Naulo
chus and Pitane, and then Elea, Myrina, and Cyme,
whereof Myrina was but seven or eight miles from
Elea, and Cyme the same distance, sixty furlongs,
from Myrina. Between Pergamus and Cyme is
reckoned twenty-six miles, but the fore-mentioned
cities Myrina and Elea, with Aminetum and Hiero-

caesarea, lay between them. On the south of Cyme
lay Phocaea, ten miles from the mouth of the river
Hermus, and about the same distance from Cyme.
From Phocaea to Smyrna is computed twenty-five
miles, and from Smyrna to Colophon, twenty miles
but Lebedus lay in the middle way between them.
Colophon and Metropolis upon the Caystrus were
each of them twenty miles from Ephesus, and
Ephesus seems not to have had any nearer neigh
bour, unless it was Priene, towards the river Ma>-
ander, from whence we may conclude, that Ephesus
was the largest diocese in all this province. And
by these few hints we may judge of the general
extent of them.
In the other province of Lydia, Carolus a Sancto
Paulo reckons twenty-six dioceses. 1. Sardis, the
metropolis. 2. Philadelphia. 3. Tripolis. 4,
Thyatira. 5. Septe. 6. Gordus. 7. Trallis. 8.
Silandus. 9. Maeonia. 10. Fanum Apollinis. 11.
Mostena. 12. Apollonia. 13. Attalia. 14. Bana.
15. Balandus. 16. Hierocaesarea. 17. Acrassus.
18. Daldus. 19. Stratonicia. 20. Satala. 21.
Gabala. 22. Heraclea. 23. Areopolis. 24. Hel
lene. 25. Sena, al. Setta. 26. Civitas Standitana.
To which Holstenius adds three more, Mastaura,
Cerasa, and Orcanis, or Hircani, which Tristan and
Carolus a Sancto Paulo both mistake for a city
some where among the Hircanians, but Holstenius
shows it belonged to Asia Minor and this province
of Lydia. I will not stand to examine the parti
cular bounds and extent of dioceses throughout this
province ; it being sufficient to observe in general,
that both it and Asia put together were not larger
than the provinces of Pontus Polemoniacus and
Helenopontus ; and yet there were not above ten or
eleven dioceses in those two provinces, whereas we
have discovered in these above seventy-five, which
is almost the disproportion of eight to one, and fully
makes out the observation I at first made of Asia
Minor, that it had some of the greatest and some of
the smallest dioceses, quietly enjoying the same
form of government together.
The next province on the south of SKt. ]0.
Asia and Lydia, is Caria, bounded on or ""'
the east with Lycia, and on the south and west with
the iEgean Sea, having the rivers Mae-ander and
Calbis for its inland bounds. Here Carolus a
Sancto Paulo has found twenty-five dioceses. 1.
Aphrodisias, the metropolis. 2. Stauropolis. 3.
Cybira. 4. Heraclea Salbaci. 5. Apollonias. 6,
Heraclea Latmi. 7. Tabae. 8. Antiochia ad Mas-
andrum. 9. Neapolis. 10. Orthosias. 11. Har
pasa. 12. Alabanda. 13. Stratonice. 14. Alinda,
15. Amyzon. 16. Jassus. 17. Bargyla. 18. Ha-
licarnassus. 19. Larima, al. Halarima. 20. Cm
dus. 21. Myndus. 22. Ceramus. 23. Anastasi-
opolis. 24. Erisa. 25. Miletus. The notitia o:
Leo Sapiens increases the number to thirty-one,

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

373

Miletus was the place whither St. Paul called the
elders of Ephesus, which was about forty miles dis
tant from it. But several dioceses lay between
them, as Heraclea, near Mount Lathmus, which
Ferrarius computes but twelve miles from Miletus ;
so also Briullium, Sion, and Arpasa in the same
coast toward Ephesus. On the south of Miletus
the other way, we have Jassus, fifteen miles from it,
and Tabae, placed between them. Prom Jassus to
Halicarnassus is computed fifty-five miles, but Bar-
gillia and Myndus stand between them. Prom
Halicarnassus to Gnidus is thirty miles, but Cera-
mus is an intervening diocese. And so the reader
may find all the dioceses of this province scarce ex
ceeding the compass of ten or fifteen miles through
out. But this was territory sufficient to make them
exceed single congregations, and we need not ques
tion but it was true of them aU, what Sozomen (lib.
5. c. 20.) particularly observes of Miletus, that in
the time of Juhan it had several Christian oratories
in its neighbourhood. For he says, Julian sent
orders to the governor of Caria, That whereas there
were several oratories or churches built in honour
of the martyrs near the temple of Didymeeum, (so
the temple of Apollo was caUed, that stood before
Miletus,) he should, if they were covered and had
communion tables in them, burn them with fire ;
or, if they were half decayed of themselves, he
should take care utterly to demolish and destroy
them. There were, it seems, churches then in the
suburbs or country region of Miletus, which Julian,
remembering what had lately happened to the
temple of Apollo at Daphne in the suburbs of An
tioch, was so careful to have destroyed, because
they were an annoyance to his god.
The next province to Caria on the
sea-coast is Lycia, where Carolus a
Sancto Paulo reckons twenty-eight dioceses. 1.
Myra, the metropohs. 2. Mastaura. 3. Telmes
sus. 4. Limyra. 5. Araxa. 6. Podalaea. 7. Si-
dyma, al. Diduma. 8. Olympus. 9. Zenopolis.
10. Tlos. 11. Corydalla. 12. Caunus, al. Aca-
leia. 13. Acarassus. 14. Xanthus. 15. Marci-
ana. 16. Choma. 17. Phellus. 18. Antiphellus.
19. Phasehs. 20. Aucanda. 21. Eudoxias. 22.
Patara. 23. Nysa, vel Nesus. 24. Balbura. 25.
(Eneanda. 26. Bubon, al. Bunum. 27. Cahnda.
28. Rhodia. The notitia of Leo Sapiens has most
of the same names, and eight more, for it makes the
whole nnmber of dioceses thirty-six. But the lesser
number in so small a province is sufficient to show
the narrow extent of its dioceses in comparison of
those of the Pontic provinces. For this province
Was not above eighty or a hundred miles square,
and the cities therefore, one may easily conclude,
lay pretty close together. Phellus is reckoned but

Sect 11.
Of Lycia.

six miles from Antiphellus one way, and ten from
Myra, the metropolis, another way. Antiphellus
was nine from Patara, and Telmessus and Patara
scarce so much from Xanthus ; for Baudrand
reckons but seventy furlongs. By which it is easy
to make an estimate of the remaining cities of this
province, which lay about equal distances from one
another. The next province on the same
shore is Pamphyha, divided by the of r-amphyiia Pri-
J ma and Secunda.
Romans into two, called Pamphyha
Prima and Secunda. In the second of them, which
bordered upon Lycia, Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons
twenty-six dioceses. 1. Perga, the metropolis. 2.
Termessus. 3. Eudoxias. 4. Maximianopolis. 5.
Palaeopolis. 6. Pentenessus. 7. Diciozanabrus,
al. Zenopolis. 8. Ariassus. 9. Pugla. 10. Adri
ans 11. Attalia. 12. Magidis. 13. Olbia. 14.
Corbasa. 15. Lysinia. 16. Cordylus. 17- La-
gania. 18. Panemoticus. 19. Geone. 20. Com-
machum. 21. Silvium. 22. Pisinda, al. Sinda vel
Isinda. 23. Talbonda. 24. Unzela. 25. Gilsata.
26. Pella. To which Holstenius adds five more, Co-
lobrassus, Coracesium, Senna, Primopolis, and Se
leucia. But three of these are by Carolus a Sancto
Paulo set in the other Pamphyh»a, with nine more,
in this order : 1. Sida, the metropolis. 2. Aspendus.
3. Etene. 4. Erymne. 5. Cassus. 6. Semneam,
which is the same with Senna before mentioned.
7. Carallus. 8. Coracesium, mentioned before. 9.
Sysdra. 10. Lyrbae. 11. Colibrassus. 12. Selga.
To which Holstenius adds Cotana, which makes
the whole number in these two provinces forty-one.
And the number is some evidence that they were
comparatively but small. Sometimes, as Holstenius
has observed, two of them were united together.
For in the council of Constantinople, under Flavian,
one Sabinianus subscribes himself bishop of Eudo-
cias, Termessus, and Jobia.45 Which we find in the
first session of the council of Chalcedon. And in
the time of Leo Sapiens some more of them were
united together ; for his notitia has but thirty-six
dioceses in both the provinces. Yet any of them
single were of a competent extent to confute the
notion of those who make episcopal dioceses only
parish churches.
On the north of Pamphyha, more SKt 13.
within land, lay the province of Ly- of Li,caoma-
caonia, where we find nineteen dioceses. 1. Ico-
nium, the metropolis. 2. Lystra. 3. Derbe: all
mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles. 4. Onosada,
al. Usada. 5. Amblada. 6. Honomada. 7. La-
randa. 8. Baratta. 9. Hyda. 10. Sabatra. 11.
Canna. 12. Berinopolis. 13. Ilistra. 14. Perte.
15. Arana, al. Baratta. 16. Isaura. 17- Misthi-
um. 18. Corna. 19. Pappa. To which Holste-

45 Cone. Chalced. Act. 1. 1. 4. p. 230.

374

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Sect. 15.
Of Phi
tlana

nius adds another, called Hydmautus, or Gadamau-
tus, in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon. But
the notitia of Leo Sapiens has but fifteen.
sect 14 In tne next province of Pisidia,
un-isidia. Carolus a Sancto Paulo finds twenty
dioceses. 1. Antiochia, the metropolis. 2. Sa-
galassus. 3. Sozopolis. 4. Apamea. 5. Tityassus.
6. Baris. 7- Adrianopolis. 8. Limenopolis. 9.
Laodicea Combusta. 10. Seleucia. 11. Adada.
12. Mallus. 13. Siniandus. 14. Metropohs. 15.
Paralaus. 16. Bindeum. 17. Philomelium, which
some place in Phrygia. 18. Prostama. 19. Gor-
tena. 20. Theodosiopolis. The notitia of Leo Sa
piens augments the number to twenty-three. I
stand not to make any particular remarks upon
these dioceses, because any reader that knows these
two provinces, will easily imagine they are not to
be compared with the other dioceses in the northern
parts of Pontus. The last provinces in the Asiatic
rygia'raca- diocese, are those which the old Greeks
'J Salutaris.
and Romans called by one common
name, Phrygia Major, but the Roman emperors
divided it at first into two, and then into three pro
vinces, one called Phrygia Salutaris, from the medi
cinal waters founcj there, another Phrygia Pacati-
ana, or, as some books read it corruptly, Capatiana,
and a third, Pacatiana Secunda. In Phrygia Salu
taris, Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons up twenty
dioceses. 1. Synnada, the metropolis. 2. Dory-
lceum. 3. Polybotus. 4. Nacolia. 5. Midaium.
6. Hipsus. 7- Prymnesia. 8. Myrum, or rather
Merum. 9. Eucarpia. 10. Lysias. 11. August-
opolis. 12. Brysum. 13. Otrum. 14. Stectorium.
15. Cinnaborium. 16. Amadassa. 17- Cotyaium.
18. Praepenissus. 19. DocimaEum. 20. Amorium.
In Phrygia Pacatiana Prima he recounts twenty-
nine. 1. Laodicea, the metropolis. 2. Tiberiopo-
lis. 3. Azana. 4. Itoana, or Bitoana. 5. Ancyra
Ferrea, which Holstenius observes to be sometimes
attributed to the province of Lydia adjoining. 6.
Cidissus. 7- Egara, which Holstenius corrects into
Aliana. 8. Pelte. 9. Apira. 10. Cadi. 11. Tra-
nopolis vel Trajanopolis. 12. Sebasta. 13. Eume-
nia. 14. Temenothyrae. 15. Aliona. 16. Trape-
zopolis. 17. Silbium. 18. Ilusa. 19. Nea. 20.
Chaeretapa. 21. Colossa, now called Chone. 22.
Sinaus. 23. Philippopolis. 24. Themisonium.
25. Sanis. 26. Acmonia. 27. Theodosiopolis. 28.
Bleandrus. 29. Atanassus. Holstenius strikes out
one of the number, for Nea is but a corruption of
the Greek for Sanaea or Sanans, as he shows, but
he finds out another, called Dioclia, to supply its
room. In Pacatiana Secunda there were but five dio

ceses, being by much the least of all the provinces.
1. Hierapolis, the metropolis. 2. Dionysiopolis. 3,
Anastasiopolis. 4. Mosynus. 5. Attudi. But this
province being of later erection, these dioceses are
more commonly attributed to Phrygia Pacatiana
without any distinction. Now, I observe of Phrygia
in general, that some of its dioceses bordering upon
Galatia were, like those of Galatia and the other
Pontic provinces, of a larger extent than the rest
about Hierapolis and Laodicea, which two metro
political sees were not at a very great distance from
one another. Ferrarius in one place says, but six
miles ; but it seems to be a typographical error, for
in another place he makes Colossae46 to be between
Hierapolis and Laodicea, upon the confluence of the
rivers Lycus and Maeander, at twenty mUes' distance
from them both. So that there must be a mistake
one way or other. Pliny is very exact in describing
the situation of Laodicea,47 for he says, it stood upon
the Lycus, and had its waUs washed also with the
Asopus and the Caprus : but yet he does not tell us
how far the confluence of these rivers was from the
confluence of the Lycus with the Maeander, where
Colossae stood. But it may be concluded, it was at
no great distance from it, since aU authors agree,
that Laodicea stood near the Maeander ; and these
three cities, Colossae, Hierapohs, and Laodicea,
which St. Paul joins together, are said by Chrysos
tom, Theodoret, and others, to be very near each
other. They who have opportunity to consult An
tonine's Itinerary, which at present I have not, may
perhaps find them more exactly described, and limit
ed with more certain bounds than I can pretend to
assign them. If the first opinion of Ferrarius be
true, and agreeable to Antonine, that they lay but
six miles asunder ; then it will readily be concluded,
that the dioceses in this part of Phrygia were com
paratively very smaU, since by Carolus a Sancto
Paulo's description, Itoana, Trapezopohs, Attudi,
Mosynus, and Antioch upon the Maeander in Caria,
seem not to have been at much greater distances
from one another.
Beside these several provinces of
the Asiatic and Pontic dioceses in of isauria and
Asia Minor, there were also three pro
vinces in it which were reckoned to the eastern dio
cese and the patriarchate of Antioch, viz. Isauria,
Cilicia Prima, and Cilicia Secunda, which must be
spoken of in this place. Isauria was anciently
reckoned only a part of Cihcia, but from the time of
Constantine, both in the civU and ecclesiastical ac
count, it was esteemed a distinct province. Carolus
a Sancto Paulo mentions twenty-two dioceses. 1.
Seleucia, the metropohs. 2. Celenderis. 3. Ane-
murium. 4. Lamus. 5. Antiochia ad Tragum.

46 Ferrar. Lexic. voce Colossre.
47 Plin. lib. 5. c. 29. Celeberrima urbs Laodicea im-

posita est Lyeo flumini, latera alluentibus Asopo et
Capro.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

375

6. Selinus, al. Trajanopohs. 7- Jotape. 8. Dio-
caesarea. 9. PhUadelphia. 10. Domitiopolis. 11.
Titopolis. 12. Hierapolis. 13. Nephelis. 14. Da-
lisandus. 15. Claudiopolis, al. Isaura. 16. Ger-
manicopolis. 17- Sbide, al. Isis. 18. Oestrus. 19.
Olbus. 20. Lybias. 21. Hermopolis. 22. Iren-
opolis. To which Holstenius adds two more, Cha-
radra and Lauzada, which is sometimes written
corruptly, Vasada and Nauzada.
In Cilicia Prima there were eight dioceses. 1.
Tarsus, the metropohs. 2. Pompeiopohs. 3. Se-
baste. 4. Coricus. 5. Adana. 6. Mallus. 7- Ze-
phyrium. And, 8. Augusta, added by Holstenius,
who shows it to be a distinct place from Sebaste.
In the other CUicia there are reckoned nine. 1.
Anazarbus, the metropohs. 2. Mopsuestia. 3.
iEga?. 4. Epiphania. 5. Irenopolis. 6. Flavi-
opolis. 7. Castabala. 8. Alexandria, now called
Scanderon. 9. Rossus, in the confines of Syria.
The greatest part of these w-ere large dioceses, like
those of Syria, as any one that computes the dis
tance between Epiphania, Alexandria, Rossus, &c.
will easUy imagine. Some reckon Lazica, which was
oi Lazica, or coi- anciently called Colchis, an appendix
to Asia Minor, and therefore I men
tion it in this place. It is all the country on the
Euxine Sea from Trabezond in Pontus to Phasis,
which Strabo reckons near 200 miles. The mo
dern notitias speak but of five dioceses, but that of
Leo Sapiens in Leunclavius has fifteen. It was
first made a Roman province in the time of Justi
nian, who mentions the cities48 that were in it, Pe
tra and Justiniana; with four castles, Pitius, Se
bastopolis, Archaeopohs and Rhodopolis, which had
anciently been in the hands of the Romans ; and
four other castles, Scandias, Sarapenes, Murisios,
and Lusieros, which he had lately taken out of the
hands of the Persians. Of these one is as ancient
as the councU of Nice : for Stratophilus, bishop of
Ptyusium, or Pitius, subscribes there among the
bishops of Pontus Polemoniacus, to which province
it was then annexed, as lying in Solo Barbarico, and
not constituting any other province. In the sixth
general councU there is mention of Petra and Pha
sis, the metropolis. And that is all the account we
have of them in the ancient councils.
se,t. is. Another appendix to Asia Minor
i»» and oie°c;da- are the lesser islands of the iEgean
Sea, which constituted a province by
themselves. Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons four
dioceses in Lesbos itself, Mytelene, Methymna, Te-
nedos, and Poroselene. But Poroselene and Tene-
dos were distinct islands by themselves, which
sometimes had bishops of their own, and sometimes
were united to Lesbos. In the council of Sardica,

19 Justin. Novel. 28.

Dioscorus subscribes himself bishop of the isle of
Tenedos alone : but in the second council of Ephe
sus, and in the councU of Chalcedon, Florentius
subscribes himself bishop of Lesbos and Tenedos
together. Now as we must say, that Tenedos was
but a small diocese by itself; for it was but 10
miles in compass, as Ferrarius computes ; so when
Lesbos was joined with it, it was a large one.
For Pliny says, Lesbos alone had nine famous
towns, and Strabo makes it 1100 stadia, or 140
miles in compass.
The other islands, called Cyclades, were divided
into eleven distinct dioceses. 1. Rhodus, the me
tropolis. 2. Samos. 3. Chios. 4. Coos. 5. Nax-
us. 6. Paros. 7. Thera. 8. Delos. 9. Tenus.
10. Melos. 11. Carpathus. Now the largest of
these, Rhodes, Samos, and Chios, were about 100 or
120 miles in compass, as Pliny informs us.49 But
the lesser sort of them, Tenos and Thera, were not
above 14 or 15 miles long, or 40 in compass. So
that among these we find dioceses of different ex
tent, as in the rest of Asia, but all agreeing in the
same species of episcopal government ; and some of
them, as Lesbos, having their chorepiscopi, but none
so small as to be confined to a single congregation.
And so we have gone over all the provinces of
the East under the civil government of the prcsfec
tus-prcstorio Orientis, except the six provinces of
the Thracian diocese, which because they are Eu
ropean province5, we will consider them as such
among the provinces of Europe, and give them the
first place in the following chapter.

CHAPTER IV.
A CONTINUATION OF THE FORMER ACCOUNT IN THE
EUROPEAN PROVINCES.
In pursuance of the former inquiry, Sect ,
we are led out of Asia Minor into the y^L'orTiLr'"
n -r, -, ., And first of Scythia.
provinces of Europe, wnere the six
provinces of the Thracian diocese, Europa, Thracia,
Heemimontis, Rhodope, Mcesia Secunda, and Scy
thia, first offer themselves to consideration. This
was aU the country from Macedonia and the river
Strymon to the Danube, which is now Romania and
Bulgaria. A country extending from Constanti
nople to Sardica above 300 miles one way, and from
the iEgean Sea to the Danube almost as much the
other. In all these provinces the dioceses were
very large. For in Scythia, the most northern pro
vince, there was but one bishopric, though there
were many cities. For the bishop of Tomi was the

« Plin. lib. 5. u. 31.

376

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

sole bishop of this whole region, as is noted by So
zomen,1 and Theodoret,2 and other ancient writers,
by whom he is sometimes called the bishop of Tomi,
and sometimes the bishop of Scythia,' as being the
only superintendent of all the churches in that Scy
thia, which was made a province of the Roman
empire. sect. 2. The province of Europa had also
ofEuropa. iarge dioceses. For several cities
were under one bishop. We find in the Acts of
the Council of Ephesus3 a petition offered to that
council by the bishops of this province, wherein
they pray, That an immemorial custom of their
country might be continued, whereby the bishop of
Heraclea had also Panium in his diocese, the bi
shop of Bizya had Arcadiopolis, the bishop of Ccele
had Callipolis, the bishop of Subsadia had Aphro-
disias : to which petition the council agreed, and
ordered, that no innovation should be made in the
matter. Nor was there any alteration in the time
of the council of Chalcedon : for there we find one
Lucian4 styled bishop of Bizya and Arcadiopolis
still. But in the council of Constantinople under
Mennas6 we meet with some alterations; for there
Panium had a distinct bishop from Heraclea, and
Callipolis from Ccele. And in the notitia of Leo
Sapiens in Leunclavius, Bizya and Arcadiapolis are
not only distinct bishoprics, but both of them ad
vanced to the honour of autocephali, or titular me
tropolitans in the church. In this province stood
also Byzantium, once subject to Heraclea, the me
tropolis, till it was rebuilt, and advanced to be the
royal city by Constantine, after which it grew so
great arfd populous, as to equal old Rome. Sozo
men says,9 Constantine adorned it with many noble
oratories ; and it appears from one of Justinian's
Novels,' that in his time four of these churches
had no less than five hundred clergy of all sorts be
longing to them. The Novatians themselves, as
Socrates observes,8 had three churches within the
city : and in the suburbs, or region belonging to
the city, the catholics had many parishes and
churches at a considerable distance, as Hebdomum,
Sycae, Marianae, Hieron, Elaea, Therapea, and Hes-
tiae, otherwise called Michaelium, which Sozomen
says9 was thirty-five furlongs from the city by
water, and seventy by land. I think it needless to
be more particular in the description of this diocese,
since these are sufficient indications of the large
ness of it. I shall only add concerning this pro
vince of Europa, that though Carolus a Sancto
Paulo reckons thirteen dioceses in it, Heraclea, Pa
nium, Caelos, Callipolis, Cyla, Aphrodisias, Theo
dosiopolis, Chersonesus, Drusipara, Lysimachia,

Sect. 3.
Of Thracia.

Bizya, Selymbria, and Arcadiopolis; yet really there
were but nine : for Caelos and Cyla, as Holstenius
has observed,10 were two names for the same city
and Callipolis was joined in the same diocese with
it ; in hke manner as Panium was annexed to Hera
clea, and Arcadiopolis to Bizya. So that these
were anciently dioceses of great extent.
In the province of Thracia properly
so called there were but four dioceses,
Philippopolis, Diocletianopolis, Nicopolis, and Di
ospolis. And the modern notitias, that of Leun
clavius only excepted, have but three : for Nicopo
lis is not mentioned in them.
In the province of Heemimontis Secl t
there were anciently six dioceses, 0fHiI™u"">u.,
Adrianopolis, Mesembria, Sozopolis, Plutinopolis,
Develtus, and Anchialus. The latter notitias reckon
but the four first, and Zoida instead of the two
last, which are omitted, as being sunk or united
into one.
In the province of Rhodope Caro- Secl 5
Ius a Sancto Paulo finds six dioceses, of ahod°i|«-
Trajanopolis, Maximianopolis, Abdera, Maronia,
iEnus, and Cypsela. To which Holstenius adds,
Topirus, which the other by mistake places in Ma
cedonia. But these were so far from increasing in
later ages, that they sunk into three, Trajanopole,
Anastasiopole, and Perus, which are all that the
modern notitias mention.
In Mcesia Inferior, or Secunda, the
last of the six Thracian provinces,
which is now much the same with
Bulgaria, Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons nine
dioceses, Marcianopolis, Nicopolis, Novae, Abritum,
Durostorum, Dionysiopolis, Odessus, Apiaria, Co-
maea; to which Holstenius adds another, called
Trista, or Prista, by Socrates, and Nicephorus
Cahstus atlavrdirpi^a. But whether increased or
diminished, we know not, for there is no account of
them in the notitias of later ages. I make no fur
ther remark upon these dioceses, save that they
were generally large ones, as any one that will cast
his eye upon a map, or examine particular dis
tances of cities, will easily be convinced. And we
may make the same general observation upon most
of the dioceses of the European provinces in Mace
donia, Dacia, and Illyricum, tiU we come as far as
Italy. For which reason, it will be sufficient to
give the reader only a catalogue of the names of
dioceses in every province of those regions, accord
ing to the order and distribution of them in the
church, following the model of the civU government,
which divided these countries into three great dio
ceses, and seventeen or eighteen provinces, under

Sect. 6.
Of Mcesia Se
cunda.

' Sozom. lib. 6. c. 21. lib. 7. c. 19.
2 Theodor. lib. 4. c. 35. 3 Concil. Ephes. par. 2. Act. 7.
4 Concil. Chalced. Act. 16. t. 4. p. 800.
5 Concil. sub Men. Act. 3 et 4.

9 Sozom. lib. 2. c. 3.
8 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 38.
9 Sozom. lib. 2. c. 3.
10 Holsten. Annot. Geograph. p. 131.

' Justin. Novel. 3.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

377

the general name of Illyricum Orientale and Occi-
dentale. The first of these are the provinces
rrorfnces'in the of Greece, which by the Romans are
civil diocese of Ma- ,, T_ j j J
cedonia. Episcopal all comprehended under one common
nia prima and name, of the civil dioceses of Mace-
Secunda. donia, which with the diocese of Da
cia was anciently the district of the prcsfectus-prcs
torio IUirici Orientalis. In the diocese of Mace
donia were anciently six provinces, or according to
Hierocles's account, seven : Macedonia Prima and
Secunda, Epirus Vetus and Epirus Nova, Thessa-
lia, Achaia, and the isle of Crete. Carolus a
Sancto Paulo confounds the two Macedonias to
gether, and reckons seventeen dioceses in both.
1. Thessalonica, the metropohs of the first Mace
donia. 2. Phihppi, the metropolis of the second.
3.' Stobi, the old metropohs of the second province.
4. Berrhcea. 5. Dium. 6. Particopohs. 7- Do-
berus. 8. Cassandria. 9. Neapolis. 10. Heraclea
Pelagoniee. 11. Torone. 12. Lete. 13. Topiris.
14. Serre. 15. Heraclea Strymonis. 16. Isle of
Thassus. 17- Hephaestia in the isle of Lemnos.
To which Holstenius " adds Primula and Zapara,
but rejects Topiris, as belonging to Rhodope, a pro
vince in the Thracian diocese, and observes of Serre,
that it was but another name for Philippi.
The next province upon the iEgean
Sea is Thessaha, where Carolus a
Sancto Paulo finds but eight dioceses : Larissa the
metropolis, Demetrias, Echinus, Cypera, Metro
pohs, Lamia, Triccae, and Thebae Pthioticae. But
Holstenius12 adds three more, Dicaesarea, Gomphi,
and Scarphia, the last of which Carolus a Sancto
Paulo confounds with Echinus. The notitia in
Leunclavius calls this province Hellas Secunda,
and names eleven dioceses in it, four of which re
tain their old names, by which it is reasonable to
conjecture, that HeUas Secunda and Thessaha were
but two names for the same province ; and the num
ber of dioceses agreeing exactly in both accounts,
we may conclude there never were above eleven dio
ceses in aU this province.
set. 9. The next province to Thessaly is
ponnesus,i'and l!u" Achaia, which was a very large pro
vince, including not only what the
ancients caUed Attica and Achaia, but also all Pe
loponnesus, and the isle of Eubcea. Here Carolus
a Sancto Paulo finds twenty-six dioceses, four of
which were in the isle of Eubcea. I. Chalcis, now
called Negroponte. 2. Oreum. 3. Porthmus. 4.
Caristus. Nine in Peloponnesus. 1. Corinthus,
the metropolis of the whole province. 2. Argos.
3. Tegea. 4. Megalopolis. 5. Lacedsemon. 6.
Messena. 7. Corone. 8. Petrse. 9. Helice. Thir
teen in the other part of Achaia. 1. Athense. 2.

Sects.
Of Thessalia.

11 Holsten. Annot. Geograph. p. 114. K Ibid. p. 115.

Megara. 3. Thespiae. 4. Naupactus. 5. Secorus.
6. Elatea. 7. Opus. 8. Strategis. 9. Thebae. 10.
Platea. 11. Tanagra. 12. Marathon. 13. Car-
sia, al. Corissia. Holstenius adds another Corone,
or Coronia, in Bceotia, beside the Corone that was
in Peloponnesus. The notitia of Leo Sapiens, in
Leunclavius and the seventh chapter of this Book,
makes three provinces of this, calling them Hellas
Prima, and Peloponnesus Prima and Secunda, and
the number of dioceses is pretty near the same, by
which we may guess no great alteration was made in
them for several ages. The largeness of these dioceses
may easily be concluded from the greatness of many
of the cities and their large territories, which the
reader may find already demonstrated by Dr. Mau
rice, in his discourse of Diocesan Episcopacy, p. 380,
concerning Thebes, Athens, Lacedsemon, Megal
opolis, and other cities of this province in particular.
The next region is Epirus, separated
from Achaia by the river Achelous. ot Epirus vetus
m, . . . and Epirus Nova.
1 his was anciently one kingdom, but
the Romans divided it into two provinces, Epirus
Vetus and Epirus Nova. In the former Carolus a
Sancto Paulo reckons ten dioceses. 1. Nicopolis,
the metropohs. 2. Anehiasmus. 3. Phoenicia. 4.
Dodone. 5. Adrianopolis. 6. Buthrotum. 7. Eu-
ria. 8. Photica. 9. Isle of Cephalenia. 10. Isle
of Corcyra. In the new Epirus, only eight. 1.
Dyrrachium, or Doracium, the metropolis. 2.
Scampes. 3. Apollonia. 4. Aiilon. 5. Amantia.
6. Lychnidus. 7. Bullidum, or Bulis. 8. Prina,
or Prisna. To which Holstenius adds Listra, or
Helistra, but with some doubting, whether it do not
rather belong to Lycaonia. These were very large
dioceses, above forty or fifty miles long ; notwith
standing which, two of them were sometimes united
together: for in the Acts of the Council of Ephesus,
as Holstenius has observed, one Felix is called13
bishop of Bulis and Apollonia together. In the
Greek notitia of Leo Sapiens, old Epirus goes by the
name of iEtolia, and has the same number of ten
dioceses only, though not the same names. The
other Epirus has sixteen, but then the province of
Praevalitana is joined to it, and most of its dioceses
taken in to make up the number. Whence I con
clude, that the dioceses in these provinces have been
of great extent in all ages ; the isle of Corcyra it
self being reckoned by some geographers forty-five
miles long, and by Pliny14 no less than ninety-
seven. In the isle of Crete, which was the Sect „
last of the Macedonian provinces, <* the iBle °f fcrele'
Carolus a Sancto Paulo names eleven dioceses. 1.
Gortyna, the metropolis. 2. Gnossus. 3. Hiera-
petra. 4. Lappa. 5. Subrita. 6. Eleuthera. 7-
Cherronesus. 8. Cydonia. 9. Cysamus. 10. Ci-

13 Cone. Ephes. Act. 1.

14 Plin. lib. 4. e. 12.

378

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

tium. 11. Cantanum. The notitia of Leo Sapiens
in Leunclavius makes them twelve, but Hierapetra
is there by mistake of some transcriber divided into
two, which being corrected reduces them to the
same number. Whence I conclude, this was pretty
near the standing number for several ages. Now,
Crete is reckoned by Ferrarius and others out of
Pliny and Strabo, two hundred and seventy or
three hundred miles long, and fifty broad. Which
makes these twelve dioceses equal to the rest of the
Macedonian provinces, all which appear visibly
to be dioceses of great extent, without descending
any further to give a more particular account of
them. The other civil diocese of Illyricum
of the five pro- Orientale went by the common name
vinces in the dio-
pesc auta0"'"' of 01° Dacia, consisting of five provinces,
Praevalitana, Mcesia Superior, Dacia
Mediterranea, Dacia Ripensis, and Dardania. Prae
valitana lies on the north of Epirus to the Adriatic
Sea, being part of that country which is now called
Albania. Carolus a Sancto Paulo names but two
dioceses in it, Scodra, the old metropohs of the
province, and Achrida, which was anciently caUed
Praevalis, but afterwards Justinian honoured it with
his own name, Justiniana Prima, and advanced it
to patriarchal dignity, assigning it all the five pro
vinces 15 of the Dacian diocese, and the two Panno-
nias in the diocese of Illyricum Occidentale, for the
limits of its jurisdiction. Besides these two bishop
rics, Holstenius has found out two more in this pro
vince, Rhizinium and Lissus, now called Alessio, on
the Adriatic Sea ; Carolus a Sancto Paulo also by
mistake places Scodra in the province of Dalmatia,
making Justiniana Prima a metropolitan see, with
out any suffragans under it.
Sect 13 On the north of Praevalitana to the
orMcesia'superior. Danube lay Mcesia Superior, between
Pannonia on the west and Dacia on the east.
Carolus a Sancto Paulo confounds the episcopal
dioceses of this province and the Dacias together,
making Sardica the metropolis of them all, and
calling them from that by the common name of
Provincia Sardicensis ; and, beside Sardica, he finds
but three more dioceses in the three provinces, Re-
messiana, Aquae, and Castrum Martis. But Hol
stenius is a httle more accurate, and treats distinctly
of them. He assigns to Mcesia Superior, Castrum
Martis, and another called Margus, seated on the
confluence of the river Margus and the Danube.
sect 14 r*"° Dtiria Mediterranea he assigns
oe^Sd^DacTa Sardica, the metropolis, and Roma-
tiana and Naissus, which he and Pagi
make to be the birth-place of Constantine the Great.
In the other Dacia, called Ripensis, from its run
ning along the banks ofthe Danube between Mcesia

rani
Ripensis,

Prima and Secunda, he places Aquas, which is men
tioned in the council of Sardica, in St. Hilary's
Fragments, and Iscus, or Iscopohs, another city
whose bishop subscribed out of the same province
in the foresaid council. In his Annotations also
upon Ortelius,10 he observes two other episcopal
cities in this province, one called Martis by Hiero
cles, or Stramartis by Procopius, and another called
Budine, now Bodine, in Bulgaria, upon the Danube :
but perhaps these are both modern sees, for he cites
no other authority but that of the notitias for them,
and Stramartis seems to be a corruption of Castra
Martis. On the south of Dacia, between it
and Macedonia, was the province of or Dardania' and
Golhia.
Dardania, divided from Macedonia by
Mount Scardus, and from Thracia by part of Mount
Hcemus. It is now part of Servia, and was an
ciently a part of Mcesia, as Dacia also was, till the
Daci, passing over the Danube, got themselves plant
ed in the middle of Mcesia, which, from that time,
was called Dacia Nova, as the other beyond the
Danube was called Dacia Antiqua, and Gothia. In
this province of Dardania, Carolus a Sancto Paulo
finds four dioceses. 1. Scupi, the metropolis. 2.
Ulpianum, otherwise called Justiniana Secunda. 3.
Diocletiana, which, at the time of the councU of
Sardica, was reckoned a city of Macedonia. 4. Nes-
syna, or Nessus. Holstenius adds another, called
Pautalia, which Hierocles, in his notitia, reckons
among the cities of Dacia Mediterranea, and Ste
phanus and Ptolemy among the cities of Thracia,
as lying in the confines of those provinces. Besides
these five provinces of the Dacian diocese, on the
south side of the Danube, there was another on the
north side out of the bounds of the Roman empire,
called Dacia Antiqua, and Gothia, from the time
that the Goths seated themselves in it. Epiphanius
speaks of one Silvanus, bishop of Gothia beyond
Scythia, taking Scythia for the Roman Scythia on
this side the Danube, whereof Tomi was the me
tropolis. Whence Holstenius rightly concludes, that
Gothia was that region which is now caUed Tran
sylvania, or Wallachia. But what episcopal sees they
had, or whether they had in aU this region any more
than one bishop, as the Scythians, and Saracens,
and some other such barbarous nations, is uncer
tain. Carolus a Sancto Paulo thinks Zarmizege-
thusa was the seat of their bishop, because Ptolemy
makes it the royal seat and metropolis of the king
dom. And this he supposes to be the same with
Gothia, mentioned in the notitia of Leo Sapiens,
among the autocephdli, or such bishops as had no
suffragans under them. But these being matters
involved in obscurity, I leave them to further in
quiry.

15 Justin. Novel. 131. c. 3.

' Holsten. Annot. in Ortel. p. 116.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

379

Out of Illyricum Orientale we pass
Sect. 16. J r
of the six pro- nex(; jnt0 tbe civil diocese of Illyri-
Tinces in the diocese J
denSe!ico™Dato!a- cum Occidentale, which was under the
''"¦ government of the prcsfectus-prcstorio
of Italy. In this diocese were six provinces, Dal-
matia, Savia, Pannonia Superior, Pannonia In
ferior, Noricum Mediterraneum, and Noricum
Ripense. In Dalmatia Carolus a Sancto Paulo
reckons four episcopal dioceses. 1. Salona, the
metropohs. 2. Jadera, now called Zara. 3. Epi-
daurus, now Ragusa. 4. Scodra, or Scutari. But
Scodra is wrong placed in Dalmatia, for, as has been
noted before, it was rather the metropolis of Prae
valitana. But Holstenius adds two more in the
room of it, Doclea and Senia, now called Segna, a
city upon the Liburnian shore.
5^ 17 The next province to this was Sa- '
or sana. ^-^ which seems to be so named from
the river Savus running through the middle of it.
It is sometimes called Pannonia Sava, being part
of Pannonia on the Savia, and sometimes Pannonia
Sirmiensis and Cibahensis, from the cities Sirmium
and Cibalis, which lay in this part of it. But here
we consider it as a distinct province from Pannonia,
from which it was separated by the river Dravus,
and is what we now caU Slavonia, and part of Bos
nia and Servia. In this province were six episco
pal dioceses. 1. Sinnium, the metropohs, near the
confluence of the Savus and the Danube. 2. Sin-
gidunum. 3. Mursa, now called Essek. 4. Cibahs.
5. Noviodunum. 6. Siscia.
Between the river Dravus and the
Sect IB.
of raononia snpe- Danube lay the two Pannomas, Su-
nor and Inferior. *
perior and Inferior, which are now
the southern part of Hungary. In the former of
these Carolus a Sancto Paulo out of Lazius speaks
of four dioceses : Vindobona or Vienna, Sabaria,
Scarabantia, and Ceha. To which Holstenius adds
Petavia, now called Petow, which the other con
founds with Patavia, or Batavia Castra, in Noricum,
now called Passaw in Bavaria. Victorinus Martyr
was bishop of this city, though Baronius and many
others commonly style him Pictaviensem, as if he
had been bishop of Poictiers in France ; whereas
he was bishop of this city in Pannonia Prima, called
Petavia, or Petow, as is observed by Spondanus,
and Pagi, and Du Pin, in their critical remarks
upon the Life of that ancient writer. In the lower
Pannonia there were but three dioceses, Curta, Car-
pis, and Stridonium, the birth-place of St. Jerom.
sect 19. More westward from Pannonia was
diternneuro'aiidiu- the province of Noricum, confined on
penBe. .
the north with the Danube, and on
the south and west with Venetia and Rhaetia, two
Ttalic provinces. This the Romans divided into
two, Noricum Mediterraneum and Ripense, in both

which Lazius mentions but four dioceses, Laurea-
cum, now called Lork, Juvavia or Saltsburg, Oyila-
bis, and Solva. Carolus a Sancto Paulo by mistake
adds a fifth, Petavio, Petow ; but that, as was said
before, belongs to another province. And the rest
were not erected till the sixth century, when that
part of Germany was first converted, which is now
Carniola and Carinthia, with part of Bavaria,
Stiria, Tirol, and Austria. By which it is easy to
judge of what vast extent those dioceses anciently
were, as they are now at this day ; two of them, as
I observed, being as large as ten or twenty in some
other parts of the world, particularly in Palestine
and Asia Minor, which have been already consider
ed ; and the observation will be more fully verified
by taking a particular view of Italy, whose episco
pal dioceses come now in order in the next place to
be considered.

CHAPTER V.

A PARTICULAR ACCOUNT OF THE DIOCESES OF ITALY.
Italy, in the sense we are now to „ . ,
Sect. 1.
speak of it, as it was taken for the lhe>rd'oceese'"o?'iho'
whole jurisdiction of the prcsfeetus ia"p"Ii"m
urbis et vicarius Italics under the Roman emperors,
was of somewhat larger extent than now it is : for
not only the islands of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica
were taken into the account, but also Rhaetia Se
cunda, which is that part of Germany that hes from
the Alps to the Danube. In this extent it was
divided into two large civil dioceses, containing
seventeen provinces of the Roman empire, as has
been showed before ; ' and in these provinces there
were about three hundred episcopal dioceses, the
names of which are still remaining, but the places
themselves many of them demohshed or sunk into
villages, and other new bishoprics set up in their
room. I shall not concern myself with the num
ber or extent of the modern dioceses, but only those
that were ancient, and erected within the first six
hundred years ; of which I am to make the same
observation in general, as I have done upon those
of Palestine and Asia Minor, that here were some
of the largest and some of the smallest dioceses,
for extent of ground, of any in the world, and yet
the same species of episcopacy retained in all with
out any variety or distinction. The dioceses of the
suburbicary provinces that lay next to Rome were
generally small, in comparison of those that lay
further to the north and west in the Italic provinces.
For about Rome the country was extremely popu-

See chap. 1. sect. 5. of this Book.

3S0

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

lous, and cities much thicker spread, which occa
sioned so many more episcopal sees to be erected in
those provinces above the other. This will plainly
appear by taking a view of each particular province,
and comparing the dioceses one with another : of
which we shall be able to give a more exact ac
count, because so much pains has been taken by
learned men in all ages, especiaUy Cluver and Hol
stenius, Ferrarius and Baudrand, in the last age, to
describe minutely and exactly the several places of
this country, and their distance from Rome and one
another. To begin with Rome itself : this was a
very large diocese in one respect, and very small in
another. In respect of the city itself, and the num
ber of people that were therein, it might be called
one of the greatest dioceses in the world. For
Pliny2 speaks of it as the most populous city in the
universe, in the time of Vespasian, when it was but
thirteen miles about. But Lipsius,3 in his book de
Magnitudine Romana, and Mr. Mede,4 and some
others think, that is meant only of the city within
the walls ; for otherwise it was but forty-two miles
in compass when St. John wrote his Revelation, in
-the time of Domitian. And afterward it received
considerable additions ; for in the days of Aurelian,
the historian5 speaks of it as no less than fifty miles
in circumference. And before this time the Chris
tians made a considerable figure in it : for Cornelius,
who lived in the middle of the third century, speaks
of forty-six presbyters," beside deacons, sub-deacons,
and other inferior clergy, belonging to the church
in his time. And within half an age more we find
an account of above forty churches in it. For so
many Optatus' says there were, when Victor Gar-
biensis, the Donatist bishop, was sent from Africa
to be the anti-bishop there : though there were forty
churches and more in the city, yet he could not ob
tain one of them, to make his handful of sectaries
look like a Christian congregation. This, as Baro
nius and Valesius have rightly observed, was spoken
by Optatus not of his own times, but of the time
when Victor Garbiensis came to Rome, which was
in the beginning of the Diocletian persecution.
Whence it may be rationally inferred, that if there
were above forty churches in Rome before the last
persecution, there would be abundance more in the
foUowing ages, when the whole city was become
Christian. But as by the vast increase of this city
the diocese was very large within, so for the same
reason it became very small without. For that

which was at first the territory of Rome, seems
afterward to have been swallowed up in the city
itself by the prodigious increase of it. Insomuch
that some have thought, that in the time of Innocent
I. the diocese of Rome had no country parishes be
longing to it, hut that they were all within the city ;
because in his epistle to Decentius, bishop of Eugu-
bium," he seems to make this difference between
other dioceses and that of Rome, that in the Roman
diocese the custom was to send the sacrament from
the mother-church to the presbyters officiating in
other churches, because all their churches lay within
the city ; but this was not proper to be done in other
places, which had country parishes," because the
sacraments were not to be carried to places at too
great a distance. But however this was, (for learned
men are not exactly agreed upon it, and I conceive
it to be a mistake,) this is certain, that the diocese
of Rome could not extend very far any way into the
country region ; because it was bounded on all sides
with neighbouring cities, which lay close round it.
On the north it had Fidenae, a bishop's see in those
times, though, as Cluver10 and Ferrarius11 show out
of Dionysius Halicarnasseus, it lay but forty stadia,
or five miles, distant from it. On the east it was
bounded with the diocese of Gabii, which some by
mistake place seventy miles from Rome, but Hol
stenius12 and Cluver, who are more accurate, tell
us, it lay in the middle way between Rome and
Praeneste, about twelve or thirteen miles from each.
In the same coast lay Tusculum, but twelve miles
from Rome. A httle inclining to the south lay the
diocese of Subaugusta, close by Rome. Here Helena,
the mother of Constantine, was buried, whence it
was called Subaugusta Helena. Holstenius13 says,
the remains of it are still visible at the place called
Tunis Pignatara. It was so near Rome, that the
writers which speak of Helena's interment, com
monly say she was buried at Rome in the church
of St. Marcelline in Via Lavicana; which is to be
understood of St. Marceliine's chm-ch in Subaugusta,
which lay in the way betwixt Rome and Lavici,
whence the way was called Via Lavicana. If we
look to the south of Rome down the river Tiber to
ward the sea, there we find three dioceses in three
cities, none of them above three miles from each
other, nor above sixteen miles from Rome. These
were Ostia, Portus Augusti, and Sylva Candida.
The first and second of which lay within two miles
of each other, Ostia on the east side, and Portus on

2 Plin. 1. 3. c. 5.
3 Lipsius de Magnitud. Roman. 1. 3. c. 2. p. 111.
4 Mede, Commentat. Apocalypt. p. 488.
5 Vopisc. Vit. Aurel. p. 645.
9 Cornel. Ep. ad Fab. Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43.
7 Optat. lib. 2. p. 49. Non enim gi-ex aut populus appel-
landi fuerant pauci, qui inter quadraginta et quod exeurrit
basilicas, locum ubi colligerent non habebant.
8 Innocent. Ep. 1. aid Decent, c. 5. De fermento autem

quod die Dominico per titulos mittimus superflue nos consu-
lere voluisti, cum omnes ecclesiae nostra? intra civitatem
sunt constitutae, &c.
9 Ibid. Quod per parochias fieri debere non put", quia
non longe portauda sunt sacramenta.
10 Cluver. Ital. lib. 2. p. 654.
11 Ferrar. Lexic. Geogr. voce Fiden&e.
12 Holsten. Annot. in Ortel. p. 85. Cluver. Ital. p. 955.
13 Holsten. Annot. Geogr. in Car. a Sancto Paulo, p. 11.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

381

the west side of the river Tiber ; and Sylva Candida
a httle more west from Portus. The site and dis
tance of Ostia and Portus from Rome we have ex
actly delivered both from ancient and modern geo
graphers. In Antonine's Itinerary it is called
eighteen; but Holstenius " observes that the ancient
miles were shorter than the modern, and therefore
both he, and Ferrarius, and others, reckon these
places precisely but sixteen miles from Rome.
Now these being sea-ports, had probably the chief
extent of their dioceses toward Rome, which takes
off from the largeness of the former. On the west
it was bounded with the diocese of Lorium, which
lay in Tuscia in the Via Aurelia betwixt Rome and
Torres, which Holstenius says,15 was but twelve
miles from Rome, and ten from Turres. And many
other dioceses lay in the same circle about Rome,
not at much further distance. For Nepe in Tuscia
was but twenty miles from Rome, and Sutrium but
four from Nepe. Nomentum, among the Sabines
in Valeria, was but twelve miles from Rome, and
Tibur in the same tract about sixteen. Lavici in
Campania, or Latium, was but fifteen, and Tres Ta-
bernre, according to some accounts, but twenty-one,
and Velitrae so near that, that Gregory the Great
united them together. But we shaU see more of
this in specifying the dioceses of each particular
province, and assigning the bounds of such as were
most remarkable for their nearness one to another.
I shall begin with those provinces
of Tuscia 'and um- which are properly called Roman, in
contradistinction to the rest of the
Italic dioceses; and in each of these assign both
the names and number of the ancient episcopal dio
ceses, that the reader who is curious in this matter,
may exercise his geographical knowledge in a more
particular search into the state of them. The first
of these in order is Tuscia and Umbria, which the
civil and ecclesiastical account always joins toge
ther as one province, though they had distinct
bounds upon other occasions. Tuscia was the
same that was anciently called Etruria, bounded
with the Tiber on the east, and the river Macra on
the west, the Apennine hills on the north, and the
Tuscan Sea on the south ; and includes now St.
Peter's patrimony in the eastern part, and the
dukedom of Florence, or Tuscany, in the west. In
this province Carolus a Sancto Paulo finds thirty-
five ancient dioceses. 1. Portus Augusti, now call
ed Porto. 2. Sylva Candida, now Sancta Ruffina.
3. Nepe, vulgo Nepi. 4. Aqua Viva, al. Carpena-
tum Urbs. 5. Phalaris, now Citta Castellana. 6.

Perentium, Ferento. 7- Polymartium, Bomarso.
8. Hortanum, Horti. 9. Blera, now Bieda. 10.
Sutrium. 11. Tarquina. 12. Salpis. But Hol
stenius thinks this is mistaken for Saepinum, in the
province of Samnium. 13. Tuscania, Tuscanello.
14. Balneum Regis, Bagnarea. 15. Perusia, now
Perugia. 16. Urbs Vetus, Orvieto. 17- Clusium,
Chiusa. 18. Cortona. 19. Aretium, Arezzo. 20.
Volsinium, Bolsena. 21. Centumcellae, now Civita
Vecchia. 22. Gravisca, now Montalto. 23. Cor-
netum. 24. Forum Claudii, now Oriolo. 25. Pisa.
26. Lucca. 27. Luna. 23. Sena. 29. Florentia.
30. Fesul&s, now Fiezoli. 31. Suana. 32. Man-
turanum. 33. Rusella, Rosella. 34. Populonia,
Porto Baratto. 35. Volaterrae. To which Hol
stenius adds Volscae, or Civitas Bulcentina, Cas
trum Valentini, and Lorium. Now some of these,
as has been already observed, were very near neigh
bours to Rome, and they were yet nearer to one
another. Nepi was but four miles from Sutrium,
as Ferrarius computes,19 and so they were after
ward united together, as the same author informs
us. Portus Augusti was bounded on one side with
Ostia, which was but two miles from it, as Ferra
rius17 and Cluver inform us ; and on the other side
with Sylva Candida, which Carolus a Sancto Paulo
places about the same distance from it. Faleria, or
Phalaris, is reckoned by Cluver 18 about five or six
miles from Nepe, and four miles from Hortanum
by Ferrarius,19 who says, Hortanum lay upon the
Tiber, opposite to the Ocriculi in Umbria, and not
above four miles to the west of it. Holstenius M
shows out of the Jerusalem Itinerary, that Aqua
Viva was but twelve miles from Ocriculi, and Pha-
leria lay between them. Polymartium was but
five miles west from Hortanum, as Perrarius com
putes,21 and Ferentium about the same distance
from Polymartium ; which two last were united in
to one, before the council of Rome under Martin,
anno 649, as Carolus a Sancto Paulo coUects from
the subscriptions of that council. Blera was but
nine miles from Forum Claudii, as Holstenius22
shows from the old Itineraries ; and Forum Claudii
not above five from Sutrium, according to Cluver's
reckoning. Lorium was but twelve miles from
Rome in the way to Civita Vecchia, as has been
showed before. Tarquina is reckoned by Ferra
rius23 about five miles from Cornetum, and about
the same distance from Gravisca, by Cluver's Ta
bles. Which is the more probable, because Hol
stenius observes,24 that these three dioceses were at
last united into one. Centumcellae, or Civita Vecchia,

14 Holsten. Annot. in Cluver. Ital. p. 79. Others reckon
but twelve modern miles. So Lipsius out of Appian.
ls- Holsten. in Cluver. Ital. p. 43,
16 Ferrar. Lexic. Geogr. voce Nepe et Sutrium.
17 Ibid, voce Ostia et Portus.
18 Cluver. Ital. lib. 2. p. 537.

19 Ferrar. Lexic. voce Hortanum.
20 Holsten. Annot. in Cluver. p. 80.
21 Ferrar, voce Polymartium.
22 Holsten. in Cluver. p. 47.
23 Ferrar. Lexic. voce Tarquinia.
24 Holsten. Annot. in Carol, a Sancto Paulo, p.

382

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

lay upon the sea, twelve miles from Gravisca, as
appears from the Jerusalem Itinerary in Hol
stenius.25 Tuscania and Volsinium, and Urbs Ve
tus, now called Orvieto, and Balneum Regis, had
much about the same distances from one another.
And all these lay within that little compass of land,
which is now called St. Peter's patrimony, hemmed
in on the east and north with the river Tiber, on
the west with the river Marta, and on the south
with the Tuscan Sea. A country that is not much
above fifty miles square, as Cluver rightly describes
it. For from Rome to Centumcellae, or Civita Vec
chia, which lies but ten miles from the river Marta,
which now divides St. Peter's patrimony from Cas
tro Ducato, Cluver and Holstenius,26 out of Anto
nine's Itinerary, in the direct course of the Via
Aurelia, reckon but forty-seven miles, which do not
exceed forty miles according to the present estima
tion. So that there being in this compass twenty
bishoprics, including Rome in the number, if we
will suppose all the dioceses to be equal, each dio
cese will be about ten or twelve miles square, which
confirms the account that has been given of the
distance of the several cities from each other. And
hence it appears, that as in some parts of the king
dom of Naples, dioceses have been multiplied above
what they were in former ages, so in this and other
parts of the pope's dominions, they have as strangely
decreased. Por now there are not near half the
number, there being sometimes two, or three, or four
united into one. For Ferrarius informs us, that
Viterbo was raised, anno 1074, out of the ruins of
three old ones, Ferentum, Tuscania, and Polymar
tium. So Citta Castellana arose from the decay of
Faleria and Hortanum. Sutrium was united to
Nepe; Tarquina and Gravisca to Cornetum; not
to mention any more of this kind, which concern
not the present inquiry. As to those dioceses which
lay in the western part of Tuscia, now called the
dukedom of Tuscany, they were much larger in
proportion than the former, for excepting Pesulae,
which lay but three miles27 from Florence, all the
other dioceses were of greater extent. Of which 1
need only give this evidence, that this part of Tus
cia is reckoned28 above two hundred miles in length,
and near a hundred in breadth, excluding the pope's
dominions. Which being divided among fifteen or
sixteen dioceses, will afford a large territory to every
one : so that it is needless to look further for a uar-
ticular account of them.
But if we return back again into Umbria, nearer

25 Holsten. in Cluver. p. 80.
26 Ibid. p. 78. Procop. de Bell. Goth. lib. 2. p. 405,
reckons it 280 stadia, or 35 miles.
27 Cluver. Ital. lib. 2. p. 452.
28 Ferrar. Lexic. Geogr. voce Tuscia.
25 Holsten. Annot. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 9, et in Cluver
p. 98.

Rome, there we shall find dioceses of the same size
and as thick as in the patrimony of St. Peter. For
it was but a httle tract of ground, bounded with the
rivers Nar and Tiber, and the Apennine hills, and
only a part of the old Umbria, which reached be
yond the Apennine to the Adriatic sea.- In the
present Umbria, Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons
eighteen bishoprics. 1. Ocriculum. 2. Narnia.
3. Tuder, now Todi. 4. Mevania, now Bevagna.
5. Tifernum Tiberinum, now Citta di Castello. 6.
Interamnia, now Terni. 7- Ameria, Amelia. 8.
Trebia, Trebi. 9. Spoletum, Spoleto. 10. Fulgi-
num, Fulgino. 11. Camerinum. 12. Hispellum.
13. Assisium. 14. Forum Novum, now Vescovio.
15. Forum Flaminii, now For-flammo. 16. Vetto-
nium, Bittona. 17. Nuceria, Nocera. 18. Eugu-
bium, Gubbio. To which Holstenius adds Tadi-
num20 and Martula. Now five of these, Fulginum,
Hispellum, Assisium, Forum Flamimi, and Meva
nia, lay so close together, that none of them was
above ten miles' distance from any of the other.
Fulginum had on the north towards Nuceria, Fo
rum Flaminii to bound it, which Ferrarius 3" says,
was but three miles removed from it. Hispellum
was but the same distance in the way to Assisium.
Trebia on the east was but six miles from Fulgi
num, and nine from Spoletum, as Ferrarius also
informs us,31 who says also it was but fifteen miles
from Fulginum to Spoletum ; so that Trebia must
lie exactly in the way betwixt them. On the south,
Fulginum was bounded again with Mevania, which
was hut six miles from it.32 On the west lay As
sisium, famous in modern stories for the birth of St
Francis, the father of the Franciscans; and this,
Ferrarius says, was but ten miles33 from Fulginum,
and about twelve from Perusia in Tuscia. If we
look a little more northward, from Forum Flaminii
to Nuceria is computed nine miles34 by Ferrarius.
From Nuceria to Tadinum (the remains of which,
Holstenius35 says, are yet to be seen in the ViaFla-
minia, near Gualdo, on the top of the Apennine) is
computed no more than eight miles by Holstenius39
and Baudrand. And from Tadinum to Eugubium
must be about thirteen. But here the dioceses be
gan to enlarge toward the western parts of this pro
vince, as was observed before of Tuscia. For west
ward of Eugubium, there was no city betwixt it and
Tifernum Tiberinum, which was twenty miles from
it. Nor had Tifernum Tiberinum any nearer neigh
bours than Arctium, which is reckoned eighteen,
and Callium twenty-two, and Perusia twenty-four

80 Ferrar. Lexic. voce Forum Flaminii.
31 Ibid, voce Trebia, et Fulginum, et Hispellum
32 Ibid, voce Mevania.
33 Baudrand. voce Fulginum et Perusia.
34 Ferrar. voce Nuceria.
35 Holsten. Annot. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 9.
36 Holsten. Annot. in Ital. Cluver. p. 86.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

3S3

miles from it, as Baudrand and Ferrarius3' have
computed. But then if we look towards Rome
again, and descend from the Apennine to the south-
em parts of this province toward the rivers Nar and
Tiber, we there first meet with Martula on the river
Nar, which Holstenius33 assures us was but six
•miles to the east of Spoleto. Down the same river
lay Interamnia, about the same distance from Mar
tula. And below that was Narnia, which Cluver,39
from the Jerusalem Itinerary, reckons to be nine
miles from Interamnia; but Holstenius, who was at
the pains to measure it, says40 it was but five miles
and two-thirds from the gate of the one city to the
gate of the other. A httle to the west of Narnia
lay Ameria, which Ferrarius41 says was not quite
six miles from it. And to the south of Narnia,
more down the river Nar toward Rome, there was
Ocriculum, which -the Jerusalem Itinerary in Clu
ver42 makes to be twelve miles from Narnia; but
Ferrarius, by the modern account, reckons but eight,
and four from Hortanum in Umbria, as has been
noted before in speaking of Hortanum. In the
middle of this province, upon the confluence of the
rivers Tinia and Asius, between Mevania and Pe
rusia, lay Vettonium, which Ferrarius43 accounts
six miles from Mevania, and eight from Perusia in
Tuscia. So that aU the dioceses of this province,
except two or three, were very smaU, and one with
another not to be reckoned above eight or ten miles
in length, since there was scarce so much distance
from one city to another. And upon this account,
as the cities decayed, several of these dioceses were
united together in after ages. For Tadinum is joined
to Nuceria, as Holstenius 44 informs us. HispeUum
and Forum Flamimi are swaUowed up in Fulgino.
So Mevania, and Trebia, and Martula are sunk and
united to other dioceses, and in aU this province,
that I can learn, there is not one new see erected.
Out of Umbria our next step toward
Sect. 3. , r
ofthe^royinceof the east is into the province of Va
leria, so called, Holstenius thinks,
from the Via Valeria, which ran directly through it.
It was bounded on the north with the Apennine, on
the west with the river Nar, which divided it from
Umbria, on the south with the Tiber and the Anio,
which divided it from Latium, or that which is now
called Campagna di Roma. On the east it border
ed upon Samnium, from which it was divided by a
hne drawn from the river Aternus to the head of

37 Ferrar. Lexic. voce Tifernum.
89 Holsten. Annot. in Ital. Cluver. p. 98.
35 Cluver. Ital. p. 526.
40 Holsten. Annot. in Cluver. p. 95. Sunt a Narniensi
porta ad pnrtam Interamnii cannae Romanae 3760, quEe sunt
5 mil. pass. §.
41 Ferrar. Lexic. voce Ameria.
42 Cluver. Ital. p. 526.
3 Ferrar. Lexic. voce Vettonium.
44 Holsten. in Ital. Cluver. p. 86.

Anio. It was anciently the country ofthe Sabines
andMarsi, and part of Old Latium, and is now call
ed Sabina in that part which runs toward Rome,
the rest being now part of the dukedom of Spoleto
and Abrusso. In this province Carolus a Sancto
Paulo reckons eleven dioceses. 1. Fidenae, now
called Castel Jubileo. 2. Nomentum, now Lamen-
tana. 3. Tibur, Tivoli. 4. Nursia, Norza. 5.
Marsi, al. Marruvium, and Valeria. 6. Praeneste,
now Palestrina. 7- Furconium, Forconio. 8. Ami-
ternum, now S. Vittorino. 9. Reate, Rieti. 10.
Cures, Curese. 11. Lista. But Holstenius45 ob
serves, that the last of these is mistaken for Lissum,
or Alessio, as it is now called, in Praevalitana on the
other side of the Adriatic Sea; and Praeneste be
longs to Latium : instead of which he substitutes
two others, Pitinum and Forum Novum, or Sabi-
num, now Vescovio, once a chief city among the
Sabines. Now, of these, Fidenae was but five miles
from the gates of Rome, as has been noted before.
Nomentum was about eight from Fidenae, and
twelve from Rome, as Baudrand46 shows out of
Sanson and Brietius ; though others place it be
yond Tibur ten miles, and twenty-six from Rome.
Tibur itself was but sixteen miles 47 from Rome, and
twelve from Praeneste. But it was a pretty large
diocese for all that. For Holstenius48 observes,
that Sublaqueum was a dependant on it, till it be
came a monastery exempt from all episcopal juris
diction; and Ferrarius49 says, that abbey had four
teen villages belonging to it. Praeneste was thirteen
miles from Gabii, and fourteen from Anagnia, and
not so much from Nomentum. Cures, now called
St. Anthimo, was only ten miles from Reate, accord
ing to Ferrarius,59 and probably something nearer
to Nomentum, because Carolus a Sancto Paulo5'
observes out of an epistle of Gregory52 the Great,
that it was united in his time to Nomentum. Some
confound Cures with Sabinum, or Forum Novum ;
but Holstenius 53 shows, that Sabinum was a distinct
city, and stood in the place which is now called
Vescovio, where the ruins of the cathedral church
are still remaining: which Baudrand says54 was
but three miles from Reate, and eleven from Inter
amnia ; but the site of this place may be passed
over as a little uncertain. The ruins of Amiternum
are still to be seen, Cluver says,55 near where Aquila
now stands. Ferrarius56 thinks it was only five
miles from it. Pitinum was but two miles from

45 Holsten. Annot. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 16.
46 Baudr. voce Nomentum.
47 Ferrar. voce Tibur.
48 Holsten. in Ital. Cluver. p. 147.
19 Ferrar. voce Sublaqueum. 5° Ibid, voce Cures.
61 Carol, a S. Paulo, Geogr. Sacra, p. 58.
52 Greg. lib. 2. Ep. 20.
53 Holsten. Annot. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 9.
64Baudr. voce Cures. 55 Cluver. Ital. lib. 2. p. 688.
56 Ferrar. voce Amiternum.

384

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Aquila, and consequently, as Holstenius observes,57
must be near Amiternum. Furconium was another
see in that neighbourhood, but eight miles from
Aquila, as Ferrarius58 acquaints us. So that these
three dioceses lay in a small compass, and are now
swallowed up in the new diocese of Aquila, which
arose out of the ruins of them all united together.
The largest of these dioceses in this tract, were
Reate, Nursia, and Marruvium or Marsi. For from
Reate to Nursia, Baudrand59 calls it thirteen miles,
Ferrarius, twenty : to Aquila twenty-five miles, and
as much to Narnia. But Interamnia and Furco
nium were something nearer to Reate. Marruvium
or Marsi, on the lake Fucinus, was at a consider
able distance from Furconium and Sulmo, which
cities lay the nearest to it. But the exact distance
is not so certain, because it is not agreed on which
side the lake Fucinus Marruvium was.
Out of Valeria and Umbria cross
of i>icenum Sub- the Apennine we come into the pro-
urb-icarium. _ _
vince of Picenum Suburbicarium, so
called to distinguish it from Picenum Annonarium,
which belonged to the Italic diocese. This lay be
twixt the Apennine on the south and the Adriatic
Sea on the north, and was divided from Picenum
Annonarium by the river iEsis on the west, and
from Samnium by the river Aternus, now called
Pescara, on the east ; and it is now the provinces
of Marca di Ancona and Abrusso Ultra. In this
province Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons fourteen
dioceses. I. Pinna, now Penna. 2. Interamnia,
now Teramo. 3. Asculum, Ascoli. 4. Firmum,
Fermo. 5. Tolenlinum, Tolentino. 6. Septempeda,
now S. Severino. 7- Matelica. 8. Cingulum, Cin-
gulo. 9. Auximum, Osmo. 10. Potentia. 11. Nu-
mana, now Humana. 12. Ancona. 13. Hadria, Adri.
14. A ternum, now Pescara. To which Holstenius69
adds five more ; Truentum, Aufinia, Faleronia,
Urbs Salvia, now called Urbisaglia, and Pausola, or
Pausulee, as Ferrarius calls it, which now goes by
the name of Monte del Olmo. The most eastern
city of this province was Aternum, on the mouth of
the river Aternus or Pescara, which (as Ferrarius1"
and Baudrand compute) was but eight miles from
Teate, and eleven from Ortona, two cities in the
province of Samnium, and not above eleven from
Adria, and twelve from Pinna. Pinna was the same
distance from Teate and Adria. Interamnia is
reckoned by Ferrarius twenty miles from Asculum;
but Baudrand says only thirteen. In the western
parts of the province, Matelica is computed but nine
miles from Septempeda; and Septempeda six from To-
lentinum, and ten from Camerinum, and twelve from
Cingulum; Cingulum is reckoned but eight from

iEsium in Picenum Annonarium, and twelve from
Auximum ; Auximum twelve from iEsium, and the
same from Ancona ; Ancona twelve from Numana-
Numana twelve from Potentia; the remains of which
last, Holstenius says,62 are still to be seen, not far
from Portus Ricanaticus and Laureto. Urbs Sal
via, according to Ferrarius's account, was but ten
miles from Tolentinum, and by Baudrand's but six.
Firmum, Truentum, and Asculum lay at a greater
distance ; for Ferrarius reckons them near twenty
miles from each other : but then he says, that Pau-
sulae was in Comitatu Firmano, and therefore not far
from Firmum ; and if Faleronia and Aufinia (whose
situation is uncertain) lay in those parts also, they
might bring the dioceses of Asculum and Truentum
to the same pitch with the rest of the province.
So that few dioceses in this province could be much
above ten miles in extent, and the largest not above
twenty, as appears from Ferrarius and other geogra
phers' computation.
From the Adriatic Sea we must
again cross the Apennine to take a oruuuni.na
view of Latium and Campania, the
ancient glory of Italy, along the Tuscan Sea east
ward to the river Silarus from the Tiber and the
gates of Rome. This in the civil and ecclesiastical
account is reckoned but one province ; but since
Latium is commonly distinguished from Campania,
I will speak first of the dioceses that were in that,
as being the nearest neighbours to Rome. This
country was anciently bounded with the rivers Tiber,
Anio, and Liris, which last divided it from Campa
nia properly so called. It now contains Campagna
di Roma, and part of Lavoro in the realm of Na
ples. It had anciently twenty-three dioceses, as
Carolus a Sancto Paulo and Holstenius have com
puted. 1. Subaugusta. 2. Ostia. 3. Gabii. 4.
Albanum. 5. Alba. 6. Antium. 7. Tres Taber-
nae. 8. Velitras. 9. Tusculum. 10. Lavici. 11.
Praeneste. 12. Signia. 13. Anagnia. 14. Feren-
tinum. 15. Aletrium. 16. Verulae. 17. Tarra-
cina. 18. Fundi. 19. Formiee. 20. Aquimrm.
21. Cassinum. 22. Atina. 23. Sora. Of these,
as has been observed before, Subaugusta lay close
by Rome ; Ostia sixteen miles from Rome and two
from Porto ; Gabii thirteen from Rome and as many
from Praeneste. Tusculum, which some mistake
for Tusculanum, where Cicero wrote his Tnsculan
Questions, was a city now called Frescati, and Fer
rarius says but twelve miles from Rome. Signia,
now called Segni, lay between Tusculum and Anag
nia, six miles from each, nine from Praeneste, and
thirty from Rome, as Baudrand informs69 us from
Holstenius. The same author says,64 Ferentimim

57 Holsten. Annot. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 1G. Pitinum
non longe fuit ab Amitemo, duobus mil. pass, ab Aquila.
53 Ferrar. voce Furconium.
59 Ferrar. et Baudrand. voce Nursia, et Reate.

60 Holsten. Annot. Geogr. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 14.
61 Ferrar. Lexic. Geogr. voce Aternum.
62 Holsten. ibid. & Lexic. Geogr. voce Signia
61 Ibid, voce Fci-enlinmn.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

385

was but five mUes from Anagnia and four from Ale-
trium; and Ferrarius65 places Verulae between Anag
nia and Sora, nine or ten miles from each. Lavici
is reckoned by Holstenius66 but fifteen miles from
Rome, and yet the diocese of Subaugusta came be
tween them : for it was in the Via Lavicana, the
direct way that leads from Rome to Lavici. Alba-
num and Alba are by some authors confounded to
gether, but Holstenius67 reckons them distinct cities,
and Ferrarius says63 the one was fourteen, and the
other sixteen miles from Rome. But perhaps the
one might only arise out of the ruins of the other,
for they were not above two miles from each other.
Velitrse was but four mUes from Alba, and twenty
from Rome ; Antium on the Tuscan shore fourteen
from Vehtrae and twenty from Ostia, as the same Fer
rarius99 informs us. Between Antium and Vehtrae lay
Tres Tabernae, the place whither the Christians came
to meet St. Paul from Rome. Carolus a Sancto Paulo
thinks it is the same which is now called Cisterna,
but Holstenius says'" it was at some distance from it
in the Via Appia, so near Vehtrae that Gregory the
Great united these two dioceses together. Ferrarius
says'1 it was but five mUes from Velitrse, and twenty-
six (or, as Baudrand computes, twenty-one) from
Rome, five from Aricia, and twenty-two from Appii
Forum, the other place whither the brethren came
to meet St. Paul. Indeed neither Aricia nor Appii
Forum are mentioned as episcopal sees by any an
cient writer: but Ferrarius72 seems to make them
both so ; for he says Aricia was a famous city and
a Roman colony, which, by the common rule of the
church, had thereby a title to an episcopal see: nor
is it any objection against it that it was but sixteen
miles from Rome, and four or five from Alba, Tres
Tabernae, and Vehtrae; for we have seen already
that many cities in this tract were at no greater dis
tance from one another. Of Appii Forum he speaks
more positively, and says it was anciently an epis
copal see,78 though from what authority he tells us
not: but there is some reason to believe it, because
it was a city at a good distance from any other. For
Tarracina on the east was near twelve miles from it,
and Tres Tabernae westward above twenty ; so that
either Tres Tabernae and Tarracina must have dio
ceses of more than ordinary extent in these parts, or
else Appn Forum must come between them. But I
let this pass, because in matters of doubtful nature,
where we are destitute of ancient authorities, nothing
can certainly be determined. I go on therefore with
those that are more certain. From Tarracina to
Fundi the modern accounts74 reckon but ten miles,

65 Lexic. Geogr. voce Verulai.
99 Holsten. Annot. in Ital. Cluver. p. 194.
" Holsten. ibid. p. 183. * Ferrar. voce Alba longa.
Ferrar. voce Velitrae, et Antium.
™ Holsten. Annot. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 9.
" Ferrar. voce Tres Tabernae. 72 Ibid, voce Aricia.
2 C

though the Jerusalem Itinerary75 calls it thirteen,
and Antonine's Itinerary sixteen. From Fundi to
Formiae the same Itineraries reckon twelve and thir
teen, which Ferrarius, from the modern geographers,
esteems but ten ; cautioning his reader here '6 against
a great error in Strabo, who makes it four hundred
stadia, that is, fifty miles, from Tarracina to Formiae,.
when indeed it was not half the distance. If we
look a little upward from the sea to the north-eastern
part of Latium, there we find Aquinum and Cas-
sinum but five miles from one another, and Atina
the same distance from Cassinum, and Sora twelve
miles from Atina, twelve from Ferentinum, sixteen
from Cassinum, and sixty from Rome. So that in
the compass of seventy old Italian miles, which are
not quite sixty of the modern, there were betwixt
twenty and thirty bishoprics, answerable to the
number of cities in Latium, in the most flourishing
times of the Roman empire.
Prom Latium we must pass into Campania, where
we first meet with Minturnae, now called Scaffa del
Garigliano, not far from the mouth of the river
Liris, which Ferrarius77 computes nine miles from
Formiae, and as many from Sinuessa. A little above
these lay Teanum, now called Tiano, eight miles
from Suessa, twelve from Capua; and Calenum was
the same distance from Capua, and but six from
Suessa, and six from Sinuessa, as Ferrarius 79 reckons.
Carolus a Sancto Paulo takes Calenum for Cagli,
and others for Cales; but Holstenius79 shows it to
be the same with Carinola, which is now a bishop's
seat, and, as Baudrand computes, but four miles from
Suessa, and as many from the Tuscan shore. Next
beyond these lay Vulturnum, now called Castel di
Bitorno, at the mouth of the river Vulturnus, eight
miles from Sinuessa, and nine from Linternum, and
ten from Capua. Five mUes beyond Linternum, on
the same shore, was Cumae, and three miles below
that Misenum, from whence to Puteoli was but three
miles likewise, and from Puteoli to Naples six, ac
cording to Ferrarius's computation. About eighteen
miles beyond Naples was Stabiae, and six from that
Surrentum, on the same shore, beyond which was
Amalphia and Salernum, the last of which is reckon
ed by Ferrarius but twenty-four miles from Naples.
On the north and east of Naples lay Nola, which
could not be above twelve miles from it : for Hol
stenius observes,89 that Octavianum, the village
where Octavius Augustus died, under Mount Vesu
vius, was in the way between them, five miles from
Naples, and seven from Nola. Between Nola and
Capua lay Acerrae, six miles from Nola, and eight

73 Ferrar. voce Forum Appii. 71 Ibid, voce Fundi.
78 Ap. Holsten. Annot. in Ital. Cluver. p. 218,
70 Ferrar. voce Formiae. 77 Ibid, voce MinturnDO.
78 Ibid, voce Teanum, et Calenum.
79 Holsten. Annot. in Cluver. Ital. p. 258.
80 Holsten. Annot. in Ortel. p. 133.

386

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

from Naples, and ten from Capua : for from Nola to
Capua was but twenty old Itahan miles, as we learn
from Pauhnus, bishop of Nola,81 who could not be
mistaken. Naples and Capua were but sixteen miles
asunder, and yet Atella, now called S. Arpino, or
S. Elpidio, lay between them, which, Ferrarius82
says, was eight miles from each. Calatia was but
the same distance to the north of Capua; Venafrum
but ten miles from Cassinum ; Abellinum was the
largest diocese in aU Campania, sixteen miles from
Beneventum, and as much from Nola, Salernum, and
Frequentum, in the province of Samnium, to which,
Baudrand83 says, it was afterward united. If now
we put all these Itahan dioceses hitherto enumerated
together, they amount to above one hundred and
ten, whereof twenty were in that httle part of Tuscia,
which is now called St. Peter's patrimony, twenty
in Umbria, eleven in Valeria, nineteen in Picenum
Suburbicarium, and forty-three in Latium and Cam
pania." And yet all this country put together was
not, in the longest part of it, above two hundred
miles on the Tuscan shore : for from the river Marta,
on which lay Tarquina and Gravisca, to Rome is
reckoned fifty modern miles ; from Rome to Naples
one hundred and twenty-five; and from Naples to
Salernum, the utmost diocese in Campania, but
twenty-four, according to the computations of Fer
rarius. On the Adriatic shore it was only the
length of Picenum Suburbicarium between the
rivers iEsis and Aternus, which was not above one
hundred and twenty miles. The breadth of it in
the widest part of it, from Ancona on the Adriatic
Sea to Ostia on the Tuscan Sea, was but one hun
dred and sixty-four miles, and in the narrower parts,
from the mouth of the river Aternus to the mouth
of the Liris, not above one hundred and twenty
miles. Which the curious may divide among one
hundred and ten dioceses, and then examine whe
ther they exceed the proportions which I have be
fore assigned them.
sect. 6. I wiU n°t stand so nicely to exa-
Of Samnium. mine ^ ^ Qf ^ Ttaliarl dioCeSCS,
but only recount the number in each province, and
make a few remarks upon the largest, as I have
hitherto done upon the smaUest; that the reader
may pursue this inquiry further at his own pleasure,
and see that the greatness or smaUness of a diocese
anciently bred no division or disturbance in the
cathohc church. The next province then in order
to be spoken of is Samnium, which lay on the coast
of the Adriatic Sea, between Picenum Suburbica
rium on the west, from which it was divided by the
river Aternus, or Pescara, and Apulia on the east,
from which it was separated by the river Frenta.
In this province Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons

81 Paulin. ad Cyther. Carm. 13. p. 492.
62 Ferrar. voce Atella. m Baudrand. voce Abellinum.

but ten dioceses. 1. Beneventum. 2. Saepimrm.
3. Sulmo. 4. Bovianum, now called Boiano. 5.
Theatea, now Chieti. 6. Ortona. 7- Frequentum,
Fricenti. 8. Alipha. 9. Samnium. 10. Corfinium,
or Valva. To which Holstenius adds Istonium and
iEclanum, but Baudrand thinks iEclanum was the
same with Frequentum. However it was, Holste
nius observes,8* that it had the name of Decimum
Quintum, because it was fifteen miles from Bene
ventum. Corfinium and Sulmo were nearer to one
another, and were afterward united together. Or
tona, Theatea, Seepinum, Bovianum, and Istonium,
were some ten, some twelve mUes from one another.
So that these dioceses were neither so little as those
about Rome, nor so large as those of the western
provinces in the Itahc diocese.
Next to Samnium lay Apulia, and
beyond that Calabria, in the utmost ofApuiiaind
J ' Calabria.
corner of Italy to the Adriatic Sea.
These two regions made but one province in the
civil and ecclesiastical account, and therefore I join
them together. In Apulia Carolus a Sancto Paulo
reckons twelve dioceses. 1. Ignatia, now called Ig-
nazzo. 2. Barium, Barri. 3. Tranum, Trani. 4. Cu-
persanum,Conversano. 5. Canusium,Canosa. 6. Si-
pontum, Siponto. 7- Arpi, now Sarpi. 8. Melphia,
Melfi. 9. Venusia, Venosa. 10. Acherontia, Ace-
renza. 1 1 . Vigihae, Biseglae. 12. Cannae. To which
the dihgence of Holstenius has added five more-
13. Bivimim, Bovino.' 14. Herdona, Ardona. 15.
Rubisium, Ruvo. 16. Salapia, Salpe. 17. iEca?,
or iEquana, since caUed Troja. In Calabria Caro
lus a Sancto Paulo found but seven dioceses, but
Holstenius makes them ten. 1. Brundisium, Brin-
disi. 2. Aletium, Lecci. 3. Hydruntum, Otranto.
4. Callipolis, Gallipoli. 5. Tarentum, Taranto. 6,
Uria, Oira. 7- Lypia, or Luspise. 8. Neritum,
Nardo. 9. Uxentum, Ugento. 10. Alexanum, be
fore called Leuce, now Alessano.
Next to these, toward the lower sea,
lay the regions of Lucania and Brutia, or Lucania' and
, Biuliii.
which are reckoned together likewise
as one province. In Lucania Carolus a Sancto
Paulo could find but five bishoprics, but Holstenius
augments them to eight. 1. Potentia, Potenza. 2.
Buxentum, which C arolus a S ancto Paulo takes to be
Pisciota, but Holstenius and others Polycastro. 3.
Paestum, Pesto. 4. Acropolis,' Agropoli. 5. Blanda,
which some take for Belvedere, but Holstenius calls
it Porto di Sapri. 6. Grumentum, Agrimonte. 7-
Veha. 8. Cocilianum, the bishop of which is some
times styled also Marcilhanensis, as Holstenius9" ob
serves, from Marcillianum, a seat or suburbs belong"
ing to the diocese of Cocilianum. In Brutia Carolusa
Sancto Paulo reckons up sixteen dioceses. I. Rhe-

84 Holsten. Annot. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 18.
85 Ibid.. Not. in Ital. Cluver. p. 299.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

337

gium, now Rezo. 2. Taurianum, Seminara. 3. Vibo
Valentia, now called Bivona. Out of these two
dioceses, Holstenius86 observes, that Roger earl of
Calabria raised the new diocese of Mileto, anno 1087.
4. Tropaea. 5. Nicotera, Nicodro. 6. Temesa, now
S. Marco. 7- Thurium, Terra Nova, al. Buffalora.
8. Cerillus,Cerilla. 9. Consentia, Cosenza. 10. Cro-
tona. 11. ScyUatium, SquiUaci. 12. Locri, Gieraci.
13. Muranum, Morano. 14. Portus Orestis, Porto
Ravaglioso. 15. Carina, united to Rhegium by
Gregory the Great. 16. Bova. To these Holstenius
adds two more, Paternum and Turres ; the first of
which sees, he says,87 was translated to Umbriatico,
and the other united to Taurianum. So that the
new diocese of Mileto, which was made out of Tau
rianum and Vibo, must be at least three old dioceses
united into one. Whence we may conclude, that
though some of the dioceses in this part of Italy
are less than they were anciently, yet others are
larger by being united : and the same observation
may be made upon Campania, where the dioceses
are now more numerous than in any other part of
Italy; though some of them are now so small, as not
to extend beyond the waUs of their cities, yet others
are larger than formerly for the reason mentioned,
because they were made up of two or three old
dioceses put together, as has been noted in its pro
per place.
sect 9. To these seven provinces which lay
sicar'jHeiita^and m Italy, we must add the islands of
 ' SicUy, Sardinia, and Corsica, with the
lesser islands that lay about them, which make up
the ten provinces of the Roman diocese, or city
prefecture. In Sicily Carolus a Sancto Paulo
counts thirteen dioceses. 1. Syracusae. 2. Tinda-
rium, Tindaro. 3. Leontini, Lentini. 4. Lilybae-
um, now caUed Marsala. 5. Tauromenium, Taor-
mina. 6. Messana. 7. Thermae. 8. Catana. 9.
Trocala. 10. Agrigentum, Grigenti. II. Panor-
mus, Palermo. 12. Alaesa, now Caronia. 13. Ca-
marina, Camarana. To which are added the two
islands of Lipara, and Melita or Malta, which had
each their bishop in the time of Gregory the Great.
The later notitias speak of seven more in Sicily,
and Baudrand takes notice of others, which he says
were old episcopal sees, as Charinum, Drepanum,
Gela Nova, Myle, now called Melazzo, and Trojan-
opolis, or Troyna ; but where he found those names
he does not inform us. However, these must be
large dioceses ; for this was the greatest island in
all the Mediterranean Sea : Baudrand says, Cluver
was at the pains to measure it, and his account is,89
that it is six hundred miles in compass. Which
being divided between thirteen or eighteen bishop
rics, wiU easUy prove them to be large dioceses,

89 Holsten. Annot. in Ital. Cluver. p. 300.
W. ibid. p. 294 et 306. <* Baud. Lex. Geog. voce Sicilia.
2 C 2

without standing to examine the distances of par
ticular places. The isle of Malta, Ferrarius89 says,
was twenty miles long, and eleven broad ; but Bau
drand makes it twenty-five one way, and fifteen
another : by either of which accounts, it was larger
than some four or five Italian dioceses. Lipara,
the chief of the seven Vulcanian or iEolian islands,
was not so large ; for it was but eighteen miles in
compass : but here was a city, and several append
ant villages, which, with the lesser islands, were
enough to make a considerable diocese, larger than
many of those about Rome.
Sardinia is sometimes reckoned to
r a i. • 1. ¦, • Sect- 10-
the African diocese, and sometimes of Sardinia and
Coreica.
to the Roman. In the notitia of the
African church published by Sirmondus, there are
said to be five dioceses, and Carolus a Sancto Paulo
speaks but of six. 1. Caralis. 2. Sulchi. 3. Te-
gula. 4. Tunis Libisonis, now called Porto di
Tonre. 5. Forum Trajani. 6. Phausania, now
Terra Nova. For Sanafer he makes to be a httle
uncertain. Baudrand99 says they were once aug
mented to eighteen, but now they are again reduced
to seven. However, the country appears to be large
enough for eighteen : for Ferrarius91 reckons it two
hundred miles long, and one hundred and seventy
broad : Baudrand brings it into a little narrower
bounds, making it only one hundred and seventy
miles in length, and eighty in breadth, and four
hundred and fifty in circumference : which will
make five or six large dioceses, and eighteen much
greater than those which lay in the neighbourhood
of Rome.
In Corsica Carolus a Sancto Paulo finds four
ancient dioceses; Holstenius, five. 1. Aleria. 2.
Urcinium, al. Adiacium. 3. Nebium. 4. Tamita.
5. Mariana. Now this island, by the lowest compu
tation of Baudrand, was one hundred and six miles
in length, and fifty in breadth, which wiU allow
forty miles to every diocese. So that these may be
reckoned the largest dioceses of aU the ten pro
vinces which belonged to the prefecture of Rome.
We are now to return into Italy Sect u
again, and to take a short view of the „,!^5 ££
seven provinces, which made up that mlma'
which is properly called the Itahc diocese in con
tradistinction to that of Rome. The first of these
which lay nearest to Rome, was Picenum Annona
rium, divided from Picenum Suburbicarium by the
river iEsis. Carolus a Sancto Paulo by mistake
makes it a province of the Roman diocese, but in
the old notitia of the empire, it is joined with Fla-
minia, and both together make but one province of
the Italic diocese. In this Picenum there were
anciently but nine dioceses. 1. iEsis, now called

89 Ferrar. voce Melita.
01 Ferrar. voce Sardinia.

90 Baudrand. voce Sardinia.

338

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Giesi. 2. Senogalha, Sinigaglia. 3. Fanum For
tunes, now Fano. 4. Pisaurum, Pesaro. 5. Ari
minum, Rimini. 6. Urbinum. 7. Tifernum Me-
taurense, so called to distinguish it from the other
Tifernum upon the Tiber, from which it was sixteen
miles' distance. It is now called St. Angelo in Vado,
and is only a part of another diocese called Urbanea,
from its founder Pope Urban VIII. 8. Forum
Sempronii, Fossembruno. 9. Callium, Cagli. In
Flaminia, which lay westward of Picenum, between
the Rubicon and the Padus, or Po, Carolus a Sancto
Paulo names eleven dioceses. 1. Ravenna. 2.
Sarsina. 3. Caesena. 4. Forum Popilii. 5. Pi-
coclse, now called Cervia. 6. Forum Livii, Forli.
7. Faventia, Faenza. 8. Porum Cornelii, now
Imola. 9. Vicohabentia, Vicovenza. 10. Hadria,
Adri. 11. Comacula, Comacchio. Of all which
dioceses I shall stand to make no other observation
but this, that they were larger than those about
Rome, and less than many others in the western
provinces, which lay at a greater distance from it.
Ferraria was as yet no diocese of itself, but first
made one by Pope Vitalian in the latter end of the
seventh century, as Ferrarius92 informs us.
sect. 12. The second of these seven pro
of jEmjiia. vinces was iEmylia, divided on the
east from Flaminia by the river Idex, on the north
from Liguria by the Po, on the west from Alpes
Cottiae by the river Trebia, and on the south from
Tuscia by the Apennine. Carolus a Sancto Paulo
reckons here but six dioceses. 1. Bononia, Bo
logna. 2. Mutina, Modena. 3. Brixellum, Bres-
sello. 4. Regium Lepidi, Reggio. 5. Parma. 6.
Placentia, Piacenza. These were all very large dio
ceses. For Bononia, the most eastern in situation,
is reckoned twenty miles from Mutina, and as much
from Forum Cornelii in Flaminia, twenty-eight
from Ferraria, which was in the next diocese north
ward, and on the south it had no nearer neighbour
than Fesulae beyond the Apennine, within three
miles of Florence. Mutina was fifteen miles from
Regium Lepidi, and Regium as much from Parma,
and Parma thirty-five from Placentia, according to
Ferrarius's computation. Brixellum on the Po
was but eight miles from Parma, but on other sides
it might have a larger diocese. For Ferrarius says,
it was twenty-four miles from Regium Lepidi, and
thirty from Cremona. So that these six dioceses
were larger than twenty of those about Rome.
sect. 13. Out of iEmylia we pass over the river
Of Alpes Cottia, Trebiainto Qne of the Alpine provinceS]
called Alpes Cottiae, which was divided also from
Liguria by the Po, from which it extended to the
Tuscan Sea, including part of Piedmont and Mont-

92 Ferrar. voce Ferraria.
99 Holsten. Annot. in Cluver. Ital. p. 4.
91 Ferrar. voce Bobium.

ferrat, and the whole republic of Genua, and part of
the duchy of Milan on this side the Po. In this
province Carolus a Sancto Paulo finds ten dioceses.
I. Augusta Taurinorum, Turin. 2. Asta, Asti. 3,
Dertona, Tortona. 4. Alba Pompeia, Alba. 5.
Aquae Statiellae, Acqui. 6. Albingaunum, Albenga.
7. Vigintimilium, Vintimiglia. 8. Bobium, Bobio.
9. Genua. 10. Savona. To which Holstenius" adds
Nicaea, Nizza. These were large dioceses, for Bobi
um had no nearer neighbour than Placentia, which
Ferrarius reckons twenty-five miles from it,94 and
Genua and Dertona thirty-five. Savona was twenty-
six miles from Genua, according to the most accu
rate computation of Holstenius.95 Ferrarius96 says,
it lay in the middle way between Genua and Albin
gaunum, at thirty miles' distance. Aqua? Statiellae
was also twenty-two miles from Savona, as Bau
drand computes ; but not so far from Asta and Alba
Pompeia ; for Alba was but eight miles to the north
of Aquae, and Asta twelve more beyond that : but
east and west these dioceses might extend very wide;
for Turin, the nearest neighbour westward, was
twenty miles from Asta and twenty-eight from Alba,
and Dertona as much to the east, according to Fer
rarius's computation. Vigintimilium was twenty
miles from Nicaea, and Albingaunum forty from
Vigintimilium, and Savona between twenty and
thirty from Albingaunum. The whole province was
one hundred and fifty miles in length, and half as
much in breadth, which made those eleven dioceses
equal to fifty of those about Rome and Naples.
Out of this province, passing over Sect u
the Po, we come into Liguria, the pro- ot L'guna'
vince whereof Milan was the metropolis ; though
the reader must note, that the last-mentioned pro
vince in the Roman historians is more commonly
called Liguria, and this Insubria; but we now
speak of them as they stood divided under the
Christian emperors. This was a large province, in
cluding all that lay between the fountain of the
Addua and the Po, and the Alps and the Athesisj
which divided it from Venetia. Yet here were but
ten dioceses to be discovered by Carolus a Sancto
Paulo, and the inquisitive diligence of Holstenius
after him. 1. Mediolanum, Milan. 2. Eporedia,
Jurea. 3. Vercellae, Vercelli. 4. Novaria. 5.
Ticinum, Pavia. 6. Laus Pompeia, Lodi. 7- Cre
mona. 8. Brixia, Brescia. 9. Bergomum, Ber
gamo. 10. Comum, Como. Of these Milan was
reckoned the largest city in Italy next after Rome.
Ferrarius says, it is now computed to have three
hundred thousand people in it ; but that is much
short of its ancient greatness : for Procopius says,9'
In Justinian's time, when it was taken by the Goths,

95 Holsten. Annot. in Cluver. Ital. p. 9.
96 Ferrar. voce Savona.
97 Procop. de Bell. Gothic, lib. 2. e. 21. p. 439.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

389

there were three hundred thousand men put to the
sword. When St. Ambrose was bishop there, it
had several Christian churches, some of which are
named by him in his epistles, as the Basilica Por-
tiana98 without the waUs, and the Basilica Major or
Nova within the city, the Basilica Faustae,99 and
Basilica Ambrosiana : and when it was all become
Christian, we must suppose a great many churches
more under one bishop ; for it never had two ex
cept in the times of the Arian persecution. With
out the walls it might also have a large diocese :
for no other city among those forementioned was
within less than twenty miles of it ; and there were
some thirty, and some forty miles removed from
one another, only Novaria and VerceUae were but
ten miles asunder, being nearer neighbours than
any other in this province. Cremona was eighteen
miles from Placentia, thirty from Brixia, forty from
Ticinum, and, if Ferrarius compute right, no less
from Mantua ; and yet the territories of Cremona
and Mantua joined together, as we may guess from
that complaint of Virgil, Mantua ves miseree nimium
vicina Cremonee, that Mantua was a little too near
to Cremona, because when Augustus sent his colony
of veterans to settle at Cremona, and the territory
of Cremona proved too little for them, he ordered
fifteen mUes to be taken from the territory of Man
tua, to make up the deficiency of the former.
Whence it is easy to infer, that the dioceses of this
province were exceeding large, since the cities were
so far removed from one another.
In the two next provinces, Rhcetia
or Bhoitia rrima Prima and Secunda, the dioceses were
and Secunda. yet larger: for in the former, which
lay next to Liguria in the middle of the Alps, and
is now the country of the Grisons, Carolus a Sancto
Paulo could find but one diocese, which was Curia,
now caUed Coire; and in the other, but three. 1.
Augusta Vindelicorum, Ausburg. 2. Quintanae, or
Colonia Augusta Quintanorum, now Kyntzen, in
Bavaria on the Danube. 3. Ratispona, or Regium,
and Castra Regina, now Regenspurg, or Ratisbone :
to which Holstenius adds, Augusta Preetoria, now
called Aosta, which is reckoned to Piedmont ; and
Brixino, now Brixen, in the county of Tirol : for, as
I observed before, all that part of Germany which
reaches from the Alps to the Danube, was an
ciently called Rhcetia, and reckoned among the
provinces of Italy, and the dioceses therein were so
large, that these five of six were equal for extent of
ground, though not for number of people, to thirty
or forty of those near Rome.
sect. is. ^ne *ast °f tjtlese seYen Italic pro-
°fStria.and vmces, was Yenetia and Histria,
which were always joined together as
one province. Venetia was divided from Rhcetia

98 Ambros. Ep. 33. ad Marcel. Sororem.

and Liguria by the river Athesis, from iEmylia and
Flaminia by the Po, and from Noricum Mediterra
neum by a line drawn from the fountain of the river
Athesis to the rise of the Savus, where Istria was
joined to it, lying between the Sinus Tergestinus on
the west, and Sinus Flanaticus on the east, which
is the utmost bounds of the north-east part of Italy.
In Histria Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons but five
dioceses. 1. Forum Julii, now Friuli. 2. Terges-
tum, Trieste. 3. Parennium, Parenzo. 4. Pola. 5.
iEmonia, which he takes to be the same that is now
called Citta Nova, but Holstenius says it is Lu-
biana, or Labach, on the Save. In Yenetia he re
counts eighteen dioceses. 1. Aquileia. 2. Pata-
vium, Padua. 3. Torcellum. 4. Altinum, Altino.
5. Acelum, Asolo. 6. Tarvisium, Treviso. 7- Ma-
rianum. 8. Verona. 9. Gradus, Grado. 10. Nova.
11. Caprulla, Cahorla. 12. Ceneta, Ceneda. 13.
Tridentum, Trent. 14. Feltria, Feltri. 15. Bellu-
num, Belluno. 16. Sabiona, Siben. 17. Opitergium,
Oderzo. 18. Celina, Celine. Some of these were
very large dioceses : Trent was above thirty miles
from Verona ; and Sabiona, and Forum Julii, and
iEmonia, and Tergestum Parentium, and Pola were
no less from one another. The rest were ten or
twenty miles removed from any other neighbouring
city ; only Altinum and Torcellum, Ferrarius 109
says, were but five miles apart, but he questions
whether they were both bishops' sees at the same
time, and thinks rather that Torcellum came only in
the room of Altinum, when that was destroyed by
Attila toward the middle of the fifth century. How
ever, the greatest part of these dioceses were, one
way or other, of large extent, as most of the north
ern dioceses in Italy were in comparison of those
which lay round about Rome. And now, I think,
the observation made in the beginning of this chap
ter has been fully verified, that in Italy there were
anciently some of the smallest and some of the
largest dioceses in the world; and yet the same
species of episcopacy preserved in them all: the
bishop of Eugubium, as St. Jerom words it, being
ejusdem meriti, and ejusdem sacerdotii, of the same
merit, and equal as to his priesthood with the bishop
of Rome. A larger or smaller diocese made no di
vision in the unity of the catholic church.

CHAPTER VI.
OF THE DIOCESES IN FRANCE, SPAIN, AND THE
BRITISH ISLES.
I have now gone through all parts of sect. i.
° ° :L Of the ancient
the Christian world, except France, boundsand divisions

Id. Ep. 85. ad Soror.

mo Ferrar. voce Altinum.

390

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

of Gailia into te- gDain and Britain, which made up
vcnteen provinces. ~£"~ , i ±
three civil dioceses, and twenty-nine
or thirty provinces of the Roman empire : but I
shall not need to be so nice and particular in in
quiring into the bounds and extent of episcopal
dioceses in these countries, because their number
being but small in proportion to the largeness of
the countries, it will easily appear to any'man, that
the dioceses were large, as they continue to be at
this day, though some alterations have been made
in their bounds since the original settlement of
them. France, as it now stands, is but a part of
old Gallia, which included also some of the Belgic,
Helvetic, and German provinces. It was at first di
vided by Augustus into four parts, Narbonensis,
Aquitanica, Lugdunensis, and Belgica. Afterwards,
about the time of Adrian, or Antoninus, as De Marca
thinks, these four were made fourteen : Narbonen
sis was divided into four, Narbonensis, Viennensis,
Alpes Maritimae, and Alpes Graiae, or Penninse;
Aquitanica was made three, two Aquitains and
Novempopulania; Lugdunensis likewise three, Lug
dunensis Prima and Secunda, and Maxima Sequa-
norum ; and Belgica was turned into four, Belgica
Prima and Secunda, and Germania Prima and Se
cunda. Last of all, about the time of the emperor
Gratian, three more provinces were made out of
these. For Lugdunensis Tertia, otherwise called
Turonia, was taken out of Lugdunensis Secunda,
and Lugdunensis Quarta, or Senonia, out of Lug
dunensis Prima, and the new province of Narbo
nensis Secunda out of the province of Vienna. And
about this time, or a httle after, Viennensis Secun
da, otherwise called Arelatensis, was made a pro
vince also. Some think also that Gallia had once
the name of Septem Provinciae, The Seven Pro
vinces, because it was divided into so many : but
De Marca1 proves this to be a vulgar error; for it
never was divided into seven provinces, but some
times we meet with the distinction of Galha and the
five provinces, and Gallia and the seven provinces ;
and in the notitia of the empire, the word seven pro
vinces is once put for seventeen, which occasioned
the mistake. Now the five provinces were either
nothing but so many parts of the old Gallia Nar
bonensis, viz. Narbonensis Prima and Secunda,
Viennensis, Alpes Maritimae, and Alpes Graiae, as
Berterius, and De Marca, and Quesnellus account
them ; or else the four first of those mentioned with
the province of Novempopulania or Aquitania Prima,
instead of Alpes Graiae, which Mr. Pagi2 shows to
be the more probable opinion. So that when the
council of Valence, anno 374, inscribe their synodi
cal epistle, Episcopis per Callias et quinque provin-
cias, these five provinces are to be understood. As

1 Marca de Primatu Lugdun. n. 66, &c.
2 Pagi, Ctitic. in Baron, an. 374. u. 18.

also in Philastrius,3 where he speaks of the Priscil-
lianists, the remains of the Manichees, sculking in
Spain and the five provinces. The like distinction
occurs in the letter of the emperor Maximus to
Pope Siricius, and some of Symmachus's epistles
which De Marca mentions. Afterward we meet
with the distinction of Galha and the seven pro
vinces, which occurs in the letters of Pope Zosimus
and Boniface, and is thought to owe its name to the
emperor Honorius, who ordered seven provinces to
meet in the convention of Aries, viz. Narbonensis
Prima and Secunda, Viennensis, Alpes Maritimae
Aquitania Prima and Secunda, and Novempopu
lania. These are sometimes distinguished from Gallia
by the name of Septem Provinciae, which occa
sioned the mistake of those who take GaUia in the
largest extent and the seven provinces to be the
same ; whereas it appears, that there were not only
seven, but seventeen or eighteen provinces in it.
The names of the bishoprics in each province, be
cause they occur not in any modern notitia, I will
here subjoin out of Carolus a Sancto Paulo, who
has collected them out of the Acts of the ancient
councils. The first of these provinces was Sh,, ,
that of the Maritime Alps, next to ^^rs
Italy, which had seven dioceses. 1. Alpes Maiili""e'
Ebrodunum, Ambrun, made the metropohs of this
province in the fifth century, for before it was not
so, when it was laid to the charge of Armentarius,
bishop of this see, that he was ordained without the
consent of the metropolitan,4 which had been a
frivolous accusation, had he himself then been me
tropolitan of the province. 2. Dinia, Digne. 3.
Nicaea, Nice. 4. Cemelene, Cimies, which was
afterwards united to Nice ; for in the fifth council
of Orleans, Magnus subscribes himself bishop of
both churches. Some say it was only six, others
thirty miles from Nice. 5. Sanicium, Senez. 6.
Glandata, Glandeve, which Baudrand says is now
translated to Intervallium, Entrevaux. 7. Ventio,
Vence. In the second province, called Alpes
r ' r Sect. 3.
Graiae, or Penninse, were but three Aipes Graiai, or
7 ' Penninte,
bishoprics. 1. Tarantasia, the me
tropohs, which see is now translated to Monaste-
rium, or Moutiers en Tarantaise. 2. Octodurum,
Martenach. 3. Sedunum, Syon en Valez, the bi
shop of which place is now prince of the city, as
Baudrand informs us.
The next province westward was
Viennensis, divided into Prima and Ti™;eJe*c^Ji™*
Secunda. In the first were six dio
ceses. 1. Vienna, the metropolis. 2. Geneva. 3.
Gratianopolis, Grenoble. 4. Civitas Albensium, al.

3 Philastr. Haer. 62. Manicha,. Qui et in Hispania et
quinque proviuciis latere dicuntur. 4 Cone. Reiens. c. 2.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

391

Vivaria and Alba Augusta, Viviers. 5. Mauriana,
St. Jean de Maurienne. 6. Valentia, Valence. In
the second, called also Provincia Arelatensis, were
ten dioceses. 1. Arelate, Aries, the metropohs. 2.
MassUia, Marseilles. 3. Avenio, Avignon. 4. Ca-
bellio, CavaUlon. 5. Carpentoracte, Carpentras.
6. Tolonium, al. Telonium, Toulon. 7- Arausio,
Orange. 8. Yasio, Yaison. 9. Dia, or Dea Vo-
contiorum, Die. 10. Tricastini, or Augusta Tri-
castinorum, now caUed St. Paul de Trois Chasteaux,
which Baudrand reckons three leagues from Avig
non, and four from Vaison.
Out of the province of Vienna
Narbonensis Prima eastward was also taken another pro
vince, called Narbonensis Secunda, or
Aquensis, from the metropohs of it, Aquae Sextiae,
Aix; beside which there were six other dioceses in
the province. 2. Apta Julia, Apt. 3. Reii, Riez.
4. Forum Juhi, Frejuz. 5. Vapincum, Gap. 6.
Segestero, Cisteron. 7- Antipohs, Antibe, since
translated to Grassa in Provence. On the west of
Viennensis Secunda, lay the province of Narbo
nensis Prima, which had ten dioceses. 1. Narbo.
2. Tolosa. 3. Baetirae, Beziers. 4. Nemausum,
Nismes. 5. Luteva, Lodeue. 6. Ucetia, Uzes. 7.
Carcaso, Carcassone. 8. Agatha, Agde. 9. Helena,
Elna. 10. Magalona, an island of the Mediterra
nean, which see is since translated to Mons Pes-
sulanus, or Montpellier. Westward of Narbonensis Prima
Sect. 6. .
ofNovernpopn- lay the province of Novempopulania,
along the Pyrenaean mountains to the
Aquitanic ocean, wherein were eleven dioceses. 1.
Elusa, Eause, the metropohs, whence the province
was styled Elusana. The see is since translated
and joined to Augusta Ausciorum, which was a
second see, now called Aux. 3. Lactoratium, Lec-
toure. 4. Convenae, Cominges. 5. Consoranni,
Conserans. 6. Vasatae, Basas. 7. Tarba, Tarbes.
8. Aturum, al. Vieo- Julia, Aire. 9. Lascara, Les-
car. 10. Olero, Oleron. 11. Aquae, Acs.
Sec[ Northward of these provinces, from
0fandstecuid2ms ^ Garumna to the Ligeris, lay the
two provinces of Aquitania Prima and
Secunda, the latter of which, bordering upon the
ocean, had six very large dioceses. 1. Burdigala,
Bourdeaux, the metropolis. 2. Aginnum, Agen. 3.
Engohsma, Angoulesme. 4. Santones, al. Medio-
lanum Santonum, Saintes. 5. Pictavi, Poitiers,
where St. Hilary was bishop. 6. Petrocorium, Peri-
gueux. In the other province, which lay eastward
from this, were nine as large dioceses. 1. Biturigae,
the metropohs, now called Bourges. 2. Arverni,
Clermont. 3. Rutena, Rhodes. 4. Arisita. 5. Ca-
durcum, Cahors. 6. Lemovica, Limoges. 7. Gaba-
lum, al. Mimate, now Mande. 8. Vellava, al.

Anicium, now le Puy en Yellay. 9. Albiga, or
Alba Helviorum, Alby, whence the Albigenses, who
flourished in these parts, had their denomination.
North and east of ' Aquitain, lay Serf 8
Gallia Lugdunensis, divided into five v°^^tSf
provinces, whereof the first had five SSSaQuse,a'uain„d
dioceses. 1. Lugdunum, Lyon, the rum'
metropolis. 2. Matisco, Mascon. 3. Cabillonum,
Chalons on the Saone. 4. Lingones, Langres. 5.
Augustodunum, Autun. The second, called Lug
dunensis Secunda, had eight dioceses. 1. Rotho-
magum, Rouen in Normandy. 2. Ebroica, Eureux.
3. Lexovium, Lisieux. 4. Baioca, Baieux. 5. Con-
stantia, Coutance. 6. Abrinca, Auranches. 7- Sa-
gium, Siez. 8. Oximum, Hiesmes, since united to
Sagium, from whence it is four leagues' distance.
Lugdunensis Tertia, otherwise called Turonensis,
had seven dioceses. 1. Turones, Tours. 2. Ande-
gavum, Angiers. 3. Cenomanum, Le Mans. 4.
Redones, Renes. 5. Namnetes, Nantes. 6. Venetia,
Vennes. 7- Aletium, Alet, since translated to Mac-
lovium, anno 1140. Five others are added by some
French writers, viz. Briocum, Dola, Trecora, Ossisma,
Corisopitum: but Carolus a Sancto Paulo makes
some question about their antiquity, because in the
time of Carolus Calvus Brittany had but four bishop
rics in the whole. Lugdunensis Quarta was that
part of France where Paris stands, the metropolis
whereof was Senones, Sens. Next to that, 2. Car-
nutum, Chartres. 3. Antissiodorum, Auxerre. 4.
Trecae, Troyes in Champagne. 5. Aurelia, Orleans.
6. Parish, Paris. 7- Melda, Meaux. 8. Nivernum,
Nevers. Lugdunensis Quinta was otherwise called
Maxima Sequanorum; not from Maximus the tyrant,
as Carolus a Sancto Paulo and many others think ;
for it was called so long before, in the time of Dio
cletian, as De Marca5 shows from an ancient inscrip
tion in Gruter. The ancient metropolis of it was
Yesontio, or Bisuntio, Besancon. 2. Aventicum,
Avenche, which see was since translated to Lausan-
na. 3. Augusta Rauracorum, Augst, translated to
Basil. 4. Vindonissa, Winich, since translated to
Constance. 5. Bollica, Belley, which, De Marca
says, arose out of the ruins of a more ancient one,
which was Noiodunum, Nion, formerly called Co
lonia Equestris.
The most northern provinces of
Gallia were Belgica Prima and Se- or Beigica prima
° and Secunda.
cunda, and Germania Prima and Se
cunda, which was all the country lying north of the
river Matrona from near Paris and Meaux to the
Rhine. Belgica Prima had but four dioceses. 1. Au
gusta Trevirorum, Treves, or Triers, the metropolis.
2. Mediomatricum, Metz. 3. Tullum, Toul. 4. Vero-
dunum, Verdun in Lorrain. In the other Belgica
there were ten dioceses. 1. Remi, Rheims. 2. Au-

6 Marca de Primat. Lugdun. n. 64.

392

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

gusta Suessionum, Soissons. 3. Catalaunum, Cha
lons in Champagne. 4. Laudunum, Leon. 5. Augusta
Veromanduorum, Vermand ; which being destroyed
by the Huns, the see was translated to Neomagus,
or Noviodunum, now caUed Noyon. 6. Cameracum,
Cambray. 7- Tornacum, Tournay. 8. Sylvanectum,
Senhs. 9. Bellovacum, Beauvais. 10. Ambianum,
Amiens. Some add two more, Teruana, Therouenne,
and Bononia, Boulogne. But Carolus a Sancto Paulo
thinks these were not very ancient; for he finds no
mention of the former before the time of Pope Za-
chary, anno 750. And the latter was made out of
the former a great many centuries after, in the time
of Charles V., anno 1350, when the see of Taruanna
was divided into three, and translated to Bononia
for that part of the diocese which is in France,
and to Audomaropolis, or St. Omers, for that part
which is in Artois, and to Ipres for the thud part
in Flanders. Germanica Prima had but four dio-
ofGermanica'prima ceses. 1. Moguntiacum, Mayence, or
and Secunda. Ments. 2. Argentoratum, btrasburgh.
3. Spira Nemetum, Spire. 4. Wormacia Yangio-
num, Worms. And Germanica Secunda had but
two. I. Colonia Agrippina, Colen. 2. Tungri, or
Aduatuca Tungrorum, Tongres in Brabant : which
see was first translated to Trajectum ad Mosam,
Mastricht, and from thence to Leodium, or Liege,
where it now continues, having the temporal juris
diction joined to the spiritual, and twenty-four towns
or cities subject to its command. Now, I suppose
any one that knows any thing of the state of these
countries, will easily conclude, that the greatest
part of these dioceses were large, as they are at this
clay : the whole number being but one hundred and
twenty-two, when the bounds of France extended
much further than they do at present, including some
parts of Helvetia, Germany, and Belgium, which are
now reckoned distinct countries of themselves.
sect n. <-)ut 01° France, passing over the
.ioT'or 'thJ'spanilh Pyrensean mountains, we come into
province.. g^ ^^ ^^ ^ p^J^ Qf
Tingitana in Africa, and the islands called Ba-
leares, made up another great civil diocese of the
Roman empire, under the prcefectus-preetorio Galli-
arum. The whole country of Spain then was di
vided only into five provinces, Tarraconensis, Car-
thaginensis, Bcetica, Lusitania, and Gallaecia, and
in these provinces there were never above seventy-
four or seventy-six episcopal dioceses, when they
were most numerous, and they are almost as many
at this day.
sect i" In tne large province of Tarraco-
Of Tarraconensis. neng:S) which ky next tQ p^^
there were only sixteen dioceses. I. Tarracona,
now Tarragona, the metropohs. 2. Dertosa, Tor-
tosa. 3. Csesaraugusta, Saragossa. 4. Tyrassona,
al. Turiasso, now Tarazona. 5. Calagurris, Cala-

horra. 6. Auca, Oca. 7- Osca, Huesca. 8. Pam-
pelona. 9. Ilerda, Lerida. 10. Barcino, Barce
lona. 11. Egara, Tarrassa, a place near Barcelona
about four or six leagues from it, and now united
to it. 12. Ausona, al. Ausa, Yicli de Ausona. 13.
Gerunda, Girone. 14. Emporia?, Empurias. 15.
Orgellum, Urgel. 16. Velia, now Veleia.
Next to this, on the coast of the . ,
1 Sect. 13.
Mediterranean, lay the province caU- of Ca,1»»pnemi».
ed Carthaginensis, from the chief city, Carthago,
Carthagena, which was the ancient metropolis of
the province, though Toledo afterward gained the
privilege of being a new metropolis, and at last
succeeded to the dignity of the whole province.
Beside these two, Carolus a Sancto Paulo reckons
twenty-two more dioceses in this province. 1. Com-
plutum, now Alcala de Henares. 2. Oxoma, Osma.
3. Pallentia. 4. Voleria, now Valera la Vieja. 5.
Saguntum, al., Segontia, Siguenza. 6. Secobia,
Segovia. 7- Arcabrica, Areas. 8. Oretum, Oreto.
9. Valentia, Valencia. 10. Dianium, Denia. 11.
Setabis, Xativa. 12. Basti, Baza. 13. Mentesa,
Mentexa. 14. Salaria. 15. Acci, now Guadix.
16. Segobriga, Segorbe. 17- Castulo, Gazlona. 18.
Bigastrum. 19. Ilhcias, which some make the
same as Alicante, others Origuela, or Elche. 20,
Ergavica, a place of more doubtful situation, some
taking it for Alcaniz near Toledo, others for Penna
Escritta, or Santaver. 21. Eliocrota, now Lorca.
22. Urci, al. Virgi, now Orce.
The next province of Bcetica had Sed H
but eleven dioceses. 1. Hispahs, Se- 0fB",i™'
ville. 2. Itahca, now Sevilla la Vieja. 3. Ilipa,
Niebla. 4. Astygis, now Ecija. 5. Corduba, Cor-
doua. 6. Egabrum, Cabra. 7. Eliberis, Elvira.
8. Malaca, Malaga. 9. Asinda, al. Assidonia, now
Medina Sidonia. 10. Tucci, now Martos. 11. Ab-
dara, Adra.
In the province of Lusitania there
were but nine dioceses. 1. Emerita,
Merida, the metropolis. 2. Abula, Avila. 3. Sal-
mantica, Salamanca. 4. Ebora, Evora. 5. Cauria.
Coria. 6. Pax Julia, now Beja, which some by
mistake confound with Pax Augusta, now called
Badajoz, which is but a modern bishopric. 7. Os-
sonaba, Estoy. 8. Olysippo, Lisbon. 9. Egita,
Eidania. Gallecia was a large province, and
yet never had above thirteen or four-'
teen' dioceses. In the council of Lucus Augusti,
or Lugo, under King Theodimir, anno 569, a com
plaint was made that the dioceses here were so
large, that the bishops could scarce visit them in a
year. Upon which an order was made, that several
new bishoprics, and one new metropolis, should be
erected : which was accordingly done by the bishops
then in council, who made Lugo to be the new me
tropolis, and raised several other episcopal sees out

Sect. 15.
Of Lusitania.

Sect. 16.
Of Gallecia.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

393

ofthe old ones, as is declared6 in the Acts of that
council. Bracara, now called Braga, was the old
metropohs, which after the division had no more
than seven dioceses subject to it. 1. Dumium. 2.
Portus Calensis, now called El Puerto. 3. Conim-
brica, Coymbra. 4. Yiseum, Viseo. 5. Lamecum,
Lamego. 6. Valentia ad Minium, Valenzia, al.
Menno. 7- Legio, Leon. The other metropolis,
Lucus Augusti, had but five suffragans. 1. Iria
Flavia, El Padron. 2. Auria, Orense. 3. Tude,
Tuy. 4. Asturica, Astorga. 5. Brittonia, Bretagna.
Of these, Legio and Asturica are thought by many
learned men to have been but one diocese in the
time of Cyprian, because he joins them together in
the same epistle,' writing to the church in both
places : but I think the argument is hardly cogent,
because he joins Emerita with them in the same in
scription. There is another place, which some say
had no diocese but a monastery, that is, Dumium
near Braga. But this is a great mistake. For
though there be an instance or two in ancient his
tory8 of bishops being ordained in monasteries with
out any diocese at aU, yet we no where read that
their monastery was their diocese ; and in the pre
sent case it was far otherwise. For, as a learned
man has showed,9 Dumium had another diocese
beside the monastery : in the Acts of the Council of
Lugo it is said to have familia regia, the king's
court, belonging to it. For Martin Braccarensis,
commonly called the apostle of GaUecia, having
converted Theodimir, king of the Suevi, from the
Arian heresy, was created bishop in the monastery
of Dumium, (which he had built,) not for the service
of the monastery, but the king's court, till he was
translated to Braccara, or Braga, the metropolis of
the province. And further, in the distribution of
dioceses made by King Wamba, the bounds of this
diocese are marked, from Duma to Albia, and from
Rianteca to Adasa: which though they be such
obscure places, as geographers take no notice of, yet
they argue the diocese to be larger than the monas
tery; or at least this monastery, like that of Sub
laqueum in the diocese of Tibur in Italy, had several
villages under its jurisdiction. And so it might
have a sufficient diocese, though not so large as the
rest of the province of Gallecia, which were so
vastly great as to need the wisdom and consideration
of a councU to contract them.
sect 17. To these Spanish provinces we
Majonea'iiiSca, must join the Spanish islands, Majo-
rica, Minorica, and Ebusus, which Ca-

9 Concil. Lucens. Cone. t. 5. p. 874.
'Cypr. Ep. 68. al. 67; Plebibus consistentibus ad Le-
gionem et Asturica?.
8 See Book IV. chap. 6. sect. 3.
9 Maurice, Defenc. of Dioc. Episc. p. 149.
Concil. Eliber. c. 77. Si quis diaconus regens plebem,
sine episcopo vel presbytero aliquos baptisaverit, episcopus

rolus a Sancto Paulo by mistake places with Sar
dinia, as appendants of the Roman diocese. Majo
lica, the largest of the Baleares, was one hundred
and ten miles in circuit, yet it never had above one
episcopal diocese, whose chief seat was Palma, now
called Mallorca, which is the name that the inha
bitants at present give to the whole island, by others
called Majorca. Minorica, Minorque, is sixty miles
in compass, and anciently enjoyed a bishop of its
own, whose see was Jamna, now called Citadella,
the capital city of the island. Ebusus, now called
Yvica, was less than these, yet large enough to
make a distinct diocese, being forty-two miles in
compass, having a city of the same name, with
several villages under its jurisdiction. So that in
all the Spanish provinces the dioceses were gener
ally very large, and not one among them whose
bounds did not far exceed the limits of a single
congregation. And that this was the true state of Secl 18
The stale of the
paniah cln
denced fro>

the Spanish church in ancient times, Sp™iahil  .,, ,.„.

appears from some of her most early 0f "heV moTnnS
councils. The council of Eliberis,
which was held anno 305, in the beginning of the
Diocletian persecution, has a canon, which plainly
supposes the dioceses to have country parishes,
when it says,19 If any deacon who has the care of a
people, shaU baptize any one without a bishop or
presbyter, the bishop shall consummate him by his
benediction. The same is more plainly intimated
by a canon of the first council of Toledo, anno 400,
which directs the presbyters of every church11
throughout each diocese to send to the bishop be
fore Easter for chrism, to be used in baptism at
Easter, and other solemn times when baptism was
to be administered. This supposes the Spanish
dioceses to have country parishes, where presbyters
and deacons resided without the bishop, and it serves
to confirm the account that has been given of the
original state and division of those churches.
Out of Spain, we come at last to the Sect 19.
British Isles, part of which only was of lreinntfand
under the Roman government, and
called the Britannic diocese; for Ireland and the
greatest part of Scotland never came under that de
nomination : yet in our passage it will not be amiss
to say something of them, as well as England, if it
were for no other reason but to set aside and cen
sure some fabulous reports that are made of them.
When Ireland was first converted, or by whom, is
not very material here to be inquired, since before

eos per benedictionem perficere debebit.
11 Cone. Tolet. l.c. 20. Placuit, ex hac die nullum alium
nisi episcopum chrisma conficere, et per dicecesim des-
tinare, ita ut de singulis ecclesiis ad episcopum ante diem
Pascha, diaeoni destinentur, qui confectum chrisma ab
episcopo destinatum, ad diem Paschae possint ad tempus
deferre.

394

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

the time of St. Patrick, anno 433, there is little men
tion of bishops or dioceses in this kingdom, and
after him the accounts of them are so uncertain
and dark, that Carolus a S. Paulo does not pretend
to give any other catalogue of them, but what he
has from Camden and the Provinciale Romanum,
both of which are modern accounts : for they make
mention of the diocese of Waterford, which, as Dr.
Cave and other learned men have observed out of
Eadmerus,12 was not erected tiU the year 1097, when
King Murchertacus and the clergy of his kingdom
petitioned Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, who
was then primate of that part of Ireland, to let Wa
terford be made a bishop's see ; to which petition he
consented, and ordained one Malchus, whom they
had elected, first bishop of the place. Nay, both these
catalogues also take notice of four archbishoprics
in Ireland, which number of metropolitans was first
introduced by Pope Eugenius, anno 1151, as Baro
nius has observed out of Roger Hoveden ; and the
same thing is noted by Matthew Paris, Simeon Du-
nelmensis, Gervasius Chronicon, and others of our
English writers. Yet because we have no cata
logues of Irish dioceses older or more authentic
than these, it will not be amiss to insert them in
this place. That in Camden has the four arch
bishoprics and their suffragans in this order.
Archiepiscopo Armachano subsunt
1. Midensis, vel Elnamirand. 2. Dunensis, al.
Dundalethglas. 3. Colchorensis, al. Lugundunen-
sis. 4. Connerensis. 5. Ardachadensis. 6. Rath-
botensis. 7- Rathlucensis. 8. Daln4iguirensis.
9. Dearrihensis. Sub archiepiscopo Dublinensi.
1. Glendelacensis. 2. Fernensis. 3. Osseriensis,
al. De Canic. 4. Lechhnensis. 5. Kildarensis.
Sub archiepiscopo Cassiliensi.
1. Laoniensis de Kendalnam. 2. Limricensis.
3. De Insula Gathay. 4. De Cellumabrath. 5. Me-
hcensis, al. de Emeleth. 6. Rossiensis, al. Ros-
creensis. 7. Waterfordiensis, al. de Batilfordian.
8. Lismorensis. 9. Clonensis, al. de Cluanania.
10. Corcagiensis. 11. De Rosalither. 12. Arde-
fertensis. Sub archiepiscopo Tuamensi.
1. Duatensis, al. Killmacduoc. 2. De Mageo.
3. Enachdunensis. 4. De Cellaiaro. 5. De Ros-
comon. 6. Clonfertensis. 7. Achadensis. 8. La-
densis, al. Killaleth. 9. De Conany. 10. De Kill-
munduach. 11. Elphinensis.

12 Eadmer. Hist. lib. 2. p. 36. Vid. Cave, Hist. Literar
vol. 2. p. 373.

The other catalogue in the Provinciale Romanum
published by Carolus a S. Paulo in the Appendix
to his Geography, advances the number of suffra
gans to fifty-three, in the foUowing order.
Sub archiepiscopo Armachano.
1. Connerinensis. 2. Deconnannas. 3. Dedam-
haliagg. 4. Dedundaleglas. 5. Deardarchad. 6.
Dedarrich. 7. Ingundunum. 8. Deralhboth. 9.
Dunensis, al. Drumorensis. 10. Elualnirand, al.
Midensis. 11. Derathlurig. 12. Renensis, al. Reu-
elensis, al. Crocorensis. 13. Cluanensis, al. Clua-
nerdensis. 14. Rochinosensis, al. Rathbotensis.
15. Artagadonensis, al. Ardocadensis. 16. Cone-
rensis. 17. Heugamensis.
Sub archiepiscopo Dublinensi.
1. Glendelacensis. 2. Caldetensis, al. Kiscaren-
sis. 3. Glensis, al. Gluisonensis. 4. Ossinensis.
5. Darensis. 6. Gaininch. 7. Licelinensis.
Sub archiepiscopo CasseUensi.
1. Decendaluensis, al. Laonensis. 2. Derostreen-
sis, al. Wldifordianus. 3. Deartefertensis. 4. Lunech.
5. Lismorensis. 6. Firmaberensis, al. Fymbarrensis.
7. De Insula. 8. Deduanamensis, al. Cluanensis.
9. Laudensis. 10. Carthax. 11. Tubricensis. 12.
Decellininabrach. 13. Deconeagia, vel Corcagen-
sis. 14. Artfertelensis. 15. Denulech, al.' Umbli-
censis. 16. Derosailitchir. 17. Waterfordensis.
Sub archiepiscopo Tuamensi.
1. Demageonensis. 2. Achadensis. 3. Nelfinen-
sis. 4. Decellaid. 5. Deconairi. 6. Eacdunensis.
7. Roscomon. 8. Decelmundaiach. 9. Cluartifer-
tensis. 10. Deculuanferd. 11. Duacensis. 12.
Bladensis. This seems to have been the greatest number of
bishops that ever Ireland had since it was a Chris
tian nation. For as to the pretence of some modern
writers, that there were at one time no less than
three hundred and sixty-five bishops, ordained by
St. Patrick, it is sohdly refuted by Dr. Maurice,
who shows plainly,19 that the story is not to be un
derstood of so many bishops at once, but of that
number in the reign of four kings successively, and
in the compass of a hundred years : which any one
that carefully reads Bishop Usher's Antiquities,14
whence the ground of the story is fetched, will
easily discern. And it is no hard matter to conceive
then, how there might be three hundred and fifty,
or, as Nennius tells the story, three hundred and
sixty-five bishops in the compass of a whole cen
tury, though there were not above fifty or threescore

13 Maurice, Defence of Dioces. Episcop. p. 155.
14 Usser. Autiquit. Eccl. Brit. p. 490.

Chap. "VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

395

at any one time living together. Another error
committed by Carolus a Sancto Paulo in reference
to the bishops of this nation, which makes the
whole number of them subject to a single abbot,
has been already rectified in speaking of the asce
tics, where I have showed,15 he mistakes Hibernia
for the little isle of Huy in the north of Scotland,
where a monastery was founded by Columbanus,
the abbots of which by an unusual custom, as Bede
calls it, had some sort of superiority over the pro
vince of the northern Picts, and the provincial bi
shops too ; but this has no relation to Ireland, nor
any other part of Scotland than what has been now
mentioned. As to the original state of dioceses in Scotland,
Carolus a Sancto Paulo, for want of light from an
cient history, could give no account of them, and
therefore he only sets down the modern names.
Under the archbishop of St. Andrews eight dioceses :
1. Bunkeld. 2. Brechin. 3. Aberdeen. 4. Rosse.
5. Moravia, or Muray. 6. Caithness. 7. Dumblain.
8. The islands called Orchades. Under the arch
bishop of Glasgow three : Candida Casa, or Whitern,
Lismore, and the Islands, that is, the Hebrides, or
Western Islands, whereof lona was one of the chief.
The principal town of this island, caUed Sodora,
was made a bishop's see by Gregory IV., anno 840,
whence the bishop of all those forty-four islands,
together with the Isle of Man, which then was but
a part of that diocese, had the name of Episcopus
Sodorensis. But when the Isle of Man fell into the
hands of the Enghsh, the Western Islands withdrew
their obedience from their ancient bishop, who
commonly lived in this island, and set up another
bishop of their own, who for a long time retained
the title of Sodorensis, but at last he rehnquished
that title to the bishop of the Isle of Man, and took
the name of Insulanus, bishop of the Isles, which
he stiU retains. The Provinciale Romanum makes
no mention either of this diocese of these islands,
or that other of the Orchades ; but speaks of one
called Dearegarchel, belonging to the pope, and
makes Glasgow only a suffragan to St. Andrews.
By which it appears that it is not many ages since
Glasgow was made an archbishopric, the bishop of
St. Andrews being then the only metropolitan
among them. But about ancient dioceses we must
not be very solicitous: for whatever fabulous
writers affirm, it is certain from Bede, that no part
of this nation possessed by the Picts, was converted
till the fifth century, when first, in the time of Ar
cadius and Honorius, the southern Picts were con
verted by Ninias, a Briton, who built a church at
Candida Casa, which was the first cathedral in that
part of Scotland, and which gave denomination of

19 See Book VII. chap. 3. sect. 14
19 Bede, lib. 3. c. 4. w Ibid.
19 Vit. Niniae, ap. TJsser. Antiq. p. 350. Ordinavit pres-

Whitern to the place, as Bede observes,16 because
the church was built of stone, which was not a very
usual thing among the Britons in those days. The
northern Picts were not converted till above a hun
dred and fifty years after this. For their apostle
was Columbanus, the famous monk, who came out
of Ireland in the time of Justin junior, anno 565,
to preach the gospel to them, as Bede informs us in
the same place. So that it would be in vain to
search after episcopal dioceses before we have any
certainty that Christianity was planted among them.
In the foUowing ages we have no particular account
of any other diocese, save this of Candida Casa, in
Bede, or any other authentic writer. For though
they speak of bishops both among the southern and
the northern Picts, yet they take no notice of the
names of their sees. Whence some have concluded,
that the Scottish bishops had no proper sees, but
were ordained at large for the whole country ; and
others, that there was but one bishop for all the
region. The first of which opinions is incredible,
because it is against the known rule of the catholic
church, which forbade any bishop to be ordained at
large : and the other is expressly refuted by Bede,1'
who speaks of several bishops in the province of
the northern Picts ; and by the writer of the Life of
Ninias, in Bishop Usher's Antiquities, who says,18
that Ninias, having converted the southern Picts,
ordained them presbyters, and consecrated them
bishops, and divided the whole region into certain
parochics, or dioceses, and so returned to his own
church again, meaning Candida Casa, before men
tioned. Whence it is evident, there were bishops
both among the northern and southern Picts, though
the names of their dioceses be not mentioned. As
for the diocese of Candida Casa, Bishop Usher truly
observes, that it was not properly in any part of the
Picts' dominions, but in that part or province of the
Romish Britain, which was called Valentia, and
afterwards Bernicia, by Bede, when it was under the
dominion of the Saxons. Bishop Usher19 thinks it
was also sometimes caUed the kingdom of Cumbria
or Cumberland ; and that the diocese of Casa Can
dida was sometimes of equal extent with that king
dom, reaching from Glasgow on the river Clota or
Cluyd to Stanemore-cross in the borders of West
moreland ; and that in the time of Kentigern the see
was removed to Glasgow. But when the Irish
Scots had seized this country, and given it the name
of Galloway, this and the neighbouring regions were
all subjected to the bishop of Sodora, whose resi
dence was in the Isle of Man, till Malcolm III.,
king of Scots, made Candida Casa a bishop's see
again, and assigned it the country of Galloway for
its diocese, which continues to be so to this day. I

byteros, episcopos consecravit, et totam terram per certas
parochias divisit : confirmatisque in fide omnibus, ad eccle
siam suam est regressus. 19 Usser. Antiq. p. 319.

398

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

cannot give any such particular account of any
other diocese in the kingdom of Scotland for want
of certain records ; but this is certain, that from the
first conversion of it, first by Ninias, and then by
Columbanus, they had several bishops among the
Picts ; part of whose country being made tributary,
as well as Valentia, to the Saxon kings of Northum
berland, their bishops consequently became subject
to the metropolitan of York, from whose hands they
sometimes had their ordination.
sect 20 There remains only one country
chufrii'ir! Errand more to be examined, which is our
and Wales. c Qwn ^ Qo ^ Brit;sn nation . a
country that embraced the Christian faith as early
as any of the western parts of the world, and there
fore may be presumed to have received the same
form of government that we have found in all other
churches. It has been noted before, that the Bri
tannic diocese was divided by the Romans at first
into three provinces, and then into five ; but by the
injury of time, we have no complete account of what
bishoprics were erected in every province. They
who speak of a precise number of flamens and arch-
flamens turned into so many archbishops and bi
shops, seem rather to deliver their own fancies than
relate true history. That which is certain in the
case, is this : there were here in the beginning of
the fourth century such episcopal churches as were
in all other nations ; for the bishops of these
churches were summoned to councils as others
were. There were British bishops in the council of
Aries, Eborius20 de civitate Eboracensi, Restitutus
de civitate Londinensi, Adelphus de civitate Colo
nia Londinensium. The last of which Holstenius,21
following Camden, and Selden in his Notes upon
Eutychius, thinks ought rather to be read Colonia
Camalodunensium ; which some take to be Col
chester, others Maldon, others Walden, in Essex.
But a late learned antiquary,22 in his posthumous
observations upon Antonine's Itinerary of Britain,
has happily discovered that the true reading should
in all probability be Colonia Lindi, which is the
old Roman name for Lincoln, as he shows not only
out of Antonine and Ptolemy, who call it Lindum,
but out of the anonymous geographer of Ravenna,
who more expressly styles it Lindum Colonia; which
with a little variation is the name that is given it
also by Bede,23 who calls it Lindocolina, and the re
gion thereabout Provincia Lindisi, whence, I pre
sume, comes the name of Lindsey Coast, which is
the name of one part of that "province to this day.
But to return to the ancient bishops of this nation.

Some authors say there were British bishops in the
council of Nice ; but that does not so evidently ap
pear from ancient history. It is more certain there
were three bishops from Britain in the council of
Ariminum, as Sulpicius Severus24 informs us. And
Athanasius also25 takes notice of British bishops in
the council of Sardica, anno 347. And Hilary in-
scribes his book, de Synodis, to the bishops29 ofthe
British provinces, among many others. Yet none
of these authors tell us precisely the number of the
whole college, and therefore we can only conjecture
from the remains of those British bishops which con
tinued in Wales after the Saxon conquests, and were
there at the coming of Austin into England. Bede
takes notice of seven of those,27 which came to the
synod of Worcester, or Austin's oak, to confer
with Austin about the settlement of the church-
And over these there was also a metropolitan, to
whom they professed subjection in the council]
which was the archbishop of Menevia, or St. Da
vid's, or, as they term him, the archbishop of Caer-
Leon upon Uske, because that was the ancient
metropolitical see, before it was translated to St.
David's. The names of the other suffragans, as
some of the British historians28 record them in
Latin, were then Herefordensis, Tavensis, Pater-
nensis, Banchorensis, Elviensis, Vicciensis, Mor-
ganensis ; that is, Hereford, LandafF, Lan-Patem,
Bangor, St. Asaph, Worcester, and Morgan. Now,
if the number of bishops in other provinces was an
swerable to this, we may conclude, there were more
bishops before the invasion of the Saxons than
there are at this day. But when Austin came into
England, he found none except the forementioned.
However, Gregory the Great gave him orders to
settle twenty-six bishops, twelve bishops suffragans
to the bishop of London, and as many subject to
the metropolitan of York, and reserve to himself
the primacy over the whole nation.29 Yet this was
rather a scheme laid for future ages, when the
whole nation should be converted, than any pre
sent settlement or constitution of the church. For
above fifty years after this, there were not above
seven bishops in all the heptarchy, or seven Saxon
kingdoms, as appears from the account which Bede
gives of the council of Herudford, anno 673, where
were present Theodore, archbishop of Dorovernia or
Canterbury,90 Bisi, bishop of the East Angles, Wil
frid, bishop of the Northumbrians, Putta, bishop of
Rochester, Leutherius, bishop of the West Saxons,
and Winfrid, bishop of the whole province of the
Mercians. In which council91 a canon w-as made,

20 Concil. Arelat. 1. an. 314.
21 Hnlsten. Annot. in Carol, a S. Paulo, p. 108.
22 Dr. Gale, Not. in Antonin. Iter. Britan. p. 96.
23 Bede, lib. 2. c. 16.
21 Sulpic. lib. 2. p. 109. 2S Athan. Apol. 2. p. 720.
26 Hilar, de Synod. ProvinciarumBritanniarum Episcopis.

27 Bed. Hist. Gent. Anglor. lib. 2. c. 2.
28 Galfrid. Monumeth. Hist. lib. 8. c. 4. Vid. Powel. Not,
in Girald. Cambrens. Itinerar. Cambria,, lib. 2. p. 170.
29 Bed. Hist. Gent. Anglor. lib. 1. c. 29.
80 Bed. lib. 4. c. 5.
31 Concil. Herudford. c. 9. ap. Bed. ibid. In commune

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

397

That the number of bishops should be augmented,
as the number of converts should increase. But
nothing was done for the present, save that Bisi or
Bifus, bishop of the East- Angles, being grown old,
two others, iEcca and Badwin, were consecrated in
his room : and from that time to the age in which
Bede lived, that province had two bishops, as our
author notes in the same place. These were the
bishops of Elmham and Dunwich, which were
afterward united, and the see removed to Thetford,
and from thence to Norwich, whose bishops suc
ceed to the whole kingdom of the East- Angles. So
that in that age a kingdom and a diocese were al
most commensurate. In the kingdom of Northum
berland there were at first but two bishops, whose
sees were York and Lindisfarne. But not long
after, anno 678, Ecgfrid, king of Northumberland,
having expelled Wilfrid, bishop of York, from his
see, four or five bishops were ordained in his room ;
one in the province of Deira ; another in the pro
vince of Bernicia ; a third at Hagulstade, or Hexam,
in Northumberland ; a fourth in the province of
the Picts, which was then subject to the English ;
and a fifth in the province of Lindissi, as Bede82
calls it, which was lately taken out of the diocese
and kingdom of Mercia, and not long after laid to it
again. The great kingdom of Mercia, (compre
hending the counties of Gloucester, Hereford, Wor
cester, Warwick, Leicester, Cambridge, Rutland,
Northampton, Lincoln, Nottingham, Bedford, Buck
ingham, Oxford, Derby, Stafford, Shropshire, Che
shire, and part of Hertfordshire,) was at first but
the diocese of one bishop, whom Bede commonly
caUs the bishop ofthe Angli-Mediterranei, or Mer
cians, whose see was Lichfield, the royal seat and
metropolis of the kingdom of Mercia ; tiU about the
year 678, a new see was erected at Sidnacester in
Lincolnshire, and some time after another at Dor
chester in Oxfordshire, which were afterward united
and removed to Lincoln. Out of this large diocese
also the sees of Worcester and Hereford were taken,
as Ely was out of that part which fell to Lincoln :
not to mention the dioceses of Chester, Peter
borough, Oxford, and Gloucester, which had their
rise out of the same at the Reformation. The dio
cese of Winchester was also very large at first, con
taining all the kingdoms of the West Saxons, till it
was divided by King Ina between Winchester and
Sherborn, anno 705. The latter of which was after
ward subdivided into the dioceses of Cornwall, De
vonshire, Somersetshire, Wiltshire, and Dorsetshire,
some of which being united again, made up the dio
ceses of Exeter, Wells, Salisbury, and Bristol, as
they now stand in the present frame and constitu
tion of the church. I think it needless to carry this

tractatum est, ut plures episcopi crescente numero fidelium
aiisrerentur, sed de hac re ad prajsens silemus.
'¦ Bed. lib. 4. u. 12. 88 Concil. Neocaesar. t. 13.

inquiry any further, since what has been already
suggested sufficiently shows, that the dioceses in
England were anciently much larger than they are
now, and that it has ever been the wisdom of the
church to multiply and contract them. Though
many of them still remain so large, that if they be
compared with some of the ancient Italian dioceses,
one of them will be found to be equal to ten or
twenty of those which lay round about Rome.
I shall conclude this chapter with
a few ancient canons, which confirm The'whoieaccount
the account that has been given of some ancient ca-
nons of the church.
episcopal dioceses throughout the
world, as supposing them generally to have country
regions and country parishes belonging to them.
The council of Neocaesarea, which was held some
years before the council of Nice, makes express
mention83 of 7rpEaf3vTipoi ETeixoiptot, country presbyters,
who are forbidden to officiate in the city church,
save only in the absence of the bishop or city pres
byters. The council of Antioch has two canons of
the same import. The one describes a bishop's di
ocese94 to be a city and all the region that was sub
ject to it, wherein he might, ordain presbyters and
deacons, and order all things according to his own
judgment, without consulting his metropolitan. The
other is a provision concerning the chorepiscopi,33
who were seated in the villages and regions about
the city, that they should govern the churches com
mitted to them, and content themselves with that
care, ordaining readers, subdeacons, and exorcists ;
but not presbyters or deacons, unless commissioned
to it by the city bishop, to whom both they and their
region were subject. A like provision is made by
the council of Nice,99 in case a Novatian bishop
should return to the unity of the catholic church,
that then the catholic bishop might provide him the
place of a chorepiscopus in some part of his diocese,
that there might not be two bishops in one city.
And indeed all the canons that mention the chore
piscopi, are full proof that a diocese was not only a
city, but a country region, over which those chore
piscopi presided, under the inspection of the city
bishop, to whom they were accountable. The ca
nons of Sardica9' and Laodicea,88 do plainly suppose
the same thing, when they prohibit bishops to be
ordained in smaU cities or villages, because a pres
byter or itinerant visitor might be sufficient to take
care of them. So in the African canons, one orders
the same as the council of Toledo, That every pres
byter99 throughout the diocese, who has the care of
a church, shall have recourse to his own bishop for
chrism to be used at Easter. And another49 says,
No bishop shall leave his principal church, to go to
reside upon any other church in the diocese. Which

84 Cone. Antioch. u. 9. 85 Ibid. c. 10, 3B Cone. Nic. c. !
97 Concil. Sardic. e. 6. 8B Concil. Laodic. c. 57.
88 Concil. Carthag. 4. c. 36. 40 Ibid. 5. c. 5.

393

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX,

canons speak plain nonsense, unless it be supposed
that there were then other churches in the diocese
beside the mother-church.
, The bishop's obligation to visit his
hisAh"P-fobii|tio„ diocese, is a further proof of the same
oncVeisa year, and'8 thing. For this was a necessary con-
confirm. sequent of having several churches at
a distance under his jurisdiction : such as he could
not personally attend himself, he was obliged to
visit, and see that they were provided of a proper
incumbent, and that every thing was performed in
due order. St. Austin and St. Basil,41 who had
pretty large dioceses, speak often upon this account
of their being employed in their visitations. And
the rule in some places was to visit ordinarily once
a year, as appears from the council of Tarraco in
Spain, which lays this injunction on bishops,42 Be
cause it was found by experience, that many churches
in their dioceses were left destitute and neglected,
therefore they were obliged to visit them once a
year. And if a diocese was so large, that a bishop
could not perform this duty annually, that was
thought a reasonable cause to divide the diocese,
and lay some part of the burden upon a new bishop;
which was the reason assigned in the council of
Lugo for dividing the large diocese of Gallecia, as
has been observed before48 in speaking of the Span
ish churches. St. Jerom has a remark upon the
exercise of confirmation, which also mightily con
firms this notion of ancient episcopal dioceses. He
says,44 it was the custom of the churches, when any
persons were baptized by presbyters or deacons in
villages, castles, or other remote places, for the bi
shop to go to them and give them imposition of
hands, in order to receive the Holy Ghost ; and that
many places lay at so great a distance, that the
parties baptized died before the bishop could come
to visit them. Which is a plain description of such
dioceses as we have generally found in every part
of the cathohc church, some few provinces except
ed, where the number of cities and populousness of
the country made dioceses more numerous and of
less extent than in other places.

CHAPTER VII.
THE NOTITIA, OH GEOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION OF
THE BISHOPRICS OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH AS
FIRST MADE BY THE ORDER OF LEO SAPIENS
COMPARED WITH SOME OTHERS.
For the fuller proof of what has been asserted in
the last chapters, and to give the reader a clear view
of the state of the ancient church, I shall here sub
join one of the notitias, or catalogues of bishoprics
contained in the five greater patriarchates, Constan
tinople, Rome, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria,
according to the account that was taken first by the
order of the emperor Leo Sapiens about the year
891. For though this does not come up to the an
tiquity of those other records, which I have gener
ally made use of in this work ; yet, being the most
ancient and perfect account we have in the kind,
and agreeing with the scattered remains of antiquity
of this nature, it will be useful as a collateral evi
dence, to corroborate the account that has been
given of the division and extent of dioceses in the
primitive church. And I the rather choose to insert
it here, to satisfy the curiosity of many of my
readers, to whose view perhaps this notitia may not
otherwise come, being scarce to be met with but in
books of great rarity or great price, which fall not
into the hands of every ordinary reader. The first
of this kind was pubhshed by Leunclavius, in his
Jus Gi-cECO-Romanum,1 anno 1596, in Greek and
Latin, under the name of Leo Sapiens, the reputed
author of it. After which some others, but imperfect,
were set forth by Carolus a Sancto Paulo,2 in his Geo
graphy of the Ancient Church. The defects of which
were supphed by Jacobus Goar, from a MS. in the
French king's library, which he published at the end
of Codinus,8 among the Byzantine historians, anno
1648; and by Bishop Beverege, from a MS. in the
Bodleian library, pubhshed in his Notes4 upon the
Pandects, anno 1672. The last of which being ac
knowledged to be the most perfect in the kind, has
been since reprinted by the learned Schelstrate,5
with some notes and observations upon the defects
and variations of all the former; which, having
revised and compared them together, I shall here
present to the curious reader, that he may have
them all together in one view.

41 Basil. Ep. 264.
42 Concil. Tarracon. c. 8. Reperimus nonnullas dioece-
sanas ecclesias esse destitutas. Ob quam rem'hac constitu-
tione decrevimus, ut annuis vicibus episcopo dioeceses visi-
tentur, &c.
43 See sect. 14. of this chapter.
44 Hieron. Dial. cont. Lucifer, c. 4. Non abnuo hanc
esse ecclesiarum consuetudinem, ut ad eos qui longe in mi-
noribus urbibus per presbyteros et diaconos baptizati sunt,
eDiscopus ad invocationem Sancti Spiritus manum impositu-

rus excurrat. And a little after, Alioquin si episcopi tan
tum imprecatione Spiritus Sanctus defluit, lugendi sunt qui
in villulis, aut in castellis, aut in remotioribus locis per
presbyteros aut diaconos baptizati, ante dormierunt, quam
ab episcopis inviserentur.
1 Leunclav. Jus. Gr. Rom. t. 2. p. 88.
2 Carol, a S. Paulo, Append, ad Geograph. Sacr.
3 Codin. de Offic. Constant, in Append, p. 337.
4 Bevereg. Not. in Can. 36. Concil. Trull.
5 Schelstrat. de Concil. Antioch. Dissert. 4. cap. 13. p. 425,

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

399

The order of presidency of the most holy patri
archs. 1. Of Rome. 2. Constantinople. S.Alexan
dria. 4. Antioch. 5. iElia, or Jerusalem.
The order of presidency of the metropolitans, and
tmtocephali, and bishops, subject to the apostolical
throne of this divinely preserved and imperial city,
viz. Constantinople.

provinces.
1, Cappadocia.
2. Asia.
3. Europa.
4. Galatia.
5. Hellespontus.
6. Lydia.
7. Bithynia.
8. The same.
9. The same.
10. Pamphyha.
11. Armenia.
12. Elenopontus.
13. Armenia.
14. Cappadocia.
15. Paphlagonia.
16. Honorias.

1.
2. 3. 4.
5. 6.7-
8.9.
10. 11.
12.
13.14. 15.
16.

17. Pontus Polemoniacus. 17.
18. Galatia. 18.
19. Lycia. 19.
20. Caria. 20.
21. Phrygia Cappatiana. 21.
22. Phrygia Salutaris. 22.
23. Lycaonia. 23.
24. Pisidia. 24.
25. Pamphyha. 25.
26. Cappadocia. 26.
27. Lazica. 27.
28. Thracia. 28.
29. Rhodope. 29.
30. Insulee Cyclades. 30.
31. iEmimontus. 31.
32. ^mimontus. 32.
33. Phrygia Pacatiana. 33.

METROPOLITANS.
Ceesarea.
Ephesus. Heraclea in Thrace.
Ancyra. Cyzicum. Sardes.
Nicomedia.
Nice. Chalcedon. Sida. Sebastea.
Amasea.Melitine. Tyana.Gangra.
Claudiopohs.Neocsesarea. Pissinus, or Justini
anople.
Myra. Stauropolis.
Laodicea. »
Synada.
Iconium.
Antioch. Perga, or SUeum.
Mocessus. Phasis.Philippopohs.Trajanople. Rhodes.
Adrianople.
Martianople. Hierapohs.

Here ends the account of provinces and metropo
litans in the notitia of Bishop Beverege and Goar,
but in Leunclavius these other metropolitans are
added without any mention of provinces at all. 34.
Thessalonica. 35. Corinth. 36. Crete. 37. Athens.
38. Seleucia. 39. Patrse. 40. Trapezus. 41. Ca
labria. 42. Larissa. 43. Naupactus. 44. Philippi.
45. Dyrrachium. 46. Smyrna. 47. Catana. 48.
Ammorium. 49. Camachus. 50. Cotyaium. 51.
Severiana. 52. Mitylene. 53. Novae Patrse. 54.
Euchaita. 55. Amastris. 56. Chonse. 57. Hydrus.
58. Kelzene. 59. Colonia. 60. Thebf*. 61. Seme.
62. Pompeiopolis. 63. Rossia. 64. Alania. 65.
¦ffinus. 66. Tiberiopolis. 67. Achaia. 68. Cerasus.

69. Nacoha. 70. Germania. 7L Madyta. 72. Apa
mea. 73. Basileum. 74. Drystra. 75. Nazianzus.
76. Corcyra. 77. Abydus. 78. Methymna. 79.
Christianopolis. 80. Rusium. 81. Lacedsemonia.
82. Naxia. 83. Attalia. To which the scholiast
adds three more, Sebastopolis, Euripus, and Cybistis
Herculis. After the metropolitans, follow the autocephali,
or independent bishops, which the notitia in Leun- '
clavius calls archbishops: they were such as had
neither metropolitans above them, nor suffragans
under them, being immediately subject to the pa
triarch only, as Goar's notitia informs us. In Bishop
Beverege's notitia they are as foUows.

provinces.
1. Mysia.
2. Scythia.
3. Europa.
4. Paphlagonia.
5. Asia.
6. Isauria.
7. Rhodope.
8. Bithynia.
9. Rhodope.
10. Galatia.
11. Europa.
12. Thracia.
13. Lesbus.
14. Hellespont.
15. Caria.
16. Thracia.
17- Insulee.
18. Rhodope.
19. Europa.
20. Lesbus.
21. Bithynia.
22. Europa.
23. Rhodope.
24. Zicchia.
25. Zicchia.
26. Zicchia.
27. Isauria.
28. Elenopontus, al. He
lenopontus.
29. Cyclades Insula?.
30. Rhodope.
31. Europa.
32. Hemimontus.
33. Armenia.
34. Abasgia.
35. Pontus Polemoni
acus.
36. Paphlagonia.
37. Lycaonia.
38. Pisidia.

AUTOCEPHALI.
1. Odyssus.
2. Tomi.
3. Bizya.
4. Pompeiopolis.
5. Smyrna.
6. Leontopolis.
7. Maronaea.
8. Apamea.
9. Maximinianopolis.
10. Germia.
11. Arcadiopolis.
12. Bereea.
13. Mitylene.
14. Parium.
15. Melitus, al. Miletus.
16. Nicopolis.
17. Proconesus.
18. Anchialus.
19. Selymbria.
20. Methymne.
21. Cius.
22. Aprus.
23. Cypsala.
24. Cherson.
25. Bosphori.
26. Nicopsis.
27. Cotrada.
28. Euchetee.
29. Carpathus.
30. Mims.
31. Drizapara, al. Mesena.
32. Mesembria.
33. Heracliopolis, al-Phy-
lactoe.
34. Sebastopolis.
35. Trapezus.
36. Amastris.
37. Misthia.
38. Neapolis.

400

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX

PROVINCES.

ATJT0CEPHALI.

39. Mare iEgeum.
40. Phrygia Salutaris.
41. Pamphyha.

39. ^Egene.
40. Cotyaium.
41. Selga.

To these, in Goar's notitia, are added two more,
Delca, or Derce., and Reni in Armenia. But that
in Leunclavius has but thirty-nine, whereof sixteen
are different names, viz. Nice, Messana, Garella,
Brisis, Carabyzia, Lemnus, Leucas, Cudrae, Sotero-
polis, Pedachthoa, Eroina, Gotthia, Sugdaia,Phullae,
Pharsala, and Matracha. And several of those
which in the Bodleian notitia are called autocephali,
are in Leunclavius reckoned among the metropo
litans, as Trapezus, Smyrna, Cotyaium, Mitylene,
Amastris, Pompeiopolis, iEnus, and Apamea.
Whence it is easy to conclude, that archbishops and
autocephali were then a sort of titular metropoli
tans, who had the privilege of being independent,
though they had no suffragan bishops under them.
NOW FOLLOW THE PARTICULAR PROVINCES, WITH
THE NUMBER OF BISHOPRICS CONTAINED IN EACH
OF THEM. Province of Cappadocia.
1. Caesarea, the metropolis. 2. Therma? Regiae.
3. Nyssa. 4. Methodiopolis Armeniee. 5. Camuli
ana. 6. Ciscissus, or Cissus : to which are added
in Leunclavius. 7. Euaissa. 8. Serias. 9. Ara-
thia. 10. iEpolia. Province of Asia.
1. Ephesus, the metropolis. 2. Hypepae. 3.
Tralles. 4. Magnesia ad Mseandrum. 5. Elea. 6.
Adramyttium. 7. Assus. 8. Gargara. 9. Mas
taura. 10. Caloe. 11. Bryulla. 12. Pittamne.
13. Myrine. 14. Phocia. 15. Aurillopolis, al. Au-
reliopolis. 16. Nisa, al. Nyssa. 17. Maschacoma.
18. Metropolis. 19. Baretti. 20. Magnesia. 21.
Aninates. 22. Pergamus. 23. Anea. 24. Priene.
25. Arcadiopolis. 26. Novae Aulas. 27. Templum
Jovis. 28. Augaza. 29. Sion. 30. Colophon. 31.
Levedus, al. Lebedus. 32. Teus. 33. Erythrae.
34. Clazomense. 35. Attadri, al. Antandri. 36.
Theodosiopolis, al. Peperine. 37. Cymae. 38.
PalaeopolisJ : to which are added in Leunclavius,
Thyraea in Chliara ; but Phocia, Magnesia, and Cla-
zomenae are wanting.
Here the province of Thracia and Macedonia is in
terposed in Leunclavius.
1. Heraclea, the metropolis. 2. Theodoropolis.
3. Rhcedestus. 4. Panium. 5. Hexamilium. 6.
Calliopolis. 7- Peristasis. 8. Chariopolis. 9.
Chalcis. 10. Daoneum. 11. Madyta. 12. Pam
philus. 13. Medea. 14. Lizicus. 15. Sergentza.
16. Metra. 17. Tzurolloe. 18. Athyra.

In the other notitias the last province is called the
province of Europa ; but it has but six bishoprics
assigned to it, viz.
1. Heraclea. 2. Panium. 3. Callipolis. 4,
Cherronesus. 5. Cylae. 6. Redestus.
Province of Galatia.
1. Ancyra, the metropohs. 2. Tabia, al. Atta-
bia. 3. Hehopolis. 4. Aspona. 5. Berinopolis.
6. Mizzus. 7- Cina. 8. Anastasiopolis.
Province of Hellespont.
1. Cyzicum, the metropolis. 2. Germe. 3. Pes.
manium. 4. Oce. 5. Baris. 6. AdrianothertB.
7. Lampsacus. 8. Abydus. 9. Dardanus. 10.
Ilium. 11. Troas. 12. Paeonia. 13. Melitopolis.
Province of Lydia.
1. Sardes, the metropolis. 2. Philadelphia. 3,
Tripolis. 4. Thyatira. 5. Seta. 6. Arilliapolis,
al. Aureliopohs. 7. Gordi. 8. Troalli. 9. Sala.
10. Silandus. 11. Mceonia. 12. Fanum Apollinis.
13. Hyrcanis. 14. Mustina. 15. Arcastus, al.
Acarasus. 16. Apollonias. 17. Attalia. 18. Baga.
19. Balandus. 20. Mesotymolus. 21. Hierocae-
sarea. 22. Dale. 23. Stratonicea. 24. Cerasia.
25. Sattala. 26. Gabbala. 27. Hermocapelia,
Province of Bithynia.
1. Nicomedia. 2. Prusa, or Theopolis. 3. Pra-
netu^. 4. Helenopolis. 5. Basilinopolis. 6. Das-
chylium. 7- Apollonias. 8. Adriana. 9. Ca?sarea.
10. Gallus, or Lophi. 11. Daphnusia. 12. Eriste.
The same Province.
1. Nice. 2. Modrina, al. Mela, or Melina. 3.
Linoe. 4. Taius. 5. Gerduservee. 6. Numericae.
7. Maximianaa. It is added in Leunclavius, that
Chalcedon in the same province had no sees under
it, as being only an autocephalus, or honorary me
tropolis. Province of Pamphyha.
1. Sida. 2. Aspendus. 3. Ettena. 4. Orymna.
5. Cassa. 6. Semnea. 7- Corallia. 8. Coracissius.
9. Syethra, al. Synedra. 10. Mylone, or Justini
anople. 11. Anamanda. 12. Dalisandus, al. Dul-
dasus. 13. Isbi. 14. Lybra. 15. Colybrassus.
16. Manaea. Province of Armenia.
1. Sebastea. 2. Sebastopolis. 3. Nicopolis. 4.
Satala. 5. Colonia. 6. Berissa.
Province of Helenopontus.
1. Amasea. 2. Amissus. 3. Sinope. 4. Ibora,
al. Pimohssa. 5. Andropa. 6. Zalichus, al. Leon-
topolis. 7- Zela.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

401

Province of Armenia Secunda.
1. Melitene. 2. Area. 3. Cucusus. 4. Arabis-
sus. 5. Ariaratha. 6. Ceomanse, al. Comana.
Province of Cappadocia Secunda.
1. Tyana, or Christopolis. 2. Cybistra. 3. Faus-
tinopolis. 4. Sasima.
Province of Paphlagonia.
1. Gangra. 2. Junopolis, al. Innopolis. 3. Da-
dybra. 4. Sorae.
Here follows next the province of Thessaha in
Leunclavius, which is omitted in others.
1. Thessalonica. 2. Citria. 3. Berrhoea. 4. Dru-
gubitia. 5. Servia. 6. Casandria. 7- Campania,
al. Castrium. 8. Petra. 9. Herculia, al. Arda-
meria. 10. Hierissus. 11. Litae ac Rentenae. 12.
Bardariotae. Province of Honorias.
1. Claudiopolis. 2. Heraclea Ponti. 3. Prusias.
4. Tius. 5. Cratea. 6. Hadrianopolis.
Province of Pontus Polemoniacus.
1. Neocaesarea. 2. Trapezus. 3. Cerosantes. 4.
Polemoneum. 5. Comana. To these are added in
Leunclavius, 6. Halyaeum. 7- Rhizaeum. 8. Coccus.
9. Eunicus. And the scholiast adds three more,
Aradase, Myrtyropolis, and Hypsela.
Province of Galatia Secunda.
1, Pisinus. 2. Mericium. 3. Eudoxias. 4. Pi-
tanissus. 5. Trochnada. 6. Germoeolonia. 7- Spa-
lea, al. Justinianopolis. 8. Orcistus.
Province of Lycia.
I. Myra. 2. Mastaera. 3. Telmessus. 4. Limyra.
5. Araxe. 6. ApriUa. 7. Tatla. 8. Arnea. 9. Si-
dyma. 10. Zenopolis. 11. Olympus. 12. Otla. 13.
Corydala. 14. Cannus. 15. Xanthus. 16. Acrassus.
17. Marciana. 18. Bobus, al. Sophianopolis. 19.
Chomas. 20. Onunda. 21. Phellus. 22. Can-
dana. 23. Phasehs. 24. AntipheUus. 25. Aca-
lissus. 26. Rhodiapolis. 27. Acanda. 28. Lebissus.
29. Eudocias. 30. Paliotae. 31. Combi. 32. Patara.
33. Barbura. 34. Nessus. 35. Cianea. 36. Melata.
Province of Caria.
1. Stauropolis. 2. Cibyra. 3. Siza. 4. Heraclea
Salbaci. 5. ApoUonias. 6. Heraclea. 7. Lacyma
(which Leunclavius makes but one, Heraclea La-
cymorum). 8. Tabi. 9. Larba. 10. Antiochia
Maeandri. 11. Tarpassaa. 12. Harpassa?. 13. Ne-
apolis. 14. Orthysias. 15. Anotetarta. 16. Ala-
bandi. 17. Stratonicea. 18. Alinda. 19. Mylassse.
20. Mezus, al. Amezon. 21. Jassus. 22. Barbilius.

23. Halicarnassus. 24. Hylarima. 25. Cnidus. 23.
Metaba. 27. Mindus. 23. Hieron. 29. Cindrama.
30. Cerama. 31. Promissus.
Province of Phrygia Cappatiana, al. Pacatiana.
1. Laodicea. 2. Tiberiopolis. 3. Azana. 4. An-
cyrosuna. 5. Pelta. 6. Appia. 7- Icria. 8. Iluza.
9. Acada. 10. Tranopolis. 11. Sebasta. 12. Eu-
menia. 13. Timenus Therarurn. 14. Agatha Coma.
15. Alina. 16. Tripolis. 17- Attanassus. 18. Tra-
pezopolis. 19. Siblia. Note, In Leunclavius there
are twenty-one cities, whereof many go by different
names in this province; as Acmonea, Chaerotopa,
Forium Poemasni, Cidissus, Lunde, Helaza, Synseum,
Thampsiopolis, Justinianopolis, Diocleaand Aristea.
Province of Phrygia Salutaris.
1. Synada. 2. Dorylaeum. 3. Nacolea. 4. Me-
daeum. 5. Hipsus. 6. Promissus. 7. Merus. 8.
Sibindus. 9. Phytia. 10. Hierapolis. 11. Eucar-
pia. 12. Lysias. 13. Augustopolis. 14. Bryzus.
15. Otrus. 16. Lycaon. 17. Stectorium. 18. Cin-
naborium. 19. Cone. 20. Scordapia. 21. Nico
polis. 22. iErocla. Here Leunclavius has but twenty
cities, and some of those under other names, but
Goar's notitia adds two more, Alopex and Cadenna.
Province of Lycaonia.
1. Iconium. 2. Lystra. 3. Vasada. 4. Ambada,
al. Amblada. 5. Vomanoda. 6. Laranda. 7- Bereta.
8. Derbe. 9. Hyda. 10. Savatra. 11. Canus. 12.
Berinopolis. 13. Galbana, al. Eudocias. 14. Ilistra.
15. Perta. Leunclavius has the same number, but
some names different from these.
Province of Pisidia.
1. Antiochia. 2. Sagalassus. 3. Sozopolis. 4.
Apamea. 5. Cibus. 6. Tyraenus. 7- Baris. 8.
Adrianopolis. 9. Portus Limenorum. 10. Laodicea
Combusta. 11. Seleucia Ferrea. 12. Dada, al. Ada-
da. 13. Zarzela. 14. Timbrias, al. Timomarias. 15.
Timandus. 16. Conane. 17- Malus. 18. Sitrian-
dus. 19. Tityassus. 20. Metropolis. 21. Pappa.
22. Parallae. 23. Mindevus, al. Bindaeus.
Province of Pamphyha Secunda.
1. Perga, al. Sileum. 2. Attalia. 3. Magydus.
al. Mandus. 4. Telimisus. 5. Isindus. 6. Eudo
cias. 7. Maximianopolis. 8. Lagina. 9. Palaeo-
polis. 10. Cremnus. 11. Corydala. 12. Peltinissus.
13. Dicytanjera. 14. Ariassus. 15. Pugla. 16. Adri-
ana. 17. Sandida. 18.Barba. 19. Perbaena. 20. Ccus.
Note, The fourteen following provinces are in
Leunclavius, but no other notitia.
Province of Peloponnesus.
1. Corinthus. 2. Damala. 3. Argos. 4. Moncin-

402

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

basia. 5. Cephalenia. 6. Zacynthus. 7- Zemena.
8. Maina. Province of Hellas.
I. Athens. 2. Euripus. 3. Diaulia. 4. Coronea.
5. Andrus. 6. Oreus. 7- Scyrus. 8. Charystus.
9. Porthmus. 10. Aulon. 11. Syra.
Province of Crete.
I. Gortyna. 2. Gnossus. 3. Arcadia. 4. Cherrone-
sus. 5. Aulopotamus. 6. Agrius. 7- Lampe. 8. Cydo-
nia. 9. Hiera. 10. Petra. II. Sitea. 12. Cissamus.
Province of Peloponnesus.
1. Patra. 2. Lacedaemonia. 3. Methone. 4. Co
rone. 5. Helus. 6. Bolcena.
Province of Hellas Secunda.
1. Larissa. 2. Demetrias. 3. Pharsalus. 4. Do-
mocus. 5. Zetonium. 6. Ezerus. 7- Laedoricium.
8. Trica. 9. Echinus. 10. Colydrus. 11. Stags.
Province of iEtolia.
1. Naupactus. 2. Bunditza. 3. Aquila. 4. Ache-
lous. 5. Rhegse. 6. Joannina. 7- Photica. 8. Ha-
drianopolis. 9. Buthrotus. 10. Chimaera.
Province of Macedonia.
1. Philippi. 2. Theoria. 3. Polystylum. 4. Be-
licea. 5. Christopolis. 6. Smolaena. 7- Caesaropolis.
8. Alectryopolis. Province of Epirus.
1. Dyrrachium. 2. Stephaniaca. 3. Chunobia. 4.
Coria. 5. Elissus. 6. Dioclea. 7. Scodra. 8. Drivas-
tus. 9. Polatha. 10. Glabinitza, al. Acroceraunia.
ll.Aulonasa. 12. Licinida. 13. Antibaris. 14. Tze-
rinicum. 15. Polycheropolis. 16. Graditzium.
In Asia under Smyrna the metropolis.
1. Phocaea. 2. Magnesia. 3. Anelium. 4. Cla-
zomenae. 5. Sosandrus. 6. Archangelus. 7. Petra.
In Armenia under Camachus.
l.Kelzene. 2. Arabraca. 3. Barzanissa. 4. Melus.
5. Melus alter. 6. Romanopolis. 7. Tutileum.
In Phrygia under Cotyaium.
1. Spora. 2. Cone. 3. Gaiocomis.
In Lesbus under Mitylene.
l.Erissus. 2. Strongyla. 3. Tenedus. 4. Ber-
bine. 5. Perperine. 6. Marmaritza.
In Hellas under Novae Patrae.
1. Gazala. 2. Cutzagron. 3. Sibictus. 4. Bariana.
Under Keltzene.
1. Tomus. 2. Chatzoun. 3. Lycopotamia. 4.

Cortzene. 5. Mastrabatz. 6. Chuit. 7- Toparchus.
8. Ambra. 9. Tutara. 10. Marmentitzur. 11. Mat-
zierte. 12. S. Nicholai. 13. Eva Deiparae. 14. Art-
zesius. 15. Artzica. 16. Amucium. 17. Percin.
18. S. Georgii. 19. Ostan. 20. S. Elissaa. 21.
Sedrac Deiparas. These fourteen metropolitical sees
with their suffragans, are in Leunclavius only : after
which the other notitias now proceed again.
Province of Cappadocia.
1. Mocessus. 2. Nazianzus. 3. Colonia. 4. Par
nassus. 5. Doara: to which Leunclavius adds
Metiana. Province of Lazica.
1. Phasis. 2. Rhodopolis. 3. Petra. 4. Ecclesia
Abissenorum. 5. Ecclesia Ziganeorum. But in Leun
clavius there are reckoned sixteen in this province.
1. Trapezus, the metropolis. 2. Cheriana. 3.
Chamuzur. 4. Chachaeum. 5. Paiper. 6. Ceramea.
7. Tochatzitzi. 8. Bizana. 9. Sacabus. 10. Phasi-
ana. 11. Tochantierz. 12. Toulnutus. 13. Lerium.
14. Tosermatzus. 15. Andacta. 16. Zarima.
Province of Thrace.
1. Philippopolis. 2. Diocletianopolis. 3. Diospolis.
But Leunclavius reckons eleven. 1, Philippopolis.
2. Agathonictea. 3. Liotitza. 4. Scutarium. 5.
Leuca. 6. Bleptus. 7. Dramitza. 8. Joannitza.
9. Constantia. 10. Behcea. 11. Bucuba.
Province of the islands Cyclades.
1. Rhodus, the metropolis. 2. Samus. 3. Chius.
4. Cous. 5. Naxia. 6. Thera. 7. Parus. 8. Le-
thrus. 9. Andrus. 10. Tenus. 11. Melus. 12,
Pissina : to which Leunclavius adds, Icaria, Lerna,
Ostypalia, Trachaea, and Nasura.
Province of Haemimontus.
1. Adrianopolis. 2. Mesembria. 3. Sozopolis.
4. Plutinopolis. 5. Zoida : to which Leunclavius
adds, 6. Agathopolis. 7- Debeltus. 8. Trabyzia.-
9. Carabus. 10. BuceUus. 11. Probatus. 12. Sco-
pelus. 13. Brisis. 14. Bulgarophugus.
The same Province.
1. Marcianopohs. 2. Rhodostolus. 3. Trama-
riscus. 4. Nobi. 5. Zecedopa. 6. Sarcara.
The same Province ; which is otherwise called
Rhodope in Leunclavius.
I. Trajanopolis. 2. Perus. 3. Anastasiopok's:
to which Leunclavius adds, 4. Didymotichus. 5.
Macra. 6. Misinopolis. 7- Pora. 8. Xantha. 9.
Peritheorium. 10. Theodorium.
Province of Phrygia Cappatiana.
1. Hierapolis. 2. Metellopolis. 3. Dionysopo-

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

403

lis. 4. Anastasiopolis. 5. Antaeda. 6. Mosyna :
with six others, which are inserted by mistake from
the province of Haemimontus. But Leunclavius
adds, Autuda, Phobi, Ancyra, Synaus, Tiberiopolis,
Cana, and Zana. Province of Galatia Secunda.
1. Arnorium. 2. Philomelium. 3. Docimeum.
4. Claneus. 5. Polyhotus. 6. Pissia. Note, This
province is caUed Phrygia in Leunclavius ; but the
cities are the same.
Here it is remarked in all the notitias, that the
following metropolitans and their suffragans were
taken from the Roman diocese, and added to Con
stantinople : viz. 1. Thessalonica. 2. Syracuse.
3. Corinth. 4. Rhegium. 5. Nicopolis. 6. Athens.
7. Patrae. 8. Novae Patrae. As also the metropo
htan of Seleucia in Isauria, or, as Leunclavius calls
it, Pamphyha, with twenty-three bishops under him.
Which conclude the notitia in Leunclavius : for it
only contains the account of the patriarchate of
Constantinople. Carolus a Sancto Paulo also
whoUy omits the Roman patriarchate, because his
manuscript here, he says, was so corrupt that there
was no sense to be made of it : but this defect is
supplied by Goar and Bishop Beverege, in whose
notitias the following account is given : — •
The Province under the most glorious Eparch of
Rome, or Italy.
Province of Rome, caUed Urbicaria.
1. Brittium. 2. Macaeria. 3. Luna. 4. Neapolis.
5. Garanta. 6. Vintimihum. 7- Genues. 8. Si-
pontus. 9. Ponturoma. 10. Insulee Centumcellae.
II. Castrum Euoriae. 12. Castrum Amalphes. 13.
Castrum Getteon. 14. Castrum Tiberias. 15. Cas
trum Nepes. 16. Insula Comaniciae. 17. Castrum
Mulium. 18. Castrum Campsas. 19. Castrum Sor-
cum. 20. Castrum Susas. 21. Castrum Ilbas. 22.
Castrum Anagnia. Province of Campania.
1. Neapolis. 2. Brettania. 3. Pannonia. 4.
Calabria. 5. Venetia. 6. Messina. 7- Vicovarina.
8. Taurata. 9. Apulia. 10. Castrum Opiterbetos.
II. Castrum Samnios. 12. Castrum Susias. 13.
Castrum Regium. 14. Castrum Taurata. 15.
Castrum Sygnias. 16. Castrum Gradum. 17.
Castrum Patriarchias. 18. Castrum Scylaceum.
19. Castrum Martyrium. 20. Castrum Ormuvera.
21. Castrum Ortonos. 22. Castrum Oppiterbitum.
Isle of Sicily.
1. Syracuse. 2. Catana. 3. Tterebenium, al.
Tauromenium. 4. Sesena, al. Messana. 5. Cepha-
ludium. 6. Thermum. 7. Panormus. 8. Lily-
baeum. 9. Trocalis. 10. Acragantus, al. Agrigen-
2 d 2

turn. 11. Tindarium. 12. Carine, al. Camarina.
13. Leontina. 14. Abeusis, al. Alesa. 15. Gaudus.
16. Melita. 17. Liparis. 18. Burcausus. 19. Di-
dymi. 20. Crica. 21. Onarea. 22. Basiludin.
Province of Calabria.
1. Rhegium. 2. Locris. 3. Scylacias. 4. Co-
tronum, al. Croton. 5. Constantia. 6. Tropaeum.
7. Tauriana. 8. Bibonum, al. Cibonum.
Provincia Annonaria.
1. Ravenna. 2. Phanus. 3. Olcusa, al. Ascu
lum. 4. Polus, al. Fulginum. 5. Pecinus, al. Pi
cenum. 6. Pisaurum. 7- Tergetra. 8. Augusto-
polis. 9. Talbitau. 10. Castrum Ferentinum.
11. Castrum Solernos. 12. Tulericum. 13. Cas
trum Zanga. 14. Castrum Nobo. 15. Castrum
Eurinica. 16. Castrum Semania. 17. Vicomanto.
18. Castrum Vereles. 19. Castrum Tamia. 20.
Castrum Varectelia. 21. Castrum Samugia. 22.
Castrum Sora. 23. Castrum SuagaUia. 24. Cas
trum Cisines. Province of iEmia, leg. iEmilia.
1. Castrum Foropompus. 2. Castrum Brizihum,
3. Castrum Brinti.
Under the most glorious Eparch of Africa.
Province of Bizacia.
1. Carthago Proconsularis. 2. Sybiba. 3.
Campsia. 4. Cileos. 5. Junce. 6. Talepte. 7-
Cascala. 8. Castellae. 9. Pezana. 10. Mamida.
11. Madasuba. 12. Colule. 13. Capse. 14
Adramytto. Province of Numidia.
I. Calama. 2. Tebete. 3. Hippo Regius. 4.
Nuzidias. 5. Castamagae. 6. Bade. 7- Meleum.
8. Leradus. 9. Castrum Bedere, al. Castra Vetera.
10. Scele. 11. Egerinesium. 12. Titessin, al. Tidi-
dita. 13. Bage. 14. Constantina. 15. Sitiphi.
Province of Mauritania Prima.
1. Rhinocururum. Province of Mauritania Secunda.
1. Septum. 2. Septum ad partem Tenessi. 3.
Spanias. 4. Mesopot. ad partem Spaniee. 5. Ma-
jurica, al. Majorica Insula. 6. Menyca, al. Mino
rica Insula. 7. Insula Sardon, vel Sardinia. 8.
Carallus Metropolis. 9. Tures. 10. Sanaphas.
11. Sines. 12. Sulces. 13. Phcesiana. 14. Chry-
sopolis. 15. Aristiane. 16. Limne. 17- Cas
trum Tutar. Note, Goar's notitia reads most of
these names differently, and makes but two of these
three last, Christianas Lacus and Tucca. Here
Carolus a S. Paulo begins again.

404

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

In the Diocese of Egypt.
Province of Augustamnica Prima.
1. Pelusium, the metropolis. ' 2. Sethroetes. 3.
Tanes. 4. Thmues. 5. Rhinocurura.- 6. Ostra-
cine. 7- Pentaschanon. 8. Casium. 9. Aph-
theum. 10. Hiphestus. 11. Panephusus. 12.
Geros. 13. Itageros. 14. Thenesus.
Province of Augustamnica Secunda.
1. Leonto Metropolis. 2. Athrabes. 3. Helius.
4. Bubastus. 5. Carbethus. 6. Arabius.
Province of iEgyptus Prima.
1. Alexandria sub duce et Augustali. 2. Her-
mopolis. 3. Milleos. 4. Costus. 5. Vicus Psa-
neos. 6. Vicus Cotrideos. 7- Sais. 8. Leonto-
polis. 9. Naucratia. 10. Andronicius. 11. Ze-
nonopohs. 12. Paphna. 13. Onuphis. 14. Tava.
15. Cleopatris. 16. Mareotes. 17. Mandate.
18. Schedia. 19. Ternuthes. 20. Sondra.
Province of iEgyptus Secunda.
1. Cabasa. 2. Phragon. 3. Pachnemon. 4.
Diospolis. 5. Sebennytus. 6. Cceno. 7- Busiris.
8. Elearchia. 9. Regeon Paralus. 10. Vicus Pa-
rianae. 11. Vicus Rhicomerium. 12. Xois: to
which Goar's notitia adds Cyma, and makes Regeon
and Paralus two distinct places.
Province of Arcadia.
1. Oxyrynchus. 2. Heracleus. 3. Cceno. 4.
Nilopolis. 5. Arsinoetes. 6. Memphilitus, al.
Memphis. Goar adds, Clisma, Theodosiopolis,
Aphroditon, and Latopolis.
Province of Thebais Prima.
1. Antinous. 2. Hermopolis. 3. Theodosio
polis. 4. Polyco. 5. Hypsele. 6. Apollonias. 7-
Anteios. 8. Panos. Goar adds Casus.
Province of Thebais Secunda.
1. Ptolemais. 2. Conto, al. Justinianopolis. 3.
Diocletianopolis. 4. Diospolis. 5. Tentyra. 6.
Maximianopolis. 7- Thebais. 8. Lato. 9. Iam-
bon. 10. Hermonthon. 11. Apollonos. 12. Vi
cus Anassae Magnae. 13. Thebais Magna. 14.
Ibis. 15. Mathon. 16. Trimunthon. 17. Erbon,
al. Hermon. Province of Libya.
1. Dranicon. 2. Paratonium. 3. Tranzala. 4.
Ammoniaca. 5. Antipyrgus. 6. Antiphron. 7-
iEdonias. 8. Marmarice.
Province of Libya Pentapolis.
1. Sozusa. 2. Cyrine. 3. Ptolemais. 4. Teu-
chcra. 5. Adriane. 6. Beronica.

Province of Tripoli.
1. Tosibon. 2. Leptis. 3. Hyon.
In the Oriental Diocese.
Province of Cilicia.
1. Tarsus. 2. Pompeiopolis. 3. Sebaste. 4.
Coricus. 5. Adana. 6. Augustopolis. 7. Mallos.
8. Zephurium. Province of Cihcia Secunda.
1. Anazarbus. 2. Mopsuestia. 3. Ageia. 4,
Epiphania. 5. Eirenopolis. 6. Flavias. 7- Alex
andria. 8. Cabissus. 9. Castabala. 10. Rhossus.
Province of Isauria.
1. Seleucia. 2. Cilendre. 3. Anemorjus. 4.
Titiopolis. 5. Lamus. 6. Antiochia. 7- Heliu-
Sebaste, al. Julio-Sebaste. 8. Cestra. 9. Seli-
nuntes. 10. Jostape. 11. Diocaesarea. 12. Olya.
13. Hierapolis. 14. Dalisandus. 15. Claudiopolis.
16. Eirenopolis. 17- Germanicopolis. 18. Nea
polis. 19. Zenonopolis. 20. Sbidae. 21. Phila
delphia. 22. Adrassus. 23. Meloe. 24. Domiti-
opohs. 25. Climata Nauzadeae. 26. Cassorum.
27- Benaeorum. 23. Golgosi. 29. Costradis.
Province of Syria Prima.
1. Antiochia ad Daphnen. 2. Paltus. 3. Seleu
cia. 4. Berrhcea. 5. Chalcis.
Province of Syria Secunda.
1. Apamea. 2. Arethusa. 3. Epiphania. 4.
Larissa. 5. Mariamne. 6. Seleucobelus. 7- R°>
phanaea. Province of Euphratisia or Hagiopolis.
1. Hierapolis. 2. Cyrus, al. Hagiopolis. 3. Sa
mosata. 4. Doliche. 5. Germanicia. 6. Zeugma.
7. Perrhe. 8. Europus. 9. Nicopolis. 10. Sche-
narchia. 11. Caesaria. 12. Sergiopolis. 13. Ori-
mon. 14. Santon. Province of Theodorias.
I. Laodicea. 2. Balanea. 3. Gabala. Goar
adds Paltus. Province of Osdroene.
1. Edessa. 2. Carrae. 3. Constantia. 4. Theo
dosiopolis. 5. Batnse. 6. Callinicus, al. Leon-
topolis. 7- Nova Valentia. 8. Birthon. 9. Mo-
nithiUa. 10. Therimachon. 11. Moniauga. 12.
Macarta. 13. Marcopolis. 14. Anastasia. 15.
Hemerius. 16. Circisia.
Province of Mesopotamia Superior, or Armenia
Quarta.
1. Amida. 2. Martyropolis. 3. Darus. 4.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

405

Castrum Ricephas. 5. Castrum Turandios. 6.
Castrum Mardes. 7- Castrum Lornes. 8. Cas
trum Riphton. 9. Castrum Isphrios. 10. Castrum
Tzauras. 11. Castrum Audasson. 12. Castrum
Amarmes. 13. Castrum Tzinobias. 14. Castrum
Banabelorum. 15. Castrum Intzietorum. 16.
Castrum Chaddorum. 17- Castrum iEsudios. 18.
Castrum Masphronas. 19. Castrum Basilicum.
20. Castrum Spelon et Odelorum. 21. Castrum
Bijubaithas. 22. Castrum Manassarorum. 23.
Castrum Phirtachabras. 24. Castrum Siteon Chi-
phas. 25. Castrum Calonos. 26. Castrum Biba-
sarorum. 27. Castrum Tzauras. 28. Castrum
Birthas. 29. Castrum Attachas. 30. Castrum
Aphuborum. 31. Castrum Florianarum. 32. Cas
trum Arimachorum. 33. Castrum Baluos. 34.
Castrum Daphnudin. 35. Castrum Samocharto-
rum. The other Armenia.
1. Dademon. 2. Arsamusaton. 3. Polichne.
4. Chosana. 5. Chosomacha. 6. Citharizae. 7-
Castrum Marticertum. 8. Castrum Baiulseos. 9.
Castrum Polios. 10. Castrum Ardon. 11. Clima
Sophines. 12. Regio Jalimbana, where Basilius
was born, who wrote the present account. 13.
Clima Anzetines. 14. Clima Digesines. 15. Clima
Garines. 16. Clima Orziacines. 17- Clima Bila-
bitenes. 18. Chma Astianices. 19. Clima Ma-
muzurarum. Province of Phoenicia Maritima.
I. Tyrus. 2. Sidon. 3. Ptolemais. 4. Beritus.
5. Biblus. 6. Tripolis. 7- Area?. 8. Orthosias.
9. Botrys. 10. Vicus Gegarta. 11. Arados. 12.
Antarados. 13. Paneas. 14. Gonasitii Saltus.
15. Vicus Politianus. 16. Vicus Trieris.
Province of Phoenicia Libani.
1. Emissa. 2. Laodicea. 3. Hehopolis. 4.
Abilla. 5. Damascus. 6. Clima Jabrudorum. 7,
Evarius, al. Justinianopolis. 8. Talmyra: in Goar
it is Palmyra. 9. Clima Maglydorum. 10. Sal
tum Gonaeticum. 11. Salamias. 12. Clima Ori
entate. Province of Palestina6 Prima.
1. .<Elia, or Jerusalem. 2. Caesarea. 3. Dora.
4. Antipatris. 5. Diospolis, al. Georgiopolis. 6.
Jamnia. 7. Nicopolis. 8. Onus. 9. Sozusa. 10.
Joppa. 11. Ascalon. 12. Gaza. 13. Raphia. 14.
Anthedon. 15. Diocletianopolis. 16. Eleuther-
opolis. 17. Neapolis. 18. Sebaste. 19. Regio
Apathus. 20. Regio Jericho. 21. Regio Libyae.
22. Regio Gadara. 23. Azotus Maritima. 24.
Azotus Hippinis. 25. Acomazon. 23. Bittymos.

«ote, This province and the next are wanting both in

27. Tricomias. 28. Toxus. 29. Saltum Constan-
tiniani. 30. Saltum Geraiticum, al. Barsamon.
Province of Palestina Secunda.
1. Scythopolis. 2. Gadara. 3. Pellae. 4. Abila.
5. Capetomas. 6. Diocaesarea. 7- Maximianopolis.
8. Gabae. 9. Tiberias. 10. Hippos. 11. Helen
opolis. 12. Clima Gaelanes. 13. Tetracomia. 14.
Comenais. Province of Palestina Tertia.
1. Petra. 2. Augustopolis. 3. Arindela. 4.
Charagmuda. 5. Areopolis. 6. Mapsis. 7- Elusa.
8. Zoara. 9. Birosabon. 10. Elas. 11. Penta-
comia. 12. Mamopsora. 13. Metrocomia. 14.
Saltum Hieraticum. Goar divides two of these
into four, reading them thus, Salton, Mamo, Psora,
Hieratic on. Province of Arabia.
1. Bostra. 2. Adrasus. 3. Dia. 4. Medaba.
5. Gerassa. 6. Neva. 7- Philadelphia. 8. Esbus.
9. Neapolis. 10. Philippopolis. 11. Phenutus.
12. Constantina. 13. Dionysias. 14. Pentacomia.
15. Tricomia. 16. Canothas. 17- Saltum. 18.
Bataneos. 19- Exacomia. 20 Enacomia. 21.
Vicus Gonias. 22. Vicus Cherus. 23. Vicus
Stanes. 24. Vicus Caberae. 25. Vicus Coreathee.
26. Vicus Bilbanus. 27. Vicus Caprorum. 23.
Vicus Pyrgoaretarum. 29. Vicus Setnes. 30.
Vicus Ariacharum. 31. Neotes. 32. Clima Ori
entalium et Occidentalium. 33. Vicus Ariatha?
Saxosae. 34. Vicus Bebdamus.
Province of Armenia Magna.
Concerning this the author only remarks, that it
is an autocephalus, or independent country, not
subject to any apostolical throne, but honoured in
respect to St. Gregory of Armenia, having two hun
dred cities and castles. Province of Cyprus.
The author makes the same observation upon this
country, that it is an independent also, in honour
of St. Barnabas the apostle, who was found here,
having the Gospel of St. Mark laid upon his breast.
The cities in this province are,
1. Constantia, the metropohs. 2. Citium. 3. Ama-
thus. 4. Curium. 5. Paphus. 6. Arsenal 7. Soli.
8. Lapithus, the birth-place of Georgius Cyprius,
who wrote the book out of which these were taken.
9. Cyrenia. 10. Tamasus. 11. Cythri. 12. Tri-
mithus. 13. Carpasin.
There is added at the end of Goar's notitia .- This
account was taken anno 6391, in the reign of the

Carolus a Sancto Paulo and Goar.

406

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

emperor Leo Sapiens, and under the patriarch Pho
tius, that is, anno 891.
In this description of the church, the reader may
observe, that the author being a Greek, is much
more accurate in his account of the Greek and
Eastern churches, than of the Western and Latin :
for here is no account of France, Spain, Britain,
Illyricum ; and such confused and imperfect ac
counts of the provinces of Italy and Africa, as show
plainly, that the author was not rightly acquainted
with the state of the church in those countries ; at
least not in Italy ; for in all Italy and Sicily here
are not mentioned above a hundred dioceses, and
yet it is clear from the accounts that have been
given before out of the subscriptions of ancient
councils, that there were nearer three hundred dio
ceses in those regions. Above one hundred and
fifty Italian bishops of distinct sees are found sub
scribed in one age in the Roman councils held under
Hilary, Felix, and Symmachus, and there were al
most as many more not mentioned in those councils,
but to be found in other councils and ancient re
cords. And though when these notitias were made,
several of the ancient dioceses might be united to
gether, yet it appears from the subscriptions of
the Roman councils under Eugenius II. and Leo
IV. in the ninth century, that there were above
double the number to what the notitias mention.
So that it must be owned, that they give but an im
perfect account of the Latin or Western church.
But the account of the Greek and Eastern churches
is more complete, and agrees very well with the
subscriptions coUected out of the ancient councils.
And so they one confirm another, and both together
fully make out the account that has been given both
of the number and extent of dioceses in the ancient
church.

CHAPTER VIII.
OF THE DIVISION OF DIOCESES INTO PARISHES, AND
THE FIRST ORIGINAL OF THEM.

sect. 1. There remains but one thing more
na™8thof "parish to be inquired into on this head, which
is the division of dioceses into such
lesser precincts as we now call parishes and parish

1 Concil. .Chalced. can. 17. Tds Ka$' E/caTijii iKKXr)triav
dypotovKis irapotKias, r) iyxmpiovs pivetv dirapaaaXEVTtos
tois KaTEXovcrtv aiiTas iirio-Koirots.
2 Concil. Vaisionen. 1. c. 2. Placuit ut non solum in ci-
vitatibus, sed etiam in omnibus parochiis, verbum faciendi
daremus presbyteris potestatem.
8 Hieron. cont. Vigilant, cap. 2.
4 Sulpic. Sever. Dial. 1. u. 4.
5 Theodor. Ep. 1 13. « Innoc. Ep. ad Decent, c. 5.

churches. Concerning which I shall here need to
say the less, because so much has already been said
incidentally in speaking of the extent of ancient
dioceses, which we have generally found too large
to be confined to a single congregation. All that I
shall add upon this subject, therefore, in this place
is only to make a few remarks upon the ancient
names of parishes, (because some of them are a little
ambiguous,) and show when, and upon what ac
count, and by what degrees dioceses were divided
into parishes, to bring them to the present state and
form of the church. As to the ancient names, I
have had occasion to show before, that the words
Trapotda, and Siokno-ig, for the three first ages were of
the same importance, denoting not what we now
call a parish church, but a city with its adjacent
towns or country region. But in the fourth and
fifth ages we find both names promiscuously given
as well to country parishes, as episcopal or city
churches. For now these lesser divisions of dio
ceses began to be called parochies, as may be seen
in the council of Chalcedon,1 which ordered, That
in every church such country parishes as belonged
of old time to any bishop, should continue in his
possession without any molestation. And in the
council of Vaison, anno 442, a decree was made,2
That country parishes should have presbyters to
preach in them, as well as the city churches. And
so the word parochia is often used by St. Jerom,8
Sulpicius Severus,4 Theodoret,5 Innocentius,8 and
other writers of those ages. Though still the name
parochia continued to signify properly an episcopal
diocese, from which it was transferred to denote
those lesser parochies, because they were a sort of
imitation of the former. Which is the account that
Socrates' seems to give of them, when, speaking of
the villages of the region of Mareotes that were
subject to the bishop of Alexandria, he says, they
were as so many leapotdai, or lesser dioceses under
his city. And upon the same reason the name
diocesis was sometimes given to a parish church also,
though it most properly belongs to an episcopal
diocese. Thus Sidonius ApoUinarius8 speaks of his
own visiting his dioceses, meaning only the parish
churches under his episcopal jurisdiction. And so
in the Collation of Carthage, it is said9 of one place,
that there was perfect unity not only in the city, but
in all the dioceses, that is, the country parishes or
villages belonging to it. Baluzius has observed the
same 10 in Ruricius Lemovicensis,1' and Gregory of

7 Socrat. lib. 1. e. 27. Elalv bird ti)v ovtov iroXtv ojs
irapotKiat. 8 Sidon. lib. 9. Ep. 16. p. 611. Peragratis forte diocesi-
bus cum domum veni, &c.
9 Collat. Carthag. Die 1. c. 176. Unitas illic perfecta
est non solum in ipsa civitate, verum etiam in omnibus dio-
cesibus. 10 Baluz. Not. ad Gratian. p. 510.
" Ruricius Lemovic. lib. 2. Ep.6.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

407

Tours,12 and some other writers. The reason of
this appeUation being, as I said before, for that
these churches, whereupon single presbyters were
fixed, were a sort of lesser dioceses, as the author
of the Pontifical18 under the name of Damasus terms
them; and some canons give them14 the name of
ecclesics dicecesance, diocesan churches ; and others,
country or village churches, whence the presbyters
residing on them were termed imxtlipioi 7rp£o-/3iVfnot,
country presbyters, by the council of Neocaesarea,15
in opposition to the city presbyters in the cathedral
or mother church. Parish churches were also pe
culiarly caUed tituli, as has been noted before,16 in
contradistinction to the bishop's church ; being such
churches as had particular presbyters and deacons
assigned to them, who upon that account are said
to have a title. And some learned persons 17 are of
opinion, that cardinal presbyters and deacons, at
first, were no more but presbyters and deacons so
deputed and affixed to the service of particular
parish churches, and that as well at Rome as other
places. As to the original of parish churches,
pSicZrcntoV there is no doubt but it was necessity,
anoroundeTuJon and the conveniences of celebrating
oraSSfom"!68 Christian offices and holding Chris-
muruoo. , . . . , , .
tian communion with greater ease,
that first gave occasion to them. For when the
multitude of believers increased so in large and
populous Cities, that one church could not contain
them, there was a necessity of dividing the assem
bly, and erecting other churches, where all the so
lemnities of the Christian worship and the usual
offices of Divine service might be performed, as well
as in the mother church, to answer the apostolical
ordinance of holding Christian communion one
with another; which was according to what we
read, Acts ii. 42, that men should continue " sted-
fastly in the apostles' doctrine and feUowship, and
in breaking of bread, and in prayers." The author
of the Pontifical under the name of Damasus, in
the Life of MarceUus, seems to say, that several of
the Roman tituli, or parish churches, were erected 1B
for the convenience of baptizing great multitudes
that were converted from paganism, and for burying
the martyrs. But if there was any necessity upon
that account, there was doubtless a greater neces
sity upon another. For in those days, the whole
body of the Christian church was used to communi
cate weekly at the Lord's table ; and it being im
possible that one church should suffice in large

12 Greg. Turon. Hist. lib. 4. e. 13. lib. 6. c. 38.
18 Ponti6cal. Vit. Marcelli. Viginti quinque titulos in
Urbe Roma constituit, quasi dioeceses, propter baptismum
et prenitentiam multorum.
14 Concil. Tarracon. can. 8.
15 Concil. Neocaesar. can. 13.
18 Book VIII. chap. 1. sect. 10.

cities for this purpose, there was an absolute neces
sity of building more, that Christians might hve in
communion one with another. And so parish
churches must be as ancient as the necessities of
the church ; and he that knows how to date the one,
may easily date the original of the other for any
particular city or diocese in the universe.
But as cities and their appendant
dioceses differed very much in their somVofthem
. . . - probably as ancient
size and extent, so it is reasonable to as the times of the
aposllcs.
believe, that some of them were obliged
to build parish churches much sooner than others.
And in such places as Jerusalem and Rome, there
is great probability, from several passages in the
Acts and St. Paul's Epistles, that there were more
churches than one from the days of the apostles.
However, it is undeniably evident from Optatus, as
I have showed before, that Rome had above forty
churches in it before the end of the third century,
or in the beginning of the Diocletian persecution.
As for the lesser cities, it will be no wonder to find
some of them which had but one church whilst the
persecution lasted; such as that city in Phrygia,
which Lactantius speaks of, where he says, the
church and all the people were burnt19 together by
one of the barbarous prefects in the last persecution.
Valesius thinks Eusebius speaks of the same city,
who says,20 it was all Christian at that time, both
magistrates and people, and therefore an army was
sent against them, which burnt them all together,
men, women, and children, as they were making
their supplications to Christ their God. From
which it may be concluded, that there were some
cities, which were but what Eusebius calls this,
iroXixvai, so very small, as to need no other church
beside the bishop's cathedral, even when all the
members of them were become universally Chris
tian. And this may seem an argument to some,
that there were anciently many episcopal dioceses
that never had any parish churches.
But here it must be remembered, Sect. 4.
what has been abundantly proved be- Pome icier ciiies
hadcountrv parishes
fore, that generally the ancient cities eB™ut'i°nlin'1'!Sofp"'-
had their suburbs or country region
belonging to them ; and some that were very small
cities, as Cyrus in Comagene, where Theodoret was
bishop, had upon this account very large territories
under their jurisdiction. And we find a great many
instances of such country regions having country
parishes, and country presbyters and deacons re
siding on them, even in the hottest times of perse-

17 Vid. Joh. Fronto. Epist. de Canonicis Cardinalibus,
Par. 1661.
18 Pontifical. Vit. Marcelli.
>s Lactant. Instit. lib. 5. c. 11. Aliqui ad occidendum
proccipites extiterunt, sicut unus in Phrygia, qui universum
populum cum ipso pariter conventiculo concremavit.
20 Euseb. lib. 8. c. 11

403

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

cution ; as appears from the canons of the council
of Eliberius,21 and those of Neocaesarea,22 the former
of which was held while the Diocletian persecution
lasted, and the latter immediately after it was over,
and yet both of them speak of country presbyters
and deacons, to whom the care of Christian assem
bhes was committed. Epiphanius also23 speaks of
village presbyters belonging to the city Caschara in
Mesopotamia in the middle of the third century,
and Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, about the
same time frequently mentions such in the regions
of Arsinoe, Alexandria, and other cities of Egypt
and Libya, in several fragments of his epistles, re
corded in Eusebius, which have already been al
leged, and need not here be repeated. Prom these
and many other such instances it is evident, that as
soon as the Christian religion began to spread itself
from the cities into the country regions in any con
siderable manner, village churches were erected,
and country presbyters fixed on them ; the neces
sities and convenience of the church requiring it so
to be for the greater benefit and edification of the
whole community. Thus parish churches had their
original both in city and country, not all at one
time, nor by any general decree, but as the exi
gences of every diocese required, the bishop of
which was always the properest judge, how many
assistants he needed to help him to discharge the
several offices belonging to him as chief superin
tendent of the city and territory under his jurisdic
tion. In France the council of Vaison speaks of
country parishes in the beginning of the fifth cen
tury, as I have noted before in the first section of
this chapter. But in England we have not so
early an account of them, because the records we
have remaining of the ancient British church, make
no mention of parishes : and after the Saxon con
versions were begun, it was some time before our
dioceses were divided into parishes, and longer be
fore they had appropriated revenues settled upon
them. Some think Honorius, the fifth archbishop
of Canterbury, divided so much of the nation as was
converted, into parishes about the year 640. So
Bishop Godwyn and Dugdale. But others think
this division is rather to be understood of dioceses
than parishes : for parochia in Bede commonly de
notes a bishop's diocese, according to the ancient
style and language of the church ; as is evident
from that canon of the council of Herudford men
tioned in Bede,24 which was held above thirty
years after this supposed division of Honorius, in

the time of Archbishop Theodore, anno 673, where
it is decreed, That no bishop shaU invade another's
parochia, or diocese, but be content with the govern
ment of the people committed to him. Bishop An
drews25 indeed brings this very canon for a proof of
parishes being now settled all over the nation : but I
conceive the other sense of the word parochia to be
more proper to that place. Though I will not deny but
that, toward the latter end of this archbishop's time,
who lived to the year 690, the division of parishes
might be made. For Bede observes,28 that religion
and the affairs of the church made a greater pro
gress in his time than ever they had done before,
And Mr. Wheelock,2' in his observations upon the
place, cites an ancient manuscript, which speaks of
the division of parishes as made under him. Now
Christianity had spread itself into the country, and
churches were built, and presbyters fixed upon
them, and first-fruits and other revenues were set
tled by King Ina28 among the West Saxons, and
by Withred, king of Kent, in the council of Becon-
celd, anno 694, and patrons, when they founded
churches, endowed them with lands for proper
maintenance : all which seem to imply, that the
original of country parishes was about the latter
end of the seventh century in this nation, and in the
next age they were fully settled.
But to return to the former times : „ , .
Sect 5.
it is further to be noted concerning ^^^£5
the ancient manner of serving the ^rf'S'i'S

city parish churches, that they were ciUgjofthebi»Lp-5
not usually committed to any particu- wise in country pa-
• rishes.
lar presbyters, as those in the country
regions were, but were served in common by the
clergy of the bishop's church. Learned men con
clude this from a passage in Epiphanius, who
seems to note it as a particular custom at Alexan
dria, that all the churches there had their own par
ticular presbyters assigned them, who dwelt near
their own churches, every one in their own streets
or divisions,28 which the Alexandrians, in their own
language, called laura. Petavius indeed30 thinks
Epiphanius was mistaken, and that it was not the
pecuhar custom of Alexandria, but common to all
great cities, to have presbyters fixed upon all their
churches. But Valesius31 and other learned men
defend Epiphanius against his censure, and show
this to have been so singular a custom at Alexan
dria, that perhaps no other city in the world in
that age, no, not Rome itself, which had above forty
churches, had any one church appropriated to any

21 Cone. Eliber. e. 77. K Cone. Neocaesar. c. 13.
23 Epiph. Hser. 66.
24 Bede, lib. 4. c. 5. Cone. Herudford. c. 2. Ut nullus
episcoporum paroehiam alterius invadat, sed contentus sit
gubernatione creditaj sibi plebis.
25 Andrews de Decimis, inter Opuscula, p. 152.
28 Bede, lib. 5. c. 8. 27 Wheelock in loc.

28 Inas Leges Eccles. c. 4. Primitia? seminum ad festum
S. Martini redduntor, &e. ap. Spelman. p. 183. Cone. Be-
conceld. c. 1. Ibid. p. 191.
29 Epiph. Hasr. 69. Arian. c. 1.
30 Petav. Annot. in loc.
31 Vales. Not. in Sozomen. lib. 1. c. 15. Maurice's
Vindic. of the Prim. Ch. p. 65.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

409

particular presbyter, but they were all served in
common by the clergy of the bishop's church.
Valesius observes, that it was so at Rome to the
time of Innocent I., who speaks of his sending the
bread of the consecrated eucharist to the presbyters
ministering in the parish churches on the Lord's
day, that they might not on that day think them
selves32 separated from his communion. So that
they seem to have been the clergy of the great
church, sent forth by turns only, to minister in the
several tituli on the Lord's day; and then their
having a title, or the care of a church, must mean
no more but their being deputed in common to the
service of the tituli, or parish churches, in contra
distinction to the cathedral church. Something of
this custom continued at Constantinople to the
time of Justinian. For in one of his Novels88 he
takes notice of three churches, St. Mary's, Theo
dore's, and Irene's, which had no appropriated
clergy belonging to them, but were served by the
ministers of the great church, who officiated in
them according to their courses. It is observed
also by some, that a pecuhar custom prevailed at
Rome, to have two presbyters officiate in every
church, whereas in other places there was but one.
Dr. Maurice84 infers this from a passage in the
Comments of Hilary, the Roman deacon, who com
monly goes under the name of St. Ambrose, who
says, that though there were but seven deacons in
all Rome, yet there was such a number of presby
ters as to have two to officiate in every church,85
because the inhabitants communicated twice a week,
and there were sick persons to be baptized almost
every day. But whether this custom was so pecu
har to Rome, as to belong to no other church, is
what I had rather the reader should believe upon
that learned man's judgment, than my own as
sertion. As to country churches, the case is very
plain, that presbyters were more early fixed and
appropriated peculiarly to them, there being not
the same convenience of serving them in common
by the presbyters of the city church. Therefore
we may observe, that the council of Neocsesarea36
makes a distinction between the imxd>pioi vpio--
rW«poi, the country presbyters, and those of the

city, forbidding the former to officiate in the city
church, except in the absence of the bishop and
city presbyters : which plainly implies, that country
parishes were then served by fixed presbyters of their
own, who had nothing to do with the service of the
city church. And the same appears from the ac
count which Athanasius gives of the presbyters of
the villages of Mareotis under Alexandria, and
many other passages of the ancient writers.
But we are to observe, that the be
ing settled in a parish-cure, whether settiedct'revenue»
., , ... , . ... not immediately fix-
in city or country, did not immedi- ea upon parishes at
. ' . - their first division,
ately entitle a man to the revenue i>u' paid into the
common stock.
arising from that cure, whether in
tithes or oblations, or any other kind. For, an
ciently, all church revenues were delivered into the
common stock of the bishop's church, whence, by
the direction and approbation of the bishop, who
was the chief administrator of the revenues of his
diocese, a monthly or an annual division was made
among the clergy under his jurisdiction, as has been
showed before, in giving an account of ecclesiastical
revenues,37 and their distribution. Where, among
other things, it has been observed out of Theodorus
Lector,83 that at Constantinople no parish church
had any appropriated revenues till the time of Gen-
nadius, in the middle of the fifth century, anno 460,
when Marcian's ceconomus first ordered the clergy
of every church to receive the offerings of their own
church, whereas before the great church received
them all. In the Western church, particularly in
Spain, in the middle of the sixth century, it appears
from the first council of Bracara, that the bishop
and city clergy had still all their revenues in a com
mon fund, which was divided into four parts, one
for the bishop,39 another for the clergy, a third for
the fabric and hghts of the church, and a fourth
for the relief of the poor, to be dispensed by the
hands of the archpresbyter or archdeacon, with the
bishop's approbation. But the country clergy, as to
their revenues, were now, or shortly after, upon a
different foot : for in the second council of Bracara,
which was held but nine years after the first, anno
572, we find a canon40 forbidding bishops to have
any share in the oblations of the parochial churches>

Innoc. Ep. 1. ad Decent, c. 5. Quarum presbyteri,
quia die ipso propter plebem sibi creditam nobiscum con
venire non possunt, idcirco fermentum a nobis confectum
per acolythos accipiunt, ut se a nostra communione maxime
ilia die non judicent separates.
33 Justin. Novel. 3. c. I.
81 Maurice of Dioces. Episcop. p. 47.
85 Ambros. Com. in 1 Tim. iii. Nunc autem septem dia
conos esse oportet, et aliquantos presbyteros, ut bini sint per
ecclesias, et unus in civitate episcopus. — Omni enim heb-
domada offerendum est, etsi non quotidie peregrinis, incolis
tamen vel bis in hebdomada, etsi non desint qui prope quo
tidie baptizentur aegri.
86 Cunc. Neocaesar. c. 13.

87 Book V. chap. 6. sect. 1.
88 Theodor. Lector, lib. 1. p. 553.
39 Cone. Bracar. 1. c. 25. Placuit ut de rebus ecclesiasticis
trps wquee fiant portiones, id est, una episcopi, alia clerico-
ruin, tertia in reparatione vel in luminariis ecclesiae. De
quarta parte sive archipresbyter sive archidiaconus illara
administrans, episcopo faciat rationem.
40 Cone. Bracar. 2. c. 2. Placuit ut nullus episcoporum
per suas diceceses ambulans, prater honorem cathedrae suae,
id est, solidos duos, aliquid aliud per ecclesias tollat. Neque
tertiam partem ex quacunque oblatione populi in ecclesiis
parochialibus requirat, sed ilia tertia pars pro luminaribus
ecclesire vel recuperatione servetur, et per singulos annos
episcopo inde ratio fiat.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

410
and assigning that third part to maintain the fabric
and lights of the church; only allowing them to
receive two solidi by way of honorary acknowledg
ment, (honor cathedrcs, the canon terms it,) in their
parochial visitations. So that at least from this
time we may date the appropriation of revenues in
Spain to the country parochial churches. In the
same council there is another canon which corrects
an abuse, that plainly implies such an appropriate
settlement upon country churches. For some pa
trons,41 it seems, would build churches on their own
lands, not for piety, but for lucre's sake, that they
might go halves with the clergy in whatever was
collected of the oblations of the people. To remedy
which inconvenience the council orders, That no
bishop should consecrate any church for the future,
that was built upon such abominable contract and
tributary condition. This is a further evidence, that
the revenues of country churches were then ap
propriated to them, else such abuses as these could
not have had any foundation. But in Germany and
France the revenues of the parochial churches seem
to have continued in the hands of the bishop, at
least he had his dividend of a fourth part, for some
a°-es longer. For there are rules in the Capitulars
of Baluzius and Goldastus's editions, which order42
tithes and oblations to be divided into four parts,
according to ancient canon, and one-fourth to be
given to the bishop. And some learned persons,48
who have narrowly examined our English constitu
tion, seem to be of opinion, that the bishops had
their portion of the ecclesiastical revenues with the
parochial clergy for some considerable time after the
first designation and settlement of parish churches.
For they suppose, that originally the bishop's cathe
dral was the only church in a diocese, from whence
itinerant or occasional preachers were sent to con
vert the country people, who for some time resorted
to the cathedral for solemn Divine worship. After
wards, by degrees, some other churches were built
among them : first private oratories, or chapels, with
out any parish bounds, for the convenience of such
as, being at too great distance from the cathedral,
might more easily resort to them. Then parish
churches with certain limits were erected, some
by the liberality of the people themselves in more
populous and wealthy places, others by the bishops,
and others by the Saxon kings ; but chiefly the lords
of manors, the thanes, as they then called them,
were the great instruments in this work of found
ing parish -churches. Whence it was that parish

Book IX.

bounds were conformed to the limits and extent of
a manor, as I have showed that the bounds of an
ancient diocese were to the territory of a city:
and hence the lord of a manor had his original
right of patronage and presentation. Yet this did
not destroy the bishop's right to a share in the
revenue of his whole diocese. But time made an
alteration in this matter: for our bishops seem
voluntarily to have relinquished their title to paro
chial revenues, as the Spanish bishops had done
before them ; though whether they made any canon
about it, as the other did, I am not able to inform
the reader. But Dr. Kennet has observed44 out of
Dugdale,45 that notwithstanding the alteration that
was made in this matter, the bishops of the Isle of
Man continued to have their tertiana, or third part
of all church revenues in that island. Which, I
suppose, was because they were not liable to any
alterations made here, as not being then of the
English jurisdiction. Thus I have given a short
account of the original and ancient state of paro
chial churches, but it is beyond my design to carry
this inquiry any further. They who would know
by what steps and encroachments parish churches
lost their revenues again, first by the confusion of
parish bounds, and a liberty granted to men to pay
their tithes and oblations where they pleased, and
then by appropriations to monasteries, and impro
priations granted to laymen, may find these things
handled at large in Dr. Kennet's elaborate Discourse
of Impropriations and Augmentation of Vicarages,
to which I refer the inquisitive reader.

41 Cone. Bracar. 2. c.6. Siquisbasilicamnonprodevotione
fidei, sed pro quaestu cupiditatis sedificat, ut quicquid ibi de
oblatione populi colligitur, medium cum clericis dividat, eo
quod basilicam in terra sua quaestus causa condiderit, quod
in aliquibus locis usque modo dicitur fieri. Hoc ergo de
cetero observari debet, ut nullus episcoporum tarn abomi-
nabili voto consentiat, &c.

THE CONCLUSION.
WHEREIN IS PROPOSED AN EAST AND HONOURABLE
METHOD FOR ESTABLISHING A PRIMITIVE DIO
CESAN EPISCOPACY (CONFORMABLE TO THE MODEL
OF THE SMALLER SORT OF ANCIENT DIOCESES)
IN ALL THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES.
All I have further to add upon this subject, is only
to make one seasonable and useful reflection upon
what has been discoursed in this last Book, with
relation to the long wished-for union of all the
churches of the Reformation in the same form of
episcopal government, agreeable to the model and
practice of the primitive church. One great ob-

42 Capitular, lib. 7. c. 375. Quatuor partes ex omnibus
(decimis et oblationibus) fiant.  Quarta episcopo refe
renda. Vid. Goldast. Constitut. Imper. t. 3. cap. 23. p. 158.
« See Dr. Kennet's Case of Impropriations, p. 9, &<:•
Mr. Wharton's Defence of Pluralities, chap. 2. p. 85.
44 Case of Impropriations, p. 28.
45 Dngdal. Monastic. Angl. t. 1. p. 718,

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

411

jection against the present diocesan episcopacy, and
that which to many may look the most plausible, is
drawn from the vast extent and greatness of most
of the northern dioceses of the world, which makes
it so extremely difficult for one man to discharge all
the offices of the episcopal function. To take off
the main force of which objection, I have been at
some pains to show, that for the preservation of
episcopacy, there is no necessity that all dioceses
should be of the same extent, since there was so
great difference in the bounds and hmits of the
ancient dioceses, but not the least difference about
the forms or species of episcopal government, for
all that, in any part of the primitive church. And
therefore, if ever it shall please God to dispose the
hearts of our brethren, in the churches of the Re
formation, to receive again the primitive form of
episcopacy, (which is much to be wished, and there
seems in some of them to be a good inclination and
tendency toward it,) there needs be no difficulty from
this objection to hinder so useful and peaceable a
design ; because every church is at liberty to con
tract her own dioceses, and hmit them with such
bounds, as she judges most expedient for the edifi
cation and benefit of the whole community ; there
being no certain geometrical rule prescribed us
about this, either in the writings of the apostles, or
in the laws and practice of the primitive church,
any further than that every city, or place of civil
jurisdiction, should be the seat of an ecclesiastical
magistracy, a bishop with his presbytery, to order
the spiritual concerns of men, as the other does the
temporal. That this was the general rule observed
in the primitive church, I think, I have made it ap
pear beyond aU dispute, and that upon this ground
there was so great a difference in the extent of dio
ceses sometimes in the same countries, as in Pales
tine, Asia Minor, and Italy, especially, because the
cities differed so much in the extent of their terri
tories, and the bounds and hmits of their jurisdic
tion. Now, it is not very material in itself whether
of these models be followed, since they are both
primitive, and allowed in ancient practice. The
Church of England has usually followed the larger
model, and had very great and extensive dioceses :
for at first she had but seven bishoprics in the
whole nation, and those commensurate in a manner
to the seven Saxon kingdoms. Since that time she
has thought it a point of wisdom to contract her
dioceses, and multiply them into above twenty;
and if she should think fit to add forty or a hundred
more, she would not be without precedent in the
practice of the primitive church. Archbishop Cran-
mer was very well apprized of this, and therefore
he advised King Henry VIII. to erect several new
bishoprics, as a great means among other things for

reforming the church. In pursuance of which ad
vice the king himself drew up a list of near twenty
new bishoprics which he intended to make, and a
bill was passed in parliament, anno 1539, to em
power the king to do this by his letters patent.
The whole transaction and the names of the in
tended sees may be read at large in Bishop Burnet's
History of the Reformation, vol. i. p. 262. The
thing indeed miscarried afterward, and by some ac
cident was never effected ; but notwithstanding it
shows us the sense of the leading men in the Reform
ation. What therefore has been and still is allow
able in this church, is allowable in others ; that is,
to multiply dioceses as necessity requires, and divide
the great care and burden of the episcopal func
tion into more hands for the greater benefit and
advantage of the church. Whenever, therefore, any
ofthe foreign churches ofthe protestant communion
shall think fit to reassume again the ancient episco
pal form of government among them, they may
both with honour and ease frame to themselves
such a model of small dioceses, as will not much
exceed the extent of one of their classes, nor much
alter its form, and yet be agreeable to the model of
the lesser sort of dioceses in the primitive church.
A temporary moderator, or a superintendent of a
small district, such as are our rural deaneries, will
easily be made a bishop, by giving him a solemn
ordination to the perpetual office of governing the
churches of such a district, as chief pastor, under
whom all other inferior pastors ofthe same district
must act in subordination to him, deriving their
authority from his imposition of hands, and doing
nothing without his consent and approbation. As
this will secure the just authority and veneration of
episcopal superintendency, whilst, according to the
rule of Ignatius, nothing is done without the bishop
in the church ; so will it be agreeable to the model
of the ancient church, which had many small dio
ceses as well as large ones, particularly in Italy,
where many episcopal sees were not above five or
six miles from one another, and their dioceses not
above ten or twelve miles in extent, such as Narnia
and Interamnia, Fidena?, Fulginum, .-Hispellum,
Forum Flaminii, and many others, that have
been particularly spoken of in the foregoing Book.
There are now a great many such dioceses in Italy
in the realm of Naples, where the whole number is
a hundred and forty-seven, twenty of which are
archbishoprics ; and some of them so small as not
to have any diocese beyond the walls of the city,
as is particularly noted by Dr. Maurice ' and others,
of Campana and Vesta, out of Ughellus's Italia
Sacra, whence it is observed also, that Cava in the
same kingdom had but five hundred communicants
belonging to it. And there are some dioceses at

1 Maurice, Diocesan Episc. p. 132.

412

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Boose IX,

present in the southern parts of France, which I
am told do not very much exceed that proportion.
The bishopric of the Isle of Man has now but
seventeen parishes, and in Bede's time 2 the whole
island had but the measure of three or four hundred
families, according to what was then the English
way of computation, though the Isle of Anglesea
had thrice that number. So that though dioceses
in the protestant churches should be thus contract
ed, yet no other church, where episcopacy is already
settled, can have any just reason to complain of
such an episcopacy as this, so long as it appears to
be agreeable to the original state, and exactly con
formable to ancient practice. Nor can any churches
then have ground for dispute with one another
about external polity and government, though the
dioceses of one church happen to be larger or smaller
than those of another ; so long as they have each
their precedents in the ancient church, they may
treat one another with the same catholic charity as
the ancient churches did, among whom we never
find the least footstep of a dispute upon this found
ation. Nor is there now any dispute between the
two sister churches of England and Ireland upon
this head, though the one has enlarged and the
other contracted her dioceses since the Reformation.
For in Ireland there are not now above half the
number of dioceses that there were before, and con
sequently they must needs be larger by uniting them
together. In England there are more in number
than formerly, some new ones being erected out of
the old ones, and at present the whole number aug
mented to three times as many as they were for
some ages after the first conversion. Beside that
we have another way of contracting dioceses in ef
fect here in England, appointed by law, which law
was never yet repealed, which is by devolving part
of the bishop's care upon the chorepiscopi, or suffra
gan bishops, as the law calls them : a method com

monly practised in the ancient church in such large
dioceses as those of St. Basil and Theodoret one
of which had no less than fifty chorepiscopi under
him, if Nazianzen rightly informs us ; and it is a
practice that was continued here all the reign of
Queen Elizabeth, and even to the end of King
James ; and is what may be revived again when
ever any bishop thinks his diocese too large, or his
burden too great to be sustained by himself alone.
From hence I conclude, that the multiplying bi
shops and contracting of dioceses in the protestant
churches, can give no just offence to any other
episcopal churches, since it was ever practised in
the ancient church, and is now practised in some
of the churches of the Reformation, where still the
dioceses remain so great, as to be capable of being
divided each into ten, without altering the species
of episcopacy, or infringing any rule of the catholic
church. If this consideration may contribute any
thing toward the settlement of a primitive episco
pacy in such churches of the Reformation as are still
without it, (which may be done by ordaining a su
preme pastor in every great town, where there is a
civil magistracy, with lesser towns and villages in
its dependence, which was the ancient notion of a
city when episcopacy was first settled by the apos
tles,) I shall then think my pains and labour, which
have not been small, in discovering the extent and
measure of so many ancient dioceses, to be still so
much the more useful, not only as opening a way
to a clear understanding of the state of the ancient
church, but as promoting the unity and firmer set
tlement of the present church, whose general in
terest, and not that of any particular church or
party interfering with it, I have proposed to my
self in this whole work to prosecute and serve.
The God of peace and truth prosper the endeavours
of all those who have no other design.

APPENDIX.

Having given no particular catalogue of the an
cient dioceses in the six African provinces, in the
foregoing Book, as of all other provinces in the
world; lest it should be thought an omission, I
have here subjoined an account of them, as col
lected by Carolus a Sancto Paulo and Holstenius,
out of the ancient councils, and the Collation of
Carthage, and the notitia of Africa, published by

2 Bede, lib. 2. e. 9.

Sirmondus, among his Miscellanies, and the works
of St. Austin, and Victor Vitensis, who speaks of
one hundred and sixty-four bishops in the first of
these provinces, called Zeugitana, or the Procon
sular Africa; though Car. a Sancto Paulo could
find the names only of one hundred and two dioceses,
and some of these named twice or thrice over. For
Bolita, and Vallis, and Vol, are but three names for

Appendix.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

413

the same city. So Abdera, and Abbirita, and Abbir
Germaniciorum, are the same. As also Sicca and
Zieea. Duassedemsai and DuEesenepsalitinee, two
corrupt names for the city Selemsal, as Holstenius
observes in his remarks upon them.
In Provincia Zeugitana, otherwise called Africa
Proconsularis.
1. Carthago. 2. Sicilibra. 3. Maxula. 4. Val-
lis. 5. Uthina. 6. Tuburbo. 7. Abdera. 8. As
sures. 9. Tucabor, al. Tucca Terebinthina. 10.
Altibura. II. Vazua. 12. Ammedera. 13. Sicca
Venerea. 14. Thinnissa. 15. Tuburbo Minus.
16. Membresa. 17. Melzita. 18. Utica. 19. Theu-
dalis. 20. Hippozaritus, al. Hippo-Diarritorum.
21. Membro. 22. Lapda. 23. Bulla Regia. 24.
Tennona, al. Tunnona. 25. Beneventum. 26.
Simithu. 27. Thele. 23. Carpis. 29. Utimmira.
30. Misua. 31. Duassedemsai. 32. Migripa. 33.
Puppiana. 34. Puppita. 35. Urcita, forsan Uci.
36. Gisipa. 37. Uzita, Uci. 38. Bonusta. 39.
Cicsita. 40. Neapohs. 41. Culcita. 42. Curubis.
43. Ccefala. 44. Bulla. 45. Clypea. 46. Megla-
polis. 47. Timida Regia. 43. Zigga. 49. Semina.
50. Parisium, forsan Pertusa. 51. Rucuma. 52.
Talbora. 53. Tagarata. 54. CeUae. 55. Uzippare.
56. Abbir Germanicia. 57- Ausana, al. Ausapha.
58. Tabuca. 59. Maraggarita, al. Naraggarita.
60. Muzua. 61. Abitina. 62. Tituli. 63. Eudala.
64. Casula. 65. Tulana. 66. Vina, al. Viva. 67.
Volita, al. Bolita. 68. Tunes. 69. Mattiana. 70.
Hilta. 71- Zarna. 72. Cubdis. 73. Municipitogia.
74. Elibia. 75. Pia. 76. Tadua. 77- Uzala. 78.
Tizzica. 79. Abora. 80. Libertina. 81. Scilita.
82. Absasalla. 83. Aradita. 84. Veri. 85. Cium-
tuburbo, which [Holstenius takes to be a corrupt
reading for Civ. M. Tuburbo. 86. Ofita. 87. Mu-
nicipium Canapium. 88. Nummula. 89. Taura-
cina. 90. Ucala. 91. Sinuara. 92. Succuba. 93.
Horta, vel Horrea. 94. Trisipellis. 95. Giutram-
bacaria. 96. Villa Magna. 97. Tigimma. 93.
Bolita. 99. Aga. 100. Csecirita. 101. TatiaMon-
tanensis. 102. Mullita. 103. Duae Senepsalitinae,
al. Selemsilita. 104. Eguge. Holstenius adds,
Furni, Simingita, Aptunga, and Simidita.
In Numidia.
1. Cirta, al. Constantina, the civil metropohs of
this province. 2. Cullu. 3. Rusicade. 4. Vaga,
al. Bagaia. 5. Lares. 6. Mileum, rectius Mile-
vum. 7. Idicra. 8. Cuiculum. 9. Nobas Parsa.
10. Diana. 11. GemeUae. 12. Cullicitanis. Hol
stenius reckons it the same with Culcita. 13. Zama
Regia, the royal seat of King Juba. 14. Lambiri.
15. Sinitu. 16. Aquae Tibilitance. 17. Hippo
Regius. 18. Tubursica. 19. Calama. 20. Ga-
sauphala, al. Gazophyla. 21. Tigillaba. 22. Ro-
taria. 23. Tipasa. 24. Tagaste. 25. Thagura,

al. Tagora. 26. Altaba. 27. Vegesela. 28. Mas-
cula. 29. Macomades. 30. Tamugada. 31. Lam-
baesa. 32. Tabuda. 33. Bercera. 34. Municipi-
um, al. Municipium Tullense. 35. Burca. 36.
Vada. 37. Centenaria. 38. Niba. 39. Amphora.
40. Buconia. 41. Sugita, al. Siguita. 42. Putea.
43. Ausucurro. 44. Fussala. 45. Noba Barbara.
46. Idassa. 47. Monte. 48. Lamsorte. 49. Ti-
didita. 50. Casa? MedianEe. 51. Cethaquensusca,
al. Cathaquensa. 52. Centuzia. 53. Noba Ger
mania. 54. Susicasia. 55. Noba Ceesaris. 56.
Vazarita, al. Bazarita. 57- Ressana. 58. Augu-
rium. 59. Octabum. 60. Gilba. 61. Mathara.
62. Midila. 63. Punentiana. 64. Metre. 65. Cas
sarea. 66. Nobasina. 67. Ccelia. 68. Zattara.
69. Tarassa. 70. Castellum Titulianum. 71. Gi-
rus Marcelli. 72. Sillita, al. Sillilita. 73. Hizir-
zada. 74. Rusticiana. 75. Madaurus. 76. Buf-
fada. 77- Sistroniana. 78. Regium. 79- Tegla.
80. Casee Nigra. 81. Tubunia. 82. Tigisi. 83.
Zabi. 84. Narangara. 85. Musti. 86. Centurio.
87. Aqua? Novae. 88. Tebeste. 89. Babra. 90.
Moxorita. 91. Tamogazia. 92. Respecta. 93.
Legiae. 94. Mazaca. 95. Lugura. 96. Turres
Concordia;. 97. Belesase. 98. Gaudiabe. 99.
Garbis. 100. Marculita. 101. Suaba. 102. Ger
mania. 103. Vadesita. 104. Naratcata. 105. La-
miggiza. 106. Lamiggiga. 107- Vagarmilita, al.
Magarmelita, et Aquae. 103. Turres Ammeniarum.
109. Mulia. 110. Ospitum. 111. Vagada, al.
Vaga, Vaiana, et Bagaia. 112. Lamasua. 113.
Tacarata. 114. Ullita, al. Vallita. 115. Seleucia,
al. Solentiana. 116. Vada. 117- Maximiana. 118.
Zaradta. 119. Girus Tarasi. 120. Vicus Pacis.
121. Tabraca. 122. Tucca. 123. Quidia. 124.
Castellum. 125. Milevi. 126. Gira. 127- Fesseita.
123. Damatcore. 129. Mada. 130. Casae Calaneae.
131. Arsicarita. 132. Vesili, rectius Vegesela. 133,
Villa Regia. 134. Legae. 135. Lamfua. 136. Va-
grava. 137. Gilba. 138. Sile. 139. Gauriana.
140. Forme. 141. Forme altera. 142. Fatum.
Holstenius adds nine more— Vicus Nigras, Dru-
siliana, Zuma, or Summa, Constantia, Limata, Mu-
tugenna, Zerta, Sululitta, Centuria; but then he
thinks some others are twice repeated, as Mileum and
Milevis, Zabi and Zama, Vaga and Vagada, Veseli
and Vegesela, Tamagazia and Tamaguda, Culsita
and Cullisitanis*, Germania and Nova Germania:
and Quida belongs to Mauritania Csesariensis.
In Byzacena.
1. Adrumetum, the civil metropolis. 2. Horrea
Ccelia. 3. Tagasa. 4. Turreblandis. 5. Media-
num. 6. Sufes. 7- Afufenia. 8. Cillita. 9. Vi
cus Aterias. 10. Mibiarcesis. 11. Segermis. 12.
Miriciana. 13. Gatiana, al. Garriana, et Gratiana.
14. Suffetula. 15. Dicea. 16. Tices. 17- An-
cusa. 18. Mascliana. 19. Vadentiniana, al. Va-

414

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

lentiniana. 20. Nara. 21. Seberiana. 22. Tu-
bulbaca. 23. Midita. 24. Tambaia. 25. Jube-
clidia. 26. Neptita. 27- Bubelia. 23. Cense. 29.
Decoriana. 30. Putea. 31. Theuzita. 32. Mac-
taris, al. Matiris. 33. Thagamuta. 34. Autentum.
35. Abaradira. 36. Bana. 37- Octabium. 38.
Octabum. 39. Aquiaba. 40. Hermiana. 41. Pa-
radamium, al. Feradi Minor. 42. Turns. 43. Ta-
raza. 44. Crepedula. 45. Trofiniana. 46. Leptis
Minor. 47. Feradimaia, al. Feradi Major. 48. Te-
muniana, vel Temoniara. 49. Unizibira. 50. Ta-
maUuma. 51. Muzuca. 52. Massimana. 53. Ser-
batiana. 54. Marazana. 55. Pederodiana. 56.
Tuzurita. 57. Matarita. 58. Usula. 59. Irpiniana,
al. Hierpiniana. 60. Aquae Albenses. 61. Mene-
phessa. 62. Capse. 63. Acola, al. Aquila. 64.
Tasbalte. 65. Municipia, et Gernisiae. 66. Tizia.
67. Ruspe. 68. Vararita. 69. Febianum. 70. Ce-
baradefa. 71. Foratiana. 72. Boana. 73. Mi-
miana. 74. Telepte. 75. Prsesidium. 76. Natio.
77. Maraguia. 78. Tetcitana. 79. Macriana. 80.
Gurgaita. 81. Cululi. 82. Arsurita, al. Sarsurita.
83. Tagarbala. 84. Aquae Regise. 85. Quaestori-
ana. 86. Carcabia. 87. Victoriana. 88. Mate-
riana. 89. Hirina. 90. Gummi. 91. Morotheo-
rita. 92. Ticualta. 93. Auzegera. 94. Gawarita.
95. Helia. 96. Talapte. 97- Limica. 98. Junca.
99. Thense. 100. Jubaltiana. 101. Tamaza. 102.
Unuricopolis. 103. Aggir, al. Aggarita. 104. Bi-
zacium. 105. Tapsus. 106. Madassumma. 107.
Tysurus. 108. Septimunicia. 109. Amurdasa.
110. Abidus, al. Aviduvicus. 111. Benefensis.
112. Dura. 113. Rufiniana. 114. Forontoniana.
115. Egnatia. 116. Frontoniana. 117. Tegariata.
118. Aggarita. 119. Garriana. 120. Castrum. 121.
Vite, where Victor Vitensis was bishop, who wrote
the History of the Vandalic Persecution. 122.
Circina. 123. Praecausa. 124. Cufruta. 125. Fi-
lace. 126. Oppenua. 127. Sublecte. 123. Cen-
culiana. 129. Suluiana. 130. Vassinassa. 131.
Aquae. Holstenius adds to these eight more, Ta-
phrura, Tiella, or Zella, Cabarsussis, Tysurus, Tys-
dros, Casulse Cariunae, Dionysiana, Aquae. But then
he reckons some names unnecessarily repeated, as
Miriciana and Maracia, which are but two names
for the same city ; so Boana and Bana ; and Gur
gaita the same with Gurges in Mauritania Cae-
sariensis. In Mauritania Sitifensis.
1. Sitifi. 2. TamaUuma. 3. Acufida. 4. Ficus.
5. Lemfocta. 6. Perdices. 7- Tubusuptus. 8. Tucca.
9. Lesuita. 10. Flumen Piscis. 11. Privatum. 12.
Gegita. 13. Satafa. 14. Cellae. 15. Gadamusa.
16. Zabi. 17. Assapha. 18. Vamalla. 19. Su-
rista. 20. Saldae. 21. Horrea. 22. Aquae Albee.
23. Igilgili, al. Eguilguili. 24. Zarai. 25. Par-
thenium. 26. Marovana. 27. Cidamus. 2 3. Macri.

29. Tamagrista. 30. Arse. 31. Mozota, al. Mopta.
32. Hippa. 33. Tamascania. 34 Vescetra. 35,
Assuoremita. 36. Serteita. 37. Melicbuza. 38
Covium. 39. Oliva. 40. Equizotum. 41. Castel
lum. 42. Eminentiana. 43. Nobahcia. 44. Le-
melefi, al. Lemellense Castellum. 45. Socia. 46,
Zallata. Holstenius adds three more, Zabunia or
Medianae Zabuniorum, Vamaccora, or Bamaccora
and Macriana; but rejects Satafa, as belonging
rather to Ceesariensis, where it is also repeated.
In Mauritania Ceesariensis and Tingitana.
1. Caesarea. 2. Ala Miharensis. 3. Bilta. 4.
Bacanaria. 5. Caputcillanum, al. CaputceUae. 6.
Cissae. 7. Castellum Medianum. 8. Gurgites. 9.
Columnee. 10. Icosium. ll.Florianum. 12. Minna.
13. Obba. 14. Maturbum. 15. Reperitanum. 16.
Rusubicari. 17- Suffara, al. Suffasar. 18. Rusto-
nium. 19. Tigis. 20. Aquae. 21. Tabora. 22.
Mamilla. 23. Sumula, al. Subbula. 24. Ubaba. 25.
Tadama. 26. Zuchabari. 27. Tipasa. 23. Ida.
29. Timisi. 30. Tasacora. 31. Vagal. 32. Car-
tenna. 33. Gratianopolis. 34. Masucaba. 35. Pa-
maria. 36. Lapidia. 37. Bulturia. 38. Malliana.
39. Castellum Tetraportiense. 40. Bapara. 41.
Tamazuca. 42. Quidium. 43. Serta. 44. Ita. 45.
Girumons. 46. Panatoria. 47. Sucarda. 48. Fi-
doloma. 49. Novae. 50. Usunada. 51. Flumenze-
rita. 52. Amaura. 53. Sestum. 54. Taranamusa.
55. Nasbinca. 56. Villanoba. 57. Vardimissa. 58,
Catula. 59. Regium. 60. Vaudinum. 61. Capra.
62. Rusucurrum. 63. Sfasteria. 64. Timida. 65,
Tabla. 66. Rusgonia. 67- Leosita. 68. Oppidum
Novum. 69. Aquisira. 70. Tigava. 71- Rusadir.
72. Castellum. 73. Mutecita. 74. Albula. 75. Bita.
76. Mauriana. 77- Baliana. 78. Arsenaria. 79.
Oborita. 80. Labdia. 81. Tenissa. 82. Catabita.
83. Herpis. 84. Voncaria. 85. Gypsaria. 86. Ta-
madempsis. 87. Vagae. 88. Tabadcara. 89. Catra,
vel Castra. 90. Elephantaria. 91. Garra. 92.
Murconium. 93. Ida. 94. Thubunae. 95. Oppi-
num. 96. Tuscamia. 97- Gunagita. 98. Maxita.
99. Satafa. 100. Vissalsa. 101. Adsinuada. 102.
CasteUum Ripense. 103. Numidia. 104. Tamuda.
105. Caltadria. 106. Subur. 107. Ambia. 108.
Murustaga. 109. FaUaba. 110. Bida. 111. Man-
accenseri. 112. Tifilta, al. Tisilta. 113. Castellum
Minus. 114. Tigamibena. 115. Junca. 116. Cor-
niculana. 117. Nobica. 118. Frontae. 119. Cas
tellum Jabaritanum. 120. Sereddeli. 121. Agna.
122. Macania. 123. Site. 124. Altaba. 125. Bene-
pota. 126. Castra Seberiani. 127. Siccesa. 128.
Flenucletu. 129. Metagonium. 130. Voncariana.
131. Maiuca. 132. Nabala. 133. Maura. 134
Tingaria. But Holstenius observes seven of these
to be supernumerary ; for Zuchabar and Subur are
but two names for the same city. So Rustonium
and Rusgonia differ only in the manner of pro-

Appendix.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

415

nunciation. Timida belongs to the Proconsular
Africa ¦ and Labdia is the same as Lapda in the said
province. Herpis is put for Irpiniana in Byzacena ;
Metagonium for Mutugenna in Numidia ; and Ma-
cania for Macriana in Byzacena.

Oea.

In Tripolis.
1. Leptis Magna. 2. Sabrata.
5. Tacape.

3. Girba. 4.

Beside these sees, which are thus assigned to their
respective provinces, Carolus a Sancto Paulo ex
hibits an alphabetical list of several others, which
he could not certainly fix in any province. But
Holstenius, in his critical remarks upon them, ob
serves, that a great many of these are only corrup
tions of the forementioned names ; and therefore I
shall here give them with his corrections, and some
additions that he has made to them from his own
observations.

1. Aurusuliana.
2. Advocata.
3. Asenemsala, which
Holstenius takes to
be the same with
Senemsala,in Africa
Proconsularis.
4. Ausugabra.
5. Acemerina.
6. Ambura; the same
with Amphora in
Numidia.
7- Abbeza.
8. Azuga ; a mistake for
Vaga.
9. Anguia.
10. Abissa.
11. Apissana.
12. Assaba.
13. Aptuca, a city in A-
frica Proconsularis.
14. Amaccura, leg. Ab
Accura.
15. Aquitana.
16. Ausuagiga.
17. Abbir, the same with
Abbarita in Africa.
18. Aniusa, added by
Holstenius.
19. Arena, idem.
20. BeUulita.
21. Bazita.
22. Botriana,
23. Bamacora, the same
with Vamacora in
Mauritania Sitifensis.

24. Burugia.
25. Bauzara.
26. Bofeta, the same
with Buffada in Nu
midia.
27. Bazarididaca.
23. Bosuta.
29. Bencenna.
30. Bartinifia.
31. Betagbara.
32. Bucara ; the same
with Boncara in
Mauritania.
33. Buslacena.
34. Bagai, the same with
Vagada, or Vaiana
in Numidia.
35. Badi, Holstenius
adds three more.
36. Bladia.
37. Burita.
33. Buronita.
39. Castrum Galbae.
40. Cedias.
41. Chullabi.
42. Cibaliana.
43. Casse Silvanae.
44. Cemerinianu.
45. Clia. A corruption
of Eha, or Helia, in
Byzacena.
46. Cathaugura.
47. Cena.
48. Caviopitavora.
49. Cincarita.
50. Catagna; the same

with Cataquensa in
Numidia.
51. Celerina.
52. Cenesta ; the same
with Tevesta in Nu
midia.
53. Casae Bastalenses.
54. Casse Favenses.
55. Cilibia.
56. Cebarsussa. To these
Holstenius adds,
57- Cancopita.
53. Ceramussa.
59. Caesariana.
60. Dydarita.
61. Drusiliana; a city of
Numidia, 12 miles
from Lares.
62. Drusita.
63. Drua.
64. Dusa.
65. Diaba; the same with
Zaba in Mauritania
Sitifensis.
66. Evera ; the same with
Vera, or Veri, in
Africa Proconsula
ris.
67- Edistiana.
68. Ensis ; the same with
Oea in Tripoli.
69. Feradi Major ; the
same with Feradi-
maia in Byzacena.
70. Furvi; the same with
Furni in Africa Pro
consularis.
71. Fissana ; perhaps
Fussala in Numidia.
72. A Furnis ; the same
with Furni.
73. Feliciana, added by
Holstenius.
74. Gitti. Municipium
Antonino.
75. Gazabeta.
76. Gazabiana. To which
Holstenius adds,
77. Ginesita.
78. Givirta, or Girbis.
79. Guira;ifitbenotthe same with Gira in
Numidia mentioned
before.

80. Haba.
81. Hospitia; the same
with Ospitum in
Numidia.
82. Horrea Avicinen-
sis.
83. HaramCeltena; the
same as Horrea Ce-
lia in Byzacena.
84. Iziriana.
85. Jucundiana.
86. Idura. Holstenius
adds two more :
87. Jacubaza.
88. Infita.
89. Limata.
90. Larita.
91. Lambia; the same
with Lambesa in
Numidia.
92. Lucimagna.
93. Lelalita.
94. Liberalia.
95. Lacus Dulcis.
96. Luperciana, men
tioned in the coun
cil under Cyprian,
which Bishop Fell
thinks is the same
with Lupertina in
the Collation of
Carthage.
97- Magarmela ; the
same with Vagar-
mela in Numidia.
98. Medefessita ; the
same as Menefessa
in Byzacena.
99. Mesarfelta.
100. Merferobita.
101. Munavilita.
102. Musertita.
103. Mopta; a city of
Mauritania Sitifen
sis. Holstenius
adds to these two
more :
104. Munaciana, and
105. Marcelliana and
Bazita, whereof one
Lucidus is named
bishop in the Col
lation of Carthage.
106. Niciba.

416

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

107. Nignenses Majores;
the same as Ni-
grenses, or Vicus
Nigras in Numidia.
108. Nurcona ; the same
with Murconium
in Mauritania Cae-
sariensis.
109. Nasaita.
110. Nova Petra.
111. Nebbita.
112. Nizugubita.
113. Novasumma ; the
same with Noba-
sina, in Numidia.
114. Onza.
115. Oria.
116. Putzia.
117. Pauzera.
118. Pista. To which
Holstenius adds
three others :
119. Pisita.
120. Pisidia, a city of
Tripolis.
121. Pertusa, a city in
Antonine's Itiner
ary near Carthage.
122. Refala; the same as
Cephala in Africa
Proconsularis.
123. Sinuara, named be
fore in Africa Pro
consularis
124. Serteita, named be
fore in Caesarea Si
tifensis.
125. Selemsila, named a-
bove in Africa.
126. Summa, Zuma in
Numidia.
127. Sena.
123. Saya.

129. Simungita, Simin-
gita, or Simina, in
Africa.
130. Sinnipsa.
131. Suboabbirita ; the
same as Zuchabari
in Mauritania.
132. Simidica,acityof A-
fricaProconsularis.
133. Siguita ; the same
as Sugita in Nu
midia.
134. Signi.
135. Sibida. Holstenius
adds two more :
136. Saturnica.
137. Salicina.
133. Tibuzabete.
139. Turuda.
140. Tunugaba.
141. Tignica.
142. Tabaicaria ; the
same as Tabadcara
in Mauritania Cae-
sariensis.
143. Taprura, Taphrura,
near the isle of Cer-
cina in Byzacena.
144. Tunis Alba.
145. Tala.
146. Tubursus, Tubursi-
ca in Numidia.
147. Tzella ; the same as
Zella in Byzacena.
148. Tibazabula.
149. Tabazaga.
150. Truvascanina.
151. Tuzumma; the same
as Zumma in Nu
midia.
152. Tunusuda.
153. Tesaniana.
154. Tusdrus ; the same
as Tysdros in By
zacena.
155. Tuzurita ; a city of

Mauritania Ceesa
riensis.
156. Tisedita.
157. Thybae. Holstenius
adds eight more :
158. Tibari.
159. Talabrica.
160. Tubia.
161. Timitica.
162. Tisilita.
163. Thasbalte.
164. Turuda.
165. Turuzi.
166. Vamaius, Uci Ma-
jus in Africa Pro
consularis.
167- Vinariona.
168. Urugita.
169. Vartana.
170. Visa.
171. Vaturba.
172. Verrono.
173. Vensana.
174. Voseta, al. Visica,
a city of Mauri
tania.
175. Vinda.

176. Vuazia.
177- Utumma.
178. Victoriana, named
before in Byzacena.
179. Vicus CaBsaris. Hol
stenius adds five
more :
180. Vallita, al. Ullita.
181. Vina; the same as
Vica, or Vina Vi
cus, in Africa.
182. Undesia.
183. Uzittara.
184. Utinuna, al. Ucimi-
na in Africa.
185. Zura.
186. Zella, named before
in Byzacena.
187- Zelta. Holstenius
thinks it should be
Zerta in Numidia.
188. Zica.
1 89. Zabunia ; the same
as Medianae Zabu-
niorum, a place
near Sitifi in Mau
ritania.

Holstenius adds one more, called Zenita or Zemta
in the Collation of Carthage, from whence the great
est part of the forementioned names are taken. But
the reader must not imagine, that so many bishop
rics, as have been specified in all the six African pro
vinces, and among these of uncertain position, were
all extant at one and the same time. For there
never was quite five hundred at one time in Africa,
as has been showed before from St. Austin and the
notitia published by Sirmondus ; and yet here are
above six hundred and eighty recounted by Carolus
a Sancto Taulo and Holstenius, after sixty are re
jected, which are named twice over. So that from
first to last there was a change of almost two hun
dred dioceses in Africa, or at least a change in their
names ; which I note, lest any should think there
were more dioceses than St. Austin mentions.

Index.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

417

AN INDEX OF THE PROVINCES.

Achaia, 383
Adiabene Assyria?, 369
¦lEgyptus Prima, 357
iEgyptus Secunda, 358
Emilia, 395
Africa Proconsularis, 355
Alpes Cottise, 395
Alpes Graiae, 398
Alpes Maritimae, ibid.
Apulia, 393
Aqucnsis, vide Narbonensis
Secunda
Aquileiensis, vide Venetia
Aquitania Prima, 399
Aquitania Secunda, ibid.
Arabia Petraea, al. Palaes
tina Tertia, 362
Arabia Philadelphia?, 360
Arcadia, 358
Arelatensis, vide Viennen
sis Secunda
Armenia Prima, 374
Armenia Secunda, ibid.
Armenia Magna, al. Persi-
ca, 369
Asia Proconsularis, 376
Assyria, 369
Augustamnica Prima, 357
Augustamnica Secunda, ib.
Axumitis, vide India
Axiimitica, 370 B
Belgica Prima, 399
Belgica Secunda, ibid.
Bithynia Prima, 376
Bithynia Secunda, ibid.
Bituricensis, vide Aquitania
Prima
Blemyes in Ethiopia, 371
Bffitica, 400
Bracarensis, vide Gallecia
Prima
Britannia, 405
Brutia, 393
Burdigalensis, vide Aquita
nia Secunda
Byzacena, 355

Calabria, 393
Campania, 392
Cappadocia Prima, 373
Cappadocia Secunda, 374
Cappadocia Tertia, ibid.
Caria, 377
Carthaginensis Hispaniae>
400
Chaldaea, 369
Cilicia Prima, 380
Cilicia Secunda, ibid.
Comagene, vide Euphraten-
sis, 365
Corsica Insula, 394
Creta Insula, 383
Cyclades Iusulae, 380
Cyprus Insula, 365

Dacia Mediterranea, 384
Dacia Ripensis, ibid.
Dacia Antiqua, sive Gothia,
384
Dalmatia, 385
Dardania, 384
Diospontum, vide Heleno
pontus

Ebrodunensis, vide Alpes
Maritimae
Elusana, vide Novempopu
lania
Emeritensis, vide Lusitania
Epirus Vetus, 383
Epirus Nova, ibid.
Ethiopia, 371
Eubcea Insula, vide Achaia
Euphratesia, 365
Europa Thraciae, 382

Flaminia, 395
Flavia Britanniae G
Galatia Prima, 375
Galatia Secunda, ibid.
E

Gallecia Prima, 401
Gallecia Secunda, ibid.
Germanica Prima, 400
Germanica Secunda, ibid.
Gothia, al. Dacia Antiqua,
384 H
Haemimontis, 382
Hagiopolitana, vide Euphra-
tensis
Helenopontus, 375
Hellespontus, 376
Hellas, vide Achaia and
Thessaha
Hibernia, 402
Histria, 396
Hispalensis, vide Bcetica
Homeritarum Regio, 370
Honorias, 375 I
Iberia, 371
Illyricum Occidental^ 385
Illyricum Orientale, 383
Immerinorum Regio, 370
India Axumitica sub M-
gypto, ibid.
Isauria, 379

Lydia, 377 M
Macedonia Prima, 383
Macedonia Secunda, ibid.
Mauritania Ceesariensis,
355, 424
Mauritania Sitifensis, ibid.
Mauritania Tingitana, 424
Maxima Ceesariensis Bri
tannia?
Maxima Sequanorum, 399
Mediolanensis, vide Liguria
Mesopotamia, 365
Mcesia Prima, sive Supe
rior, 384
Mcesia Secunda, sive In
ferior, 382 N
Narbonensis Prima, 399
Narbonensis Secunda, ibid.
Nicopolitana, vide Epirus
Vetus
Noricum Mediterraneum,
385
Noricum Ripense, ibid.
Notitia Imperii, 342
Notitia Ecclesiae, 343
Novempopulania, 399
Numidia, 355, 423

Larissena, vide Thessaha
Latium, 391
Lazica, 380
Lesbus Insula, ibid.
Liguria, 395
Libya Marmarica, sive Se
cunda, 358
Libya Pentapolis, sive Cy-
renaica, ibid.
Lucania, 393
Lugdunensis Prima, 399
Lugdunensis Secunda, ibid.
Lugdunensis Tertia, ibid.
Lugdunensis Quarta, ibid.
Lugdunensis Quinta, Vide
Maxima Sequanorum
Lusitania, 400
Lycaonia, 378
Lycia, ibid.

Osrhoena, 365

Palaestina Prima, al. Salu
taris, 361
Palaestina Secunda, ibid.
Palaestina Tertia, al. Arabia
Petreea, ibid.
Pamphylia Prima, 378
Pamphylia Secunda, ibid.
Pannonia Superior, 385
Pannonia Inferior, ibid.
Paphlagonia, 375
Peloponnesus, vide Achaia
Persia, 370
Phoenicia Prima, 365
Phoenicia Libani, ibid.

418

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Phrygia Pacatiana Prima,
379
Phrygia Salutaris, ibid.
Phrygia Pacatania Secun
da, ibid.
Picenum Annonarium, 394
Picenum Suburbicarium,
391
Pisidia, 379
Pontus Polemoniacus, 374
Praevalitana, 384
R
Ravennensis, vide Flaminia
Remensis, vide Belgica Se
cunda

Rhoetia Prima and Secun
da, 396
Rhothomagensis, vide Lug
dunensis Secunda
Rhodope, 382

Samnium, 393
Sardinia, 394
Saracenorum Regio, 370
Savia, 385
Scotia, 404
Scythia eis Danubium in
Thracia, 380
Scythia trans Danubium,
384

Senonensis, vide Lugdu
nensis Quarta
Sicilia, 394
Syria Prima, 365
Syria Secunda, ibid.

Tarraconensis, 400
Thebais Prima, 358
Thebais Secunda, ibid.
Theodorias, 365
Thessaha, 383
Thessalonicensis, vide Ma
cedonia
Thracia, 382
Tripolitana, 356

Trevirensis, vide Belgica
Prima
Turonensis, vide Lugdu
nensis Tertia
Tuscia, 388 U
Valeria, 390
Venetia, 396
Viennensis Prima, 398
Viennensis Secunda, ibid.
Umbria, 388 Z
Zeugitana, vide Africa Pro
consularis

AN INDEX OF EPISCOPAL SEES.

Abaradira, in Byzacena
Abdara, in Bcetica, 400
Abdera, in Rhodope, 382
Abdia, vel Ada, incertee po
sit, in Hispania
Abellinum, in Campania,
393
Abrinca, Auranches, in
Lugdunensis Secunda,
399
Abritum, in Mcesia Secun
da, 382
Abula, in Lusitania, 400
Abydus, in Hellespontus,
376
Abyla, in Phoenicia Libani,
365
Acarassus, in Lycia, 378
Acelum, in Venetia, 396
Acci, Guadix, in Carthagi-
nensis Hispania, 400
Acerree, in Campania, 392
Acherontia, Acerenza, in
Apulia, 393
Achrida, in Praevalitana,
384
Acmonia, in Phrygia Paca
tiana, 379
Acrassus, in Lydia, 377
Acropolis, in Lucania, 393
Adada, in Pisidia, 379
Adana, in Cilicia Prima,
380
Adra, in Arabia Philadel
phia?, 360
Adramyttium, in Asia, 377

Adriana, in Hellespontus,
376
Adriana, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Adrianopolis, in Epirus Ve
tus, 383
Adrianopolis, in Honorias,
375
Adrianopolis, in Pisidia,
379
Adrianopolis, in Haemimon
tis, 382
Adrianotheree, in Helles
pontus, 376
Adulis, in Ethiopia, 371
iEca?, in Apulia, 393
iEelanum, in Samnium,
ibid.
ASgee, in Cilicia Secunda,
380
Mgea,, in Asia, 377
iElia, vide Hierusalem, 361
iEmi, idem cum iEno
iEmonia, in Histria, 396
jEnus, in Rhodope, 382
iEsis, in Picenum Anno
narium, 394
Agatha, Agde, in Narbo
nensis Prima, 399
Agdamia, incerta? posit, in
Phrygia
Aginnum, Agen, in Aqui
tania Secunda, 399
Agrigentum, in Sicily, 394
Agrippina, in Germanica
Secunda, 400
Agraga, incerta? Provinciae,
in Hispania

Aila, in Palaestina Tertia,
361
Alabanda, in Caria, 377
Aleesa, in Sicily, 394
Alba Pompeia, in Alpes
Cottiae, 395
Albanum, in Latium, 391
Alba, in Latium, ibid.
Albensium Civitas, Vivaria,
in Viennensis, 398
Albiga, Alby, in Aquitania
Prima, 399
Albingaunum, Albenga, in
Alpes Cottiae, 395
Aleria, in Corsica, 394
Aletium, in Calabria, 393
Aletium, Alet, in Lugdu
nensis Prima, 399
Aletrium, in Latium, 391
Alexandria, iu iEgyptus
Prima, 356, 359
Alexandria, Scanderon, in
Cilicia Secunda, 380
Alexanum, Alessano, in Ca
labria, 393
Algiza, vide Argiza, in Asia
Alinda, in Caria, 377
Aliona, in Phrygia Pacati
ana, 379
Aliplia, in Samnium, 393
Altinum, in Venetia, 396
Amadassa, in Phrygia Sa
lutaris, 379
Amalphia, in Campania, 392
Amantia, in Epirus Nova,
383
Amasea, in Helenopontus,
375

Amastris, in Paphlagonia,
375
Amathus, in Cyprus, 365
Amathus, in Pala?stina Se
cunda, 361
Ambianum, Amiens, in Bel
gica Secunda, 400
Amblada, in Lycaonia, 378
Ambura, vide Amphora
Ameria, in Umbria, 389
Amida, in Mesopotamia,
365
Amisus, in Helenopontus,
375
Amiternum, in Valeria, 390
Amorium, in Phrygia Salu
taris, 379
Amyzon, in Caria, 377
Anagnia, in Campania, 391
Anapolis, incerta? posit, ex
Concil. Sardicensi
Anastasiopolis, in Caria, 377
Anastasiopolis, in Galatia
Prima, 375
Anastasiopolis, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, 379
Anazarbus, in Cilicia Se
cunda, 380
Anchialus, in Hecmimontis,
382
Anchiasmus, in Epirus Ve
tus, 383
Ancona, in Picenum Sub
urbicarium, 391
Ancyra, in Phrygia Pacati
ana, 379
Ancyra, in Galatia Prima,
375

Index.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

419

Andera, in Asia, 377
Andegavum, Angiers, in
Lugdunensis Tertia, 399
Andrapa, in Helenopontus,
375
Andropolis, in jEgyptus
Prima, 356
Ansa, in Asia, 377
Anemurium, in Isauria,
379
Anenysia, forsan Anaea
Anitha, in Arabia, 360
Anicium, vide Vellava
Aninetum, in Asia, 377
Antaradus, in Phoenicia
Prima, 365
Antamm, in Thebais Pri
ma, 358
Anthedon, in Palaestina
Prima, 361
Anthysa, urbs incerta? posit.
Antinoe, in Thebais Prima,
358
Antiochia ad Meeandrium,
in Caria, 377
Antiochia Mygdonia?, vide
Nisibis, in Mesopotamia
Antiochia, in Pisidia, 378
Antiochia, in Syria Prima,
365, 367
Antiochia- ad Tragum, # in
Isauria, 379
Antipatiis, in Paleestina
Prima, 361
Antiphellus, in Lycia, 378
Antiphra, in Libya, 358
Antipolis, Antibe, in Nar
bonensis Secunda, 399
Antipyrgus, in Libya, 358
Antissiodorum, Auxerre, in
Lugdunensis Quarta, 399
Antithou, in Augustamnica
Secunda, 358
Antium, in Latium, 391
Antrum, incerta? positionis,
in Thessaha vel Samo-
thracia
Apamea, in Pisidia, 379
Apamea, in Bithynia Se
cunda, 376
Apamea, in Syria Secunda,
365
Aphnaeum, in Augustam
nica Prima, 356
Aphrodisias, in Caria, 377
Aphroditopolis, in Arcadia,
358
Apiaria, in Mcesia Secunda,
382
Apira, in Phrygia Pacati
ana, 379
Apollinig Civitas Parva, in
Thebais Prima, 358
Apollinis Fanum, in Lydia,
377

Apollonia, in Epirus Nova,
383
Apollonia, in Lydia, 377
Apollonias, in Caria, ibid.
Apollonias, in Bithynia, 376
Apta Julia, Apt, in Narbo
nensis Secunda, 399
Aptuchi Fanum, in Penta
polis, 358
Aqua Viva, in Tuscia, 388
Aqua?,inDaciaRipensis,384
Aquae, Acs, in Novempo
pulania, 399
Aqua? Sextia?, Aix, in Nar
bonensis Secunda, ibid.
Aquae Statiellae, Acqui, in
Alpes Cottia?, 395
Aquileia, in Venetia, 396
Aquinum, in Latium, 391
Aquitana, incerta? provin-
cia in Africa
Arabyssus, in Armenia Se
cunda, 374
Araclia, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 361
Arad, in Palaestina Tertia,iJ.
Aradus, in Phoenicia Pri
ma, 365
Arana, in Lycaonia, 378
Arausio, Orange, in Vien
nensis Secunda, 399
Araxa, in Lycia, 378
Area, in Armenia Secunda,
374
Area, in Phoenicia Prima,
365 •
Arcabrica, Areas, in Car-
thaginensis Hispania, 400
Arcadiopolis, in Asia, 377
Arcadiopolis, in Europa,
382
Archelais, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 361
Ardona, in Apulia, 333
Arelate, Aries, in Viennen
sis Secunda, 399
Areopolis, in Lydia and
Asia, 377
Areopolis, in Palaestina
Tertia, 361
Arethusa, in Syria Secun
da, 365
Aretium, in Tuscia, 388
Argentoratum, Strasburg,
in Germanica Prima, 400
Argiza, in Asia, 377
Argos, in Achaia, 383
Ariarathia, in Armenia Se
cunda, 374
Ariassus, in Pamphylia
Secunda, 378
Ariminum, in Picenum An
nonarium, 395
Arindela, in Palaestina Ter
tia, 362

Arisita, in Aquitania Prima,
399
Arista, in Bithynia, 376
Aiiana, in Phrenicia Liba-
ni, 365
Armaquetius, urbs incerta?
posit, ex Concil. Sardi-
censi
Arpi, in Apulia, 393
Arsinoe, in Arcadia, 358,
359
Arsinoe, in Cyprus, 365
Arverni, Clermont, in A-
quitania Prima, 399
Ascalon, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 361
Asculum, in Picenum Sub
urbicarium, 391
Asenemsala, vide Senem-
sala
Asinda, Medina Sidonia, in
Bcetica, 400
Aspendus, in Pamphylia
Prima, 378
Aspona, in Galatia Prima,
375
Assisium, in Umbria, 389
Assus, in Asia, 377
Asta, Asti, in Alpes Cottiae,
395
Asturica, Astorga, in Gal-
laecia, 402
Astygis, Ecija, in Bcetica,
400
Asuna, vide Sasima, 374
Atanassus, in Phrygia Pa
catiana, 379
Atella, in Campania, 393
Aternum, Pescara, in Pice
num Suburbicarium, 391
Athenae, in Achaia, 383
Atina, in Campania, 391
Atribis, in Augustamnica
Secunda, 356
Attalia, in Lydia, 377
Attalia, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Attudi, in Phrygia Paca
tiana, 379
Aturum, Aire, in Novem
populania, 399
Avara, in Arabia, 360
Auca, in Tarraconensis,400
Aucanda, in Lycia, 378
Avenio, Avignon, in Vien
nensis Secunda, 399
Aventicum, Avenchc, in
Maxima Sequanorum,
399
Aufinia, in Picenum Sub
urbicarium, 391
Augusta Rauracorum,
Augst, in Maxima Sequa
norum, ibid.
Augusta Suessionum, Sois

sons, in BelgicaSecunda,
399, 400
Augusta, in Cilicia Prima,
380
Augusta Ausciorum, Aux,
in Novempopulania, 399
Augusta Taurinorum, Tu
rin, in Alpes Cottiae, 395
Augusta Trevirorum, Tri
ers, in Belgica Prima, 399
Augusta Veromanduorum,
400
Augusta Vindelicorum,
Ausburg, in Rhoetia Se
cunda, 396
Augustodunum, Autun, in
Lugdunensis Prima, 399
Augustopolis, in Paleestina
Tertia, 361
Augustopolis, in Phrygia
Salutaris, 379
Aulium, in Asia, 377
Aulon, in Epirus Nova, 383
Aurelia, Orleans, in Lugdu
nensis Quarta, 399
Aureliopolis, in Asia, 377
Auria, Orense, in Gallaecia,
402
Ausona, Vich de Ausona,
in Tarraconensis, 400
Auximum, Osmo, in Pice
num Suburbicarium, 391
Axumis, in Ethiopia, 371
Azana, in Phrygia Pacati
ana, 379
Azotus,in Paltostina Prima,
361
Azuga, vide Vaga B
Babylon, in Augustamnica
Secunda, 356
Bactra, eadem cum Bacha-
tha, in Palaestina Tertia,
or in Arabia, 360, 361
Beetiree, Beziers, in Nar
bonensis Prima, 399
Baioca, Baieux, in Lugdu
nensis Secunda, ibid.
Balanaea, in Theodorias, 365
Balandus, in Lydia, 377
Balbura, in Lycia, 378
Balcea, urbs incerta? posit.
Balia, urbs incerta? posit.
Balneum Regis, Bagnarea,
in Tuscia, 388
Bana, in Lydia, 377
Bapara, in Mauritania Ca?-
sariensis
Baptinum,urbs incertae pos.
Baratta, in Lycaonia, 378
Barca, in Pentapolis, 358
Barcino, Barcelona, in Tar
raconensis, 400
Barcusa,urbs incerta? posit.

420

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Bares, in Hellespontus, 376
Bargaza, al. Baretta, in
Asia, 377
Bargyla, in Caria, ibid.
Barissara, forsan BerisSa,
in Armenia Prima
Baris, in Pisidia, 379
Barium, in Apulia, 393
Baschat, vide Bacatha, 361
Basilinopolis, in Bithynia,
376
Basti, Baza, in Carthagi-
nensis, 400
Batava Castra, vide Pata-
via, in Noricum, 385
Batnee, in Osrhoena, 365
Bellovacum, Beauvais, in
Belgica Secunda, 400
Bellunum, Belluno, in Ve
netia, 396
Beneventum, in Samnio,
393
Berenice, in Pentapolis, 358
Bcrgomum, in Liguria, 395
Berinopolis, in Galatia Pri
ma, 375
Berinopolis, in Lycaonia,
378
Bcrisse, in Armenia Prima,
374
Bcrraca, in Syria Prima,365
Berrhaea, in Macedonia, 383
Berytus, in Phoenicia Pri
ma, 365
Bethauna, urbs incertae po
sitions, in Syria
Bigastrum, in Carthaginen-
sis, 400
Bindeum, in Pisidia, 379
Bisuntio, Besanson, 399
Biturigee, Bourges, in Aqui
tania Prima, ibid.
Birinum, al. Vibinum, Bo-
vino, in Apulia, 393
Bizya, in Europa Thracia,
382
Blacena, al. Blatea, urbs
incertae posit, in Dacia
vel Achaia
Blanda, in Lucania, 393
Bleandrus, in Phrygia Pa
catiana, 379
Blera, Bieda, in Tuscia, 388
Bobium, in Alpes Coltia?,
395
Bollica, Belley, in Maxima
Sequanorum, 399
Bononia, in jEmylia, 395
Bononia, Bolougne, in Bel
gica Secunda, 400
Boreeum, in Pentapolis, 358
Bosporus, in Scythia trans
Danube
Bossa, urbs incertae posit.
Bostra, in Arabia, 360

Botolium, urbs incerta?
posit.
Botrus, in Phoenicia Prima,
365
Bova, in Brutia, 394
Bovianum, Boiano, in Sam
nium, 393
Bracara, in Gallecia, 402
Briocum, in Lugdunensis
Tertia, 399
Brittonia, in Gallecia, 402
Brixellum, Bressello, in
iEmylia, 395
Brixia, Brescia, in Liguria,
ibid.
Brixino, Brixen, in Rhoetia
Secunda, 396
Brullena, in Asia, 377
Brundusium, Brindisi, in
Calabria, 393
Brysum, in Phrygia Salu
taris, 379
Bubastus, in Augustamnica
Secunda, 356
Bubon, al. Bunum, in Ly
cia, 378
Budine, in Dacia, 384
Bullidum, in Epirus Nova,
383
Buna, incertae posit, in Ly
cia
Bura, forsan in Achaia
Burdigala, Bourdeaux, in
Aquitania Secunda, 399
Busiris, in .rEgyptus Se
cunda, 358
Buthrotum, in Epirus Ve
tus, 383
Butus, in Aigyptus Secun
da, 358
Buxentum, in Lucania, 393
Byblus, in Phoenicia Prima,
365
Byzacium, in Byzacena
Byzantium, in Europa, 382

Cabasa, in jEgyptus Se
cunda, 358
Cabellio, Cavaillon, in Vi
ennensis Secunda, 399
Cabillonum, Chalons sur
Saone, in Lugdunensis
rrima, ibid.
Cabula, urbs incerta? posit.
Cadi, in Phrygia Pacatiana,
379
Cadurcum,Cahors,in Aqui
tania Prima, 399
Ca?na, urbs incertae posit.
Caerleon, in Britannia Se
cunda, 405
Ceesaraugusta, Saragossa,
in Tarraconensis, 400
Caesarea, in Bithynia, 37G

Caesarea, in Cappadocia
Prima, 373
Caesarea,inEuphratesia,3G5
Caesarea, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 361
Caesarea Philippi, vide Pa-
neas, in Phoenicia Prima,
365
Caesena, in Flaminia, 395
Calagurris, Calahorra, in
Tarraconensis, 400
Calatia, in Campania, 393
Calenum, Cagli, in Campa
nia, ibid.
Calinda, in Lycia, 378
Callinicus, in Osrhoena, 365
Callipolis, in Calabria, 393
Callipolis, in Europa Thra
cia, 382
Callium, Cagli, in Picenum
Annonarium, 395
Camarina, in Sicilia, 394
Cameracum, Cambray, in
Belgica Secunda, 400
Camerinum, in Umbria,
389
Camuliana, in Cappadocia
Secunda, 374
Candas, urbs incerta? posit.
Candida Casa, "Whitern, in
Valentia Britannia?, 404
Canna, in Lycaonia, 378
Cannae, in Apulia, 393
Canotha, in Arabia, 360
Cantanum, in Creta, 384
Canusium, in Apulia, 393
Caparcotia, in Palaestina
Secunda, 361
Capitolias, in Palaestina
Secunda, ibid.
CapruUa, in Venetia, 396
Capua, in Campania, 392
Caput Cillanum, in Mauri
tania Ceesariensis
Caradea, vide Corada
Caralis, in Sardinia, 394
Carallus, in Pamphylia
Prima, 378
Carcaso,in Narbonensis,399
Carina, in Brutia, 394
Carissa, in Paphlagonia,
incert. positionis
Caristus, in Achaia, 383
Carnutum, Chartres, in
Lugdunensis Quarta, 399
Caropti, forsan Carothus,
in Cyrenaica
Carpasia, in Cyprus, 365
Carpathus, in Insula? Cy
clades, 380
Carpentoracte, Carpenfras,
in Viennensis Secunda,
399
Carpis, in Pannonia Infe
rior, 385

Carrae, in Osrhoena, 365
Carsia, in Achaia, 383
Carteriopolis, in Cyprus
365
Carthage, in Africa Pro
consularis, 356
Carthago.in Carthaginensis,
400
Casatana, urbs incerta? po
sit.
Caschara, in Mesopotamia,
365, 369
Cassandria, in Macedonia,
383
Cassinum, in Latium, 391
Cassium, in Augustamnica
Prima, 356
Cassus, in Pamphylia Pri
ma, 378
Castabala, in Cilicia Se
cunda, 380
Castrum Martis, in Mcrsia
Prima, 384
Castrum Valentini, in Tus
cia, 388
Castrum Uceciense, TJzes,
in Narbonensis Prima,
399
Castulo, Gazlona, in Car
thaginensis, 400
Casula? Carianenses, in By
zacena
Catana, in Sicilia, 394
Cathaquensa, in Numidia
Catuellaunorum Civitas,
Chalons, in Champagne,
in Belgica Secunda, 400
Caunus, in Lycia, 378
C auria, Coria, in Lusitania,
400
Celenderis, in Isauria, 379
Celia, in Pannonia Inferior,
385
Celina, in Venetia, 396
Cemelene, Cimies, in Alpes
Maritimae, 398
Ceneta, Ceneda, in Venetia,
396
Cenomanum, Le Mans, in
Lugdunensis Tertia, 399
Centumcellee, Civita Vec
chia, in Tuscia, 388
Cepha, in Mesopotamia,
365
Cephalenia Insula, 383
Ceramus, in Hellespontus,
376
Ceramus, in Caria, 377
Cerasa, in Lydia, ibid.
Cerasus, in Pontus Pole-
moniacus, 374
Cerillus, in Brutia, 394
Cestrus, in Isauria, 380
Cetharquensusca, vide Ca
thaquensa

Index.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

421

Chffiretapa, in Phrygia Pa
catiana, 379
Chalcedon, in Bithynia, 376
Chalcis, in Achaia, 383
Chalcis, in Syria Prima,365
Charadra, in Isauria, 380
Chatima?a, urbs incerta? po-
sitionis, ex Cone. Sard.
Cherronesus, in Crete, 383
Chersonesus, in Europa
Thraciee, 382
Chios, Insula Cyclades, 380
Choma, in Lycia, 378
Chonochara, vide Comoara
Qrytrus, in Cyprus, 365
Cibalis, in Savia, 385
Cidissus, in Phrygia Paca
tiana, 379
China, urbs incerta? posit.
ex Cone. Ephes.
Cingulum, in Picenum
Suburbicarium, 391
Cinna, in Galatia Prima,
375
Cinnaborium, in Phrygia
Salutaris, 379
Circesium,in Osrhoena,365
Ciscissa, in Cappadocia Pri
ma, 374
Citium, in Crete, 383
Citium, in Cyprus, 365
Civitas Albensium, 398
Cius, in Bithynia, 376
Claudiopolis, in Honorias,
375
Claudiopolis, in Isauria,380
Clazomenee, in Asia, 377
Cleopatris.injEgyptus Pri
ma, 356
Clusium, in Tuscia, 388
Olypea, in Africa Procon
sularis
Clysma, in Arcadia, 358
Cocihanum,inLucania,393Coeios, in Europa, 382
Colobrassus, in Pamphylia
Secunda, 378
Colonia Londinensium, vide
Colonia Lindi, in Britan
nia, 405
Colonia, inCappadocia Ter
tia, 374
Colonia Agrippina, in Ger
manica Secunda, 400
Colophon, in Asia, 377
Colossa, Chone, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, 379
Comacula, Comacchio, in
Flaminia, 395
Comaea, in Mcesia Secunda,
382
Comana, in Armenia Se
cunda, 374
Comana, in Pontus Pole-
moniacus, ibid.

Commachum, in Pamphy
lia Secunda, 378
Comoara, in Phoenicia Li-
bani, 365
Complutum, Alcala de He-
nares, in Carthaginensis,
400
Comum, Como, in Liguria,
395
Cone, in Phrygia Salutaris,
411
Conimbrica, Coymbra, in
Gallecia, 402
Consentia, Cosenza, in Bru
tia, 394
Consoranni, Conserans, in
Novempopulania, 399
Constantia, Coutance, in
Lugdunensis Secunda,
ibid.
Constantia, Constance, in
Maxima Sequanorum,
vide Vindonissa
Constantia, in Cyprus, 365
Constantia, al. Cirta, in
Numidia, 355
Constantine, in Arabia,
360
Convenee, Cominges, in
Novempopulania, 399
Coos, in Insulae Cyclades,
380
Coprithis, in ASgyptus Pri
ma, 356
Coptus, in Thebais Secun
da, 358
Coracesium, in Pamphylia
Secunda, 378
Corada, in Phoenicia Li-
bani, 365
Corbasa, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Corcyra, Corfu, in Epirus
Vetus, 383
Corduba, Cordova, in Bce
tica, 400
Cordylus, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Corfinium, or Valva, 393
Coricus, in Cilicia Prima,
380
Corinthus, in Achaia, 383
Corisopitum, in Lugdunen
sis Tertia, 399
Corissia, in Achaia, 383
Corna, in Lycaonia, 378
Cornetum, in Tuscia, 388
Corniculana, in Mauritania
Ceesariensis
Corone, in Achaia, 383
Corone, in Bceotia, ibid.
Cortona, in Tuscia, 388
Corydalla, in Lycia, 378
Cotana, in Pamphylia Pri
ma, ibid

Cotenopolis, incerta? posit.
in iEgyptus, 357
Cotyaium, in Phrygia Sa
lutaris, 379
Cratia, al. Flaviopolis, in
Honorias, 376
Cremona, in Liguria, 3y5
Crotona, in Brutia, 394
Crusa, Insula Doridis, in
Sinu Ceramico
Ctesiphon and Seleucia, in
Assyria, 369
Cucusus, in Armenia Se
cunda, 374
Cuma, al. Cyme, in Asia,
377
Cumee, in Campania, 392
Cupersanum, Conversano,
in Apulia, 393
Cures, St. Anthimo, in Va
leria, 390
Curia, Coire, in Rhoetia
Prima, 396
Curium, in Cyprus, 365
Curta, in Pannonia Infe
rior, 385
Cusa, in Thebais Prima,
358
Cybira, in Caria, 377
Cybistra, in Cappadocia
Secunda, 374
Cydonia, in Crete, 383
Cyla, al. Coeios, in Europa,
382
Cynopolis Superior, in Ar
cadia, 356
Cynopolis Inferior, in M-
gyptus Secunda, 358
Cypera, in Thessalia, 383
Cypsela, in Rhodope, 382
Cyrene, in Pentapolis, 358
Cyrus, in Comagene, 365,
368
Cysamus, in Crete, 383
Cyzicus, in Hellespontus,
376 D
Dablis, in Bithynia, 376
Dadibra, in Paphlagonia,
375
Daldus, in Lydia, 377
Dalisandus, in Isauria, 380
Damascus, in Phoenicia
Libani, 365
Danaba, in Phoenicia Li
bani, ibid.
Dardanum, in Hellespon
tus, 376
Darnis, in Libya, 358
Dausara, in Osrhoena, 365
Delos Insula, 380
Demetrias, in Thessalia,
383
Derbe, in Lycaonia, 378

Dertona, Tortona, in Alpes
Cottiae. 395
Dertosa, Tortosa, in Tarra
conensis, 400
Develtus, in Heemimontis,
382
Dia, or Dea Vocontiorum,
Die, in Viennensis Se
cunda, 399
Dianium, Denia, in Car
thaginensis, 400
Dicaesarea, in Thessalia,383
Diciozanabrus, al. Zenopo
lis, in Pamphylia, 378
Dinia, Digne, in Alpes Ma
ritimae, 398
Diocaesarea, in Isauria, 380
Diocletiana, in Dardania,
384
Diocletianopolis, in Thra
cia, 382
Dioclia, in Phrygia Paca
tiana, 379
Dionysias, in Arabia, 360
Dionysiopolis, in Mcesia
Secunda, 382
Dionysiopolis, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, 379
Diospolis, in Thracia, 382
Diospolis, in jEgyptus Se
cunda, 358
Diospolis Magna, al. The
bais Magna, in Thebais
Secunda, ibid.
Diospolis Parva, in Thebais
Secunda, ibid.
Diospolis, al. Lydda, in
Palaestina Prima, 361
Diospontum, nameof apro-
vince, not of a city, 374
Disthis, in Pentapolis, 358
Dium, in Macedonia, 383
Doara, in Cappadocia Ter
tia, 374
Doberus, in Macedonia,
383
Docimecum, in Phrygia Sa
lutaris, 379
Doclea, in Dalmatia, 385
Dodonc, in Epirus Vetus,
383
Dola, in Lugdunensis Ter
tia, 399
Doliche, in Comagene, 365
Domitiopolis, in Isauria,
380
Dora, in Paleestina Prima,
361
Dorlanis, urbs incerta? posit,
ex Cone. Sardic.
Dorovernia, in Britannia
Prima, 405
Doryleeum, in Phrygia Sa
lutaris, 379
Drusipara, in Europa, 382

422

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Duassedemsai, vide Selem-
sal
Dumium, in Gallecia, 402
Durostorum, in Mcesia Se
cunda, 382
Dyrrachium, Doracium, in
Epirus Nova, 383
E
Ebora, Evora, in Lusitania,
400
Eboracum, in Britannia,405
Ebrodunum, Ambrun, in
Alpes Maritima?, 398
Ebroica, Eureux, in Lug
dunensis Secunda, 399
Ebusus, Insula, 402
Echinus, in Thessalia, 383
Echineota, incertae posit, in
jEgyptus
Edessa, in Osrhoena, 365,
369
Egabrum, Cabra, in Bceti
ca, 400
Egara, Tarrassa, in Tarra
conensis, ibid.
Egara, in Phrygia Pacati
ana, 379
Egita, Eidania, in Lusita
nia, 400
Egnatia, in Byzacena
Elana, al. Neela, in Arabia,
360
Elatea, in Achaia, 383
Etoa, in Asia, 377
Elearchia, in .rEgyptus Se
cunda, 358, 360
Elesma, vide Clysma, in
Arcadia, 358
Eleuthera, in Crete, 383
Eleutheropolis, in Palaesti
na Prima, 361, 363
Elia, in Palaestina Prima,
361
Eliberis, Elvira, in Boetica,
400
Eliocrota, Lorca, in Car-
thaginensis Hispania?,
ibid.
Elusa, Eause, in Novem
populania, 39g
Elusa, in Palaestina Tertia,
361
Emerita, Merida, in Lusi
tania, 400
Emesa, in Phoenicia Libani,
365
Eminium, incertae posit, in
Hispania
Emmaus, vide Nicopolis,
361
Emporia?, Empurias, in
Tarraconensis, 400
Engolisma, Angoulesme, in
Aquitania Secunda, 399

Epala, al. Epula, urbs in
certa? posit.
Ephesus, in Asia, 377
Epidaurus, Ragusa, in Dal
matia, 385
Epiphania, in Syria Secun
da, 365
Epiphania, in Cilicia Se
cunda, 380
Eporedia, Jurea, in Ligu
ria, 395
Ergavica, Alcaniz, in Car-
thaginensis, 400
Erisa, in Caria, 377
Erra, in Arabia, 360
Erymne, ui Pamphylia Pri
ma, 378
Erythra, in Pentapolis, 358
Erytra?, in Asia, 377
Esbus, in Arabia, 360
Etene, in Pamphylia Pri
ma, 378
Evaria, al. Euroia, al. Jus
tinianopolis, in Phoeni
cia Libani, 365
Evaza, in Asia, 377
Eucarpia, in Phrygia Salu
taris, 379
Eudoxias, in Lycia, 378
Eudoxias, inPamphylia Se
cunda, ibid.
Eugubium, Gubbio, in Um
bria, 389
Eulandra, urbs incerta? po-
sitionis
Eumenia, in Phrygia Pa
catiana, 379
Euria, in Epirus Vetus, 383
Europus, al. Amphipolis
and Thapsacum, in Eu-
phratesia, 365
Euusum, vide Ebusus In
sula

Faleronia, Faleroni, in Pi
cenum Suburbicarium,
391
Fanum Jovis, in Asia, 377
Fanum Fortuna?, Fano, in
Picenum Annonarium,
395
Faventia, Faenza, in Fla
minia, ibid.
Faustinopolis, in Cappado
cia Secunda, 374
Feltria, Feltri, in Venetia,
396
Ferentinum, in Latium, 391
Ferentium, Ferento, in
Tuscia, 388
Fesula?, Fiezoli, in Tuscia,
ibid.
Ficoclee, Cervia, in Flami
nia, 395

Fidenae, in Valeria, 390
Firmum, Firmo, in Pice
num Suburbicarium, 391
Flagonea, vide Phragonea,
in A3gyptus Secunda,
358
Flaviopolis, in Cilicia Se
cunda, 380
Florentia, Florence, in Tus
cia, 388
Formiae, in Latium, 391
Forontoniana, in Bizacena
Forum Flaminii, For -flam-
mo, in Umbria, 389
Forum Claudii, Oriolo, in
Tuscia, 388
Forum Novum, Vescovio,
in Umbria, 389
Forum Sempronii, in Pi
cenum Annonarium, 395
Forum Cornelii, Imola, in
Flaminia, ibid.
Forum Livii, Forli, in Fla
minia, ibid.
Forum Popilii, in Flami
nia, ibid.
Forum Julii, Friuli, in His
tria, 396
Forum Trajani, in Sardi
nia, 394
Forum Julii, Frejuz, in
Narbonensis Secunda,
3g9
Fragonia, in Egyptus Se
cunda, 358
Frequentum, Fricenti, in
Samnium, 393
Fulginum, Fulgino, in Um
bria, 389
Fundi, in LatirrrB,391
Furconium, Forconio, in
Valeria, 390 G
Gabala, in Lydia, 377
Gabala, in Theodorias, 365
Gabalum, Mande, in Aqui
tania Prima, 399
Gabbus, in Syria Prima,
365
Gabii, in Latium, 391
Gadamautus,m'efe Hydmau-
tus, in Lycaonia, 379
Gadamusa, in Mauritania
Sitifensis
Gadara, in Palaestina Se
cunda, 361
Gaiopolis, forsan Gaeapolis,
in Arabia
Gangra, inPaphlagonia,375
Gargara, in Asia, 377
Gavaea, incerta? posit, in
^Egyptus, 358
Gaza, in Palaestina Prima,
361, 363

Gazula, incertae posit, in
Egyptus, 358
Gegita, in Mauritania Silif.
ensis
Geneva, in Viennensis Pri
ma, 398
Genua.iu Alpes Cottiae, 395
Geone, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Gerara, in Palaestina Pri-
ma, 361
Gerasa, in Arabia, 360
Germa, in Hellespontus,
376
Germanicia, in Euphrate-
sia, 365
Germanicopolis, in Isauria,
380
Geronta, vol Gerus, velGe-
ranus Locus, urbs in-
certae posit, in Armenia,
vel Macedonia
Gerunda, Girone, in Tar
raconensis, 400
Gerus, in Augustamnica
Prima, 356
Gilsata, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Gindarus, in Syria Prima,
367
Girberis, in Tripolis, 356
Glandata, Glandeve, in Al
pes Maritimae, 398
Gnidus, in Caria, 378
Gnossus, in Crete, 383
Gomphi, in Thessalia, ibid.
Gordus, in Lydia, 377
Gordus, in Bithynia, 376
Gortena, in Pisidia, 379
Gortyna, in Crete, 383
Gradus, Grado, in Venetia,
396
Gratianopolis, Grenoble, Li
Viennensis, 398
Gravisca, Montalto, in Tus
cia, 388
Grumentum, Agrimonte, in
Lucania, 393 H
Hadria, Adri„in Picenum
Suburbicarium, 391
Hadria, Adri, in Flaminia,
395
Hadriana, in Bithynia, 376
Hadrianopolis, in Ha?mi-
montis, 382
Hagulstade, in Britannia,
407
Halicarnassus, inCaria,377
Harpasa, in Caria, ibid.
Hebrides Insula?
Helena, Etna, in Narbon
ensis, 399
Helice, in Achaia, 3S3

Index.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

423

Heliopohs, in Augustamni
ca Secunda, 358
Heliopohs, in Phoenicia Li
bani, 365
Hellene, in Lydia, 377
Hellenopolis, in Bithynia,
376
Helmham, or Elmham, in
Britannia, 407
Hephaestia, in Macedonia,
383
Hephaestus, in Augustam
nica Prima, 356
Heraclea, in Augustamni
ca Prima, ibid.
Heraclea, in Macedonia,
383
Heraclea, in Europa Thra
cia?, 382
Heraclea, in Lydia, 377
Heraclea Latmi, in Caria,
ibid.
Heraclea Ponti, in Hono
rias, 375
Heraclea Salbaci, in Caria,
377
Heraclea Superior, in Ar
cadia, 358
Herdona, Ardona, in Apu
lia, 393
Herefordia, in Britannia,
405
Hermouthes, in Thebais
Secunda, 358
Hermopolis Parva, in M-
gyptas Prima, 356
Hermopolis Magna, in The
bais Prima, 357
Hermopolis, in Isauria, 380
Hierapetra, in Crete, 383
Hierapolis, in Phrygia Pa
catiana, 379
Hierapolis, in Isauria, 380
Hierocaesarea, in Lydia, 377
Hieropolis, in Euphratesia,
365
Hierusalem, in Palaestina
' Prima, 361, 364
Himeria, in Osrhoena, 365
Hippo Biaretorum, in A-
frica Proconsularis, 355
Hippo Regius, in Numidia,
ibid.
Hippus, in Palaestina Se
cunda, 361
Hipsele, in Thebais Prima,
358
Hipsus, in Phrygia Saluta
ris, 379
Hircani, in Lydia, 377
Hispalis, Seville, in Bceti
ca, 400
Hispellum, in Umbria, 389
Honomada, in Lycaonia,
378

Hortanum, Horti, in Tus
cia, 388
Hyda, in Lycaonia, 378
Hydmautus, in Lycaonia,
379
Hydrax, in Pentapolis, 358
Hydruntum, Otranto, in
Calabria, 393
Hypaepa, in Asia, 377

Jabruda, in Phoenicia Li
bani, 365
Jadera, in Dalmatia, 385
Jamna, in Minorica, 402
Jamnia, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 364
Jassus, in Caria, 377
Ibonium, vide Bivinum
Iborea, in Helenopontus,
375
Iconium, in Lycaonia, S78
Jericho, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 361
Ignatia, in Apulia, 393
Ilerda, Lerida, in Tarra
conensis, 400
Ilipa, al. Ilipla, Niebla, in
Bcetica, ibid.
Uistra, in Lycaonia, 378
Ilium, in Hellespontus, .376
Illicias Alicante, in Cartha-
ginensis, 40 J
Illiturgis, incerta? posit, in
Hispania
Ilusa, in Phrygia Pacati
ana, 379
Ingilon, urbs incertae posit.
Insula?, vide Hebrides
Interamnia,*Terni, in Um
bria, 389
Interamnia, Teramo, in Pi
cenum Suburbicarium,
391
Jonopolis, vide Junopolis,
in Paphlagonia, 375
Joppa, in Palaestina Prima,
361
Jotape, in Isauria, 380
Irenopolis, in Cilicia Se
cunda, ibid.
Iria Flavia, El Padron, in
Gallecia, 402
Isaura, in Lycaonia, 378
Iscus, in Dacia Ripensis,
384
Isinda, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Istonium, in Samnium
Italica, Sevilla la Vieja, in
Bostica, 400
Itoana, Bitoana, in Phry
gia Pacatiana, 379
Juliopolis,in Galatia Prima,
375

Junopolis, hi Paphlagonia,
375
Juritum, urbs incerta? posit.
Justiniana Prima, in Prae
valitana, 384
Justinianopole, al. Mocis
sus, in Cappadocia Ter
tia, 374
Juvavia, in Noricum, 385

Labdia, vel Lapda
Lacedaemon, in Achaia 383
Lacobriga, incertae posit, in
Hispania
Lactoratium, Lectoure, in
Novempopulania, 399
Laerus, urbs vel insjla in
certa? posit, in jEgaeo
Mari
Lagania, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Lamecum, Lamego, in Gal
lecia, 402
Lamia, in Thessalia, 383
Lamphania, urbs incerta?
posit.
Lampsacus, in Hellespon
tus, 376
Lamus, in Isauria, 379
Landava, Landaff, in Bri
tannia Secunda, 405
Laniobra, incerta? posit, in
Hispania
Laodicea, in Phrygia Pa
catiana, 379
Laodicea, in Pisidia, ibid.
Laodicea, in Theodorias,
365
Laodicea, in Phoenicia Li
bani, ibid.
Lapithus, in Cyprus, ibid.
Lappa, i Crete, 383
Laranda, in Lycaonia, 378
Larima, in Caria, 377
Larissa, in Thessalia, 383
Larissa, in Syria Secunda,
365
Lascara, Lescar, in Novem
populania, 399
Latopolis, in Thebais Se
cunda, 358
Laudunum, Leon, in Bel
gica Secunda, 400
Laverica, incerta? posit, in
Hispania
Lavici, in Latium, 391
Laureacum, Lork, in No
ricum, 385
Laus Pompeia, Lodi, in
Liguria, 395
Lauzada, in Isauria, 380
Lebedus, in Asia, 377
Ledra, in Cyprus, 365
Legio,Leon, in Gallecia,402

Lemandus, in Pentapolis,
358
Lemovica, Limoges, in A-
quitania Prima, 399
Leontini, Lentini, in Sicilia,
394
Leontopolis, in Augustam
nica Secunda, 356
Leptis Magna, in Tripolis,
ibid.
Lete, in Macedonia, 383
Letus, in ^Egyptus Prima,
356
Lexovium, Lisieux, in Lug
dunensis Secunda, 399
Libias, in Palaestina Prima,
361
Lichfield, in Britannia, 407
Lilybeeum, Marsala, in Si
cilia, 394
Limenopolis, in Pisidia, 379
Limyra, in Lycia, 378
Lindisfarne, in Britannia,
407
Lindocolina, al. Lindum
Colonia, Lincoln, in Bri
tannia, 405
Lingones, Langres, in Lug
dunensis Prima, 399
Linoe, in Bithynia Secunda,
376
Linternum, in Campania,
392
Lipara Insula, 394
Lisia, urbs incerta? posit.
Lisinia, in Pisidia
Lissus, Alessio, in Praeva
litana, 384
Lista, in Valeria, 390
Loeri,Gieraci, in Brutia,393
Londinum,inBritannia,405 Lorium, in Tuscia, 388
Luca, in Tuscia, ibid.
Lucus Augusti, in Gallecia,
402
Luetum, urbs incerta? posit.
Lugdunum, Lyons, in Lug
dunensis Prima, 399
Luna, in Tuscia, 388
Luteva, Lodeue, in Narbo
nensis Prima, 399
Lybias, in Isauria, 380
Lycopolis, in Thebais Pri
ma, 358
Lychnidus, in Epirus Nova,
383
Lydda, vide Diospolis, 361
Lydda, in Palaestina Pri
ma, ibid.
Lypia, Luspiae, in Calabria,
393
Lyrbae, in Pamphylia Pri
ma, 378
Lysias, in Phrygia Saluta
ris, 379

424

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Lysimachia, in Europa, 382
Lysinia, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Lystra, in Lycaonia, ibid.
M
Macedonopolis, urbs incer
ta? posit, in Mesopotamia
Meeonia, in Lydia, 377
Magalona,Isle of Magalone,
in Narbonensis Secunda,
399
Magidis, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Magnesia Meeandri, in A-
sia, 377
Magnesia Sipyli, in Asia,
ibid.
Magnetum, incerta? posit.
in Hispania
Majorica Insula, 402
Maiuma, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 361, 363
Malaca, Malaga, in Bcetica,
400
Malleotana, urbs incerta?
posit, forsan Malliattha,
in Arabia
Mallus.in Cilicia Prima,3S0
Mallus, in Pisidia, 379
Manturanum,in Tuscia,388
Marathon, in Achaia, 383
Marcelilanum, vide Cosilia-
num
Marciana, in Lycia, 378
Marcianopolis, in Mcesia
Secunda, 382
Marcopolis, in Osrhoena,
365
Mareotis, in jEgyptus Pri
ma, 356
Margus, in McEsia Prima,
384
Mariama, Mariamne, in Sy
ria Secunda, 365
Mariana, in Corsica, 394
Marianopolis, in Euphra-
tesia, 365
Marianum, in Venetia, 396
Marmarica, in Libya, 358
Maronia, in Rhodope, 382
Marruvium, al. Marsi, in
Valeria, 390
Martyropolis, in Mesopo
tamia Prima, 365
Massilia, Marseilles, in Vi
ennensis Secunda, 399
Mastaura, in Lydia, 377
Matelica, in Picenum Sub
urbicarium, 391
Matisco, Maseon, in Lug
dunensis Prima, 399
Mauriana, St. Jean de Mau-
rienne, in Viennensis,399
Maustaura, in Lycia, 378

Maximianopolis, in Arabia,
360
Maximianopolis, in Rho
dope, 382
Maximianopolis, in Pam
phylia Secunda, 378
Maximianopolis, in Palaes
tina Secunda, 361
Maximianopolis, in The
bais Secunda, 358
Medaba, in Arabia, 360
Mediolanum, Milan, in Li
guria, 395
Mediomatricum, Metz, in
Belgica Prima, 399
Megalopolis, in Achaia, 383
Megara, in Achaia, ibid.
Melda, Meaux, 399
Melita Insula, 394
Melitene, in Armenia Se
cunda, 374
Melitopolis, in Hellespon
tus, 376
Melos Insula, 380
Melphia, Melfi, in Apulia,
393
Memphis, in Arcadia, 358
Menelaites, in jEgyptus
Prima, 356
Menevia, St. David's, in
Britannia, 405
Mennith, in Paleestina Se
cunda, 361
Mentesa, Mentexa, in Car-
thaginensis, 400
Mesembria,in H eemimontis,
382
Messana, in Sicilia, 394
Messene, in Achaia, 383
Metelis, in JSgyptus Pri
ma, 356
Methymna, in Lesbos, 380
Metrocomia, vide Bacatha,
in Paleestina Tertia
Metropolis, in Asia, 377
Metropolis, in Thessalia,
383
Metropolis, in Pisidia, 379
Mevania, Bevagna, in Um
bria, 389
Midaium, in Phrygia Salu
taris, 379
Migirpa, in Africa Procon
sularis
Mignenia, urbs incertee po
sit, forsan Magniana, in
Illyricum Occidentale
Miletus, in Caria, 377
Mileum, al. Milevis, in Nu
midia, 355
Miniza, al. Mnisus, in Me
sopotamia, 365
Minoida, al. Mennith, in
Palaestina Secunda, 361
Minorica Insula, 402

Minturnee, in Campania,
392
Misenum,in Campama,i5i'rf.
Misthium, in Lycaonia, 378
Mocissus, vide Justinopolis,
in Cappadocia Tertia,374
Mocta, vide Mopta vel Mo-
zota
Moguntiacum, Ments, in
Germanica Prima, 400
Molitianum, urbs incerta?
posit.
Mopsuestia, in Cilicia Se
cunda, 380
Morea, al. Famagorea, urbs
incertee positionis
Mostena, in Lydia, 377
Mosynus, in Phrygia Paca
tiana, 379
Muranum, Morano, in Bru
tia, 394
Mursa, in Savia, 385
Mutina, Modena, in Mmy-
lia, 395
Myndus, in Caria, 377
Myra, in Lycia, 378
Myrrina, in Asia, 377
Myriangelus, urbs incertee
positionis
Myrum,al.Merum,in Phry
gia Salutaris, 379
Mytelene, in Lesbos, 380
N
Nacolia, in Phrygia Salu
taris, 379
Naissus, in Dacia Ripensis,
384
Namnetes, Nantes, in Lug
dunensis Tertia, 399
Narbo, in Narbonensis Pri
ma, 399
Narnia, Narni, in Umbria,
389
Naucratia, in jEgyptus
Prima, 356
Naulochus, in Asia, 377
Naupactus, Lepanto, in A-
chaia, 383
Naxus Insula, 380
Nazianzum, in Cappadocia
Tertia, 374
Nea, vide Saneea, in Phry
gia Pacatiana, 379
Neapolis, Naples, in Cam
pania, 392
Neapolis, in Macedonia,
383
Neapolis, in Caria, 377
Neapolis, in Arabia, 360
Neapolis, Sichem, in Pa
laestina Prima, 361
Nebium, in Corsica, 394
Neela, vide Elana, in Ara
bia, 360

Nemausum, Nismes, in
Narbonensis, 399
Neocaesarea, in Pontus Po.
lemoniaeus, 374
Neocaesarea, in Bithynia,
376
Neocaesarea, vide Caesarea,
in Euphratensis
Nepe, vulgo Nepi, in Tus-
cia, 388
Nephelis, in Isauria, 380
Neritum, Nardo, in Cala-
bria, 393
Nessyna, Nessus, in Dar
dania, 384
Nibe, Nive, in Arabia, 360
Nicaea, Nice, in Alpes Ma
ritimae, 398
Niceea, Nice, in Bithynia,
376
Nicephorium, in Osrhoena,
365
Nicium, in jEgyptus Pri
ma, 356
Nicomedia, in Bithynia,376
Nicopolis, in Epirus Vetus,
383
Nicopolis, in Mcesia Se
cunda, 382
Nicopolis, in Thracia, ibid.
Nicopolis, in Armenia Pri
ma, 374
Nicopolis, Emmaus, in Pa
leestina Prima, 361, 364
Nicotera, Nicodro, in Bru
tia, 394
Nilopolis, in Arcadia, 358
Nisibis, in Mesopotamia,
365, 369
Nisilectum, urbs incertee
posit.
Nitria, in iEgyptus Prima,
356
Nivernum, Nevers, in Lug-
dunensis'Quarta, 399
Nola, in Campania, 392
Nomentum, Lamentana, in
Valeria, 390
Nosalena, urbs incerta? pos.
forsan in Armenia Minor
Nova, in Venetia, 396
Nova Aula, in Asia, 377
Novee, in Mcesia Secunda,
382
Novaria, in Liguria, 395
Noviodunum, in Savia, 385
Noviodunum, Noyon, in
Belgica Secunda, 400
Nuceria, Nocera, in Um
bria, 389
Numana, Humana, in Pi
cenum Suburbicarium,
391
Nursia, Norza, in Valeria,
390

Index.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

425

Nysa, vel Nesus, in Lycia,
378
Nyssa, in Asia, 377
Nyssa, in Cappadocia Se
cunda, 374 0
Oasis Magna, in Thebais
Prima, 358
Occa, in Hellespontus, 376
Ocriculum, in Umbria, 389
Octodurum, Martenach, in
Alpes Graiae, 398
Odessus, in Mcesia Secun
da, 382
CEea, in Tripolis, 356
QSneanda, in Lycia, 378
Olbia, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, ibid.
Olbia, in Pentapolis, 358,
359
Olbus, in Isauria, 380
Olero, Oleron, in Novem
populania, 399
Oliva, in Mauritania Sitif
ensis
Olympus, in Lycia, 378
Olysippo, Lisbone, in Lu
sitania, 400
Onosada, al. Usada, in Ly
caonia, 378
Onosarta, in Syria Prima,
365
Onium, al. Ilium, in Au
gustamnica Secunda, 356
Onuphis, in iEgyptus Pri
ma, ibid.
Opita, urbs incerta? posit.
Optergium, Oderzo, in Ve
netia, 396
Opus, in Achaia, 383
Orchades, in Britannia, 404
Orcistus, in Galatia Secun
da, 375
Orestis, in Brutia, 394
Oretum, Oreto, in Cartha-
ginensis, 400
Oreum, in Achaia, 383
Orgellum.in Tarraconensis,
400
Orthosias, in Phoenicia Pri
ma, 365
Orthosias, in Caria, 377
Ortona, in Samnium, 393
Osca, in Tarraconensis, 400
Ossismorum, in Lugdunen
sis Tertia
Ossonaba, Estoy, in Lusi
tania, 400
Ostia, in Latium, 387, 391
Ostracina, in Augustam
nica Prima, 356
Otrum, in Phrygia Salu
taris, 379
OvUabis, in Noricum, 385

Oximum, Hiesmes, in Lug
dunensis Secunda, 399
Oxoma, al. Uxama, Osma,
in Carthaginensis, 400
Oxyrinchus, in Arcadia,358

Pachneumonis, in iEgyp
tus Secunda, 358
Paemanium, in Hellespon
tus, 376
Peestum, Pesto, in Luca
nia, 393
Palaebisca, in Pentapolis,
358
Paleeopolis, in Asia, 377
Paleeopolis, in Pamphylia
Secunda, 378
Palladianum, urbs incertae
posit.
Pallentia, in Carthaginen
sis, 400
Palma, in Majorica, 402
Palmyra, in Phoenicia Li
bani, 365
Paltus, in Theodorias, al.
Syria Prima, ibid.
Pampelona, in Tarraconen
sis, 400
Panaephysus, in Augustam
nica Prima, 356, 360
Paneas, al. Caesarea Phi
lippi, in Pbcenicia Pri
ma, 365
Panemoticus, in Pamphylia
Secunda, 378
Panium, in Europa, 382
Panopolis, in Thebais Pri
ma, 358
Panormns, Palermo, in Si
cilia, 394
Paphos, in Cyprus, 365
Pappa, in Lycaonia, 378
Paraetonium, in Libya, 358
Paralaus, in Pisidia, 379
Parallus, in Arcadia, 358
Paralus, in .iEgyptus Se
cunda, ibid.
Paraxia, urbs incerta? posit.
in Macedonia
Parembola, in Arabia, 360
Parentium, in Histria, 396
Parish, Paris, in Lugdun
ensis Quarta, 399
Parium,inHellespontus,376Parma, in iEmylia, 395
Parnassus, iu Cappadocia
Tertia, 374
Paros Insula, 380
Parosithus, urbs incertae
positionis
Partenium, in Mauritania
Sitifensis
Parlicopolis, in Macedonia,
383

Parus, urbs incerta? posit.
in Pisidia
Patara, in Lycia, 378
Patavia, al. Batava Castra,
Passaw, in Noricum, 385
Patavium, Padua, in Vene
tia, 396
Patavium, in Bithynia, 376
Paternum, urbs mcertae po
sit, in Cappadocia Se
cunda, forsan Parnassus
Pausola, in Picenum Sub
urbicarium, 391
Pautalia, in Dardania, 384
Pella, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Pella, in Paleestina Secun
da, 361
Pelte, in Phrygia Pacati
ana, 379
Pelusium, in Augustamnica
Prima, 356
Pentenessus, al. Pednelis-
sus, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Pepere, vel Perpere, in A-
sia, 377
Perga, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Pergamus, in Asia, 377
Periorcis, urbs incerta? po
sit, in Libya vel iEgypto
Perre, in Euphratesia, 365
Perte, in Lycaonia, 378
Perusia, in Tuscia, 388
Pessinus, in Galatia Se
cunda, 375
Petavia, Petow, in Panno
nia, 385
Petenessus, in Galatia Se
cunda, 375
Petra, in Lazica, 380
Petra, in Palaestina Prima,
361
Petra, in Palaestina Tertia,
ibid.
Petree, in Achaia, 383
Petrocorium, Perigueux, in
Aquitania Secunda, 399
Phacusa, in Augustamnica
Prima, 356
Phalaris, in Tuscia, 388
Pharan, in Paleestina Ter
tia, 361
Pbarbeethus, in Augustam
nica Secunda, 356
Pharnacea, urbs incerta? po
sit, in Pontus, al. Cilicia
Phaselis, in Lycia, 378
Phasis, in Lazica, 380
Phausania, in Sardinia, 394
Phellus, in Lycia, 378
Phenon, in Paleestina Ter
tia, 361
Philadelphia, in Lydia, 377

Philadelphia, in Isauria,380
Philadelphia, in Arabia,360
Philippi, in Macedonia Se
cunda, 383
Philippopolis, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, 379
Philippopolis, in Thracia,
382
Philippopolis,in Arabia,360
Philomelium,in Pisidia,379
Phocaea, in Asia, 377
Phoenicia, in Epirus Vetus,
383
Photica,in Epirus Vetus.iA.
Phragonea, in .tEgyptus Se
cunda, 358, 360
Phthenoti Nomus, in M-
gyptus Prima, 356
Phuphena, urbs incertee po
sitionis, in Isauria vel
Armenia Minor
Phylee, in Thebais Secun
da, 358
Pictavi, Poictiers, in Aqui
tania Secunda, 399
Pinna, Penna, in Picenum
Suburbicarium, 391
Pionia, in Hellespontus,376
Pisa, in Tuscia, 388
Pisaurum, Pesaro, in Pice
num Annonarium, 395
Pisinda, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Pitane, in Asia, 377
Pitinum, in Valeria, 390
Pitius, in Pontus, 375, 380
Placentia, in jEmylia, 395
Placia, urbs incerta? posit.
in Galatia vel Bithynia
Platanus,urbs incertae posit.
in Syria vel Phoenicia
Platea, in Achaia, 383
Plutinopolis, in Heemimon
tis, 382
Podaleea, in Lycia, 378
Pola, in Histria, 396
Polemonium, in Pontus Po-
lemoniacus, 374
Polybotus, in Phrygia Sa
lutaris, 379
Polymartium, Bomarso, in
Tuscia, 388
Pompeiopolis, in Paphla-
¦gonia, 375
Pompeiopolis, in Cilicia
Prima, 380
Populonia, in Tuscia, 388
Poroselene Insula, 380
Forphyrium, in Phoenicia
Prima, 365
Porthmus, in Achaia, 383
Portus Orestis, in Brutia,
394
Portus Calensis, El Puerto
in Gallecia, 402

426

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Portus Augusti, Porto, in
Tuscia, 388
Potentia, in Picenum Sub
urbicarium, 391
Potentia, Potenza, in Lu
cania, 393
Praeeonesus, in Hellespon
tus, 376
Praeneste, Palestrina, in
Valeria, 390
Praeneste, in Latium, 391
Praenetum, in Bithynia, 376
Preepenissus, in Phrygia
Salutaris, 379
Priene, in Asia, 377
Primopolis, in Pamphylia
Secunda, 378
Primula, in Macedonia, 383
Prina, in Epirus Nova, ibid,
Prista, al. Tristra and Sex-
antaprista, in Mcesia Se
cunda, 382
Privatum, in Mauritania
Sitifensis
Prosolene Insula, vide Po
roselene
Prostama, in Pisidia, 379
Prusa, in Bithynia, 376
Prusias, in Honorias, 375
Prymnesia, in Phrygia Sa
lutaris, 379
Psynchus, vide Oxyrinchus,
358
Ptolemais, in Thebais Se
cunda, ibid.
Ptolemais, Aeon, in Phoe
nicia Prima, 365
Ptolemais, in Pentapolis,
358
Ptyusium, in Lazica vel
Pontus Polemoniacus,
380
Pugla, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Puteoli, Puzzolo, in Cam
pania, 392 Q
Quintanae, in Rhcetia Se
cunda, 396 R
Rabba, vide Petra, 361
Rachleena, urbs incerta? po
sitionis, in Phoenicia
Raphaneea, in Syria Se
cunda, 365
Raphia, in Paleestina Pri
ma, 361
Rapta, urbs incerta? posit.
in Africa
Ratispona, in Rhcetia Se
cunda, 396
Ravenna, in Flaminia, 395
Reate, Rieti, in Valeria, 390

Redones, Renes, in Lug
dunensis Tertia, 399
Regium Lepidi, Reggio, in
iEmylia, 395
Regium, or Reii, Riez, in
Narbonensis Secunda,
399
Remessiana, in Dacia, 384
Remi, Reims, in Belgica
Secunda, 399
Rhegium, Rezo, in Brutia,
393, 394
Rhesina, in Mesopotamia,
365
Rhinocurura, in Augustam
nica Prima, 356
Rhizinium, in Praevalitana,
384
Rhodia, in Lycia, 378
Rhodus Insula, 380
Rhofi, Rochester, in Bri
tannia, 405
Rocus, urbs incerta? posit.
Roma, in Latium and Tus
cia, 387
Romatiana, vide Remessi
ana
Rossus, in Cilicia Secunda,
380
Rothomagum, Rouen, in
Lugdunensis Secunda,
399
Rubisium, Ruvo, in Apulia,
393
Rusella, in Tuscia, 388
Rutena, Rhodes, in Aqui
tania Prima, 399

Sabaria, in Pannonia Pri
ma, 385
Sabatra, in Lycaonia, 378
Sabiona, in Venetia, 396
Sabrata, in Tripolis, 356
Seepinum, in Samnium, 393
Sagalassus, in Pisidia, 379
Sagium, Siez, in Lugdun
ensis Secunda, 399
Sais.in iEgyptus Prima, 356
Salamis, vide Constantia
Salapia, Salpe, in Apulia,
393
Salaria, in Carthaginensis,
400
Salernum, in Campania,
392
Salmanttca, Salamanca, in
Lusitania, 400
Salona, in Dalmatia, 385
Salpis, in Tuscia, 388
Samnium, in Samnium, 393
Samos Insula, 380
Samosata, in Euphratesia,
365
Sanafer, in Sardinia, 394

Sanicium, Senez, in Alpes
Maritimae, 398
Sanis, in Phrygia Pacatiana,
379
Santones, Saintes, in Aqui
tania Secunda, 399
Saracene, incerta? posit, in
Arabia, 365
Sardica, in Dacia, 384
Sardis, in Lydia, 377
Sarsina, in Flaminia, 395
Sarta, urbs incerta? posit.
Sasima, in Cappadocia Se
cunda, 373
Satala, in Lydia, 377
Satala, in Armenia Prima,
374
Savona, in Alpes Cottiae, 395
Sbide, in Isauria, 380
Scampes, in Epirus Nova,
383
Scarabantia, in Pannonia,
385
Scarphia, in Thessalia, 383
Scena? Mandrorum, in Au
gustamnica Secunda, 358
Scepsis, in Hellespontus,376
Schedia, in iEgyptus Pri
ma, 356, 359
Scodra, in Praevalitana, 384
Scupi, in Dardania, ibid.
Scyllatium, in Brutia, 394
Scythopolis, in Paleestina
Secunda, 361
Sebasta, in Phrygia Paca
tiana, 379
Sebaste, in Cilicia Prima,
380
Sebaste, Samaria, in Palees
tina Prima, 361
Sebastea, in Armenia Pri
ma, 374
Sebastopolis, in Armenia
Prima, 374
Sebennythus, in jEgyptus
Secunda, 358
Secobia, Segovia, in Car
thaginensis, 400
Secorus, in Achaia, 383
Sedunum, Syon en Valez,
in Alpes Graiee, 398
Segestero, Cisteron, in Nar
bonensis Secunda, 399
Segobriga, Segorbe, in Car
thaginensis, 400
Segontia, al. Saguntum, Si-
guenza, in Carthaginen
sis, ibid.
Sela, in Augustamnica Pri
ma, 356
Seleucia and Ctesiphon, in
Assyria, 369
Seleucia, in Pisidia, 379
Seleucia, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378

Seleucia Pieria, in Syria
Prima, 365
Seleucia Belum, in Syria
Secunda, ibid.
Seleucia, in Isauria, 379
Selga, in Pamphyha Prima,
378
Selinus, in Isauria, 380
Sella?, urbs incerta? posit.
Selymbria, in Europa, 382
Semneam, in Pamphylia
Prima, 378
Sena, in Tuscia, 388
Sense, in Augustamnica Se
cunda
Senia, Segna, in Dalmatia,
385
Senna, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Senogallia,Senegaglia,inPi- cenum Annonarium, 394
Senones, Sens, in Lugdun
ensis Quarta, 399
Septe, in Lydia, 377
Septempeda, S. Severino, in
Picenum Suburbicarium,
391
Sergiopolis, in Euphratesia,
365
Serre, al. Philippi, in Ma
cedonia, 383
Sestus, in Hellespontus
Setabis, Xativa, in Cartha
ginensis, 400
Sethreete, in Augustamnica
Prima, 356
Setta, in Lydia, 377
Sexantaprista, in Mcesia Se
cunda, 382
Sichem, vide Neapolis, 361
Sida, in Pamphylia, 378
Sidnacester, in Britannia,
407
Sidon, in Phoenicia Prima,
365, 367
Sidyma, in Lycia, 378
Signia, Segni, in Campania,
391
Silandus, in Lydia, 377
Silbium, in. Phrygia Paca
tiana, 379
Simidica, in Africa Procon
sularis
Sinaus, in Phrygia Pacati
ana, 379
Siniandus, in Pisidia, ibid.
Sinna Municipium, in Afri
ca Proconsularis, incerta?
posit.
Sinope, in Helenopontus,
375
Sion, in Asia, 377
Sipontum, in Apulia, 393
Sirmium, in Pannonia In
ferior, 385

Index.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

427

Siscia, in Pannonia Inferior,
385
Siteum, vide Citium, in
Crete, 383
Smyrna, in Asia, 377
Sodera, in lona Insula
Sodoma, in Palaestina Ter
tia, 361
Soli, in Cyprus, 365
Solva, in Noricum, 385
Sophene, in Armenia Mag
na, 374
Sora, in Latium, 391
Sora, in Paphlagonia, 375
Sozopolis, in Heemimontis,
382
Sozopolis, in Pisidia, 379
Sozusa, in Pentapolis, 358
Sozusa, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 361
Spira Nemetum, in Ger
manica Prima, 400
Spoletum, Spoleto, in Um
bria, 389
Stabiae, in Campania, 392
Standitana, in Lydia, 377
Stauropolis, in Caria, ibid.
Stectorium, in Phrygia Sa
lutaris, 379
Stephane, urbs incertae po
sit, in Phocide vel Galatia
Stobi, in Macedonia, 383
Strategis, in Achaia, ibid.
Stratonice, in Caria, 377
Stratonicia, in Lydia, ibid.
Stridonium, in Pannonia
Inferior, 385
Suana, in Tuscia, 388
Subaugusta Helena, in La-
hum, 387, 391
Subrita, in Crete, 383
Subsadia, in Europa, 382
Suessa, in Campania, 392
Sulchi, in Sardinia, 394
Sulmo, in Samnium, 393
Sura, in Euphratesia, 365
Surrentum, in Campania,
392
Sutrium, in Tuscia, 388
Sycamazon, in Paleestina
Prima, 361
Sycaminum, in Phoenicia
Prima, 365
Sylva Candida, Sancta Ruf-
fina, in Tuscia, 388
Sylvanectum, Senlis, in
Belgica Secunda, 400
Synnada, in Phrygia Salu
taris, 379
Syracusa?, in Sicilia, 394
Sysdra, in Pamphylia Pri
ma, 378

Tabs?, in Caria. 377

Tabia, in Galatia Prima,
375
Tacapa, in Tripolis, 356
Tadinum, in Umbria, 389
Talbonda, in Pamphylia
Secunda, 378
Tamita, in Corsica, 394
Tanagra, in Achaia, 383
Tanis, in Augustamnica
Prima, 356
Tarantasia, in Alpes Graiae,
398
Tarba, al. Bigorra, Tarbes,
in Novempopulania, 399
Tarentum, Taranto, in Ca
labria, 393
Tarquina, in Tuscia, 388
Tarracina, in Latium, 391
Tarracona, in Tarraconen
sis, 400
Tarsus, in Cilicia Prima,
380
Tarvisium, Treviso, in Ve
netia, 396
Tathyris, in Thebais Se
cunda, 358
Taua, in .iEgyptus Prima,
356
Taurianum, Seminara, in
Brutia, 394
Tauromenium, Taormina,
in Sicilia, 394
Teanum, in Campania, 392
Tegea, in Achaia, 383
Tegula, in Sardinia, 394
Telmessus, in Lycia, 378
Temenothyrae, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, 379
Temesa, in Brutia, 394
Temnus, in Asia, 377
Tenedos Insula, 380
Tentyra, al. Teuchira, in
Thebais Secunda, 358
Tenus Insula, 380
Teos, in Asia, 377
Tephra, in Homeritarum
Regione Arabica, 370
Tergestum, Trieste, in His
tria, 396
Termessus, in Pamphylia
Secunda, 378
Teruanna, Therouenne, in
Belgica Secunda, 400
Teuchira, in Pentapolis, 358
Teuchira, in Thebais Se
cunda, ibid.
Thamassus, in Cyprus, 365
Thamiate, in Arcadia, 358
Thassus, in Macedonia, 383
Theatea, in Samnium, 393
Thebae Pthioticae, in Thes
salia, 383
Thebee, in Achaia, ibid.
Thebais, in Thebais Secun
da, 358

Thcmisonium, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, 379
Thennesus, in Augustamni
ca Prima, 356, 360
Theodosiopolis Nova, in
Europa, 382
Theodosiopolis, in Cappa
docia Prima, 374
Theodosiopolis, in Arcadia,
358
Theodosiopolis, in Pisidia,
379
Thera Insula, 380
Therenunthis, in Thebais
Secunda, 358
Thermae, in Sicilia, 394
Thermae Regiee, in Helles
pontus, vide Germa, 376
Thermae, in Cappadocia
Prima, 374
Thespiee, in Achaia, 383
Thessalonica, in Macedonia
Prima, ibid.
Thinis, in Thebais Secun
da, 358
Thmuis, in Augustamnica
Prima, 356
Thoi, in Thebais Secunda,
358
Thou, in Augustamnica Se
cunda, ibid.
Thurium, in Brutia, 394
Thyatira, in Lydia, 377
Thymbria, in Asia, ibid.
Tiberias, in Palaestina Se
cunda, 361
Tiberiopolis, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, 379
Tiberiopolis, in Cyprus, 365
Tibur, Tivoli, in Valeria,
390
Ticelia, in Pentapolis, 358
Ticinum, Pavia, in Liguria,
395
Tiella, vide Zella, in Biza
cena
Tifernum Tiberinum, Citta
di Castello, in Umbria,
389
Tifernum Metaurense, in
Picenum Annonarium,
395
Tindarium, in Sicilia, 394
Titopolis, in Isauria, 380
Tium, in Honorias, 376
Tios, in Lycia, 378
Tolentinum, in Picenum
Suburbicarium, 391
Toletum, Toledo, in Car
thaginensis, 400
Tolonium, Toulon, in Vi
ennensis, 399
Tolosa, Thoulouse, in Nar
bonensis, ibid.
Tomi, in Scythia, 380

Topirus, in Rhodope, 382
Torcellum, in Venetia, 396
Torone, in Macedonia, 383
Tournacum, Tournay, in
Belgica Secunda, 400
Trajanopolis, in Rhodope,
382
Trallis, in Asia, 377
Trallis, in Lydia, ibid.
Tranopolis, in Phrygia Pa
catiana, 379
Tranum, in Apulia, 393
Trapezopolis, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, 379
Trapezus, in Pontus Pole-
moniacus, 374
Trebia, in Umbria, 389
Trecae, Troyes, in Lugdu
nensis Quarta, 399
Tremenothyri, in Phrygia
Pacatiana, vide Temeno
thyrae, 379
Tremithus, in Cyprus, 365
Tres Tabernee, Cisterna, in
Latium, 391
Tricastini, or Augusta Tri-
castinorum, St. Paul des
Trois Chasteaux, in Vi
ennensis Secunda, 399
Tricca?, in Thessalia, 383
Tridentum, Trent, in Ve
netia, 396
Tripolis, in Phoenicia Pri
ma, 365
Tripolis, in Lydia, 377
Troas, in Hellespontus, 376
Trocala, in Sicilia, 394
Trochmi, in Galatia Se
cunda, 375
Tropaea, in Brutia, 394
Truentum, in Picenum Sub
urbicarium, 391
Tucci, Martos, in Bcetica,
400
Tude, Tuy, in Gallecia, 402
Tuder, Todi, in Umbria,
389
Tullum, Toul, in Belgica
Prima, 399
Tungri, TongreR, in Ger
manica Secunda, 400
Turones, Tours, in Lug
dunensis Tertia, 399
Turre Blandis, in Bizacena
Turris Libisonis, in Sar
dinia, 394
Tuscania, in Tuscia, 388
Tusculum, Frescati, in La
tium, 387, 391
Tyana, in Cappadocia Se
cunda, 374
Tyrassonav Tarazona, in
Tarraconensis, 400
Tyrus, in Phoenicia Prima,
365, 367

428

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book IX.

Valentia, Valence, in Vien
nensis Prima, 399
Valentia, Valencia, in Car
thaginensis, 400
Valentia ad Minium, Va-
lenzia, al. Menno, in Gal
lecia, 402
Valentinianopolis, in Asia,
377
Valva, in Samnium, 393
Vantena, vide Antinoe, in
Thebais Prima, 358
Vapincum, Gap, in Nar
bonensis Secunda, 399
Vasada, vide Lauzada, in
Cilicia Secunda
Vasatee, Basas, in Novem
populania, 399
Vasio, Vaison, in Viennen
sis Secunda, ibid.
Ucetia, Uzes, in Narbonen
sis Prima, ibid.
Velia, in Lucania, 393
Velia, Veleia, in Tarraco
nensis, 400
Velitrse, in Latium, 391
Vellava, al. Anicium, le Puy
en Vellay, in Aquitania
Prima, 399
Venafrum, in Campania,
393
Venetia, Vennes, in Lug
dunensis Tertia, 399

Venta, "Winchester, in Bri
tannia, 407
Ventio, Vence, in Alpes
Maritima?, 398
Venusia, in Apulia, 393
Vercellae, Vercelli, in Li
guria, 395
Verodunum, Verdun, in
Belgica Prima, 399
Verona, in Venetia, 396
Verula?, Veroli, in Latium,
392
Vesontio, Bezanson, in
Maxima Sequanorum,
399
Vettonium, Bittona, in Um
bria, 389
Vibo-Valentia, Bivona, in
Brutia, 394
Vicentia, Vicenza, in Ve
netia
Vicohabentia, Vicovenza, in
Flaminia, 395
Vienna, in Viennensis Pri
ma, 398
Vigiliee, in Apulia, 393
Vigintimilium, Vintimiglia,
in Alpes Cottiae, 395
Vindobona, Vienna, in Pan
nonia Superior, 385
Vindonissa, Winich, in
Maxima Sequanorum,
399
Viseum, Viseo, in Gallecia,
402

Ulpianum, in Dardania, 384
Unnogorita, urbs incertae
positionis
Unzela, in Pamphylia Se
cunda, 378
Volaterrae, in Tuscia, 388
Voleria, Valera la Vieja, in
Carthaginensis, 400
Volscae, al. Vulci, in Tus
cia, ibid.
Volsinium, Bolsena, inTus-
cia, 388
Urbmum, in Picenum An
nonarium, 395
Urbs Salvia, Urbisaglia, in
Picenum Suburbicarium,
391
Urbs Vetus, Orvieto, in
Tuscia, 388
Urci, Orce, in Carthaginen
sis, 400
Urcinium, in Corsica, 394
Uria, in Calabria, 393
Urima, in Euphratesia, 365
Vulturnum, in Campania,
392
Uxentum, Ugento, in Ca
labria, 393 W
"Winchester, in Britannia,
407
"Wormacia Vangionum,
"Worms, in Germanica
Prima, 400

Worcester, inBritannia, 407

Xanthus, in Lycia, 378
Xoes, in -iEgyptus gecun.
da, 358

Zabulon, in Palaestina Pri
ma, 361
Zagula, in Libya, 358
Zapara, in Macedonia, 383
Zarmizegethusa, in Gothia,
384
Zela, in Helenopontus, 375
Zelona, 374
Zena, forsan Zenopolis
Zenopolis, in Lycia, 378
Zephyrium, in Cilicia Pri
ma, 380
Zerabena, in Arabia, 360
Zerta, in Numidia
Zeugma, in Euphratesia,
365
Zicchia, in Scythia
Zichna, urbs incerta? posit,
in Macedonia
Zigga, vide Sicca Venerea
Zoara, in Paleestina Tertia,
361
Zoropassa, urbs incerta? po
sit, in Cilicia vel Isauria
Zuchabari, in Mauritania
Ceesariensis
Zygris, in Libya, 358

BOOK X.

OF THE INSTITUTION OF THE CATECHUMENS, AND THE FIRST USE OF THE CREEDS OF
THE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
OF THE SEVEKAL NAMES OF CATECHUMENS, AND THE SOLEMNITY THAT "WAS USED IN ADMIT
TING THEM TO THAT STATE IN THE CHUECH. ALSO OF CATECHISING, AND THE TIME OF
THEIH CONTINUANCE IN THAT EXERCISE.

Having hitherto discoursed of the
Therason'oi the several orders of men which made up
IH^»SSK" *• the great body of the Christian church,
and of churches themselves, or places
of worship, and of the several districts into which
the body diffusive was divided, I come now to con
sider the service of the church, or its public offices
\ and exercises, by which men were disciplined and
1 trained up to the kingdom of heaven. And to speak
of these in their most natural order, it will be neces
sary to begin with the institution of the catechu
mens, who were the lowest order of men that had
any title to the common name of Christians, and
their instruction was the first part of the church's
service. Some things relating to these have been
already touched upon in speaking of the difference
between them and the marol, or perfect Christians,
in the first Book.1 The office of the catechist has
also been considered in speaking of the inferior or
ders2 of the clergy : and the places of instruction,
or catechetic schools, have been treated of in the
account3 that has been given of the ancient churches.
So that, omitting these things, I shall only speak in
this place of such rites and customs as were observed
in the practice of the church in training up the
catechumens, and preparing them for baptism ; pre
mising something concerning the several names that
* were given them. They were called catechumens
from the Greek words narnxkoi and KaTjjxnatg, which
signify in general the instruction that is given in
the first elements or rudiments of any art or science;
but in a more restrained ecclesiastical sense, the in
struction of men in the first principles of the Chris
tian religion. Hence they had also the names of

Sect. 2.
Imposition of
hands used in the
first admission of
catechumens.

' Book' I. chap. 4. sect. 5. 2 Book III. chap. 10.
3 Book VIII. chap. 7. sect. 12.
• Tertul. de Ptenitent. cap. 6.
6 August, de Fide ad Catechumen, lib. 2. cap. 1.
8 Book I. chap. 3. sect. 3.
' Sulpic. Vit. Martin. Diafeg. 2. cap. 5. p. 291. Cuncti

novitioli, and tyrones Dei, new soldiers of God, as
we find in Tertullian'1 and St. Austin,5 because they
were just entering upon that state, which made them
soldiers of God and candidates of eternal life. They
are sometimes also called audientes, hearers, from
their instruction : though that name more commonly
denotes one particular sort of them, such as were
allowed to hear sermons only, but not to partake in
any of the prayers of the church ; of which more
hereafter in the following chapter.
I have already observed in another
place,6 that the catechumens, by vir
tue of their admission into that state,
had some title to the common name
of Christians also; being a degree higher than either
heathens or heretics, though not yet consummated
by the waters of baptism. And upon this account,
they were admitted to this state not without some
ceremony and solemnity of imposition of hands
and prayer. Which appears evidently from what
Sulpicius Severus7 says of St. Martin, That pass
ing through a town, where they were all Gentiles,
and preaching Christ unto them, and working some
miracles, the whole multitude professed to believe
in Christ, and desired him to make them Chris
tians : upon which, he immediately, as he was in
the field, laid his hands upon them, and made them
catechumens, saying to those that were about him,
that it was not unreasonable to make catechumens
in the open field, where martyrs were used to be
consecrated unto God. Where we may observe,
that to make Christians, and to make catechumens,
is the same thing, and that this was done by im
position of hands and prayer. Which observation

catervatim ad genua b. viri ruere cceperunt, fideliter postu-
lantes, ut eos faceret Christianos. Nee cunctatus, in medio
ut e»t campo, cunctos, imposita universis manu, catechu-
menos fecit ; cum quidem ad nos conversus diceret, Non
irrationabiliter in campo catechumenos fieri, ubi solerent
martjres consecrari.

430

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

will help us to the right understanding of some
obscure canons and difficult passages in ancient
writers, which many learned men have mistaken.
In the first council of Aries8 there is a canon, which
orders imposition of hands to be given to such Gen
tiles as in time of sickness express an inclination to
receive the Christian faith. And in the council
of Eliberis9 there is another canon to the same
purpose, which says, That if any Gentiles, who
have led a tolerable moral life, desire imposition
of hands, they should have it allowed them, and
be made Christians. Now the question is, what
is here meant by imposition of hands, and being
made Christians? Mendoza10 and Vossius" take
it for imposition of hands in baptism ; and Al
baspiny,12 for imposition of hands in confirmation.
But the true sense is no more than this imposition
of hands used in making catechumens, which in
some sort gave Gentile converts an immediate title
to be called Christians. And so I find Valesius,13
and Basnage,1* and Cotelerius,15 understand it. And
this must be the meaning of that passage in Euse
bius,10 where, speaking of Constantine's prayers in
the church of Helenopolis a little before his death,
he says, It was the same church where he had first
been admitted to imposition of hands and prayer ;
that is, had been made a catechumen with those
ceremonies : for no other imposition of hands can
here be meant, since it is now agreed on all hands,
that Constantine was not baptized till he had left
Helenopolis, and was come to Nicomedia, a little
before his death. By this also we may understand
the meaning of those canons of the first general
council of Constantinople,17 and the council of
Trullo,18 where, speaking of the reception of such
heretics as the Eunomians, and Montanists, and
Sabellians, who had not been truly baptized, they
say, They should be received only as heathens, viz.
the first day be made Christians, the second day
catechumens, the third day be exorcised, then in
structed for a considerable time in the church, and
at last baptized. Here being made Christians, evi
dently signifies no more than their being admitted
to the lowest degree of catechumens, by imposition

8 Cone. Arelat. 1. cap. 6. De his qui in infirmitate cre
dere volunt, placuit debere eis manum imponi.
8 Cone Eliber. u. 39. Gentiles si in infirmitate desidera-
verint sibi manum imponi, si fuerit eorum ex aliqua parte
vita honesta, placuit eis manum imponi et fieri Christianos.
10 Mendoza, Not. in Cone. Eliber. u. 39.
11 Voss. de Baptismo, Disp. 12. Thes. 5. p. 164.
12 Albaspin. Not. in Cone. Eliber. c. 39.
13 Vales. Not. in Euseb. de Vit. Constant, lib. 4. c. 61.
" Basnag. Critic, in Baron, an. 44. p. 482.
15 Coteler. Not. in Constitut. Apostol. lib. 7. c. 39.
16 Euseb. de Vit. Const, lib. 4. c. 61. "EvBa Si) Kal irpm-
TOV TtOV Sli XEipodEtjiaS EUXtOV 7]£l0VTO.
17 Cone. Constant. 1. c. 7. 'Qs"EXXi)vas SExdpEBa,KaiTi)v
irfxoTrji; npipav irotovpEV ailTovs XpiaTlavovs, ti)v Se

of hands and prayer j after which came many iL
termediate ceremonies of exorcising, catechising
&c, before they were made complete Christians by
baptism. So that, as Theodosius observes19 in one
of his laws, there were two sorts of men that went
by the name of Christians, one called Christiani ac
fideles, Christians and believers, and the other, Chris
tiani et catechumeni tantum, Christians and catechu
mens only: the former whereof were made so by
baptism, and the other by imposition of hands and
prayer. Which was a ceremony used in most of
the offices of religion, in baptism, confirmation, or
dination, reconciling of penitents, consecration of
virgins, curing the sick, and, as we have now seen,
particularly in the first admission of new converts
to the state of catechumens.
Here also, as in most other offices „ . „
' Sect. 3. '
of the church, they used the sign of J^^"^
the cross. St. Austin joins all these c'ma^
ceremonies together, when he says, That catechu
mens20 were in some sort sanctified by the sign of
Christ, and imposition of hands and prayer; mean
ing, that these ceremonies were used as indications
of their forsaking the Gentile state, and becoming
retainers to the Christian church. The same rite
is mentioned also by St. Austin in his Confessions,21
as used upon himself during his being a -catechu
men ; but whether he means there his first admis
sion, or his continuance in that state, is not certain.
But in the Life of Porphyrius, bishop of Gaza, writ
ten by his disciple Marcus, it is more plainly ex
pressed; for that author, speaking of some new
converts, says, They fell down at the bishop's feet
and desired the sign of Christ. Upon which, he
signed them with the sign22 ofthe cross, and"ihade
them catechumens ; commanding them to attend
the church. And so in a short time after, having
first instructed them in the catechism, he baptized
them. The circumstance of time here men- Se(A 4
I tioned, may lead us in the next place „,„",' "ere1 XitS
to¦ • , , , to be catechumens.
inquire, at what age persons were
admitted catechumens ? And how long they con
tinued in that state before they were baptized ? The

SEVTEpav KaTtixovpivovs, EiTa tij Tpirn HfcopKiXppzv ail
Tovs — Kal tote aiiTobs (SaTrTt{\opEV.
18 Cone. Trull, c. 95. Vide etiam Anonymi Epist. ad
Martyrium Antiochenum, ap. Beveregii Pandect, t. 2.
p. 100.
18 Cod. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 7. de Apostat. Leg. 2.
20 Aug. de Peccator. Meritis, lib. 2. c. 26. Catechumenos
secundum quendam modum suum per signum Christi et
orationem, mantis impositione puto sanctificari.
21 Aug. Confess, lib. 1. c. II.
22 Marcus, Vit. Porphyr. Prociderunt ad ejus pedes
petentes Christi signaculum. Beatus vero cum eos signas-
set, et fecisset catechumenos, dimisit illos in pace, pra>
cipiens eis ut vacarent sanetee ecclesiae. Et paulo post, cum
eos catechesi instituisset, baptizavit.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

431

Sect 5.
How long they
continued in that
state.

» first question concerns only heathen converts : for,
as for the children of believing parents, it is certain,
that as they were baptized in infancy, so they were
admitted catechumens as soon as they were capable
of learning. But the question is more difficult about
r heathens. Yet I find in one of the Resolutions of
Timothy, bishop of Alexandria, that children, be
fore they were seven years old, might he catechu
mens. For he puts the question thus : Suppose a
child of seven years old,23 or a man that is a cate
chumen, be present at the oblation, and eat of the
eucharist; what shall be done in this case ? And
the answer is, Let him be baptized. By which it
is plain, he speaks of heathen children, and not of
Christians, who received not only baptism, but the
eucharist, in their infancy, by the rule and custom
of the church then prevailing, as will be showed in
their proper place. As to the other point, how long
they were to continue catechumens, j
there was no certain general.rule fixed!
about that ; but the practice varied according to the
difference of times and places, or the readiness and
, proficiency of the catechumens themselves. In the
| apostolical age, and the first plantation of the church,
: we never read of any long interval between men's
[ first conversion and their baptism. The history of
Cornehus, and the Ethiopian eunuch, and Lydia,
and the jailer of Philippi, in the Acts of the Apos
tles, to mention no more, are sufficient evidence,
that in those days catechising and baptism imme
diately accompanied one another. And there were
good reasons for it : the infant state of the church,
and the zeal of the converts, both required it. But
' in after ages, the church found it necessary ¦ to
lengthen this term of probation, lest an over-hasty
admission of persons to baptism, should either fill
the church with vicious men, or make greater num
bers of renegadoes and apostates in time of persecu
tion. For this reason, the council of Eliberis24 ap
pointed two years' trial for new converts, that if in
that time they appeared to be men of a good con
versation, they might then be allowed the favour of
baptism. Justinian, in one of his Novels,25 ap
pointed the same term for Samaritans, because it
was found by experience, that they were wont fre
quently to relapse to their old rehgion again. The

^Timoth. Alex. Resp. Canon, qu. 1.
Cone. Eliber. c. 42. Eos qui ad fidem primam credu-
htatis accedunt, si bona! fuerint conversationis, intra bien-
mum placuit ad baptismi gratiam admitti.
B Justin. Novel. 144. Per duos primum annos in fide
wstituantur, et pro viribus Scripturas ediscant, tuncque de-
mum sacro redemptionis offerantur baptismati.
28 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 32. '0 plXXtov mm,x«crfl<H,
Tpta ett| raTriXEto-eaj, &c.
27 Cone. Agathen. c. 34. Judaei, quorum perfidia fre
quenter ad vomitum redit, si ad legem catholicam venire
voluerint, octo menses inter catechumenos ecclesia limen

Apostolical Constitutions25 lengthen the term to>
three years, but with this limitation, that if men
were very diligent and zealous, they might be ad- 1
mitted sooner ; because it was not length of time,
but men's conversation and behaviour, that was to
be regarded in this case. The council of Agde,
anno 506, reduced the time for Jewish converts27 to
eight months, giving the same reason why they
made the time of probation so long, because they
are often found to be perfidious, and returned to
their own vomit again. In other places, the time
is thought by some to be limited to the forty days
of Lent ; for so some learned men conjecture from a
passage or two in St. Jerom, and Cyril's Catechetic
Discourses. St. Jerom28 says, it was customary in) '
his time to spend forty days in teaching catechu-]
mens the doctrine of the blessed Trinity. And St.
Cyril seems to imply as much, when he asks the
catechumens, why they should not think it reason- ¦
able29 to spend forty days upon their souls, who had 1
spent so many years upon thdr own vanities and '
the world ? The time of Lent is not expressly men
tioned in either place, but it seems to be intended,
because in those ages, Easter was the general time
of baptizing over all the world. But I understand
this only of the strict and concluding part of this
exercise. In some cases, the term of catechising
was reduced to a yet much shorter compass, as in
case of extreme sickness, or the general conversion
of whole nations. Socrates observes, that in the/
conversion of the Burgundians, the French bishop
that converted them, only took seven days' time to
catechise them,30 and on the eighth day baptized
them. So in case of desperate sickness, the cate
chumens were immediately baptized with clinic
baptism ; as appears from the forementioned council
of Agde, which, though it prescribes eight months'
time for the catechising of Jews, yet in case of ex
treme danger,3' if their life was despaired of, it al
lows them to be baptized at any time within the
term prescribed. Cyril of Alexandria,32 in one of
his canonical epistles, gives the same orders con
cerning catechumens who had lapsed, and were for
their crimes expelled the church, that notwithstand- (
ing this, they should be baptized at the hour of*
death. St. Basil takes notice, that Arintheus, the
Roman consul,33 being converted by his wife, and

introeant, &e.
28 Hieron. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. c. 4. Consuetudo apud
nos ejusmodi est, lit iis qui baptizandi sunt per quadraginta
dies publice tradamus sanctam et adorandam Trinitatem.
28 Cyril. Catech. 1. n. 5. p. 18.
» Socrat. lib. 7. c 30.
31 Cone. Agathen. u. 34. Quod si casu aliquo periculum
infirmitatis intra prasscriptum tempus incurrerint, et despe-
rati fuerint, baptizentur.
32 Cyril. Ep. Canon, ad Episc. Libya; et Pentapol. ap.
Bevereg. Pandect, t. 2. p. 178.
83 Basil. Ep. 186.

432

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

in danger of death, was immediately baptized. And
there are infinite numbers of such examples to be
met with in ecclesiastical history, to verify the ge
neral observation which Epiphanius34 makes upon
the practice of the church, that such catechumens
as were at the point to die, were always, in hopes
of the resurrection, admitted to baptism before their
death. 'v But excepting these cases, a longer
The substance of time was generally thought necessary
the ancient cate- . . -, , • j
ctiisms, and method to discipline and tram men up graau-
of instruction. r i"
ally for baptism ; partly for the reason
already mentioned, that some just experiment might
be made of their conversation during that time ;
and partly to instruct them by degrees, first in the
more common principles of religion, to wean them
from their former errors, and then in the more re
condite and mysterious articles of the Christian
faith : upon which account they usually began their
discourses with the doctrine of repentance and re
mission of sins, and the necessity of good works,
and the nature and use of baptism, by which the
catechumens were taught, how they were to re
nounce the devil and his works, and enter into a
new covenant with God. Then followed the expli
cation of the several articles of the Creed, to which
some added the nature and immortality of the soul,
and an account of the canonical books of Scripture;
which is the substance and method of St. Cyril's
eighteen famous discourses to the catechumens. The
author of -the Apostolical Constitutions35 prescribes
these several heads of instruction : Let the catechu
men be taught before baptism the knowledge of the
Father unbegotten, the knowledge of his only be
gotten Son, and Holy Spirit ; let him learn the order
of the world's creation, and series of Divine provi
dence, and the different sorts of legislation ; let him
be taught, why the world, and man, the citizen of
the world, were made ; let him be instructed about
his own nature, to understand for what end he him
self was made ; let him be informed how God pun
ished the wicked with water and fire, and crowned
his saints with glory in every generation, viz. Seth,
Enos, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and his posterity,
Melchisedeck, Job, Moses, Joshua, Caleb, and Phi-
neas the priest, and the saints of every age ; let him
also be taught, how the providence of God never for
sook mankind, but called them at sundry times,
from error and vanity to the knowledge of the truth,
reducing them from slavery and impiety to liberty
and godliness, from iniquity to righteousness, and

from everlasting death to eternal life. After these
he must learn the doctrine of Christ's incarnation
his passion, his resurrection, and assumption ; and
what it is to renounce the devil, and enter into cove
nant with Christ. These were the chief heads of
the ancient catechisms before baptism : in which it
is observable, there is no mention made of the doc
trine of the eucharist, or confirmation, because these
were not allowed to catechumens till after baptism •
and the instruction upon the former points was not
given all at once, but by certain degrees, as the dis
ciphne of the church then required, which divided
the catechumens into several distinct orders or
classes, and exercised them gradually, according to
the difference of their stations : of which I shall
give a more particular account in the following
chapter. Here I shall only remark further, getl ,
that they allowed them to read some a£ed"to «,Ttn.
portions of the Scripture ; for the mo- Holy s"iplu"•
ral and historical books were thought most proper
at first for their instruction ; and the chief use of
those which are now called apocryphal books, was
then to instil moral precepts^into the catechumens.
Upon this account Athanasius says,80 ThougrT they
were not canonical books, as the rest of the books
of the Old and New Testament ; yet they were such
as were appointed to be read by those who were new
proselytes, and desirous to be instructed in the ways
of godliness : such were The Wisdom of Solomon,
The Wisdom of Sjrach, Esther, Judith, Tobit; to
which he also adds, the book called, The Doctrine
of the Apostles, a.nd the Shepherd, that is, Hermes
Pastor. The author87 of the Synopsis of the Holy
Scripture also, under the name of Athanasius, has
much the same observation, That besides the canoni
cal books, there were other books of the Old Testa
ment, which were not in the canon, but only read to
or by the catechumens. But this was not allowed
in all churches ; for it seems to have been other
wise in the chm-ch of Jerusalem, at the time when
Cyril38 wrote his Catechetical Discourses; for he
forbids his catechumens to read all apocryphal
books whatsoever, and charges them to read those
books only which were securely read in the church,
viz. those books which the apostles and ancient
bishops (who were wiser than the catechumens) had
handed down to them. Then he specifies particu
larly the canonical books of the Old and New Tes
tament, all the same as are now in our Bibles, ex
cept the Revelation, because I presume it was not

84 Epiphan. Hair. 28. Cerinthian. n. 6.
33 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 39.
30 Athan. Ep. Heortastic. t. 2. p. 39. "Etiv Kal ETepa
fitfiXta tovtiov £%oiSev' it KavovtYdpEva piv, TETVlrtopiva
Se irapd Ttov iraTeptov dvaytvwaKEtjBai toXs apTt irpoctEpxo-
pivois, Kal ftovXopivots KaTi)XEXtxBat tov T/Js Evae^Elas
Xoyov' Sotpia SoXopuivos, &C. Kal SlSaxi] KaXovpivi], Ttov

' AiroToXeov, Kal b leoipriv.
37 Athan. Synops. Scriptur. t. 2. p. 55. 'Ektos toiv m-
voviTppivtov ETEpa /3i/3Xia tt)s traXatds StaSrvKqs, It Kavovt-
X,6pEva piv, dvayivtoo-Kopeva Si povov toXs KaTt]x»pEvots.
38 Cyril. Catech. 4. n. 22. p. 66. IIpos ti itroKpvipa fui«i»
i'xe koivov, Sec. Ibid. p. 67."Oo-a iv iKKXrialais pi) ivayivtia-
ketui, TavTa pr]Si KaTi traVTov dvayivtotTKE.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

433

then read in the church : and at last concludes with
thi6 charge to the catechumens, that they should
norreaTanjTother books privately by themselves,
which were not read publicly in the church. From
whence I conclude, that as the books which we now
call apocryphal, were not then read in the church
of Jerusalem, so neither were they allowed to be
read by the catechumens, though they were read
both publicly and privately in many other churches.
I know some learned persons are of a different
opinion, and think that Cyril, by apocryphal hooks,
means not those which we now call apocryphal, viz.
Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, &c, but other pernicious
and heretical books, which were absolutely repro
bated and forbidden to all Christians. But if that
had been his meaning, he would not have said, that
the canonical books were the only books that were
read in the church of Jerusalem, but would have
distinguished, as other writers in other churches do,
between canonical, ecclesiastical, ami apocryphal
books, and have intimated that 'the ecclesiastical
books were such as were allowed to be read in the
church, as well as the canonical, for moral instruc
tion, though not to confirm articles of faith. Where
as he says nothing of this, but the express contrary,
that none but the canonical books were read pub-
liqly in the church, nor were any other to be read
privately by the catechumens. Which, at least,
must mean thus much, that in the church of Jeru
salem there was a different custom from some other
churches; and that though in some churches the
catechumens were allowed to read both the canoni
cal books and the apocryphal, or, as others call them,
the ecclesiastical ; yet in the church of Jerusalem
they were allowed to read only the canonical Scrip
tures, and no other. However, it is observable, that
no church anciently denied any order of Christia.ns
the use ofthe Holy Scriptures in the vulgar tongue,
since even the catechumens themselves, who were
but an imperfect sort of Christians, were exhorted
and commanded to read the canonical books in all
churches, and the apocryphal books in some
* churches for moral instruction. Nay, if we may be-i
lieve Bede, they were obliged to get some of thef
Holy Scriptures by heart, as a part of JheirexerciseJ
and_discipline, before they were baj)tizedT~FoThe '
commends it as a laudable custom in the ancient
church,89 that such as were to be catechised and
baptized, were taught the beginnings of the four
Gospels, and the intent and order of them, at the
time when the ceremony of opening their ears was
solemnly used; that they might know and remem

ber, what, and how many, those books were, from
whence they were to be instructed in the true faith.
So far were they from locking up the Scriptures
from any order of men in an unknown tongue, that
they thought them useful and instructive to the
meanest capacities ; according to that of the psalm- i
ist, " Thy word giveth light and understanding to ;
the simple.'' And therefore they allowed them to be
vulgarly read, not only by the more perfect and com
plete Christians, but even by the very catechumens ;
among whom, as St. Austin and others have ob
served, those were commonly the most tractable
and the best proficients, who were the most con
versant in the Holy Scriptures. For which reason
they made it one part of the catechumens' care, to
exercise themselves in the knowledge of them, and i
did not then fear that men should turn heretics by /
being acquainted with the word of truth.

CHAPTER II.
OP THE SEVERAL CLASSES OR DEGREES OF CATE
CHUMENS, AND THE GRADUAL EXERCISES AND
DISCIPLINE OF EVERY ORDER.
That there were different orders or
degrees of catechumens in all such Four orders or de-
churches as kept tO the term of Cate- mens among the
A ancients.
chising for two or three years together,
is acknowledged on all hands by learned men ; but
what was the precise number of these orders, is not
so certainly agreed. The Greek expositors of the
ancient canons usually make but two sorts, the
drfXlTEpoi and the TtXeidirspoi, the imperfect and the
perfect, the beginners and the proficients, who
were the immediate candidates of baptism. So
Balzamon,1 and Zonaras,2 Alexius Aristenus,3 and
Blastares. And in this opinion they are followed
by many modern writers. Dr. Cave4 makes no
other distinction but this of the perfect and imper
fect, and says of the imperfect, that they were as
yet accounted heathens ; which, for the reasons
given in the foregoing chapter, I cannot subscribe
to : for I have showed, that from the time that
they received imposition of hands to make themj
catechumens, they were always both called and ac- (
counted Christians, though but in an imperfect
state, till they were completed by baptism. Bishop
Beverege5 makes but two sorts of catechumens like
wise, the diepoaiuevoi, and the ivxdptvoi, or yovvicXivov-

! Bed. de Tabernae. lib. 2. c. 13. t. 4. p. 887. Pulcher in
ipsa ecclesia mos antiquitus inolevit, ut his qui catechizandi,
etdinstianis sunt sacramentis initiandi, quatuor Evangeli-
orum principia recitentur, ac de figuris et ordine eorum in
I apertione aurium suarum solenniter erudirentur : quo sciant
I exinde ac meminerint, qui et quot sint libri, quorum verbis
2 F

maxime in fide veritatis debeant erudiri.
1 Balzam. Not. in Cone. Neocoesar. t. 5.
2 Zonaras, ibid.
3 Alex. Aristen. in Cone. Ancyr. c. 14.
« Cave, Prim. Christ, lib. 1. c. 8. p. 211.
5 Bevereg. Not. in Cone. Nicen. c. 11.

4;M

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X,

rig, that is^the hearers, who only stayed to hear
the sermon and the Scriptures read, and the kneel
ers or substrators, who stayed to receive the minis
ter's prayers and benediction also. Suicerus' and
Basnage7 go much the same way, dividing them
into two classes, the audientes and competentes.
Maldonate8 adds to these a third class, which he
calls catechumeni poenitentes, such catechumens as
were under the discipline and censures of the
church. Cardinal Bona9 augments the number
to four kinds, viz. the audientes, genujiectentes,
competentes, and electi. And indeed it appears,
that there were four kinds of them ; yet not ex
actly the same as Bona mentions ; for the com
petentes and electi were but one and the same
order. But there was another order antecedent to
all these, which none of these writers mention,
which we may call the il\toi:ovptvoi, that is, such
catechumens as were instructed privately, and with-
out-doors, before they were allowed to enter the
church. sect 2 That there was such an order or
Ufvof 'or citicim- degree of catechumens as this, is evi-
™S'n4ra!5urS" dently deduced from one of the ca
nons of the council of Neocaesarea,
which speaks of several sorts of catechumens, and
this among the rest, in these words : If any catechu-
men,'0 who enters the church, and stands amongst
any order of catechumens there, be found guilty of
sin ; if he be a kneeler, let him become a hearer,
provided he sin no more ; but if he sin while he is a
hearer, let him be cast out of the church. Here it
seems pretty evident, that there was an order of
catechumens not allowed to enter the church, to I
which such of the superior orders as had offended,'
were to be degraded by way of punishment, which
the canon calls expulsion from the churoh. Which
does not mean, utterly casting them off as heathens
again, but only reducing them to that state in which
they were before, when they first received imposi
tion of hands to make them catechumens ; which
was a state of private instruction, before they were
allowed to enter the church. Maldonate calls these,
The order of penitents among the catechumens;
and Balzamon and Zonaras, on this canon, style
them mourners ; which expresses something of this
order, but not the whole : for there were catechu
mens privately instructed out of the church, who
were not properly mourners or penitents, as per
sons cast out of the church by any censure, but
they were such as never had yet been in the church,
but were kept at a distance for some time from that

6 Suicer. Thesaur. t. 2. p. 72.
' Basnag. Critic, in Baron, p. 481.
8 Maldonat. de Baptism, c. 1. p. 79.
' Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 16. „, 4.
10 Cone. Neocaes. c. 5. KaTr)xovpEvos, iiv Eto-EpxdpEvos
Eis itvpiaKov iv Ty twv KaTrjxovpivtov Ta£et ?i]Ky, utos Si

privilege, to make them the more eager and de
sirous of it. And till we can find a better name for
these, I call them from this canon, the iZuiMptvot *
which is a general name, that will comprehend both .
this lowest order of catechumens privately instruct
ed out of the church, and also such delinquents of
the superior orders as were reduced back again to
it by way of punishment for their faults.
The next degree above these, were gM(
the hearers, which the Greeks call , SK™&i, Th» .
' aKootovtvot. mini
dtrpoojpcvoi, and the Latins, audientes. *"'">" »<*»«•¦
Who were so called from their being admitted to
hear sermons and the Scriptures read in the church,
but they were not allowed to stay any of the pray
ers, no, not so much as those that were made over
the rest of the catechumens, or energumens, or
penitents ; but before those began, immediately
after sermon, at the word of command then solemnly
used, Ne quis audientium, Let none of the hearers
be present, they were, to depart the church. As
appears from the author of the Apostolical Consti
tutions,11 who orders the deacon to dismiss the
hearers and unbelievers with that solemn form of
words, before the liturgy or prayers of the church
began. Upon which account the council of Nice12
calls them, dtepotopkvovg pdvo'v, hearers only, to dis
tinguish them from such catechumens as might not
only hear sermons, but also attend some particular
prayers of the church, that were especially offered
up for them, whilst they were kneeling upon their
knees, and waiting for imposition of hands, and
the minister's benediction.
Hence arose a third sort of cate
chumens, which the Greeks call yo- Thirdly, Thi^o™-
. . T . ' uKLvovree, tit oe-
wKXivovree, and the Latins, genutlec- nufeeteutes,ais
. ** J kneelers.
tentes and prostrati, that is, kneelers -1 "
or prostrators. These sometimes have the name of
catechumens more especially appropriated to them,
as in the forementioned canon of the council of Nice,
which runs in these terms, " It is decreed by the
great and holy synod, concerning the catechumens
that have lapsed, That they for three years shall be
hearers only ; and after that, pray with the cate
chumens again." Hence that part of the liturgy
which respected them, was particularly called K>
Tnxovpkvwv evxv, The prayer of the catechumens,
which came immediately after the bishop's sermon,
together with the prayers of the energumens and
penitents, as we learn from the council of Laodicea,"
which orders the method of them ; and the forms
of these prayers are recited both in the Apostolical
Constitutions14 and St. Chrysostom,15 which I do

dpapTavoov, idv piv yovv kX'ivviv, aKpodtrBto, ptjKETt apap-
Tavtov' iiv Si aKpotopEvos eti dpapTavt}, i^oiBEiadoj.
11 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. u. 5.
12 Cone. Nicen. can. 14.
13 Cone. Laod. c. 19. " Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 6. ,
15 Chrysost. Horn. 2. in 2 Cor. i

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

435

not here insert, because they will have a more
proper place in the liturgy of the church. Together
with these prayers fhey always received imposition
of hands, kneeling upon their knees : whence the
council of Neocessarea,18 and others, distinguish
them by the name of yowKXivovrtg, the kneelers ;
the prayer is called oratio impositionis manus, the
prayer of imposition of hands, which was frequently
repeated both in the pubhc and private exercises of
the catechumens. Above these was a fourth order,
^¦ourthiy.Thcdom- which the Greeks call fiairTiZopivoi
petetltes and electi ;
the immediate can- antl AajTlZouSVOl J and tfle LatmS, COm- 1
didates-of baptism. r r , ' '
petentes and electi: all which words!
are used among the ancients to denote the imme- j
diate candidates of baptism, or such as gave in their ¦'
names to the bishop, signifying their desire to be
baptized the next approaching festival. Their pe
titioning for this favour gave them the name of
competentes; and from the bishop's examination
and approbation or choice of them, they were styled
electi. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Catechetic
Discourses,17 always terms them tptoriZopEvoi, which
though it frequently signifies persons ah-eady bap
tized, or illuminated by_the sacrament of baptism,
yet in his style, it denotes persons yet to be bap
tized, or such as had only the illumination of cate
chetical instruction antecedent to baptism. And
so the name fiaitTiZopivoi, in the author of the
Apostolical Constitutions,18 is taken, not for persons
actually baptized, but for those catechumens who
Were desirous to be baptized. Whence, in the same
author, the prayer that is said over the catechu
mens in the church is called (3airTiZopkvuiv and tj>u>Ti-
I loptvmi fiixv> the prayer for those that went about
i to be illuminated and baptized. Which also shows,
that the substrati and competentes were different or
ders or degrees of the catechumens, (contrary to
what Mr. Basnage and some others have asserted,)
since different prayers, at different times in the
church, were offered up for them.
sect. 6. These competentes, as I said, were
der'Sp'tlcuiar: so called from their petitioning for
prepare? "„t w the sacrament of baptism, as we learn
tiem. „ -
from St. Austin, who often gives this
reason1" for it, telhng us, that upon the approach
of the Easter festival, it was usual for the cate
chumens to give in their names in order to be

16 Cone. Neocaesar. c. 5. " Cyril. Catech. 1, 2, &c.
18 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 8.
19 Aug. de Fide et Oper. c. 6. Cum fontis illius sacra-
menta peteremus, atque ab hoc competentes etiam vocare-
rour, &c. Id. de Cura pro Mortuis, c. 12. Pascha appro-
pwquante deditjiomen inter alios competentes.
| 9 Diot!j5>-Jrfierarch. Eccles. c. 2. n. 4. p. 216. 'lepdpxns
"TaypdilfutsAat, keXevei toXs hpEvai t6v dvSpa Kal tot
dvdSoxov, f
21 Cone. Coiistant. sub Menna. Act. 5. t. 5. p. 22-1. 'O t?s
lepoernyapias Iraiii els to fSdirTicrpa irpoaioVTtov iyypdepEtv
4 2f2

baptized, whence they were called competentes, pe
titioners or candidates for baptism. When their
names were given in, and their petition accepted,!
then both they and their sponsors were registered)
in the books of the church; as is noted by the
author under the name of Dionysius20 the Areopa
gite, who brings in the bishop commanding the
priests to register both the catechumen and his
sponsor or susceptor together. And in the council
of Constantinople, under Mennas,21 there is mention
made of an,nfficer_in the church, particularly ap
pointed to this business, one whose appropriated
office it was to register the names of those who J
offered and presented themselves to baptism. These-'
registers were called their diptychs ; but as they '
had several sorts of diptychs, some for the dead and
some for the hving, these were particularly called
Siirrvxa ZuivTtov, the diptychs or books of the living,
as is observed by Pachymeres,22 in his comment
upon the foresaid place of Dionysius.
When their names were thus regis
tered, then followed a scrutiny or ex-

Sect. 7.
Partly by frequent
. . examinations, in
animation of their proficiency under "-inch such as aP-
x " proved themselves
had th
electi.

¦-- - proved themselve
the preceding stages of the cateche- JgJ,'11" "»me of
tical exercises. And this was often
repeated before baptism, according to the direction \
given in this case by the fourth council23 of Carthage.
They that were approved upon such examination,
were sometimes called electi, the chosen, as we find
in the decrees of Pope Leo Magnus, who speaks of
them under this appellation,21 because they were
now accepted and chosen as persons qualified for
baptism at the next approaching festivals of Easter
or Whitsuntide, which were the usual times of bap
tizing. Cardinal Bona makes these electi a distinct
order from the competentes ; but there seems to be
no ground for such a distinction, because their ex
ercises were all the same henceforward till they
arrived at baptism.
For as they were all' examined, so
they were all exorcised alike for
twenty days before baptism.
custom is often mentioned by the an- ?fsu5,|u™ss- a'°d
cient writers, both of the Greek and
Latin church. St. Austin, more than once, speaks
ol it as the common practice of the African church ;
joining examination,25 catechising, and exorcism to
gether, and telling us that the fire of exorcism, as

Sect. 8.
Partly by exor-
, . t.sm, accompanied
1 Q1S with imposition of
hands,"and the V

TETaypevos. 22 Pachymer. in Dionys. p. 234.
23 Cone. Carthag. 4. can. 84. Crebra examination bap
tismum percipiant.
21 Leo, Ep. 4. ad Episc. Siculos, c. 5. In baptizandis in
ecclesia electis, ha3C duo tempora, de quibus locuti sumus,
esse legitima, &c.
25 Aug. in Psal. Ixv. Post ignem exorcismi venitur ad
baptismum. Id. de Fide et Oper. c. 6. Suis nominibus
datis, abstinentia, jejuniis, exorcismisque purgantur. 
Ipsis diebus quibus eatechizantur, exorcizantur, scrutantur.

436

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

f

his phrase is, always preceded baptism. We learn
the same from Cyprian, and the council of Car
thage, held under him, about the validity of he
retical baptism : for there it is often said, that he
retics26 and schismatics were first to be exorcised
with imposition of hands, and then baptized, before
they could be admitted as true members of the ca
thohc church. And we learn from thence also,
l that the practice was so universal, that the here-
j tics themselves did not omit it, though it was
esteemed of no effect by the catholics when done
by them, but looked upon only as a mock-practice,
where one demoniac27 exorcised another, as Ctecilius
a Bilta phrases it in the same council. Ferrandus
Diaconus28 also speaks of this exorcism, which im
mediately followed the scrutiny or examination of the
competentes. And the hke testimonies may be seen
in Petrus Chrysologus,29 and the second council of
Bracara,30 for the practice of the Italic and Spanish
churches. In the last of which, it is particularly
specified that these exorcisms shall continue for
. twenty days before baptisnil Gennadius of Mar
seilles31 testifies not only for the French church, but
the universal church throughout the whole world,
that exorcisms and exsufflations were uniformly
used both to infants and adult persons, before they
were admitted to the sacrament of regeneration and
fountain of life. And for the Greek church in par
ticular, (though the author of the Apostolical Con
stitutions, for a peculiar reason, makes no mention
of this ceremony, because he represents the busi
ness of an exorcist not as a standing and ordinary
office in the church, but as an extraordinary and
miraculous gift of God,32 as it was in the age of the
apostles,) yet Gregory Nazianzen, and Cyril of Je
rusalem, are undeniable evidences of the practice :
for Nazianzen, in his Oration upon Baptism,33 thus
bespeaks his catechumen : Despise not thou the
medicinal office of exorcism, neither grow weary of
the length or continuance of it ; for it is a proper
trial of a man's sincerity in coming "to the grace of
baptism. Cyril, in like manner,34 bids his catechu-

26 Cone. Carthag. ap. Cyprian, p. 232. Censeo omnes
haereticos et schismaticos, qui ad catholicam ecclesiam vo-
luerint venire, non ante ingredi, nisi exorcizati et baptizati
prius fuerint. Ibid. p. 237. Primo per manus impositionem
in exorcismo, secundo per baptismi regenerationem, tunc
possunt ad Christi pollicitationem venire.
27 Ibid. p. £30. Apud haereticos omnia per mendacium
aguntur, ubi exorcizat daimoniacus, &c.
28 Ferrand. Ep. ad Fulgent, de Catechizando jEthiope,
inter Fulgentii Opera, p. 606. Celebrato solenuiter scru-
tinio, per exorcismurn contra diabolum vindicatur.
23 Pet. Chrysolog. Serm. 52. Hinc est quod veniens ex
gentibus impositione manus et exorcismis ante a daemone
purgatur. Vid. Serm. 105.
30 Cone. Bracar. 2. c. 1. Ante viginti dies baptismi ad
purgatiocein exorcismi concurrant catechumeni, &c.
81 Gennad. de Dogmat. Eccles. c.31. Iliad etiam quod
circa baptizandos in universo mundo sancta ecclesia uni-

men to receive exorcism with diligence in the time of
catechizing. For whether it was insufflation or ex
orcism, it was to be esteemed salutary to the soul;
for as mixed metals could not be purged without
fire, so neither could the soul be purged without ex
orcisms, which were Divine, and gathered out of
the Holy Scriptures. He adds a httle after, that,
the exorcists did thus, by the power of the Holyf
Spirit, cast a terror upon the evil spirit, and make
him fly from the soul, and leave it in a salutary state/
and hope of eternal life; where we may observe
two things that give great light in this matter: 1.
Why it is so often called by the ancients the " fire
of exorcism ; " because it purges the soul, and as it
were fires the evil spirit from it. 2. That these
exorcisms were nothing but prayers, collected and
composed out of the words of the Holy Scriptures, l
to beseech God to break the dominion and power of
Satan in new converts, and to deliver them from I
his slavery by expelling the spirit of error and wick
edness from them. Therefore Cyril K in another
place calls them Xoyoi tvxrjg, the words of prayer,
by which a devil, or a demoniac, who could not be
held in chains of iron by many, was often held by
one, through the power of the Holy Ghost working '
in him ; and the bare insufflation of an exorcist,
was a fire of sufficient force to expel the invisible
spirits. So that the whole business of exorcism, -
and the power of it, is to be resolved into prayer,
some forms of which are now extant in the Eucho-
logium,30 or Rituals of the Greek Church, pubhshed
by Goar, and the Rituals of the Ancient Gallican
Church, published by Mabillon.37 From whence -
also it appears, that the insufflation, and imposition
of hands, and the sign of the cross, [which was
used at the same time, as we find in the writings of
St. Austin38 and St. Ambrose,39] were only looked
upon as decent ceremonies or concomitants of
prayer ; to whose energy, and not to the bare cere
monies, the whole efficacy and benefit of this part
of the catechumens' discipline is to be attributed.
For though the ceremonies be sometimes only men-

formiter agit, non otioso contemplamur intuitu: cum sive
parvuli sive juvenes ad regenerationis veniunt sacramentum,
non prius fontem vitae adeant, quam exorcismis et exsuffla-
tionibus clericorum spiritus ab eis immundus abigatur.
32 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 26.
33 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 657. Mr, SiairTvaris i%op-
Kierpti ^EpairEtav, pr}Si irpos to pr]KOS Ta\iTt]S dirayo-
pEvcrijs. Bderavds eut'l Kal avrt} Tljs TrEpl TO xdptapa
yvr)cri6T-i)T0S. 31 Cyril. Praefat. ad Catech. n. 5. p. 7. Tis iiropKitrpis
Sexh pETi trirttSris' Kav kpcpva-nB-ijs Kav iiropKia^ijs, trtoTt]-
pia a-ot to irpdypa vdpitrov Eivai, Sec. Vid. Catech. 1. n.
5. p. 18.
33 Cyril. Catech. J 6. n. 9. p. 234.
36 Eucholog. p. 335.
37 Mabillon. Musreum Italic, t. 1. p. 323.
33 Aug. Confes. lib. 1. c. 11.
39 Ambros. de iis qui mitiantur, c. 4.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

43?

itt i

tioned, yet prayer is always to be understood, and
to be taken for the substance of the action, whilst
the other were only the circumstances of it.
During this same term of twenty •
Partly by the a- jjayS tne catechumens were also ex
ercises of resting J
UsStlf^ftt ercised with jbstinence and fasting,
pmsfrce. as a su;(-aDie preparation for their en
suing baptism. The fourth council of Carthage has
a canon which joins all these things together : Let \
such as give in their names to be baptized,40 be ex- j
ercised a long time with abstinence from wine and
flesh, and with imposition of hands, and frequent
examination, and so let them receive their baptism.
In like manner St. Austin puts abstinence,41 fast
ings, and exorcism together, and particularly men
tions abstinence from the marriage bed, during this
time of preparation for baptism. So Socrates tells
us,42 when the Burgundians desired baptism of a
French bishop, he first made them fast seven days.
And when a certain Jewish impostor, who had been
baptized by the Arians and Macedonians, came at
last to Paul, the Novatian bishop, to desire the like
favour of him, the same author observes,43 That Paul
would not admit him, till he had first exercised him
with fasting many days, and taught him the rudi
ments of the Christian faith. These fastings are
also mentioned by Justin Martyr and Tertullian, %
where they speak of men's preparation for baptism. j
As many, says Justin Martyr,44 as believe the things [
to be true which we teach, and promise to conform
their hves to the laws of our rehgion, they first of \
all learn to ask pardon of their by-past sins of ;
God by prayers and fastings, we joining our prayers
and fastings with theirs. So Tertullian,45 They that ¦
are about to receive baptism, must first use frequent
prayers and fastings, and geniculations and watch-
ings, and make confession of all their former sins,1
in imitation of John's baptism, taking it for a \
favour, that they are not obhged to make public ;
confession of their flagitious crimes and offences.'
Whence we may conclude, that these confessions
were sometimes pubhc, and sometimes private, as
directed by the wisdom of the church. They who

would see more of this matter, may consult St. Cy
ril's Catechetic Discourses,46 and Gregory Nazianzeii's
Oration about Baptism,47 wlio, to confession, and
prayers, and fasting, add humicubations, and groans
andtears, and forgiving of enemies, as proper indi
cations of a penitent mind, before men came to re
ceive the seal of forgiveness at God's hand by the
ministry of his church.
At this time also the competentes
were taught the words of the Creed, Partly 'by learning
which they were obliged to get by creed,andtheLord-s
heart, in order to repeat it before the
bishop at their last examination before baptism.
This part of catechising was often performed by the
bishop himself, as we may learn from those words
of St. Ambrose,48 where he thus distinguishes the
competentes from the other catechumens : When the \
catechumens were dismissed, I recited the Creed to
the competentes in the baptisteries of the church.
This was done in some churches twenty days before
baptism ; for so the second council of Bracara or
dered49 for the Spanish churches. But the council
of Agde in France50 speaks only of eight days be
fore Easter, appointing Palm Sunday to be the day
when the Creed should be publicly taught the compe
tentes in all their churches. But perhaps we are to
distinguish betwixt the public and private teaching
of the Creed ; and so one might be done privately
twenty days before by the catechists in the baptis
teries or catechetic schools, and the other publicly,
eight days before, by the ministers of the church.
However this was, there was a certain day appoint
ed for these catechumens to give an account of their
Creed, and that was the parasceue, or day before our
Saviour's passion, which the council of Laodicea51
calls the fifth day of the great and solemn week,
when such as were to be baptized, having learnt
their Creed, were to repeat it before the bishop or
presbyters in the church. And this was the only
day, for several ages, that ever the Creed was publicly
repeated in the Greek churches, as Theodorus Lec
tor52 informs us, who says, It was used to be recited
only once a year, and that was on the parasceue, or

40 Cone. Cartliag. 4. c. 84. Baptizandi nomen suum dent,
et diu sub abstinentia vini et carnium, ac mantis imposi-
tione, crebra examinatione baptismum percipiant.
41 Aug. de Fide et Oper. c. 6. Sine dubio non admit-
terentur, si per ipsos dies quibus earn le in gratiam percep-
tun, suis nominibus datis, abstinentia, jejuniis, exorcismis-
que purgantur, cum suis legitimis et veris uxoribus . se
concubituros profiterentur, atque hujus rei, quamvis alio
tempore licitae, paucis ipsis solennibus diebus nullam con-
tmen tiam servaturos.
42 Socrat. lib. 7. p. 30. « Ibid. c. 17.
44 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 93.
tertul. de Bapt. c. 20. Ingressuros baptismum, ora
tionibus crebris, jejuniis et geniculationibus et pervigiliis
orare oportet, et cum confessione omnium retro dclictorum,
W exponant etiam baptismum Johannis. Tingebantur,
wquit, confitentes delicta sua. Nobis gratulandum est, si

non publice eonfitemur iniquitates aut turpitudines nostras.
Vid. Tertul. de Pcenitent. c. 6.
48 Cyril. Catech. 1. n. 5 et 6. p. 18 et 19.
47Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt.
48 Ambros. Ep. 33. ad Marcellinam sororem, p. 158. Di-
missis catechumenis, symbolum aliquibus competentibus
tradebam in baptisteriis basilicae.
*9 Cone. Bracar. 2. u. 1. Ante viginti dies baptismi, ca-
techumeni symbolum, quod est, Credo in Deum Patrem Om-
nipotentem, specialiter doceantur.
50 Cone. Agathen. c. 9. Symbolum etiam placuit ab om
nibus ecclesiis una die, id est, ante octo dies Dominica? re-
surrectionis, publice in ecclesia competentibus praedicari.
51 Cone. Laodic. c. 46. "Oti SeX tovs tjitoTiQipivovs Tt)p
iriaTiv iicpavSrdvEiv, Kal t;; iripirTi] tt/s itSopdSos airay.
yiXXEiv Tip iiriaKOirtp r) toXs irpEo-fivTipots
52 Theodor. Lector, lib. 2. p. 563.

438

. ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

.Book X,

day of preparation to our Saviour's passion, now
called Holy Thursday ; at which time, the bishop
was always wont to catechise the competentes in the
church. When they had learned the Creed, they
were also taught the Lord's prayer, which was not
allowed ordinarily to the catechumens till imme
diately before their baptism. For this prayer was
usually called, ivxn mo-Tiiv, the prayer of the faith
ful, as being peculiarly used only by persons bap
tized, who were made sons of God by regeneration,
and had a title, as such, to address God under the
denomination of their Father which is in heaven :
which catechumens, at least those of the first orders,
could not so properly do ; but when they arrived at
this last degree of competentes, and stood as imme
diate candidates of baptism, then this form was part
of their instruction, and not before. As we learn
from Ferrandus Diaconus, who speaks first of their
repeating the Creed, and then learning53 the Lord's
prayer. And the same is evident from Chrysos
tom, Austin, and Theodoret, of whom I shall have
occasion to speak more particularly in chap. v. sect.
9, where I treat of the ancient discipline in conceal
ing the sacred mysteries from the catechumens.
Together with the Creed, they were
And the form of also taught how to make their proper
renouncing the de- . . , ,
vii, and covenanting responses m baptism ; particularly the
other responses to form of renouncing the devil and his
be used in baptism. °
works, his pomps, his worship, his
angels, his inventions, and all things belonging to
him; and the contrary form of covenanting with
Christ, and engaging themselves in his service -. for
though these acts in their highest solemnity did
properly appertain to the substance of baptism it
self; yet it was necessary to instruct the catechu
mens beforehand, how they were to behave them
selves in these matters, that they might not, through
ignorance, be at a loss when they came to baptism.
And therefore the author of the Apostolical Con
stitutions54 orders it to be one special part of the
catechumens' instruction, just before their baptism,
that they should learn what related to the renunci
ation of the devil, and covenanting with Christ.
And these engagements they actually entered into,

/ not only at their baptism, but before it, as a just
preparation for it : for, says that author, they ought
' first to abstain from the contraries, and then come
to the holy mysteries, having purged their hearts
beforehand of all spot and wrinkle, and habits of
sin. And the same thing is intimated by Tertul
lian, and Ferrandus the deacon of Carthage; for
Ferrandus says expressly,55 that the catechumens,
at the same time that they were exorcised, made
their actual renunciation of the devil, and then were
taught the Creed. And Tertullian means the same
thing, when he says, that this renunciation was
made twice ; first in the church,56 under the hands
of the bishop, and then again when they came to
the water to be baptized. And hence it became one
part of the ancient office of deaconesses, to instruct
the more ignorant and rustic sort of women, how
they were to make their responses at the time of
baptism to such interrogatories as the minister
should then put to them, as I have had occasion to
show from a canon of the fourth council of Car
thage,5' in discoursing of the office of deaconesses
in another58 place.
Beside these parts of useful disci
pline and instruction, there were some what meant by the
. - . -, . competentes going
other ceremonies of less note used to- ™ied sometime i,e-
fore baptiem.
ward the catechumens, which I must
not wholly pass over. Among these was the cere- -
mony of the competentes going veiled, or with their
faces covered, for some days before baptism: which
custom is taken notice of by Cyril of Jerusalem,5"
together with the reason of it : Your face, says he -
to the catechumens, was covered, that your mind
might be more at liberty, and that the wandering
of your eyes might not distract your soul. For
when the eyes are covered, the ears are not diverted
by any impediments from hearing and receiving the
saving truths. St. Austin and Junilius give a more
mystical reason for it. For they suppose the cate
chumens went veiled in public, as bearing the image
of Adam's slavery after his expulsion out of Para
dise ; and that these veils, being taken away after
baptism,60 were an indication of the liberty of the
'spiritual life, which they obtained by the sacrament

53 Ferrand. Ep. ad Fulgent, de Catechizando iEthiope.
Ipsa insuper sancti symboli verba memoriter in conspectu
fidelis populi clara voce pronuncians, piam regulam Do
minican orationis accepit.
54 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 39 et 40. MavSraviTto Ta irEpl
Trjs diroTayrjS tov SlafloXov, Kal Ta irEpl Tr)S avvrayr)S tu
Xpto-Tou, &c.
65 Ferrand. Ep. ad Fulgent, inter Opera Fulgentii. p. 606.
Per exorcismum contra diabolum vindicatur: cui se renun-
ciare constanter, sicut hie consuetudo poscebat, auditurus
symbolum, profitetur.
56 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c. 3. Aquam adituri, ibidem,
sed et aliquanto prius in ecclesia sub antistitis manu con-
testamur nos renunciare diabolo, et pompae et ano-elis ejus.
57 Cone. Carthag. 4. c. 12. Viduae vel sanctimoniales,

quae ad ministerium baptizandarum mulierum eliguntur,
tain instructae sint ad officium, ut possint apto et sano ser-
mone docere imperitas et rusticas mulieres, tempore quo
baptizandae sunt, qualiter baptizatori interrogates responde
at, et qualiter accepto baptismate vivant.
58 Book II. chap. 22. sect. 9.
69 Cyril. Praefat. ad Catech. n. 5. p. 7. ' EtrKtiratai trov
to irpootoTrov, 'Iva trxoXdary Xoiirov v Sidvoia.
60 Aug. Ser. 4. in Dominic. Octav. Paschfe, 155. de Tem
pore. Hodie octavae dicuntur infantium : revelanda sunt
capita eorum, quod est indicium libertatis. Habet enim
libertatem ista spirit al is naiivitas. Junil. de Partibus Di
vina? Legis, lib. 2. c. 16. Bibl. Patr. t. 1. p. 15. Typum
gerunt Adae Paradiso exclusi  propter quod et per publi
cum capitibus tectis incedunt. ;

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

439

of .regeneration. However it be, the evidences are
plain, that there was such a ceremony used to the
catechumens: but, as Valesius61 rightly observes, it
did not respect them all, but only that order of them
that were peculiarly called the competentes.
Another ceremony of this nature,
of the0 ceremony was the custom of touching the ears
called Ephphata, or - ..
opening ofthe ears 0f the catechumens, and saying unto
of the catechumens. j i . i
them, Ephphata, Be opened : which
Petrus Chrysologus62 joins with imposition of hands
and exorcism ; making it to have something of mys-\
/tical signification in it, to denote the opening of the\
understanding to receive the instructions of faith. 1
And St. Ambrose,63 or an author under his name, de
scribes the same custom, deriving the original of it
from our Saviour's example, in saying, Ephphata, Be
.. opened, when he cured the deaf and the blind. But
this custom seems not to have gained any great
credit in the practice of the church ; for besides
these two authors, there is scarce any other that so
much as mentions it ; and whether it was used to
the first or last order of the catechumens, is not very
easy to determine.
sect. 14. The like may be said of another
.n?heirlekcXpt ceremony which is mentioned in St.
Ambrose, which was the custom of
anointing the eyes with clay, in imitation of our Sa
viour's practice, when he cured the blind man by
making clay of his spittle, and anointing his eyes
with it, John ix. 6. The design of this ceremony,
as that author explains it,64 was to teach the cate
chumens to confess their sins, and to review their
consciences, and repent of their errors, that is, to
acknowledge what state and condition they were in
by their first birth. St. Austin seems also85 to refer
to this practice in his discourse upon the blind man
cured by our Saviour, where he says, The catechu
mens were anointed before baptism, as the blind
man was by Christ, who was thereby perhaps made
a catechumen. sect. is. Vicecomes66 and Mr. Basnage67
techSeS he'd^a mention another custom, which was
^sinthe'time'of peculiar in their opinion to the Afri-
can church, viz. the use of a lighted

hiexorcism.

61 Vales. Not. in Euseb. de Vit. Constant, lib. 4. c. 62.
62 Chrysolog. Serm. 52. p. 286. Hinc est quod veniens
ex gentibus impositione manus et exorcismis ante a tlaemone
purgatur; et apertionem aurium percipit, ut fidei capere
possit auditum.
Ambros. de iis qui initiantur, c. 1. Quod vobis signifi-
cavimus, cum apertionis celebrantes mysterium, diceremus,
Effeta, quod est, aperire.  Hoc mysterium celebravit
Christus in evangelio, cum mutuui curaret et surdum. Id.
de Sacramentis, lib. 1. c. 1. Mysteria celebrata sunt aper
tionis, quando tibi aures tetigit sacerdos et naves.
61 Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 3. c. 2. Ergo quando dedisti
nomen tuum, tulit lutum et liniyit super oculos tuos. Quod
signiHcat ut peccatum tuum fatereris, ut conscientiam tuam
recognosceres, ut pcenitentiam ageres delictorum, hoc est,
sortem humanoe generationis agnosceres.

taper put into the hands of the catechumens in
time of exorcism, to signify (as Mr. Basnage ex- ,
plains it) the illustration of the Holy Ghost; or,i
as Vicecomes would have it, the power of exorcism '
in expelling Satan. But their observation, I think,
is grounded upon a mere mistake, interpreting some
words of St. Cyprian and St. Austin in a literal
sense, which are only figurative and metaphorical.
Cyprian, speaking of the power of Christians over
unclean spirits, says,68 among many other things,
that they could oblige them by their powerful stripes
to forsake the persons they had possessed; that
they could put them to the rack, and make them
confess, and cry out, and groan ; that they could
scourge them with their whips, and burn them with
their fire. Where it is plain enough to any unpre
judiced reader, that the fire of exorcism here spoken
of, is of the same kind with the whips, and stripes,
and rack ; that is, the spiritual and invisible power '
of the Holy Ghost, as Cyprian himself immediately
explains them, when he says, All this was done, but
not seen ; the stroke was invisible, and the effect of
it only appeared to men. So that it was not a ma
terial fire, or a lighted taper in the hands of the
catechumens, that Cyprian speaks of, as Vicecomes
fancies, but the invisible fire or power of the Holy
Ghost. And it is the same fire that St. Austin
means,whose authority only is urged by Mr. Basnage
to found this custom on. He speaks of a fire in
deed in the sacraments,63 and in catechising, and in
exorcising. For whence otherwise should it be,
says he, that the unclean spirits so often cry out, I
burn, if there be not a fire that burns them ? From
the fire of exorcism we pass to baptism, as from
fire to water, and from water to a place of rest.
There is nothing in all this that can signify'a light
ed taper in the hands of the catechumens, which
certainly has no power to burn an unclean spirit :
but the fire of exorcism is the invisible fire of the
Holy Ghost, that is, the energy and powerful opera
tion of God's Spirit, which casts out devils with a
word, and makes Satan fall like lightning from,
heaven. Though I deny not but that this custom
might come into the church in after ages ; for Albi-

63 Aug. Tract. 44. in Johan. t. 9. p. 133. Catechumenus
inunctusest nondum lotus.
66 Vicecomes de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 2. c. 32.
61 Basnag. Critic, in Baron, p. 488.
68 Cypr. ad Donatum. p. 4. Facultas datur, immundos et
erraticos spiritus ad confessionem minis increpantibus co-
gere ; ut recedant duris verberibus urgere ; conflictantes,
ejulantes, gementes, incremento pcenae propagantis exten-
dere; flagris caedere, igne torrere. Res illic geritur, nee
videtur; occulta plaga, et poena manifesta.
<® Aug. Enarrat. in Psal. lxv. p. 277. In sacramentis et
in catechizando et in exorcizando adhibetur prius ignis.
Nam unde immundi spiritus plerumque clamant, Ardeo, si
ille ignis non est ? Post ignem autem exorcismi venitur ad
baptismum, &c.

440

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

nus Flaccus, a ritualist of the eighth century, speaks
of a custom like to it,™ as used at least the night
before the catechumens were to be baptized. For,
describing the ceremonies of the vigil of the great
sabbath before Easter, he says, A wax taper was
i used to be carried before the catechumens, which
; signified the illumination wherewith Christ enlight
ened that night by the grace of his resurrection,
and the catechumens coming to baptism. And this
was it that deceived Vicecomes, who would have all
modern customs appear with a face of antiquity,
and therefore wrested the words of St. Cyprian and
St. Austin, to patronize a novel ceremony, which in
their days was not so much as thought of.
There is another mistake which
Sect. 16.
a^rSo'the runs through the writings of many
catechumens. modern authors, concerning what the
ancients call the sacrament of the catechumens.
They suppose, that though the catechumens were
t not allowed to participate of the eucharist, yet they
had something like it, which they call eulogies, or
panis benedictus, consecrated bread, taken out of the
same oblations, out of which anciently the eucharist
itself was taken. Baronius71 was the first that
maintained this opinion, and after him Bellarmine,72
and Vicecomes,73 Albaspiny,74 Petavius,75 Bishop Be
verege,76 Estius, Maldonate, and many others follow
him in the same assertion. But the opinion is wholly
grounded upon a mistaken passage in St. Austin,
who speaks indeed of something that, according to
the language of his age, was then called the sacra
ment of the catechumens ; but he does not say, that
it was consecrated bread, or part of the same eulogies
out of which the eucharist was taken. His words
are these :" That which the catechumens receive,
¦ though it be not the body of Christ, is yet a, holy
thing, and more holy than the common meat which
sustains us, because it is a sacrament. He gives it
the name of sacrament, according to the custom of
that age, which was, to call every thing a sacrament,
that had either any thing of mystery or of spiritual
signification in it. But that this sacrament was not
: the consecrated bread, but only a little taste of salt,
; we may learn from the same St. Austin, who, speak-
¦ ing of himself as a catechumen, says, At that time 7S
he was often signed with the cross of Christ, and

f

seasoned with his salt. And that it was this, and
no more, appears further from a canon of the third
council of Carthage, at which St. Austin was pre
sent, which orders,79 That no other sacrament should
be given to the catechumens on the most solemn
days of the paschal festival, except their usual salt;
giving this reason for it, That forasmuch as the
faithful did not change their sacraments on those
days, neither ought the catechumens to change
theirs. From whence it is easy to be inferred, that
the sacrament of the catechumens means no more
| than this ceremony of giving them a little taste of
the salt, like milk and honey that was given after
baptism, as Cardinal Bona,80 and Mr. Aubertine,81
and Basnage,82 have rightly concluded : the design
of the thing being not to give them any thing in
imitation of the eucharist, or introductory to that,
which they always kept hid as a secret from them ;
but that by this symbol they might learn to purge
and cleanse their souls from sin ; salt being thj
emblem of purity and incorruption.
I have but two things more to ob
serve concerning the discipline used
° x mens were pi. 
towards the catechumens. The one ^,^7™'""'
relates to those ecclesiastical censures
and punishments, which were usually inflicted on
them7in case they were found to have lapsed into
any gross and scandalous offences. These being
not yet admitted into full communion with the
church, could not be punished as other offenders,
by being subjected to those several rules of penance
as other offenders were ; nor did the church think
fit to be so severe upon them, as upon other peni
tents that lapsed after baptism : but their punish- •
ment was commonly no more but a degradation of
them from one degree of catechumenship to another,
or at most a prorogation of their baptism to the
hour of death. This appears plainly from the fifth
canon of the council of Neocaesarea, which speaks
thus of the several degrees of catechumens and
their punishment : If any catechumen, who comes
to church, and stands in any order of catechumens
there, be found guilty of sin ; if he be a kneeler or
prostrator, let him hecome a hearer, if he sins no
more; but if he sin while he is a hearer, let him be
cast out of the church. After the same manner it

Sect. 17.
How Ihe catechu
mens were punish.

70 Albin. al. Alcuin. de Divin. Offic. c. 19. Cereus prae-
cedit catechumenos nostros ; lumen ipsius Christum signifi-
cat, quo prresens nox illuminetur, gratia scilicet resurrec-
tionis, et catechumeni ad baptismum venturi.
71 Baron, an. 313. n. 55.
72 Bellarm. de Sacram. lib. 2. c. 25.
»« Vicecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 2. c. 9. p. 259.
74 Albaspin. Observat. lib. 2. c. 36.
75 Petav. Animadvers. in Epiphan. Exposit. Fidei, p. 366.
76 Bevereg. Not. in Can. 2. Cone. Antioch. Estius in
Sentent. lib. 4. Dist. 10. sect. 5.
77 Aug. de Peccator. Meritis, lib. 2. c. 26. Quod acci-
piunt catechumeni, quamvis non sit corpus Christi, sanctum

est tamen, et sanctius quam cibi quibus alimur, quoniam
sacramentum est.
78 Aug. Confess, lib. 1. c. 11. Audieram ego adhuc puer
de vita aeterna nobis promissa per humilitatem Filii tui Do
mini Dei nostri, et signabar jam signo crucis, et condiebai
ejus sale.
70 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 5. Placuit ut per solemnissimos
paschales dies sacramentum catechumenis non detur, nisi
solitum sal : quia si fideles per illos dies sacramenta non
mutant, non catechumenis oportet mutari.
80 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. c. 16. n. 3.
81 Albertinusde Eucharist, lib. 2. pr650et711.
82 Basnag. Exercit. Critic, in Barou. p. 487.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

441

was decreed by the great council83 of Nice, That if
any of the catechumens (by whom they more espe
cially mean the kneelers) were found guilty of sin,
they should be degraded to the classis of the hear
ers for three years, and after that be admitted to
pray with the catechumens again. In the council
of Eliberis there are several canons to this purpose.
For whereas the ordinary time of continuing cate
chumens was but two years, as appointed by that84
council; yet in case of lapsing, they were obliged to1
continue catechumens sometimes three years, some-)
times five, and sometimes to the hour of death, be-^T
fore they were baptized, according to the nature and \
quahty of their offences. If a catechumen took
upon him the office of a heathen flamen, and did
not sacrifice,85 but only exhibit the usual games, he
was to be punished with the prorogation of his bap
tism for three years from the time of his lapsing.
If a woman who was a catechumen divorced herself
from her husband,86 her punishment was five years'
prorogation. But if she committed adultery, and j
1 *l after conception used any arts to destroy her infant
/ // in the womb, then her baptism was to be deferred
to the hour87 of death. And this was the highest
punishment that ever was inflicted upon catechu
mens. For though in this council many times
communion, even at the hour of death, be denied to
believers that had lapsed after baptism; yet we
meet with no instance or command, in this or any
other place, prohibiting catechumens to be baptized
at their last hour. The sixty-seventh canon of this
council88 orders them for some crimes to be cast out
of communion ; which is the same as the council of
Neocaesarea calls casting out of the church, or re
ducing them back to the lowest rank of private cate
chumens, who were not allowed to enter the church :
but when this was done, if ever after69 they showed
true signs of repentance, and a desire to be baptized,
they were admitted to this privilege at the hour of
death, if not before : and this council gives a reason
for this moderation. toward them in comparison of
others, because their sins were committed whilst
they were unregenerate in the old man, and there
fore were more easily pardoned than crimes corn-

tone. Nicen. v. 14. Tlzpl Ttov KaTrixupivtov Kal ira-
patrEtrovTtov eSo£e tiJ dy'ia Kal /le-yaXi; avvdStp, IbtE Tpteov
iriiv auToiis aKpotopivovs pSvov, ptTd Ta»Tu EvxEaSeai
pETa tuv KaTr)X«pEvtov.
81 Cone. Eliber. c. 42.
85 Ibid. c. 4. Itemflamines, si fuerint catechumeni, et se
a sacrifices abstinuerunt, post triennii tempora, placuit ad
baptismum admitti debere.
Ibid. c. 10 et 11. Intra quinquennii autem tem
pera, catechumena si graviter fuerit infirmata, dandum ei
baptismum placuit non denegari. Vid. can. 73. de Dela-
toribus. Ibid. can. 68. Catechumena, si per adulterium eonce-
perit, et coni-eptum necaverit, placuit earn in fine baptizari.
Vid. can. 73. ibid.

mitted by believers after baptism. This was the
distinction universally observed between the pun
ishments of the catechumens, and those that had
arrived to greater perfections in the church.
But in case the catechumens died
without baptism, by neglect or their How they were
J c l l , treated by the
own default, then they were punished church, if they died
r without baptism. i
as other malefactors, who unqualified
themselves for thesoiemnities of a Christian burial. J
They were put into the same rank as those who laid
violent hands on themselves, or were publicly exe
cuted for their crimes. The first council of Bracara
joins all these90 together, as persons unworthy to be
interred with the usual solemnities of singing of
psalms, or to be commemorated amongst the faith
ful in the oblations and prayers of the church. For -
in ancient times, prayers, and oblations, and thanks
givings were solemnly made in the communion ser
vice, for all that died in the faith of Christ, and in
full communion with the church : but such as neg
lected their baptism, were none of this number ; and .
therefore they were buried in silence, and no men- 1
tion was ever after made of them among others in /
the prayers of the church. Chrysostom91 says ex
pressly, This was the peculiar privilege of those that
died in the faith, but catechumens were excluded
from this benefit and all other helps, except that of
alms and oblations for them.
This discipline plainly respected Sect ,„
those who put a contempt upon the an^S'o" t„e
holy ordinance of baptism, and neg- neces!"l!"' aPllsm-
lee ted to receive it, when the time of their catechu-
menship perhaps was expired, and they were under
an obligation by the laws of the church to have re
ceived it. But in case there was no contempt, but
only an unforeseen and unavoidable necessity hin
dered their baptism, whilst they were diligently pre
paring for it ; in that case, they were treated a little
more favourably by the ancients, who did not ge
nerally think the mere want of baptism in such cir
cumstances to be such a piacular crime, as to ex
clude men absolutely from the benefit of church
communion, or the hopes of eternal salvation.
Some few of them indeed are pretty severe upon

88 Cone. Eliber. can. 67. Prohibendum ne qua fidelis vel
catechumena aut comicos aut viros cinerarios (al. scenicos)
habeat; qufecunque hocfecerit a communione arceatur.
89 Ibid. c. 45. Qui aliquando fuerit catechumenus, et
per infinita tempora nunquam ad ecclesiam accesserit, si
eum de clero quisquam cognoverit esse (al. voluisse esse)
Christianum, aut testes aliqui extiterint fideles, placuit, ei
baptismum non negari, eo quod in veterem hominem deli-
quisse videatur.
90 Cone. Bracar. 1. c. 35. Catechumenis sine redemp-
tione baptismi defunctis, simili modo, non oblationis sanetre
commemoratio, neque psallendi impendatur officium.
91 Chrysost. Horn. 3. in Phil. p. 1225. Oi Si KaTnxpb-
pEvot ovSi TavTi)s d£tovPTat Trjs irapapvSrias, &c.

442

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

infants dying without baptism, and some others
seem also, in general terms, to deny eternal life to
adult persons dying without it : but yet, when they
interpret themselves, and speak more distinctly,
they make some allowance, and except several
cases, in which the want of baptism may be sup
plied by other means, when the want of it proceeded
not from contempt, but from some gi'eat necessity
and disability to receive it. They generally ground
tne necessity of baptism upon those two sayings of
our Saviour, " He that believeth and is baptized,
shall be saved ;" and, " Except a man be born of
water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God." But then, in their exposition of
these texts, they limit the sense to the ordinary me
thod of salvation, and such cases wherein baptism
- i may be had. And as for extraordinary cases, wherein
baptism could not be had, though men were desir
ous of it, they made several exceptions in behalf of
other things, which, in such circumstances, were
I thought sufficient to supply the want of it.
sect w The chief of these excepted cases
tisrahesup"i.e°df byP" was martyrdom, which commonly goes
martyrdom. ^ ^ name Qf sec()nd baptism, Or,
baptism in men's own blood, in the writings of the
ancients, because of the power and efficacy it was
thought to have, to save men by the invisible bap
tism of the Spirit, without the external element of
water. Tertullian,92 upon this account, not only
dignifies it with the title of second baptism, but
says, it was that which men desired to suffer, as
that which procured the grace of God and pardon93
of all sins by the compensation of their own blood;
for by this act all sins were pardoned. This was that
second baptism94 in men's own blood, with which
our Lord himself was baptized after he had been
baptized in water. This baptism was of force both
to compensate for want of baptism, and to restore
it when men had lost it. Cyprian treads in the
steps of his master Tertullian ; for speaking of the
catechumens, who were apprehended and slain for
the name of Christ, before they could be baptized
in the church, he says, These were not deprived95 of

02 Tertul. de Patient, c. 13. Quum vero producitur ad
experimentum felicitatis, ad occasionem secundae intincti-
onis, &c.
83 Tertul. Apol. c. 50. Quis non ubi requisivit accedit ?
ubi accessit, pati exoptat? ut totam Dei gratiam redimat,
ut omnem veniam de eo compensatione sanguinis sui expe-
diat ? Omnia enim huic operi delicta donantur.
91 Tertul. de Bapt. c. 16. Est quidem nobis etiam secun
dum lavacrum, unum et ipsum, sanguinis scilicet : de quo
Dominus, Habeo, inquit, baptismo tingui, quum jam tinctus
fuisset. — Hie est baptismus, qui lavacrum et non acceptuin
repraosentat, et perditum reddit.
95 Cypr. Ep. 73. ad Jubaian. p. 208. Deinde nee privari
baptismi sacramento, utpote qui baptizentur gloriosissimo
et maximo sanguinis baptismo, de quo et Dominus dicebat,
habere se aliud baptisma baptizari, &c.
96 Cvpr. de Orat. Domin. p. 150. Quale 'delictum est,

the sacrament of baptism, seeing they were baptized
in the most glorious and celebrated baptism of their
own blood ; to which our Lord had reference, when
he said, " I have another baptism to be baptized
with.'' And, says he, that they who are thus bap
tized in blood, are also sanctified and consummated
by their passion, and made partakers of the grace
which God hath promised, is further declared by
our Saviour in his Gospel, in that he said to the
thief, who believed and confessed him upon the
cross, " To-day thou shalt be with me in paradise."
Cyprian has many other noble encomiums and
flights upon this second baptism, and he excepts
no sort of men from the benefit of it, but only one,
that is, heretics and schismatics, because they
wanted the grace of charity, and died out of the
communion of the church without repentance ; in
which case he thought martyrdom itself not suffi
cient " to expiate their crimes, though it was avail
able to purge away any others. Origen was wont
to speak of this kind of baptism, under the name of
baptism by fire, as that which often translated even
catechumens to heaven, though they wanted bap
tism by water. For so Eusebius represents both
Origen's sense and his own, when, speaking of the
martyrs that suffered out of the school of Origen,
he says, Two of them were only catechumens ; He-
raclides among the men, and Herais among the wo
men,9* were in this class only, when they died, but
they received baptism by fire, as Origen was used
to phrase it. And that this baptism did purge
away sins, as well as baptism by water, Origen
himself declares : for he argues thus, That martyr
dom98 is rightly called baptism, because it procures
remission of sins, as baptism by water and the
Spirit doth; and that by virtue of Christ's promise,
who ascertains pardon of sins to all that suffer mar
tyrdom, saying, " Whosoever shall confess me be
fore men, him will I confess before my Father which
is in heaven." And that this was then the general
doctrine of the Christians in that age, appears fur
ther from this, that it was so common and well
known, that the heathens themselves were not

quod nee baptismo sanguinis potest ablui? Quale crimen
est, quod martyrio non potest expiari ? Vid. Cypr. de Unit.
Eccl. p. 113. It. Ep. 55. ad Antonian. p. 108. Ep. 57 et
60. ad Cornel. Ep. 73. ad Stephan. p. 207.
97 Euseb. Hist. lib. 6. c. 4. 'Hpais eti KaTi)x»pEvr], to
l°,dirTitrpa, iiis ira ep-nalv abros, to Std irvpds XafZ&a, tov
fiiov i%EXriXv%EV.
98 Orig. Tract. 12. in Matth. p. 85. Si baptismus indul-
gentiam peccatorum promittit, sicut accepimus de baptis
mo aquae et Spiritus: remissionem autem accepit peccatorum
et qui martyrii suscipit baptismum: sine dubio ipsum mar
tyrium rationabiliter baptismus appellatur. Quoniam au
tem remissio fit peccatorum omni martyrium sustinenti,
manifestum est ex eo quod ait, Omnis qui confessus fuerit in
me coram hominibus, et ego confitebor in illo coram Patre
meo qui est in ccelis.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

443

ignorant of it. For in the Acts of the Martyrdom
of St. Felicitas and Perpetua, who suffered about
the time of Origen and Tertullian, one Saturus a
catechumen98 is spoken of as being thrown to a
leopard, who by the first bite of the wild beast was
so washed all over in blood, that the people, as he
returned, gave him the testimony of the second
baptism, crying out, Salvum latum ; salvum latum ;
Baptized and. saved ; baptized and saved. This
they said only by way of ridicule of the Christian
doctrine of martyrdom's being esteemed a second
baptism, and a means of salvation : but the author
of the Acts rightly observes, that he was saved in
deed, who was so baptized.
Nor was this only the doctrine of the more an
cient writers, who lived in the times of persecution
and martyrdom, but of those that followed after,
and who are commonly imagined more rigid de
fenders of the necessity of baptism. For even St.
Austin and all his contemporaries, who were en
gaged against Pelagius, made the same allowance
in the case of martyrdom. St. Austin declares him-
self100 wholly of Cyprian's opinion, that martyrdom
does many times supply the room of baptism ; and
i/ he thinks Cyprian argued well from the instance of
the thief^upon the cross, to whom it was said,
though he was not baptized, " To-day thou shalt be
with me in paradise." St. Austin often argues from
the same101 example of the thief in other places,
telling us, That by the ineffable power and justice
of God, baptism was imputed to the thief upon his
faith, and it was accounted to him as if he had re
ceived it, because he had a good mind and will to
ward it, though he could not actually receive it in
his body by reason of his crucifixion. Therefore
he reckons him192 among those who are sanctified
by the invisible grace without the visible sacrament,

as he thinks many were both under the Old and
New Testament : from whence yet it does not fol
low, that the visible sacrament may be contemned
by any ; for the contemner of it cannot by any
means be sanctified by the invisible grace thereof.
In his book De Civitate Dei, he speaks more ge
nerally 103 of all those that suffer martyrdom, that .
though they have not been washed in the laver of
regeneration, yet their dying for the confession of
Christ avails as much toward the remission of sins,
as if they had been washed in the holy fountain of
baptism. For which he alleges those sayings of our
Saviour, " He that loses his life for my sake, shall
find it;" and, "He that confesses me before men, him
will I confess before my Father which is in heaven."
This passage is repeated and approved by Prosper,
in his Collection of Sentences101 out of St. Austin's
works : to which he adds an epigram of his own,
expressing his sense to this purpose : They are not 105
deprived of the holy baptism of Christ, who, instead
of a font, are washed in their own blood ; for what
ever benefit accrues to any by the .mystical rite of
the sacred laver, is all fulfilled by the glory of mar
tyrdom. Fulgentius is as severe as any man, yet
he allows martyrdom108 to compensate for the want
of baptism. Though he pronounces peremptorily
of all others, that die without the sacrament of faith
and repentance, which is baptism, that they shall
not inherit eternal life ; yet he excepts those that
are baptized in their own blood for the name of
Christ. And Gennadius, after he has said, that
none but persons 107 baptized are in the way of sal
vation ; and that no catechumen, though he die in
good works, can have eternal life ; yet he excepts
the case of martyrdom, because in that all the mys
teries of baptism are fulfilled. A mariyr, as the
author ofthe Apostolical Constitutions108 expresses

" Acta Perpetuae et Felicit. ad calcem Lactantii de Mort.
Persecutor, p. 34. Statim in fine spectaculi leopardo ejecto,
de uno morsu tanto perfusus est sanguine, ut populus rever-
tenti illi secundi baptismatis testimonium reclamaverit :
Salvum lotum : salvum lotum. Plane utique salvus erat,
qui hoc modo laverat.
'" Aug. de Bapt. lib. 4. c. 22. Baptismi sane vicem ali-
quando implere passionem, de latrone illo, cui non baptizato
dictum est, Hodie mecum eris in paradiso, non leve docu-
mentum B. Cyprianus assumit.
101 Aug. Octogint. Quaest. lib. qu. 62. t. 4. Ineffabili po
testate dominantis Dei atque justitia deputatum est etiam
baptismum credenti latroni, et pro accepto habitum in
ammo libero, quod in corpore crucifixo accipi non po-
terat. m Vjg. Quaest. in Levit. qu. 84. t. 4. Hoc et de latrone
dio, cui secum crucifixo Dominus ait, Hodie mecum eris in
paradiso. Neque enim sine sanctificatione invisibili tanta
felicitate donatus est. Proinde colligitur invisibilem sancti-
hcationem quibusdam affuisse atque profuisse sine visibili-
bus sacramentis. — Nee tamen ideo sacramentum visibile
contemnendum est; nam contemptor ejus sanctificari nuUo
modo potest.
103 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 13. c. 7. Quicunque etiam non

percepto regenerationis lavacro, pro Christi confessione
moriuntur, tantum eis valet ad dimittenda peccata quantum
si abluerentur sacro fonte baptismatis. It. Ep. 108. ad Se-
leucian. Ipsa passio pro baptismo deputata est. It. de
Orig. Animae, lib. 1. c. 9.
104 Prosper. Sentent. 149.
105 Id. Epigram. 88.
Fraudati non sunt sacro baptismate Christi,
Fons quibus ipsa sui sanguinis unda fuit
Et quicquid sacri fert mystica forma lavacri,
Id totum implevit gloria martyrii.
ion Fulgent, de Fide ad Petram, c. 30. Firmissime tene
et nullatenus dubites, exceptis illis qui pro nomine Christi
suo sanguine baptizantur, nullum hominem accepturuin
vitam seternam, qui non hie a malis suis fuerit per poeni-
tentiam fidemque conversus, et per sacramentum fidei et
pcenitentise, id est, per baptismum liberatus. Vid. Fulgent.
de Baptismo ^Ethiopis, c. 8.
107 Gennad. de Eccles. Dogmat. c. 74. Baptizatis tan
tum iter esse salutis credimus ; nullum catechumeuuin,
quamvis in bonis operibus defunctum, vitam acternam ha
bere credimus, excepto martyrio, ubi tota baptismi sacra-
menta complentur.
108 Constit. Apost. lib. 5. c. 6.

444

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

it, may rejoice in the Lord, and leave this life with
out sorrow, though he be but a catechumen ; be
cause his passion for Christ is a more genuine bap
tism : he really and experimentally dies with his
Lord, whilst others only do it in figure. It were
easy to add many other such testimonies out of St.
Chrysostom,109 and St. Jerom,110 St. Basil,1" Gregory
Nazianzen,112 Cyril of Jerusalem,113 and St. Am
brose:114 but enough has been already said to show
this to be the general sense of the ancients, that
catechumens were not to be despaired of, though
they died without baptism, if they were baptized in
their own blood. Nor was it only the case of martvrs
Scot. 21. J
reAendtonycefair,hSu"h they sPea-k s0 favourably of, but ot all
pious^p^riib other catechumens, who, whilst they
baptism. wel.g preparing for baptism by the
/ exercises of faith, and repentance, and a pious life,
' were suddenly cut off, before they could have oppor
tunity to put their desires in execution. St. Ambrose
joins these two cases together, and makes them in a
manner parallel. For in his funeral oration upon
the younger Valentinian, who was thus snatched
away before he could attain to his desired baptism,
he thus makes apology for him: If any one115 is
concerned that the holy rites of baptism were not
solemnly administered to him, he may as well say,
that the martyrs are not crowned, if they happen to
die whilst they are only catechumens : but if the
martyrs are washed in their own blood, then this
man also was washed by his piety and desire of
baptism. St. Austin was entirely of the same opi
nion, that not only martyrdom,116 but faith and re
pentance joined with a desire of baptism, was suffi
cient to save a man in the article of necessity, when
there was otherwise no opportunity to receive it.
Considering, says he, over and over again the case
of the thief upon the cross, I find that not only
suffering for the name of Christ may supply that
which was wanting of baptism, but also faith and
true conversion of heart, if want of time in extreme
necessity would not suffer the sacrament of baptism
to be administered. For that thief was not cruci

fied for the name of Christ, but for the merit of
his own crimes; nor did he suffer because he was a
believer, but he became a believer whilst he was a )
suffering. Therefore his case declares how far that/
saying of the apostle avails, without the visible sa-
/. crament of baptism, " With the heart man believeth
unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession
is made unto salvation : " but then only this invisible
operation is performed, when the ministry of bap
tism is excluded purely by the article of necessity
and not any contempt of religion. Therefore when
these writers speak in general terms of the absolute
necessity of baptism, tKey~rmiItTrJe allowed to in
terpret; themselves with these two hmitatinnl_and
restrictions. As when St. Ambrose says,117 NoThan
,ascends into the kingdom of heaven, but by the sa-
/crament of baptism, he must be understood to ex
cept martyrs, and such catechumens as were desirous
lof baptism, but could not have it by reason of some
pressing necessity intervening to hinder it : such
as was the ease of Valentinian, who was slain sud
denly before he had opportunity to receive it. The
like interpretation must be put upon all such pas
sages in St. Austin,118 Chrysostom,119 Cyril of Jeru
salem,120 or any others, who speak in general terms
of the absolute necessity of baptism for catechu
mens or adult persons.
Cyprian also had a very charitable Se t
opinion concerning all such heretics tiJ^tSniiJihe
and schismatics, as forsook their err- Hw'X'cnantjIn''
ors, and returned to the unity of the tnongSVloppiy
..... , t-,,1 i -i the want ofbaplism,
catholic church, b or though accord
ing to his principles [who denied the validity of
their baptism] none of these could be really and
truly baptized, unless they were rebaptized upon
their return to the church ; yet if any such died in
the unity of the church without being rebaptized,
he did not think their condition deplorable, [though
in his opinion they died without baptism,] but cha
ritably hoped they might find mercy and favour
with the Lord. For he thus answers the objection
that was made against his own opinion about rebap
tization : Some man will say,121 What then becomes

109 Chrys. Horn. 11. in Ephes. p. 1107.
110 Hieron. Com. in Rom. vi. t. 9. p. 277.
111 Basil, de Spir. Sanct. c. 15. t. 2. p. 323.
112 Nazianzen. Orat. 39. in S. Lumina. t. 1. p. 634.
1,3 Cyril. Catech. 3. n. 7.
111 Ambros. de Virginib. lib. 3. p. 118.
115 Ambros. de Obitu Valentin, p. 12. Si quia solenniter
non sunt celebrata mysteria, hoc movet : ergo nee mar-
tyres, si catechumeni fuerint, coronantur. Quod si suo ab-
luuntur sanguine, et hunc sua pietas abluit et voluntas.
ns Aug. de Bapt. lib. 4. c. 22. Etiam atque etiam con-
siderans, invenio non tantum passionem pro nomine Christi
id quod ex baptismo deerat, posse supplere, sed etiam fidem
couversionemque cordis, si forte ad celebrandum mysterium
baptismi in angustiis temporum succurri non potest. Ne
que enim latro ille pro nomine Christi crucifixus est, sed
pro mentis facinorum suorum ; nee quia credidit passus est,

sed dum patitur credidit. Quantum igitur valeat etiam sine
visibili sacramento baptismi quod ait apostolus, corde cre-
ditur ad justitiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem, in illo
latrone declaratum est : sed tunc impletur invisibiliter, cum
ministerium baptismi non contemptus religionis, sed arti-
culus necessitatis excludit.
117 Ambros. de Abrah. Patriarch, lib. 2. c. 10. Nemo
ascendit in regnum ccelorum, nisi per sacramentum bap
tismatis. 119 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 4. c. 21.
119 Chrys. de Sacerdot. lib. 3. c. 5. It. Horn. .3. in Phi
lip, p. 1224. Horn. 3. in 1 Cor. p. 317.
120 Cyril. Catech. 3. n. 7.
121 Cypr. Ep. 73. ad Jubaian. p. 208. Sed dicet aliqtiis :
Quid ergo fiet de his qui in praeteritum de hreresi ad eccle
siam venientes, sine baptismo admissi sunt? Potens est
Dominus rnisericordta sua indulge aliam dare, et eos qui ad

Chap.- II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

445

of all those, who in times past came over from he
resy to the_church, and were admitted without bap
tism? The Lord, says he, is able of his mercy to
grant them indulgence, and not exclude them from
the gifts of his church, who are simply admitted
into the church, and die in the communion of it.
Firmilian, bishop of Caesarea, delivers himself much
after the same manner in answer to the same ob
jection : What shall become of those122 who, return
ing from heretics, are admitted without the baptism
of the church ? If they depart out of the world,
says he, in that condition, we reckon them in the
number of such catechumens among us as die before
v they are baptized. So that in his opinion two sorts
of persons might be saved without baptism, that is,
catechumens in the church, and such heretics as
returned to the peace and unity of the church,
though, according to his sentiments, they were not
baptized. St. Austin often mentions and approves
this opinion of Cyprian ;123 nay, and urges it in fa
vour of the church against the Donatists : for sup
posing the catholics did err in admitting heretics
without baptism, yet they were in the number of
those, whom Cyprian presumed capable of pardon
for the sake of unity and charity, which covers a
multitude of sins. St. Basil also, as Vossius124 has
rightly observed, seems to have been of Cyprian's
opinion, that God in his mercy was able to save
such schismatics as returned to the peace and unity
of the church, even without baptism. For though
he thought their baptism null and void, as Cyprian
did, yet he advises men to comply with the custom
of receiving125 such to communion in those churches
which received their baptism, rather than break the
peace and unity of the church upon it. Which ad
vice he would hardly have given, had he not thought
such men in such circumstances capable of salva
tion by God's mercy without baptism.
I find one case more in which
The case of per- some of the ancients made an allow-
soae communicat* a
as with the church ance for the want of baptism; and.
without baptism. r i
Sghl'to sup*Ph, that was, when the church, presum- \
the^ant of bap- ing a person to nave been truly bap-"
tized, Tile himself bema fide presuming
so too,) admitted him to communicate constantly at '
the altar for many years, though it appeared at
last that either he had not been baptized at all, or
at least with a very doubtful and suspicious bap

tism ; yet in this case constant communicating with
the church was thought to supply this defect or
want of baptism. A single act of communicating,
indeed, in a child, or a catechumen, happening only
by some surprise or mistake, was not deemed suf
ficient to compensate for baptism ; for in that case
the canons provided, that whenever any such thing
happened the party should be immediately bap
tized. Thus in the canonical determinations of
Timothy, bishop of Alexandria, the question being
put, What should be done in case a youth of seven
years old, or a man that was only a catechumen,
being present at the oblation, had communicated
through ignorance or mistake ? the answer 126 is,
Let him be baptized. And so the author of the
Apostolical Constitutions brings in the apostles
making this decree,127 That if any unbaptized person ,
should, through ignorance, partake of the eucharist. j
they should immediately instruct and baptize him, f
that he might not go away a idespiser. But in case
a man, upon presumption of his being truly bap
tized, when he was not so, had been allowed to
communicate with the church for many years, his
communicating at the altar was thought to super
sede the necessity of baptism, and such a one was
allowed to continue in the church without rebap
tizing. There is a famous instance in Eusebius of
such a case that happened at Alexandria in the
time of Dionysius, which Eusebius relates out of
an epistle of Dionysius to Xystus, bishop of Rome,
where he asks the bishop of Rome's advice upon it.
A certain person, who for many years had assem
bled and communicated 128 with the church, both in
his own time, and in the time of his predecessor,
Heraclas, happening to be present at the baptism
of some who were lately baptized, upon hearing the
interrogatories and answers that are usually made
in that solemnity, came to me weeping and lament
ing himself, and falling down at my feet, confessed,
with a most solemn protestation, that the baptism
which he had received among heretics, was not like
this, nor had any thing common with it, for it was
full of blasphemy and impiety; and therefore he
said his soul was full of trouble, and he had not
confidence to lift up his eyes unto God, being ini
tiated with such impious words and ceremonies.
He prayed, therefore, that I would give him our sin
cere baptism, and admit him to the adoption and

ecclesiam simpliciter admissi, in ecclesia dormierunt, ab
ecclesiae suae muneribus non separare.
122 Firmil. Ep. 75. ap. Cyprian, p. 226. Quid ergo, in-
quurnt, fietde his qui ab haereticis venientes, sine ecclesiae
baptismo admissi sunt ? Si de saeculo excesserunt, in eorum
numero, qui apud nos catechizati quidem, sed priusquam
baptizarentur obierunt, habentur.
123 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 2. c. 13. Cum arbitraretur eos qui
extra ecclesiae communionem baptizarentur, baptismum
noil habere, credidit eos tamen in ecclesiam simpliciter ad-
missos, propter ipsius unitatis vinculum posse ad veniam

pervenire. It. lib. 5. c. 2. Bene quidem praesumpsit, quod
charitas unitatis possit cooperire multitudinem peccato
rum. — Nos autem si ad ecclesiam sine baptismo admittimus,
in eo numero sumus quibus Cyprianus propter unitatis cus-
toJiam ignosci posse praesumpsit. It. lib. 5. c. 28. It.
cont. Crescon. lib. 2. c, 33 et 35.
121 Voss. de Baptismo, Disput. 11. p. 156.
125 Basil. Can. Epist. c. 1.
i2»Timoth. Bespons. Canon, qu. 1. ap. Bevereg. Pan
dect, t. 2. 127 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 25.
128 Dionys. Epist. ad Xystum, ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 9.

448

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

grace of the church. Which thing I durst not do,
but told him, his communicating for so long time
at the altar was sufficient to this purpose. For I
durst not rebaptize one who had so often heard the
solemn thanksgiving, and joined with the rest in
saying Amen to it ; who had stood at the Lord's
table, and stretched forth his hand to receive the
holy food ; who had taken it and been so long used
to participate of the body and blood of Christ. But
I bid him be of good courage, and with a firm belief,
and a good conscience, continue to partake of the
holy mysteries. This was a nice resolution of a
rare and singular case, and we scarce meet with
such another instance in ancient history; but I
have mentioned this and all the preceding cases,
to show, that the ancients had not generally that
rigid opinion of the absolute necessity of baptism
J (barring the neglect and contempt of the sacred in-
t stitution) which some would father upon them ;
1 since they thought the bare want of it might be dis
pensed with and supplied so many several ways ;
'' either, 1. By martyrdom; or, 2. By faith and true
1 . conversion ; or, 3. By an immense charity, and love
of unity and peace ; or, 4. By a constant partaking
of the eucharist in the bosom of the church.
sect 24 -^ut it is to be observed, that these
faTts^ying °ni>ap- allowances were chiefly made to adult
ofett ™Jf. persons, who could exhibit faith and
repentance, the essential parts- of re
ligion, to make some compensation for the want
of the external ceremony of baptism ; but as to in
fants, the case was thought more difficult, because
there was no personal faith or repentance could be
pleaded in their behalf, so that they were destitute
both of the outward visible sign, and the inward
» spiritual grace, of baptism. Upon this account,
they who spoke the most favourably of them, would
only venture to assign them a middle state, neither
in heaven nor hell. As Gregory Nazianzen,129 who
says, That such children as die unbaptized with
out their own fault, shall neither be glorified nor
punished by the righteous Judge, as having done
no wickedness, though they die unbaptized, and as
rather suffering loss than being the authors of it.
Severus, bishop of Antioch, follows Nazianzen in
this opinion ; for, first, he says,130 That if children ,
die unbaptized, without partaking of the laver of

129 Naz. Orat. 40. t. i. p. 653.
130 Sever. Catena in Joh. iii. p. 83.
131 Aug. de Peccat. Meritis, lib. 1. c. 12. Quamvis con-
deinnatio gravior sit eorum, qui originali delicto etiam pro
pria conjunxeruut, ettanto singulis gravior, quanto gravius
quisque peccavit: tamen etiam illud solum quod originaliter
tractum est, non tantum a regno Dei separat, quo parvulos
sine accepta gratia Christi intrare uon posse, ipsi etiam con-
fiteutur; verum et a salute ac vita aeterna facit alienos,
quae nulla aha esse potest praeter regnum Dei, quo sola
Cln-isti societas introducit.
u2 Ibid. c. 16. Potest proinde recte dici, parvulos sine

regeneration, they are certainly excluded from the 1 I I
kingdom of heaven ; but then he adds, that foras- j ! I
much as they have committed no sin, they shall not
undergo any punishment or torment, but be con
signed to a sort of middle state, which he describes
as a state betwixt the glory of the saints and the
punishment of the damned. But this opinion of a -
middle state never found any acceptance among the
Latins. For they make but two places to receive
men after the day of judgment, heaven and hell;,
and concluded, that since children, for want of ,
washing away original sin, could not be admitted
into heaven, they must of necessity be in hell, there
being no third place between them. St. Austin fre
quently insists upon this against the Pelagians, who
distinguish between the kingdom of God and eter
nal life, asserting, that children dying unbaptized
might be admitted to eternal life and salvation,
though not to the kingdom of God : whom he op
poses after this manner in his books about the Me
rits and Remission of Sin : Though, he says, the
•condemnation131 .of those shall be greater, who to
original sin add actual sins of their own ; and every
man's condemnation so much the greater, by how
much greater sin he commits ; yet original sin alone
does not only separate from the kingdom of God,
whither children, dying without the grace of Christ,
cannot enter, as the Pelagians themselves confess ;
but also it excludes them from eternal life and sal
vation, which can be no other than the kingdom of
God, into which our communion with Christ alone , , ,
can introduce us. A little after132 he says plainly, -
that children dying without baptism are under con
demnation, though theirs be the mildest of any
other. But he is very much deceived, and deceives
others, who teaches that they are in no condemna
tion at all, whilst the apostle declares, that "judg
ment was by one offence to condemnation." And
again, that " by the offence of one judgment came
upon all men to condemnation." He tells us,'sl
upon this account the Punic Christians were userl (
to call baptism by the name of salvation, and^'
the sacrament of the body of Christ, hfe. And,'
therefore, since no one could hope for salvation and
eternal life without baptism and the body and blood
of the Lord, it was in vain to promise children sal
vation without them. In the same book134 he de-

baptismo de corpore exeuntes in damnatione omnium mitis-
sima futuros. Multum autem et fallit et fallitur, qui eos in
damnatione pradicat non futuros, dicente apostolo, Judicium
ex uno'delicto in condemnationem. Et paulo post, Perunius
delictum in omnes homines ad condemnationem.
133 Ibid. c. 24. Optime Punici Christiani baptismum
ipsum nihil aliud quam salutem, et sacramentum corporis
Christi, nihil aliud quam vitam vocant— Si ergo nee sains,
nee vita aeterna sine baptismo, et corpore et sanguine Do
mini cuiquam speranda est, frustra sine his promittitur
parvutis. 13' Ibid. c. 28. Nee est ullus ulli medius locus, ut possit

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

447

clares peremptorily against the doctrine of a middle
state for infants or any other. There is no middle
place for any, says he ; he must be with the devil,
who is not with Christ. For our Lord himself, in
tending to take away this opinion of a middle state,
which some erroneously endeavour to assign to chil
dren dying unbaptized, as if by virtue of their in
nocence they might be in eternal life, though not
with Christ in- his kingdom, so long as they wanted
baptism, pronounced this definitive sentence to stop
the mouths. of these men, saying, "He that is not
with me, is against me.'' He argues against this
middle state in many other places 13S against, the Pe
lagians, and urges the necessity of baptism to take
away original sin in children, and bring them by
regeneration to eternal life : Therefore, he says, men
ran with their children to be baptized, because they
verily believed they could not otherwise be made
alive in Christ. Fulgentius 136 is rather more pe
remptory and severe than St. Austin : he says, It is(
to be believed, without all doubt, that not only men,!
who are come to the use of reason, but infants,!
whether they die in their mother's womb, or after '
they are born, without baptism in the name of the
• Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are punished with
/everlasting punishment in eternal fire, because
/ though they have no actual sin of their own, yet
they carry along with them the condemnation of
original sin from their first conception and birth.
The author under the name of Justin Martyr,137
also speaking of infants, says, There is this dif
ference between those that die baptized, and those
that die unbaptized, that the one obtain the benefits
that come by baptism, which the other do not obtain.
And the' author of the Hypognostics,138 under the
name of St, Austin, who is supposed by learned
men to be either Marius Mercator, or Sixtus, bishop
of Rome, disputing against the Pelagians, treads ex
actly in the steps of St. Austin ; for he says, There
is no middle state between heaven and hell ; a third
place for unbaptized infants is no where mentioned
in Scripture, This was only an invention forged in
the shop of the Pelagians, to find out a place where

infants might have rest and glory without the grace
of Christ. These are pretty severe expressions,
and yet, considering the state of the controversy be
tween the catholics and Pelagians, there seems to
have been pretty good reason for them. For Pela- "
gius said, There was no original sin, nor any need I
of baptism to wash away the guilt of it, but chil- 1
dren might obtain salvation and eternal life, dis
tinct from the kingdom of God, without it. In '
opposition to this, the catholics maintained the ne
cessity of baptism fdr infants, as well as adult per
sons, to purge away original sin, and procure eternal
life for them. But they have not so plainly told us,
whether there be any excepted cases as to what
concerns infants, as they have concerning adult per
sons ; whether a bare want of baptism in the child, ]
when there was no contempt or neglect of baptism /
in the parent, but an unavoidable necessity and
sudden death intervening, debars the child from the
kingdom of heaven ? Among all the ancients, only I ¦
Fulgentius has declared absolutely against the sal- \
vation of infants dying before the birth in the 7
mother's womb. But others seem to speak more
favourably, except where the parents were guilty of
a contempt or neglect of haptism, in not bringing
their children to he baptized when they had time
and opportunity to do it, in which case the child \
might fail of salvation for the parents' fault, and i
there be no impeachment of God's justice or mercy '
in the punishment. This seems to have been the
judgment of that excellent author, who wrote the
book De Vocatione Gentium, which goes under the
name of Prosper or St. Ambrose. For he gives this
reason, why this doctrine about the necessity of
haptism for the salvation of infants was so earnestly
pressed upon men, That parents might not be re
miss or negligent in bringing their children to
baptism ; which they certainly would be, if they
were once possessed with an opinion that there was
no necessity of baptism to salvation. We ought
not to believe, says he,139 in general terms, that they
who obtain not the sacrament of regeneration, can
appertain to the society of the blessed. For every

esse, nisi cum diabolo, qui non est cum Christo. Hinc et ipse
Dominus volens auferre de cordibus male credentium istam
nescio quam medietatem, quam conantur quidam parvulis
non baptizatis tribuere, ut quasi merito innocentiae sint in vi
ta ajterna, sed quia non sunt baptizati, non sint cum Christo
m regno ejus, deflnitivam protulit ad haec ora obstruenda
scntentiam, ubi ait, Qui mecum non est, adversum me est.
135 Aug. de Anima, lib. 1. c. 9. lib. 2, c. 12. lib. 3. c. 13.
It. Epist. 28. ad Hieron.
m Fulgent, de Fide ad Petrum, c. 27. Pirmissime tene
et nullatenus dubites, non solum homines jam ratione uten-
tes, verum etiam parvulos, qui sive in uteris matrum vivere
incipuint et ibi moriuntur, sive cum de matribus nati, sine
Sacramento sancti baptismatis, quod datur in nomine Patris,
* ihi, et Spiritus Sancti, de hoc sasculo transeunt, ignis
teterni sempiterno supplicio puniendos : quia etsi propria!
actionis peccatum nullum habuerant, originalis tamen pec-

cati damnationem carnali conceptione et nativitate traxe-
runt. Vid. Fulgent, de Baptismo ^Ethiopis, ... 8.
137 Justin. Quaest. et R;spons. ad Orthodox, qu. 56.
138 Aug. Hypognostic. lib. 5. c. 5. Primum locum fides
catholicorum divina authoritate regnum credidit esse ccclo-
rum, unde, ut dixi, non baptizatus excipitur; secundum, Ge-
hennam, ubi omnis apostata, vel a Christi fide alienus, aeterna
supplicia experietur. Tertium penitus ignoramus, imo nee
esse in Scripturis Sanctis invenimus. Finge, Pelagiane, lo
cum ex officina perversi dogmatis tui, ubi alieni a Christi
gratia vitam requiei et gloriae possidere parvuli possint.
™ Prosper, de Vocat. Gentium, lib. 2. c. 8. Neque credi
fas est, eos qui regenerationis non adepti sunt sacramentum,
ad ullum beatorum pertinere consortium.  Non latet quan
tum cordibus fidelium desidiae gigneretur, si in baptizandis
parvulis nihil de cujusquam negligentia, nihil de ipsorum
esset mortalitate metuendum.

443

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

one must be sensible, how easily sloth and negli
gence would creep into the hearts of the faithful, if
in the business of baptizing infants nothing was to
be feared from the parents' carelessness, or the mor
tality of their children. This author presses the
necessity of baptizing infants, as all good Christians
f do, upon supposition of some benefit which the pa
rents' care may bring to the child ; and contrariwise,
an irreparable damage and loss which the child may
sustain by the parents' default and negligence. And
this is sufficient to quicken the care and watchful
ness of parents, though it be allowed, that in cases
of extreme necessity children may be saved without
baptism. Nor is it improbable, that the ancients
intended no more, though their expressions run in
severe and general terms, without standing precisely
to make exceptions. For it cannot be denied but
that infants may be martyrs as well as adult per
sons ; such were the children which Herod slew at
^Bethlehem : parents may likewise desire baptism
for their children, vowing faith and repentance in
their name, when some extreme necessity only, and
not any culpable neglect, hinders the obtaining of
it. And in such cases, if adult persons may be saved
without baptism, [as all the ancients agree,] there
seems to be a parity of reason to extend the same
charity and indulgence to little children. Hincmar,
archbishop of Rheims, a man of great reputation
and learning in his time, and one well versed in the
writings of the ancients, gives this solution of the
whole matter upon a remarkable case that happened
in his time. A certain bishop of the same country,
Hincmar, bishop of Laon, had for some unjust cause
hindered the baptism of infants in his diocese, when
their parents or godfathers desired they might be
baptized ; by which means many children died with
out baptism. Now, the question was concerning the
future state of these infants, whether the parents'
desire and presenting them to baptism was sufficient
for the salvation of their children ? This, without
any scruple, Hincmar140 resolves in the affirmative,
That as children, who are subject to original sin,
. which is the sin of other men, are saved by the faith
of others, that is, their godfathers, answering for
them in baptism; so those infants, who, by the
command of that perverse bishop, were denied bap
tism, might be saved by the faith and faithful desire
of their parents or godfathers, who had required
both in heart and words that their children might
be baptized ; and this by the gift of him, whose Spi
rit, that is the author of regeneration, bloweth where
it listeth. If we thus interpret the sense of the
ancients with Hincmar, then all those passages

which condemn infants dying without baptism
must be understood not of the bare want of baptism
when it could not be had, but of the parents' con
tempt or neglect in not desiring or procuring bap
tism for their children, when it was in their power
to do it. I have been the longer in explaining and
confirming the truth of these points concerning the
necessity of baptism both for infants and adult per
sons, because the ancients are mistaken by some
and accused by others, as too severe in urging the
necessity of baptism ; when yet it appears their
sentiments about it were exact enough as to what
concerned the case of catechumens, and also capa
ble of a favourable interpretation in the case of in-
. fants, if we do not over-rigidly force their general
expressions beyond the true design and intentions
of the authors.
I should here have put an end to this discourse
concerning the institution and discipline of the cate
chumens, but only that there are two things that
may seem to require a little more distinct handling
than has been allowed them above : 1. Concerning
the original, nature, and use of the ancient creeds
of the church, which were chiefly drawn up for the
institution and service of the catechumens, and
therefore are most proper to be considered in this
place. 2. Concerning that part of their discipline,
which consisted in concealing from them for some
time the distinct and full knowledge of some of the
higher doctrines and mysterious rites of the church.
The consideration of which things shall be the sub
ject of the following chapters.

CHAPTER III.
OF THE ORIGINAL, NATURE, AND NAMES OF THE
ANCIENT CREEDS OF THE CHURCH
In speaking of the creed, it will be
proper to say something, in the first T,|j,lheS;Jis
place, of its several ancient names,
and the reasons of them, because some of them are
a little obscure, and liable to be mistaken. The
most usual name of the creed was symbolum ; but
why it was called so, is not agreed among learned
men. Baronius ' assigns three reasons of the name : -
I. He supposes every apostle cast in his symboh,'
his article or part, to the composition of it; and
therefore it might be called their symbol or colla
tion. But if the foundation of this supposition be

m Hincmar. Opusc. 55. Capit. c. 48. Sicut parvulis na-
turali, id est, alieno peccato, obnoxiis, aliorum, id est, patro-
norum fides pro eis respondentium in baptismate sit ad
salutem: ita parvulis, quibus baptismum denegari jussisti,
parentuin vel patronorum corde credentium, et pro parvulis

suis fideli verbo baptisma expetentium, sed non impetran-
tium, fides et fidelis postulatio prodesse potuerunt, dono ejui
cujus Spiritus, quo regeneratio fit, ubi vult spirat.
1 Baron, an. 41. u. 15.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

449

uncertain, (as we shall see hereafter that it is,) this
could not be the reason of the name. 2. He thinks
it might be so called, because it was like the tessera
militaris among the Roman soldiers, a sort of mark
or badge, by which true Christians might be dis-
' tinguished from infidels, or heretics. 3. Because it
was a collation or epitome of the Christian doctrine.
- Suicerus8 adds to these a fourth reason of the name.
. It might be so called, he thinks, not from the
military badge, but the military oath or contract,
which soldiers made with the emperor, when they
. entered into his service. For the creed is a token
of the contract which we make with God at our
baptism. For this he alleges the testimony of St.
Ambrose,3 who calls the creed, the oath or bond of
our warfare ; and Petrus Chrysologus,4 who says,
an agreement or covenant is called symbolum both
in human and Divine contracts. This last signifi
cation is not improbable ; but the second is more
generally received and approved by modern5 au
thors, and has also the countenance of some ancient
writers. For Maximus Taurinensis'1 supposes it
to be called the symbol, because it is a sign or
mark by which believers are distinguished from
unbelievers and renegadoes. And Ruffinus ' allows
this signification, when he says, It was therefore
called the sign or mark, because at that time (when,
according to his opinion, it was made by the apos
tles) many of the circumcised Jews, as is related
both by St. Paul, and in the Acts of the Apos
tles, did feign themselves to be the apostles of
Christ ; and to serve their own lucre or their belly,
went forth to preach ; naming indeed the name of
Christ, but not preaching him according to the true
lines of tradition. Therefore the apostles laid down
this mark or test, whereby to discern him who
preached Christ truly, according to the apostolical
rules. It is further reported to be a customary thing
in civil wars, that because their arms, language, me
thods, and manner of fighting are the same, there
fore every general, to prevent fraud, should give his
soldiers a distinct symbol, which in Latin is called a
sign or token ; that if one met another, of whom he
had reason to doubt, by asking him the symbol, he

might discover whether he was friend or foe. But
this does not satisfy a late learned writer,8 who
thinks, " That this name was not derived from any
military custom, but rather to be fetched from the
sacra, or religious services of the heathens, where
those who were initiated in their mysteries, and
admitted to the knowledge of their pecuhar services,
which were hidden and concealed from the greatest
part of the idolatrous multitude, had certain signs
or marks, called symbola, delivered unto them, by
which they mutually knew each other, and upon
the declaring of them, were without scruple ad
mitted in any temple to the secret worship and rites
of that god whose symbols they had received."
The use of these symbols among the heathens is
abundantly proved by that learned author, both
from heathen and Christian writers ; but then he
alleges no authority to prove that the Christians
called their creed by the name of symbol, in imita
tion of that heathen practice : and it is some preju
dice against it, that no such thing is said or hinted
by any ancient writer. Neither is it very likely that
the Christians would have so nice a regard to the
abominable and filthy mysteries of the heathen, as
to choose that signification of the name symbol for
their creed, when with much more decency it might
be fetched from the innocent and ordinary customs
used in military affairs or civil contracts, from which
it is with greater probability derived, both by an
cient and modern writers.
Another usual name of the creed Sect. 2.
was leavuiv, the rule, so called because whycaiied«m,m,
and regula fidei.
it was the known standard or rule of
faith, by which orthodoxy and heresy were ex
amined and judged. As when the council of An
tioch9 says of Paulus Samosatensis, that he was an
apostate from the rule, it is plain the meaning is,
he had deviated in his doctrine from the creed, the
rule of faith. Agreeably to this, it is commonly
styled among the Greeks,10 opoc and etcdomg jricn-Ewc,
the determination or exposition of the faith; and
sometimes simply wiaTig, the faith;1' which answers
to the Latin name, regula fidei, the rule of faith, the
common appellation of it in Irenaeus,12 Tertul-

2 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce "SiiptoXov.
3 Ambros. de Veland. Virgin, lib. 3. Symbolum cordis
signaculum, et nostras militiee sacramentum.
4 Cbrysolog. Horn. 62. Placitum vel pactum, quod lucn
spes venientis continet, vel futuri, symbolum nuncupari,
contractu etiam docemur humano, &c.
s Forbes, Instruct. Histor. Theolog. lib. 1. c. 1. n. 2.
8 Maxim. Taurin. Homil. in Symbol, p. 239. Signacu
lum symboli inter fideles perfidosque discernit.
7 Ruffin. Expos. Symboli ad calcem Cypriani, p. 17. In
dicium autem vel signum idcirco dicitur, quia illo tempore,
sicut et Paulus apostolus dicit, et in Actis Apostolorum re-
fertur, multi ex circumcisis Judaeis simulabant se esse apos-
tulos Christi, et lucri alicujus vel ventris gratia ad praedi-
candum proficiscebantur ; nominantes quidem Christum, sed
2 G

non integris traditionum lineis nunciantes. Idcirco ergo
istud indicium posuere, per quod agnosceretur is, qui Chris
tum, vere secundum apostolieas regulas prsedicaret. De-
nique et in bellis civilibus hoc observari ferunt : quoniam
et armorum habitus par, et sonus' vocis idem, et mos unus
est, atque eadera instituta bellandi, ne qua doli subveptio
fiat, symbola discreta unusquisque dux suis militibus tradit;
quse latine vel signa vel indicia nominantur : ut si forte
occurrerit quis de quo dubiteturs interrogatus symbolum,
prodat si sit hostis, an socius.
8 Critical History ofthe Creed, p. 11,
9 Epist. Cone. Antioch. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 30. 'Atto-
crTas tov Kavovos,
10 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 39 et 40. lib. 5. c. 4.
11 Theodoret. Hist. lib. 1. u. 7. 12 Iren. lib. 1. u. 19

450

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

lian,13 Novatian,14 and St. Jerom,15 where they speak
of heretics, and their deviations from the common
articles of the Christian faith contained in the
creeds of the church. Another ordinary appellation of
my iniied the creed in the ancient Greek writers
mathema. t
is pdBripa, the lesson, so called from
the obligation the catechumens were under to learn
it. This may easily be mistaken by an unwary
reader for a lesson in the Bible, unless where some
note of distinction is added to it. Therefore when
we read in the council of Constantinople, under
Mennas, that after the reading of the Gospel, in
time of the communion service, the holy lesson16
was read according to custom, we are not to under
stand it of any other lesson out of the Bible, but of
the creed, which was then made part of the com
munion service. And so Socrates 17 sometimes uses
the word : and Valesius ls has observed, that in two
manuscripts of that author, where the Nicene
Creed, is recited, the title of mathema is set before
it. But Leontius Byzantinus 19 speaks more ex
plicitly, and calls it by way of distinction, the de
cree or lesson of faith, speaking of the creed which
the fathers of the council of Chalcedon were about
to make. Valesius20 has also observed out of
Sect. 4.
why called i,p,(tt- Socrates, that it is sometimes styled
7 ''' simply and absolutely ypatpr) and ypdp-
pec which words, though they are usually taken to
signify the Holy Scripture, yet here they must
have another meaning ; for the creed, properly
speaking, is not an inspired writing, unless in that
sense as it may be said to be collected out of the
inspired writings -. but here those words signify
only, in a common sense, letters or learning, and so
are used, as the foregoing word, mathema, with a
peculiar reference to the learning of the catechu
mens. Some also allege Cyprian for another name,
as if he called the creed peculiarly the sacrament
of faith.2' But I am not satisfied that Cyprian's
meaning is so to be restrained. For he is rather
speaking in general against profaning the mysteries
of rehgion, which include the sacraments, or any

other religious rites, as well as the creed ; applying
that text of Scripture to his purpose, " Give not
that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast ye your
pearls before swine, lest they tread them under
their feet, and turn again and rend you." Or if it
be hmited to any particular mystery, it should
rather signify baptism than the creed : for baptism
is sometimes called the sacrament of faith by St.
Austin,22 and the sacrament of faith and repentance
by Fulgentius23 and others, as I shall more particu
larly show, when I come to treat of baptism. For
which reason, I do not take this to be any particu
lar name given to the creed by any ancient writer ;
but the creed is the faith itself, (the credulitas, as
some middle-age writers24 call it,) and the sacra
ment of faith is baptism.
The next inquiry is into the original
and nature of the ancient creeds ; wieihertint
' which is commonly
which will admit of three questions: K ™AX£"'
I. Whether that which is commonly EStfe'S
called the Apostles' Creed, was com- °rm ° ™ "•
posed by the apostles in the same form of words
as now it is used in the church ? 2. Whether the
apostles made or used any creeds at all for the in
stitution of catechumens, or the administration of
baptism ? 3. If they did, what articles were con
tained in them ? The first question is now generally -
resolved in the negative by learned men, though
many both of the ancients and moderns have been
of a different opinion. Some have thought that the
twelve apostles in a full meeting composed the
creed in the very same form of words as now it is
used in the church ; and others have gone so far as
to pretend to tell what article was composed by
every particular apostle. Dr. Comber is so positive
in the matter, as to say, " We have no better medium
to prove the books25 were written by those authors
whose names they bear, than the unanimous testi
mony of antiquity ; and by that we can abundantly
prove the apostles were the authors of this creed."
For this he cites Clemens Romanus, Irenaeus, Ori
gen, Tertullian, Ruffinus, Ambrose, Austin, Jerom,
Pope Leo, Maximus Taurinensis, Cassian, and Isi
dore. But none of these writers, except Ruffinus,

13 Tertul. de Praescript. c. 13. Regula est autem fidei, qua
creditur unum omnino Deum esse, &c. It. de Veland.
Virgin, u. 1. Regula autem fidei una omnino est, sola im-
mobilis et irreformabilis, credendi scilicet in unicum Deum
omnipotentem, &c.
11 Novatian. de Trinit. c. 1 et 9. Regula veritatis.
15 Hieron. Ep. 54. ad Marcellam, cont. En-ores Montani.
Primum in fidei regula discrepamus, &c.
16 Cone. C. P. sub Menna, Act. 5. t. 5. p. 181. Tov dyiov
paQnpaTos KaTa to o-vvhOes XexBevtos.
17 Socrat. Hist. lib. 3. c. 25. T« Xottri tov paStjpaTos.
Usser. de Symbolis, p. 20, shows the same out of Justinian,
Maxentius, and Photius.
18 Vales. Not. in Socrat. lib. 1. c. 8.
19 Leont. de Sectis. Act. 6. p. 515. "ESo£ev avToXs So-te
opov iriaTEtos Kal pdBripa iroirjaai.

20 Vales. Not. in Theodor. Hist. lib. 1. c. 8.
21 Cypr. Testim. ad Quirin. lib. 3. c. 50. Sacramentum
fidei non esse prophanandum.  Ne dederitis sanctum ca-
nibus, &c.
22 Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Sicut secundum quondam
modum sacramentum corporis Christi corpus Christi est,
sacramentum sanguinis Christi sanguis Christi est, ita sa
cramentum fidei fides est.
23 Fulgent, de Fide ad Petrum, c. 30. Per sacramentum
fidei et pcenitentiae, id est, per baptismum liberatus.
24 Vid. Herardi Turonensis Capitul. 140. ap. Wharton.
Auctarium Historioe Dogmaticae Usserii, p. 368. Gloria
Patri, ac sanctus, atque credulitas, et Kyrie Eleison a cunc-
tisreverentercanatur. It. Edictum Reccaredi Regis ad cal.
cem Concilii Toletani tertii.
25 Comber's Companion to the Temple, p. 132.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

451

speak home to his purpose ; but only say, the creeds
in general are of apostolical institution : which, for
the substance, no one denies; for they speak of
several forms, and yet ascribe them all to the apos
tles ; which is an argument they did not mean this
particular form any more than others. For the
Nicene Creed is often called the Apostles' Creed ;
and yet no one believes that that Creed was com
posed toiidem verbis by the apostles. Ruffinus in
deed seems to say, there was an ancient tradition,
that the apostles, being about to depart from Jeru
salem,28 first settled a rule for their future preach
ing ; lest, after they were separated from one an
other, they should expound different doctrines to
those whom they invited to the Christian faith.
Wherefore being all assembled together, and filled
with the Holy Ghost, they composed this short rule
of their preaching, each one contributing his sen
tence, and left it as a rule to be given to all believ
ers. And for this reason, he thinks, it might be
called the symbol, because that word in Greek sig
nifies both a test and a collation of opinions toge-
' ther. The author27 under the name of St. Austin
is a little more particular in the story j for he pre
tends to tell us what article was put in by each par
ticular apostle : Peter said, " I beheve in God, the
fFather Almighty." John, " Maker of heaven and"
/earth." James, " and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, ,
j our Lord." Andrew added, " who was conceived
l' by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary."
j Philip said, "suffered under Pontius Pilate, was
! crucified, dead, and buried." Thomas, " He de
scended into hell; the third day he rose again from
the dead." Bartholomew, " He ascended into hea
ven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father
Almighty." Matthew, "From thence he shall come
to judge the quick and the dead." James, the son
of Alphseus, added, " I beheve in the Holy Ghost,
I the holy cathohc church." Simon Zelotes, " the
communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins." Jude,
the brother of James, " the resurrection of the
Vbody." Matthias, " hfe everlasting."
But now there is an insuperable difficulty lies
against this tradition, which is this, that there are
two or three articles here mentioned, which are

28 Ruffin. Expos. Symboli, ad calcem Cypriani, p. 17.
Discessuri itaque ab invicem, normam prius futurae sibi
pradicationis in commune constituunt : ne forte alius ab
alio abducti, diversum aliquid his qui ad fidem Christi invi-
tabantur, exponerent. Omnes ergo in uno positi, et Spiritu
Sancto repleti, breve istud futurae sibi, ut diximus, praedica-
lionia indicium, conferendo in unum quod sentiebat unus
quisque, componunt; atque banc credentibus dandam esse
regulam statuunt. Symbolum autem hoc multis et justissi-
nus caussis appellare voluerunt. Symbolum enim Grace et
indicium dici potest, et collatio, hoc est, quod plures in
unum conferunt.
"Aug. de Tempore, Ser. 115. al. 92. in Append. 1. 10. p.
2 O 2

known not to have been in this Creed for three or
four ages at least. For Ruffinus himself tells us, -
The descent into hell was neither in the Roman28
Creed, which is that we call the Apostles' Creed,
nor yet in any creed of the Eastern churches ; only
the sense of it might be said to be couched in that
other expression, he was buried. Bishop Usher and
Bishop Pearson have demonstrated the truth of this
observation by a particular induction from all the
ancient creeds, and showed this article to be want
ing in them all for four hundred years, except the
Creed of Aquileia, which Ruffinus expounds, and
the Creed of the council of Ariminum, mentioned
in Socrates.29 Others have made the same observa- .
tion upon the article concerning the communion of
saints, which is not to be found either in the Creed
of Aquileia, or any ancient Greek or Latin creed
for above the space of four hundred years. Nor is '
the article of " the life everlasting" expressly men
tioned in many creeds, but only inclusively contain
ed in " the resurrection of the body ;" which is the
concluding article in many ancient creeds. These are
plain demonstrations, without any other argument,
that the creed, as it stands in the present form, could
not be composed in the manner as is pretended by
the apostles. The silence of The Acts of the Apos- ¦
ties about any such composition, is a collateral evi
dence against it. The silence of ecclesiastical writers '
for above three whole centuries, is a further con
firmation. The variety of creeds, in so many dif
ferent forms, used by the ancients, yet extant in
their writings, some with omissions, others with
additions, and all in a different phrase, are no less
evident proofs, that one universal form had not been
pitched upon and prescribed to the whole church by
the apostles. For then it is scarce to be imagined,
that any church should have received any other
form in the least tittle varying from it. These rea
sons do now generally satisfy learned men, that no
such precise form was composed, according to that
pretended tradition, by all the apostles. The reader
may find dissertations in Vossius,30 Bishop Usher,31
Hammond L'Estrange^Basnagius,33 Suicerus,54 and
the learned author of the late Critical History of
the Creed,35 to this purpose. And it is much to be

28 Ruffin. Expos. Symboli, p. 22. Sciendum sane est,
quod in ecclesiae Romanae symbolo non habetur additum,
Descendit ad interna, sed neque in Orientis ecclesiis habetur
hie sermo ; vis tamen verbi eadem videtur esse in eo quod
sepultus dicitur.
29 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 37. 80 Voss. de tribus Symbolis.
81 Usser. de Symbolo Romano.
»2 L'Estrange, Alliance of Divin. Offic. chap. 3. p. 80.
33 Basnag. Critic, in Baron, p. 471.
31 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce JibpfioXov. t. 2. p. 1092.
35 Critical Hist, of the Creed, chap. 1. p. 27. See also
Bishop Bull's Judicium Ecclesiae Cathol. &c. cap. 5. n. 3,
where he refers to Vossius as having abundantly proved
this thesis.

452

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

wondered at, that any knowing person, against such
convincing evidence, should labour to maintain the
contrary, upon no better grounds than only this,
that the ancients agree in calling the creed apostoli
cal. For they do not always intend this particular
form, but call all other forms apostolical, the Nicene
Creed, the Constantinopolitan Creed, the Eastern
Creeds, the Western Creeds, and all others which
agree with this in substance, though not in method
or expression, and are all equally apostolical, as
being all derived from the apostles' preaching, and
for substance composed by them, and some of them
perhaps left in the churches where they preached,
as the first rudiments of this creed seem to have
been in the Roman church. So far all the ancient
catholic creeds may be said to be apostolical, as
being in substance the same with the creeds used in
baptism by the apostles.
sect e By a-11, then, that has hitherto been
ap^&SScrli said, I intend not to insinuate, that
form,9 no'f'in ssu'b" the apostles used no creeds at all, but
rather that they used many, differing
in form, but not in substance, from one another.
All that I contend for, is only this, that none of the
present forms are exactly the same in expression
with those of the apostles, which is demonstrated
from the variety of creeds used in several churches,
and from the addition of some words to that creed
which pretends most to be apostolical. But though
the apostles composed no one creed to be of per
petual and universal use for the whole church, yet
it is not to be doubted but that they used some forms
in admitting catechumens to baptism. There are
many expressions in Scripture that favour this, par
ticularly Philip's questions to the eunuch before he
baptized him, and St. Peter's interrogatories, or the
answer of a good conscience towards God, which
was used in baptism : and the constant practice of
the church, in imitation of the apostles, admitting
none to baptism but by answer to such interroga
tories, is a sufficient demonstration of the apostolical
practice. But then, as the church used a liberty of
expression in her several creeds, so it is not im
probable the apostles did the same, without tying
themselves to any one form, who had less need to
do it, being all guided by inspiration. And hence
it came to pass, that there being no one certain form
of a creed prescribed universally to all churches,
every church had liberty to frame their own creeds,
as they did their own liturgies, without being tied
precisely to any one form of words, so long as they
kept to the analogy of faith and doctrine at first
delivered by the apostles : which seems to be the
true reason of so many ancient forms, differing in
words, not in substance.

But now the grand question still
remains, concerning the nature, sub- coS^"^™"
stance, and extent of the apostolical i""1*"1 ^ *"
creeds, that is, what articles were contained in
them ? Some there are who would confine these to •
very narrow bounds, making them at first to be no
more than what is contained expressly in the form
of baptism, " I beheve in God the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost." So Episcopius36 and his followers,
who would persuade the world, that for the three
first ages, the doctrine of our Saviour's Divinity was
no necessary article of the Christian faith. But the
learned Bishop Bull,37 and Dr. Grabe,38 have judi
ciously refuted these pretences ; the one, by showing
from all the ancient creeds, that this doctrine was a
necessary article before the Nicene council ; and the
other, by evincing from Scripture, that the linea
ments of the Apostles' Creed used in the administra
tion of baptism, were at the first much larger than
what Episcopius pretended ; and that in the apos
tles' age, either by their authority or permission,
the creed consisted of all the present articles, except
only those two, of the descent into hell, and the
communion of saints, which are owned to be of later
admission. Mr. Basnage39 indeed has a peculiar -
opinion, that the creed was composed and the chief
articles inserted only in the second century, in op
position to several heresies, which then began to
infest the church. The Gnostics brought in the
doctrine of a two-fold deity, the one good, the other
evil : against this pestilent heresy, the church put
that article into her creed, " I believe in God," or,
in one God. Menander, the disciple of Simon Ma
gus, asserted, that the world was not created by
God, but by angels : this occasioned the church to
insert those words, " Maker of heaven and earth."
Carpocrates taught, that Jesus was a mere man,
and begotten of both sexes, as other men : in op
position to whom, it was inserted, that Christ was
" conceived by the Holy Ghost." The Basihdians
did not believe Jesus was crucified by the Jews, but
only Simon of Cyrene : to confute whom, they put
in those words, " He was dead and buried." Carpo
crates rejected the resurrection of the flesh : and
upon that, " I believe the resurrection of the flesh,"
was added to the creed. Thus, if we will hearken •"
to this learned person, there was no creed at all
made by the apostles, but it was composed entirely
by the church, and gradually augmented, only as
the rise of sects and heresies required some opposi
tion to be made to them. The learned author of
the late Critical History of the Creed goes the same
way, only with this difference, that he supposes
(what Mr. Basnage does not) that some articles were
inserted by the apostles themselves, and others su-

36 Episcop. Institut. lib. 4. sect. 2. cap. 34.
87 Bull. Judic. Eccles. Cathol. &c. cap. 6.

33 Grabe, Annotata ad cap. 5, 6, et 7. ejusd. p. 61.
89 Basnag. Exercitat. in Baron, p. 476.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

453

jjeradded by the church, as the occasion of heresies
required. But when he speaks of the particular
articles, he falls in with Mr. Basnage's notion about
the "chiefest ; for he supposes the first article, " I
beheve in one God," not to be made against the po
lytheism of the Gentiles by the apostles, but only
by the church, upon the rise of the heresies of the
Valentinians, Cerdonians, Marcionites, and others
in after ages. Which in effect is to say, the creed
was made, and not made by the apostles ; for if the
principal articles were not composed by them, I see
not what else can entitle them to have been the au-
. thors of it. And therefore I much more readily
subscribe to the opinion of the learned Dr. Grabe,
' which he maintains against this learned person,
that the article of " one God the Father, Maker of
heaven and earth," was originally inserted into the
creed by the apostles, against the capital error of
the Gentiles, who made one god to have power over
heaven, another over the earth, another over the
sea, &c, and divided the divine honour among them.
For so the vulgar among the heathen practised
their idolatry; however, the philosophers among
them might be a httle more refined in their theology,
and have more agreeable notions of the unity of the
supreme God. Therefore it is reasonable to beheve
this first article was inserted, to make men renounce
in their baptism this erroneous opinion of the
Gentiles. The opinion of Episcopius, that nothing more
was originally in the creed about our Saviour, but
only the bare title of the Son, is solidly refuted by
Dr. Grabe, who proves from Scripture, that he had
always this title with the addition of his being the
Son of God : and that those other articles, "He was
crucified, dead, and buried; that he rose again, and
ascended into heaven, and sat at the right hand of
God, and from thence should come to judge the
quick and dead," were all original articles of the
creed; being such doctrines as the apostles chiefly
taught their catechumens, and such as the Jews
and Gentiles either denied, or ridiculed : and there
fore it was proper to make all new converts, at their
entrance on Christianity, make a particular profes
sion of such articles, in opposition to their former
errors, whether they came over from the Jews or
Gentiles. Upon this account he also rejects the
opinion of the author of the Critical History, who
supposes the article of the ascension of Christ into
heaven, to have been added to the creed only in the
second century, and that in opposition to Apelles,
one of Marcion's disciples, who denied the ascen
sion of Christ's flesh into heaven. But if it had
been designed agamst him, it would no doubt have
been more particularly expressed, that his flesh

40 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 6. Cum sub tribus et testatio
ndeiet sponsio salutis pignorentur necessario adjicitur ec-

ascended into heaven, as Dr. Grabe observes it is in
Irenasus, and not barely that Christ ascended into
heaven. For the same reason he concludes, that the
following articles, of his session at God's right hand,
and his coming to judge the quick and the dead,
could not be inserted into the creed in opposition
to the Marcionites and Gnostics, as the foremen
tioned author supposes ; for then they would have
been more precisely worded against their reigning
tenets, which were, that Christ's flesh was void of
sense in heaven, and that Christ was not the Son
of that God who is the Judge of the world : where
fore it is more reasonable to suppose those articles
were originally inserted by the apostles, to correct
the ignorance and errors of the Jews and Gentiles.
As to those two articles, " He was conceived by
the Holy Ghost, and born ofthe Virgin Mary," Dr.
Grabe makes some question whether they were as
ancient as the former, because they do not appear
in the common catechetical discourses of the apos
tles, but he thinks, before St. John's death they
were inserted against the heresies of Carpocrates,
Ebion, and Cerinthus, who denied both articles, and
asserted, that Christ was born of Joseph and Mary,
after the common way of mankind.
The article of the Holy Ghost was always a part
of the Apostles' Creed, by the confession of Episco
pius himself. And therefore the opinion of those
who maintain, that nothing more was required of
catechumens before baptism, but only the profession
of their faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, is
wholly to be rejected.
The article of "remission of sins " was also origin
ally in the apostolical creeds, because it always
appears to have been one principal point of their
catechetical institutions. And therefore the opinion
of the learned author of the Critical History, that
it was only in some creeds, but not in all, till the
rise of the Novatian heresy, is also to be rejected ;
because it appears from Cyprian, that it was in the
creed which the Novatians themselves made use of
in baptism.
The articles of " the resurrection of the' dead, and
life everlasting," are also concluded to have been in
the Apostles' Creed, if not from the veiy first, yet at
least when St. Paul wrote his Epistle tothe Hebrews,
because he there mentions "the resurrection of the
dead," and "eternal judgment," among the funda
mental doctrines of the Christian faith, Heb. vi. 2.
The article of "the church," Dr. Grabe thinks, was
not originally in the creed, but added in the latter
end of the first century, or beginning of the second,
upon occasion of heretics and schismatics separating
from the church. At least it appears from Tertul
lian's book De Baptismo,40 that the profession of it

clesiae mentio ; quoniam ubi tres, id est, Pater, Filius, ct
Spiritus Sanctus, ibi ecclesia, quae trium corpus est.

454

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

was required in his time, of catechumens at their
baptism. For he says, after they had testified
their faith in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
they also added the church, because where those
three were, there was the church, and it was the
body of the three.
The article of " the communion of saints," he
readily acknowledges, was never in any creed before
the fourth century. And that concerning the de
scent into hell, was not originally in the creed, but
added upon occasion of heretics in after ages. But
the precise time of its addition is not exactly agreed
upon between the author of the Critical History
and Dr. Grabe. The former (who is allowed to
have explained the genuine sense of this article
with as great exactness as the most consummate di
vine) supposes it to have been added against the
Arians and Apollinarians, (who denied the soul or
spirit of Christ,) because the fathers argued thus
against them : Christ descended into hell either in
his Divinity, or his soul, or his body : but it is ab
surd to ascribe the descent into hell either to his
Divinity or his body ; and therefore it must be his
soul that descended; which proves the reality of
his soul. But Dr. Grabe thinks this article was of
earlier date, because it is to be found in some of the
Arian creeds themselves, and others, more ancient
than the Apollinarians : and that if it had been in
serted against the Apolhnarian doctrine, it would
not have been barely said, " he descended into hell ;"
but rather, he descended by his soul into hell;
which had been directly against that heresy. There
fore he rather supposes it to have been added to the
creed in opposition to the Valentinians and Marcion
ites, who, according to the account given by Ire
nseus41 and Tertullian,42 pretended, that the souls of
all that died of their sects went immediately to hea
ven ; when yet Christ himself went into the state
and place of separate souls for three days before his
resurrection and ascension.
Upon the whole matter, Dr. Grabe concludes,
that all the articles of the creed, except these three,
the communion of saints, the church, and the de
scent of Christ into hell, were solemnly professed
by the first Christians, in their confessions of faith
in the apostles' days, by their authority, or at least,
their approbation ; for which reason, the creed, as
to those parts of it, may properly be called apos
tolical. And it could hardly be, that all churches
in the world should so unanimously agree in the
common confession of so many articles of it, unless
it had proceeded from some such authority as they
all acknowledged. But the reason why the con
fessions of particular churches differed in words
and phrases, he thinks was from hence, that the

creed which the apostles delivered, was not writ-,
ten with paper and ink, but in the fleshy tables of
the heart, as St. Jerom words it.43 Whence every
church was at liberty to express their sense in their
own terms. But he will not undertake to vindicate
the common tradition of Ruffinus, that it was
made by joint consent of all the apostles, when they
were about to separate from one another; and
much less, that every one of the twelve apostles
cast in his symbol to complete the number of twelve
articles, as the other story is told by the author un
der the name of St. Austin, which he thinks is not
in the least to be regarded. I have been a httle
more particular in representing the sense of this
great man upon this point, both because his account '
of the original of the several articles of the creed
seems to be most exact, and because the discourse
where he delivers his opinion may not yet be fallen
into the hands of every ordinary reader.

CHAPTER IV.
A COLLECTION OP SEVERAL ANCIENT FORMS OF THE
CREED OUT OF THE PRIMITIVE RECORDS OF THE
CHURCH.
I shall now in the next place present SKt ,_
the reader with several of the ancient thriecrcT°in"'te-r
forms of the creed, as we find them ™ul"
preserved in the most ancient writers, and the most
authentic primitive records of the church. The use
of these will be, not only to illustrate and confirm
what has been said in the last chapter, but also to
declare what was the ancient faith of the church,
and show the vanity of modern heretics, especially
the Arians, who pretend that the doctrine of our
Saviour's Divinity was no necessary article of faith
before the council of Nice. Bishop Usher, in his
curious tract De Symbolo Romano, has already
collected a great many of these ancient forms; but
because that piece is written in Latin, and become
very scarce, and some things more may be added to
it, I will here oblige the English reader with a new
account of them, beginning with the fragments of
the creed which we have in Irenaeus, Origen, Cy
prian, Tertullian, and other private writers, which
Bishop Usher gives no account of. Some fancy the
creed may be found in the writings of Ignatius,
Clemens Romanus, Polycarp, and Justin Martyr :
but Bishop Pearson1 has rightly observed, That
these, writers, however they may incidentally men
tion some articles of faith, do not formally deliver
any rule of faith used in their own times. The

41 Irenreus, lib. 5. c.31.
12 Tertul. de Anima, cap. 55.

43 Hieron. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. c.9.
1 Pearson's Exposition of the Creed, Article 5. Initio.

„Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

455

first that speaks of this is Irenseus, who calls it the
unalterable canon2 or rule of truth, which every
man received at his baptism. And he immediately
declares what it was in these words : The church,
though it be dispersed over all the world,3 from one
end of the earth to the other, received from the
apostles and their disciples the belief in one God,
the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth,
and sea, and all things in them ; and in one Christ
Jesus, the Son of God, who was incarnate for our
salvation ; and in the Holy Ghost, who preached
by the prophets the dispensations [of God], and the
advent, and nativity of a virgin, and passion, and
resurrection from the dead, and bodily ascension of
the flesh of his beloved Son Christ Jesus our Lord
into heaven, and his coming again from heaven in
the glory of the Father, to recapitulate all things,
and raise the flesh of -all mankind; that, according to
the will of the invisible Father, every knee should
bow, of things in heaven, and things in the earth,
and things under the earth, to Jesus Christ, our
Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, and that
every tongue should confess to him ; and that he
may exercise just judgment upon all, and send spi
ritual wickednesses, and the transgressing and apos
tate angels, with all ungodly, unrighteous, lawless,
and blaspheming men, into everlasting fire ; but
grant hfe to ah righteous and holy men, that keep
his commandments and persevere in his love, some
from the beginning, others after repentance, on
whom he confers immortality, and invests them
with eternal glory. This faith,- he says, was the
same in all the world ; men professed it with one
heart and one soul: for though there were different
dialects in the world, yet the power of the faith was
one4 and the same. The churches in Germany had
no other faith or tradition than those in Iberia or
Spain, or those among the Celtae, that is, France,
or in the East, or in Egypt, or in Libya, or in the
middle parts of the world, by which he means Je
rusalem and the adjacent churches, which were
reckoned to be in the midst of the earth. But as
one and the same sun enhghtened all the world ; so
the preaching of this truth shined all over, and en

lightened all men that were willing to come to the
knowledge of truth. Nor did the most eloquent
ruler of the church say any more than this, [for
no one was above his Master,] nor the weakest di
minish any thing of this tradition. For the faith
being one and the same, he that said most of it,
could not enlarge it, nor he that said least, take any
thing from it.
The reader will easily perceive, that IreniBus, by
this one faith, did not mean the express form of
words now used in the Apostles' Creed; for his
words differ much in expression from that, though
in sense and substance it be the same faith, and
that which was then preached and taught over all
the churches.
There is another such form of apos
tolical doctrine collected by Origen in Tie creed of ori-
his books of Christian Principles,5
where he thus delivers the rule of faith : The things
which are manifestly handed down by the apos
tolical preaching, are these : first, That there is one
God, who created and made all things, and caused
the whole universe to exist out of nothing ; the God
of all the just that ever were from the first creation
and foundation of all ; the God of Adam, Abel, Seth,
Enos, Enoch, Noe, Sem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,
the twelve patriarchs, Moses and the prophets : and
that this God, in the last days, as he had promised
before by his prophets, sent our Lord Jesus Christ,
first to call Israel, and then the Gentiles, after the
infidelity of his people Israel. This just and good
God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, gave
both the law and the prophets, and the Gospels, be
ing the God of the apostles, and of the Old and New
Testament. The next article is, That Jesus Christ,
who came into the world, was begotten of the Fa
ther before every creature, who, ministering to his
Father in the creation of all things, [" for by him all
things were made,"] in the last times made himself
of no reputation, and became man : he who was
God, was made flesh; and when he was man, he
continued the same God that he was before. He
assumed a body in all things hke ours, save only
that it was born of a virgin by the Holy Ghost.

2 Iren. lib. 1. c. 1. p. 44.
9 Ibid. cap. 2. p. 45.
4 Ibid. c. 3.
5 Origen. irEpl dpxwv, in Praefat. t. 1. p. 665. Species
vero eorum, quae per praedicationem apostolicam manifeste
traduntur, istae sunt. Primo quod unus Deus est, qui omnia
creavit atque composuit, quique ex nullis fecit esse uni versa;
Deus a prima creatura et conditione muudi omnium justo.
rum, Deus Adam, Abel, Seth, Enos, Enoch, Noe, Sem,
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, 12 patriarcharum, Moysi et pro-
phetarum: et quod hie Deus in novissimis diebus, sicut per
prophetas suos ante promiserat, misit Dominum nostrum
Jesum Christum, primo quidem vocaturum Israel, secundo
etiam Gentes post perfidiam populi Israel. Hie Deus Jus
tus et bonus, Pater Domini nostri Jesu Christi, legem et

prophetas et Evangelia dedit, qui et apostolorum Deus est,
et Veteris et Novi Testamenti. Turn deinde quia Jesus
Christus ipse qui venit, ante omnem creaturam natus ex
Patre est. Qui cum in omnium conditione Patri ministras-
set (per ipsum enim omnia facta sunt) novissimis tempori-
bus seipsum exinaniens homo i'actus est: incarnatus est
cum Deus esset, et homo mansit quod Deus erat. Corpus
assumpsit nostro corpori simile, eo solo difterens r^iod na-
tum ex Virgine de Spiritu Sancto est. Et quoniam hie
Jesus Christus natus, et passus est in veritate et non per
imao-inem communem hanc mortem, vere mortuus est; vere
enim a mortuis resurrexit, et post resurrectionem conversa-
tus cum discipulis suis, assumptus est. Turn deinde honore
ac dignitate Patri et Filio sociatum tradiderunt Spiritum
Sanctum, &c.

45G

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

And because this Jesus Christ was born, and suffer
ed death, common to all, in truth, and not only in
appearance, he was truly dead ; for he rose again
truly from the dead, and after his resurrection con
versed with his disciples, and was taken up into
heaven. They also delivered unto us, that the
Holy Ghost was joined in the same honour and dig
nity with the Father and the Son.
Thus far Origen speaks of the principal articles
of the Christian faith, as handed down by the church
from the preaching of the apostles. And there goes
another book under his name, written by way of
dialogue against the Marcionites, where he more
succinctly delivers the catholic faith, in opposition
to the false principles of those heretics : " I believe
there is one God,6 the Creator and Maker of all
things ; and one that is from him, God the Word,
who is consubstantial with him and co-eternal, who
in the last times took human nature upon him of the
[Virgin] Mary, and was crucified, and raised again
from the dead. I beheve also the Holy Ghost, who
exists to all eternity." It is true, learned men are
not certainly agreed who was the true author of
those dialogues : Westenius, who first published
them in Greek, ascribes them to Origen ; but Hue-
tius makes one Maximus the author, who lived, as
he conjectures, in the time of Constantine. But
whoever was the author, they contain a form of a
very orthodox creed, for which reason I have given
it a place in this collection.
sect 3. Next after Origen, we find some
uJc'ee'dTTcrtui- parts of the ancient creed in Tertul
lian, who speaks of it as the rule of
faith common to all Christians. There is, says he,
one rule7 of faith only, which admits of no change
or alteration ; that which teaches us to believe in
one God Almighty, the Maker of the world, and in
Jesus Christ his Son, who was born of the Virgin
Mary, crucified under Pontius Pilate, the third day

arose again from the dead, received into heaven
and sitteth now at the right hand of God, who shall
come again to judge both the quick and the dead
by the resurrection of the flesh.
In his book of Prescriptions8 against Heretics he
has another form not much unhke this : The rule
of faith is that whereby we believe one God only,
and no other beside, the Maker of the world, who
produced all things out of nothing, by his Word
which he sent forth before all things. This Word
was called his Son, who at sundry times appeared
to the patriarchs, and always spake by the pro
phets, and at last descended into the Virgin Mary
by the power and Spirit of God the Father, and
was made flesh in her womb, and born of her a
man, Jesus Christ ; who preached a new law, and
a new promise of the kingdom of heaven; who
wrought miracles, and was crucified, and the third
day arose again, and was taken into heaven, and
sitteth at the right hand of the Father ; whence he
sent the power of the Holy Ghost in his stead, to
guide them that beheve : who shall come again
with glory, to take the saints into the possession
and fruition of eternal hfe and the heavenly pro
mises, and to condemn the profane to everlasting
fire, having first raised both the one and the other
by the resurrection of the flesh. This rule, he
says, was instituted by Christ himself,9 and there
were no disputes in the church about it, but such
as heresies brought in, or such as made heretics.
To know nothing beyond this, was to know all
things. In his book against Praxeas he repeats the same
creed, with a little variation of expression : We be
lieve in one God,10 yet under this dispensation,
which we call the economy, That that one God
hath a Son, which is his Word, who proceeded from
him, by whom all things were made, and without
whom nothing was made. We beheve that he was

6 Origen, Cont. Marc. Dial. 1. p. 815. t. 2. Edit. Latin.
Basil. 1571.
7 Tertul. de Veland. Virgin, cap. 1. Regula quidem
fidei una omnino est, sola immobilis et irreformabilis, cre-
dendi scilicet in unicum Deum Omnipotentem, mundi Con-
ditorem, et Filium ejus Jesum Christum, natum ex Virgine
Maria, crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato, tertia die resuscitatum
a mortuis, receptum in crelis, sedentem nunc ad dexteram
Patris, venturum judicare vivos et mortuos, per carnis etiam
resurrectionem. 8 Id. de Prat-script, advers. Haereticos, cap. 13. Regula
est autem fidei, ilia scilicet qua creditur, unum omnino
Deum esse, nee alium praeter mundi conditorem, qui uni-
versa de uihilo produxerit, per Verbum suum primo omnium
emissurh. Id Verbum Filium ejus appellatum, in nomine
Dei varie visum patriarchis, in prophetis semper auditum
postremo delatum ex Spiritu Dei Patris et virtute in Vir-
ginem Mariam, carnem factum in utero ejus, et ex ea na
tum hominem et esse Jesum Christum: exinde preedicasse
novam legem, et novam promissionem regni ccelorum vir-
tutes fecisse : fixumcruci: tertia die resurrexisse : in coeios
ereptum sedere ad dexteram Patris : misisse vicariam vim

Spiritus Sancti, qui credentes agat: venturum cum claritate
ad sumendos sanctos in vitae aeternae et promissorum cocles-
tium fructum, et ad prophanos judicandos igni perpetuo,
utriusque partis resuscitatione cum carnis resurrectione.
8 Ibid. cap. 14. Haec regula a Christo instituta, nullas
habet apud nos quaestiones, nisi quas haereses inferunt et
quae haereticos faciurit. — Nihil ultra scire, omnia scire est.
10 Tertul. advers. Prax. cap. 2. Unicum quidem Deum
credimus, sub hac tamen dispensatione, quam olKovop'mv
dicimus, ut unici Dei sit et Filius Sermo ipsius, qui ex ipso
processerit, per quem omnia facta sunt, et sine quo factum
est nihil. Hunc missum a Patre in virginem, et ex ea na
tum hominem et Deum, Filium hominis et Filium Dei, et
cognominatum Jesum Christum. Hunc passum, hunc mor-
tuum, et sepultum secundum Scripturas, resuscitatum a
Patre, et in ccelos resumptum, sedere ad dexteram Patris,
venturum judicare vivos et mortuos. Qui exinde miserit
secundum promissionem suam a Patre Spiritum Sanctum
Paracletum, sanctificatorem fidei eorum qui credunt in
Patrem et Filium et Spiritum Sanctum. Hanc regulam
ab initio evangelii decucurrisse, &c. Confer. Tertul. de
Bapt. cap. 6et 11.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

457

sent by the Father to be born of a virgin, both man
and God, the Son of man and the Son of God, and
that he was called Jesus Christ. That he suffered,
and was dead and buried according to the Scrip-
- tures ; that he was raised again hy the Father, and
taken up again into heaven, where he sits at the right
hand of the Father, and shall come again to judge
the quick and dead. From whence also he sent
from his Father, according to his promise, the Holy
Ghost the Comforter, who sanctifies the faith of
those that believe in the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost. This faith, he says, was the rule of be
lieving from the beginning of the gospel, and the
antiquity of it was sufficiently demonstrated from
the novelty of heresies, which were but of yester
day's standing in comparison of it.
• • Now, it is easy to observe, that Tertullian here
speaks not of any certain form of words, but of the
substance of the faith: for some articles, as the
descent into hell, and the communion of saints, are
not here expressly mentioned, though they may
be imphed; but the articles of the Trinity, the in
carnation, &c, are both expressed and carefully ex
plained in such a manner, as shows the necessity
of an explicit faith in those points, and how the
doctrine of our Saviour's Divinity was a prime ar
ticle of the creed from the very foundation of the
church. sect t. Next after TertuUian we have some
tJ'creeK'ctpri- remains of the use of the creed in
Cyprian : he says, Both the catholics
and Novatians agreed in the same form of inter
rogatories, which they always proposed to cate
chumens at their baptism; some of which were
these questions in particular, Whether they believed
in God" the Father, and in Christ his Son, and in
the Holy Ghost ? And, whether they believed the
remission of sins and hfe eternal was to be obtained
by the holy church ? For though, as he observes,
the Novatians did but falsify and prevaricate, as it
were, in these questions ; there being no true church
among them to grant remission of sins ; yet, how
ever, they observed the same form of words as the
church did in her creed, and put the same questions
to all that came to them for baptism. Cyprian re
peats this in another epistle, which is written in the
name ofthe council of Carthage12 to the bishops of
Numidia, where mention is made of the same inter

rogatories, as generally used in the administration
of baptism. From whence it appears, that not
only the articles of the Trinity, but those other
which relate to the church, and remission of sins,
and eternal life, were parts of the creed used in
Cyprian's time in all the African churches. And
except the descent into hell, and the communion of
saints, (which are of later date in the creed than the
times of Cyprian or Tertullian,) all the other articles
are taken notice of by these two primitive writers.
Not long after Cyprian lived Grego- Secl 5
ry, bishop of Neoceesarea, commonly g0^h6ThaudmItur'"
called Thaumaturgus. Among his BUS'
works, published by Gerhard Vossius of Tongres,
we have a creed which he composed for the use
of his own church, or rather, as Gregory Nyssen re
ports in his Life, a creed which he received in the
entrance on his ministry by a vision from heaven.
The form is in these13 words : " There is one God,
the Father of the living Word, the subsisting Wis
dom and Power, the eternal express image of God,
who is a perfect begetter of a perfect, a Father of
an only begotten Son. And one Lord, One of One,
God of God, the character and image of the God
head, the Word of power, the Wisdom that compre
hends the whole system of the world, the Power that
made every creature. The true Son of the true
Father, invisible of invisible, incorruptible of incor
ruptible, immortal of immortal, eternal of eternal.
And one Holy Ghost, who has his existence from
God, who was manifested to men by the Son, the
perfect image of the perfect Son, the living Cause
of all living, the Fountain of holiness, essential
sanctity, who is the Author of hohness in all others.
In whom God the Father is manifested, who is
above all and in all, and God the Son, whose power
runs through all things. A perfect Trinity, whose
glory, eternity, and dominion is no way divided or
separated from each other. In this Trinity, there-
'fore, there is nothing created or servile, nothing ad
ventitious or extraneous, that did not exist before,
but afterward came into it. The Father was never
without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit,
but the Trinity abides the same, unchangeable and
invariable for ever."
This creed is not a complete summary ofthe faith,
but only so far as relates to the doctrine of the Holy
Trinity, of which it is one of the most convincing

11 Cypr. Ep. 69. al. 76. ad Magnum, p. 183. Quod si
abquis iUud opponat, ut dicat, eandem Novatianum legem
tenere, quam catholica ecclesia teneat, eodem symbolo quo
et nos baptizare; eundem n6sse Deum Patrem, eundem
Filium Christum, eundem Spiritum Sanctum, ac propter hoc
usurpare eum potestatem baptizandi posse, quod videatur
in interrogatione baptismi a nobis non discrepare: sciat
quisquis hoc opponendum putat, primum non esse unam
nobis et schismaticis symboli legem, neque eandem inter-
rDgationem : nam cum dicunt, Credis remissionem peccato
rum et vitam aeternam per sanctam ecclesiam, mentiuntur

in interrogatione, quando non habeant ecclesiam.
'- Cypr. Ep. 70. ad Episc. Numid. p. 190. Sed et ipsa
interrogatio quae fit in baptismo, testis est veritatis. Nam
cum dicimus, Credis in vitam aeternam, et remissionem pec
catorum per sanctam ecclesiam ? Intelligimus remissionem
peccatorum non nisi in ecclesia dari, &c.
13 Gregor. Neocaesar. Oper. p. 1. et ap. Greg. Nyss. t. 3.
p. 546. Els Qeos, iraTrip Aoyov X,!ovtos, aotpias vtpETtocrt]s,
Kal SvvdpEtos Kal xapaKTripos diSiov, teXeios teXe'iov yev-
vriTtop, UaTrjp 'Yiov povoyEvovs' eIs Kvpios, pdvos £K po-
vov, Qeos iK Qtov, Sic.

458

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

testimonies that is to be met with in any of the
ante-Nicene fathers ; it being particularly designed
against the two opposite heresies of the Samosateni
ans and Sabelhans, the one of which denied the
Divinity of our Saviour, and the other his personal
subsistence. Some modern Arians, following San-
dius, have objected against it, as not genuine ; but
the learned Bishop Bull has abundantly vindicated
the credit of it14 from the undeniable evidences of
Gregory Nyssen and St. Basil, to whose excellent
Dissertation I refer the reader.
In the same age with Gregory
The creed oi ha- Thaumatureus lived Lucian the mar
cian the martyr. °
tyr, who suffered in the last persecu
tion under Diocletian. He was presbyter of the
church of Antioch, where he wrote a confession of
faith in opposition to the Sabellians. The form is
recorded both by Athanasius,15 and Socrates,16 and
Hilary, who comments upon it, and vindicates it from
the objections which some made against it, because
it was produced by the Arians, in the council of
Antioch, under Constantius, anno 341, as if it had
favoured then- opinion, which Hilary shows it did
not, though there were some, expressions in it
against the Sabellians, that might be wrested to an
heretical sense, [as any catholic words may be,]
contrary to the mind of the author. The form, as
delivered by St. Hilary, runs thus : " We believe,"
according to the tradition of the Gospels and apos
tles, in one God the Father Almighty, Creator, and
Maker, and Governor of all things, of whom are all
things : and in one Lord Jesus Christ, his only be
gotten Son, who is God, by whom are all things,
who was begotten of the Father, God of God, Whole
of Whole, One of One, Perfect of Perfect, King of
King, Lord of Lord, the Word, the Wisdom, the
Life, the true Light, the true Way, the Resurrec
tion, the Shepherd, the Gate, the incommutable and
unchangeable image of the Divine essence, power,
and glory, the First-born of every creature, who was
always from the beginning God the Word with

God, according to what is said in the Gospel, < And
the Word was God, by whom all things were made
and in whom all things subsist;' who, in the last
days, descended from on high, and was born of a
virgin, according to the Scriptures, and being the
Lamb of God, he was made the Mediator between
God and men, being fore-ordained to be the Author
of our faith and hfe : for he said, ' I come not from
heaven to do my own will, but the will of him that
sent me.' Who suffered and rose again for us the
third day, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on
the right hand of the Father, and he shall come
again with glory to judge the quick and the dead
And we beheve in the Holy Ghost, which is given
to believers for their consolation, and sanctification,
and consummation, according to what our Lord
Jesus Christ appointed his disciples, saying, ' Go,
teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of
the Father, and ofthe Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'
Whence the properties of the Father are manifest,
denoting him to be truly a Father, and the pro
perties of the Son, denoting him to be truly a Son,
and the properties of the Holy Spirit, denoting him
to be truly the Holy Ghost : these names not being
simply put and to no purpose, but to express the
particular subsistence, or hypostatic substance, as
the Greeks term it, of each person named, so as to
denote them to be three in hypostasis, and one by
consonance." This creed was anciently suspected by some as
an Arian creed, because of the term three hypos
tases, or three substances, in Hilary's translation.
But Hilary abundantly clears it from this suspicion,
by showing, that these terms were only used to op
pose the Sabellians, who made the three persons
no more than three names ; and that all other ex
pressions in it are very full and significant against
the Arian heresy. And therefore neither does he
censure the council of Antioch as Arians, who only
repeated and adopted this creed from Lucian, but
he calls them a synod of ninety-five holy bishops,

14 Bull. Defens. Fid. Nic. sect. 2. cap. 12. u. 2.
15 Athan. de Synod. Arimin. et Seleuc. t. 1. p. 892.
16 Socrat. lib. 2. c. 10.
17 Hilar, de Synodis, p. 107. Consequenter evangelicce
et apostolical traditioni credimus in unum Deum Patrem
Omnipotentem, cunctorum quae sunt aedificatorem et facto-
rem et provisorem, ex quo omnia: et in unum Dominum
Jesum Christum, Filium ipsius unigenitum, Deum per quem
omnia, qui generatus est ex Patre, Deum ex Deo, Totum ex
Toto, Unum ex Uno, Perfectum de Perfecto, Regem de Re
ge, Dominum de Domino, Verbum, Sapientiam, Vitam, Lu
men verum, Viam veram, Resurrectionem, Pastorem, Ja-
nuam, inconvertibilem et incommutabilem, Divinitatis es-
sentiaeque ec virtutis et gloriae incommutabilem imaginem,
primum editum totius creaturee, qui semper fuit in principio
apud Deum Verbum Deus, juxta quod dictum est in evan-
gelio : et Deus erat Verbum, per quem omnia facta sunt, et
in quo omnia constant, qui in novissimis diebus descendit
de summis, et natus est ex virgine secundum Scripturas, et

Agnus factus est Mediator Dei et hominum, praedestinatus
fidei nostree et dux vitae ; dixit quippe, Non enim descendi
de coelo, ut facerem voluntatem meam, sed voluntatem ejus
qui me misit. Qui passus est, et resurrexit pro nobis tertia
die, et ascendit in coeios, et sedet in dextera Patris, et iterum
venturus cum gloria judicare vivos et mortuos. Et in Sanc
tum Spiritum, qui in paraclesin et sanctificationem et con-
summationem credentibus datus est, juxta quod et Dominus
Jesus Christus ordinavit discipulis, dicens, Pergite et do
cete universas gentes, baptizantes eas in nomine Patris et
Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Manifesta utique Patris, vere
Patris, certaque Filii, vere Filii, notaque Spiritus Sancti,
vere Spiritus Sancti ; hisque nominibus non simpliciter,
neque otiose propositis, sed significantibus diligenter pro-
priam uniuscujusque nominatorum substantiam et ordinem
et gloriam, ut sint quidem per substantiam tria, per conso-
nantiam'vero unum. Tr) viro^da-Et Tpia, ti] Si avptptovta. ev.
So the Greek in Socrates and Athanasius.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

459

who intended thereby to establish the catholic faith
against the Sabellians chiefly, though not without
a sufficient guard against the Anomceans, or Arians.
His words are these:18 The holy synod intending to
destroy the impiety of those heretics, who eluded
the true faith.of a Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, by
the equivocation of three names only, that by a tri
ple appellation, without any real subsistence be
longing to each name, they might, under the false
shadow of three names, introduce such a unity, as
that the Father alone, though but one and the same,
should have the name of the Holy Spirit and of the
Son also : therefore the synod used the term, three
substances or hypostases, meaning by substances,
subsisting persons, and not intending to introduce
such a division of substance in the Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost, as implies a dissimilitude and di
versity of essence : [which was the heresy of the
Arians, who made the Father only God, and the
other two persons only creatures, so dividing the
substance by a diversity of nature or essence : which
this council did not:] and therefore Hilary says,
They were not to be blamed, though they spake of
the Divine persons as of three substances or hypos
tases, and one by consent, because they meant no
more than real subsisting persons, in opposition to
the Sabellians. Yet notwithstanding this just de
fence and apology made by St. Hilary for this
council, it is condemned by Baronius, Binnius,
Hermantius, and many other modern writers, as an
Arian council. But the learned Schelstrate has
written an accurate dissertation in favour of this
council, wherein he answers19 all the objections
made by Baronius and his followers, either against
this council or the creed of Lucian the martyr;
which is also done by our learned Bishop Bull,20 to
whose Dissertations I refer the curious reader.
Sa,t , About the time of Lucian the mar-
apJo£ c»ibu- tyr, in the latter end of the third cen
tury, Cotelerius supposes the author
or compiler of the book called, The Apostolical
Constitutions, to have lived; which I think more
probable than either the opinion of those, who
thrust him down to the fifth century, or the opinion
of Mr. Whiston, who will needs have this book not
only to be the genuine work of Clemens Romanus,
but the work of a Divine and inspired writer. For
this reason I speak of him in this place next after

Lucian, as one that has left us the form of an an
cient creed, then most probably used in some of the
Eastern or Greek churches. For he brings in the
catechumen making his professicrh in these words :
" I beheve21 and am baptized in one Unbegotten,
the only true God Almighty, the Father of Christ,
the Creator and Maker of all things, of whom are
all things : and in one Lord Jesus Christ, his only
begotten Son, the First-born of every creature, who
before all ages was begotten, not made, by the good
will of the Father, by whom all things were made
in heaven and in earth, visible and invisible, who in
the last times came down from heaven, and taking
flesh upon him, was born of the holy Virgin Mary,
and lived a holy life according to the laws of God
his Father, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
and died for us, and the third day after he had suf
fered, rose again from the dead and ascended into
heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father,
and shall eome again with glory in the end of the
world, to judge both the quick and dead, of whose
kingdom there shall be no end. And I am baptized
into the Holy Ghost, that is to say, the Comforter,
which wrought effectually in all the saints from the
beginning of the world, and was afterward sent to
the apostles by the Father, according to the promise
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and after the
apostles to all others, who, in the holy catholic
church, beheve the resurrection of the flesh, the re
mission of sins, the kingdom of heaven, and the
life of the world to come."
Some have suspected this author of Arianism, but
there is nothing of it appears in this creed: for
though he gives the title of dykvvnTov only to the
Father, yet that is no more than what Alexander
and Athanasius, and all the opposers of Arius, al
ways did, who never asserted Svo dykwnra, as those
words signify, two absolute, co-ordinate, unbegotten
principles, which is the proper notion of two Gods ;
but always reserved the title of dykvvnrov, unbegot
ten, to the Father only, as the eternal principle and
fountain of the Deity, and styled the Son povoyevrj
Otbv, the only begotten God, which is the proper
notion of the Son of God, who is neither created
nor unbegotten, but eternally begotten of the sub
stance of the Father, and this title of povoyfvi)g Gaoc,
the only begotten God, is the same as this very
author of the Constitutions elsewhere ascribes to

8 Hilar, de Synodis, p. 108. Volens igitur congregata
sanctorum synodus impietatem earn perimere, quae verita-
tatem Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti nominum numero
eluderet, ut non subsistente causa uniuscujusque nominis,
Wplexnuncupatio obtineret sub falsitate nominum unionem,
ut Pater solus atque unus idem atque ipse haberet et Spiri
tus Sancti nomen et Filii : idcirco tres substantias esse dix-
erunt, subsistentium personas per substantias edocentes,
non substantiam Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti diversi-
tate dissimilis essentia? separantes. Quod autem dictum
est, ut sint quidem tier substantiam tria, per consonantiam

ver" unum, non habet calumniam, &c.
15 Schelstrat. Sacrum Concilium Antiochenum restitutum,
Dissert. 3. c. 2. p. 109.
20 Bull. Defens. Fid. Nic. sect. 2. <;. 13. n. 6.
21 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 41. TIio-tevio Kal fSairrilopat
e'is 'iva dyivvr)TOV, povov dXr)Bivoir Oeov iravTOKpaTopa,
tov TlaTEpa tov XptoTov, KTiaTi)V Kal Sriptovpyov tuiv
dirivTwv, i% ov Tti irdvTa, Kal eIs tov Kvptov 'lijerovv tov
Xpto-Tov, tov povoyEvi) avTOV Ylov, tov irptoTOTOKOV irdenjs
KTio-Eeos, tov irpo altiivtov EvSoKta toO ITaTpds yEVvr)BivTa-,
oh KTicrBivTa, &C.

460

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X

the Son,22 whom he makes to be no creature, but
God, in this only differing from the Father, that he
is not unbegotten ; which is necessary to the notion
of a Son ; for it Were a contradiction to say, he is
the Son of God, and yet unbegotten also. I observe
this, to show how little advantage the modern
Arians have from this author, if we allow him but
that favourable interpretation, which injustice ought
to be allowed to all ancient catholic writers.
We may further observe, that though this creed
be the same in substance with the Roman Creed,
which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, yet it
differs from it very much in phrase and expression,
and comes nearer the creeds of the Eastern church ;
and though it be as perfect as any of that age, yet
it has neither the article of the descent into hell, nor
the communion of saints, expressly mentioned in it ;
which shows that these articles were not totidem
verbis inserted into the first creeds of the church.
Thus far I have collected the scat-
Sect 8.
The creed of Jem- tered remains of the ancient creeds,
salem. _
which were composed before the Ni
cene Creed, for the use of several churches, as they
are still upon record in private writers. But we
have some more perfect forms also remaining, as
those of Jerusalem, CcEsarea, Antioch, Alexandria,
and Rome, by comparing which together, the reader
may easily perceive, how the unity of the faith was
exactly agreed upon, and preserved, with some va
riety of expression. The Creed of the church of
Jerusalem we have imperfectly in St. James's Li
turgy, and more perfect in the Catechetical Dis
courses of Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, which are
an exposition upon it. In St. James's Liturgy we
have only the beginning of the creed : " I believe in
one God the Father Almighty,23 Maker of heaven
and earth, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of
God." But the remaining articles are not inserted,
as being vulgarly known without reciting. How
ever, in Cyril's catechisms the articles are rehearsed
at full length, and when collected together they run
in this form :
" I believe in one God24 the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible
and invisible : and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the
only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father
before all ages, the true God, by whom all things
were made, who was incarnate and made man, who
was crucified and buried, and the third day he rose
again from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and
sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and shall
come to judge the quick and dead, of whose king
dom there shall be no end. And in the Holy Ghost
the Comforter, who spake by the prophets. In one
baptism of repentance, in the remission of sins, in

one cathohc church, in the resurrection of the flesh
and in life everlasting."
That this creed was neither the Nicene Creed
nor the Constantinopolitan, is evident, because it
wants the word consubstantial, and other titles
which are given to the Son in the Nicene Creed:
nor has it the full explication of the character of
the Holy Ghost, which was afterward made in the
Constantinopolitan Creed : which is not to be won
dered at, because Cyril's catechisms were written
some years before the council of Constantinople was
held. Therefore it must be the ancient Creed of
Jerusalem, as learned men25 have rightly concluded
and hence also observed, that the Oriental creeds
had originally the articles that follow the Holy
Ghost, viz. the catholic church, the remission of
sins, the resurrection of the flesh, and eternal life.
Only the communion of saints, and descent into •
hell, are wanting in it.
And so we find in the Creed of Cae
sarea in Palestine, in the profession The'creed'ofcie-
of which Eusebius says he was bap
tized, and catechised ; the descent into hell is not
mentioned in it. But it differs in expression from
the Jerusalem Creed, and comes up the nearest to
the Nicene Creed of any other. The form, as it
was proposed by Eusebius himself to the council
of Nice, is in these words : " We beheve in one God
the Father26 Almighty, Maker of all things visible
and invisible: and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the
Word of God, God of God, Light of Light, Life
of Life, his only begotten Son, the First-born of
every creature, begotten of the Father before all
ages, by whom all things were made ; who for our
salvation was incarnate, and conversed among men,
and suffered, and rose again the third day, and
ascended unto the Father, and shall come again to
judge the quick and the dead. We beheve also in
one Holy Spirit. Every one of these we beheve to
be and exist ; we confess the Father to be truly a
Father, the Son truly a Son, the Holy Ghost truly
a Holy Ghost, according to what our Lord, when
he sent his disciples to preach, said, ' Go teach all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' "
The articles that follow the Holy Ghost, are here
omitted only for the same reason, as I shall show
hereafter, they were omitted in the Nicene Creed,
because then no dispute was made about them, and
only so much of the Creed was now produced as
was necessary to be mentioned in opposition to the
Arian heresy.
The Creed of Alexandria was some- Sect 10.
what shorter than this, and is sup- The2S.°'A1'!S
posed by learned men to be thatwhich

22 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 43. lib. 8. c 7, 11, 12, 17.
28 Jacobi Liturg. in Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 2. p. 7.
21 Cyril. Cateches. 6, &c.

25 Bull. Judic. Eccles. Cathol. &c. cap. 6. n. 5.
26 Euseb. Epist. ad Ecclesiam Caesar, ap. Socrat. lib. 1.
cap. 8.

Chap. IV.

ANIIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

461

Arius and Euzoius delivered in to Constantine,
when they made a sort of feigned recantation before
him. The form is recorded in Socrates2' in these
words : " We believe in one God the Father Al
mighty, and in Jesus Christ his Son our Lord, God
the Word begotten of him before all ages, by whom
all things were made that are in heaven and in
earth; who came down from heaven, and was in
carnate, and suffered and rose again, and ascend
ed into heaven, and shall come again to judge the
quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost, and
in the resurrection of the flesh, and in the life of the
world to come, and in the kingdom of heaven, and
in one cathohc church of God extended from one
end of the earth to the other."
The Creed of the church of Anti-
The teed ir An- och seems to be that which is re
corded in Cassian, who delivers it as
it was probably received in that church from the
time of the apostles, only with the addition of the
word consubstantial, inserted from the time of the
council of Nice. " The text and faith of the Creed
of Antioch," says he, " is this : ffl I beheve in one only
true God the Father Almighty, Maker of all crea
tures visible and invisible : and in Jesus Christ our
Lord, his only begotten Son, the First-born of every
creature, born of him before all ages, and not made,
very God of very God, consubstantial with the Father,
by whom the world was framed and all things made.
Who for our sakes came and was born of the Virgin
Mary, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and
buried, and the third day rose again according to
the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and shall
come again to judge the quick and the dead."
Cassian here repeats not the whole creed, but
only those articles that were proper to be urged
against Nestorius, who had been baptized into this
faith, and by this creed, at Antioch, from which he
shows his prevarications, and how he had started
from the profession which he himself had made in
the words of this creed both at his baptism and or
dination, leaving the remaining articles unrecited.
' sect 12. The reader may easily perceive, by
com'm0™"iie™he comparing the forementioned creeds,
that the articles of the communion of
saints, and the descent into hell, are not expressly

mentioned in any of them. Nor were they origin
ally in the Roman Creed, which is commonly called
the Apostles' Creed, as appears not only from the
testimony of Ruffin, but from some ancient copies
of this creed still remaining. Bishop Usher29 met
with two copies here in England, which wanted
these additions, and also that of hfe everlasting.
The one was in Greek, though written in Saxon
characters, at the end of King Athelstan's Psalter,
about the year 703; and the other in Latin; but
both exactly in the same form of words : " I believe
in God the Father Almighty ; and in Jesus Christ
his only begotten Son our Lord, who was born of
the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, and was cru
cified under Pontius Pilate, and was buried, and
the third day rose again from the dead, ascended
into heaven, sitteth on the right hand of the Father,
whence he shall come to judge the quick and the
dead. And in the Holy Ghost, the holy church,
the remission of sins, and the resurrection of the
flesh. Amen."
The variations of these ancient forms from the
present form of the Apostles' Creed, in the want of
several words that have since been added, are noted
by Bishop Usher, who also observes, that this creed
is dehvered by several ancient authors with some
variety of expression. For in some authors, which
use this creed, life everlasting is added after the re
surrection of the flesh. As in the homilies of Petrus
Chrysologus,30 bishop of Ravenna, where he ex
pounds this creed. And in the author of the book
de Symbolo ad Catechumenos, in the ninth tome of
St. Austin's works. And in the creed which Mar
cellus, bishop of Ancyra, presented to Pope Julius,
which is recorded in Epiphanius.31 But others con
clude this creed with the resurrection of the flesh,
and make no expre'ss mention of life everlasting ;
not that they supposed it to be no article of faith,
but because it was included in the other article of
the resurrection, as they rightly expound it. St.
Jerom says plainly,82 that the creed was concluded
with the resurrection of the flesh. And Maximus
Taurinensis,33 who expounds every article of it dis
tinctly, says the same. And St. Austin also34 con
cludes the creed with the resurrection of the flesh,
but then he includes eternal life in the exposition

27 Socrat. lib. 1. t. 26.
23 Cassian. de Inearnat. lib. 6. p. 1272. Textus ergo et
ndes Antiocheni Symboli haec est : Credo in unum et so
lum verum DeumPatrem Omnipotentem, Creatorem omni
um visibilium et invisibilium creaturarum. Et in Dominum
nostrum Jesum Christum, Filium ejus unigenitum, et primo-
genitum totius creaturae, ex eo natum ante omnia saecula, et
non factum, Deum verum ex Deo vero, homousion Patri,
per quem et saecula compaginata sunt et omnia facta. Qui
propter nosvenit et natus est ex Maria Virgine, et crucifix-
us sub Pontio Pilato, et sepultus, et tertia die resurrexit se
cundum Scripturas, et in ccelos ascendit, et iterum veniet
judicare vivos et mortuos. Et reliqua.

29 Usser. de Symbolis, p. 6.
80 Petrus Chrysol. Homil. 57, &c.
31 Epiph. Hair. 72. Marcel, n. 3.
32 Hieron. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. In symbolo fidei — post
confessionem Trinitatis et unitatem ecclesiae, omne Chris
tiani dogmatis sacramentum carnis resurrectione con-
cludilur. 33 Maxim. Taurin. Horn. 1. de Diversis, p. 239. Hie re
ligionis nostras finis, haec summa credendi est.
31 Aug. de Fide et Symbolo, t. 3. p. 66. Qua corporis
resurrectione facta, a temporis conditione liberati, aeterna
vita ineffabili charitate et stabilitate sine corruptione per-
fruemur.

462

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

of it. For, says he, when the resurrection of the
body is effected, we shall be freed from the condi
tions of time, and enjoy eternal life with ineffable
charity and stability without corruption. And so
the author of the sermons De Tempore88 under his
name : The resurrection of the flesh is the end of all,
but it is an end without end. For there is no death
after that. Therefore they made it the conclusion
of the creed, because it was the conclusion of all
things in this world. And thus it was in the Creed of the
Tiie'creed'of church of Aquileia, which differed in
Aqudeia. ^^_ points both from the Roman
and Oriental creeds. For Ruffinus, who wrote an
exposition upon it, concludes it with the article of
the resurrection, and neither mentions nor expounds
the article of eternal life, but only tacitly, as it is
implied in the resurrection. In other articles some
additions were made to this creed, which were not
in the Roman: for here the descent into hell is
particularly mentioned; and not only the resurrec
tion of the flesh in general, but the resurrection of
this flesh in particular; and in the first article,
after the word Almighty, were added, impassible
and invisible, as peculiar appellations of God the
Father. For it was thus conceived : "I believe in
God the Father Almighty, invisible and impassi
ble ; 3S and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,
who was born by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin
Mary, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and bu
ried ; he descended into hell, and the third day rose
again from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and
sitteth on the right hand of the Father, whence he
shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And
in the Holy Ghost, the holy cathohc church, the
remission of sins, and the resurrection of this flesh."
The reason of adding the words " invisible and
impassible" to this creed, which were not in the Ro
man, was to obviate the Sabellian or Patripassian
heresy, which asserted that God the Father was
born of the virgin, and so made visible and passi
ble in the flesh. In opposition to which impiety,
Ruffinus says,37 their forefathers seem to have added
those words, professing the Father to be invisible
and impassible, that is, that he never was incarnate,
as the Son only was, and not the Father. The de
scent into hell is also almost peculiar to this creed :
for excepting this and the creed of the council of
Sirmium or Ariminum, mentioned by Socrates,38 this

article was not expressly mentioned in any other
creed of this age ; though Ruffinus thinks it was
always imphed in the word " buried," which he reck
ons of the same importance. When it first came
into the Roman Creed, the reader may find a par
ticular account in Bishop Pearson, who speaks of
it as done about the year 600.
I have hitherto given an account
° Sect 14.
of all such creeds as might be reck- ^t^m^olj
oned of use in the church before the lhec0UMil <*«*•¦
time of the Nicene council. I shall now give the i
hke account of the first forming of the Nicene
Creed, and how it was afterward completed, and
put into a new form, by the council of Constantino
ple. The Creed, as first published by the council -
of Nice, was in these words : " We believe in one
God Almighty,39 Maker of all things visible and in
visible : and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of
God, begotten of the Father, the only begotten,
that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God,
Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten
not made, of one substance with the Father, by
whom all things both in heaven and earth were
made. Who for us men and our salvation came
down from heaven, and was incarnate and made
man, and suffered, and the third day rose again, and
ascended into heaven, and shall come again to
judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy
Ghost. And those who say, there was a time when
the Son of God was not, or that he did not exist be
fore he was made, because he was made out of no
thing, or of another substance or essence, or that he
was created or mutable, the cathohc and apostohc
church anathematizes them."
This Creed often occurs in the writings of the
ancient fathers and councils in this very form ; as
in Athanasius, Epist. ad Jovian, t. 1. p. 247; Hi
lar, de Synodis, p. 114; Leo, Ep. 95, ad Leonem
Imperat; the Council of Rome, under Julius, an.
337 ; the Council of Ephesus, Epist. ad Nestor. ;
the Council of Chalcedon, Act. 2; the Council of
Hippo ; the sixth Council of Carthage ; the Pre
face to the African Code ; the third Council of Bra
cara ; the third and thirteenth of Toledo ; the fifth
General Council of Constantinople, Act. 17 1 and
many others.
Now, some learned persons have been of opinion,
that the ancient creeds before the council of Nice,
had none of the articles which follow after the Holy

35 Aug. Serm. 119. De Tempore, t. 10. p. 306. Iste jam
finis est. Sed finis erit sine fine resurrectio carnis, &c.
35 Ruffin. Expos. Symboli ad calcem Cypriani, p. 19.
Credo in Deum Patrem Omnipotentem, invisibilem et im-
passibilem. Et in Christum Jesum unicum Filium ejus,
Dominum nostrum, qui natus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Ma
ria Virgine, crucifixus sub Pontio Pilato, et sepultus, de
scends ad interna: tertia die resurrexit a mortuis, ascendit
iu ccelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris; inde venturus est judi
care vivos et mortuos. Et in Spiritum Sanctum, sanctam

ecclesiam catholicam, remissionem peccatorum, hujus carnis
resurrectionem. 31 Ruffin. ibid. p. 19. Sciendum quod duo isti sermones
in ecclesiae Romanae symbolo non habentur : constat autem
apud nos additos haareseos causa Sabellii, illius profecto qua!
a nostris Patripassiana appellator ; id est, quae Patrem ip
sum vel ex virgine natum dicit, et visibilem factum, vel pas-
sum affirmat in came.
38 Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 37.
38 Ap. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 8.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

463

Ghost, but all ended as that does, with those words,
" and in the Holy Ghost." This was the opinion
of Vossius and Erasmus ; and Bishop Usher says,
he was once inclined to think so himself, but upon
better consideration, he professes40 he found it ne
cessary to alter his judgment. For it plainly ap
pears from most of the forms before recited, that
several of the articles which follow after the Holy
Ghost, were always a part of the creed : and the
reason why the council of Nice repeated them not,
was only because there was then no dispute about
them, and they only rehearsed so much of the for
mer creeds as there was then occasion for, to oppose
the heresy of the Arians, leaving the rest to be sup
plied from the former creeds, then generally re
ceived in the church. This is evident, both from
the creeds used by the Arians, and those that were
used by the church, before the council of Constan
tinople had settled and new-modelled the form of
the Nicene Creed that was afterwards generaUy re
ceived in the church. Thus in the creed of the se
parating bishops in the council of Sardica, related
by St. Hilary41 and others, after the article of the
Holy Ghost there follows, " We beheve in the holy
church, and in remission of sins, and eternal hfe ;"
or, as it is more perfectly in his Fragments,42 " the
holy church, the remission of sins, the resurrection
of the flesh, and eternal hfe." So again, the Euse
bians in their first creed, which they pubhshed in
the council of Antioch, mentioned both by Athana
sius and Socrates,43 after the article of the Holy
Ghost, add, " We believe the resurrection of the flesh,
and eternal hfe." Now, it were absurd to think the
Arians should retain these articles in their creeds,
and in the mean time the church reject or neglect
them. Therefore it is plain the Nicene Creed was
only one part of the ancient creed, that was used
at full length in baptism, though not. here so re
cited. And what has been observed before out of
Cyril's catechisms, is a manifest proof of it.
This is further evident from the
two creeds, a shorter and a longer, re
cited in Epiphanius, who wrote his
Anchorate some years before the council of Con
stantinople. The shorter creed, which he says
every catechumen repeated at his baptism from the
time of the council of Nice to the tenth year of
Valentinian and Valens, anno 373, was in these
words: "We beheve44 in one God the Father Al
mighty, Maker of heaven and «arth, and of all things
visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus
Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of
the Father before all ages, that is, of the substance
of his Father, Light of Light, very God of very God,
begotten notmade, of one substance with the Father,

Sect 15.
The creeds of
Epiphanius.

40 Usser. de Symbolis, p. 17.
41 Hilar.de Synodis, p. 108.
42 Hilar. Fragmenta, p. 140.

by whom all things were made which are in heaven
and in earth. Who for us men and our salvation
came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the
Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, and was made
man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pi
late, and suffered and was buried, and the third
day rose again according to the Scriptures, and
ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand
of the Father. And shall come again with glory to
judge both the quick and the dead, of whose king
dom there shall be no end. And in the Holy Ghost,
the Lord and Giver of hfe, who proceedeth from the
Father, who with the Father and the Son together
is worshipped and glorified, who spake by the pro
phets. And in one catholic and apostolic church.
We confess one baptism for the remission of sins,
and we look for the resurrection of the dead, and
the life of the world to come. But they who say,
there was a time when the Son of God was not, or
that he was not before he was begotten, or that he
was made out of nothing, or of any other substance
or essence, or that he is mutable or changeable, those
the cathohc and apostolic church anathematizes."
This, says Epiphanius, is the faith which was de
livered by the holy apostles, and received by the
church in the council of Nice, where three hundred
and eighteen fathers were present. By which he
does not mean that these articles were delivered in
this very form either by the apostles or the council
of Nice, but that the church agreed upon this form
to be used at baptism, in pursuance of the doctrine
delivered by the apostles and the Nicene fathers.
And afterwards, upon occasion of the Apollinarians
and other heretics, which infested the church about
the tenth year of Valentinian and Valens, and the
sixth of Gratian, and the ninetieth year of the Dio
cletian account, that is, anno 373, she enlarged
her creed with a more particular explication of some
certain articles in opposition to those heresies. And
then the form appointed to be used in baptism was
in these terms, as he informs us in the same place :
" We believe in one God the Father Almighty,
Maker of all things visible and invisible ; and in
one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of
God the Father, the only begotten, that is, of the
substance of the Father, God of God, Light of
Light, very God of very God, begotten not made,
being of one substance with the Father, by whom
all things were made, as well in heaven as in earth,
visible and invisible. Who for us men and for our
salvation came down from heaven, and was incar
nate, that is, was born in perfect manner of the holy
Virgin Mary, by the Holy Ghost, and was made
man, that is, took upon him perfect man, soul and
body and mind, and whatsoever is in man, sin only

43 Socrat. lib. 2. u. 10. Athanas. De Synod. Arim. et Se
leuc. t. 1. p. 892.
41 Epiphan. Anchorat. n. 120. t. 2. p. 122.

464

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

excepted; not by the seed of man, nor merely by
existing in man, but by framing flesh to himself into
one holy unity ; not after the manner as he inspired
the prophets, and spake and wrought in them, but
by being perfectly made man. For the Word was
made flesh, not by undergoing any change, or
transforming the Godhead into manhood, but by
making one perfect and Divine union. For there is
but one Lord Jesus Christ, not two, the same God,
the same Lord, the same King. Who suffered in
the flesh and rose again, and ascended with his
body into heaven, and sitteth in glory at the right
hand of the Father ; whence he shall come with
glory in the same body to judge the quick and dead,
of whose kingdom there shall be no end. We be
lieve in the Holy Ghost, who spake in the law, and
preached by the prophets, and descended at Jordan ;
who spake by the apostles, and dwells in the saints :
and thus we believe of him, that he is the Holy
Spirit, the Spirit of God, the perfect Spirit, the Com
forter, uncreated, proceeding from the Father, re
ceiving from the Son, in whom we believe. We
believe in one catholic and apostolic church, in one
baptism of repentance, in the resurrection of the
dead, in the just judgment of body and soul, in the
kingdom of heaven, and life everlasting. And those
that say, there was a time when the Son or the
Holy Ghost was not, or that they were made out of
nothing, or of another substance or essence ; that
say, the Son of God, or the Holy Ghost, are muta
ble or changeable ; those the cathohc and apostolic
church, the mother of us and you, anathematizes.
And again, we anathematize those that confess not
the resurrection of the dead, and all heresies which
accord not to this holy faith."
Now, if these creeds were in use in the church
at the time which Epiphanius mentions, then it is
certain the Nicene Creed was completed by the
church for the use of her catechumens long before
the general council of Constantinople: and what
was done by that council, was rather to contract the
form, than to augment or lengthen it, as any one
may easily perceive, that will compare the Con
stantinopolitan Creed with either of those that have
now been recited out of Epiphanius.
For the creed that was drawn up
The Nicene breed, in the second general council of Con-
as compleled by the a
council of con.tan- stantinople, is no other but the Ni-
tinople, anno ,181. E '
cene Creed, with the addition of such
articles as were always used by the church in the
interrogatories of baptism, though not inserted in
the particular form used by the Nicene council. I
need not here repeat the form, because it is the

same with that which is commonly called the Ni
cene Creed in our liturgy. Only the word Filioque,
expressing the procession of the Holy Ghost from
the Father and Son together, was added afterward
by the Latin church. For the first copies of this
Creed in the council of Constantinople,45 and the
councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon,46 have it only,
proceeding from the Father, h tov Harpbg kwopivi-
pivov, without any mention of the Son : but in the
Latin councils, the word Filioque is commonly added,
as in the first council of Bracara, anno 41 1, and the
third council of Toledo,4' anno 589, where the Con
stantinopolitan Creed is recited.
As to the use of the Nicene Creed,
. . ., „ , Sect. 17.
it is certain, it was used in the Greek „.of aw useorihB
' Nicene Creed in the
church much after the same manner li?'"^"™^
as the Apostolical and other creeds S™ T^iTl
were used in the Latin church; first \X£J*S
in the office of baptism ; afterward it
was taken in to be a part of the liturgy in the com
munion service. Some learned persons, I know, are
of opinion, that the Nicene Creed was never used
in the administration of baptism, but only the Apos
tolical Creed still throughout the whole church.
But this is a very plain mistake. 1. Because it does
not appear, that the Apostolical Creed, which is the
Roman Creed, was ever used in the Greek church,
even before the Nicene Creed was made : for they
had several creeds of their own, agreeing indeed
with the Roman Creed in substance, but differing
from it in words and expression ; and those creeds
were used by the Greek or Eastern church in the
administration of baptism. 2. When the Nicene
Creed was formed, it is very evident, that very form
was used by many churches in the East as the
creed of baptism. For the fathers of the council
of Constantinople under Mennas, anno 536, do fre
quently call it the creed in which both they them
selves were baptized,48 and also baptized others.
And so it is said in the synodical epistles of the
councils of Tyre and Jerusalem, which are related"
in the acts of the same council. As also in the acts
of the general councils of Ephesus5" and Chalce
don,51 in the former of which' an order was made
that catechumens should be taught the Nicene
Creed, and no other. The like may be observed in
the edict of the emperor Basiliscus mentioned by
Evagrius,52 who, speaking ofthe Nicene Creed, calls
it the creed in which both he and all his ancestors
were baptized. And ' it is remarked by Epipha
nius,53 of the two creeds which he recites, that they
were the creeds which every catechumen repeated
at his baptism ; which were nothing but the Nicene

45 Cone. Constantin. Cone. t. 2. p. 953.
16 Cone. Chalcedon. Act. 2. t. 4. p. 341.
«' Cone. t. 5. p. 1001.
48 Vid. Con. C. P. sub Menna, Act. 5. Con. t. 5. p. 166,
171, 179.

49 Ibid. p. 190 et 199.
50 Cone. Ephes. Act. 6. t. 3. p. 690.
51 Cone. Chalced. Act. 2. t. 4. p. 341.
52 Evagr. lib. 3. c. 4 et 7.
58 Epiphan. Anchorat. u. 120. t. 2. p. 120.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

465

Creed, with the addition of such articles as the
church supplied, to make it a complete summary of
the faith. So that nothing can be more evident,
than that the Nicene Creed was the creed then
generally made use of in all the Eastern churches
for the instruction of catechumens at their baptism.
But as yet it was not made a part of the common
liturgy of the church, to be repeated daily in Divine
¦ service. St. Ambrose54 indeed speaks of it as used
in private devotion, and gives directions to the holy
virgins so to use it in their morning retirements,
and upon other proper occasions. And Habertus55
thinks it was also required of bishops at their ordin
ation ; which is not improbable, because they were
obliged to make a profession of their faith. But all
this did not yet make it a part of the daily liturgy
of the church. For it is agreed among learned men,
both of the Romish and protestant communion, that
the creed was not used to be repeated in the daily
service till about the middle of the fifth century in
the Greek church, and not till some time after in
the Latin church. So Valesius,58 Cardinal Bona,5'
Schelstrate,59 Pagi,83 Christianus Lupus,60 Hamond
L'Estrange,6' and Vossius.62 Theodorus Lector63
observes, that Peter Fullo, who was bishop of An
tioch about the year 471, was the first that ordered
the creed to be repeated in that church, iv irdar,
avvd£u, in every church assembly. And the same
author reports,64 that Timotheus, bishop of Constan
tinople, anno 511, was the first that brought in this
custom into that church ; which he did in hatred
to his predecessor Macedonius, and with an intent
to represent him as disaffected to the Nicene Creed,
which before that time was used to be rehearsed in
the church only once a year, on the parasceue, or
great day of preparation before the passover, now
called Maundy Thursday, when the bishop was
wont to catechise such as were to he baptized at
Easter. From the Oriental churches, the custom
was brought into the West, first in Spain and Gal-
licia, at the petition of King Recaredus, by the order
of the third council65 of Toledo, about the year 589,
when those churches were newly recovered from
the inundation of the Arian heresy, this practice
was then thought a proper antidote to preserve
them from relapsing into their ancient error. Lupus

and Pagi say, it was not brought into the French
churches till the time of Charles the Great, and
then Pope Leo III. advised them to lay it aside
again, because it was not yet the custom of the
Roman church. They concluded yet further, that
in the time of Pope John VIII., anno 870, it was
not yet the practice of the Roman church. But at
last, in the days of Benedict VIII., anno 1014, as
is collected from Berno Augiensis, the custom was
admitted into the Roman church ; for this reason,
to give it in the words of Lupus, since the Roman
church could not bring over the French and Spanish
churches to her own way, she resolved at last to
comply with their custom, that there might be no
disagreement among them ; and so the Nicene
Creed came to be universally read throughout the
whole church.
There is but one creed more, which
I need to stand to rive any account or the Athanasian
„ ,, . , ,,... Creed.
of, and that is the creed which is
commonly received under the name of the Athana
sian Creed. Baronius66 is of opinion, that it was
composed by Athanasius when he was at Rome,
and offered to Pope Julius as a confession of his
faith. Which circumstance is not at all likely, for
Julius never questioned the faith of Athanasius.
However, a great many learned men have so far
embraced the opinion of Baronius, as to beheve this
creed to be of Athanasius's composing; as Cardi
nal Bona,67 and Petavius,68 and Bellarmine,69 and
Rivet,™ with many others of both communions.
Scultetus leaves the matter in doubt. But the best
and latest critics, who have examined the thing
most exactly, make no question, but that it is to be
ascribed to a Latin author, Vigilius Tapsensis, an
African bishop, who lived in the latter end of the
fifth century, in the time of the Vandalic Arian
persecution. The learned Vossius'1 and Quesnel'2
have written particular dissertations upon this sub
ject. Their arguments are, I. Because this creed
is wanting in almost all the manuscripts of Athana
sius's works. 2. Because the style and contexture
of it does not bespeak a Greek, but a Latin author.
3. Because neither Cyril of Alexandria, nor the
council of Ephesus, nor Pope Leo, nor the council
of Chalcedon, have ever so much as mentioned it

54 Ambros. de Virgin, lib. 3. p. 115. Symbolum quoque
specialiter debemus, tanquam nostri signaculum cordis, an-
telucanis horis quotidie recensere. Quod etiam, cum horre-
mus aliquid, animo recurrendum est.
55 Habert. Archieratic. p. 499.
56 Vales. Not. in Theodor. Lector, lib. 2. p. 566.
" Bona, Rer. Liturgie'. lib. 2. c. 8. n. 2.
88 Schelstrat. Concil. Antiochen. cap. 6. p. 210.
50 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 325. n. 18.
60 Lupus, Scholia in Concil. t. 1. cap. 4. p. 13.
" Alliance of Divine Offices, chap. 3. p. 79. chap. 6. p. 170.
52 Vossius de Syrnbolis.
* Theodor. Lector. Hist. lib. 2. p. 566.
2 H

84 Ibid. p. 563.
68 Cone. Tolet. 3. c. 2. Petitione Reccaredi regis consti
tuit synodus, ut per omnes ecclesias Hispaniae et Galliciae,
secundum formam Orientalium ecclesiarum, concilii Con-
stantinopolitani symbolum fidei recitetur : et priusquam Do
minica dicatur oratio, voce clara populo praedicetur, &c.
M Baron, an. 310. n. 11. " Bona de Psalmodia.
68 Petav. Not. in Epiphan. Haer. 72.
68 Bellarmin. de Scriptor. Eccles. p. 81.
70 Rivet, Critic. Sacr. lib. 3. c. 4. p. 240.
71 Voss. de Symbolis, Dissert. 2.
72 Quesnel. Dissert, de variis Fidei Symbolis in antiquo
codice Romano.

4C6

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X

in all that they say against the Nestorian or
Eutychian heresies. 4. Because this Vigilius Tap-
sensis is known to have published several others of
his writings under the borrowed name of Athanasius,
with which this creed is commonly joined. These
reasons have persuaded such men as Bishop Pear
son,78 Archbishop Usher,'4 Hamond L'Estrange,75
Dr. Cave,'9 Schelstrate," Pagi,™ and Du Pin, critics
of the best rank, to come in to this opinion^ that
this creed was not composed by Athanasius, but by
a later and a Latin writer. Dr. Cave thinks, the
first that mentions it under the name of Athanasius,
is Theodulphus Aurelianensis, who lived about the
year 794, in the reign of Charles the Great : but in
this he is a little mistaken ; for the council of Autun,
which was held above a hundred years before,
anno 670, not only mentioned it under that name,
but ordered every presbyter, deacon, subdeacon, &c,
to read it together with the Apostles' Creed,79 or be
liable to the bishop's censure for his omission;
which implies, that it was then esteemed the genuine
work of Athanasius, and as such had for some time
been received in the church. But whoever was the
author of it, there never was any question made of
its orthodoxy, except by the Samosatenians and
Arians in these later ages of the church. Only, as
Bishop Usher and others have observed, the modern
Greeks now use it with some additions and altera
tions. For, whereas it is said in the Latin copies,
that thejHoly Ghost proceedeth from the Father
and the Son ; the Greeks now read it, from the
Father, or the Father only; as ParcBus™ has re
marked in his exposition of this creed. And in the
Greek copy lately brought out of the East, and
published by Bishop Usher, there is a long inter
polation by way of addition and explication of those
words, " He was man of the substance of his mother,
perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul
and human flesh subsisting." With some other ad
ditions of lesser note, which the curious reader may
find marked out in the fore-mentioned tract81 of
that learned author.
To all the creeds that have been related in this
chapter, I think it. not improper to add the short
account which Eusebius gives of the first preaching

of St. Thaddaeus to King Agbarus and the people of
Edessa, which I had from the information of my
learned and judicious friend Mr. Lowth, to whose
useful conversation I owe many other curious re
marks and observations, that he scattered through
out the Antiquities of the Church. This is not in
deed properly a creed, but a summary of his first
sermon, or the heads of his first catechetical insti
tution to the people. " Concerning the coming of
Jesus into the world, after what manner it was •
and concerning his mission, for what reason he was
sent by the Father ; concerning his power, and the
mysteries which he spake in the world, and by what
power he did these ; then of his new way of preach
ing; of his meanness and abject estate, and the
humility of his outward appearance as a man; after
what manner he humbled himself, and submitted to
death, and made a diminutive82 appearance of his
Divine nature ; what things he suffered of the
Jews, and how he was crucified, and descended into
hell, and brake down the partition that had been
kept up in former ages ; how he arose from the
dead, and raised with himself those that slept in
preceding generations ; how he descended [from
heaven] alone, but ascended with a mighty com
pany to his Father ; how he sits at the right hand
of God the Father, and shall come again with
glory and power to judge both the quick and the
dead." Here are two things very remarkable in
this ancient account of the first principles of Chris
tian doctrine, viz. the Divinity of our Saviour, and
the descent into hell, both which are here expressed
in terms, for which reason I thought it might de
serve a place among the creeds of the church. Eu
sebius says, he had the account in the Syriac
tongue, as it was preserved in the archives of the
church of Edessa, signed in the year 340, which
(according to the computation of time then used by
the Syrians -of Edessa, reckoning from the first
year that Seleucus began to reign in Asia) falls in
with the same year that Christ suffered and arose
from the dead, as Valesius, and Pagi93 after him,
have rightly computed in their observations upon
this passage of Eusebius.

73 Pearson, in Symbol. Artie. 8. p. 570. Edit. Lat.
74 Usser. de Symbol. Rom. p. 1.
!i L'Estrange's Alliance of Divine Offices, chap. 4. p. 99.
78 Cave, Hist. Literar. vol. 1. p. 146.
77 Schelstrat. Cone. Antioch. Dissert. 3. c. 2. p. 109.
™ Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 3-iO. n. 6. Du Pin, vol.
2. p. 35.
79 Cone. Augustodun. Can. ult. Con. t. 6. p. 536. Si quis
presbyter, diaconus, subdiaconus, vel clericus, symbolum
quod inspirante Sancto Spiritu apostoli tradiderunt, vel
fidem sancti Athanasii praesulis irreprehensibiliter non re-
censuerit, ab episcopo condemnetur
80 Paraeus, Not. in Symbol. Athanas. ad calcem Ursin.

Calech. p. 124.
81 Usser. de Symbolis, p. 29.
82 Euseb. lib. 1. cap. 13, 'Eo-ptKpvvEv aiWS tS]v BioTi)ra.
 KaTfc€i) els tov dSr}v, Kal StiaxiaE tppaypdv, See. It
is worth our observation to compare the apostle's expression,.
Phil. ii. 7, iavTbv ekevcoo-e, "He made himself of no reput
ation," or, he emptied himself, with this expression of Thad
daeus, ierptKpvvEv aiiTii Tr)v 0soTT]Ta, He lessened, or maiie
a diminutive show and appearance of his Godhead. For
these places mutually explain one another, and are a solid
proof that the divinity of Christ in the apostolical age was
one of the principal articles of the Christian faith.
83 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 41. n. 3.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

467

CHAPTER V.
OF THE ORIGINAL, NATURE, AND REASONS OF THE
ANCIENT DISCIPLINE, IN CONCEALING THE SA
CRED MYSTERIES OF THE CHURCH FROM THE
CATECHUMENS. That which makes this inquiry a lit-
TheSe™'rs'«nd tie more necessary, is the several vain
rSmanists upon pretences of the Romanists concern
ing the original and reasons of this
disciphne. Bellarmine and others urge it as a mighty
argument for transubstantiation in particular, as if
the concealing the mystery of the eucharist from
the catechumens, was an indication of the belief of
the church concerning the real presence of Christ's
body and blood, which they were so studiously care
ful to hide from the knowledge of the catechumens.
But this is abundantly refuted by a more accurate
observation of Albaspineeus, a learned bishop of the
same communion, who in his book of the Ancient
Polity of the Church relating to the Eucharist,1 as
I find him cited by-others,2 rejects this as an in
competent proof of the Romish doctrine of the real
presence. For he rightly observes, that the ancients
concealed not only the mystery of the eucharist,
but also the sacrament of baptism from the cate
chumens; yea, and almost all other their sacred
rites and ceremonies, which in a large sense are
called sacraments, as the oil of chrism or confirm
ation, and the ordination of priests, which were as
studiously concealed from the knowledge or in
spection of the uniniated, as the elements of the
holy eucharist were. So that the bare concealing
that mystery from the catechumens, could no more
be an argument of transubstantiation in the bread
and wine in the eucharist, than it was in the waters
of baptism, or any other ceremony where the same
silence and caution was used.
The learned Schelstrate, with a subtle invention,
has made a more general "use of this ancient prac
tice, to palliate and excuse all the novel doctrines
and practices of his own church. He wrote a book
which he entitled Disciplina Arcani, a book highly
magnified by Pagi and others of his own commu
nion,3 as stopping the mouths of the protestants,
when they ask the Romanists, why no footsteps of
their modern doctrines and practices appear in the
earliest writers of the church ; the answer is ready

1 Albaspin. Police de l'ancienne Eglise, &c. lib. 1. c. 2.
p. 47.
2 Albertin. de Eucharist, lib. 2. p. 703.
3 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 118. n. 4.
4 Albaspin.Dbservat. lib. 1. c. 13. p. 38. Postrema verba,
quibus cavetur, ne octo libri Constitutionum Apostolicarum
publicentur, aperte indicant, eas primis saeculis factas non
2 H 2

upon all occasions, from this Disciplina Arcani,
that it was because these doctrines and practices
were kept secret, and only handed down by tradi
tion, not committed to writing, lest they should
come to the knowledge of the uninitiated Jews and
Gentiles, and the catechumens of the church. This
is the reason, he tells us, why there is no account
ofthe seven sacraments, nor ofthe worship of saints
or images, in the first writers of the church. The
things were really believed and practised from the
days of the apostles, as he will have it, but kept
secret, as the hidden mysteries of rehgion, which
were not to be divulged to any but such as were
initiated and prepared to know them.
This is an artifice that would justify as many
errors and vanities as any church could be guilty
of: it is but working a little with this admirable
instrument and tool, called disciplina arcani, and
then all the seeming contradictions between the
ancient doctrines and practices of the church uni
versal, and the novel corruptions of the modern
church of Rome, will presently vanish and disap
pear. So that we need not wonder, why men, whose
interest it serves so much, should magnify this as a
noble invention. When yet in truth it is only a
veil and a mist cast before the reader's eyes, which
may be easily dispelled by giving a true account of
that ancient piece of discipline and practice, first in
its original, and then in the nature, use, and rea
sons of it.
As to its original, the learned Al-
baspinaeus has rightly observed, That This discipline not
r . striclly observed in
in the apostolical age, and some time the «"rj«' as«s °<
after, they were not so very strict in
this discipline of concealing their sacred mysteries
from the knowledge of the catechumens. For he
thus argues against the antiquity of the book called
the Apostohcal Constitutions : The last words, says
he,4 which forbid the publication of those eight
books, do plainly show, that they were not written
in the first age ; for the Christians of the first age
did never make any scruple of publishing their
mysteries, as appears from the writings of Justin
Martyr. Mr. Aubertine observes5 the same out of
Athenagoras and Tatian. And Daille" joins in
opinion with Albaspineeus, and cites his authority
with approbation. And Basnage is' so far from
thinking, that the apostles concealed their mys
teries from the catechumens, that he rather sup
poses they administered the sacraments in their
presence. Upon which supposition, the whole

esse, cum primi saeculi Christiani sua lubentes mysteria, ut
vel ex Justino constat, enuntiarent.
5 Albertin. de Eucharist, lib. 2. p. 709.
" Dallams de Scriptis Ignatii, lib. 1. c. 22. p. 142.
' Basnag. Exercitat. in Baron, p. 419. Alta de mysteriis
silentia non agebant apostoli, nee catechumenos arceban
a sacrainentorum conspectu.

468

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

fabric which Schelstrate builds upon the disciplina
arcani, is ruined at once. For then it is certain,
the apostles had no such fear or caution upon them,
lest the catechumens should come to the know
ledge of the Christian rites or doctrines, as is pre
tended. And indeed any one that looks into the
writings of the apostles, may perceive with half an
eye, that they were far enough from concealing
their opinion about the worship of angels, saints,
and images ; for they expressly write against it.
And when they speak of the mysteries of baptism
and the eucharist, they do it with the greatest free
dom, without any fear or apprehension of giving
offence to the catechumens. Nay, and when this discipline was

about the time of
Tertullian,

im for oiher church, it is very evident, it was done
i than what . . ...

the Romanists pre- for different reasons than those which
tend. the Romanists pretend. The first be
ginning of it seems to have been about the time of
Tertullian; for he is the first writer that makes
any mention of it. He says," There was a secrecy
and silence observed in all mysteries. And he
blames the heretics of his own times for not re
garding something of this discipline. They made
no distinction, he says,9 between believers and cate
chumens ; they all met together, they all heard to
gether, they all prayed together. And if heathens
chanced to come in upon them, they gave that
which was holy to dogs, and cast their pearls, such
as they were, before swine. Here it is plain, the
church now made several distinctions between cate
chumens and believers, which heretics did not. The
place of the catechumens was now in a separate
part of the church ; they heard sermons, but not all
that believers were allowed to hear ; they had
prayers for themselves, but were not admitted to
hear the prayers of the faithful, which were pecu
liar to the celebration of the eucharist, from which
catechumens were excluded. But all this was, and
might be done, without favouring in the least the
vain pretences of the modern Arcanists ; for in all
this there was no design to conceal such mysteries
as the worship of saints, and angels, and images,
from the knowledge of the catechumens ; but on
the contrary, Tertullian speaks openly of these
kinds of worship, and with indignation condemns
them as superstitious practices, belonging only to
heathens or heretics, and not to the mysteries of the
church.

And in the following ages, no writer
that mentions this discipline, among Thifproved from
all those that give us a more particu- oVu^ uiSefS!
, , j, , , .1 . they concealed from
lar account of what things were con- the catechumeni,.
. , „ . , , . , . Which were, 1. The
cealed from the knowledge or inspec- manner otadminii.
° ^ tering baptism.
tion of the catechumens, ever so much
as intimates, that the worship of saints and images
was in the number of the mysteries of the church
which they concealed from them. But the myste- •
ries which they were so careful in some measure to
| hide from them, were, I. The manner of administer-
i ing baptism. 2. The unction of chrism or confirm
ation. 3. The ordination of priests. 4. The man-
iner of celebrating the eucharist. 5. The liturgy
or Divine service of the church. 6. And for some
time, the mystery of the Trinity, the creed, and the
Lord's prayer, till they became greater proficients,
and were ready for baptism. In the first place, that .
they were careful to conceal from them the manner
of administering baptism, appears from this, that
catechumens were never so much as suffered to en
ter10 or look into the baptistery, or place where
baptism was administered, according to the order of
the first council of Orange. St. Basil therefore
/says,11 ^Baptism, the eucharist, and the oil of chrism,
/ were things that the uninitiated were not allowed
k. to look upon.^ And St. Austin,12 putting the ques
tion, What things were kept secret, and not made
public in the church ? answers, The sacrament of
baptism, and the sacrament of the eucharist. For •
even pagans may see our good works, butjhe sacra
ments are kept hidden ~from"fheni7" And as they
did not admit catechumens to see baptism adminis
tered, so neither did they ordinarily discourse of it
before them in plain terms, but in a mystical way,
or else wholly excluded them from such discourses,
as incompetent hearers. We do not speak openly,
says St. Cyril,13 of the sacraments before the cate
chumens, but deliver many things covertly, that the
faithful who know them, may understand us, and
they who know them not, may receiye_jrio Jrarm.
So Theodoret,14 We discourse of mysteries obscurely
because of the unbaptized; but when they are gone,
we speak plainly before the initiated. In like man
ner Nazianzen,15 speaking of baptism, You have
heard, says he, so much of the mystery as we are
allowed to speak publicly in the ears of all, and the
rest you shall hear privately, which you must retain
secret within yourself, and keep under the seal of
baptism. A great many other passages may be read

8 Tertul. Apol. c. 7. Ex furma omnibus mysteriis silentii
fides adhibetur.
8 Tertul. de Prescript, advers. Haeretic. cap. 41. In
primis quis catechumenus, quis fidelis, incertumest": paritcr
adeunt, pariter audiunt, paritcr orant : etiam ethnici si
supervenerint, sanctum canibus, et porcis margaritas, licet
non veras, jactabunt.
10 Cone. Arausican. can. 19. Ad baptisteiium catechu
meni nunquam admittendi.

11 Basil, de Spiritu Sancto, c. 27. "A oiiSi iieoieTEvEai
e£etl toXs dpvriTOts, t. 2. p. 352.
12 Aug. Com. in Psal. ciii. Concio. 1. 1. 8. p. 484. Quid est
quod occultum est, et non publicum in ecclesia? Sacra
mentum baptismi, sacramentum eucharistiae. Opera nostra
bona vident et pagani, sacramenta vero occultantur illis.
13 Cyril. Catech. 6. n. 16.
11 Theodor. Quaest. 15. in Numer. t. I. p. 149.
15 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. 1. 1. p. 672.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

4G9

in Chrysostom,18 Theodoret,1' Cyril of Alexandria,18
the author under the name of Dionysius the Areo
pagite," and the Apostolical Canons,20 with many
others to the same purpose. From all which we
learn, that though the ancients acquainted the cate
chumens with the doctrine of baptism so far as to ;
make them understand the spiritual nature and de- \
sign of it, yet they never admitted them to the sight j
ofthe outward ceremony, nor so much as to hear any >
plain discourse about the manner of its administra-/
tion, till they were fitted and prepared for the actual
reception of it. And they observed the same disci-
secondi.; The pline in reference to the holy unction
manner of adminis- , . i • -i .1 t ,¦ n ¦
tering the holy unc- or chrism, which the .Latins call 1m-
tionorconnrmation. # #
position of hands, or confirmation.
St. Basil,21 speaking of the oil which was'i sed to
be consecrated and used in this ceremony, says, It
was one of those things which the uninitiated were
not allowed to look upon. And Pope Innocent
I., writing to another bishop about confirmation,
and the form of words used in the administration
of it, says, He could22 not repeat the words, lest he <
should seem to disclose the mystery, rather than I
answer the question proposed.
A third thing which they concealed
Thirdij.Theordi- from the catechumens, was the or-
nation of priests. . .
dmation of priests. The council of
Laodicea23 has. a canon to this purpose, That ordin
ations shah not be performed in the presence of
the hearers, that is, the catechumens. And Chry
sostom, speaking of this office, and the solemn
prayers used at the consecration, delivers himself
in an obscure and covert way, because of the cate
chumens. He that ordains, says he, requires the
prayers of the church,24 and they then join their
suffrage, and echo forth those words which the in
itiated know. For wo may not speak them openly
before the uninitiated catechumens.
SmL7 A fourth thing which they con-
turlyw'pubikf u" cealed from the catechumens, was the
chZ3£ .°uch m the pubhc liturgy or solemn prayers of
gumens, penitJUte" the church. For one rank of the Ca
sed the faithful , , ,. , ,
tecnumens, the audientes or hearers,
were only permitted to stay and hear the sermon,
but not any prayers of the church. Another sort,
called kneelers or prostrators, had the prayers of
the church particularly for themselves, but no

others. And the competentes stayed only to hear
the prayers offered up for themselves and the ener
gumens, and then were dismissed. They might not
stay to hear so much as the prayers for the peni
tents, much less the prayers for the church militant,
or any others preceding the communion. But be
fore all these, the usual word of command was given
by the deacons, or sacred heralds of the church, Ne „
quis audientium, or, Ite, missa est, Catechumens, de- >
part. From whence it is easy to collect further,
that the solemn office of the absolution of penitents
was never performed in the presence of the cate
chumens. For the time of absolution was not till
all others were dismissed, except the penitents them
selves who were to be absolved, which was imme
diately before their going to the altar to begin the
communion service. As seems to be clear from
those words of Optatus, where he speaks of it as the
common custom, both in the church and among the
Donatists,25 to give imposition of hands for absolution,
immediately before their going to say the Lord's prayer
at the altar. AU these things therefore were kept se
cret from the catechumens ; for they were never suf
fered to be hearers or spectators of any part of them.
But as the eucharist was the high- Sect 9
est mystery in the Christian service, „eT'ofhldebrattn1|n"
so they were most careful to conceal
the manner of its celebration from the catechumens.
And in this they made a difference between one sort
of penitents and the catechumens. For the highest
class of penitents, called consistentes or co-standers,
were allowed to be present at the communion pray
ers, and see the oblation offered and received by the
faithful, though they might not partake with them.
But catechumens of all ranks were wholly excluded
from all this. They were always dismissed before
these prayers began, and the doors of the church
were locked and guarded by proper officers, to the
intent that no uninitiated person should indiscreetly
rush in upon them. We shut the doors, says Chry- ,
sostom,26 when we celebrate the holy mysteries, and \
drive away all uninitiated persons. This was one
of the secrets of the church, as we heard St. Austin
before27 speak of it; one of the things which a
catechumen might not look upon, according to St.
Basil.28 Therefore the author of the Apostolical
Constitutions28 makes it part of the deacon's office,
not only to command their absence, but also to keep

16 Chrys. Horn. 40. in 1 Cor. p. 688. Horn. 46. in Act. p.
BG8. t. 4. Ed. Savil.
" Theodor. Hteret. Fabul. lib. 5. c. 18.
" Cyril, adv. Julian, lib. 7. t. 6. p. 247. " Dionys.
Eccles. Hierar. c. 2. p. 251. »> Canon. Apost. c. 85.
21 Basil, de Spiritu Sancto, c. 27.
22 Innocent. Ep. 1. ad Decentium Eugubin. c. 3. Verba
vero dicere non possum, ne magis prodere videar, quam ad
consultationem respondere.
Cope. Laodic. can. 5. M^ SeXv tos xEtPOTOV^a5 *'7"
trapovtriq dKpotopivtov yivEaBai.

24 Chrysost. Horn. 18. in 2 Cor. p. 872. "'0 piXXtov x"-
poToveXv, tos 'eke'iviov Euxis koXeX tote, Kal aiiTol iirtij/ri-
ept{\ovTai, Kal iirt^ocoaiv, airEp itrltriv ol pEpvnpivof ov
yip Si] Stipes iirl T&v dpvfiTtov iKKaXvlCTEtv HiravTa.
* Optat. cont. Parraen. lib. 2. p. 57. Inter vicina mo
menta, dum manus imponitis et delicta donatis, mox ad
altare conversi, Dominicam orationem praetermittere non
potestis. Vid. Constitut. Apost. lib. 8. cap.. 6—9.
28 Chrys. Horn. 23. in Mat. p. 236.
2' Aug. in Psal. ciii. " Basil, de Spir. Sanct. c. 27.
28 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. n. 57. lib. 8. c. 11.

470

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

the doors, that none might come in, during the time
of the oblation. Epiphanius30 and St. Jerom81
bring it as a charge against the Marcionites, that
they despised this discipline, and admitted catechu
mens indiscriminately with the faithful to all their
mysteries. And PaUadius32 forms a like charge
against the enemies of Chrysostom, that in the tu
mult they raised against him, they gave occasion to
the uninitiated to break into the church, and see
those things which it was not lawful for them to set
'..their eyes upon. Nay, so strict was the church
then in the observation of this discipline, that
Athanasius convicted the Mdejians of false witness
-against him, when they pretended to prove, by the
testimony of some catechumens, that Macarius, one
of his presbyters, had overturned the communion
table in the time of the oblation : he argued, that
this could not be so, because,33 if the catechumens
were present, there could then be no oblation.
Nor did they only exclude catechumens from
the sight of these mysteries, but also from all dis
courses which treated plainly about them. They
made a distinction between moral and mysterious
subjects, and admitted the catechumens to the one,
but not to the other, as I have had occasion for
merly to show84 from the testimonies of Theodoret,35
St. Austin,36 and St. Ambrose.8' To which we may
here add that of St. Cyril of Jerusalem: You was
once, says he, a catechumen, and then we38 did not
discourse of mysteries to you : and now that you
have attained by experience to the height of those
things which we teach, you will easily perceive
that catechumens are not worthy to be hearers of
such things. And that of Gaudentius, bishop of
Brixia, who in his sermon to the neophites,39 or
persons newly baptized, tells them, he would now
open to them those mysteries, which could not be
explained in the presence of the catechumens.
Sometimes indeed they spake of the eucharist be
fore the catechumens in their popular discourses ;
but then they did it in such obscure and figurative
terms as were understood only by communicants,
and not by the catechumens : according to that of
St. Chrysostom ;40 I would speak plainly, but I dare
not because of the unbaptized. For they make our
expositions to be more difficult, they compel us to
speak obscurely, or else we must reveal what is not
to be revealed unto them. Upon this account Epi
phanius, speaking of the words of institution before

the catechumens, would .not say, This bread is my
body, this wine is my blood ; but Hoc meum est Iioc
et hoc, This is my that and that,41 to let the initiated
know his meaning, and not the catechumens. And
hence it was they so often used that phrase, "loamv
o\ pepvripkvoi, Et norunt fideles, The initiated know
what we say; which phrase Casaubon42 has ob
served to occur no less than fifty times in the writ
ings of St. Chrysostom. Casaubon makes another
good observation upon this matter, which the learn
ed Albertinus takes from him,4* and strenuously
defends : That whereas there are three things in the
eucharist; 1. The symbols, or sacred elements rjf
bread and wine ; 2. The things signified by them ;
and, 3. The rites of celebration; that which the
ancients laboured chiefly to conceal from the cate
chumens, was not the things signified, but only the
symbols or outward signs, and the rites and manner
of celebration. For they made no scruple to call
the eucharist by the name of Christ's body and
blood before the catechumens, at_ the samajiine
that they would not_call it bread and wine,_or
speak particularly of the form and manner of ad
ministering it, as Albertinus proves out of Theodoret
and many others. Which shows, that the reason
of concealing the mystery from the catechumens
was not the behef of transubstantiation, as the
Romanists pretend ; for then they would have
chosen rather to conceal the names of Christ's body
and blood, than the names of the outward symbols,
and the mystical rites of celebration, the latter of
which they studiously concealed, but not the former.
He that would see more of this, may consult the
elaborate, discourse of that most acute and learned
writer, where he answers all the objections of Cof-
fetellus against the present assertion.
The last sort of things which they
for some time concealed from the more sixthly, The mj»-
, .. tery of the Trinitj,
imperfect catechumens, were the sub- the creed, and the
r Lord's prayer, from
limer doctrines of Christianity, such ^h2,aJrt ot M'
as the mystery of the Trinity, and
hypostatic union, together with the creed itself and
the Lord's prayer, which the catechumens did not
learn tiU immediately before their baptism. For so
Theodoret tells us,44 that they did not teach this
prayer to the uninitiated, but to the baptized, or
' immediate candidates of baptism. For no one that
\ was not baptized could presume to say, " Our Father
Which art in heaven ; '' not having yet received the

30 Epiphan. Haeres. 42. n. 3.
"' Hieron. Com. in Galat. vi. t. 9. p. 199.
32 Pallad. Vit. Chrysostom. c. 9. The same complaint is
made by Chrysostom himself in his first epistle to Pope
Innocent, t. 4. p. 681. Edit. Front. Ducaoi.
33 Athan. Apol. 2. t. 1. p. 747.
81 Book I. chap. 4. sect. 8.
35 Theodor. Quaest. 15. in Numer.
88 Aug. Serm. 1. ad Neophytos, in Append, t. 10. p. 845.
87 Ambros. de Initiatis, c. 1. » Cyril. Catech. Praef. n. 7.

39 Gaudent. Serm. 2. ad Neophytos, Bibl. Patr. t. 2. p.
14. Ea solum aperienda neophytis, quae prasentibus cate
chumenis explanari non possunt.
40 Chrys. Horn. 40. in 1 Cor. p. 688.
41 Epiphan. Anchorat. n. 57.
42 Casaub. Exercit. 16. in Baron p. 490.
43 Albertin. de Euchar. lib. 2. p. 708.
41 Theod. Epitom. Divin. Decret. lib. 5. Haeret. Fabul.
c. 28. TaxiTr)v ti)v irpoo7EVxi)v ov tovs dpvilTOVS, aXXa
Toils pv^aytoyovpivovs StSaaKopEV.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

471

gift of adoption. But he that was made partaker
of baptism might call God his Father, as being
adopted among the sons of grace. St. Chrysostom45
speaks after the same manner: This prayer belongs
only to the faithful, as both the rule of the church
and the beginning of the prayer itself teach. For
an unbaptized person cannot yet caU God his Fa
ther. This prayer was then peculiar to the com
munion service, and never used in the church, but
only at the altar, where none of the catechumens
could be present, but only the faithful. Whence it
was called, evxv m^Hv, the prayer of the faithful.
And one petition in it was thought to refer more
particularly to the eucharist, " Give us this day our
daily bread," dprov imovtnov, our super-substantial or
super-celestial bread, as many ofthe ancients render
it. For these reasons they never taught the Lord's
prayer to any of the catechumens but the highest
rank of them, the competentes, a few days before
their baptism. As we learn from those words of
St. Austin,46 Now learn the Lord's prayer, which ye
must repeat eight days hence, when ye are to be
baptized. So they received it. only on Saturday be
fore Palm Sunday, in order to repeat it on Saturday
before Easter, which was the day of their haptism.
They observed the same disciphne in reference
to the creed, which they taught to the catechu
mens at the same time only as they did the Lord's
prayer, a httle before their baptism. This they did
not always commit to writing, but kept it, as St.
Jerom47 words it, in tables of the heart, and de
livered it by word of mouth, that it might not come
to the knowledge of the uninitiated and unbelievers.
Which is the reason that Sozomen gives,48 why he
did not insert the words of the Nicene Creed into
his history, because probably many uninitiated
persons might read his book, who ought not to read
or hear the creed. They were as careful not to com- J
municate to new beginners the profound mysteries
of the Trinity and incarnation, tiU they had first
prepared them by proper preceding instructions for
the reception of them. Therefore, as St. Jerom
observes,49 it was the custom of the church to put
off this part of the instruction of catechumens to
the last, and not acquaint them with these doctrines
till about forty days before they were to be bap
tized, though the catechetical instruction had con
tinued perhaps for two or three years before.
This was the whole of that discipline we read
so much of among the ancients, of concealing the

sacred mysteries from the catechumens. Among
aU which we have never the least intimation given,
that the practice of image-worship, or the adoration
of saints and angels, or the doctrine of seven sacra
ments, were the mysteries they intended to conceal
from them. For in those days there were no such
mysteries in the Christian church. And therefore
the late invention of Schelstrate is a mere fiction
and sophism, to cover the nakedness of the present
Roman church. And the pretence of Bona,50 con
cerning the prohibition of images in churches made
by the council of Eliberis, that it was only to con
ceal the secrets of religion from the knowledge of
the heathen, is an absurd supposition, which nei
ther Albaspinseus nor Petavius could digest, as I
have showed more fully in another place,51 where
I speak of the ornaments of the ancient churches.
As to those things which they really
concealed from the catechumens, the Reasons fo'r con-
j. j. , mi . .i cealmg these thinga
true reasons were, first, Ijiat the from the catechu-
. , . ... .. /-i, ' • mens. First, That
plainness and simplicity of the Chris- '(» plainness and
*- r - " simphcity of them
tian rites might not be contemned by ^^anot be con'
them, or give any occasion of scandal
or offence to them, before they were thoroughly in
structed about the nature of the mysteries. For .
both Jews and Gentiles, out of whom Christian
converts were made catechumens, were apt to de
ride the nakedness and simplicity of the Christian
religion, as void of those pompous ceremonies and
sacrifices, with which those other religions abound
ed. The Christian religion prescribed but one
washing in water, and one oblation of bread and
wine, instead of that multitude of bloody sacrifices
which the other rehgions commanded. Therefore, .
lest the plainness of these few ceremonies should
offend the prejudiced minds of catechumens, before
they were well instructed about them, the Christian
teachers usually adorned these mysteries with great
and magnificent titles, such as would convey noble
ideas to the minds of men concerning their spirit
ual effects, but concealing their other names, lest
the simplicity of the things should offend them.
When they spake of the eucharist, they never men
tioned bread and wine, but the sacrifice ofthe body \
and blood of Christ ; and styled baptism, illumina- \
tion and life, the sacrament of faith and remission
of sins, saying, httle in the mean time of the out
ward element of water. This w#s one plain reason, i
why they denied catechumens -the -sight of their \
sacraments, and always spake in mystical terms be-

45 Chrysos. Horn. 20. al. 19. in Matt. p. 200. Horn. 2. in 2
Cor. p. 740.
48 Aug. Horn. 42. ex 50. t. 10. p. 195. Tenete ergo hanc
orationem, quam reddituri estis ad octo dies.  Ad octo
dies ab hodierno die reddituri estis hanc orationem, quam
hodie accepistis.
47 Hieron. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. c. 9. p. 173. Symbo
lum fidei et spei nostra, quod ab apostolis traditiuri, non

scribitur in charta et atramento, sed in tabulis cordis car-
nalibus. 48 Sozomen. lib. 1. c. 20.
48 Hieron. Epist. 61. ad Pammach. c. 4. p. 167. Consue-
tudo apud nos istiusmodi est, ut his qui baptizandi sunt, per
quadraginta dies publice tradamus sanctam et adorandam
Trinitatem. 50 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 16. u. 2.
" Book VIII. chap. 8. sect. 6.

472

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book X.

fore them. We shut the doors, says Chrysostom,52
when we celebrate our mysteries, and keep off all
uninitiated persons from them, not because we ac
knowledge any imperfection in the things them
selves, but because many are weakly affected toward
'¦¦ them. And so St. Cyril,53 in the place mentioned
above, We speak not openly of our mysteries be-
' fore the catechumens, but say many things mysti
cally and obscurely, that they who know them may
understand us, and they who know them not may
\ receive no harm. In like manner the synod of
Alexandria,54 charging the Meletians for publishing
the mystery of the eucharist before the catechu
mens, and what was worse, before the heathens,
contrary to those rules of Scripture, " It is good to
conceal the secrets of a king ;" and, " Give not
that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast ye your
pearls before swine ;" they add, that it is not lawful
to bring mysteries upon the open stage before the
uninitiated, lest the heathen, through their ignor
ance, should deride them, or the catechumens, by
their curiosity, should be offended. Therefore there
was an ancient rule in the church, That if any un
initiated person had by any mistake been admitted
to partake of the eucharist, he should be imme
diately instructed and baptized, that he might not
go forth a contemner or despiser, as the author of
the Apostolical Constitutions55 words it. And the
fourth council of Toledo gives a like reason56 why
such Jews as had been baptized by force, should
continue in the Christian profession, lest the name
of God should be blasphemed, and the faith which
they had received should be reputed vile and con
temptible ; though they made a severe decree
! against obliging any Jews to be baptized by force
or compulsion for the future.
Sec[ n Another reason assigned for this
ciiietce°nadlyreTe°reCnce" discipline of silence, was to conciliate
a reverence in the minds of men for
the mysteries which they kept so concealed from
them. For, as St. Basil observes,5' the veneration
\ of mysteries is preserved by silence. And as things
that are trite and obvious are easily contemned, so
those that are uncommon and reserved are naturally
adapted to beget in men an esteem and veneration.

62 Chrys. Horn. 23. in Mat. p. 236.
63 Cyril. Catech. 6. u. 16.
51 Apud Athanas. Apol. 2. t. 1. p. 731.
55 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 25.
56 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 56. Oportet ut fidem etiam, quam
vi vel necessitate susceperunt, tenere cogantur, ne nomen
Domini blasphemetur, et fides, quam susceperunt, vilis ac
contemptibilis habeatur.
57 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, c. 27.
59 Aug. Serm. 1. inter 40. Edit, a Sirmondo, t. 10. Non
rnirari debetis, fratres charissimi, quod inter ipsa mysteria
de mysteriis nihil diximus, quod non statim ea quae tradidi-
mus interpretati sumus. Adhibuimus enim tam Sanctis re
bus atque divinis honorem silentii.

!And therefore he thinks, the apostles and fathers of
the church, who made laws about these matters,
pi-escribed secrecy and silence, to preserve the dig-
snity of the mysteries. St. Austin53 gives the same
reason for this practice, when he says, it was the
honour that was due to the mysteries, which made
him pass them over in silence, and not explain them.
' St. Austin- adds to this a third rea-
; son, which is, that the mysteries of Thirdly, -fo'mai,,
I . .. -, .. . . , ., the catechumens
baptism and the eucharist were there- ™»re desirous to
jy l ¦ ,11. , know them-
fore chiefly concealed from the cate- 
chumens, to excite their curiosity, and inflame their
zeal, and make them more earnest and solicitous in
hastening to partake of them, that they might come
to an experimental knowledge of them. Though
the sacraments, says he, are not disclosed59 to the
catechumens, it is not always because they cannot
bear them, but that they may so much the more
ardently desire them, by how much they are the
more honourably hidden from them. And again,
The Jews acknowledge not the priesthood8'1 ac
cording to the order of Melchisedeck. I speak to
the faithful ; if the catechumens understand it not,
let them cast away their slowness and hasten to the
knowledge of it. They that do not yet eat of this61
banquet, let them hasten upon invitation. The
feast of Easter is at hand. Give in your name to
baptism. If the festival does not excite you, let
curiosity draw you, that you may know that^wliich
is said, " He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my
blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him."
These were the reasons which engaged the an
cients to conceal their mysteries from the catechu
mens : which, we plainly see, have no relation to
such doctrines as that of transubstantiation, or the
number of seven sacraments, or such superstitious
practices as the worship of images, or saints and
angels, which are mere novelties, and the modern
inventions of the Romish church.
I have now gone through aU things relating to
the discipline, of the catechumens in their prepara
tion for baptism. We are next to take a view of
baptism itself, and inquire into the manner how the
church administered it, and what rites and customs
were observed in the celebration of it.

59 Aug. Horn. 96. in Joh. Et si catechumenis sacramenta
fidelium non produntur, non ideo fit quod ea ferre non pos-
sint, sed ut tanto ardentius ab eis concupiscantur, quanto
eis honorabilius occultantur.
80 Aug. Horn, in Psal. cix. Judaei non agnoscunt sacer
dotium secundum ordinem Melchisedek. Fidelibus loquor,
si quid non intelligunt catechumeni, auferant pigritiain,
festinent ad notitiam.
61Id. de Verbis Domini, Horn. 46. Qui nondum man-
ducant, ad tales epulas invitati festinent. — Ecce Pascha
est, da nomen ad baptismum. Si non te excitat festivitas,
ducat ipsa curiositas, ut scias quid dictum sit, Qui manducat
carnem raeam et bibit sanguinem meum, manet in me, et
ego in eo

BOOK XI.

OF THE RITES AND CUSTOMS OBSERVED IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF BAPTISM IN THE
PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
OF THE SEVERAL NAMES AND APPELLATIONS OF BAPTISM IN THE TEIMITITE CHITECH.

There are a great many questions
b«™L°Zet'co°rn- relating to the doctrine of baptism,
EinSerrecu which I intend not to make any part
of the subject of this Book, because
they may be found in any didactical and polemical
writers upon this head, and especially in Vossius
his elaborate discourse De Baptismo, where he accu
rately canvasses all questions of this nature, and
learnedly determines them from the doctrine of the
ancients. Here the reader may find a satisfactory
account of aU questions relating to the mystical
signification and spiritual effects of baptism ; such
as are, 1. Regeneration; 2. Adoption; 3. Recep-,
tion into the covenant of grace. In which also is'
contained remission of sins, renovation of the spirit,
and eternal hfe, which are the noble effects confer
red on all those that rightly receive it. Here also
he determines the questions, How it comes to pass,
that though sins are forgiven in baptism, yet con
cupiscence, the fuel or incentive of sin, remains
still in the regenerate ? And whence it is, that after
baptism, we are still afflicted with diseases, and that
as well infants as adult persons ? How it comes to
pass, that the magistrate has power to punish those
sins which are committed before baptism, even after
they are purged away and forgiven in baptism?
With many other questions of the like nature,
which are not necessary to come into this discourse.
I shall also omit the question about the indelible
character of baptism, which is pretended to be im
pressed upon the soul ; and the questions about the
administrator of baptism, and lay baptism, and
heretical baptism, because I have lately considered
these distinctly and fully in a first and second part
of the Scholastical History of Lay Baptism. What

1 Cone. Carthag. ap. Cypr. u. 19. p. 234. Si haeresis a
Deo est, habere et indulgentiam Divinam potest.
2 Cone. Rom. can. 7. ap. Coteler. Not. in Const. Apost.
hb. A. c. 9. Paschae tempore presbyter et diaconus per pa-
rochias dare remissionem peccatorum et ministerium im-
plere consueverunt, etiam praesente episcopo.

remains therefore to be considered in this place, is
only such other matters in the practice of the an
cient church relating to the administration of bap
tism, as have not yet been spoken to. And here,
first of all, it will be proper to say something of the
ancient names of haptism ; some of which were
taken from the internal and spiritual effects of it ;
others, from the nature and substance of the action ;
others, from the conditions required in the receivers ;
others, from the external circumstances and rites
observed in the administration.
From one of its noble effects, it was
sometimes styled indulgentia, indul- Hence baptism
, . , called indulgentia,
gence, or absolution and remission of indulgence, or ab-
° ' solution.
sins. Thus, in the African council
under Cyprian,' Privatianus a Suffetula terms it,
the Divine indulgence. And in the Roman council
mentioned by Cotelerius,2 it is said, That at the
Easter festival, remission of sins, meaning baptism,
may be administered by either presbyter or deacon,
in the presence of the bishop in the parish churches.
But, forasmuch as absolution or remission of sins
may not always necessarily accompany baptism,
through some default in the administrator or the
receiver, though the baptism be otherwise a true
baptism ; therefore St. Austin, in disputing with
the Donatists, chooses rather to call it8 the sacra
ment of grace, and the sacrament of absolution,
rather than grace or absolution itself; because
wicked men may receive the sacrament of baptism,
but they cannot receive the grace of baptism, which
is absolution, or remission of sins ; for God grants
that to none but those that turn to him with a sin
cere faith and true repentance. Whenever there
fore the ancients call baptism by the name of abso-

8 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 5. c. 21. Sacramentum gratiae dat
Deus etiam per malos : ipsam vero gratiam non nisi per
seipsum vel per sanctos suos. — Baptismum vero, quod est
sacramentum remissionis peccatorum, nulli dubium est ha
bere etiam homicidas posse, &c.

474

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

lution or indulgence, they are to be understood with
this limitation, that it is so only to those who are
worthy receivers of it. And hence we may observe,
that the true ancient proper notion of an absolution,
or indulgence, is God's pardoning sin by the minis
terial application of his sacraments, which are the
seals of his covenant, granting remission of sins :
whence baptism, entering men into that covenant
of grace, was dignified with the. name of the sacra
ment of absolution and indulgence.
Another noble effect of baptism,
And SiT-yeve- was regeneration, or a new birth from
ZnTxpZT*; the death of sin to the life of right
eousness. For every Christian was
supposed to be born again by the waters of bap
tism, according to that of Tertullian,4 Nos pisciculi
secundum lx$i>v nostrum Jesum Christum in aqua
nascimur, We fishes are born in water, conformable
to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, i'xSuc ; which,
as I have observed5 in another place, was an acros
tic, or technical name, made of the initial letters of
our Saviour's several titles in Greek, 'Ir/o-oic Xpiorbg,
Biov 'Xibg, 'S.oiTrjp, which put together, make up the
name IX9Y2, which signifies a fish, and is alluded
to not only by Tertullian, but by Prosper" and Op
tatus.' Hence baptism had the name of 7roXiyye-
vEoia \bvxrjg," in Cyril's Catechism, The regeneration
of the soul ; and vSmp Ztvrjg, the water of life, in Jus
tin Martyr;9 and fans Divinus, in Cassiodore,1" the
Divine fountain, whence comes our English name,
font ; with many other titles of the same import
ance. And because this new birth was wrought
by the power and influence of the Spirit, therefore
it was called the spiritual birth, whereby those who
were born carnally to the world before, were now
born spiritually to God. And so, as Optatus words
it,11 God was hereby made Father of men, and the
holy church their mother. For till men were bap
tized, they were not perfect members of Christ's
body, the church, nor properly adopted into God's
family, and consequently had as yet no right to call
God their Father, or the church their mother. And
because the Divine operations of the Holy Spirit in
sanctifying grace, are sometimes in Scripture caUed
the unction or anointing of the Spirit, therefore
baptism had also the name of chrism or unction,

from this noble effect attending it. Gregory Nazi
anzen takes notice of this among many other titles
of honour : We call it, says he, the gift,12 and grace,
and baptism, and unction, and illumination, and
garment of immortality, and laver of regeneration,
and seal or character, and whatever else is precious
or honourable. And in explaining these terms, he
particularly notes, that it had the name of unction,
because it was a sacred and a royal thing, as those
things usually were that were anointed. Whence
every man was in some sense made a king and a
priest to God by Christ in his baptism, upon which
account St. Jerom13 styles baptism, sacerdotium laici,
the layman's priesthood, in contradistinction to the
clerical priesthood, which was only conferred by
ordination. Another effect of baptism, was the
enlightening men's understandings And^T,juori
with Divine knowledge. Hence bap
tism had the name of tpumtrpbg, illumination, as it
frequently occurs in Chrysostom,14 Nazianzen,"
Dionysius the Areopagite,16 the council of Laodicea,"
and many others. The reason of which name
seems to be partly from the preceding instruction
of the catechumens in their preparation for baptism,
according to that of Justin Martyr, This laver11 is
called illumination, because the minds of those who
learn these things are enlightened. Then again, -
because it was the entrance on an enlightened state,
and the introduction to Divine knowledge, which
grew by degrees to greater perfection : for Justin's
words may be understood of the knowledge conse
quent to baptism. And so the reason is given by
Clemens Alexandrinus,10 and the author under the
name of Dionysius,20 because it confers the first
light, and is the introduction to all other Divine il
luminating mysteries, therefore, from the effect, it
was dignified with the name of illumination. Per
haps it might be so called in regard also that the
baptized were now admitted to all the mysterious
parts and recondite knowledge of religion, which
by the discipline of the church were kept secret
from them whilst they were catechumens. And
perhaps some regard might be had to the plentiful
effusion of the Spirit in the gift of tongues, know
ledge, and prophecy, which in the apostolical age

' Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 1. 5 Book I. chap. 1. sect. 2.
6 Prosper, de Praedict. et Promissis, par. 2. cap. 39.
7 Optat. lib. 3. p. 62. s Cyril. Catech. Praefat. n. 10.
» Justin. Dial. p. 231.
10 Cassiodor. in Cantic. cap. 7.
11 Optat. lib. 2. p. 52. DumTrinitas cum fide concordat,
qui natus fuerat saeculo, renascitur spiritualiter Deo. Sic tit
hominum Pater Deus, sancta sic lit mater ecclesia.
12 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 638. Aiopov KaXipEv, xd-
ptapa, fldiTTiapa, XP^apa, tpeoTttrpa, itpSapirias 'ivSvpa,
XuTpov iraXtyyEVEo-ias, acppayiSa, irdv oti Tiptov.
13 Hieron. Dialog, advers. Lucifer, cap. 2. Sacerdotium
laici, id est, baptisma. Scriptum est eniin, Regnum quippe

nos et sacerdotes Deoet Patri suo fecit. Et iterum, Gentem
sanctam, regale sacerdotium, &c.
'* Chrysost. Horn. 13. in Heb. p. 1818.
15 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 638.
16 Dionys. Hierar. Eccl. cap. 3. " Cone. Laod. can. 47.
18 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 94. RaXsT-rat Si thto t6 Xtsrpdv
cptoTiapos, ws tptoTiX)opivtov Ti)V Sidvoiav Ttov Tavra pav-
SavovTtov. 13 Clem. Alex. Paedagog. lib. 1. c. 6. p. 93.
20 Dionys. Eccl. Hier. cap. 3. p. 283. 'EirEtSiv irrjdVrs
tptoTos pETaSiStoeri, Kal iraamv ierTiv dpXV Ttov Seiuiv tpoo-
TaytoyttXiv, iK tS teXhpevh ttjv dXi]B?i t5 tptoTiapuTos
tnrtovvpiav vpvapev.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH,

475

was immediately conferred at baptism, by the impo
sition of the hands of the apostles.
Another effect of baptism was eter-
And Mto,5Uiva- nal salvation, as it was the ordinary
means, not only of obtaining remis
sion of sins, but of bringing men by the grace and
blood of Christ to the glory of the kingdom of hea
ven. Whence, as St. Austin observes,21 it was very
common among the Punic or African Christians to
call baptism by the name of salus, salvation, as they
did the sacrament of the body of Christ by the
name of hfe, because these two sacraments were
reputed necessary to the obtaining of salvation or
eternal life. And upon this account Gregory Na
zianzen, introducing a person pleading for liberty
to delay his baptism, makes him speak after this
manner : I stay only for my father, or mother, or
brother, or wife, or children, or friends, or some
near relations, and then I wiU be saved, rnvitcavTa
o-w&ijcnHiai j22 the meaning of which must needs be,
that then he would be baptized, in order to obtain
salvation. Such honourable titles and appella
tions did the ancients give to this sacrament of
baptism, taken from the noble effects which it was
supposed to confer on ah those who were worthy
partakers of it.
s«t s Next, from the nature and sub-
.ndTblbchn.; stance of it, it had the names of mys-
rimn^ȣm, terium, sacramentum, and mppayig. The
*° "*paif't- two first of which are so common,
and so well known to every reader, that I need not
here spend time to explain them. Only I shall note,
that the terms, mystery and sacrament, are some
times taken in a larger sense, to signify any sacred
ceremony, or any part of religion that had any
thing of spiritual or mystical signification in it. Of
which there will be a more proper place to discourse,
when we come to treat of confirmation. The name
o-ftMvic, and signaculum, the seal of the Lord, is a
httle more uncommon, as applied to baptism, and
therefore has occasioned some errors among learned
men, who often mistake it either for the sign of the
cross, or the consignation and unction that was
used in confirmation. Thus in that famous dis
course of Clemens Alexandrinus, entitled, Quis
Dives salvetur, part of which is recorded in Euse

bius,23 and the whole published by Combefis,24 it is
said, that the bishop, to whose care St. John had
committed a certain young convert, first instructed
or catechised him, and then gave him the perfect
phylactery or preservative against sin, namely, the
seal of the Lord, rijv otppayiSa tov Kvpiov. Now, by
the seal of the Lord, Christopherson, and Bellarmine,
and others from him, understand confirmation : Mr.
Seller,25 and some others, will have it to be the sign
of the cross ; but Valesius,23 and Daille,2' more truly
expound it of baptism, which was called the seal of
the Lord, because in the very nature of it there is
contained a covenant made between God and man ;
and baptism being the seal of this covenant, it was
with the greatest propriety of speech styled, the seal
of the Lord. In this sense the ancient author of the
Acts of Paul and Thecla uses the name otppaylg for
baptism. Give me, says Thecla to St. Paul, the seal
of Christ,28 and no temptation shall touch me. And
Hermas Pastor, in like manner, speaking of some
that were baptized and gone to heaven, uses the
same dialect : They that are now dead, were sealed2?
with the seal of the Son of God, and are entered
into the kingdom of God. For before a man re
ceives the name of the son of God, he is consigned
over to death ; but when he receives that seal, he is
freed from death, and consigned over to life. N ow,
that seal is water, into which men descend bound
over to death, but rise out of it marked out or sealed
unto hfe. This seal therefore was preached unto
them, and they made use of it, that they might
enter into the kingdom of God. In all this passage,
there is no express mention made of baptism, but
it is called the seal and name of Christ, because it
sets the mark and name of Christians on us, and
distinguishes us from Jews and Gentiles, and shows
that we belong to the dominion and possession of
Christ. Hence Tertullian frequently calls it signa
culum fidei,33 the signature of our faith; and says,
We are distinguished from Jews by this signature
in our bodies," because their signature was circum
cision, but ours baptism. In like manner, Gregory
Nazianzen, accounting for the reason of this name,
says, It was called the seal of the Lord, because it
was an indication to whose dominion32 we belong,
and because it was the consignation of us to eternal

21 Aug. de Pec. Merit, lib. 1. c. 24 t. 7. p. 294. Optime
Punici Christiani baptismum ipsum nihu aliud quam salutem
et sacramentum corporis Christi, mm! aliud quam vitam
vocant, &c.
22 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 655. K Euseb. lib. 3. c. 23.
21 Combefis, Auctarium Novissimum, p. 185.
25 Seller, Life of Just. Martyr, p. 102.
" Vales. Not. in Euseb. Iiy3. c. 23.
27 Dallams de ConfirmatJEb. 2. c. 1. p. 110.
23 Acta Thecla!, ap. Grabe Spicileg. t. 1. p. 106. Ac's
riot Ttjv ev XpitrTtp trtppayiePq, Kal &x dtj/ETat pa itei-
pcttrpos. 23 Hermas Past. lib. 3. Sinvil. 9. n, 16. Illi igitur de-

functi sigillo Filii Dei signati sunt, et intraverunt in regnum
Dei. Antequam enim accipiat homo nomen Filii Dei,
morti destinatus est: at ubi accipit iUud sigillum, liberatur
a morte, et traditur vitae. IUud autem sigillum aqua est,
in quam descendunt homines morti obligati, ascendunt vero
vitae assignati. Et illis igitur praedicatum est illud sigillum,
et usi sunt eo ut intrarent in regnum Dei.
90 Tertul. de Spectac. c. 4. Ad principalem auctoritatem
convertar, ipsius signaculi nomen. It. c. 24. Hoc erit
pompa diaboli, adversus quam in signaculo fidei ejeramus.
81 Tertul. Apol. c. 21. Neque de ipso signaculo corporis,
neque de consortio nominis cum Judaeis agimus.
32 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 639.

476

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

life. In which respect, Constantine, at the hour of
death, desiring the benefit of baptism from the
bishops that were about him, is said by Eusebius33
to ask it in these words : " Now is the time for me
to enjoy the seal of immortality; now is the time
for me to obtain the seal of salvation." Whence it
was also called, the seal of the Spirit, because every
worthy receiver was supposed, together with the
outward element, to receive the earnest of the Spirit
in baptism : according to that of Chrysostom, As a
mark is set upon34 soldiers, so the Spirit is put upon
true believers ; and as the Jews had circumcision
for their character, so we have the earnest of the
Spirit. And this distinction between the internal
and external seal of baptism was necessary to be
made, because many men received the external seal
of baptism, or the outward form of it, who by their
own default could not receive the internal seal of
the Spirit. Thus the author of the Apostolical
Constitutions35 observes, that even Simon Magus
himself received the seal of the Lord, meaning the
outward form of baptism ; but neither he nor any
other author ever said, that he received the internal
seal or grace of the Holy Spirit. In hke manner
Optatus tells the Donatists,35 that both they and the
catholics were sealed with one and the same seal,
which he explains to be the outward form of bap
tism, in which they both agreed and were both
alike baptized. But both Optatus, and St. Austin,
and all other ancient writers are agreed, that here
tical and schismatical baptism, such as was that of
the Donatists, could not confer the internal seal, or
sanctifying graces ofthe Holy Spirit, because these
were only conferred by the ministry of the holy
catholic church, of which I have given a more ample
account in another place.37 So that in this respect
it was always thought necessary to distinguish be
tween the internal and external seal of baptism, be
cause though they are commonly joined together, as
in all true believers, yet they are sometimes separ
ated, as in such hypocritical or unworthy receivers,
as Simon Magus, and others of the like complexion.
St. Austin commonly uses the names,
Sect. 7. T J '
And character character reams, and character Do-
JJomimcus, the
or'the S,rIh"aoler minicusi the royal mark or character,
and the character of the Lord. By

33 Euseb. de Vita Constant, lib. 4. c. 62. "Qpa Kal hpas
diroXavtrai xf/s dSeavaToiroiH trtppayiSos' tiipa tS atoT-i]piu
ereppayiapaTOS pETaaxeXvi
34 Chrysost. Horn. 3. in 2 Cor. in fine. KaSdirEp TpaTtti-
Taes atppayts, btio Kal toXs Tris-tus to irvEvpa iiriTl^E-
Tai, &c.
35 Constit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 14. 'Eiu.tov b pdyos 1-1)1/ iv Ku-
pttp atppayiSa EXa(Be. Vid. Aug. deBapt. lib. 6. c. 12.
36 Optat. lib. 3. p. 72. Pares credimus, et uno sigillo sig-
nati sumus : nee aliter baptizati quam vos.
37 Scholast. Hist, of Lay Baptism, part I. chap 1
n. 21. •
38 Ibid, part II. chap. 6.

which he does not mean any internal quality, or
spiritual pow.er, distinct from baptism, imprinted on
the soul, as the modern school-men now love to
word it; but only the external form of baptism,
which is common to all receivers both good and
bad, who are duly baptized in the name of the Holy
Trinity ; they are so far signed by the mark or
character of the Lord, as thereby to be distinguished
from unbaptized Jews and Gentiles, who never
made any formal profession of Christianity, nor
ever received so much as the external character or
indication of it. And this character is allowed by
St. Austin to be so far indelible also, as that an
apostatizing Christian, though he turn Jew or pa
gan in profession, can never need a second baptism,
but only repentance and absolution, to reinstate him
in all the privileges of the Christian church. Of
which, because I have spoken largely in a former
Book, I need say no more in this place.38
Another sort of names given to bap-
tism, were taken from the conditions saS'i,;,*" JJg
required of all those that received it, and"|Pe°l™»"
which were, the profession of a, true faith and a
sincere repentance. Upon which account baptism
is sometimes called the sacrament of faith, and the
sacrament of repentance. St. Austin uses this
name to explain how39 children may be said to
have faith, though they are not capable of making
any formal profession by themselves : As the sa
crament of the body of Christ is in some sort the
body of Christ, and the sacrament of the blood of
Christ is the blood of Christ, so the sacrament of
faith is faith. And upon this account, when the
answer is made, that an infant believes, who has
not yet the habit of faith, the meaning is, that he
has faith because of the sacrament of faith, and
that he turns to God because of the sacrament of
conversion. Fulgentius uses the same terms in
speaking ofthe necessity of baptism: Firmly believe,
and doubt not,40 that excepting such as are baptized
in their own blood for the name of Christ, no man
shall have eternal life, who is not here first turned
from his sins by repentance and faith, and set at
liberty by the sacrament of faith and repentance,
that is, by baptism. Whence we may observe, what
the ancients mean, when they speak of penance

89 Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifae. Sicut secundum quendam
modum sacramentum corporis Christi corpus Christi est, et
sacramentum sanguinis Christi sanguis Christi est, ita sa
cramentum fidei fides est. — Ac per hoc cum respondetur
parvulus credere, qui nondum fidei habet affectum, respon
detur fidem habere propter fidei sacramentum, et convertere
se ad Deum propter conversionis sacramentum, &c.
i3 Fulgent, de Fide ad Peti\-im, cap. 30. Firmissime tene
et nullatenus dubites, exceptis illis, qui pro nomine Christi
suo sanguine baptizantur, nullum hominem accepturum vi
tam aeternam, qui non hie a malis suis fuerit per pceniten-
tiam fidemque conversus, et per sacramentum fidei et poem-
tentiae, id est, per baptismum, liberatus, &c.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

477

and absolution, or remission of sins, as a sacrament:
for they themselves explain their own meaning to
be baptism, which is a sacrament requiring repent
ance as a condition, and granting absolution as an
effect and privilege to all worthy receivers.
Lastly, From the ceremonies used
TheSnot»tion of in the act of administration it took the
the names, baptism, .. - , . ^ .
unction, (aver, &c. peculiar names of baptism, miction,
That they do not r .
unirertaiiy denote and layer ol regeneration, which pro-
immereion. - ° x
perly denote either an immersion in
water, or such a washing or sprinkling, as was used
among the Jews in some cases, and among Christians
when they had occasion to baptize sick persons upon
a death-bed. For then baptism was administered by
sprinkling only, and not by dipping or immersion,
as we shall see when we come to speak more parti
cularly of clinic baptism. So that it must be noted,
that baptism in the ancient style of the church, does j
not absolutely and necessarily import dipping or im- 1
mersion, though that was the more usual ceremony
practised heretofore as well upon infants as adult
persons, but an exception was made for the time of
sickness, and such other cases of necessity, as could
not admit of a total immersion. In which cases,
the substance of baptism was still supposed to be
preserved, though some minuter circumstances were
less regarded.
sect. 10 Besides these names, which were
n.m..!°™ntobaPa: taken from things that more immedi
ately related to the administration of
baptism, there were some others alluding to circum
cision, and others respecting the great Author and
Institutor of it, our Saviour Christ, and others taken
from the more remote and distant effects of it,
which, because we shall have no further occasion to
speak of them, it will not be improper just to men
tion in this place. Because baptism succeeds in the
room of circumcision, and is the seal of the Chris
tian covenant, as that was the seal of the covenant
made with Abraham, therefore it is, by way of ana
logy, sometimes styled the great circumcision. As
when Epiphanius, comparing them both together,
says, The carnal circumcision41 served for a time,
till the great circumcision came, that is, baptism ;
which circumcises us from our sins, and seals us in
the name of God. So in regard that baptism had
Christ for its author, and not man, it was anciently
known by the name of SSipov, and xanirr/ja Kvpivv, the
gift of the Lord. As in the ancient Acts of Paul
and Thecla; when Thecla desired the seal of the
Lord, Paul bids her wait with patience, and she
should receive Seopidv tov Xpiorov, the gift of Christ,

which, as the learned editor observes,42 is but an
other way of denoting baptism. Sometimes it was
simply called SOipov, without any other addition, by
way of eminence, because it was both a gratuitous
and a singular gift of Christ. We call it the gift,
says Gregory Nazianzen,48 because it is given to
those who offer nothing for it. And St. Basil, dkov
iiriTpkxttv rip Stiptp, We ought to run to the gift,14
meaning baptism. And Casaubon has also further
observed,45 that because the Spirit was likewise given
in baptism, therefore the Holy Ghost had sometimes
the name of Munus, The gift. And the eucharist
also, or the sacramental oblation of the- body and
blood of Christ, both before and after consecration,
commonly went by this name, Sdpa and piaTuca SStpa,
of which there are various instances collected out
of the ancient rituals by that learned writer, which
are not proper to be inserted in this place. Baptism
had also the name of htpodwv, or viaticum, as well as
the" eucharist, which denotes properly the prepara
tion of all things necessary for a journey : in which
respect both the sacraments were called viatica, be
cause they were equally esteemed men's necessary
provision, and proper armour, both to sustain and
conduct them safe on their way in their passage
through this world to eternal life. St. Basil, ex
horting men of all ages and conditions to receive
baptism, makes his address to them in these words :4S
Art thou a young man ? Then secure thy youth by
the bridle of baptism. Art thou past the flower of
thy age ? Then beware thou lose not thy viaticum,
thy phylactery, which should keep and preserve
thee in thy way to eternal hfe. In allusion to which
name, Gregory Nazianzen,47 speaking of the minis
ter's act in baptizing, terms it itpoSidZtiv, giving to
men their viaticum, or provision for their journey to
another world. In reference to the making men
complete members of Christ's body, the church, it
had the name of 7-t-XttuxTtc. and rcXer/}, the consecra
tion and consummation; because it gave men the
perfection of Christians, and a right to partake of
the t-6 rkXttov, which was the eucharist, or Lord's
supper. It had the name of pnnic, and pvoTaytoyia,
the initiation, because it was the admittance of men
to all the sacred rites and mysteries of the Chris
tian religion. And as the eucharist, from its repre
senting the death of Christ by the outward elements
of bread and wine, was called the sacred symbols,
so baptism sometimes had the same name, as we
find in Isidore of Pelusium, and the author of the
Dispute with Arius in the Council of Nice, under
the name of Athanasius. Though the priest48 be an

41 Epiphan. Hasr. 8. al. 28. Cerinth. n. 4. Vid. Just.
Mart. Dial. c. Tryph. p. 261.
"Grabe, Spicileg. Patrum, t. 1. p. 106.
48 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 638.
44 Basil. Homil. 1.3. de Bapt. p. 411.
"Casaubon, Exercitat. 16. in Baron, n. 51.

4J Basil. Homil. 13. de Bapt. p. 413. Mrj fypttoBfis Ta
iepdSta, pi) diroXia-ns to cjjvXaKTvptov.
" Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 644.
18 Isidor. lib. 2. Ep. 37. 'O teXovpevos oiiSiv irapapXdir-
TETtU s'lS Tfl tytOTI}pitoSr) avpfidXa, El O UpEVS pi] EV /3lOUS
Eit), dXX avTos piv iravTtos.

478

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

ill liver, says Isidore, the person initiated receives
no harm by the symbols of salvation, but only the
priest himself. And the other49 thus argues for the
Divinity of the Holy Ghost : If the Holy Spirit be
not of the substance of the Father and the Son,
why then did the Son of God join him together
with them in the symbol of sanctification, when he
said to his disciples, " Go teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost ? " In both which places, it
is plain, the symbols of sanctification and salvation
can mean no other than baptism. And hence it
appears, that the same honourable titles were given
to the waters of baptism, as to the elements of bread
andwine in the Lord's supper; and whatever change
was supposed to be wrought in the one by the in
vocation of the Holy Spirit, was equally ascribed to
the other also ; and as noble effects derived from
the font as the Lord's table, whilst the death of
Christ was equally represented, and the benefits of
it alike communicated to all worthy receivers in
baptism and the Lord's supper. For which reason
I have been a little the more curious in examining
and explaining the several titles of honour which
the ancients gave to baptism, that under these emi
nent characters we might see what apprehensions
and ideas the church of Christ always had of this
venerable mystery, which some now by way of con
tempt call water-baptism, as if the Spirit had no
concern in it ; whose doctrines may easily be per
ceived not to proceed from the general sense of the
ancient catholic church, but from particular sects
and heresies broken off from it, of which it may not
be amiss to give a short account in the following
chapter.

CHAPTER II.
OF THE MATTER OP BAPTISM, WITH AN ACCOUNT
OP SUCH HERETICS AS REJECTED OR CORRUPTED
BAPTISM BY WATER.
Sect , Though the church always maintain-
jec1tedtbvmthe°!ere: ed an honourable opinion of baptism,
drutie^nnd Mw°o- as a Divine and heavenly institution,
rTa'S, and QuSltit yet there wanted not sects and here
sies, who in the earliest ages spake
very diminutively and contemptibly of it ; and either
in whole or in part upon various reasons rejected or

corrupted it. The Ascodrutae, who were a sort of
Gnostics, placed all rehgion in knowledge, and under
pretence of spiritual worship, would admit of no
external or corporeal symbols whatsoever. They
asserted, as Theodoret ' describes them, that Divine
mysteries, being the images of invisible things, were
not to be performed by visible things ; nor incor
poreal things by sensible and corporeal things,
Therefore they never baptized any that were of
their sect, nor celebrated any part of the mystery of
baptism among them. For they said, the know
ledge of all things was their redemption. Irencuus 2
and Epiphanius observe the same thing to be prac
tised, upon the same principle of spiritual redemp
tion by knowledge alone, among some of those who
were called Marcosian heretics, whilst others of
them, who retained a sort of baptism, invented
strange forms of their own to corrupt it, of which I
shall give an account in the following chapter, sect.
8. Irenseus 3 gives a like account of the Valentinians,
some of which wholly rejected baptism, and others
corrupted it with strange forms of their own invent
ing, as the Marcosians did, who seem to have been
branches of the same heresy under different leaders.
Tertullian4 brings a like charge against one Quin-
tilla, a woman preacher at Carthage a little before
his time, who set up to decry water-baptism as use
less, pleading, that faith alone was sufficient to save
men, as it did Abraham, who pleased God without
any other sacrament but the sacrament of faith.
Against this heresy Tertullian wrote his book of
Baptism, to establish the necessity of it frcm our Sa
viour's institution, and to answer the little sophisms
whereby the libertines of this new sect pretended to
destroy it.
The Archontici rejected baptism
for another reason, as Epiphanius5 und't,. u,e Ar-
* x cnontici.
and Theodoret 6 inform us. They had
entertained a very monstrous and blasphemous
opinion, that the world was not created by the su
preme God of all things, but by certain powers,
whom they called dpxovn g, rulers, whence they them
selves had the denomination of Archontici; these
rulers, seven or eight in number, they imagined to
be in so many several orbs of the heavens one above
another, with orders of angels and ministries under
them : and to the chief of these they, gave the name
of Sabaoth. Now, they also pretended that baptism
was only administered in the name of Sabaoth, and
not in the name of the supreme God, and therefore
they rejected both it and the eucharist as foreign
institutions, given by Sabaoth, the God of the Jews

49 Athanas. Disp. contra Arium in Cone. Nic. t. 1. p. 141.
T'lVOS EVEKEV OVVI]ptBpi)0-£V avTO O 'XlOS TOV QEOV iv TOO
avpfioXtp tov dytatrpov, Sec.
1 Theodor. Haeret. Fabul. lib. 1. c. 10.
2 Iren. lib. 1. u. 18. 3 Iren. lib. 3. c. 2.
1 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 1. Nuper conversata istic qusedam

de Caiana haeresi vipera venenatissima, doctrina sua ple-
rosque rapuit, imprimis baptismum destruens, &c. It. cap.
13. Adeo dicunt, Baptismus non est necessarius, quibus fides
satis est, &c.
5 Epiphan. Hasr. 40. de Archonticis, n. 2.
6 Theodor. Haer. Fab. lib. 1. c. 11.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

479

Sect 3.
And by Ihe Se-
leucians and Her
mans.

and the giver of the law, whom they blasphemously
distinguished from the supreme God.
The Seleucians and Hermians re
fused the use of baptism by water, as
St. Austin7 describes them. And the
ground of their refusal was a pretence, that bap
tism by water was n,ot the baptism instituted by
Christ, because St. John Baptist, comparing his own
baptism with the baptism of Christ, says, " I bap
tize you with water, but he that cometh after me, j
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with j
fire,"3 they thought the souls of men consisted of
fire and spirit, and therefore a baptism of fire was
more suitable to their nature. But what kind of
baptism that was, none of the ancients have told us;
unless perhaps we may conjecture from what Cle
mens Alexandrinus" tells us out. of Heracleon, of
some, who, when they had baptized men in water,
also made a mark upon their ears with fire;
so joining water-baptism and, as they imagined,
baptism by fire, together. Though this was far
enough from the fiery baptism St. John speaks of,
which some of the ancients understand of the or
dinary operations of the Spirit, which consume
our sins ; and others, of that extraordinary effusion
of the Spirit in the form of fiery tongues upon the
apostles at the day of Pentecost ; and others, of
the fire of the last judgment. A particular account
of which interpretations, the reader that is curious
may find in Suicerus upon this subject.10 I only
note further out of the anonymous writer about
heretical baptism, published by Rigaltius and Bi
shop Fell at the end of St. Cyprian, that there
were a sort of heretics, who pretended, that baptism
by water alone was of itself imperfect, because St.
John had said, we were to be baptized with the
Holy Ghost and with fire. Therefore they boast
ed,11 that theirs was the only complete and perfect
baptism, and all others curtailed and given only by
halves, because when they went down into the
water to baptize, either by some curious art in phi
losophy, like that of Anaxilaus, or by some magical
art, .they made fire to appear upon the surface of
the water, and this they called baptism by fire.

' Aug. de Haeres. c. 59. Seleuciani et Hermiani baptis
mum in aqua non accipiunt.
3Philastr. de Haeres. u. 8. Seleucus et Hermius haere-
tici animas hominum de igne et Spiritu esse existimantes,
isto baptismo non utuntur, propter verbum hoc quod dixit
Johannes Baptista: Ipse vos baptizabit in Spiritu et
igne. " Clem. Alex. Electa ex Scriptura, ap. Combefis Aucta-
™m, t 1. p. 202._ "Evioi Si, Sis tpijatv 'BpaKXitov, irvpl tu
oiTtt tZv treppayilopivtov KaTEerr)pr)vavTo. Irenaeus, lib. 1.
c 24, has something like this, of the Carpocratians.
10 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. t. 1. p. 630.
Anonym, de Baptismo Haereticorum, ad calcem Cypri
ani, p. 30. Tcntant nonnulli iterum tractare se solos in
tegrum atque perfectum, non sicuti nos, mutilatum ct
decurtat-im baptisma tradere. Quod taliter dicantur adsig-

Which they confirmed from an apocryphal writ
ing of their own inventing, called, The Preaching of
Peter or Paul, wherein it was said, that when
Christ was baptized, fire so appeared upon the
water. The censure which this author passes upon
this kind of baptism, is, that it is adulterate, per
nicious, and wholly evacuating the true baptism of
Christ. Another sect which rejected water- „ .
J Sect. 4.
baptism, were the Manichees, who, ChMd^Viini™-
among many other prodigious errors, a""-
maintained, that baptizing in water was of no effi
cacy to salvation, and therefore they despised it,
and never baptized12 any that entered into their
society, as St. Austin and the author of the Pree-
destinatus,13 published by Sirmondus, inform us. But
whether they admitted any other kind of baptism,
or upon what ground they rejected this, we are not
told : only we may probably conjecture, that it was
upon that general vile principle of theirs, that ma
terial things were the work of an evil god, and
therefore to be abhorred as polluted and profane.
One branch of this heresy were afterward called
Paulicians, from one Paulus and Johannes, the first
founders of it. Euthymius, out of Photius, give's a
large account of them, where he tells us,11 that
though they really rejected and despised baptism,
yet they pretended to receive it : but that was only
with a deceitful equivocation ; for they maintained
that the word of the Gospel was baptism, because
our Lord said, " I am the living water." The learn
ed Vossius is of opinion,15 that those words, Ego
sum aqua viva, " 1 am the living water," was the
form which these Paulicians used in baptism in
stead of the form of the church: but he plainly
mistakes Euthymius, who does not say, that they
used this as a form of words in their baptism ; for
they had no baptism at all, nor consequently any
form of words for baptizing ; but their opinion was,
that believing in Christ, or the word or the truth
of the Gospel, was all the baptism that was required
of men, and that because Christ had said, " I am
the living water.'' Yet sometimes, as Euthymius
relates in the same place,10 they would bring their

nare, ut quam mox in aquam descenderunt, statim super
aquam ignis appareat, &c.
12 Aug. de Haeres. cap. 46. Baptismum in aqua nihil
cuiquam perhibent salutis adfrrre : Nee quenquam eorum
quos decipiunt, baptizandum putant.
13 Pnedestinatorum Haeresis, c. 46.
14 Euthym. Panoplia. Par. 2. Titul. 21. p. 48. Quin
etiam cum baptismum aspernentur, iUud tamen se fingunt
suscipere: Nam Evangelii verba baptismum existimant,
quoniam Dominus, Ego sum, inquit, aqua viva.
15 Voss. de Baptismo, Disp. 1. Thes. 2. p. 28.
'" Euthym. ibid. Liberos etiam suos ab ecclesiae presby
teris salutari baptismo volunt aliquando lustrari; existi
mant enim crucem et baptismum corpori prodesse. Horum
tamen vim -ad animae purgationem pervenire non putant,
nee ullam aliam afferre utilitatem.

480

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

children to the presbyters of the church to be
baptized after the cathohc way, because they had
an opinion that both baptism and the cross were
of some advantage to the body for the cure of
diseases, but of no other efficacy, benefit, or virtue
to purge the soul. And such an opinion possessed
the minds of many others, who had no further re
gard for baptism, but only as it was of use to free
the body of some distemper or uncleanness. St.
Austin '7 puts the question once or twice concerning
some such persons, who desired to be baptized with
no other view but this. And Matthew Blastares ls
mentions a famous case of the Agarenes, who com
pelled the Christian clergy that were under their
dominion, to baptize their children before they
would circumcise them, because they conceived this
would contribute toward the prevention of those
distempers and noisomenesses, which are occasion
ed by circumcision. Upon this case a question was
made in the council of Constantinople under Lucas
Chrysoberges, whether such persons, when they
came over to the Christian faith, were to be rebap
tized, or only anointed with chrism ? And it was
resolved, that they ought without controversy to
be rebaptized, since the baptism with which they
were washed, was not received with any pious in
tent, but only as an amulet or a charm. These in
stances make the account which Euthymius gives
of the Paulicians seem veiy probable, that though
they had no regard for baptism as a Christian sa
crament, yet they might sometimes make use of it,
as the Saracens did, as an enchantment, or a sort of
magical spell ; which appears to be the only use they
ever made of it, and that not in their own assem
blies, (where they had no sacraments at all, neither
baptism nor the eucharist,) but fraudulently receiv
ing it in the church at the hands of the Christian ca
thohc priests. The reader may observe by the way,
that these Paulicians were not the followers of
Paulus Samosatensis, bishop of Antioch, who are
commonly called Paulianists and Samosatenians
[though Balsamon confounds them together] ; but
they had their denomination from another Paulus
Samosatensis and one Johannes, who revived and
enlarged the heresy of the Manichees, as appears
plainly from Euthymius. And Justellus '• and Vos
sius20 have observed the same out of Cedrenus,
Theophanes, Matthew Blastares, Nicephorus, and
other modern Greeks, with which it would be need
less in this place to trouble the reader.

17 Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifacium.
• 1S Blastar. Syntagm. Can. Litera B. cap. 3. ap. Bevereg.
Pandect, t. 2. p. 42. Vid. Balsamon in Photii Nomocanon,
Tit. 13. de Laicis, cap. 2. et Baron, an. 1148. p 358 t 12'
It. an. 1145. p. 314.
19 Justel. Not. in can. 19. Codicis Eccl. Universae.
20 Voss. de Baptismo, Disp. 20. p. 241.
21 Cone. Ephes. Act. 7. t. 3. p. 809.
22 Theod. Epitom. Divin. Decret. sive de Fabul. Haeret.

Some add to the forementioned
sects, who rejected baptism, the he- vnlil^;oa lh,
resy of the Messalians, or Euchites, chK'K 0? b«£
who were so called from the Greek
word ibx'h prayer, and Messalians, from the Syriac
word Metsdlah, which is much of the same signifi
cation, because they resolved all rehgion into prayer.
But it does not appear that they wholly rejected the
sacrament of baptism : for then the church would
have ordered them upon their return to have been
baptized, as Jews or pagans ; which she never did,
but only obhged them to anathematize their errors
in order to be admitted to communion, as may he
collected from the decree of the general council of
Ephesus,21 made with relation to such of the clergy
or laity as returned from them. But their error
was in denying the principal part of. the spiritual
efficacy of baptism : they said, indeed, it granted re
mission of sins that were past, but added no strength
or ability from the Spirit to withstand sin for the
future. This we learn from Theodoret, who com
paring the doctrine of the catholic church and that
of the Messalians upon this point together, delivers
himself22 to this purpose : Baptism, says he, is not
like a razor only, as the Messalian enthusiasts call
it, which takes away sins that are past ; though it
has this effect among many others : for if this were
the only work of baptism, for what reason should
we baptize infants, who have never yet tasted of
sin ? For the sacrament does not only promise
this effect, but greater and more perfect things than
that. It is the earnest of future good, the type of
the resurrection to come hereafter, the communica
tion of our Lord's passion, the participation of our
Lord's resurrection, the garment of salvation, the
clothing of joy, and the robe of light, or rather, light
itself. So that we must allow Theodoret to be his
own interpreter, when he seems to give a more
harsh account of these Messalians in another place,
describing them as men who taught, that no man
ner23 of advantage accrued from Divine baptism
to those who received it, but that it was only fervent
prayer that expelled the indwelling devil out of
men's minds. For this is to be understood with
the forementioned exception, that they aUowed
baptism so far to be useful, as to wash away all
former sins, but not to grant any further perfection.
And so Harmenopulus 24 represents their doctrine,
as teaching, that neither baptism nor participation
of the eucharist could give a man the perfection of

lib. 5. cap. 18.
23 Theod. Haeret. Fab. lib. 4. cap. 10. Mi)Sepiaii U to5
Belov 'SairTitrpaTos cotpiXEtav toXs d]*iovplvots ytvEtrvat'
pdvr)v Si Tr)v tjirovSaiav evxvv tov Saipova tov evoikov
i^EXavvEiv. 24 Harmenop. de Sectis, c. 18. Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t. 1.
p. 536. To fidirTicrpa pi) teXeiovv tov dvBptotrov, pi)0E Tt)V
pETdXi]\l/iv, dXXi pdvt]v Ti)v leap' avToXs eiixfiv.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

4S1

a Christian, but only such prayer as they pretend
ed to. In hke manner Euthymius23 describes them,
as maintaining, that baptism did not eradicate sin.
They did not deny that it purged away former sins,
but they would not allow any efficacy of the Spirit
to be joined with it to resist or overcome sin for the
future. Against which doctrine Euthymius thus
argues : Our Lord Jesus Christ said, " Except a
man be bom of water and the Spirit, he cannot
enter into the kingdom of God." Now, the Holy
Ghost is a Divine fire; for he descended in the
form of fiery tongues upon the disciples, and the
forerunner of Christ spake of this to the multitude,
when he testified of the excellency of Christ, " He
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with
fire." As therefore material fire, when it catches a
wood, burns all things upon, the surface of the
earth, dries up the roots, and purges the place from
filth ; so the Holy Spirit does, and much more. For
it is a fire consuming the iniquity of those who are
baptized. And it not only purges and obliterates
the spots, and scars, and filth of the soul, but also
illuminates and endows it with many gifts, as the
apostles, and especially St. Paul, teach us, where
they speak of the distribution of the graces of the
Holy Spirit, which are conferred on those who are
baptized. From this account of the Messalians it
appears, that they were neither Anabaptists nor
Quakers; they neither rejected the baptism of adult
persons nor infants : for the true state of the con
troversy between them and the church, was not
about the use of the outward element of water in
baptism, but about the internal and spiritual effects
of it, which the Messalians confined to remission of
sins, but the church extended to many other noble
benefits, which were the gifts and graces of the
Holy Spirit. Upon which account the church never
rebaptized the Messalians, that we read of, as she
did the Manichees, and such other heretics, who
rejected the use of water, which was the outward
element which Christ had appointed. If this was
either neglected, or any other element used instead
of it, the baptism was esteemed not only irregular,
but null, as wanting one necessary and essential
part, which could not be supplied but by a new
baptism. And therefore when a certain Jew had
been baptized in sand, for want of water, in the
wilderness, Dionysius, bishop of Ascalon, ordered
him to be rebaptized, as Johannes Moschus26 tells
the story. And this was done, not because he was

23 Euthym. Panopl. Par. II. Tit. 22. p. 55. Negant divi-
num baptismum posse radices evellere peccatorum, &c.
23 Moschus, Pratum Spirituale, cap. 176.
27 Whitgift's Defence, Tract. IX. p. 519.
28 Centur. Magdeburg. Cent. II. cap. 6. p. 82.
Antonius Augustinus cites it out of a Spanish Collection
of Canons, and Baluzius from one in France, under the
name of Siricius. Presbyter qui in vino baptizat proxima
necessitate, ut aeger non periclitetur, pro tali re nulla ei culpa
2 I

baptized by a layman in extreme necessity, but, as
Archbishop Whitgift,27 after the Centuriators,23 has
observed, because the baptism wanted water. Such
was the church's opinion of the necessity of water-
baptism, that, where it might be had, she never-
thought fit to dispense with the neglect or contempt
of it ; and therefore she urged the necessity of it
against those ancient heretics who despised it, even
whilst she judged favourably of such catechumens
as died without baptism, not through contempt, but
unavoidable necessity: of which I have given a
particular account in the last Book, chap. 2. sect.
20, &c.
Indeed there is one exception against this in some
collections of the canon law. For there we have
a decree under the name of Pope Siricius,29 which
says, That if an infant is baptized in wine instead
of water, in case of necessity, it is no crime, and
the baptism shall stand good. But, as Antonius
Augustinus and Baluzius have observed, this was
no decree of Siricius, but of Stephen IL, about the
middle of the eighth century. So that it cannot
be pleaded as a competent authority to show what
was the ancient practice of the church. Antonius
Augustinus is very positive, that the primitive
church had never any such custom. And it seems
pretty evident from that saying of St. Ambrose,30
That if we take away water, the sacrament of bap- j
tism cannot stand. But among the moderns, Beza,sl '
and some of the schoolmen, Tolet and Valentia,
determine otherwise : against whose resolution I am
not concerned to dispute, but only to declare what
I take to have been the more current and received
opinion of the primitive writers of the church.

CHAPTER III.

OF THE ANCIENT FORM OF BAPTISM, AND OF SUCH
HERETICS AS ALTERED OR CORRUPTED IT.
Next to the matter of baptism, it will Sect ,
be proper to consider the form of words n^™^""^
..... ., -i • • .  nameofthe Father,
in which it was anciently administer- son, and Hoiy
ed. And this was generally such a
form of words as made express mention of every
person of the blessed Trinity, according as our Sa
viour did at the first institution, when he command-

adscribatur. Si vero aqua aderat, et necessitas talis non
urgebat, hie communione privetur. Infans vero ille, si in
Sancta Trinitate baptizatus est, in eo baptismo permaneat.
Vid. Anton. August, de Emendat. Gratiani, p. 200. et Baluz.
Not. in Anton, p. 431.
30 Ambros. de iis qui initiantur, cap. 4. Nee iterum sine
aqua regenerationis mysterium est.
31 Beza, Ep. 2. ad Tillium.

432

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

ed his disciples to baptize in the name ofthe Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost. Tnis the ancient author
of the Recognitions1 means, when he says, Men
were baptized under the appellation of the triple
mystery. And again,2 By invocating the name of
the blessed Trinity. Tertullian3 refers this to the
institution of Christ: The law of baptizing was
imposed, and the form prescribed, " Go, teach all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." In another
place4 he says, Christ appointed baptism to be ad
ministered not in the name of one, but three,
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Therefore we are
dipped not once, but thrice, unto every person at
the mention of each name. Cyprian derives this
practice5 hkewise from the institution, saying, The
Lord, after his resurrection, taught his disciples
after what manner they should baptize, when he
said, " Go, teach all nations," &c. ; where he de
livered the doctrine of the Trinity, unto which
mystery or sacrament the nations were to be bap
tized. And he argues" further, against such heretics
as baptized only in the name of Jesus Christ, from
the same principle, that Christ commanded the na
tions to be baptized, not into one person, but a com
plete and united Trinity. Hence Optatus7 calls
baptism, the laver which Christ commanded to be
celebrated in the name of the Trinity, and that
holy water which flowed from the fountain of
those three names. And to mention no more authori
ties, (which are innumerable,) St. Austin3 observes,
that this was not only the general practice of the
catholic church, but of most heresies also. For
one might more easily find heretics that did not
baptize at all, than such as retained baptism with
out using those evangelical words, of which the

creed consists, and without which baptism cannot
be consecrated.
And hence it appears, that St. Aus
tin and these other writers thought This ib™ or word.
, . . . r j generally thought
this precise form of words necessary neceeHrytobeuied
to be used in the administration of
baptism, by virtue of the original appointment and
institution. And this may be further evidenced to
have been the general sense of the ancients, some
one or two only excepted. The Apostohcal Canons'
order every bishop and presbyter, that shall presume
to baptize any other way than according to the com-
; mand of the Lord, in the name of the Father, Son,
j and Holy Ghost, to be deposed. And Athanasius"1
(speaks of such baptism as null, that is any otherwise
dehvered : He that takes away any one person from
the Trinity, and is haptized only in the name of
the Father, or only in the name of the Son, or only
in the Father and the Son, without the Spirit,
receives nothing, but remains void and uninitiated ;
for in the Trinity alone initiation is given. He
says in another place,11 that baptism, which is as it
were the compendium of our whole faith, is not
given in the name of the Word, but of Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost. Didymus of Alexandria12 treads
in the steps of Athanasius : I cannot suppose any
one, says he, so mad and void of understanding,
as to think that to be perfect baptism, which is
given in the name of the Father and Son, with
out the assumption of the Holy Spirit; or in the
name of the Father and Holy Ghost, omitting the
name of the Son ; or in the name of the Son and
Holy Ghost, without first mentioning the name of
the Father. For though any man should be of
such a stony heart, as I may say, or so much beside
himself, as to leave out one of the appointed names

1 Clem. Rom. Recognit. lib. 6. cap. 9. Baptizantur sub
appellatione triplicis sacramenti.
2 Id. lib. 3. cap. 67. Baptizabitur unusquisque vestrum
in aquis perennibus, nomine Trinae Beatitudinis invocato
super se.
3 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 13. Lex tingendi imposita est,
et forma praescripta, Ite, inquit, docete nationes, tingentes
eas in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti.
4 Id. cont. Praxeam. cap. 26. Novissime mandans, ut tin-
gerent in Patrem et Filium et Spiritum Sanctum. Nam
nee semel, sed ter, ad singula nomina in singulas personas
tingimur. 3 Cyprian. Ep. 73. ad Jubaian. p. 200. Dominus post
resurrectionem discipulos suos mittens, quemadmodum bap-
tizare deberent, instituit et docuit, dicens — Ite et docete
gentes omnes, baptizantes eas in nomine Patris et Filii et
Spiritus Sancti. Insinuat Trinitatem, cujus Sacramento
baptizarentur. 6 Ibid. p. 206. Quomodo quidarn dicunt, foris extra eccle
siam, imo et contra ecclesiam, modo in nomine Jesu Christi
ubicunque et qnomodocunque Gentilem baptizatum, remis
sionem peccatorum consequi posse; quando ipse Christus
gentes baptizari jubeat in plena et adunata Trinitate ?
7 Optat. lib. 5. p. 85. Lavacrum quod de Trinitate cele-
brandum esse mandaverat  aqua sancta quae de trium

nominum fontibus inundat.
8 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 6. c. 25. Quis nesciat, non esse bap
tismum Christi, si verba evangelica quibus symbolum con
stat, illic defuerint ? sed facilius inveniuntur haeretici, qui
omnino non baptizent, quam qui non illis verbis baptizent.
8 Canon. Apost. c. 49.
10 Athan. Epist. ad Serapion. t. 1. p. 204. '0 vqiaipov-
pEVOS Tt t-7/s TptdSos, Kal iv pdvtp Tip tov XlaTpos ovopaTt
fiairTtfopEvos, f) iv pdvtp Tip ovopaTt "Xiov, f) XWP" TOv
IIiiEuiiaxos iv TJaTpl Kal 'Tito, o'vSiv XapfidvEt, iXXi Kivds
Kal aVsXrjs SlapivEi, Sec.
11 Id. Orat. 5. cont. Arian. p. 535. Ovk els Aoyov, d\\'
eis XlaTEpa Kal "Ytov Kal" Ay tov TLvEvpa SiSorai.
12 Didymus de Spir. Sancto, lib. 2. Bibl. Patr. t. 9. p. 37.
Non arbitror quenquam tain vecordem atque insanum fu-
turum, ut perfectum baptisma putet, quod datur in nomine
Patris et Filii, sine assumptione Spiritus Sancti : aut rursus
in nomine Patris et Spiritus Sancti, Filii vocabulo praeter-
misso: aut certe in nomine Filii et Spiritus Sancti, non
praeposito vocabulo Patris. Licet enim quis posset esse
saxei, ut ita dicam, cordis, et penitus mentis alienaa, qui ita
baptizare conetur, ut unum de praeceptis nominibus pratei-
mittat, videlicet contrarius legislator Christo; tamen sine
perfeetione baptizabit; imo penitus a peccatis liberate non
potetit, quos a se baptizatos existimaverit.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

483

in baptism, setting up himself a lawgiver in opposi
tion to Christ, his baptism will be imperfect, and
altogether insufficient to grant remission of sins to
those whom he esteems baptized by him. Idacius
Clarus13 asserts the same, arguing thus against
Vcvrimundus the Arian, for the Divinity of the
Holy Ghost: If the Holy Ghost be not equal to
the Father and Son in the substance of the Deity,
why then is that sacrament of baptism imperfect,
which is given without him ? St. Basil14 has a,
whole chapter to the same purpose. The very title
of it is against those, who asserted that it was suffi
cient to give baptism only in the name of the Lord.
And whereas they urged, that in several passages of
Scripture baptism was said to be given only in the
name of Christ; he answers, that, in all those places,
though the name of Christ was only mentioned, yet
the whole Trinity was understood. Which he con
firms from the like expressions concerning the Holy
Ghost,. 1 Cor. xii. 13, "By one Spirit we are all
baptized into one body;" and Acts i. 5, "Ye shall
be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days
hence ;" where the apostles seem only to make
mention of the Holy Ghost in baptism. But, says
he, no one may from hence conclude, that that bap
tism is perfect, wherein the Holy Ghost alone is
named. For the tradition ought to remain inviola
ble, which was given by the quickening grace. He
means the form of baptizing, given by the command
of Christ, Matt, xxviii. Upon which he concludes,
that as we beheve in the Father, and in the Son,
and in the Holy Ghost, so we are baptized in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost. Therefore both Vossius15 and Peta
vius ls are greatly mistaken to allege St. Basil as one \
of those who asserted, that baptism in the name of
Christ alone was allowable, when he so plainly and
directly writes against it. Many other testimonies
might here be inserted out of Theodoret,17 Gregory

Nazianzen ls and Nyssen,19 Theophylact,20 and others,
but I shall only add further the decree of Pope Vigi
lius, which shows both the practice of the church,
and the severity of her censures against any one that
should pretend to transgress this settled rule of bap
tizing. If any bishop or presbyter, says he, baptize
not according21 to the command of the Lord, "in
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost," but in one person of the Trinity, or in
two, or in three Fathers, or in three Sons, or in three
Comforters, let him be cast out ofthe church of God.
Indeed, among all the writings of Sect 3
the ancients, I have never yet met m^hf nam'e'PofBm
with any but two, that plainly and eve™«iiimS Tn'the
directly allow or approve of any other
form of baptism, save that which was appointed by
Christ at the institution. Gennadius mentions one
Ursinus, an African monk, who, he says, wrote a
book [which is now lost] wherein he asserted,
against such as were for rebaptizing all heretics,
that it was not lawful to rebaptize those, who
were baptized either simply m in the name of Christ, -
or in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost : ,
but it was sufficient for both sorts of them, upon
confession of the Trinity, to receive the bishop's
confirmation in order to obtain eternal life. This
author plainly distinguishes betwixt the two forms
of baptizing, one with explicit mention of the three
persons of the Trinity, and the other in the name
of Christ alone ; both which he makes to be lawful,
and equivalent in sense, though differing in words
from one another. And St. Ambrose, I confess,
seems to have been of the same opinion. For he
takes all those expressions of Scripture, which speak
of being baptized in the name of Christ, to mean, ,
the using such a form as this, I baptize thee in the !
name of Christ, without any express mention of the
three persons, though the whole Trinity was im
plied in it. He that is blessed in Christ, says he,23

13 Idacius, lib. 3. contra Varimundum, Bibl. Patr. t. 4.
p. 300. Si Spiritus Sanctus Deitatis substantia Patri et
Filio non coaequatur, cur in Sacramento sacri baptismatis
nihil absque illo completur ?
14 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 12. Ov teXeiov &v tls Eiirt)
to paiTTttrpa, to fxdvov tov TivEvpaTos dvopa iirEKXrjBt]'
XP1 yip dirapdjiaTOv pivEiv Trjv iv Ty X,tooieottp xdpiTt
SeSopivriv irapdpacrtv, Sec.
13 Voss. de Bapt. Disp. 2. Thes. 5. p. 51.
10 Petav. de Trin. lib. 2. cap. 14. n. 6.
17 Theodor. Ep. 146. ad Johan. CEconom. t. 3. p. 1038.
" Naz. Orat. 24. p. 431.
13 Nyssen. de Bapt. Christi, t. 3. p. 372.
20 Theophylact. in Luc. xxiv. Fulgent, de Inearnat. c. 1 1.
Cyril. Dial. 7. de Trin. t. 5. p. 633.
vigil. Ep. 2. ad Eutherium, cap. 6. Si quis episcopus
aut presbyter juxta praeceptum Domini non baptizaverit in
nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, sed in una Persona
Trinitatis, aut in duabus, aut in tribus Patribus, aut in tribus
Fihis, aut in tribus Paracletis, projiciatur de ecclesia Dei.
Gennad. de Scriptor. Eccles. cap. 27. Ursinus mona
chus scripsit adversus eos, qui rebaptizandos haereticos de-
2 i 2

cernunt, docens, nee legitimum, nee Deo dignum rebap-
tizari illos, qui in nomine vel simpliciter Christi, vel in
nomine Patris, Filii,et Spiritus Sancti, quamvis pravo sensu,
baptizentur: lis autem, post Sanctee Trinitatis et Christi
simplicem confessionem, sufficere ad salutem manus impo-
sitionem catholici sacerdotis.
23 Ambros. de Spir. Sancto, lib. 1 . cap. 3. Qui benedicitur
in Christo, benedicitur in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus
Sancti, quia unum nomen, potestasuna. — Denique et .rEthi-
ops eunuchus Candaces reginae, baptizatus in Christo ple
num mysterium consecutus est. — Quemadmoduin si unum in
sermone comprehendas, aut Patrem, aut Filium, aut Spi
ritum Sanctum, fide autem nee Patrem nee Filium nee
Spiritum abneges, plenum est fidei sacramentum : ita etiam
quamvis et Patrem et Filium et Spiritum dicas, et aut Patris
aut Filii aut Spiritus Sancti minuas potestatem, vacuum est
omne sacramentum.  Qui unum dixerit, Trinitatem sig-
navit. Si Christum dicas, et Deum Patrem a quo unctus
est Filius, et ipsum qui unctus est Filium, et Spiritum quo
unctus est, designasti. Et si Patrem dicas ; et Filium ejus,
et Spiritum oris ejus pariter indicasti; si tamen id etiam
corde comprehendas.

484

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

is blessed in the name of the Father, and Son, and
Holy Ghost; because the name is one, and the
power one. The Ethiopian eunuch, who was bap-
1 tized in Christ, had the sacrament complete. If a
man names only a single person expressly in words,
either Father, Son, or Holy Ghost, so longas he does
notdenyinhis faith either Father, Son.orHolyGhost,
the sacrament of faith is complete : as, on the other
hand, if a man in words express all the three per
sons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but in his faith
diminishes the power either of the Father, or Son,
or Holy Ghost, the sacrament of faith is void. He
says further, He that names but one person, designs
thereby the whole Trinity. He that names Christ
only, intends both the Father by whom the Son is
, anointed, and the Son himself who is anointed, and
1 the Spirit with which he is anointed. And he that
names only the Father, does in like manner intend
both his Son and the Spirit, of his mouth, if he truly
believe them in his heart. So that, according to St.
Ambrose, it was a sufficient baptism, though only one
person, Father, Son, or Holy Ghost, was expressly
mentioned.because in one name by an orthodox believ
er all the rest were implied. But this appears to have
been a singular opinion in St. Ambrose, contrary to
the general stream and current ofthe ancient writers.
For though Petavius joins St. Basil with him ; and
Vossius after Soto makes Cyprian and Athanasius,
and the author of the Opus Imperfectum under the
name of St. Chrysostom, to be abettors of the same
assertion ; yet it is clear from what has been alleged
before out of Cyprian, Athanasius, and Basil, that
they were of the contrary opinion, and esteemed it
an error and transgression against the first institu
tion, to give baptism only in the name of Christ.
Whence it is also further evident, that they did not
understand those passages of Scripture, which speak
of baptizing in the name of Jesus, or the Lord, or
Christ, as new forms of baptizing, different from
the original form delivered by Christ ; but as Eu
logius in Photius24 has explained them : To be bap-
.• tized into Christ Jesus, signifies to be baptized accord-
I ing to the command and tradition of Jesus Christ ;
\that is, " in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and ofthe Holy Ghost." According to which sense, it
follows, that the form of baptizing deliveredby Christ,
was not changed, as some imagine, but precisely ob
served even by the apostles, and after them by the
general consent and practice of the catholic church.
It is true, indeed, as sects grew up

Sect. i.
alteratioi
made in tlie form

or alteration, of and jncreased in the chUrch, some in-

novations were made in this matter ^S;,1*^;!;
among them. For though, as St. dW«to-
Austin observes, the greatest part of heretics who
retained any baptism at all, retained also the old
form of the church ; yet some there were who varied
from it, and brought in new forms of their own, ac
cording as their fancies or the genius of their here
sies led them. There were some very early that
turned the doctrine of the Trinity into Tritheism,
and, instead of three Divine persons under the
economy of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, brought
in three collateral, co-ordinate, and self-originated
beings, making them three absolute and independ
ent principles, without any relation of Father or
Son, which is the most proper notion of three Gods.
And having made this change in the doctrine of the
holy Trinity, they made another change answerable
to it in the form of baptism. For instead of baptiz
ing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
they brought in an unheard-of form of baptizing
in the name of three unoriginated principles, as we
learn from one of those called the Apostolical Ca
nons, which is directly levelled against them in these
words : If any bishop25 or presbyter baptize not ac
cording to the command of Christ, in the name of
-the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; but in three un-
joriginated principles, or in three Sons, or in three
; Paracletes, or Holy Ghosts, let him be deposed.
This canon does not describe these heretics by any
name, but we may conjecture from another canon
of the first council of Bracara, that they were the
Gnostics who first introduced this kind of Tritheism,
or doctrine of three Gods, into the world, which was
afterwards taken up by the Priscillianists, and both
of them condemned together" in that council. For
so the canon words it : If any one shall introduce
any strange names26 of the Divinity beside the Holy
Trinity, saying, that in the Godhead there is a
Trinity of Trinities, as the Gnostics and Priscillian
ists maintain, let him be anathema. This was the
consequence of- asserting three unbegotten princi
ples : for hereby they made three Fathers, and three
Sons, and three Holy Ghosts, which was a Trinity
of Trinities, as the council charges them. And in
compliance with this grand error, they sometimes
baptized in the name of three Fathers, or three
Sons, or three Holy Ghosts. As seems pretty evi
dent from that decree of Pope Vigilius made against
all such heterodox innovations : If any bishop or
presbyter27 baptize not according to the command
of the Lord, in the name of the Father, Son, and

21 Eulog. ap. Phot. Cod. 280. p. 1608. To sis Xptiov 'Iu-
arovv ftaTrTtaS7]vai trr)paivoi dv to kutk Tijy ivToXi/v Kal
irapdSotrtv Toij XptTOV 'Irjcrou l3airTitT^i]vai, toutetiv, eis
ITa-rEpa, Kal 'Ytov, Kal "Aytov UvEvpa. Vid. Aug. Cont.
Maximin. lib. 3. cap. 17.
25 Canon. Apost. c. 49. Et tls itrio-Koiros r) irpEafivTEpos
KaTa Ti]V tov Kupiou Sidraeliv pi) fiaTTTian eIs TLaTEpa, Kal

'Ytov, Kal" Aytov XlvEvpa, dXX' eIs tosis dvipxoos, f) eis
tpeXs vioiis, f, eis TpEXs irapaKXvTOvs, KadatpEiaJto.
26 Cone. Bracar. 1. can. 2. Si quis extra Sanctam Triui-
tatem alia nescioquae Divinitatis nomina introducit, dicens,
quod in ipsa Divinitate sit Trinitas Trinitatis, sicut Gnos-
tici et Priscilliani dixerunt, anathema sit.
27 Vigil. Ep. 2. ad Euther. cap. 6. Cited before, sect. 2.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

4S5

Holy Ghost ;" but in one person of the Trinity, or
in two, or in three Fathers, or in three Sons, or in
three Paracletes or Holy Ghosts, let him be cast out
of the church. Another corruption of the form of
n»s£°an.o' Jus "T- baptism was introduced by Menander,
hm™- who was a disciple of Simon Magus,
and to all his master's heresies added this of his
own, That no one could be saved, except he was
baptized in his name, as Tertullian informs us.28
The reason of this innovation is assigned by Ire
neeus23 and Epiphanius,30 who tell us, that he tooki
upon him to be the Messias : for he taught, that he
was the person sent for the salvation of men ; and ¦
to gather a church by mysteries of his own appoint
ing, to deliver men from the dominion of the angels
and principalities and powers that made the world.
And Theodoret31 gives the same account of him;
for he says, He called himself the Saviour of the
world, and taught that men were saved by being
baptized in his name, by which means also they got
power over the powers that made the world. But
this was so absurd a heresy, that, as Epiphanius ob
serves, it never prevailed much in the church.
Menander had promised his proselytes, as Tertul
lian says,32 That all who would be baptized in his
name, should be immortal and incorruptible, and
have the benefit of an immediate resurrection : but
experience in a httle time confuted this foolery;
for in a hundred years' time none of his immortal
apostles appeared, to convince any doubting Thomas
of the truth of such a pretended resurrection. And
so this vain attempt upon the baptism of Christ
quickly sunk by its own absurdity.
A no less absurd innovation was
Thirdly, By the a. made by the Elceseans, so called from
their founder, one Elcesai, who taught
them enchantments and invocation of demons, and
to use baptisms33 in the name or confession of the
elements, or letters, as Theodoret represents them.
Though what sort of baptism this was, is not very
easy to conjecture, there being scarce any one besides

Theodoret that gives any account of this heresy.
But they were great admirers of astrology and
magic, and upon that account perhaps might bring
the elements into their baptism, by composition of
certain letters and numbers used by them in their
magical operations.
The Montanists also, or Cataphry- Secl ,
gians, introduced a new form of bap- Monffit/a^la-
tism. For Montanus, their founder, wli,"ls'
took upon him to be the Holy Ghost, and made
himself two prophetesses, Priscilla and Maximilla,
who pretended to write books by inspiration.
Therefore their followers, having them in great
esteem, corrupted the old form of baptism, and ad
ministered it in the name of Father, Son, and Mon
tanus, or Priscilla, as St. Basil acquaints us, who
therefore judges their baptism to be null, and ne
cessary to be repeated34 when they came over to
the catholic church. Theophylact35 gives the same
account of them, telling us, that their foul and
stinking tongues baptized in the name of Montanus,
and Priscilla, and Maximilla. By which he does
not mean, that they used those three names in
stead of the Trinity, but that they added the name
of Montanus, or Priscilla, or Maximilla, to the Fa
ther and Son, instead of the Holy Ghost. For
which reason, most probably, the council of Laodi
cea36 orders them to be rebaptized, notwithstanding
that some of them had received a pretended ordina
tion, and were advanced not only to the dignity of
bishops, but to the title of patriarchs and maximi
among them, as the council of Laodicea words it.
And the same decree was made against them in the
first general council of Constantinople,37 and some
others also. St. Jerom seems further to intimate,
that these Montanists were, as to the doctrine of
the Trinity, really Sabellians. For though they
pretended to believe a Trinity of Divine persons,
yet it was but equivocally, in the same way as Sa
bellius had done before, whose three persons were
no more but three names, or different appearances
of one and the same person. Therefore St. Jerom39

23 Tertul. de Prescript, c. 46. Quicquid se Simon dixe-
rat, hoc se Menander esse dicebat, negans habere posse
quenquam salutem, nisi in nomine suo baptizatus fuisset.
23 Iren. lib. 1. cap. 21.
30 Epiphan. Haer. 22. "EXayei/ iavT&v ireiriptfiBai eis
trtorrjptav SiiBev, Kal els to trvvdysiv Tlvds zis to iavTov
pvo-rtptov, Sec.
31 Theod. Haeret. Fab. lib. 1. cap. 2. ~SiioTi)pa iavTov irpotr-
VyopEvtFE. — Sw^Eo-Oat Si tovs e'is abTdv fiairTt'^opEvovs.
32 Tertul. de Anima, cap. 50. In hoc scilicet se a superna
et arcana potestate legatum, ut immortales et incorrupti-
biles et statim resurrectionis compotes fiant, qui baptisma
ejus induerint.— At ubi sunt illi quos Menander ipse per-
fiidit, quos in Stygem suam mersit ? Apostoli perennes veni-
ant, assistant ; videat illos meus Thomas, audiat, contrectet,
et credat.
33 Theod. Haeret. Fab. lib. 2. c. 7. KixpipiTai PairTicr-
uatrtv ettI rij Ttov cttoixe'hov bpoXoyia.

34 Basil. Epist. can. 1. cap. 1.
85 Theoph. in Luc. xxiv. p. 546.
38 Cone. Laodic. can. 8.
87 Cone. 1. Constant, can. 7.
38 Hieron. Ep. 54. ad Marcellam adv. Montanum. Pri-
mum in fidei regula discrepamus. Nos Patrem et Filium
et Spiritum Sanctum in sua unumquemque persona poni-
mus, licet substantia copulemus : illi Sabellii dogma sec-
tantes, Trinitatem in unius personae angustias cogunt. 
Aperta est convincenda blasphemia dicentium, Deum pri-
mum voluisse in Veteri Testamento per Moysem et pro
phetas salvare mundum : sed quia non potuerit explere,
corpus sumpsisse de Virgine, et in Christo sub specie Filii
praedicantem, mortem obiisse pro nobis. Et quia per duos
gradus mundum salvare nequiverit, ad extremum per Spi
ritum Sanctum in Montanum, Priscillam et Maximillam
insanas fceminas descendisse : et plenitudinem quam Paulus
non habuerit— abscissum et semiviruin habuisse.Montanum.

486

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

says, The Montanists differed from the catholics
in the very rule of faith. For we assert Father,
and Son, and Holy Ghost, every one distinct in
his own person, though united in substance ; but
they, following the opinion of Sabellius, bring the
Trinity to the narrow restraints of one person.
That is, as he explains it a httle after, they said,
That God at first intended to save the world by
Moses and the prophets ; but because he could not
effect his design that way, he assumed a body of
the virgin, and preached in Christ under the species
of a Son, and suffered death for our sakes. And
because by these two degrees he could not save the
world, at last he descended by the Holy Ghost into
Montanus, Priscilla, and Maximilla; and made
Montanus, who was a eunuch, and but half a man,
have that plenitude of prophecy, which Paul him
self could not pretend to have. From this account
of St. Jerom, it is evident the Montanists in point of
doctrine were really Sabellians, and believed but
one person in the Godhead under different appear
ances, or manifestations of himself, which they
called it-pooum-a, persons, in an equivocal sense, where
by they imposed upon many catholics, and among
the rest upon Theodoret,39 to make them believe
them sound and orthodox men, when yet they as
serted three persons in no other sense, than Simon
Magus, and Praxeas, and Noetus, and Sabellius,
and all the Patripassians had done before them.
Now, it is very probable the Sabellians had intro
duced a new form of baptism, correspondent to their
principles, for which reason all the councils that
mention them order them to be rebaptized i4" and the
Montanists, following the doctrine of Sabellius, were
hable to the same censure. So that upon all ac
counts it must be concluded, they had made inno
vations upon the form of baptism received in the
catholic church. Another very strange form was con-
Fifthiy, by the ceived by the Marcosians, or Marcites,
Marcosiane. so called from one Marcus, a sorcerer,
who taught his disciples to baptize in the name of
the unknown Father of all things ;41 in the name of
truth, the mother of all things ; and in Jesus, who
descended (or, as Eusebius reads it,42 in him who
descended into Jesus) for the union, and redemption,
and communion of the principalities or powers ; or,

Sect. 9.
sthly, hy t...
Paiilianigts.

Sixthly, by the
"auliarf '

in the union, and redemption, and communion of
these powers. For it may be so understood, as if
the names of these powers were taken into their
form of baptism. But Ireneeus, and Epiphanius
from him, tell us, they had several forms of bap
tism, and some of them added certain hard Hebrew
names to astonish their catechumens and converts,
which the inquisitive reader may find in those writ
ers. And some of them wholly rejected baptism
as useless, because the mysteries of the ineffable
and invisible power were not to be performed by
visible and corruptible creatures, nor intellectual
and incorporeal things by those that are sensible
and corporeal : but the knowledge of the ineffable
greatness was a perfect redemption. And in this
they agreed with the Ascodrute, of whom we have
spoken in the last chapter.
The Paulianists, or followers of
Paulus Samosatensis, bishop of Anti
och, who denied the Divinity of Christ,
seem also to have been guilty of introducing a new
form of baptism, though I do not remember any
ancient writer, that tells us particularly what it was.
But St. Austin concludes it must be so, because the
council of Nice43 made an order to receive them
only by a new baptism into the church : which he
takes to be an argument, that the Paulianists had
not kept to the form or rule of baptism, which many
other heretics, when they left the church, took
along with them, and continued still to observe.
Pope Innocent likewise44 assigns this for the reason,
why the council of Nice allowed the baptism of the
Novatians, but not the Paulianists ; because the
Paulianists did not baptize in the name of the Fa
ther, Son, and Holy Ghost, but the Novatians in
their baptism always made use of those venerable
names, as being, in point of the Divine power of the
Holy Trinity, always asserters of the cathohc faith.
Another sort of heretics there were,
who instead of "Father, Son, and seventhly, TnsEu-
nomians and other.
Holy Ghost, used this form, "I bap- who bapti.jd ini«
•* ' ' * the death of ChriBt.
tize thee into the death of Christ."
Among the Apostolical Canons, there is one that
particularly reflects upon this as an unlawful prac
tice : 4S If any bishop or presbyter use not three im
mersions in the celebration of baptism, but one only
given in the death of Christ, let him be deposed.

89 Theod. Hairet. Fab. lib. 3. cap. 2.
48 Vid. Concil, Constantinop. 1. can. 7. Concil. Trull.
can. 95.
41 Theodor, Haeret. Fab. lib. 1. cap. 9. Eis ovopa dy-
coitb ILaTpos Ttov oXtov, eis iXrjSetav pt]TEpa irdvTtov eIs
tov KaTeXSdvra 'l-nauv, eIs evtotriv Kal diroXt/Tptotrtv Kal
Kotvtoviav tiov SvvdpEtav . So also in Irenaeus, lib. 1. cap. 18,
and iu Epiphanius, Haeres. 34.
42 Euseb. lib. 4, cap. 11, has it, els tov KaTeXSrovTa eIs
TOV 'It]0~tiV.
43 Aug. de Haeres. cap. 44. Istos sane Paulianos bapti-
zandos esse in ecclesia catholica Nicaeno concilio consti-

tutum est. Unde credendum est, eos regulam baptismatis
non tenere, quam secum multi haeretici, cum de catholica
discederent, abstulerunt, eamque custodiunt.
44 Innocent. Ep. 22. ad Episcopos Macedon. cap. 5. Id
circo distinctum esse ipsis duabus haeresibus ratio manifcsla
declarat : quia Paulianistae in nomine Patris, Filii, et Spi
ritus Sancti, minime baptizant : et Novatiani iisdem tre-
mendis venerandisque nominibus baptizant, &c.
45 Canon. Apost. c. 50. Ei tis iiritiKoiros fj irpEatiirEpos
pi] Tpia (iairTio-paTa pids pvritXEvos iiriTEXio-r}, dXXi EO
fiaTTTio-pa, to eIs t6v SldvaTOv tu Kvpia SiSdpevov, KaB
ctipEtaSto, Sec.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

487

For our Lord did hot say, Baptize into my death ;
but, " Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy
Ghost." St. Paul indeed sometimes speaks of being
baptized into the death of Christ; but then, as
Origen has rightly observed, this does not denote
any new form of baptism ; for no other form of bap-'
tism was ever thought lawful,46 beside that which
was given in the name of the Trinity, according to
the command of Christ: and the apostle is not
speaking of the manner of baptizing, but of Christ's/
death, and our conforming to it, as signified in bap-j
tism. Where it would not have been convenient
to have said, As many of us as have been baptized
in the name of the Father, or of the Holy Ghost,
have been baptized into his death : and therefore
the apostle in prudence omitted them in that place,
because it was not proper to mention either Father
or Holy Ghost, where he was speaking of death,
which did not belong to them, but only to Christ
incarnate. Notwithstanding this just observation
of Origen's, Eunomius the Arian revived this irre
gular practice of those ancient heretics, and cast off
the old form of baptism, to make way for others
more agreeable to his damnable errors and opinions.
For because he denied the Divinity of the Son and
Holy Ghost, he would no longer use the trine im
mersion, nor baptize in the name of the Trinity, but
only into the death of Christ, as Socrates47 gives an
account of his practice. Epiphanius43 observes of
the Anomceans, who were the pecuhar followers of
Eunomius, that they baptized also in another form,
in the name of the uncreated God, and the name of
the created God, and the name of the sanctifying
Spirit, created by the created Son. And so stiff
were they to this form of their own inventing, that
they baptized not only the catholics, but all other
sects, and even the Arians themselves who had
been otherwise baptized before them. And Gregory
Nyssen tells us from Eunomius his own books, that
he perverted the law of Christ, the law or tradition
of the Divine institution ; and taught, that baptism
was not to be given in the name of the Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost, as Christ commanded his disciples
when he first delivered the mystery, but49 in the
name of the Creator and Maker, and not Father
only, but God of the only begotten. Upon which

he charges him with adding to the word of God,
and corrupting it, because no such words as Creator
or Maker of the only begotten, or the Son's being a
creature, or the servant of God, were to be found in
the words of the first institution.
But now this innovation was pe
culiar to the disciples of Eunomius, whether ah the
though Baronius50 and some other of'the some mno-
vation.
learned men bring the charge against
the Arians in general, upon the mistaken authority
of Athanasius and St. Jerom. Athanasius says
they baptized51 in a Creator and a creature ; and St.
Jerom, that they believed in the Father, the only
true God, in Jesus Christ, the Saviour52 and a crea
ture, and in the Holy Ghost, the servant of them
both. But they do not say that the Arians used
this form of baptism; but only that their baptism,
though it was given in the name of the Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, was, in effect, no more than
if it had been given in the name of a creature, be
cause they beheved the Son and Holy Ghost to be
no more than creatures. The Arians corrupted the
faith, but they still retained the catholic form of
baptism, till Eunomius brought in another form
among them. And that is the true reason why both
the first general council of Constantinople,53 and
the council of Trullo,54 ordered the Eunomians to
be rebaptized, at the same time that they appointed
the other Arians to be received by imposition of
hands only, without a new baptism. And the se
cond council of Aries made a like decree concerning
the Bonosiaci, or followers of Bonosus, bishop of
Sardica, who were a branch of the Arians, that be
cause they retained baptism in the catholic form, as
they there say the other Arians did,55 therefore it
should be sufficient, after the confession of a true
faith, to receive them with chrism and imposition of
hands, without a new baptism. Which is a demon
stration, that neither the ancient Arians before
Eunomius, nor the Bonosians after him, had made
any alteration in this matter ; but though they had
corrupted the faith, yet they retained the ancient
form of baptizing used in the catholic church. For
had it been otherwise, there is no question to be
made, but that (as Suicerus56 out of Vossius57 has
rightly observed) the ancient councils would have
rejected their baptism, as they did the Eunomians,

46 Orig. Com. in Rom. vi. p. 540. Cum utique non habea-
tur legitimum baptisma nisi sub nomine Trinitatis, &c.
47 Socrat. lib. 5. c. 24.
18 Epiph. Haer. 76. Anomcean. p. 992.
49 Nyssen. cont. Eunom. lib. 1 1. 1. 2. p. 706. Mtj eIs Tla-
Tipu te Kal'YiSv Kal" Aytov TLvEvpa KaZrws iveTEiXaTO toXs
rta8irra.it irapaSlSiis tcS pvrripiov, dXX' eIs S-npttipyiv Kal
ktl<ss)v, Kal y povov TLaTEpa tb povoyzvas, dXXd t6v Oeov.
50 Baron, an. 325. n. 88.
" Athanas. Orat. 3. cont. Arian. t. 1. p. 413. Eis ktit!]v
Kat KTttrpa, Kal eIs iro'ujpa Kal iroirjTriv.
52 Hieron. Dial. adv. Lucifer, c. 4. Arrianus cum nihil

aliud crediderit — nisi in Patre solo vero Deo, et in Jesu
Christo salvatore creatura, et in Spiritu Sancto utriusque
servo: quomodo Spiritum Sanctum ab ecclesia recipiet, qui
necdum peccatorum remissionem consecutus est ?
53 Cone. Const. 1. can. 7. " Cone. Trull, can. 95.
65 Cone. Arelat. 2. can. 17. Bonosiacos autem ex eodem
errore venientes (quos, sicut Arianos, baptizari in Trinitate
manifestum est) dum interrogati fidem nostram ex toto
corde confessi fuerint, chrismate et manus impositione in
ecclesia recipi sufficit.
58 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. t. 1. p. 638.
57 Voss. de Bapt. Disp. 2. p. 54.

483

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN- CHURCH.

Book XI.

the form of baptism
in the catholic
church.

and ordered them to have been rebaptized upon their
return to the cathohc church. For the observation
of the form of baptism was always esteemed so ne
cessary a part of the institution, and so essential to
the sacrament, that where it was wanting, the bap
tism was reputed an imperfect and void baptism,
and to be repeated, by all the rules made against
heretics in the catholic church.
sect 12 There is one question more relating
t ™e£re mldfto to the form of baptism, which it may
not be improper to resolve in this
place : that is, whether any additions
were ever allowed to be made to the form of bap
tism in the catholic church ? Some learned persons
are of opinion, that such additions, when they were
only by way of explication, and greater illustration,
to confirm the truth against heretics, were used in
the form of baptism, as well as in the creed. But
I think Vossius, upon better grounds of reason and
authority, more judiciously determines the contrary.
Two authors are commonly alleged in favour of
their assertion, viz. Justin Martyr and the author
of the Constitutions, but neither of them comes
fully up to the thing intended. For Justin Martyr,
as Vossius observes,58 is only giving a paraphrasti-
cal exphcation of the words used in baptism for the
instruction of the heathens, to whom he is writing,
when he tells them how the Christians baptized in
the name of the Father of all things, who was
Lord and God, and in the name of Jesus Christ our
Lord, and of the Holy Ghost. And the author of
the Constitutions is yet more plain : for first of all,
he tells every bishop and presbyter, that they ought
to baptize53 precisely in that form of words which
our Lord enjoined us, when he said, " Go, teach all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching
them to observe all things which I have commanded
you." And then he goes on to explain the several
names of the three persons concerned, viz. That the
Father is the person who sent, Christ the person
who came, and the Paraclete or Comforter the per
son who bears witness. So that this was plainly
an explication or paraphrase of the form of bap
tism only, and not the very form that was then in
use. Nor can it be made appear, that ever the ca
thohc church varied from the form delivered by our
Saviour, though Vossius thinks a form with such
an orthodox addition would not destroy the essence
of baptism, as those heretical forms certainly do
which corrupt the truth of the cathohc faith.

CHAPTER IV.
OF THE SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM, OR AN ACCOUNT
OF WHAT PERSONS WERE ANCIENTLY ALLOWED
TO BE BAPTIZED. WHERE PARTICULARLY OF IN
FANT BAPTISM.
Having spoken of the matter and
form of baptism, I should now have why the quest™
. -, ... -, . ... about the adminis-
considered the persons by whom this trato™ of baptisma
x here omitted.
sacrament was anciently administered :
but because I have lately had occasion to handle
this subject fully in a scholastical way, in two dis
tinct discourses,1 it will be sufficient in this place to
give this summary account of the matter. There I
have showed, that bishops, as the apostles' suc
cessors, were the persons chiefly intrusted with this
power; that they granted power to presbyters to
baptize in ordinary cases ; to deacons, sometimes in
ordinary, and sometimes only in extraordinary cases;
to laymen, only in extraordinary cases of extreme
necessity : that the usurped baptism of laymen was
allowed to be valid, so far as not to need repeating,
though given irregularly ; that the baptism of wo
men was wholly prohibited; that the baptism of
Jews and infidels was never allowed, though now
accepted in the church of Rome ; that the baptism
of heretics and schismatics was disannulled by the
Cyprianists, and some few others, who required a
true faith, as well as a true form, to make a com
plete baptism ; but that this opinion was rejected
by the great body of the catholic church, who
thought the defects of heretical baptism might be
supplied by imposition of hands without rebaptizing;
that yet it was agreed, both by the Cypiianists and
all others whatsoever, that heretics and schismatics
had not the power of priests, because some of them,
as the Novatians, never had a just and legal call to
the priesthood ; and others were deprived of their
power by the lawful authority of the church, which
first committed that power to them; that thence
forward they were reputed, not true Christian priests,
but wolves and antichrists, instead of true shepherds
and governors of the flock of Christ; that the
church had power, not only to suspend the execu
tion of their office, but to cancel their commission,
and wholly take away the power and authority of
the priesthood from them, and then they were re
duced to the state and condition of laymen; and
sometimes they were not only degraded from the
priesthood, but thrust down one degree below lay-

53 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 107. 'Ev bvopaTt tou HaTpbs
Ttov oXtov Kal Sea-iroTov Qeov, Kal tov "2toTr]pos nptbv Xpttr-
tov 'Iijo-ou, Kal TivEtipaTOs" Aytov, To iv vSaTi tote Xov-
Tpov irotovvTai.
" Constit. Apost. lib, 7. u. 22. Ovtio ftairTiaeis, tos b
TL&ptos SizTafcuTo vpXv, Xiytov, iropEvBivTES paBt]TEvaaTe

irdvTa T<i eBv-i), fiairTiaavTES abTois eIs to Svopa tov
TlaTpos, Kal tov 'Yiov, Kal tov "Aytov UvEvpaTos  tou
diroo-TEtXavTOS TlaTpos, tov iXBovTos XpiaTov, tov pap-
TvpriaavTOS TlapaKXijTOV.
1 Scholastical History of Lay Baptism, 1st and 2nd part,
1712, and 1714.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

4S9

men, by being anathematized and cast out of the
communion of the church : and yet, notwithstand
ing all this, the church did not think fit to cancel
or wholly disannul the baptisms given by such men,
though given by usurpation and without any au
thority of the priesthood, so long as it appeared
they were given in due form, in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. All which things
being abundantly proved in the two foresaid dis
courses, I think it not proper to repeat or insist any
longer upon them ; but shall now proceed, as the
order of the discourse requires, to consider the per
sons on whom baptism was anciently conferred.
And here, first of all, it is certain,
sect.2. ' . '
who were an- that none but hving persons, whether
ciently reckoned the or
g^"bg^'0, adult or infants, and that in their own
oi ta'pSVuitn" personal capacity, were ever reckoned
5iS in thpKoman subjects capable of baptism in the
primitive church. The ancients knew
nothing of that profane custom of giving baptism
to inanimate things, as bells and the like, by a su
perstitious consecration of them. The first notice
we have of this is in the Capitulars of Charles the
Great,2 where it is only mentioned to be censured.
But afterward it crept into the Roman offices by
degrees, (as I have noted in another place3 out of
Baronius, Cardinal Bona, and Menardus,) till at last
it grew to that superstitious height, as to be thought
proper to be complained of in the Centum Gravamina
of the German nation, drawn up in the pubhc diet
of the empire held at Norimberg, anno 1518, where
(after having described the ceremony of baptizing
a bell with godfathers, who make responses, as in
baptism, and give it a name, and clothe it with a
new garment, as Christians were used to be clothed,
and all this to make it capable of driving away tem
pests and devils) they conclude4 against it, as not
only a superstitious practice, but contrary to the
Christian religion, and a mere seduction of the
simple people, and an exaction upon them. For
which reason they declare, so wicked and unlawful
a custom ought to be abolished. He that would see
more of this, may consult Hospinian,5 or Wolfius,6
or Sleidan,' who describe the ceremony at large out
of the old Romish Pontifical. For I must return
to the primitive church.
sect, 3 ¦^nc* ^ere we meet with a practice
Biv8an£fte°de!S.be a uttle more ancient, but not less su
perstitious, than the former ; which
2 Capitular. Caroli Magni, cited by Durantus de Ritib.
Eccl. lib. 1. c. 22. n. 2. Ut clocas non baptizent.
'¦ See Book VIII. chap. 7. sect. 15.
Centum Gravam. n. 51. in Fasciculo Rer. expetend. t.
1. p. 366. Quae res non solum superstitiosa, sed etiam
Christiana! religioni contraria, ac simpliciorum seductio, et
mera est exactio.— Res igitur tarn nefanda et illicita merito
aboleri debet.
5 Hospin. de Templis, lib. 4. cap. 9. p. 113.
" Wolfius, Lection. Memorabil. Centur. 16. an. 1550.

was a custom that began to prevail among some l,
weak people in Africa, of giving baptism to the i
dead. The third council of Carthage8 speaks of it
as a thing that ignorant Christians were a little
fond of, and therefore gives a seasonable caution
against it, to discourage the practice. And this is
again repeated in the African Code." Gregory Nazi
anzen10 also takes notice of the same superstitious
opinion prevailing among some who delayed to be
baptized. In his address to this kind of men, he
asks them whether they stayed to be baptized after .
death ? And doubts upon this account whether to
esteem them greater objects of pity or contempt.
Philastrius also11 notes it as the general error of the
Montanists or Cataphrygians, that they baptized
men after death. The practice seems to be ground
ed upon a vain opinion, that when men had neg
lected to receive baptism in their hfe-time, some
compensation might be made for this default by re
ceiving it after death. And for the same reason,
they gave the eucharist also to the dead in the like
circumstances, which is equally condemned in the
forementioned African Canons, as proceeding from
gross ignorance in some presbyters, and want of a
due understanding of the true intent and meaning
of those holy institutions; for whose information
they order provincial councils to be held twice a
year, that they might be better instructed.
Another absurd practice prevailing
among some of the ancient heretics, Nor i™ the' living
. P . . , . . , . , for the dead.
was a sort ol vicarious baptism, which where of the apos-
tle's meaning or be-
was, that when any one died without jig baptized for the
' t J ... dead» 1 Cor- iv- 29-
baptism, another was baptized in his
stead. St. Chrysostom tells us12 this was practised
among the Marcionites with a great deal of ridicu
lous ceremony, which he thus describes : After any
catechumen was dead, they hid a hving man under
the bed of the deceased ; then coming to the dead
man, they spake to him, and asked him whether he
w ould receive baptism ? And he making no answer,
the other answered for him, and said, he would be
baptized in his stead; and so they baptized the living
for the dead, as if they were acting a comedy upon
the stage, so great was the power of Satan in the
minds of these vain men. Afterward, when any one
challenged them upon this practice, they had the
confidence to plead the apostle's authority for it,
" Why are they then baptized for the dead ? " Against
which St. Chrysostom urges very well, That if this

7 Sleidan, Commentar. lib. 21. p. 388.
9 Cone. Carth. 3. can. 6. Cavendum, ne mortuos bapti-
zari posse fratrum infirnv'tas credat.
a Cod. Eccles. Afr. can. 18. Mr; toos r}Sr) TEXEVTtiivTas
^aiTTlcrBr}vat iroinar) r) Ttov irpEtr(ivTEptov dyvota.
10 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 648. "H Kal aii pivsis vEKpds
XovSr/vai ; ov paXXov iXEOvpsvos V ptaovpEvos.
11 Philastr. de Haeres. cap. 2. de Cataphry. Hi mortuos
baptizant, &c.
12 Chrys. Horn. 40. in 1 Cor. p. 688.

490

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

were allowed, in vain had God threatened those
that died unbaptized. For by this means, any Jew
or Gentile might easily be made a Christian, by
having another after his death baptized for him.
Tertullian brings the same charge against the Mar
cionites,13 comparing their practice to the heathen
lustrations for the dead upon the kalends of Fe
bruary. But he tells them, they did but in vain
allege the apostle's authority for this practice, as if
he had argued from it for the truth and confirmation
of the resurrection ; for the apostle speaks but of
one baptism, and that was of the living for them
selves. He reflects upon the same practice in an
other place,14 wheje he calls it the vicarious bap
tism, which some used in hopes of the resurrection.
Suicerus thinks the Cerinthians were the first au
thors of this kind of baptism, and that indeed would
carry it up to the apostles' time. But Epiphanius,
on whose authority he depends, says no such thing,
as from any certain proof, or his own judgment,
but only that there was an uncertain tradition
handed down to them, concerning some heretics in
Asia in the apostles' days,15 who, when any one died
without baptism, substituted another in his room to
be baptized for him, lest in the resurrection he
should be punished for want of baptism, and be
subjected to the powers which made the world.
And the same tradition asserted, that the apostle
hence took occasion to say, " If the dead rise not,
why are they then baptized for the dead ? " But
Epiphanius wholly rejects this opinion, nor do we
find any of the ancients so interpreting this passage
of the apostle, except only the author under the
name of St. Ambrose, who is clearly of opinion,
that the apostle had respect to such a custom then
in being, and thence drew an argument from the
example16 of those, who were so firmly persuaded
of the truth of the future resurrection, that when
any one among them was prevented by sudden
death, they had another to be baptized in his name,
fearing lest he should either not rise at all, or rise
to condemnation. But St. Chrysostom gives a
much more rational account of the apostle's argu-

13 Tertul. cont. Marcion. lib. 5. cap. 10. Viderit institutio
ista, kalendae si forte Februariae respondebunt illi pro mor-
tuispetere. Noli ergo apostolum novum statim auctorem
aut confirmatorem eum denotare, ut tanto magis sisteret car
nis resurrectionem, quanto illi qui vane pro mortuis bapti-
zarentur, fide resurrectionis hoc facerent. Habemus ilium
alicubi unius baptismi definitorem.
14 Tertul. de Resur. Carnis, cap. 48. Si autem et bapti-
zantur quidam pro mortuis, videbimus an ratione. Certe
ilia praesumptione hoc eos instituisse contendit, qua alii
etiam carni vicarium baptisma profuturum existimarent ad
spem resurrectionis.
15 Epiphan. Haeres. 28. Cerinthian. u. 6.
16 Ambros. Com. in 1 Cor. xv. Exemplum eorum subjicit,
qui tain securi erant de futura resurrectione, ut etiam pro
mortuis baptizarentur. Si quem forte mors prawenisset, ti-
mentes, ne aut male, aut non resurgeret, qui baptizatus non

ment ; for he supposes him to refer to the catholic
custom of making every catechumen at his baptism
with his own mouth declare his belief of the resur
rection of the dead, by repeating the creed, of which
that was a part, and so being baptized into that
faith, or hope of the resurrection of the dead. And
therefore he puts them in mind of this, saying, If
there be1' no resurrection of the dead, why art thou
then baptized for the dead, that is, the body ? For
therefore thou art baptized for the dead, believing
the resurrection of the dead, that the body may not
remain dead, but revive again. So that baptizing
for the dead is an elliptical expression, for being
baptized into the faith or belief of the resurrection
of the dead. And so I think Tertullian18 is to be
understood, when he says, in opposition to the
error of the Marcionites, that to be baptized for
the dead is to be baptized for the body, which
is declared to be dead by baptism : that is, we
are baptized into the belief of the resurrection of
the body, both whose death and resurrection are
represented in baptism. And the interpretation of
Epiphanius comes pretty near these, when he says1"
it refers to those who were baptized upon the ap
proach of death in hopes of the resurrection from
the dead ; for they showed thereby that the dead
should rise again, and that therefore they had need
of the remission of sins, which is obtained in bap
tism. The same sense is given by Theodoret,20 and
Theophylact,21 and Balsamon and Zonaras,22 and
Matthew Blastares,23 among the Greeks ; and it is
embraced by Bishop Patrick,24 and Dr. Hammond,25
as the most natural and genuine exposition of this
difficult passage of the apostle. Some indeed think
it may refer to another custom, of baptizing over the
monuments of the martyrs, who died for the faith
in hopes of a future resurrection. But that custom
was hardly ancient enough to be alluded to in the
time of the apostles, though Vossius25 and some
other learned mean incline to this opinion. However
it be, it is not likely the apostle would draw an ar
gument from the absurd practice of the worst of
heretics : therefore whatever interpretation be

fuerat, vivus nomine mortui tingebatur.
" Chrys. Horn. 40. in 1 Cor. p. 689. EI ph. etik avdw
trts, ti Kal pairTt'fri virip Ttov VEKpiov' thte'zi, toiv atopd-
Ttov ; Kai yap iirl tbto taini^Ti, tb i/ekoh trtiipaTos avail.
TatTlV TTITEVIOV, OTl ItKETl pEVEl VEKpOV.
18 Tertul. cont. Marcion. lib. 5. cap. 10. Igitur et pro
mortuis tingui, est pro corporibus tingui ; mortuum enim
corpus ostendimus.
"Epiphan. Hair. 28. n. 6.
20 Theodor. Com. in 1 Cor. xv. 29.
21 Theophyl. in eundem loc.
22 Balsamon. in Can. 18. Cone. Carthag. ap. Bevereg.
Pandect, t. 1. p. 541.
23 Blastar. Syntag. Canon, ibid. t. 2. p. 41.
** Patrick, Aqua Genitalis, p. 453.
25 Hammond in 1 Cor. xv. 29.
20 Voss. Thes. Theol. Disp. 15. p. 225.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

491

thought most proper and worthy to be received,
that is certainly to be rejected, together with the
error of the Marcionites, who founded their vicari
ous baptism upon the authority of this apostohcal
passage, contrary to the sense and practice of the
whole cathohc chm-ch, which never allowed of bap
tism given to the living for the dead, or of any baptism
but such as was given to men in their own persons.
Now, of persons who were reckon-
prooif oV 'infant ed capable of receiving baptism, there
ancient" records of were two sorts, infants and adult per-
the church. # ^
sons. And infants were of two sorts,
either such as were born of Christian parents, or
such as were born of heathens, but by some provi
dential means became the possession and property,
as I may call it, of the Christian church ; neither
pf which sort were excluded from baptism, when
sufficient sponsors could be provided for them.
This is so evident from the ancient records of the
church, that it is to be wondered, how some learned
persons could run into the contrary opinion, and
offer reasons from antiquity, in prejudice of the
church's constant practice. Mr. Wall, in his
elaborate discourse27 of Infant Baptism, has justly
reflected upon abundance of these men, who, by
their unwary concessions, have given too great ad
vantage to the Anabaptists of this age. There are
some others also, which he had not seen, who ad
vance as unworthy notions of the ancient practice ;
for Salmasius, and Suicerus28 out of him, deliver it
as authentic history, that for the two first ages no
one received baptism who was not first instructed
in the faith and doctrine of Christ, so as to be able
to answer for himself, that he believed, because of
those words, " He that believeth and is baptized."
Which, in effect, is to say, that no infant, for the
two first ages, was ever admitted to Christian
baptism. But afterwards they own paedo-baptism
came in, upon the opinion, that baptism was neces
sary to salvation. Now, I shall not think myself
obliged to be very prolix in refuting this opinion,
together with the false supposition which is made
the foundation of it, since that has so often and so
substantially been done by Vossius,29 Dr. Forbes,30
Dr, Hammond,31 Mr. Walker,32 and especially Mr.

Wall,33 who has exactly considered the testimony
and authority of almost every ancient writer that
has said any thing upon this subject. But that
no one who reads these collections may be wholly
at a loss for want of other authors, I shall here sub
join a brief account of the most pertinent authori
ties that occur in the three first ages.
The most ancient writer that wo „ , „
Sect. 6.
have is Clemens Romanus, who lived RoFmanuSclandM 4
in the time of the apostles. And he, Hermcs Pastor'
though he does not directly mention infant baptism,
yet says a thing that by consequence proves it.
For he makes infants liable to original sin, which
in effect is to say, that they have need of baptism to
purge them from it. For speaking of Job, he says, ,
Though he was a just man, yet he34 condemns him- I
self, saying, There is none free from pollution,
though his life be but of the length of one day.
Now, if children be born in sin, they have need of
a regeneration to make them capable of the king
dom of heaven. Hermas Pastor lived about the
same time with Clemens, and has several passages
to show the general necessity of water, that is, bap
tism, to save men. In one place he represents the
church as a tower built on the waters, and says,35
Hear, therefore, why the tower is built on the
waters ; because your life is saved, and shall be
saved, by water. In another place, he makes water-
baptism so necessary to all, that in a vision he re- )
presents the apostles as going after death36 to baptize
the holy spirits who lived under the Old Testa
ment, that they might be translated into the king
dom of God. It was necessaiy, says he, for them
to ascend by water, that they might be at rest ; for
they could not otherwise enter into the kingdom of
God, than by putting off the mortality of their
former life. They therefore, after they were dead,
were sealed with the seal of the Son of God, and so
entered into the kingdom of God. For before any
one receives the name of the Son of God, he is lia
ble to death ; but when he receives that seal, he is
delivered from death and is assigned to life. Now,
that seal is water, into which men descend bound
over unto death, but ascend out of it assigned unto
life. For this reason the seal was also preached

27 Wall, Hist, of Infant Baptism, part 2. chap. 2.
28 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. t. 2. p. 1136. Primis duobus
sxculis nemo baptismum accipiebat, nisi qui in fide instruc-
(us, et doctrina Christi imbutus, testari posset, se credere,
propter ilia verba, Qui crediderit et baptizatus fuerit. 
rostea opinio invaluit, Neminem salvari posse, nisi qui
baptizatus fuisset.
29 Voss. de Bapt. Disp. 14.
80 Forbes, Instruct. Hist. Theol. lib. 10. cap. 5.
81 Hammond, Def. of Infant. Bapt. chap. 4.
32 Walker, Plea for Infant Baptism, chap. 27, &c.
™ Wall, Hist, of Infant Baptism, part 1. chap. 1, &c.
84 Clem. Rom. Ep. 1. ad Corinth, n. 17. Autos euvtov
Kcrniyopwi/ Xiyet, ovSeIs KaBapds died pvirov, ovSi e! pids
nuipas i] Jo,,) auTou

35 Hermas Pastor, lib. 1. Vision 3. cap. 3. Quare igitur
super aquas aedificatur turris, audi. Quoniam vita vestra
per aquam salva facta est et fiet.
3G Id. lib. 3. Simil. 9. u. 16. Necesse est ut per aquam
habeant ascendere, ut requiescant : non poterant enim
aliter in regnum Dei intrare, quam ut deponerent mortali-
tatem prioris vitae. Illi igitur defuncti sigillo Filii Dei
signati sunt, et intraverunt in regnum Dei. Antequam
enim accipiat homo nomen Filii Dei, morti destinatus est:
at ubi accipit illud sigillum, liberatur a morte, et traditur
vitae. Illud autem sigillum aqua est, in quam descendunt
homines morti obligati, ascendunt vero vita? assignati. Et
illis igitur praedicatum est illud sigillum, et usi sunt eo, ut
intrarent in regnum Dei.

492

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XL

unto them, and they made use of it, that they might
enter into the kingdom of God. The plain design
of this place, is to represent the necessity of baptism,
without which none can ordinarily enter into the
kingdom of God. And it cannot be doubted, that
he who thought it so necessary even for the patri
archs, who died before the coming of Christ, must
think it equally necessary to all those who lived
under the dispensation of the gospel. Though
whether the baptism here mentioned be to be under
stood in a hteral and corporeal sense, or only in a
metaphorical or mystical way, as a vision or a para
ble may require, is what may admit of some dispute.
And therefore Cotelerius37 gives his opinion for the
latter sense, concluding, that forasmuch as washing
in water properly belongs to bodies, and not to spi
rits, our author is necessarily to be understood of
metaphorical and mystical baptism, that is, the spi
ritual effects of it, the good things which are con
ferred by God in baptism, the chief of which is a
title to eternal life, which the patriarchs after death
are supposed to be made partakers of, by believing
the word of the gospel then preached to them.
This was that spiritual water, in which departed
souls were baptized, as the bodies of the living are
baptized in common water; from the analogy of
which we must needs conclude the necessity of
water-baptism for all those who are in a capacity to
receive it, that is, for all those who are yet in the
body, in order to be made partakers of eternal life.
God indeed may, if he pleases, give the baptism of
the Spirit, and the baptism of faith, which is the
baptism of the word, without it : and so some of the
ancients suppose the apostles to be baptized without
water, from that saying of our Saviour, " Now ye are
clean, through the word which I have spoken unto
you ;" so Tertullian38 and others : (though the more
general opinion38 is, that they were baptized by
Christ himself:) in like manner God might dispense
with the want of water-baptism in cases extraordi
nary, and supply this want either by martyrdom, or
faith and repentance, in such cases where it could
not be had ; as I have showed (in the last Book)
the general consent of the ancients40 upon this
matter to be ; but yet in all ordinary cases where
water-baptism might be had, they concluded as
generally for the necessity of it, from that assertion
of our Saviour, " Except one be born of water and
the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God." This was not only a doctrine of the third or

fourth ages, as Salmasius and Suicerus represent
but the doctrine of the very first ages immediately
succeeding the apostles ; for, we see, Hermes Pastor
who lived in the apostolical age, founds the general
necessity of baptism upon that very saying of our
Saviour. And therefore they who represent this
doctrine of the necessity of baptism as a novelty or
an error, first introduced into the church in the
age of St. Austin against the Pelagian heretics, do
manifest wrong both to the doctrine itself, and to
St. Austin, and to the ancients, who embraced
and delivered the same before him. And it gives
an unnecessary advantage to the anti-paedobaptists,
which a right understanding of this matter abso
lutely takes from them. I thought it therefore of
some use to observe this against Salmasius and
Suicerus, and to add it to the observations which
Mr. Wall has made upon Hermes Pastor.
Another ancient writer, who lived
within the compass of the second cen- From ju.tin' siar-
tury, was Justin Martyr, who very
plainly speaks of infant baptism as used from the
time of the apostles. For in one of his Apologies
he takes occasion to say,41 There were among Chris- ' '
tians in his time many persons of both sexes, some
sixty, and some seventy years old, who had been
made disciples to Christ from their infancy, and
continued virgins or uncorrupted all their hves.
Now, Justin wrote this Apology about the year 14S,
in the middle of the second century, and therefore
those whom he speaks of as baptized sixty or seventy
years before in their infancy, must be persons bap
tized in the first age, while some of the apostles
were hving. In another place of the same Apology 4I
he urges these words of our Saviour, John iii. 35,
" Except ye be " regenerated, or " born again, ye
cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven," to prove
the necessity of baptism. And in his Dialogue with
Trypho the Jew, he speaks of the whole progeny
of Adam as hable to death43 and the deception of
the serpent by reason of Adam's sin, beside the
particular guilt which each man contracts by actual
sin in his own person. Now, if all mankind be
born with original sin, this extends to infants, who
have need of regeneration or baptism to free them
from it. And this assertion in Justin by conse
quence proves the necessity of baptism for infants,
as well as others, that they may have redemption
from original sin. In another place of the same
Dialogue he makes baptism parallel to circum-

87 Coteler. in loc. p. 117. Quandoquidem lavatio corpo-
ribus competit, non animis, noster necessario intelligit bap
tismum metaphoricum et mysticum, bona videlicet quae in
baptismate a Deo conceduntur.
38 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 12.
"D Vid. Augustin. Ep. 108. Anonymus auctor de non ite-
rando Baptismo, ad calcem Cypriani, p. 23. Edit. Oxon. It.
Clem. Alex. Hypotypos. lib. 5. ap. Johan. Moschum Prat.
Spiritual, cap. 176.

*> See Book X. chap. 2. sect. 20.
41 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 62. Kal iroXXoi tives koi iroXXal
E^nKovToiiTai Kal itSopi)KOVTOVTai, ol l/c iraiSwv Epavt)-
TEvBr}o-av Tip Xpio-Ttp, dtpBopot Stapivovai.
« Ibid. p.'94.
43 Justin. Dial. c. Tryph. p. 315. To yivos tuiv avBpii-
Ttov died tov ' ASip viro SdvaTov Kal irXdvi}V tov "Otptuis
iirEirTtiiKEi, irapi xrjK ISiav aWiav UdaTou aiiT&v no-
vijpEvcrapivov.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

493

cision, saying," We have not received that carnal
circumcision, but the spiritual circumcision, which
Enoch and those hke him observed. And we have
received it by baptism, through the mercy of God,
because we were sinners ; and it is incumbent on
all persons to receive it in the same way. Now, if
baptism be answerable to circumcision, and succeed
in its room, and be necessary to be received as the
means to obtain the true circumcision of the Spirit;
then as infants were admitted to circumcision, so
they were to he admitted to baptism, that being the
ordinary means of applying the mercy of the gos
pel to them, and cleansing them from the guilt of
original sin. Next after Justin Martyr, I subjoin
And the author of the ancient author of the book called,
mntemp'Srary1 S The Recognitions, or Travels of St.
Justin Martyr. °
Peter ; because, though it be not the
genuine work of Clemens Romanus, whose name it
borrowed, yet it is an ancient writing of the same
age with Justin Martyr, mentioned by Origen in his
Philocalia, and by some ascribed to Bardesanes Sy
rus, who lived about the middle of the second cen
tury. This author speaks of the necessity of bap
tism in the very same style as Justin Martyr did,
making it universally necessary to purge away ori
ginal sin, and to qualify men for the kingdom of
heaven. For putting an objection by way of ques
tion, What does baptism by water45 contribute to
ward the worship of God ? He answers, 1st, That
it is fulfilling that which is the will and pleasure of
God. Then, 2ndly, The man that is regenerated
by water, and born again to God, is thereby freed
from the weakness of his first nativity, which comes
to him by man : and so he is made capable of sal
vation, which he could not otherwise obtain. For
so the true Prophet (meaning Christ) has testified
with an oath, saying, " Verily, I say unto you, ex
cept one be born again of water, he shall not enter
into the kingdom of heaven." This author indeed
does not speak particularly of the baptism of in
fants, but his reasons are such, as show his discourse
to extend to them. For if baptism be necessary
upon these two accounts, first to cut off concupis
cence, or original sin, which is the infirmity of our
first birth ; and then to qualify us to enter into the
kingdom of God ; these are general reasons for bap
tism, which make it necessary for infants as well

Just. Dial, p. 261. Ob TavTi)v tt)v KaTi txdpKa ira-
pEKatoptv irEpiTopr)v, dXXi irvEvpaTtKriv, vv 'Evibx Ka'L "i
opom itpiXatjav riptXs Si Sli tov PairTicrpaTOS abri/v,
«rEiJr| ipapTtoXol iyEyovEipEV, Sea to eXeos to irapi tov
Ueov,i\dp0pEV, ko.1 irdtstv e>etoi/ bpoims XapfldvEtv. '
5 Recognition, lib. 6. n. 9. p. 551. ap. Coteler. 1. 1. Quid
confert aquae baptismus ad Dei cultum? Primo quidem,
quia quod Deo placuit iinpletur ; secundo, quia regenerato
ex aquis, et Deo renato, fragilitas prioris nativitatis, qua? tibi
per hominem facta est, amputatur ; et ita dcmum pervenire
potens ad salutem; aliter vero impossibile est. Sic enim

as any other, since, according to this author, they
are born in original sin, and cannot enter into the
kingdom of God, till that sin be purged away by the
waters of baptism. Here, then, we have another
author within the compass of the two first ages, di
rectly confronting that assertion of Salmasius and
Suicerus, that the doctrine of the necessity of bap
tism to salvation, was not the doctrine of the two
first ages, but only an opinion taken up afterwards,
upon which foundation the practice of infant bap
tism was introduced into the church. For no one
can, or ever did, declare himself plainer for the ne
cessity of baptism to salvation, than this author
does, from the words of our Saviour Christ, which
he interprets as all the ancients both before and
after him did, of the ordinary necessity of water-
baptism to salvation. So that if infant baptism
was founded, as Salmasius pleads, upon the opinion
of the necessity of baptism to salvation ; this author
must be an asserter of infant baptism, because he
was undeniably an asserter of the general necessity
of baptism to salvation. I have the rather insisted a
httle upon this author's meaning, because I know
not whether his testimony has been produced be
fore in this cause by any other.
Not long after the time of Justin Scct „
Martyr and the author last mentioned, And I"""t"s'
lived Irenseus, bishop of Lyons, who, as Mr. Dod-
well evidently shows,48 and Dr. Cave from him,4' was
born in the latter end of the first century, about the
year 97, and was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a
disciple of St. John. About the year 176, he wrote
his book against heresies, being then near eighty
years old, and died not many years after. So that
he must needs be a competent witness ofthe church's
sense and practice upon this point during the se
cond century. Now, there are three things relating
to this matter, which appear very evident from him.
1. That the church then believed the doctrine of
original sin. 2. That the ordinary means of purging
away this sin, was baptism. 3. That children, as
well as others, were then actually baptized to ob
tain remission of sins, and apply the redemption of
Christ to them. For the doctrine of original sin ;
he sometimes calls it the sin48 of our first parents,
which was done away in Christ, by his loosing the
bonds wherein we were held and bound over unto
death : the sin whereby we offended God49 in the

nobis cum Sacramento verus propheta testatus est, dicens :
Amen dico vobis, nisi quis denuo renatus fuerit ex aqua, non
intrabit in regnum ccelorum. This is repeated in the Greek
Clementines, Horn. 11. n. 26. p. 698.
40Dodw. Dissert, in Iren. "Cave, Hist. Lit. vol. i. p. 41.
48 Irense. lib. 5. c. 19. Protoplasti peccatum per correp-
tionem primogeniti emendationem accipiens. — Vinculis illis
resolut.is, per quae alligati eramus morti.
49 Id. lib. 5. cap. 16. Deum in primo quidem Adam of-
fendimus, non facientes ejus praceptum, in secundo autem
Adam reconciliati sumus, obedientes usque ad mortem facti.

494

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

first Adam, by disobeying his command ; but were
reconciled to God in the second Adam, by obedi
ence unto death. So that infants, as well as others,
were under the guilt of this sin, and had need of a
Redeemer with the rest of mankind, to deliver them
from it. Now, the ordinary way of being freed from
this original guilt, he says, is baptism, which is our
regeneration,50 or new birth unto God. And this
he expressly affirms to be administered to children
as well as adult persons. For, says he, Christ51
came to save all persons by himself; all, I say, who
by him are regenerated unto God ; infants, and little
ones, and children, and youths, and elder persons.
Therefore he went through the several ages, being
made an infant for infants, that he might sanctify
infants; and for little ones he was made a httle
one, to sanctify them of that age also. No art can
elude this passage, so long as it is owned that re
generation means baptism. And for this we have
the explication of Irenaeus himself, who calls bap
tism by the name of regeneration ; and so all the
ancients commonly do, as Suicerus (against whom
I am now disputing) scruples not to own, alleging
Justin Martyr,52 Chrysostom, and Gregory Nyssen,
to this purpose. Which fully evinces infant bap
tism in the age of Irenaeus, that is, in the second
century, to have been the common practice of the
church. sect. 10. In the latter end of the second cen-
And Tertuliian. ^^ and beginning 0f tne third) livefl
TertuUian, presbyter of the church of Carthage,
who, though he had some singular notions about
this matter, yet he sufficiently testifies the church's
practice. In his own private opinion he was for
deferring the baptism of infants, especially where
there was no danger of death, till they came to years
of discretion : but he so argues for this, as to show
us that the practice of the church was otherwise.
For, says he, according to every one's condition
and disposition,53 and also their age, the delaying of
baptism is more advantageous, especially in the case
of little children. For what need is there that the
godfathers should be brought into danger ? Because
they may either fail of their promises by death, or
they may be deceived by a child's proving of wicked
disposition. Our Lord says, indeed, " Do not forbid

them to come unto me." Let them come therefore
when they are grown up : let them come when they
can learn ; when they can be taught whither it is
they come : let them be made Christians when they
can know Christ. What need their innocent age
make such haste to the forgiveness of sins ? Mea
proceed more cautiously in worldly things : and he
that is not trusted with earthly goods, shall he be
trusted with Divine ? Let them know how to ask
salvation, that you may appear to give it to one that
asketh. For no less reason unmarried persons ought
to be delayed, because they are exposed to tempta
tions, as well virgins that are come to maturity, as
those that are in widowhood by the loss of a con
sort, until they either marry or be confirmed in con
tinence. The way of Tertullian's arguing upon
this point, shows plainly that he was for introducing
a new practice ; that therefore it was the custom of
the church in his time to give baptism to infants,
as well as adult persons : and his arguments tend
not only to exclude infants, but all persons that are
unmarried or in widowhood, for fear of temptation.
Which are rules that no one beside himself ever
thought of, much less were they confirmed by any
church's practice. But even this advice of Tertul
lian, as singular as it was, seems only calculated for
cases where there was no danger or apprehensions
of death : for otherwise he pleads as much for the
necessity of baptism as any other, both from those
words of our Saviour,5* " Except one be born again
of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of heaven ;" as also from the general cor
ruption of original sin, which renders every son of
Adam unclean till he be made a Christian: which
is only done in baptism; for men are not born
Christians, but made so. And therefore, in case of
necessity, he thought every Christian had power to
give baptism, rather than any person should die
without it. Which seems to imply, that his opinion
for delaying baptism, whether of infants or others,
respected only such cases where there was no dan
ger of death : but even in those cases the practice
of the church was otherwise, for she baptized in
fants as soon as they were born, though without
any imminent danger of death, as appears from
Tertullian's discourse itself, who laboured to make

50 Irenae. lib. 1. cap. 18. Tou patrTiapaTos tjjs eis 0eov
dvayEvvritrEtos, Sec.
51 Id. lib. 2. cap. 39. Omnes venit per semetipsum sal
vare : omnes inquain, qui per eum renascuntur in Deum ¦
infantes, et parvulos, et pueros, et juvenes, et seniores. Ideo
per omnem venit aetatem, et iufantibus infans factus, sancti-
ficans infantes : in parvulis parvulus, sanctiricans hanc
ipsam habentes eetatem, &c.
s2 Suicer. Thesaur. Eccles. voce 'Ai/ayEViiiio-is, 1. 1. p. 243.
53 Tertul. de Baptismo, c. 18. Pro cuj usque persona; con
ditione ac dispositione, etiam aetate, cunctatio baptismi utilior
est, praecipue tamen circa parvulos. Quid enim necesse est
sponsores etiam periculo ingeri ? Quia et ipsi per mortali-

tatem destituere promissiones suas possint, et proventu malic
indolis falli. Ait quidem Dominus, Nolite illos prohibere ad
me venire. Veniant ergo dum adolescunt, veniant dum
discunt, dum quo veniunt docentur : fiant Christiani, dum
Christum nosse potuerint. Quid festinat innocens alias au
remissionem peccatorum? Cautius agetur in saecularibus ;
ut cui substantia terrena non creditur, Divina credatur.
N6rint petere salutem, ut petenti dedisse videaris. Non
minori de causa innupti quoque procrastinandt, in quibus
tentatio praeparata est: tarn virginibus per maturitatem,
quam viduis per vacationem, donee aut nubant, aut conti-
nentia corroborentur.
54 Tertul. de Anima, cap. 40. De Bapt. cap. 13.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

495

an innovation, but without any success ; for the
same practice continued in the chm-ch in the fol
lowing ages.n Origen lived in the beginning of
And origen. the third century, and nothing can be
plainer than the testimonies alleged from him. In
one place he says, Every one is born in original
sin ; which he thus proves from the words of Da
vid, saying, " I was conceived in iniquity, and in
sin53 did my mother bear me ;'' showing, that every
soul that is born in the flesh, is polluted with the
filth of sin and iniquity : and that therefore it was
said, as we mentioned before, that none is clean
from pollution, though his life be but of the length
of one day. Besides all this, it may be inquired,
what is the reason, why the baptism of the church,
which is given for remission of sins, is by the custom
of the church given to infants also ? Whereas if
there were nothing in infants that wanted remission
and indulgence, the grace of baptism might seem
needless to them. In another place54 he says, In
fants are baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Of
what sins ? or when did they commit them ? Or
how can any reason be given for baptizing them,
but only according to that sense which we men
tioned a little before ; None is free from pollution,
though his life be but the length of one day upon
the earth ? And for that reason infants are bap
tized, because by the sacrament of baptism the pol
lution of our birth is taken away ; and, " Except
one be bom of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter
into the kingdom of heaven." Where he not only
makes infant baptism the practice of the church,
but derives it from Divine institution. As he does
in another place55 from apostolical tradition ; for he
affirms, that the church received the order of bap
tizing infants from the apostles. For they to whom
the Divine mysteries were committed, knew that

a Orig. Horn. 8. in Levit. 1. 1. p. 145. Audi David dicen-
tem, In iniquitatibus, inquit, conceptus sum, et in peccatis
peperitme mater mea: ostendens, quod quaecunque anima
in came nascatur, iniquitatis et peccati sorde polluit.ur : et
propterea dictum esse illud, quod jam superius memoravi-
mus; quia nemo mundus a sorde, nee si unius diei fuerit
vita ejus. Addi his etiam illud potest, ut requiratur quid
causaisit, cum baptisma ecclesia; in remissionem peccatorum
detur, secundum ecclesiae observantiam etiam parvulis bap
tismum dari? Cum utique si nihil esset in parvulis quod
au remissionem deberet et indulgentiam pertinere, gratia
baptismi superflua videretur.
54 Orig. in Luc. Horn. 14. t. 2. p. 223. Parvuli bapti-
zantur in remissionem peccatorum. Quorum peccatorum ?
Vel quo tempore peccaverunt ? Aut quomodo potest ulla
lavacn in parvulis ratio subsistere, nisi juxta ilium sensum
de quo paulo ante diximus, Nullus mundus a sorde, nee si
unius diei quidem fuerit vita ejus super ten-am. Et quia per
baptismi sacramentum nativitatis sordes deponuntur, prop
terea baptizantur et parvuli. Nisi enim quis renatus fuerit
"^j* et SPirltu, non potest intrare in regnum ccelorum.
Id. in Rom. lib. 5. cap. 6. p. 543. Ecclesia ab apos-

there is in all persons the natural pollution of sin,
which must be washed away by water and the
Spirit : by reason of which the body itself is also
called the body of sin.
In the middle of this age lived St. Sectl2
Cyprian, in whose time there was a the^Sn&S*
question moved concerning the day thase anie' him-
on which infants ought to be baptized. For one
Fidus an African bishop had sent a query to him
upon this case, whether infants were to be baptized,
if need required, as soon as they were born, or not
till the eighth day, according to the rule given in
the case of circumcision? To this question St. Cy
prian and a council of sixty-six bishops returned
this synodical answer : As to the case of infants,
whereas you judge56 that they ought not to be bap
tized within two or three days after they are born ;
and that the rule of circumcision should be observed,
so that none should be baptized and sanctified be
fore the eighth day after he is born ; we were all in
our council of the contrary opinion. It was our
unanimous resolution and judgment, that the mercy
and grace of God is to be denied to none as soon as
he is born. For if the greatest offenders, and they
that have sinned most grievously against God be
fore, have afterward, when they come to beheve,
forgiveness of their sins ; and no person is kept off
from baptism and grace ; how much less reason is
there to prohibit an infant, who being newly born
has no other sin, save that, being descended from
Adam according to the flesh, he has from his birth
contracted the contagion of the death anciently
threatened ! Who comes for that reason more easily
to receive forgiveness of sins, because they are not
his own, but other men's sins, that are forgiven him.
Here we have both the practice of the church, and
the reason of it together; infants were baptized, be
cause they were born in original sin, and needed

toll's traditionem suscepit etiam parvulis baptismum dare.
Sciebant enim illi quibus mysteriorum secreta commissa
sunt Divinorum, quia essent in omnibus genuinae sordes pec
cati, quae per aquam et Spiritum ablui deberent : propter
quas etiam corpus ipsum corpus peccati nominatur.
M Cypr. Ep. 59. al. 64. ad Fidum, p. 158. Quantum vero
ad causam infantium pertinet, quos dixisti intra secundum
vel tertium diem, quo nati sunt, constitutos, baptizari non
oportere, et considerandam esse legem circumcisionis anti
qua?, ut intra octavum diem eum qui natus est baptizandum
et sanctificandumnon putares: longe aliud in concilio nos-
tro omnibus visum est. — Universi potius judicavimus, nulli
hominum nato misericordiam Dei et gratiam denegandam.
 Porro autem si etiam gravissimis delictoribus etin Deum
multum ante peccantibus, cum postea crediderint, remissa
peccatorum datur ; et a baptismo atque a gratia nemo pro
hibetur ; quanto magis prohiberi non debet infans, qui re-
cens natus nihil peccavit, nisi quod secundum Adam car-
naliter natus, contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate
contraxit? Qui ad remissam peccatorum accipiendam hoc
ipso facilius accedit, quod illi remittuntur non propria, sed
aliena peccata.

496

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

baptism to cleanse them from the guilt and pollu
tion of it. To this we may add another place of
Cyprian, where describing the great wickedness of
those that lapsed in time of persecution, he thus
aggravates their crime : That nothing might be
wanting5' to fill up the measure of their wickedness,
their little infants were either led or carried in their
parents' arms, and lost that which they had obtained
at their first coming into the world, meaning the
benefits of their baptism. And therefore he brings
them in thus pleading against their parents in an
elegant strain at the day of judgment: This was no
fault of ours, we did not of our own accord forsake
the meat and cup of the Lord, to run and partake
of those profane pollutions : it was the unfaithful
ness of others that ruined us, we had our parents
for our murderers ; they denied us God for our Fa
ther, and the church for our mother ; for whilst we
were httle, and unable to take care of ourselves, and
ignorant of so great a wickedness, we were insnared
by the treachery of others, and by them drawn into
a partnership of their impieties. Here we may ob
serve, that children were made partakers of the eu
charist (which Cyprian calls the meat and drink of
the Lord) ; and this is evident from other passages
in the same author : which is a further evidence for
the practice of infant baptism ; for it is certain that
none but baptized persons were ordinarily allowed
to partake of the eucharist at the Lord's table. I
think it needless to clog this discourse with any
more authorities from the council of Eliberis, Op
tatus, Gregory Nazianzen, Basil, Ambrose, Chry
sostom, Paulinus, the councils of Carthage, St.
Austin, or St. Jerom, or other writers of the fourth
age, which the reader may find collected together
by Mr. Wall, with suitable observations on them.
It is sufficient to my design, against Salmasius and
Suicerus, to have proved that infant baptism was
not owing to any new doctrine begun in the third
century, but was derived from more ancient prin
ciples, and handed down through the two first ages
from apostolical practice.
I shall now proceed to remark a
infant bant'ism few other things relating to the ban-
not to he delayed to ° *
theee?arri' ie'it""- tlsm °^ ini>ants, among those who al-
Sn^fS, "^elk lowed them t0 be capable of it from
SKSfnSa. the.ir Mrth. Some there were in the
African church, as we have heard out
of the last-mentioned citations from Cyprian, who
were strictly for confining baptism to the eighth
day, because such was the rule in the case of cir
cumcision. But Cyprian and the council of Car
thage answer all the arguments that were brought
in favour of this novelty, which seems only to have
been a question in theory, and scarce ever reduced

to practice. The abettors of it pleaded, that an in
fant in the first days after its birth is unclean so
that any one of us abhors to kiss it. To which Cy
prian answers, We judge not53 this to be any reason
to hinder the giving to it the heavenly grace ; for it
is written, " To the clean all things are clean :" nor
ought any of us to abhor that which God has vouch
safed to make. To the other pretence, that the
eighth day was observed in the Jewish circumcision
he answers, That this was only a type going before
a shadow and resemblance, but upon Christ's com
ing it was fulfilled in the substance ; for, because
the eighth day, that is, the next to the sabbath day,
was to be the day on which the Lord was to rise
from the dead, and quicken us, and give us the spi
ritual circumcision ; this eighth day, that is. the
next day to the sabbath, or Lord's day, was signi
fied in the type before, which type ceased when the
substance came, and the spiritual circumcision was
given to us. So that we judge that no person is to
be hindered from obtaining the grace, by the law
that is now appointed ; and that the spiritual cir
cumcision ought not to be restrained by the circum
cision that was according to the flesh : but that all
are to be admitted to the grace of Christ; foras
much as Peter says in the Acts of the Apostles, " The
Lord hath showed me, that no person is to be called
common or unclean." This is the only place where
ever we read that this question was made; and after
the resolution here given, we never find that it was
proposed again. So that this circumstance of time
seems never to have prevailed in the practice of the
church. Gregory Nazianzen had also a singular
opinion in relation to the time of baptizing children
when there was no danger of death. For in that
case, he thought it better to defer it till they were
about three years old ; but in case of danger, to give
it immediately after they were born, for fear they
should die unbaptized. His words are theie : What
say you53 to those 'that are as yet infants, and are
not in a capacity to be sensible either of the grace,
or of the loss of it ? Shall we baptize them too P
Yes, by all means, if any danger so require it. For
it is better that they should be sanctified without
their own sense of it, than that they should die un
sealed and uninitiated. And the ground of this is
circumcision, which was given on the eighth day,
and was a typical seal, and was given to those who
had not the use of reason : as also the anointing of
the' door-posts, which preserved the firstborn by
things that have no sense. As for others, I give
my opinion, that they should stay three years, or
thereabouts, till they can hear the mystical words,
J and make answers to them ; and though they do
not perfectly understand them, yet they can then

57 Cypr. de Lapsis, p. 125. Ac nequid deesset ad eriini-
nis cumulum, infantes quoque parentum manibus vel impo-
siti vel attiacti, amiserunt parvuli, quod in primo statim

nativitatis exordio fuerant consecuti, &c.
58 Cypr. Ep. 59. al. 64. ad Fidum, p. 160.
59 Naz. Orat. 40. de Baptismo, t. 1. p. 658.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

497

frame to speak them : and then you may sanctify
them in soul and body with the great sacrament of
initiation. But this was a singular opinion of Na
zianzen, taken up upon some particular reasons,
which the church never assented to : and therefore
I join this with that other of Fidus the African, as
pecuhar fancies of private men, which never gained
any esteem or credit in the public and avowed prac
tice of the church. Yet in some churches a custom had
Sect. 11.
churches 'u >SsV prevailed to defer the baptism of in-
[7t '."pproachSI fants, as well as adult persons, where
feBtuai. there was no apparent danger of death,
to the time of some of the more eminent and noted
festivals, which were more peculiarly designed and
set apart for the solemn administration of baptism.
Socrates says, " in Thessaly they only baptized at
Easter : upon which account a great many in those
parts died without baptism. He does not say ex
pressly, that this was the case of children; but
there are some reasons to incline one to believe, that
it related to them as well as others. For both in
the French and Spanish councils there are canons
which order the baptism of children to be adminis
tered only at Easter, except in case of necessity and
imminent danger of death. In the council of Aux
erre" it was decreed for the French churches, That
no children should be baptized at any other time
save on the solemn festival of Easter, except such
as were near death, whom they called grabatarii,
because they were baptized on a sick bed. And if
any one contumaciously in contempt of this decree
offered their children to baptism in any of their
churches, they should not be received. And if any
presbyter presumed to receive them against this
order, he should be suspended three months from
the communion of the church. The second council
of Bracara82 also speaks of the like practice in the \
Spanish churches, ordering that in the middle of
Lent, such infants as were to be baptized at EasterT;
should be presented twenty days before to undergo
the purgation, or preparation of exorcism. St.
Austin also speaks of children, infants,63 httle ones,
sucklings hanging on their mothers' breasts, coming
at Easter to be baptized among adult persons ;

whence Palm-Sunday, or the Sunday before Easter,
had the name of Octaves Infantium, the Octave of
Infants, upon their account. St. Ambrose also61
speaks of great numbers of infants coming at Easter
to be baptized : This, says he, is the Paschal gift :
pious fathers and holy mothers bring their new
born progeny in great multitudes by faith to the
holy font, from whose womb being regenerated
under the tree of faith, they shine with the innocent
ornament of lights and tapers. These are abundant
proofs, that though in cases of extremity children
might receive baptism at any time, yet in other
cases, where there was no visible appearance or
danger of death, their baptism in many places was
deferred till the Easter festival, as well as that of
adult persons.
Whilst I am upon the subject of
infant baptism, it will not be improper a resolution of
to resolve certain cases and questions, whether children
. . might he baptized,
that may be put concerning it, so far wl>™ only one Pa-
¦* * ° rent ivas Christian }
as they are capable of being resolved
from the practice ofthe church, or judgment ofthe
ancient writers. One is concerning such children
who had only one parent Christian, and the other
a Jew or a heathen : these were reckoned capable
of baptism upon the right of one parent being Chris
tian. For so it was resolved in the fourth council
of Toledo,65 in the case of such women as had Jews
for their husbands, that the children that were
born of them should follow the faith and condition
of the mother: and so on the other hand, they
who had unbelieving mothers, and believing fa
thers, should follow the Christian religion, and not
the Jewish superstition.
Another case was concerning the
children whose parents were under whether the chil
dren ofexcommuni-
excommumcation and the church s j»»» parents might
be baptized.
censures. St. Austin had occasion
to consider this case upon the account of one Aux-
Ilius, a young bishop, who in a fit of ungoverned
zeal had rashly excommunicated one Classicianus,
and together with him, laid his whole family under
an anathema and interdict. Which was a practice
that, however some later popes have dealt much in,
the ancients were not acquainted with. He also

"Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 22. 'Ev xais ripipats ts ndtrxa
povov tWriJoo-i- Sid atpoSpa irXb.v oXiytov ol Xoiirol pi)
tatTTltT$EVTES dirO^Vl]OTKtifTl.
61 Cone. Antissiodor. can. 18. Non licet absque Paschaj
solennitate ullo tempore baptizare, nisi illos quibus mors
vicma est, quos grabatarios dicunt. Quod si quis in alio
pago; contumacia faciente, post interdictum hoc infantes
suos ad baptismum detulerit in ecclesias nostras, non reci-
piantur. Et quicunque presbyter ipsos extra nostrum praa-
ceptuin recipere praesumpserit, tribus mensibus a commu-
niotie ecclesiae sequestratus sit.
32 Cone. Bracar. 2. can. 9. Mediante Quadragesima, ex
viginti diebus baptizandos infantes, ad exorcismi purgati-
onem offerre praecipiant. Vid. Cone. Matiscon. 2. can. 3.
63 Aug. Serm. 160. de Tempore, t. 10. p. 331. Hodie
2 X

octavae dicuntur infantium. — Illi pueri, infantes, parvuli,
lactantes, matemis uberibus inhaerentes, et quantum in eos
gratiae referatur nescientes, ut ipsi videtis, quia infantes vo-
cantur, et ipsi habent octavas hodie. Et isti senes, juvenes,
adolescentuli, omnes infantes, &c.
64 AmbrosWde Mysterio Paschae, cap. 5. Hoc Paschae
donum. — Hinc casti patres, pudicae etiam matres, novel-
lam per fidem stirpem prosequuntur innumeram. Hinc sub
fidei arbore ab utero fontis innocui cereorum splendet orna-
tus, &c.
BS Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 63. Filii autem qui ex talibus
(Judacis) nati existunt, fidem atque conditionem matris
sequantur. Similiter et hi qui procreati sunt de infidelibus
mulieribus, et fidelibus viris, Christianam religionem se
quantur, non Judaicam superstitionem.

498

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

seems to have forbidden any children to be bap
tized, who were born in the family during this in
terdict. Upon which St. Austin took occasion to
write to him, and expostulate with him upon the
reasons of these proceedings, desiring to be inform
ed86 upon what grounds and authority of reason or
testimony of Scripture he could confirm his opinion;
by what right a son was to be anathematized for
, the father's crime, or a wife for her husband's, or a
servant for his master's ; or a child not yet born, if
he happened to be born in the house whilst it lay
under such an interdict, why it should not have
the benefit of the laver of regeneration in danger of
death. In corporal punishments, he owns, some
times it was otherwise : for God thought fit to
punish some despisers, with their whole families,
though they were not accessory to the contemner's
crimes, that by the death of mortal bodies, which
must otherwise have shortly died, he might strike
terror into the living : but he never dealt thus in
spiritual punishments, which affect the soul ; but
" the soul that sinneth, it shall die." And therefore
St. Austin for his own part declares, he never durst
use excommunication to this purpose, though he
was never so highly provoked by the most villan-
ous actions of any men against the church; be
cause if any one should ask him a reason of such
his practice, and oblige him to show the justice of
his proceeding, he freely owns, he could find nothing
to answer him. Whence, I think, we may fairly
conclude, that the excommunication of a parent
did not deprive the child of his right to baptism :
and though there were some who made a stretch
upon church power in this case, yet their actions
were so far from being generally approved, or
authorized by any rule, that they were rather
thought to deserve a censure. The reader that
would know how the Reformed churches have re
solved this same case, about the admission of the
children of excommunicated persons to baptism,
may consult another discourse67 which I have
formerly had occasion to write in defence of the
church, where this case is more particularly con

sidered and resolved upon the principles and prac
tice of some of the most eminent churches of the
Reformation. Another question, sometimes agi
tated in the primitive church, was whether e'spoeed
, ., , children, whose pa-
concerning such children who were rents™,™ unknown,
° , - „ , might be baptiied.
either exposed, or redeemed from the
barbarians, whose parents were unknown, and con
sequently it was utterly uncertain whether they
were ever baptized or not. This was a case that
often happened in Africa, where the Christians
bordered upon several barbarous nations; and it
was thus resolved upon a consultation in one of the
councils of Carthage : That all such infants68 as had
no certain witnesses to testify that they were bap
tized, neither could they testify for themselves, by
reason of their age, that the sacrament had been
given them ; that such should, without any scruple,
be baptized, lest a hesitation, in that case, should
deprive them of the purgation of the sacrament.
And this resolution was made at the instance of the
legates of the churches of Mauritania, who inform
ed the council, that many such children were re
deemed by them from the barbarians; in which
case it was uncertain whether their parents were
heathens or Christians.
But (as in some cases) if it plainly Scct lg
appeared, that the parents of infants, dr™b„erl jewshor £
who by some providential means fell trS!Ynglan5ec!!se
into the hands of Christians, were
mere Jews or pagans ; yet, in such cases, baptism
was not denied to the infants, because they were
now become the possession of Christians, who un
dertook to be their sponsors, and answer for their
education. This is evident from St. Austin,69 who
says it in express terms : This grace is sometimes
vouchsafed to the children of infidels, that they are
baptized, when by some means, through the secret
providence of God, they happen to come into the
hands of pious Christians. Sometimes they were
bought or redeemed with money, sometimes made
lawful captives in war, and sometimes taken up by
any charitable persons™ when they were exposed

06 Aug. Ep. 75. ad Auxilium. Apud charitatem tuam ta-
cere non potui, ut si habes de hac re sententiam, certis ra-
tionibus vel Scripturarum testimoniis exploratam, nos quo
que docere digneris : quomodo recte anathematizetur pro
patris peccato filius, aut pro mariti uxor, aut pro domini
servus, aut quisquam etiam in domo nondum natus, si eodem
tempore quo universa dumus est anathemate obligata, nas-
catur, nee ei possit per lavacrum regeneratioifis in mortis
pcriculo subveniri.  Ego autem, si quis ex me quadrat,
utruin recte fiat, quid ei respondeam non iuvenio. Nunquam
hoc facere ausus sum, cum de quorundam facinoribus immani-
ter adversus ecclesiam perpetratis gravissime permoverer.
67 French Churches' Apology for the Church of England,
Book III. chap. 19.
68 Cone. Carthag. 5. can. 6. Placuit, de infantibus, quo-
ties non inveniuntur certissimi testes, qui eos baptizatos esse
sine dubitatione testentur, neque ipsi sunt per aetatem idonei

de traditis sibi sacramentis respondere, absque ullo scrupulo
eos esse baptizandos, ne ista trepidatio eos faciat sacramen-
torum purgatione privari. Hinc enim legati Maurorum
fratres nostri consuluerunt, quia multos tales a barbaris re-
dimunt. Vid. Cod. Can. African, c. 72.
63 Aug. de Gratia et Libero Arbitrio, cap. 22. t. 7.' p.
527. Aliquando iiliis infidelium pracstatur haec gratia, ut
baptizentur, cum occulta Dei providentia in manus piorum
quomodocunque perveniunt.
70 Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Videas multos non offerri a
parentibus, sed etiam a quibuslibet extraneis, sicut a do-
minis servuli aliquando offeruntur. Et nonnunquam mor
tuis parentibus suis, parvuli baptizantur ab eis oblati, qui
illis hujusmodi misericordiam praebere potuerunt. Ali
quando etiam quos crtideliter parentes exposuerunt, nutn-
endos a quibuslibet, nonnunquam a sacris virginibus col-
liguntur, et ab eis offeruntur ad baptismum.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

499

by their parents: in all which cases, either the
faith and promises of the sponsors, or the faith of
the church in general, who was their common mo
ther, and whose children they were now supposed
to be, was sufficient to give them a title to Christian
baptism. The holy virgins of the church did many
times in such exigences become their sureties, and
take care of their religious education. And so it
happened, as is observed by St. Ambrose, or who
ever was the author of the excellent book71 De Vo-
catione Gentium, that many who were deserted by
the impiety of their kindred, were taken care of by
the good offices of others, and brought to be bap
tized by strangers, when they were neglected by
their nearest relations. Which was so general and
charitable a practice among the ancients, that some
learned modern writers72 speak of it with great
commendation upon that account, and tell us such
children have a right to baptism, after the same
manner that Abraham's servants bought with his
money had to circumcision, as well as those that
were born in his house. And they concur so far in
asserting it to be the common practice, beyond all
controversy, in the primitive church, as to say, that
St. Austin made use of it as an uncontested argu
ment to prove free grace and election against the
Pelagians. Which I note only here by the way, for
the sake of some mistaken persons, who impute the
encouragement of the same practice in the English
church, not to her charity, but rather to a fault and
error in her constitution. There is one question more, con-
S"*- 19- . , . ?
whether children cerning such infants as were born
com whde their pa- °
m°6u"be\aMLhedM whue their parents were heathens :
but of these there was no doubt ever
made; for as soon as the parents were baptized
themselves, they were obhged to take care that their
wives and children and whole families should be
baptized likewise. To which purpose there is a law
in the Justinian Code,73 inflicting a severe penalty
upon them in case of neglect or prevarication in
this matter. For it is there enacted, that such pa
gans as were yet unbaptized, should present them
selves, with their wives and children, and all that
appertained to them, in the church, and there they

should cause their little ones immediately to be
baptized, and the rest as soon as they were taught
the Scriptures according to the canons. But if any
persons, for the sake of a public office or dignity,
or to get an estate, received a fallacious baptism
themselves, but in the mean time left their wives, or
children, or servants, or any that were retainers or
near relations to them, in their ancient error, their
goods in that case are ordered to be confiscated, and
their persons punished, by a competent judge, and
excluded from bearing any office in the common
wealth. Photius repeats this law in his Nomocanon,
and adds to it another of the same nature, concern
ing the Samaritans, That though they themselves
were not to be baptized till they had been two years
catechumens, yet their little ones, who were not
capable of instruction, might be admitted to baptism
without any such delay or prorogation : which law
is now extant among Justinian's Novels.'4 From all
which it appears, that as soon as any Jews or hea
thens were either baptized themselves, or had only
taken upon them the state of catechumens, their
children were made capable of baptism, and, ac
cordingly, by law required to be baptized. Thus
much of infants, and the several cases I have met
with in the writings of the ancients, relating to
their baptism.

CHAPTER V.
OP THE BAPTISM OF ADULT PERSON'S.
The other sort of persons on whom
baptism was conferred, were adult no «dutt persons
to be baplized witli-
nersons, who were grown up to years outpreviousinstrnc-
r t ° . tion, to qualirylhem
of understanding, and who, in those ^J™*" '"' lhem"
days, made up the main body of the
baptized. These were usually converts from Ju
daism or Gentilism, who, before they could be ad
mitted to baptism, were obliged to spend some time
in the state of catechumens, to qualify them to
make their professions of faith and a Christian hfe

71 Ambros. de Vocat. Gent. lib. 2. cap. 8. Multis saepe,
quos suorum impietas deseruit, alienorum cura servierit, et
ad regenerationem venerint per extraneos, quae eis non erat
providenda per proximos.
Vid. Bivet. et Walaeum in Synopsi Purioris Theologiae,
Disput. 44. n. 49.
" Cod. Justin, lib. 1. Tit. 11. de Paganis, Leg. 10. Qui
nondum sunt baptizati, ipsi cum liberis et conjugibus et om
nibus suis perducant se ad sanctas ecclesias : et suos parvulos
liberos sine mora baptizari curent: majores vero prius
Scriptures secundum canones doceantur. Si vero propter
militiam, veldignitatem, vel facultates habendas fingant bap
tizari: et liberos aut conjuges eorum, aut domesticossuos in
errore reliquerint, et eos qui sibi attinent et necessitudine
2 k 2

juncti sunt: publicantur et competenter plectuutur, et
rempublicam non attingunt. This law is repeated by Bal
samon, Constitut. Eccles. ap. Justell. Bibliothec. Juris Ca
non, t. 2. p. 1298. and in Photius Nomocanon. Tit. 4. cap.
4. p. 907. ibid.
" Phot. Nomocan. Tit. 4. cap. 4. p. 907. Justin. Novel,
144. cap. 2. Per duos primum annos in fide instituantur,
et pro viribus Scripturas ediscant : tumque denium sacro
redemptions offeranturbaptismati, tarn longi temporis poeni-
tentia prorsus redemptionis fructum assecuti. Pueros autem
admodum, qui per aetatem doctrinas intelligere nequeunt,
etiam absque hac observatione sacro dignari baptismate
admittimus.

5C0

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

in their own persons. For without such personal
professions, there was ordinarily no admission of
them to the privilege of baptism. The time of their
instruction, and the substance and manner of it, has
already been considered particularly in the last
Book : all, therefore, I have further to observe con
cerning them here, is in relation to some special
cases, which we- find determined in the canons of the
ancient councils, when, because great multitudes
were baptized at riper years, the church had occa
sion to consider many cases, which are scarce to be
met with in the rules of later ages.
One of these doubtful cases was in
vet dIirr.'b2persons reference to dumb persons, who were
allowed to be bap- , ^ . . - . ,.
tired in some cer- incapacitated at the time ot baptism
tain cases. * /.tit
from answering for themselves. In
this case, if persons had desired to be baptized be
fore this infirmity came upon them, or if they could
by sufficient signs signify their present desire, the
church favourably accepted their request, and ad
mitted them to the privilege of baptism. The first
¦y council of Orange1 has a canon in favour of such
persons, both with respect to baptism and penance ;
for it decrees, That a person who is suddenly struck
speechless, may either be baptized, or admitted to
penance, if it appears by the testimony of others,
that he had any such will or desire before he be
came dumb ; or if in the time of this misfortune he
could make signs to express his present desire and
intention. In the African Code, there is a canon
to the same purpose, That men2 so sick that they
cannot answer for themselves, may be baptized, if
their friends who attended them in danger, do tes
tify their desire of baptism. And among the canon
ical answers of Timotheus of Alexandria, there is
one of the hke nature. For the question is put,3
Whether if a catechumen be so disordered in his
mind that he cannot make profession of his faith,
he maybe baptized, notwithstanding this infirmity?
And the answer is, He may if he be not possessed.
We have an instance of this case actually verified
in the baptism of an African negro slave at Car
thage, whom his master had caused to be instructed
among the catechumens, and prepared him among
the competentes for baptism. He had made his pro

fession of faith and the usual renunciations publicly
in the church, as was customary 'for the candidates
of baptism to do before they came to the baptistery
to consummate the mystery. But just before the
time of baptism he fell sick of a fever, which made
him speechless. However, he was baptized ; others
answering in his name, as if it had been for an in
fant. Ferrandus, who tells the story, had some
doubts concerning this baptism, which he commu
nicated to Fulgentius, bishop of Ruspa, who gave
him a consolatory answer to this effect : That this
man4 had all the conditions required by our Saviour
for adult persons, which were, that they should be
lieve and be baptized. Faith and the profession of
it is the act of the man : the baptizing him is only
the act of the minister. And though this man had
not his senses when the minister performed his act,
yet he had when he himself performed his own.
We believe, indeed, that none but infants are saved
by the faith of those that bring them, and that at
the age of reason a man's own confession is requir
ed : but this man made his profession whilst he had
his senses, and was baptized whilst he was yet ahve.
From whence he concludes, that there was no reason
to doubt of his salvation, because he had done all
that was necessary on his part, and was baptized in
the manner that in this case the canons had ap
pointed. Let me add to all this, how it is that Al-
baspinaeus and many others understand that canon
of the council of Eliberis,5 which speaks of cate
chumens deserting their station, and forsaking the
church for a long time, yet at last desiring to be
baptized : in this case, though they were speechless,
they might be baptized, if either any of the clergy,
or other faithful witnesses, could testify that they
desired to be made Christians, because their crimes
were committed whilst they were in the old man :
or, as other copies read it, because they seemed to
have relinquished and bid adieu to the old man ;
that is, in their former state of sin and natural cor
ruption. And this was but the very same privilege
as was allowed men in the business of penance,
mentioned in the forecited council of Orange, and
also the fourth council of Carthage, where it is
said,6 That if a lapser desires to be admitted to

1 Cone. Arausican. 1. can. 12. Subito obmutescens,
prout statutum est, baptizari aut poenitentiam accipere po
test, si voluntatis pi-ieteritic testimonium aliorum verbis ha
bet, aut prresentis in suo nutu.
2 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 31. Ut aegrotantes, si pro se re-
.spondere non possunl, cum voluntatis eorum testimonium
5'ii dixerint, baplizentur. Similiter et. de pcenitentibus
agendum est. This canon is repeated in the Codex Canon.
Eccles. Afric. can. 48. and in the later editions of the
Councils it is read with a little variation, thus, Cum volun
tatis eorum testimonium hi, qui suis periculo proprio affuere,
dixerint, baptizentur, &c.
3 Timoth. Respons. Canon, cap. 4. ap. Bevereg. Pan
dect, t. 2. p. 166.

4 Fulgent, de Baptismo ^thiopis, cap. 8. See a like
case in St. Austin's Confessions, lib. 4. cap. 4.
5 Cone. Eliber. can. 45. Qui aliquando fuerit catechu-
menus, et per infinita tempora nunquam ad ecclesiam ac-
ccsserit, si eum de clero quisquam agnoverit voluisse esse
Christianum, aut testes aliqui fideles extiterint, placuit ei
baptismum non negari, eo quod in veterem hominem deh-
quisse videatur, al. eo quod veterem hominem dereliquisse
videatur. 6 Cone. Carthag. 4. can. 76. Qui pcenitentiam in infir
mitate petit, si casu, dum ad eum sacerdos invitatus venit,
oppressus infirmitate obmutuerit, vel in frenesin versus fu
erit, dent testimonium qui eum audierunt, et accipiat pami-
tentiam ; et si continuo creditur moriturus, reconcilietur pet

Cuap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

501

penance in time of sickness, and unfortunately be
comes speechless, or falls into a frenzy, while the
priest who is sent for is coming to him, they who
heard his desire shall testify for him, and he shall
be admitted to penance : and if he seems to be at
the point of death, he shall be reconciled by the
imposition of hands, and have the eucharist poured
into his mouth. But if he recovers, the witnesses
shall acquaint him that his. petition was granted,
and then he shall submit himself to the ordinary
rules of penance, so long as the priest who admitted
him to penance shall think fit in his discretion.
Now, it is probable that, after the same manner,
persons who were baptized in such a condition,
when they recovered, were obliged to make their
professions, as was usual in baptism, when after
wards they received the imposition of hands in
confirmation. But as I cannot affirm this upon the
certain evidence of any rule or canon, as in the
other case of penance, but only judge by parity of
reason, I will not be positive, but leave every one
to enjoy his own opinion.
Secl 3 Another question was sometimes
inAcLs°yS-B raised about the energumens, or per-
mtl' sons possessed by evil spirits, whe
ther during the time of their possession it was
proper to give them baptism. The council of Eli
beris orders them to be deferred, till they were set
free and cured ; but yet in case of extremity, and
visible appearance of death,7 appoints them to be
baptized. The first council8 of Orange seems tqX
have allowed it not only in absolute necessity, but
in the remissions and intervals of their distemper ;
for it orders, That such catechumens as were pos
sessed, should be baptized, according as their ne
cessity required, or opportunity permitted. In the
canons of Timothy, bishop of Alexandria, the same
question is put, but resolved a little differently : If
baptism be desired for a catechumen that is pos
sessed, what shall be done ? To which the answer
is, Let him be baptized at the hour of death, and
not otherwise." So likewise in the Constitutions 10
under the name of the Apostles : If any one is pos
sessed with a devil, let him be taught the principles

of piety, but not be received to communion till he
is cleansed : yet if he be under the pressure of im- A
minent death, let him be received. Some under
stand this of being received to the communion of
the eucharist, but it is plain the author means it of
being received to the communion of the church by
baptism: for he is there giving rules concerning
persons to be baptized, and describing their neces
sary qualifications ; among which this is one, That
energumens shall be cleansed before they be ad
mitted to communion, except at the hour of death,
where necessity gave them a dispensation. And
this was the ancient rule in the time of Cyprian,
who says, That they who were possessed with un
clean spirits, were baptized in time of sickness : and
many times this benefit followed from it, that
though some of those for want of faith were still
vexed11 with unclean spirits; the true energy of
baptism, which was to deliver men from the power
of the devil, failing in some by their own default
and weakness of faith : yet in others it was found
true by experience, that they who were baptized in
time of sickness and urgent necessity, were thereby
delivered from the unclean spirit, with which they
were before possessed, and thenceforward lived a
very laudable and reputable life in the church, and
made a daily proficiency and increase in heavenly
grace by the augmentation of their faith. And, on
the contrary, it oftentimes happened, that some of
those who were baptized in health, when they after
ward fell into sin, were tormented with the unclean
spirit returning upon them : whence it was ap
parent, that the devil was excluded in baptism by
the faith of the believer, but if afterward his faith
failed, the devil returned to his old possession.
From this discourse of Cyprian we learn, not only
that energumens in time of extremity were admitted
to baptism, but that baptism in such cases was
many times a peculiar benefit to them, whilst it
delivered them from the possession of unclean spirits,
which could not before be cast out by any power
of the exorcists, though in those days the power
of exorcism was a miraculous gift of the Holy
Ghost.

mantis impositionem, et infundatur ori ejus eucharistia. Si
supervixerit, admoneatur a supradictis testibus petitioni suae
satisfactum, et subdatur statutis pcenitentiae legibus, quam-
diu sacerdos qui poenitentiam dedit,. probaverit. Vid. Leo.
Ep. 89. ad Theodor. Forojuliensem. al. 91.
7 Cone. Eliber. can. 37. Eos qui ab immundis spiritibus
vexantur, si in fine mortis fuerint constituti, baptizari placet.
8 Cone. Arausican. can. 15. Energumenis catechumenis,
m quantum vel necessitas exegerit, vel opportunitas per-
miserit, de baptismate consulendum.
9 Timoth. Respon. Canon, c. 2. 'Eav SaipoviC[dpEvos pi)
KaSapttrStfj, h SbvaTaiXafiCiv to dyiov pdirTicrpa. irEpl Si
tI)v e£o5ov $airTiXf.Tai.
10 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. cap. 32. 'Edir Si tis Saipova i'x",
OlSaGKEtrSto piv ti)v Everi^Etav, pi] irpoctSExioSoi Si eIs koi-
vtui/tav^plv avKaSaptaSrij.El Se SdvaTos KuTEireiyoi,irpoti-

SexeoSio. 11 Cypr. Ep. 76. al. 69. ad Magnum, p. 187. Si aliquis
in illo movetur, quod quidam de iis qui a)gri baptizantur,
spiritibus adhuc immundis tentantur ; sciat diaboli nequi-
tiam pertinacem usque ad aquam salutarem valere, in bap
tismo vero omne nequitiae suae virus amittere.  Ibid. p.
188. Hoc denique et rebus ipsis experimuv, ut necessitate
urgente in ccgritudine baptizati et gratiam consecuti, ca-
reant immundo spiritu, quo antea movebantur; et lauda-
biles ac probabiles in ecclesia vivant, plusque per dies
singulos in augmentum caelestis gratias per fidei incrementa
proficiant. Et contra nonnulli saepe de illis qui sani bapti
zantur, si postmodum peccare cceperint, spiritu immundo re-
deunte quatiuntur; ut manifestum sit, diabolum in baptismo
fide ciedenlis excludi; si fides postmodum defeccrit, regredi.
See also Clemen. Recognit. lib. 4. cap.32. to the same purpose.

502

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

Another observation to be made
No aayeNo be upon the baptism of adult persons, is
teSimonj1,ofl,thi« in relation to such as were slaves to
Christian masters. For we find by
the author of the Constitutions under the name of
the Apostles, that in the examination of the several
qualifications of those that offered themselves to
baptism, one part of the inquiry was, whether
they were slaves or freemen. If they were slaves
to a heathen, they were only taught their obliga
tions to please their master, that the word of God
might not be blasphemed; and the master had
no further concern in their baptism, as being him
self an infidel : but if the master were a Christian,
then the testimony of the master was first to be re
quired12 concerning the life and conversation of his
slave, before he could be admitted to the privilege^ ^
of baptism. If he gave a laudable account of him,
he was received ; if otherwise, he was rejected, till
he approved himself to his master. So far in those
days it was thought necessary and serviceable to
religion to grant Christian masters a power over
their slaves, that without their testimony and appro
bation they could not be accepted as fit candidates
of baptism : not that this was intended to counte
nance any tyrannical power in Christian masters to
debar their slaves of baptism, and deny them the
privilege and benefits of the Christian religion,
(which is a piece of barbarous cruelty, and spiritual
tyranny over men's souls, unknown to former ages,)
but the design was to preserve the purity of religion,
and keep back hypocritical and profane pretenders
from the holy mysteries ; the over-hasty admission
of whom might prove a scandal and disgrace to the
profession, if persons of a doubtful life were indis
criminately and indifferently admitted to the sacred
rites of it. This caution wisely lodged a useful
power in the hands of Christian masters, which
prudence and charity directed them to use soberly,
to edification, and not to destruction. And experi
ence proved it to be a useful rule ; for it both made
the masters zealous for the salvation of their slaves,
as we have seen in the instance of the African
negro mentioned in Fulgentius, and also made the
slaves sincere in their professions and pretences to
religion, when they knew they could not be ac
cepted as real converts, worthy of baptism, without
the corroborating testimony of their masters. There

were also laws of state obliging all masters to take
care of their families, so far as to see that every
individual person, slaves as well as children, were
made Christians ; and in default of this, some
penalties were annexed, depriving the masters of
certain privileges in the commonwealth, if they
were found either remiss, or acting by collusion in
this part of their duty.13 So that all imaginable
obligation was laid upon masters, both in point of
interest, duty, and charity, to take care of the in
struction of their slaves, and bring them with their
own testimonials to Christian baptism.
Yet, because baptism was to be a Sect
voluntary act in adult persons, some a JS'n'JJJj'^JJ
laws were made against compelling JeuS1byl?iJISeto'»
any one by force to receive it. In ""'"'¦
the fourth council of Toledo a canon was made to
this purpose concerning the" Jews, who had some
times been drawn by force to be baptized against
their will, and it was ordered by the synod, that
thenceforth no one should be compelled by force to
profess14 the Christian faith. " For God hath mer
cy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will
he hardeneth." For such are not to be saved against
their will, but of their own free consent, that the
form or method of their justification may be perfect.
For as man perished by his own free will, obeying
the serpent, so every man is saved (when he is call
ed by the grace of God) by his own voluntary act
of faith, and conversion of his own mind. There
fore they are not to be compelled by force, but to
be persuaded by their own free will to be converted.
But as to those who have heretofore been forced to
embrace Christianity, as was done in the time of
the religious prince Sisebutus, or Sisenandus, foras
much as they have been partakers of the sacraments,
and have received the grace of baptism, and the
unction of chrism, and the communion of the body
and blood of the Lord, therefore they ought to be
obliged to hold the faith, which they were com
pelled by force or necessity to receive, lest the name
of the Lord should be blasphemed, and the faith
which they have received be vilified and exposed to
contempt. By this we learn, that baptism was
always to be a voluntary act in adult persons, and
none were to be compelled against their own wills
to receive it : and though the church did not rescind
such actions as were done against this rule, yet she

S 12 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. cap. 32. 'Eciy iriaTov SovXos i),
EptoTacrBto b Kupios aiiTov, ei papTvpsX aiiTtp' iiv Si pi],
dirol3aXXEo~Bto, 'itos dv aiiTov dfctov iirtSEtfy] too SEairoTr)
eI Se papTVpEl avTtp, irpooSExiaBto.
13 See chap. 4. sect. 19.
11 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 56. De Judeeis autem praecepit
sancta synodus, nemini deinceps ad credendum vim in-
ferre. Cui enim vult Deus miseretur, et quem vult indurat.
Non enim tales inviti salvandi sunt, sed volentes, ut integra
sit forma justitia : sicut enim homo propria arbitrii volun
tate serpenti obediens periit, sic vocante se gratia Dei,

propria; mentis conversione homo quisque credendo salvatur.
Ergo non vi, sed libera arbitrii voluntate, ut convertantur
suadendi sunt, non potius impellendi. Qui autem jam pri-
dem ad Christianitatem venire coacti sunt, sicut factum est
temporibus religiosissimi principis Sisebuti, (al. Sisenandi,)
quia jam constat eos sacramentis Divinis sociatos, et bap
tismi gratiam suscepisse, et chrismate unctos esse, et corpo
ris Domini et sanguinis extitisse participes, oportet etiam
ut fidem, quam vi vel necessitate susceperunt, tenere cogan-
tur, ne nomen Domini blasphemetur, et fides, quam susce
perunt, vilis ac contemptibilis habeatur.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

503

did not approve them, but thought them worthy of
her censure, and unfit to be made a precedent for
the future. That which looks most like force in
this case allowed bylaw, was the orders of Justinian
mentioned" before, one of which appoints the hea
thens, and the other the Samaritans, to be baptized,
with their wives, and children, and servants, under
pain of confiscation. But even these laws did not
compel them to be baptized against their wills, but
allowed them two years' time to be catechumens,
and admitted none but such as made a voluntary
profession of their faith and repentance. For the
penalties were only designed to prevent fraud and
prevarications, in such as pretended to receive bap
tism themselves, but in the mean time took no care
to have their families made Christian ; against whom
the wisdom of the state then thought no laws se
vere enough could be enacted. So that these laws
were tempered with the greatest prudence, between
the extremes of rigour and remissness, that men
might be made sensible, on the one hand, of their
obligations to become Christians, and yet none have
reason to complain, on the other hand, that they
were forced by violence to embrace a religion against
their wills, which they could not approve and assent
to. For the penalties, as I said, were only designed
to chastise the hypocritical practices and fraudulent
remissness of manifest prevaricators. And it were
to be wished, that all civil governments and states
in all ages would enact such laws, and put them
duly in execution, against such sort of Christians,
who, instead of encouraging their slaves to be bap
tized, are the only obstacles to hinder and deprive
them of the benefit of Christian baptism.
I have one thing more to note con-
what™ersonSwere cerning adult persons, who might or
tum; wii™ par- might not be admitted to baptism:
ticular account of °
some certain trades and that is, that all such heathens as
andvocations,whichS wrre'hnai'- ma(le their livelihood out of any scan
ners ,md ,tage. ^ajous tj-a{jes or professions, which
could not be allowed by the rules of
Christianity, were rejected from baptism, till they
solemnly promised to bid adieu, and actually for
sook such vocations. The author of the Apostoli
cal Constitutions specifies several of this nature.
/ Such as the 7ropvo/3omtoi, panders or procurers ; iropvai,
whores; «'t$<uAo7roioi, makers of images or idols;16
against whom Tertullian has also a particular dis

sertation, where he censures this trade as incon
sistent with the profession of Christianity, telling
men, that by this art they made the devils their
alumni, their pupils, to whom they were a sort of
foster-fathers, whilst they furnished out materials to
carry on their service. And with what confidence,17
says he, can any man exorcise his own alumni,
those devils, whose service he makes his own house
a shop or armoury to maintain ? reflecting on this
unlawful trade of making images for the idol tem
ples. Next to these in the Constitutions follow ol
iiei crieiivijg, actors and stage-players, who could not
stick to that profession, and be admitted to Christian
baptism, because a great deal both of lewdness and
idolatry was actually committed or encouraged by
such as made a livelihood of that profession. The
canons, therefore, forbade all such to be baptized,
and excommunicated those that fell to the trade
again after baptism. If a soothsayer or a stage-
player, says the council of Eliberis,18 have a mind
to become believers, that is, to be baptized, let them
be received, on condition they first bid adieu to their
arts, and return not to them again. Which if they
attempt to do against this prohibition, they shall
be cast out of the church. In like manner, the third
council of Carthage19 appoints all such to be ex
communicated, and not to be reconciled or received
again to favour but upon their conversion. And in
the time of Cyprian, not only public actors, but pri
vate teachers and masters of this scandalous art,
were debarred the communion of the church: as
appears from Cyprian's answer to Eucratius, who
put this question to him, Whether20 a stage-player
might communicate, who continued to follow that
dishonourable trade, by teaching children that per
nicious art, which he was master of ? To which
Cyprian replies, That it was neither agreeable to the
majesty of God, nor the discipline of the gospel,
that the modesty and honour of the church should
be defiled with so base and infamous a contagion.
For if the law prohibited men to wear women's ap
parel, and laid a curse upon all that did it ; how
much greater was the crime, not only to wear their
clothes, but to express their loose, and wanton, and
effeminate gestures, by teaching this immodest art
to others ! Indeed, this kind of life was scandalous
even among the wise and sober part of the very
heathens. Tertullian observes, That they who pro-

15 See chap. 4. sect. 19.
16 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. cap. 32.
17 Tertul. de Idololat. t. 11. Qua constantia exorcizabit
alumnos suos, quibus domum suam cellariam praestat ?
3 Cone. Eliber. can. 62. Si augur aut pautomimi credere
voluerint, placuit, ut prius artibus suis renuncient, et tunc
demurn suscipiantur, ita ut ulterius non revertantur. Quod
si facere contra interdictum tentaverint, projiciantur ab
ecclesia. 8 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 35. Utscenicis atque histrioni-
bus, caiterisque hujusmodi personis, vel apostaticis, con-

versis vel reversis ad Dominum, gratia vel reconciliatio non
negetur. 20 Cypr. Ep. 61. al. 2. ad Eucratium, p. 3. Consulendum
me existimasti, quid mihi videatur de histrione quodam, qui
apud vos constitutus, in ejusdem adhuc artis suae dedecore
perseverat, et magister et doctor non erudiendorum, sed per-
dendorum puerorum, id quod male didicit, ceteris quoque
insinuat; an talis debeat communicare nobiscum 1 Puto nee
Majestati Divinae, nee evangelicae disciplinae congruere, ut
pudor et honor ecclesiae tam turpi et infami contagione
foedetur, &c.

5C4

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

Sect. 7.
And gladiators.
charioteers, and
other gamesters.

fesse_d these arts were noted with infamy,21 degraded
and denied many privileges, driven from court, from
pleading, from the senate, from the order of knight
hood, and all other honours in the Roman city and
commonwealth. Which is also confirmed by St.
Austin,22 who says, No actor was ever allowed to
enjoy the freedom, or any other honourable privi
lege of a citizen of Rome. Therefore, since this
was so infamous and scandalous a trade even among
the heathens, it is no wonder the church would ad
mit none of this calling to baptism, without obliging
them first to bid adieu to so ignominious a profes
sion. To have done otherwise, had been to expose
herself to reproach, and to have given occasion to
the adversary to blaspheme, if men of such lewd
and profligate practices had been admitted to the
privileges of the church, who were excluded from
the liberties of the city, and honours of the com
monwealth. The next that are prohibited in
the Constitutions, are charioteers, and
gladiators,23 and racers, and curators
of the common games, practisers in the Olympic
games, minstrels, harpers, dancers, vintners, and
such like, who are commanded either to quit these
callings, or to be rejected from baptism. It may
seem a little strange, that some of these callings,
which seem indifferent in their own nature, and are
now commonly allowed, should then be thought
just reasons to debar men from baptism. But it is
to be supposed, that these arts in the time of hea
thenism were instrumental in carrying on idolatry,
lewdness, and profaneness, and therefore by the an
cients, whose discipline was exact, were thought
improper to be allowed in the practice of a Chris
tian. The Circensian games were in honour of the
gods, and therefore to be concerned in them as a
charioteer, was still to partake in idolatry. Upon
which account, the first council of Aries24 orders all
such to be excommunicated as continued after bap
tism in this service. And there is a remarkable
story told by St. Jerom25 in the Life of Hilarion,
concerning one of these charioteers, a heathen of
the city of Gaza, who, being struck by the devil
with a dead palsy, as he was driving his chariot, so
that he could not move his hand, nor neck, but only

21 Tertul. de Spectac. cap. 22. Damnaflt ignominia et
capitis minutione, arcentes curia, rostris, senatu, equite,
caeterisque honoribus omnibus simul ac ornamentis.
22 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 2. c. 14. Actores poeticarum
fabularum remcvent a societate civitatis  ab honoribus
omnibus repellunt homines scenicos.
23 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. u. 32. "Kvioxos, fi povopdXos, f)
TaStoSpopos, fl XovSEpiricrTTis, fl 'OXvpirtKos, i) xopavXns,
ri KtSraptiiis, f) XvpiaTt)s, f) b Tr)v opxnatv ilriSEtKvvpEvos,
f) KairryXos, f} iravaderBtotiav, i) dirofiaXXitidtocrav.
21 Cone. Arelat. 1. can. 4. De agitatoribus, qui fideles
sunt, placuit eos, quamdiu agitant, a communione separari.
25 Hieron. Vit. Hilarion. cap. 13. Auriga Gazensis, in

his tongue to prayer; in this condition he was
brought in a bed to Hilarion, who told him that lie
could not be healed, unless he believed in Jesus,
and promised to bid adieu to his former trade. The
man immediately upon this believed, renounced, and
was -healed, rejoicing more for the salvation of his
soul than his body. This calling ministered to
idolatry, and upon that score a renunciation of it
was so precisely exacted of men at their baptism.
The gladiator's art was infamous for its barbarity
and cruelty, involving men in murder and blood
shed, and therefore utterly inconsistent with the
rules of Christianity. The racers, and curators of
the public games, and Olympic combatants, were all
concerned in idolatrous practices ; for these games
also were held in the name and to the honour of
some idol god ; which calling was therefore to be
renounced, as an appendage to idolatry, before men
came to baptism. For the other trades, of min
strels, harpers, dancers, &c, besides their minister
ing to levity, vanity, and luxury,- they were also
employed in idol worship and other profaneness,
which seems to have been the principal reason of
making such a strict prohibition of them in the
subsequent life of every Christian.
The next sort of persons mentioned s 1 8
in the Constitutions, as unworthy of v,^Se^ol£i
baptism, are lascivious persons, with cur"'"s *rU
all practisers of curious arts,26 as magicians, en
chanters, astrologers, diviners, magical charmers,
idle and wandering beggars, makers of amulets and
phylacteries, and such as dealt in heathenish lus
trations, soothsayers, and observers of signs and
omens, interpreters of palpitations, observers of ac
cidents in meeting others, making divination there
upon, as upon a blemish in the eye, or in the feet,
observers of the motion of birds or weasels, observ
ers of voices and symbolical sounds. All these are
appointed to be examined and tried a considerable
time, whether they would relinquish their arts or
not. If they did, they might be received ; if not,
they were to be rejected from baptism. The names
of these curious arts, which I have expressed in the
margin, are some of them difficult to be understood.
The XtbraysQ are explained by Chrysostom27 to be
idle wandering beggars, given to spend what they

curru percussus a dasmone, totus obriguit, ita ut nee manus
agitare, nee cervicem posset reflectere. Delatus ergo in
lecto, cum solam linguam moveret ad preces, audivit non
prius posse sanari, quam crederet in Jesum, et se sponderet
arti pristinae renunciaturum. Credidit, spopondit, sanatus
est, magisque de animae quam de corporis salute exultavit.
26 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. cap. 32. Mdyos, iiraoiSbs, da-
TpoXdyos, paVTts, SripEirtpSos, XdiTafc, dxXaytoyos, irEpt-
dppaTa irotmv, irEptKaSaipiav, oliovtcTTris, o-vp[ioXoSEiKT7]s,
iraXpiov ippEVEbs, epvXaTTopEVOs iv ervvavTwazl Xtbfias
di^rEtos, 77 iroSwv, r) dpvLSrtov, n yaXiov, v iiritptovytiEtov, r)
lrapaKpoapaTtov avpfldXiKeov, xpdvto SoKipa'fioSoiaav, &C.
27 Chrysost. Horn. 13. in Ephes.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

505

got in gaming and luxury. But others make them
a sort of diviners, or fortune-tellers, like our gipsies,
which is most agreeable to this place. The ittpidp-
uora were the same with the phylacteria, which
were amulets made of ribands, with a text of Scrip
ture, or some other charm of words, written in them,
and hanged about the neck to cure diseases, and
preserve men from danger, whence they had the
name of phylacteries or preservatives. Now, this
was a piece of heathenish superstition and idolatry,
which stuck closest to new converts, and was most
difficult to be cured. Therefore we find the ancient
canons and fathers very severe in their censures and
invectives against it. The council of Laodicea'con-
demns clergymen that pretended to make such phy
lacteries, which were truly the bonds and fetters of
their own souls, and orders all such as wore them
to be cast out of the church.28 The council of
Trullo29 decrees six years' penance for such of
fenders. St. Chrysostom30 declaims against it as
gross idolatry, whatever little pleas were brought
in favour of it. The use of amulets to hang about
the neck, says he, is idolatry, though they that gain
by it offer a thousand philosophical arguments to
defend it, saying, We only pray to God, and do no
thing more ; and, The old woman that made them
was a Christian and a believer ; with other such
like excuses : notwithstanding all which, he threat
ens to excommunicate all such as were found to
practise it. So that, as this was a crime deserving
excommunication in all that were already baptized,
it was thought also a just reason to prohibit any
from coming to baptism, who would not first pro
mise to renounce it.
s^,, 9 Another sort of persons whom the
puFb"cqu!anrerr,'nd author of the Constitutions excludes
from the privilege of baptism, are
• frequenters of the public games and theatre. If
any man's mind31 be addicted to the madness of
the theatre, or huntings, or horse-racings, or other
gymnastical sports and exercises, let him either
leave them off or be rejected from baptism. The
learned Hieronymus Mercurialis32 has an observa
tion, that will explain the reason of this prohi
bition. For in his curious discourse, De Arte Gym-
nastica, he observes, these several sorts of heathen
games and plays were instituted upon a religious
account, in honour of the gods, and men thought

they were doing a grateful thing to them, whilst
they were engaged in such exercises. Therefore a
Christian could not be present at them as a spec
tator, without partaking, in some measure, in the
idolatry of them. Besides, there was a great deal of
barbarity and cruelty, as well as lewdness and pro
faneness, committed in many of them, which it
did not become a Christian eye to behold with plea
sure and approbation. The theatre was looked
upon as the devil's propriety, and so he himself
termed it, as we learn from that famous story in
Tertullian,33 where speaking of a Christian woman,
who went to the theatre, and returned possessed
with a devil, he says, The unclean spirit being asked
by the exorcist, how he durst presume to make such
an attempt upon a believer, replied confidently,
that he had a right to her, because he found her
upon his own ground. For these reasons the an
cient canons. and fathers are so frequently severe
in their invectives against all theatrical exercises,
not only in the actors, but also in the spectators,
declaring them to be incompatible with the piety
and purity of a Christian life. And upon this ac
count men were obliged to renounce them before
they could be admitted to baptism. But of this
something more when we come to the form of re
nunciation. The several sorts of persons hither
to mentioned were excluded from ' in iiimt' cases the
, . . - , , military life niiirlit
baptism without exception : but there unqualify men tor
A t x baptism.
are two other kinds or states of life,
that must be considered with some distinction, that
is, the mihtary life, and the state of concubinage, as
it is called sometimes in the civil law and ancient
canons. Some learned persons34 are of opinion,
that the ancients had so much a dislike to the mili
tary life, as to excommunicate such as bore arms
after baptism : which they affirm upon the authority
of the Nicene fathers, to whom they impute it as an
error, that they condemned absolutely the military
life as unlawful, which St. John Baptist had ap
proved. But this charge is grounded merely upon
a mistake and misunderstanding of the meaning of
those fathers, who had no intent to condemn the
military life in general, but only as it might happen
to be unlawful in some particular circumstances
and cases. The words of the canon referred to are
these : " If any, who at first by the grace of God

28 Cone. Laodic. can. 36. Ov SeX UpartKHS fj KXnpiKas
hoieiv tA XsyopEva tpvXaKTtipta, &Tiva iari SEerpuniipta
Ttov <\rvxiov avTrnv' tous Si tpopiivTas piirTEaBat 'ek Ti]S 'ek-
KXriorias iKEXivaapsv.
23 Cone. Trull, can. 61.
30 Chrys. Horn. 8. in Colos. p. 1374. TA irepiairTa, Kav
pvpta tpiXocrotpioinv ol 'ek testiov xpi)paTt![6pivoi, Sec. z'tSto-
XoXaTPEia to irpdypa 'ectiv. Vid. Chrys. in Psalm, ix. et
Horn. 6. adversus Judaeos. It. Basil, in Psal. xlvi. Chrys.
Horn. 21. ad Pop. Antioch.
81 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. cap. 32. QeaTpopavla. eItis

irpdoKEiTat, r) Kvvi]yiots, i) liriroSpopiots, ri dyttitrtv' ij irav-
ardoSto, it diroftaXXioSto.
32 Mercurial, de Arte Gymnast, lib. 1. cap. 3. p. 12. Lu-
dorum finis erat religio quaedam, qua.antiqui opinabantur
sese diis rem gratam illis ludis tanquam promissam facturos.
33 Tertul. de Spectac. cap. 26. Theatrum adiit, et inde
cum daemonio rediit. Itaque in exorcismo cum oncr'aretur
immundus spiritus, quod ausus esset fidelem aggredi ; con-
stanter, et justissime, inquit, feci, in meo enim inveni.
31 Scult. Discus. Quaest. de Concilio Nicaeno, in Medulla
r-iir. par. I. p. 477.

506

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI,

made confession of the faith,35 and cast away the
mihtary girdle, afterward return to their vomit
again, so as to give money and buy a place in the
army, let them be ten years among the prostrators,
after they have been three years among the hearers."
The generality of interpreters take this to refer pe
culiarly to the times of Licinius the persecutor, who
by an edict had ordered all such Christian soldiers
to be cashiered, as would not sacrifice to the gods ;
upon which many Christians in the army threw
away their girdles, and quitted the military life.
But afterward some of them returned again to it
upon the conditions proposed, doing sacrifice and
committing idolatry, and giving money to regain
their places ; against whose prevarication and re
volt the discipline of this canon was intended. So
Balsamon and Zonaras among the old expositors ;
and so Grotius36 and Ziegler,37 Sylvius and Corio-
lanus, Binnius, and Bishop Beverege, -with many
other modern writers. Albaspinseus thinks it pe
culiarly respected such penitents only, as vowed to
renounce all secular business and employments,
and to hve in a state of perpetual penance, but af
terward3" returned to a secular life, and took upon
them civil offices again, which in the imperial law
and canons of the church are sometimes called by
the name of militia palatina. And Salmasius ad
vances39 an opinion not much different from this.
However, it, is agreed on all hands, that the council

/ of Nice made no general prohibition of the military
life, but only in some such special cases. There
is therefore no reason to conclude from hence, that
they esteemed the vocation of a soldier simply un-
I lawful. Especially considering that Constantine
(himself allowed the soldiers, who were cashiered
by Licinius, to return to their ancient employment
again, as is rightly observed by Ziegler out of The
odoret and Eusebius.40 Nay, the first council of
Aries excommunicated all such as threw away their
arms in time of peace,4' on pretence that they were
Christians. All which abundantly proves, that the
ancient canons did not condemn the military life as
a vocation simply unlawful or antichristian, nor
consequently such as men were obliged to renounce
at their baptism ; but all that was required of them,
was only what St. John Baptist had exacted before,

when they came to his baptism, as appears from the
rule in the Constitutions,42 providing in this case
That a soldier, when he desired baptism, should be
taught to do violence to no man, to accuse no one
falsely, and to be content with his wages : if he con
sented to these things, he was to be received • if
otherwise, to be rejected. This was the standing
rule of the church, and I believe there is no instance
of any man being refused baptism merely because
he was a soldier, unless some unlawful circumstance
as that of idolatry, or the like, made the vocation
sinful. The other case, which has been
matter of doubt, is concerning the whether persons
state of concubinage, which in the »ho ii»ed°in'the'
stateofconcubinage.
common acceptation is a matter of
such ill fame, that it seems a wonder to many to
hear of any allowance made to it in the civil law
and ancient canons. But they made a distinction
anciently in this matter, as the Jews and patriarchs
of old did, among whom there was one sort of con
cubines which was permitted, as differing nothing
from a wife, save only that she was not married with
all the solemnities and usual forms that the other
was. And this sort of concubines the ancient ca
nons received both to baptism and the communion.
The rule in the Constitutions43 about this matter is
given thus : A concubine that is a slave to an infidel,
if she keep herself only to him, may be received to
baptism; but if she commit fornication with others,
she shall be rejected. Alike decree was made in
the council of Toledo44 concerning the admission of
persons to the communion : If any Christian who
has a wife, have also a concubine, let him not com
municate. B ut if he have no wife, but only a con
cubine instead of a wife, he may not be repelled
from the communion, provided he be content to be
joined to one woman only, whether wife or concu
bine, as he pleases. Now the difference betwixt
such a concubine and a wife, as learned men have
observed,45 was, not that the one was truly married,
and the other not; but in the different way of their
being married. For she that was called a wife was
married publicly, and with great solemnity, and in
struments of dowry, and other ceremonies which the
civil and canon law required; but she who was

85 Cone. Nic. can. 12. Ol itpoo-kX))$evtes piv dirb Tr]s
X'ipiTos, Kal ti)v irptoTi]v bppi]V ivSEtgdpEvot, Kal iiroSri-
pEvot Tcte X^tovas, pETd Si TavTa iirl to oIkeXov ipETOv dva-
SpapovTES, Sec.
38 Grot, de Jure Belli, lib. 2. c. 2. p. 36.
37 Ziegler. Animadvers. in Grotium, lib. 1. c. 2. p. 105.
38 Albaspin. Not. in Can. 12. Cone. Nic.
39 Salmas. de Fcenore Trapezitico, p. 782. cited by Ziegler.
40 Euseb. de Vit. Constant, lib. 2. c. 33.
41 Cone. Arelat. 1, can. 3. De his qui arma projieiunt in
pace, placuit abstinere eos a communione.
42 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 32. Sxpctxiairrjo irpoaieov Si-
SaaKEaSto pi] dSiKtXv, pi) crvKOtpctvTEXv, dpKEXaSrai Si StSopi-

vots oijstoviois' irEtBopEvos irpoerSEXEa^tm, avTiXEyuiv alio-
(SaXXiaSco. 43 Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 32. IlaXXaKri tivos dwiiti
SuXi], iKEtvtp pdvtp axoXd^utra, irpoaSExier^to' eI SiKaiirpos
dXXtts do-EXyaivEt, a-iro/3a\\.£o-.&w.
44 Cone. Tolet. 1. can. 17. Si quis habens uxorem fidelis,
concubinam habeat, non communicet. Caiterum is qui non
habet uxorem, et pro uxore concubinam habeat, a commu
nione non repellatur, tantum ut unius mulieris, aut uxons,
aut concubinae, ut ei placuerit, sit conjunctione contentus.
45 Vide Anton. Augustinum de Emendatione Gratiani,
lib. 1. Dial. 15. p. 170. Pet. Martyr. Loc. Com. lib. 2.
cap. 20. n.3. p. 273.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

507

called' a concubine, was one married in a private
way, without the solemnity which the law required :
but they both agreed in these three things : 1 . That
they were unmarried persons before. 2. That they
obhged themselves to their husbands to live in con
jugal chastity, and in procreation of children, and
be joined to no other. 3. And that they would
> continue faithful in this state all their lives. Now,
this sort of concubines, being in the nature of wives
married without the formalities required in the civil
law, were not reputed guilty of fornication, though
they wanted the privileges, rights, and honours
that the law allowed to those who were called legal
wives : and therefore they were admitted to baptism
without any further obligation, in case the husband
. was a heathen. But if the husband was a Chris
tian, the rule in the Constitutions made a little dif-
• ference. For if he had a concubine, he was obliged
to dismiss her, and marry a lawful wife,46 if his
concubine was a slave ; and if she was a free woman,
he must make her a lawful wife ; otherwise he was
to be cast out of the church. And so in the de
crees of Pope Leo,47 Christians who had only con
cubines, were obhged to dismiss them, if they were
slaves, unless they would free them, and lawfully
endow them, and give them a public marriage as
the laws required. And in this these decrees seem to
differ from that of the council of Toledo, which al
lows a concubine to cohabit in private wedlock
without any ecclesiastical censure. St. Austin43
reckons this case one of those dubious and difficult
points which cannot easily he determined. But he
inclines to think a concubine of this kind might be
admitted to baptism, because her case differs much
from that of a professed adulteress, who could never
be admitted to baptism, whilst she lived in the prac
tice of so flagrant a crime ; but the other case, he
thinks, is a matter which the Scripture has no
where so positively condemned, but rather left in
doubt, as many other such points and questions,
which the church in her prudence must decide by
the best skill she has to determine such difficult
questions. I have represented the sense of the an
cients upon this point as clearly as I could, because
it has occasioned some ill-grounded censures of the
ancients, and of Gratian's canon-law, (which is only
copied from them,) in some modern authors ; as if
they had aUowed such concubines as we commonly
call harlots, to be baptized without giving signs of
repentance ; whereas, we see, this matter was not

so crudely delivered by them, but considered and
determined with several necessary cautions and
distinctions. And I have been the more particular
in malting inquiries concerning these several kinds
of adult persons, who might, or might not, be ad
mitted to baptism, because these are questions
which the reader will not easily find so distinctly
examined in modern writers, who have professedly
treated of the subject of baptism.
I only note one thing more, con- Stct 12
cerning a pretended rule of purity .iVe'Sion"",
among the Marcionites, which was, if^peS1 E
that they would admit no married apl5°
persons to their baptism ; but they must be either
virgins, or widows, or bachelors, or divorced per
sons : which, as Tertullian observes, came doubtless
from their abhorrence and condemnation49 of the
married hfe ; which error was common to them
with many other ancient heretics : though I do not
find this peculiarity, of denying baptism to such
persons, ascribed to any others. However it was,
we are sure there was no such rule ever made to
discourage marriage in the catholic church. Her
rule was always that of St. Paul, " Marriage is
honourable in all, and the bed undefiled ; but whore
mongers and adulterers God will judge." The
church took upon her to judge adulterers, and by
the power of the keys to exclude them from bap
tism ; but beyond this she pretended to no power
or commission from God, to be exercised over any
others, whom God had left at liberty ter be married
or unmarried, as they saw occasion.

CHAPTER VI.
OF THE TIME AND PLACE OF BAPTISM.
Next to the persons who were the
... Sect. 1.
subjects of baptism, it will be proper J™?»def/e|™
to consider the circumstances of time ^J^JJ mi""''
and place in the administration of it.
As to infants, I have already showed, that no time
was limited for their baptism ; but they were to be
regenerated as soon as they could with convenience
after the time of their natural birth ; being confined
to no day, as circumcision was, by any rule of Scrip
ture : though the church in some places deferred

" Constit. Apost. lib. 8. c. 32. Hitos iiv IxV iraXXaKnv,
el pev obXijh, Trauo-ao-3-io, Kal vdpto yapi'iTto, ei Si iXevSri-
pav, iKyapEtTU axiTr)V vdptp. e! Se pr], diroflaXXiaSto.
47 Leo, Ep. 92. ad Rusticum, c. 4. Clericus, si filiam
viro habenti concubinam in matrimonium dedcrit, non ita
accipiendum est, quasi conjugato ei dederit, nisi forte ilia
mulier et ingenua facta, et dotata legitime, et publicis nup
tiis honestata videatur.  Ibid. c. 5. Ancillam a toro ab-
Jicere, et uxorem certae ingenuitatis accipere, non duplica-

tio conjugii, sed profectus est honestatis.
48 Aug. de Fide et Operibus, cap. 19. t. 4. p. 33. De con-
cubina quoque, si professa fuerit nullum se alium cognituram,
etiamsi ab illo cui subdita est, dimittatur : merito dubitatur,
utrum ad percipiendum baptismum non debeat admitti.
43 Tertul. cont. Marcion. lib. 1. cap. 29. Non tingnitur apud
ilium caro nisi virgo, nisi vidua, nisi ccelebs, nisi divortio
baptisma mercata.— Sine dubio ex damnatione conjugii in-
stitutio istaconstabit.

503

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

them, when there was no danger of death, to the
solemnity of some greater festival. But for adult
persons, the case was something otherwise ; for
their baptism was generally deferred for two or
three years, or a longer or shorter time, by order
of the church, till they could be sufficiently instruct
ed, and disciphned to the practice of a Christian
hfe ; of which I have given a full account in the
last book. Others had their baptism put off a longer
time by way of punishment, when they fell into
gross and scandalous crimes, which were to be ex
piated by a longer course of discipline and repent
ance. This was sometimes five, or ten, or twenty
years, or more, even all their lives to the hour of
death, when their crimes were very flagrant and pro
voking. If a catechumen turned informer against
his brethren in time of persecution, and any one
was proscribed or slain by his means, then, by a
canon1 of the council of Eliberis, his baptism was
to be deferred for five years. And so in case a
woman-catechumen divorced herself from her hus
band, her punishment was five years'2 prorogation.
But if she committed adultery, and after conception
used any arts to destroy her infant in the womb,
then she was to remain unbaptized all her hfe, and
only be admitted3 to baptism at the hour of death.
From whence it is plain, that the baptism of adult
persons was sometimes deferred a considerable time
by order of the church ; but then this was always
either by way of preparation or punishment, whilst
catechumens were first learning the principles of
religion, or were kept in a state of penance to make
satisfaction to the church for some scandalous
transgression. But others deferred their baptism
of their own accord, against the rules
against the rules of of the church ; of which practice there
the church. 1. Su- A
Pen™ of safvatiSn1'" are frequent complaints in the writings
of the ancients, and severe invectives
against it, answering the common pleas which men
usually urged in their own behalf. Some did it out
of a supine laziness and careless negligence of their
salvation, which was a very common reason,4 but
such a one as men were ashamed to own, because
its own reproach was a sufficient answer to it.
sect. 3. Others deferred it out of a hea-
nes'storeno"u™c1e"tfe thenish principle still remaining in
to°the severities"!^ them, because they were in love with
the world and its pleasures, which
they were unwilling to renounce, to take upon

Sect. 2.
Private
deferring baptism,

them the yoke of Christ, which they thought would
lay greater restraints upon them, and deny them
those hberties which they could now more freely
indulge themselves in, and securely enjoy. They
could spend their life in pleasure, and be baptized
at last, and then they should gain as much as those
that were baptized before; for the labourers who
came into the vineyard at the last hour, had the
same reward as those that had borne the burden
and heat of the day. Thus Gregory Nazianzen5
brings them in, arguing for delaying their baptism,
as men now usually do for delaying repentance.
This reason was so very absurd and foolish, that
many who were governed by it were ashamed to
own it. But yet, as St. Basil" observes, though they
did not speak a word, their actions sufficiently pro
claimed it. For it was the same as if they had said,
Let me alone, I will abuse the flesh to the enjoyment
of all that is filthy ; I will wallow in the mire of
pleasures ; I will imbrue my hands in blood ; I will
take away other men's goods, hve by deceit, for
swear and he ; and then I will be baptized when I
shall leave off sinning. Such men had the idol of
infidelity still in their hearts, as the author7 of the
Recognitions, under the name of Clemens Romanus,
charges them ; and that was the true reason why
they put off their baptism ; for had they believed
baptism to be necessary to all, whether just or un
just, they would have made haste to receive it, be
cause the end of every man's life is utterly uncertain.
Another sort of men put off their
baptism to the end of their lives upon
a sort of Novatian principle, because
they pretended to be afraid of falling into sin after
baptism ; and there was no second baptism allowed
to regenerate men again to the kingdom of heaven ;
whereas, if they were baptized at the hour of death,
heaven would be immediately open to them, and
they might go pure and undefiled into it. In the
mean time, if they died before baptism, they hoped
God would accept the will for the deed, and the
desire of baptism for baptism itseK. Now, as this
pretence was founded on abundance of errors, so
the ancients are copious in refuting them. St.
Basil8 argues against their practice from the un
certainty of life. For who, says he, has fixed for
thee the term of life ? "Who is it that can promise
thee the enjoyment of old age ? Who can undertake
to be a sufficient sponsor for futurity? Do you not
see both young and old suddenly snatched away ?

Sect. 4
1. A fear of falling
after baptism.

1 Cone. Eliber. can. 73. Si quis catechumenus delator fue
rit, et per delationem ejus aliquis fuerit proscriptus vel inter-
fectus, post quinquennii tempora admittatur ad baptismum.
2 Ibid. can. 11.
3 Ibid. can. 68. Catechumena si per adulteriurn concepe-
rit, et conceptum necaverit, placuit earn in fine baptizari.
4 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 654. Constit. Apost. lib. 6.
cap. 15.

5 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 650 et 652.
6 Basil. Exhort, ad Bapt. Horn. 13. t. 1. p. 414.
7 Clem. Recognit. lib. 6. n. 9. ap. Cotelerium, t. J. Qui
moratur accedere ad aquas, constat in eo infidelitatis adhuc
idolum permanere ; et ab ipso prohiberi ad aquas, qua: sa-
lutem conferunt, properare. Sive enim Justus, baptismus
tibi per omnia nocessarius est, &c.
8 Basil. Exhort, ad Bapt. t. 1. p. 415.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

.TOO

And why do you stay to make baptism only the gift
of a fever? Gregory Nazianzen9 calls it a riddle,
for an unbaptized man to think he is baptized in
the sight of God, whilst he depends upon his mercy
in the neglect of baptism ; or to imagine himself in
the kingdom of heaven, without doing the things
that belong to the kingdom of heaven. This is
but a vain hope, says Gregory Nyssen,19 bewitching
the soul with false appearances and pretensions.
And as they thus exposed the groundless hopes of
these men, so they as zealously demonstrated to them
the vanity of their pretended fears. For though
there was no second baptism for them that fell into
sin after the first, yet it was not impossible for men
to avoid falling into damnable sins after their first
purgation ; or if they did so fall, yet if they were
not sins unto death, they might obtain a second
cleansing by pardon upon repentance. So that it
was plain madness and folly to neglect baptism
upon such uncertain fears, because that was to run
a much more dangerous risk, whilst they sought to
avoid a lesser inconvenience, which was attended
with much more safety, and had no such appre
hended danger in it.
Some again there were, who de-
4. superstitious ferred their baptism upon a principle
fancies in reference ...
tothe time and mi- of mere fancy and superstition, m re-
nisters of baptism. v *
ference to the time, or place, or minis
ters of baptism. Gregory Nazianzen11 brings in
some, making this excuse : I stay till Epiphany,
the time when Christ was baptized, that I may be
baptized with Christ ; I rather choose Easter, that
I may rise with Christ ; I wait for "Whitsuntide,
that I may honour the descent of the Holy Ghost.
And what then ? In the mean time comes death
suddenly, in a day thou didst not expect, and in an
hour thou art not aware of. Others had a super
stitious fancy to be baptized in some certain place,
as at Jerusalem, or in the river Jordan, and there
fore they deferred their baptism till they could have
a convenience to come to the place intended. This
seems tacitly to be reflected on by Tertullian,12 when
he says, There is no difference between those whom
John baptized in Jordan, and those whom Peter
baptized in the Tiber : and by St. Ambrose, in his
discourse to the catechumens,13 where exhorting

them to come with all possible speed to be baptized,
he invites them to draw the blessing of consecra
tion from the font of Jordan, and to drown their
sins in that stream where Christ's sacred person
was baptized : but then, that they might not mistake
his meaning, he adds, that in order to their being
baptized in the font of Jordan, it was not necessary
they should go to the Eastern country, or to the
river in the land of Judea; for wherever Christ
was, there was Jordan ; and the same consecration
which blessed the rivers of the East, sanctified also
the rivers of the West. Eusebius tells us,1* that
Constantine had a design for many years to have
been baptized in the river Jordan, after the example
of Christ ; and that perhaps might be the reason
why he so long deferred his baptism : but God, who
knew best what was fit for him, disappointed him
in this design, and he was at last baptized at Nico
media a little before his death. For as to that
story, which is so pompously set forth by Baronius,15
concerning his being baptized by Pope Sylvester at
Rome, and cured of his leprosy; it is a mere fable,
refuted by the testimony of all the ancients, Euse
bius, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Athanasius,
St. Ambrose, St. Jerom, and the council of Arimi
num, who all speak of his baptism immediately be
fore his death : and the best critics since Baronius,
Valesius,16 and Schelstrate,17 Lambecius,18 Papebro
chius,19 and Pagi,26 agree in their verdict with the
ancients against the modern fiction. So that now
it is agreed on all hands, that Constantine was one
of those who deferred his baptism to the time of his
death : and the most probable account that can be
given of this, is the fancy which he had entertained
of being baptized in Jordan, which the providence
of God never suffered him to put in execution.
Another sort of fanciful men would not be baptized,
till they could have one to minister baptism to
them, who had some extraordinary qualifications.
Gregory Nazianzen takes notice of some such as
these, and rebukes them after this manner : Say not
thou,2i A bishop shall baptize me, and that a metro
politan, and also one of Jerusalem : for grace is not
the gift of the place, but of the Spirit. Say not, I
will be baptized by one that is of noble birth, and
that it will be a reproach to thy noble descent to

3 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 647.
" Nyssen de Bapt. t. 2. p. 216.
11 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 654.
Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 4. Nee quicquam refert inter
cos quos Joannes in Jordane, et quos Petrus in Tiberi
tinxit. "Ambros. Ser. 41. t. 3. p. 268. Debemus, fratres dilec-
tissimi, vobis catechumenis loquor, gratiam baptismatis ejus
omni festinatione suscipere, et de fonte Jordanis quem ille
benedixit, benedictionem consecrationis haurire ; ut in eum
gurgitem in quem se illius sanctitas mersit, nostra peccata
mergantur.— Sed ut eodem fonte mergamur, non nobis Ori-
¦"italis petenda est regio, non fluvius terrae Judaicae. Ubi

enim nunc Christus, ibi quoque Jordanes est. Eadem con-
secratio, quae Orientis flum.na benedixit, Occidentis fluenta
sanctificat. " Euseb. de Vita Constant, lib. 4. c. 62.
'5 Baron, an. 324. n. 17.
>6 Vales. Not. in Socrat. lib. 1. c. 39.
17 Schelstrat. Concil. Antiochen. Dissert. 2. c. I. p. 43.
™ Lambec. Commentar. de Bibliotheca Vindobonensi, t.
5. ap. Pagi.
19 Papebroch. Acta Sanctor. Maii. t. 5. Vit. Constant.
Maii 21. p. 15.
20 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 324. n. 4.
21 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 656.

510

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

be baptized by any other. Say not, If I am baptized
by a presbyter, it shall be one that is unmarried,
and one that is of the continent and angelic order,
as if thy baptism were defiled by any other. Make
not thyself judge of the fitness or qualification of
the preacher or baptizer, for there is another that
judgeth of these things. Every one is qualified to
thee, for thy purgation, provided only he be one of
those that are allowed, and not condemned, nor a
foreigner, nor an enemy of the church. Judge not
thy judges, thou that hast need of healing. Tell
me not of the dignity of thy purgators ; make no
difference among thy spiritual fathers ; one may be
better or more humble than another, but each of
them is in a higher rank than thee. By all this it
appears, that a superstitious distinction of times
and places and persons had an influence upon some,
and was pleaded as a reason for deferring baptism.
Others pleaded for deferring their
roho/i'trampie baptism till they were thirty years
of Christ. 0i^ from tne exampie of Christ, be
cause he was of that age when he was baptized.
Which pretence is copiously refuted by Gregory
Nazianzen,22 showing in answer to it, that Christ,
as God, was purity itself, and had no need of pur
gation, but what he did in that kind, was only for
the sake of men ; that there was no. danger could
befall him by delaying or protracting his baptism ;
that there were particular reasons for his doing so,
which did not belong to other men ; and that he
did many things which we are not concerned to fol
low his example in, for all his actions were not de
signed to be copies and examples for our imitation.
He that would see more of these pleas, may con
sult the discourses of St. Basil, Nazianzen, and
Nyssen upon this subject ; or Mr. Walker's trea
tise of Infant Baptism, in the preface to which, he
enumerates no less than nineteen such cases as
these, which were the pretended occasions of men's
deferring their baptism. Those I have already
mentioned, are sufficient to our present purpose,
to show, that when men made great delays in this
matter, they commonly did it against the rules and
orders of the church ; and that the ancients with
great severity and sharpness always declaimed and
inveighed against it, as a dangerous and unchristian
practice. Therefore, though there may be some par
ticular instances of persons, who thus carelessly
and wilfully, through ignorance or false conceits,
neglected their own baptism, and perhaps the bap
tism of their children too ; yet these men's actions
are of no account to show us what were the stand
ing measures and methods of proceeding in the
church, since they are manifest transgressions of her

rule, and deviations from her ordinary practice.
The church had but two reasons at any time for
deferring the baptism of adult persons year after
year; the one was, to give sufficient time to the
catechumens to prepare them for baptism ; and the
other, to reform their miscarriages, when they hap
pened to turn lapsers or apostates before their bap
tism. Both these were grounded upon one and
the same principle; which was, that men were
obliged to give sufficient security and satisfaction
to the church, that they intended to live by the
rules of the gospel, before they were admitted to
the mysteries of it : and the best security that could
be given, was from the experiment and trial before
hand, and therefore this discipline was used to
make them give testimony of their intentions by a
reasonable prorogation of their baptism.
Upon this account, the church ap- „ .
x c Sect. 7.
pointed certain stated seasons and ™mK™o'r,ib"'
solemn times of baptism in ordinary {jj£ i^, pS
cases; allowing her ministers still the <»*•«* ^fl**-
liberty to anticipate these times, if either cate
chumens were very great proficients, or in danger
of death by any sudden accident or distemper. The
most celebrated time among these, was Easter; and
next to that, Pentecost or Whitsuntide ; and Epiph
any, or the day on which Christ was supposed to
be baptized. These three are plainly referred to by
Gregory Nazianzen,23 where he brings in some
giving this reason why they deferred their baptism:
One said, he stayed till the Epiphany (for the an
cients mean that by tpHra and lumina, not Candle
mas, as some mistake it, but Epiphany, the day on
which Christ was baptized, and manifested to the
world) ; another said, he had a greater respect for
Easter ; and a third, that he waited till the time of
Pentecost. Which plainly implies, that these three
festivals were then the most noted and solemn
times of baptism. But Easter and Pentecost were
the chief; for they are sometimes mentioned with
out the other, and sometimes with an express pro
hibition of it. St. Jerom speaks of the two former,
as usual, hut says nothing of the latter. He tells
us, some referred that prophecy in Zechariah to
baptism,24 " Living waters shall go out from Je
rusalem ; in summer and in winter shall it be." The
Septuagint reads it, " in summer and in the spring."
And this they applied to the two solemn times of
baptism, Pentecost and Easter, one of which was in
summer and the other in the spring, when the living
waters of baptism were distributed to all that thirst
ed after them. He mentions the same in his epis
tle to Pammachius,25 against the errors of John of
Jerusalem, where he speaks of forty that were bap-

22 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 658.
23 Ibid. p. 654. Mivto Ta tjiiiiTa' to Hdcrxa pot TtpieoTE-
pov, 1-7)11 HEVTt]KOTi]v iteSi^opai, Sec.
24 Hieron. Com. in Zachar. xiv. 8 Aquas viventes multi

ad baptismum referunt, quae in vere etin aestate, hoc est, in
Pascha et Pentecoste, sitientibus largiendae sunt.
25 Id. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. cap. 16. Circa dies Pente-
costes, quadraginta diversae aetatis et sexfts presbyteris tui-

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

511

tized at Bethlehem upon Pentecost, and others that
offered themselves at Easter, but were rejected by
thathumoursome bishop, when they were ready for
baptism. These two, and no other, are likewise
spoken of by Tertullian.28 He says, Easter was
appointed as the time of Christ's sufferings, into
which we are baptized. And after that, Pentecost
is a very large space of time set aside for that pur
pose. In which time Christ manifested his resur
rection to his disciples, and the grace of the Holy
Spirit was first given, and the angels predicted his
second advent at his ascension. Where it is very
plain, that Tertullian, by the large space of Pentecost,
does not mean a particular day, but the whole fifty
days between Easter and Whitsuntide, which in his
time was one continued festival, as he tells us in
other places.27 And therefore, though Vicecomes **
reprehends Ludovicus Vives for asserting this, as if
he had no authority for it ; yet Habertus29 defends
him out of this place of Tertullian, and other learn
ed men30 are of the same opinion. Vicecomes thinks
the time of baptizing at Easter was only one day,
that is, the great sabbath, or Saturday, when our
Saviour lay in the grave. But this is also a mis
take : for though this day was the most famous for
baptizing catechumens, and infants also, as we learn
from Chrysostom81 and the author of the Constitu
tions,32 yet the whole time of fifty days was set apart
for this purpose, and accounted but as one solemn
season for baptism. Which, perhaps, is the true
reason why some ancient canons aUow no other
time but that of Easter for baptism; including the
whole fifty days from Easter till Pentecost, in the
sense of Tertullian. Thus, in the second council
of Mascon,38 a decree was made, That whereas many
Christians, not regarding the lawful time of bap
tism, were used to bring their children to be baptized
upon any holyday or festival of a martyr, so that

at Easter there were not above two or three to be
baptized ; they therefore enacted, that from thence
forward no one should be permitted so to do, except
ing those whose children were in extremity of sick
ness and danger of death. A like decree was made
in the council of Auxerre,34 confining all children
to the time of Easter, except in case of sickness,
when they were allowed to have clinic baptism.
And so Socrates says35 it was the custom in Thes-
saly only to baptize at Easter. All which must either
be understood to include the fifty days of Pentecost,
or else it must be said these churches had a peculiar
custom differing from the rest of the world. For in
other rules and canons, express mention is made of
Easter and Pentecost, though other festivals are ex
cluded. In the council of Girone, in Spain,39 all
catechumens are ordered to come only at Easter, or
Pentecost, because the greater the feast was, the
greater ought the solemnity to be. But on all other
festivals, none but sick people were to be baptized,
who were not to be refused baptism at any time.
Siricius, in his epistle to Himerius,37 bishop of Tar
raco, in Spain, intimates indeed, that abundance of
people presumed to take greater liberties to be bap
tized on the nativity of Christ, and the Epiphany,
and the festivals of the apostles and martyrs ; but
this was against the rule of the Roman church, and
all others, which reserved this privilege peculiarly
to Easter, with its Pentecost, or fifty days following,
at which time baptism was generally administered
to all that were qualified, but not at other times,
except only to infants, and persons in a languishing
condition and in danger of death. In the time of
Pope Leo, the custom had prevailed in Sicily, to
baptize as many on the festival of Epiphany as at
Easter or Pentecost: but he calls38 this an unrea
sonable novelty, and a confusion of the mysteries
of each time, to think, that no difference was to be

obtulimus baptizandos.  It. Praecepisti Bethleem presby
teris tuis, ne competentibus nostris in Pascha baptismum
tiaderent. Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 19. Diem baptismo solenniorem
Pascha praestat, cum et passio Domini, in qua tingimur,
adiropleta est. — Exinde Pentecoste ordinandis lavacris
latissimum spatium est, quo et Domini resurrectio inter
discipulos frequentata est, et gratia Spiritus Sancti dedi-
cata, &c.
27 Vid. Tertul. de Idol. cap. 14. et de Coron. Mil. cap. 3.
28 Vicecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 1. c. 25.
29 Habert. Archieratic. par. 8. Observ. 4. p. 134.
" Cave, Prim. Christ, par, 1. c. 10. p. 307.
31 Chrysost. Ep. 1. ad Innocent, p. 680.
32 Constit. Apost. lib. 5. c. 19.
33 Cone. Matiscon. 2. can. 3. Comperimus Christianos,
non observantes legitimum diem baptismi, pene persingulos
dies ac natales martyrum filios suos baptizare, ut yix duo
vel tres reperiantur in sancto Pascha, qui per aquam et
opiritum Sanctum regenerentur : idcirco censemus, ut ex
hoc tempore nullus eorum peraittatur talia perpetrare, pra
ter illos, quos infirmitas nimia aut dies extremus compellit
nliis suis baptismum suscipere.

34 Cone. Antissiodor. can. 19. Non licet absque Paschae
solennitate ullo tempore baptizare, nisi illos quibus mors
vicina est, quos gi-abatarios dicunt, &c.
38 Socrat. lib. 5. u. 22.
88 Cone. Gerundens. can. 4. De catechumenis baptizan-
dis id statutum est, ut in Paschae solennitate, vel Pente-
costes, quanto majoris celebritatis celebritas major est, lanto
magis ad baptizandum veniant. Caeteris autem solennitati-
bus infii-ini tantummodo debeant baptizari, quibus quocun-
que tempore convenit baptismum non negari.
37 Siric. Ep. ad Himer. c. 2. Sola temerita'te prscsumitur,
ut passim ac libere natalitiis Christi, seu apparitionis, nee
non et apostolorum seu martyrum festivitatibus, innumerae,
(ut adseris) plebes baptismi mysterium consequantur, cum
hoc sibi privilegium, et apud nos, et apud omnes ecclesias,
dominicum specialiter cum Pentecoste sua Pascha defendat,
quibus solis per annum diebus, ad fidem confluentibus gene
ralia baptismatis tradi convenit sacramenta, &c.
88 Leo, Ep. 4. ad Episc. Siculos, cap. 1. Miror vos tarn
irrationabilem novitatem usurpare potuisse, ut confuso tem-
poris utriusque mysterio, nullam esse difl'erentiam crederetis
inter diem quo adoratus est Christus a Magis, et diem quo
resurrexit a mortuis, &c.

512

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

made between the day on which Christ was adored
by the wise men, and that whereon he arose from the
dead. Therefore, since these two, Easter and Pen
tecost, were the only lawful39 times of baptizing the
elect catechumens in the church, he gives them an
admonition, that they should mingle no other days
in the hke observance. He gives the same admoni
tion to the bishops of Campania,40 Samnium, and
Picenum, in another epistle, against baptizing any,
except in case of necessity, on the festivals of the
martyrs. And after him Gelasius41 made another
decree, directed to the bishops of Lucania, prohibit
ing baptism to be given at any other time, save
Easter and Pentecost, except in case of dangerous
sickness, when there might be reasonable fear of
the parties dying without the remedy of salvation.
So that in the Roman and Western churches this
was the general rule, to baptize none of the adult in
ordinary cases, save only upon these two great fes
tivals, though the practice in some places was a
little dissonant to the injunction of the canons. In
the Eastern churches, and in Africa, Epiphany
seems also to have been regarded. For, besides
what has been already noted out of Nazianzen,
Valesius42 has observed out of the ancient ritual,
called Typicum Sabse, that on this day they were
wont, to baptize in the church of Jerusalem. And
Joannes Moschus43 mentions the same custom in
other parts of the East. And Victor Uticensis44
plainly intimates, that it was a solemn time of bap
tizing at Carthage and in the African churches.
For though he does not name it Epiphany, yet we
may easily collect it was either that day or Christ's
nativity ; for he says, it was but a little before the
kalends of February, that fatal day on which the
African bishops were banished, and the church de
stroyed by the fury of the Arians, in the time of the
Vandalic persecution. It was also customary in some
o,*nfestivaiSeo'flathe churches, to make the anniversary
^"and^nn"": festival of the dedication of the church
sarvdaysofthededi- -, ,. /,. ,. . 0 ..
cation of churches, a solemn time of baptizing. Sozomen45
observes it to have been so at Jerusa
lem, from the time that Constantine built that

famous church over our Saviour's grave at Mount
Calvary, called Anastasis, or the church ofthe resur
rection. For every year after that time the church
of Jerusalem held an anniversary festival of the
dedication, which, to make the solemnity more au
gust, lasted for eight days together, on which they
held ecclesiastical meetings, and administered the
sacrament of baptism ; and many men came from
all parts of the world to visit the sacred places upon
this occasion. Valesius43 takes some pains to prove
out of several authors, the Chronicon Alexandrinum,
Nicephorus, the Greek Menologium, and Typicum
SabcB, that this was on the thirteenth of September;
that no one might think it fell in with the festivals
of Easter or Pentecost, the other solemn times of
baptism. Whether the same custom prevailed in
any other churches, is -not said ; but it is not im
probable that it might obtain, because Jerusalem
was a leading pattern, and is sometimes styled the
mother of all churches. The custom of baptizing
on the festivals of the apostles and martyrs seems
to have prevailed in many of the French and Spanish
churches ; but this was condemned and forbidden
by many canons, and therefore cannot be spoken
of as an authentic custom, because it was rather a
transgression and encroachment upon the estab
hshed rules of the church, which in this case might
be observed without any detriment, whilst a hberty
was granted to baptize at any time upon sudden
emergencies and extraordinary cases.
Indeed, in the first plantation of the Stet 9
gospel there was no such obligation B*„ ™tb.e t^
to observe any stated times of bap- ea °J*'
tism, because the apostles made no law about it.
They themselves baptized indifferently at any time,
as occasion required, and they left this cireumstance
wholly to the judgment and prudence of their suc
cessors in the church, to act as reason and piety
should direct them. This is very evident from the
history of the Acts of the Apostles, and the subse
quent history of the church compared together.
The author of the Comments on St Paul's Epistles,
under the name of St. Ambrose,47 has diligently
noted this difference in the church's discipline, be-

89 Leo, Ep. 4. ad Episc. Siculos, cap. 5. Unde quia ma-
nifestissime patet, haec duo tempora baptizandis in ecclesia
electis esse legitima, monemus ut nullos. alios dies huic ob-
servantiae misceatis.
40 Leo, Ep. 80. ad Episc. Campan. cap. ].
41 Gelas. Ep. 9. ad Episc. Lucan. cap. 10. Baptizandi
sibi quispiam passim quocunque tempore nullam credat
inesse fidsciam, praeter Paschale festum et Pentecostes ve-
nerabile sacramentum, excepto duntaxat gravissimi lan
guors incursu, in quo verendum est, ne morbi crescente
periculo, sine remedio salutari fortassis aegrotans exitio prae-
ventus abscedat.
42 Vales. Not. in Theodoret. lib. 2. c. 27.
11 Mosch. Prat. Spirit, cap. 214.
" Victor, de Persec. Vandal, lib. 2. Bibl. Patr. t. 7. p. 603.
48 Sozom. lib. 2. cap. 26. 'Qs kci'i pvrio-Eis iv aiirij iopTii

TEXEtaBat, Kal oktco hpipas icpEfrjs iKKXi]n-ld''Elv.
46 Vales. Dissert, de Anastasi et Martyrio Hierosolym. ad
calcem Eusebii, p. 306.
47 Ambros. Com. in Ephes. iv. Primum omnes docebant
et omnes baptizabant, quibuscunque diebus vel temporibus
fuisset occasio. Nee enim Philippus tempus quaesivit, aut
diem, quo eunuchum baptizaret; neque jejunium intcrpo-
suit. Neque Paulus et Silas tempus distulerunt, quo opti-
onem carceris baptizarent cum omnibus ejus. Neque Petrus
diaconos habuit, aut diem quaesivit, quando Cornelium cum
omni domo ejus baptizavit.  Ubi autem omnia loca cir-
cumplexa est ecclesia, conventicula constituta sunt, et rec-
tores et caetera ofEcia in ecclesia ordinata sunt. — Hinc ergo
est, unde nunc neque diaeoni in populo praedicant, neque
clerici vel laici baptizant ; neque quocunque die credentel
tinguntur, nisi acgri.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

513

tween the first and the foUowing ages. At first,
says he, eveiy one taught and baptized on all days
and times, as occasion required. Philip stayed for
no time, nor day, to baptize the eunuch, nor did he
use any intermediate fast before it. Neither did
Paul and Silas delay the time when they baptized
the keeper of the prison with all his house. N either
did Peter use deacons, or stay for a solemn day,
when he baptized Cornelius and his family. But
when the church had spread itself into all parts,
then oratories were built, and church-officers were
appointed, and several orders made about the ad-
ministration of baptism ; whence it was, that now
neither deacons preached, nor any of the inferior
clergy, nor laymen baptized, nor was baptism ad
ministered at all times to believers, but only to those
that were sick.* That which seems to have made
the difference in this matter, was the difference in
the zeal and readiness of the first converts and
those that came afterwards. For the church found
it necessary in process of time to proceed a. httle
more slowly with the candidates of baptism, both
in.the instruction and trial of them, because of their
iulness, and negligence, and frequent relapses.
And by this means it came to pass, that in some
populous churches, often vast multitudes were bap
tized together. As PaUadius observes in the Life
of St. Chrysostom,48 that at Constantinople three
thousand persons were baptized at once upon one
of these greater festivals. And this was the reason
why deacons at Rome, who were not allowed to
baptize upon any other occasion, no, not even in
times of sickness, were admitted to do it at Easter,
because of the vast numbers of people that came
then to be baptized, as I have had occasion to show
out of a canon of one of the Roman councils in an
other discourse.49
Secl 10, But when these rules about stated
ruia»ererp'buSng times of baptism were in their strict-
ingages. eg^. 0^seryatj0Ij) there were still several
cases, wherein it was thought proper to dispense
with them, and discharge men of their obligation.
The case of sickness and extremity pleaded a just
exemption, as we have seen before, in all the canons
of the universal church. And the promptness and
proficiency of some catechumens above others, gave
them an earher title to baptism, if they desired it,
without waiting for a more solemn season, especiaUy
in the Eastern churches ; as may be collected from
the exhortations of Chrysostom and Basil, inviting

48 Pallad. Vit. Chrysost. cap. 9.
48 Scholast. Hist, of Lay Baptism, part 1. chap. 1. p. 19.
59 Chrys. Horn. 1. in Act. t. 4. p. 615. Edit. Savil.
51 Basil. Exhort, ad Bapt. Horn. 13. t. 1. p. 409.
52 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 654.
59 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 19. Geterum omnis dies Domini
«t, omnis hora, omne tempus habile baptismo : si de solen
nitate interest, de gratia nihil refert.
2 L

such as were duly prepared for haptism, to receive
it the first opportunity, without staying for one of
these greater festivals. You pretend to stay to the
time of Lent, says Chrysostom :M but why so ? Has
that time any thing more than others ? The apos
tles received not this grace at Easter ; but at an
other time. Neither was it the time of Easter,
when the three thousand and the five thousand
were baptized, of whom we read in the Acts of the
Apostles. Other things, says St. Basil,51 have their
pecuhar seasons; there is a time for sleep, and a
time for watching ; a time for war, and a time for
peace : but the time of baptism is man's whole life ;
all times are seasonable to receive salvation thereby,
whether day or night, every hour, every minute,
every moment. And Nazianzen,52 in answering
that plea which men used for delay, that they stay
ed only till Easter, Pentecost, or Epiphany, plainly
shows, that he rather thought men ought not to de
fer their baptism, when once they were qualified for
it, lest death should come suddenly upon them in a
day they did not expect it, and in an hour they were
not aware of. And in this respect it was true, what
Tertullian said in the close of his discourse upon
this subject, that every day63 was the Lord's day,
every hour, and every time was fit for baptism, if
men were fit and prepared for it. One day might
be more solemn than another, but the grace of bap
tism was the same at all times. So that these so
lemn times were set apart for prudent reasons by
the church, and for as prudent reasons they might
be dispensed with, when'either the necessities of a
languishing distemper, or the zeal and activity of
forward proficients, made it advisable to anticipate
the usual times of baptism, which, like all other
parts of discipline, were designed for edification,
and not for destruction.
The hke observation may be made gB!t „
with respect to the place of baptism; «S0T„,"pL!!u,
for this varied also with the state and the "posto lc ases"
circumstances of the church. In the apostolical
age, and some time after, before churches and bap
tisteries were generally erected, they baptized in any
place where they had convenience, as John baptized
in Jordan, and Philip baptized the eunuch in the
wilderness, and Paul the jailer in his own house.
So Tertulhan observes, that Peter54 baptized his
converts in the Tiber at Rome, as John had done
in Jordan; and that there was no difference whether
a man was baptized in the sea, or in a lake, in a

54 Tertul. de Bapt. c. 4. Nulla distinctio est, mari quis
an stagno, flumine an fonte, lacu an alveo diluatur, nee
quicquam refert inter eos quos Joannes in Jordane, et quos
Petrus in Tiberi tinxit. — Omnes aquae de pristina originis
praerogativa sacramentum sanctificationis consequuntur, in-
vocato Deo. Supervenit enim statim Spiritus de cadis, et
aquis superest, sanctificans eas de semetipso, et ita sanctifi-
catae vim sanctificandi combibunt.

514

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI,

river, or a fountain ; for the same Spirit sanctified
the waters in aU places, and gave them the power of
sanctification, when once they were consecrated by
invocation and prayer. After this manner, the au
thor of the Recognitions, under the name of Cle
mens Romanus,55 represents Peter preaching to the
people, and telhng them, they might wash away
their sins in the water of a river, or a fountain, or
the sea, when they were baptized by invoking the
name of the blessed Trinity upon them. And he
describes his own baptism, and some others,56 as
given them by Peter, in certain fountains in Syria
by the sea-shore. And so it seems to have con
tinued to the time of Justin Martyr and Tertullian.
For Tertullian speaks of their going from the church
to the water, and then making57 their renunciations
there as they had done in the church before. And
Justin Martyr, describing the ceremony of the ac
tion, says, They brought the person who was to be
baptized53 to a place where there was water, and
there gave him the same regeneration which they
had received before. But in after ages baptisteries were
in surceedi'ns; built adjoining to the church, and
aires confined to the °
baptisteries of the then rules were made, that baptism
church. ' c
should ordinarily be administered no
where but in them. Justinian, in one of his Novels,59
refers to ancient laws, appointing, that none of the
sacred mysteries of the chm-ch should be celebrated
in private houses. Men might have private ora
tories for prayer in their own houses, but they were
not to administer baptism or the eucharist in them,
unless by a particular licence from the bishop of
the place. Such baptisms are frequently condemn
ed in the ancient councils, under the name of wapa-
(3airrio-paTa, baptisms in private conventicles. As
in the council of Constantinople under Mennas,60
complaint is made against Zoaras the monk, that
though the emperor had forbidden all private bap
tisms by an edict, yet Zoaras, despising that order,
had baptized many in a private house upon the
Easter festival. The edict which that council re

fers to, was another Novel of Justinian's,81 made
against Severus and his accomphces, who, after they
were expelled the church, held conventicles in pri
vate houses, and received, and baptized, and gave
the communion to all that came to them. Which
sort of parabaptizations are there condemned. So
also in the petition of the monks presented to Men
nas and the council under him, these baptisms and
communions in private houses are reckoned81 to be
an erecting of strange altars and baptisteries, in op
position to the true altar and baptistery, or laver of
the church ; under which name they are frequently
condemned in the Acts ™ of that council. And in
the council of Trullo the order was again renewed,
That no persons64 should receive baptism in ora
tories belonging to houses, but that they who desire
illumination, should go to the catholic, that is, the
public churches ; and that on pain of deposition to
the clergyman who was the administrator, and
excommunication to the layman who was the re
ceiver. Now, all these laws and rules were
intended for the preservation of de- Eaceptin cue of
- n -, . ,. , , Bickness, or with the
cency and good order in the church, bishop's licence to
. . the contrary upon
that baptism might be performed in B9™ «p™ai occa-
the presence of the whole church,
whereof men were then made members, and all the
congregation might be spectators and witnesses of
their admission. Upon which account it was im
proper to allow it to he done either in heretical con
venticles, or in private houses. Yet, in cases of
necessity, sickness, imprisonment, journeying, and
the like, these rules could not bind ; for they were
only made for ordinary cases. Therefore we read
of martyrs sometimes baptized in prison, and fre
quently of clinics, as they were called, who were
baptized on a sick-bed, and others baptized at sea
or in a journey, which were not interpreted trans
gressions of this rule, because the exigence and ne
cessity of the case made them lawful. And some
times baptism was allowed in private oratories by
the bishop's licence, as both the law of Justinian

55 Clem. Recoguit. lib. 4. c. 32. Ut in praesenti quidem
tempore diluantur peccata vestra per aquam fontis, aut flu-
minis, aut etiam maris, invocata super vos trino Beatitudi-
nis nomine. Vid. Clementin. Horn. 9. n. 19.
58 Ibid. lib. 6. n. 15. In fontibus, qui contigui habentur
mari, perennis aquae mihi baptismum dedit, Sec.
57 Aquam adituri, ibidem, sed et aliquanto prius in eccle
sia sub antistitis manu contestamur nos renunciare diabolo
&c. Tertul. de Cornn. c. 3.
53 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 93. "EiCEtTa ayovTat bip' ijixusv
EvBtL I'lStOp ETl, &C.
58 Justin. Novel. 58. Priscis sancitum est legibus, nulli
penitus esse licentiam, domi quae sacratissima sunt ao-ere. 
Sed si quidem domos ita simpliciter aliqui habere putant
oportere in sacris suis, orationis videlicet solius gratia, et
nuUo celebrando penitus horum quae sacri sunt mysterii hoc
eis permittimus, &c.
68 Cone. Constant, sub Menna, Act. 1. p. 70. Ed. Crab.

Quanquam piissimus imperator noster mandaverit non re-
conventiculare, neque rebaptizare (leg. parabaptizare)
Zoaras tamen tale praeceptum despexit, et parabaptizavit
in die Paschaj non paucos.
61 Justin. Novel. 42. c. 3. Sancimus quemlibet talium
silentium ducere, et non convocare aliquos ad se, neque ac-
cedentes recipere, aut parabaptizare audere, aut sacram
communionem sordidare.
K Libel. Monachor. in Act. 1. Cone, sub Menna. ap.
Crab. t. 2. p. 28. Isti falsi sacerdotes et veri anticlirisli in
domibus intrarunt, et aliena altaria erexerunt, et baptistena
aedificaverunt, in contrarium veri altaris et sancti lavacn.
83 Epist. Monachor. 2. Syriae in Act. 1. Ibid. p. 67.
64 Cone. Trull, can. 59. MijSapios iv EiiKTtipitf oliof
evSov o'tKias TuyxdvovTi pdirTtcrpa iiriTEXEtaBto' aXK oi
PeXXovtes a"£iso-Bat tS dxpdvTtt rptoTiapaTos, Tats icaooXi-
KaXs irpotTEpxiaBtocrav iKKXijaiats.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

515

and the canons in some places had provided. For
the council of Agde65 in France aUows the eu
charist to be celebrated in country chapels at all
times by the bishop's leave, not excepting the
greater festivals : and it is reasonable to suppose,
that where the eucharist was allowed, tiiere baptism
might be administered also, though they were not
properly parochial or baptismal churches. The
council of Eliberis66 in Spain speaks of deacons
presiding over a people, and baptizing in places
where there was neither bishop nor presbyter, which
we must reasonably suppose to have been country
villages at some distance from the mother church,
where yet for convenience baptism was aUowed to
be performed by the hands of a deacon. As St.
Jerom " also testifies, who says, That in villages and
castles, and places remote from the bishop's church,
men were baptized both by presbyters and deacons.
So that though the bishop's church was the ordin
ary place of baptism, as he himself was the chief
minister of it, and the pubhe baptistery was only at
his church; yet upon proper reasons, by his au
thority and permission, baptism might be adminis
tered in other places, especiaUy in those that were a
sort of secondary churches ; of which, and their
several distinctions from the ecclesia matrix, the
episcopal or principal church, I have given a
more particular account before in the discourse of
churches.

CHAPTER VII.
OF THE RENUNCIATIONS AND PROFESSIONS MADE
BT ALL PERSONS IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THEIR
BAPTISM.

Sectl.

Having thus far conducted the cate-,
quheXaJfrson". chumens to the place of baptism, that
to rSnoun'ce'The1' is, to the baptistery of the church;, we]
are next to consider, how the disci- \
pline of the church proceeded with them imme
diately before their baptism. And here we are to

observe in the first place, that three things were
now indispensably required of them at this season,
that is, a formal and solemn renunciation of the
devil, a profession of faith made in the words of
some received creed, and a promise or engagement
to live in obedience to Christ, or by the laws and
rules of the Christian religion. For though these
things were in some measure required of them be
fore, during the time of their institution, yet now
they were to make a more solemn and pubhc pro
fession of them before the congregation. TertuUian
seems1 to intimate this twofold profession, when he
says, That according to the discipline of the church
in his time, catechumens first made their renuncia
tion of the devil, and his pomp and his angels, in
the church, when they received imposition of hands
from the bishop in his prayers for them, and again
when they came to the water to be baptized.
The form of this renunciation is

more perfectly delivered by the author The form °f '^

Sect. 2.
; form o:
renunciation, and
of the Constitutions in these words : thei=i'°rt°tit-
I renounce Satan, and his works, and his pomps,2
and his service, and his angels, and his inventions,
and all things that belong to him, or that are sub
ject to him. Others express it more concisely ;
some calling it the renunciation of the world, as
Cyprian,3 who sometimes joins the devil and the
world together, as where he asks one of the lapsers,
who had gone to offer sacrifice at the capitol, How
a servant4 of God could stand there, and speak, and
renounce Christ, who before had renounced the
devil and the world ? And so it is in St. Ambrose :
Thou wentest into the baptistery; consider what
questions were asked thee, and what answers thou
gavest to them. Thou didst renounce the devil and
his works, the world,5 and its luxury and pleasures.
In like manner, St. Jerom6 joins the devil and the
world together: I renounce thee, Satan, and thy
pomp, and thy vices, and thy world which lieth in
iniquity. Sometimes the games and shows, which
were part of the devil's pomp, were expressly men
tioned in this form of renunciation, as it is in Sal
vian : I renounce the devil, his pomps, his shows,
and his works. For he thus addresses himself to
Christians, who still gave themselves liberty to be

65 Cone. Agathen. can. 21. Si quis etiam extra parochias,
in quibus legitimus est ordinariusque conventus, oratorium
in agro habuerit, reliquis festivitatibus ut ibi missas teneat
propter fatigationem familiae, justa ordinatione permitti-
mus, &c.
Cone. Eliber. can. 77. Si quis diaconus regens plebem,
sine episcopo vel presbytero aliquos baptizaverit, episcopus
eos per benedictionem perficere debebit.
Hieron. Dial, cum Lucifer, cap. 4. In viculis et cas-
tellis et remotioribus locis per presbyteros et diaconos bap
tizati, &c.
Tertul. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3. Aquam adituri, ibidem,
sed et aliquanto prius in ecclesia, sub antistitis manu, con-
testamur nos renunciare diabolo et ponipaj et angelis ejus.
2 Const. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 41. ' AiroTao-aopai Tip
2 L 2

Sa-rava, Kal toXs 'ipyois avTov, Kal TaXs iropiraXs aiiTov,
Kal TaXs XaTpEtats ati-rou, Kal toXs dyyiXois avrov, Kal
TaXs iepEVpEGEatv avTov, Kal nrdert toXs vit abiov.
3 Cypr. Ep. 7. al. 13. ad Rogat. p. 37. Seculo renuncia-
veramus, cum baptizati sumus.
4 Cypr. de Lapsis, p. 125. Stare illic potuit Dei servus,
et loqui, et renunciare Christo, qui jam diabolo renunciarat
et seculo.
5 Ambros. de Initiatis, cap. 2. Ingressus es regenera-
tionis sacrarium, repete quid interrogatus sis, recognosce
quid respondent. Renunciasti diabolo et operibus ejus,
mundo et luxuriae ejus ac voluptatibus.
8 Hieron. Com. in Mat. xxv. 26. Renuncio tibi diabole,
et pompae tuae et vitiis tuis, et mundo tuo, qui in maligno
positus est.

516

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

spectators at the Roman shows : What is the first
profession' that Christians make at baptism ? Is
it not a protestation, that they renounce the devil,
and his pomps, and his shows, and his works?
Therefore these shows and pomps, even by our own
profession, are the works of the devil. How then,
0 Christian, canst thou, after baptism, follow those
shows, which thou confessest to be the work of the
devil ? Tertullian made use of the same argument
before, to make Christians refrain from following
the Roman theatres. But then he had also the
charge of idolatry to throw into the scale against
them. For, says he," what is the chief and principal
thing to be understood by the devil, his pomps, and
his angels, but idolatry? Therefore if all the pre
paration and furniture of the shows be made up of
idolatry, there can be no dispute, but that the re
nunciation we make in baptism relates to those
shows, and is a testimony against them. He argues
after the same manner, against all such secular
offices,9 and honours, and employments, as could not
be held and discharged without partaking in some
idolatrous rites and ceremonies ; such as the offices
of the flamens, and many others ; in which, the
very wearing of a crown or garland, or exhibiting
some of the public shows to the people, as by such
an office they were obliged to do, made them guilty
of idolatry, though they abstained from the grosser
act of it, that of offering incense and sacrifice to
the idols. And so the council of Eliberis '" deter
mined, That such flamens as only exhibited the
pubhc shows to the people, (which in their lan
guage is called Munus dare,) though they did not
sacrifice to the idols, should be cast out of the church
all their lives, and only be admitted to communion
at the hour of death. Whence it is plain, that in
the times of heathenism and idolatry, all such offices
and employments as obliged men to exhibit those
public games and shows to the people, were sup
posed to be included in the renunciation of the
pomps and works of the devil, because of the idola

try that was interwoven with them. But in the
time of Salvian, all this idolatry was abohshed, and
these pomps and shows were no longer exhibited to
the honour of idol gods : yet they had still so much
vanity, lewdness, and profaneness in them, that they
were justly complained of as unchristian and dia
bolical, upon the account of their immorality, and
therefore were reputed among those unlawful pomps
which every Christian was supposed to renounce at
his baptism. Cyril of Jerusalem, who wrote after
idolatry was in a great measure destroyed, still con
tinues the charge" against them for their lewdness
and cruelty, and reckons them among the pomps of
the devil, whilst he is explaining to his catechumens
this part of their baptismal profession.
The antiquity of this renunciation Sret_ 3
is evidenced from all the writers that ,h?\ea„"Sti0„!
have said any thing of baptism. And JrL^Swi5i"d
by some it is derived from apostolical ptac"ce-
institution and practice. For so they interpret that
passage of St. Paul to Timothy, 1 Tim. vi. 12, "Lay
hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art called, and
hast professed a good profession before many wit
nesses." The authors of the Comments under the
names of St. Ambrose and St. Jerom, supposed to
be Hilary the Roman deacon and Pelagius, give
this interpretation of the place.: Thou hast con
fessed a good confession12 in baptism, by renouncing
the world and its pomps, before many witnesses,
before the priests and ministers and the heavenly
i powers. So Pelagius. And Hilary15 seems to say
further, that this confession was also entered or
enrolled in the monuments of the church. Others
Ido not found it upon this or any other express text
of Scripture, but yet derive it from ancient tradi-
[tion. As Tertullian and St. Basil, the former of
which reckons l4 it among many other ecclesiastical
rites and usages, which are not expressly determined
in Scripture, but yet proceeded from tradition, and
are confirmed by custom. And St. Basil15 ranks it
among those mystical rites which were received in

7 Salvian. de Provident, lib. 6. p. 197. Quae est enim in
baptismo salutari Christianorum prima confessio ? Quae
scilicet, nisi ut renunciare se diabolo ac pompis ejus, atque
spectaculis et operibus protestentur ? Ergo spectacula et
pompae, etiam juxta nostram professionem opera sunt dia-
boli. Quomodo, O Christiane, spectacula post baptismum
sequeris, quae opus esse diaboli confiteris ? Vid. Cyril. Ca
tech. Myst. I. n. 4.
8 Tertul. de Spectac. cap. 4. Quid erit summum ac prao-
cipuum in quo diabolus et pompae et angeli ejus censeantur,
quam idololatria? — Igitur si ex idololatria universam spec-
taculorum paraturam constare constiterit, indubitate praeju-
dicatum erit etiam ad spectacula pertinere renunciationis
nostrae testimonium in lavacro.
9 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. cap. 13. Hae erant pompae di
aboli et angelorum ejus, officia seculi, honores, solennitates
postulatrices, falsa vota, humana servitia, laudes vanae, glo
ria, turpes : et in omnibus istis idololatria in solo quoque
censu coronarum, quibus omnia ista redimita sunt.

18 Cone. Eliber. can. 3. Item flamines, qui non immo-
laverint, sed munus tantum dederint, eo quod se a funestH
abstinuerunt sacrificiis, placuit in fine eis praestari commu-
nionem, acta tamen legitima pcenitentia.
11 Cyril. Catech. Mystag. 1. n. 4. p. 280.
12 Pelag. in 1 Tim. vi. 12. Confessus es bonam confes-
sionem in baptismo, renunciando saaculo et pompis ejus,
coram multis testibus, coram sacerdotibus, vel ministris,
virtutibusque coelestibus.
18 Ambros. in 1 Tim. vi. 12. Cujus confessio inter ipsa
rudimenta fidei, teste interrogante et respondente, monu-
mentis ecclesiasticis continetur.
14 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c.3. Hanc si nulla Scripture
determinavit, certe consuetudo corroboravit, quae sine dubio
de traditione manavit. ,
15 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, c. 27. Tmv iv tij £KkX))<"_?
irEtpvXaypivtov SoypaTtov Kal KrjpvypaTtov, to pEV ek t»j«
iyypitpov SiSao-KaXlas exppev, Ta Se 'ek tijs toiv airotrro-
Xtov irapaSotTEoos, StaSoBivTa hpXv iv pvarripitp.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

517

the church, not from any written word, but by pri
vate direction and tradition from the apostles. The.
conjecture of those learned men16 is not improbable,
who think the form of renunciation, made by way
of questions and answers, to have been so ancient
in the church, as that the apostle St. Peter may be
justly thought to refer to it, when he styles baptism,
"The answer of a good conscience toward God,"
which can reasonably refer to nothing so well as
that common custom of answering in baptism, Dost
thou renounce the devil? &c. I renounce him. Dost
thou beheve in God ? &c. I beheve.
It is further to be observed concern-
TaisS£niinciaUon ing this renunciation, that as soon as
Sanding mtRieir baptisteries were built, there was a
face to the west. ... , . ., . .
And the reason of particular place m them assigned pe-
seme other ceremo- cmiarly to this service. For they
commonly had two distinct apart
ments, as has been showed before,17 in the descrip
tion of churches ; first, their irpoauXiov oZkov, their
porch, or ante-room, where the catechumens made
their renunciations of Satan, and confessions of
faith ; and then their io-tirtpov dlmv, their inner room,
where the ceremony of baptism was performed.
When the catechumens were brought into the former
/of these, they were placed with their faces to the
west, and then commanded to renounce Satan with
some gesture and rite expressing an indignationl
against him, as by stretching out their hands, or
folding them, or striking them together ; and some
times by exsufflation and spitting at him, as if he
were present : which were all of them so many in
dications of their abhorrence. Cyril of Jerusalem,
in his mystical catechisms to the iUuminated,18 thus
describes this part of the action : Ye were first
brought into the ante-room of the baptistery, and
placed toward the west in a standing posture, and
then commanded to renounce Satan, by stretching
' out your hands against him, as if he were present.
A httle after he explains the meaning of their doing
this with their face toward the west. The west,
says he, is the place of darkness, and Satan is dark
ness, and his strength is in darkness. For this\
reason ye symbolicaUy look toward the west, when j
ye renounce that prince of darkness and horror. /
St. Jerom plainly aUudes to this custom, when he
says, In our mysteries, meaning the celebration of
baptism, we first renounce him that is in19 the

west, who dies to us with our sins : and then turn- ;
ing about to the east, we make a covenant with the \
Sun of righteousness, and promise to be his servants. .
In like manner, St. Ambrose, discoursing to some ,
newly baptized persons ;28 When you entered into
the baptistery, and had viewed your adversary whom
you were to renounce, you then turned about to the
east. For he that renounces the devil, is turned
unto Christ. Whence, as Gregory Nazianzen21 ob
serves, they did not only renounce the devil in
words, but in their very habit and gesture ; for they
did it divested of their clothes, and with their body
turned toward the west, and with hands stretched
out against him ; to this they added sometimes a
collision, or striking of the hands together, and an
exsufflation, or a spitting at their adversary, to ex
press their abhorrence of him, as the author under
the name of Dionysius22 describes it.
From whom we learn also, that this Becti 5
renunciation was repeated three times. ci^l ^ "Si
For, in another place, he thus de- ' ™e "™e"'
scribes the whole ceremony : The priest makes the
person who is to be baptized28 to stand with his
hands stretched out toward the west, and striking
them together; (the original is, rde xe~lPa£ dwui-
BoivTa, which denotes collision, or striking of the
hands together by way of abhorrence ;) then he bids
him ipdivorjaai rplg rtp Yarava, thrice exsuffiate, or
spit, in defiance of Satan : afterwards, thrice repeat
ing the solemn words of renunciation, he bids him f
thrice renounce him in that form : then he turns
him about to the east, and with hands and eyes
hft up to heaven, bids him awrdZaoBai rip Xpi^tp,
enter into covenant with Christ. Vicecomes 24 thinks
this triple renunciation was made, either because
there were three things which men renounced in
their baptism, the devil, his pomps, and the world ;
or to signify the three persons of the Trinity, by
whom they were adopted as sons upon their re
nouncing Satan; or because it was usual in civil
adoptions and emancipation of slaves, for the master
to yield up his right by a triple renunciation, which
he shows from Aulus Gellius and Sigonius. But
as the ancients are silent in this matter, I leave
these reasons to the discretion of every judicious
reader. The next thing required of men at sect 6.
. . The second thing
their baptism, was a vow or covenant required of men at

16 See Dr. Cave, Prim. Christ, lib. 1. cap. 10. p. 315, and
Estius and Grotius on 1 Pet. iii. 21.
17 Book VIII. chap. 7. sect. 1.
18 Cyril. Catech. Mystag. 1. n. 2. p. 278. Elo-yeiTe irpmTov
eIstSv irpaaiXtov oXkov tb fSaTTTfsrjpiu, Kal irpds -ris Svcr-
Pis tTniTE!, rjKurmTt Kal ICpOtSETaTTECrBz SKTEIVEIV Tl']V
XEtPa, Kal tlis irapovTt dirETdTTzaBz Top SaTtxva.
Hieron. in Amos vi. 14. In mysteriis primum renun-
ciamus ei qui in occidente est, nobisque moritur cum pecca-
tis: et sic versi ad orientem, pactum inimus cum sole jus-
titiae, et ei servituros nos esse promittimus.

20 Ambros. de Initiatis, cap. 2. Ingressus ut adversarium
tuum cerneres cui renunciandum mox putares, ad orientem
converteris. Qui enim renunciat diabolo, ad Christum con-
vertitur. 21 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 67. Tvtocrri Kal toXs axvpaat
Kal toXs pvpaaiv, tos oXrjv diroiripirr) ti)V dBEiav, &tios ciX?;
Beott)ti avvTaaadpEvos,
22 Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccl. cap. 3. p. 258. Tvpvbv Kal
dvvirdSETOv'iir)at irpos Svapds depopiovTa, Sec.
28 Ibid. p. 253.
24 Vieecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 2. cap. 20. p. 311.

518

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

theirbaptism.wasa of obedience to Christ, which the
vow or covenant of / . .
obedience to Christ Greeks call, ovvTao-ertaOat Xpirtp, giving
themselves up to the government and conduct of
Christ. This was always an indispensable part of
their obligation, before they could be admitted to
the ceremony of regeneration. They first renounced
the devil, and then immediately promised to live in
obedience to the laws of Christ. Some indeed in
St. Austin's time pleaded hard for an exemption in
this particular. They were willing to hriake a pro
fession of faith in Christ, but not of universal obe
dience ; and yet would impudently pretend to de
mand baptism of the church, notwithstanding their
incorrigible temper. Against whom he wrote that
excellent book, De Fide et Operibus, to show the
necessity of good works, as well as faith, tothe being
of a Christian ; where he answers all the objections
and arguments they pretended to bring from Scrip
ture : for they pleaded Scripture for their practice.
Amongst other things they urged that famous text
of St. Paul, " Other foundation can no man lay
than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if
any man build upon this foundation gold, silver,
precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man's
work shall be made manifest : for the day shall de
clare it, because it shall be revealed by fire ; and
the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it
is. If any man's work abide which he hath built
thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's
work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss : but he
himself shall be saved ; yet so as by fire.'' Upon
which they made this perverse comment : That they
who built upon this foundation25 gold, silver, pre
cious stones, were such as added good works to
their faith in Christ; but they who built wood,
hay, stubble, were they that held the same faith
in unrighteousness and a wicked hfe. And they
imagined, that even these men might be so purged
by certain punishments of fire, as to obtain salva
tion by virtue of the foundation, which they re
tained. To which St. Austin replies, That if this
was true,26 it were a laudable charity indeed for
them to endeavour that all men might indifferently
be admitted to baptism, not only adulterers and
adulteresses, who pretended false marriages con

trary to the express command of Christ, but also
public harlots continuing in the basest of all pro
fessions ; which yet the most neghgent church on
earth never pretended to admit to baptism, till they
had first forsaken that vile prostitution. They
urged further, that to deny wicked men the privi
lege of baptism, was to root out the tares before the
time. To which St. Austin27 replies, That this rejec
tion of them from baptism was not rooting out the
tares, but rather not sowing them, as the devil did :
they did not prohibit any that were willing to come
to Christ, but only convinced them by their own con
fession, that they were unwilling to come to him.
And therefore, though these men called it a novel
doctrine and practice to reject harlots, and stage-
players, and all that made open profession of such
abominable arts, from baptism, yet he tells them
this was grounded upon the rules28 of ancient truth,
which manifestly declared, that " they who do such
things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." And
that this was the ancient rule, by which the church
proceeded, is evident from all the writers that have
spoken of baptism. Justin Martyr, who describes
the ceremonies of baptism with the greatest sim
phcity, says, It was only given to those who, to
their confession of faith, added also a promise or
vow " that they would live according to the rules
of Christianity. And hence came that usual form
of words in their profession, Swrdrropai o-ea Xpio-j-e, V
I give myself up to thee, 0 Christ, to be governed
by thy laws : which immediately followed the dm!-
raltg, or renunciation of the devil, whose service
they forsook to choose a new master ; as we find it
frequently in St. Chrysostom,90 St. Basil," St. Cyril
of Alexandria,82 the author of the Apostolical Con
stitutions,83 and most of the Greek writers, whose
words, as being but one and the same form, I think
it needless to repeat upon this occasion. The Latins
commonly call it promissum, pactum, and votum, a
promise, a covenant, and vow, which names they
apply indifferently to all parts of the Christian
engagement, as well the renunciation of the devil,
as the profession of faith, and obedience to Christ,
which do mutually suppose, and are virtually in
cluded in one another. For he that renounces the

25 Aug. de Fide et Oper. c. 15. t. 4. p. 30. Quod quidam
ita intelligendum putant, ut illi videantur aedificare super
hoc fundamentum aurum, argentum, lapides pretiosos, qui
fidei qua? in Christo est, bona opera adjiciunt : illi autem
foenum, ligna, stipulam, qui cum eandem fidem habeant,
male operantur. Unde arbitrantur per quasdam pcenas
ignis eos posse purgari ad saltitem percipiendam merito
fnndamenti. 26 Ibid. Hoc si ita est, fatemur istos laudabili charitate
conari, ut omnes indiscrete admittantur ad baptismum non
solum adulteri et adulterae, contra sententiam Domini falsas
nuptias proetendeutes, verum etiam publicae meretrices in
turtjissima professione perseverantes, quas certe nulla etiam
negligentissima ecclesia consuevit admittere, nisi ab ilia
primitus prostitutione liberatas.

27 Ibid. c. 17. Quando tales ad baptismum non admitti-
mus, non ante tempus zizania evellere conamur, sed nolu-
mus insuper sicut diabolus zizania seminare ; nee ad Chris
tum volentes venire prohibemus, sed eos ad Christum venire
nolle, ipsa sua confessione convincimus.
28 Ibid. c. 18. Antiquum et robustum morem ecclesia
retinet, ex ilia scilicet liquidissima veritate venientem, qua
certum habet, quoniam qui talia agunt, regnum Dei non
possidebunt. 29 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 93. Kal /3iki/ ovtios SivacOai
virttrxviovTai, Sec.
80 Chrys. Horn. 21. ad Popul. Antioch. p. 275. Horn. 6.
in Colos. p. 1358.
81 Basil. Horn. 13. Exhort, ad Bapt.
82 Cyril, in John xi. 26. » Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 41.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

519

devil and the world, does thereby profess himself a
soldier and servant devoted to Christ. Therefore
St. Ambrose-, speaking of the renunciation, calls it,81
a promise, a caution, a hand-writing or bond, given
to God, and registered in the court of heaven ; be
cause this is a vow made before his ministers, and
the angels, who are witnesses to it. Upon which
account he says in another place,35 It is recorded,
not in the monuments of the dead, but in the book
of the living. St. Austin calls it, a profession36
made in the court of angels, and the names of the
professors are written in the book of hfe, not by
any man, but by the heavenly powers. St. Jerom37
styles it, a covenant made with the Sun of right
eousness, and a promise of obedience to Christ.
And he so speaks of this ceremony, as to show it
to be a distinct act from the renunciation, (though
they both tended to the same end,) because differ
ent rites were used in expressing them. For in
renouncing the devh they had their faces to the
west, for symbolical reasons which we have heard
before ; but in making their covenant with Christ
they turned about to the east, as an emblem of that
light which they received from the Sun of right
eousness, by engaging themselves in his service. ^
This custom of turning about to the
This voir of obe- east, when they made their profession
dience made by *¦
tarnins to the east 0f 'obedience to Christ, is also men-
And why. '
. tioned by St. Ambrose, Gregoiy Nazi
anzen, Cyril of Jerusalem, and the author under the
name of Dionysius. For which they assign two
reasons : I. Cyril88 teUs his disciples, that as soon
as they had renounced the devil, the paradise of
God, which was planted in the East, and whence
our first parent for his transgression was driven into
banishment, was now laid open to them : and their
turning about from the west to the east, which is
the region of hght, was a symbol of' this. For the '
same reason, St. BasU39 and some others of the an
cients tell us, they prayed toward the east, that they .
might have their faces toward paradise. The other /
reason for turning to the east in baptism, was be

cause the east or rising sun was an emblem of the
Sun of righteousness, to whom they now turned
from Satan : Thou art turned about to the east, says
St. Ambrose,40 for he that renounces the devil, turns
unto Christ. Where he plainly intimates with St.
Jerom, that turning to the east was a symbol of
their aversion from Satan, and conversion unto
Christ, that is, from darkness to light, from serving
idols to serve him who is the Sun of righteousness
and Fountain of light.
; Together with this profession of
(obedience, there was also exacted a Tim s third8' thing
i c ' e jy •./! r- required ofthe party
jprolession ot taitn ot every person to to be baptized, was
- "ft .. . Ail-' . a profession of faith
be baptized. And this was always to in ll,e usual ™rds
t  J — - •* of the creed.
[be made in the same words of the
creed, that every church used for the instruction of
her catechumens. They were obhged to repeat it
privately to the catechist, and then again pubhcly
in the church, when they had given in their names
to baptism; as I have showed41 before. But be
sides this, they were also obliged to make a more
solemn profession of it at the time of baptism, and
give distinct answers to the several questions, as
the minister propounded them, with relation to the
several parts of the creed, which contained the sum
mary of Christian faith. There were "some indeed
in St. Austin's time, who, as they were for excluding
the profession of obedience out of the baptismal
vow, so were they for curtailing the profession of
faith, and reducing it to one single article, I believe
Jesus Christ to be the Son of God. In favour of
this, they pleaded the example of Philip baptizing
the eunuch upon this short confession,42 and that
saying of St. Paul to the Corinthians, " I deter
mined to know nothing among you, save Jesus
Christ, and him crucified." Yet they durst never
proceed so far as to put their designs in practice ;
for they still continued to make interrogatories
about the other articles, as the church always did,
concerning the Holy Ghost, the holy church, the
remission of sins, the resurrection of the dead, the
incarnation of Christ, his passion and death upon

14 Ambros. de Sacrament, lib. 1. c. 2. Respondisti, Abre-
nuncio : memor esto sermonis tui, et nunquam tibi excidat
series cautionis tuae. — Ubi promiseris considera, vel quibus
promiseris: Levitam vidisti, sed minister est Christi. Vidisti
ilium ante altaria ministrare : ergo chirographum tuum te-
netur, non'in terra, sed in ccelo.
Id. de Initiatis, cap. 2. Tenetur vox tua, non in tumulo
mortuorum, sed in libro viventium.
86 Aug. de Symbolo, lib. 2. c. 1. t. 9. Professi estis re
nunciare vos diabolo, pompis, et angelis ejus. Videte di-
lectissimi, quia hanc professionem vestram in curiam pro-
fertis angelicam : nomina profitentium in libro excipiuntur
vitae, non a quolibet homine, sed a superiore ccelitus po
testate. Hieron. Com. in Amos vi. 14. In mysteriis primum
renunciamus eiqui inoccidente est: et sic versi in orientem,
pactum inimus cum sole justitiae, et ei servituros nos esse
promittimus.

38 Cyril. Catech. Mystagog. 1. n. 6.
89 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 27.
1U Ambros. de Initiatis, c. 2. Ad orientem converteris.
Qui enim renunciat diabolo, ad Christum convertitur.
41 Book X. chap. 2. sect. 10.
42 Aug. de Fide et Oper. cap. 9. Spado, inquiunt, ille
quem Philippus baptizavit, nihil plus dixit, quam, Credo
Filium Dei esse Jesum Christum. Nina ergo placet, ut
hoc solum homines respondeant, et continuo baptizentur ?
Nihil de Spifitu Sancto, nihil de sancta ecclesia, nihil de
remissione peccatorum, nihil de resurrectione mortuorum ?
&c. Si enim spado cum respondisset, Credo Filium Dei
esse Jesum Christum, hoc ei sufficere visum est, ut continuo
baptizatus abscederet : Cur non id sequimur, atque anferi-
mus cetera quos necesse habemus etiam cum ad baptizan-
dum temporis urget angustia exprimere, interrogando ut
baptizandus ad cuncta respondeat, etiamsi ea memoriae
mandare non valuit ?

520

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

the cross, his burial and resurrection on the third
day, his ascension, and session on the right hand of
the Father : all which were thought so necessary,
that the church never omitted them even in clinic
baptism, when men were baptized upon a sick-bed :
for if they were able to speak, they answered for
themselves, as St. Austin says, to every particular
interrogation, though they were not able to commit
them to memory ; and if they were speechless, their
sureties or sponsors answered for them, as they did
for children, as will be showed in the next chapter.
So that one way or other the whole creed was re
peated, and every individual article assented to by
men at their baptism. And this was always the
practice of the church from the very days of the
apostles, and in their time also : for though no
other article be mentioned in the baptism of the
eunuch, but only his believing Jesus Christ to be
the Son of God, yet, as St. Austin observes in the
same place,43 the Scripture,in saying, Philipbaptized
him, is to be understood as meaning that all things
were fulfilled, which use to be observed in baptism,
though, for brevity's sake, they be not mentioned.
And indeed in all the accounts we have of baptism
in ancient writers, there is express mention of this
profession, either to beheve the doctrines of Chris
tianity in general, as they are delivered in Scrip
ture, or as they are briefly summed up in the arti
cles of the creed. Justin Martyr44 says, Before men
were regenerated, they must both profess to believe
the truth of those things which they had been
taught, and also promise to live answerable to their
, knowledge. Cyprian particularly45 mentions the
use of the creed in baptism, and specifies in several
of the interrogatories that were made in reference
to the particular articles of it ; as, Whether they
believed eternal hfe, and remission of sins in the
holy church ? which were always the concluding
articles of the creed. And in another place he
speaks both of these, and the articles relating to
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as interrogatories
used in baptism both by the catholic church,46 and

the Novatians. For however they differed in the
sense of some of the articles, yet they both agreed
in the same form of interrogatories, and both bap
tized in the same creed. Tertullian also47 specifies
the articles relating to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
and the church, as part of the interrogatories of
baptism. And Eusebius, reciting the words of the
Creed of Caesarea,46 says, it was the Creed into which
he was baptized. The same use was made of the
Nicene Creed, as soon as it was composed, in most
of the Eastern churches ; or they ordinarily bap
tized in the profession of that faith, as I have show
ed in the last book.49 It were easy here to subjoin
many testimonies out of St. Ambrose, St. Jerom,
Cyril of Alexandria and Jerusalem, Chrysostom,
Nazianzen, Basil, Epiphanius, and Salvian, and the
author of the Constitutions : but the matter is so
incontestable, that the ancients did never baptize
into the profession of any single article, but into
a complete and perfect creed, that I think it need
less to insist upon the proof of it, whilst there is not
any pretence of an exception to be made against it
in any public or private baptism whatsoever.
There were some circumstances and
ceremonies of this confession, which This "confession
because they added something to the solemn and pobiic
t ° manner.
solemnity of the action, it will not be
improper to mention. As, first, that it was usually
done in public before many witnesses. Which was
a circumstance grounded upon apostohcal practice,
and very rarely dispensed with. Primasius50 de
duces it from the example of Timothy, who wit
nessed a good confession before many witnesses :
which he interprets of his profession of faith made
at baptism. Which is also the exposition given by
Ephrem Syrus.51 And Pope Leo52 seems to refer
to the same, when he exhorts men to stand firm in
that faith, which they confessed before many wit
nesses ; that faith in which they were born again of
water and the Holy Ghost, and received the unction
of salvation, and the seal of eternal hfe. It was
usual at Rome, St. Austin53 tells us, to make this

43 Aug. de Fide et Oper. cap. 9. In eo quod ait, Bap-
tizavit eum Philippus, intelligi voluit impleta esse omnia,
quae licet taceantur in Scripturis, gratia brevitatis, tamen
serie traditionis scimus implenda.
14 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 93. "Ocrotai, iretaSiocri Kal ttitev-
toatv dXt)$r) TavTa Ta vtp' rjptov StSatTKopEva Kal XEyope-
va eIi/cu, Kal fl lbv tiTais SvvacrSlui viricrxvioVTai  dvayEV-
viovTat. 45 Cypr. Ep. 70. ad Episc. Numidas, p. 190. Sed et ipsa
interrogatio quae fit in baptismo, testis est veritatis. Nam
cum dicimus, Credis in vitam aeternam, et remissionem pec
catorum per sanctam ecclesiam ? Intelligimus remissionem
peccatorum non nisi in ecclesia dari, &c.
46 Cypr. Ep. 69. al. 76. ad Magnum, p. ia3.
47 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 6. Quum sub tribus et testatio
fidei et sponsio salutis pignorentur, necessario adjicitur ec
clesiae mentio : quoniam ubi tres, id est, Pater et Filius et
Spiritus Sanctus, ibi ecclesia, quae trium corpus est.

43 Euseb. Epist. ad Caesarienses, ap. Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 8.
49 Book X. chap. 4. sect. 17.
50 Primas. in 1 Tim. vi. 12. Confessus bonam con-
fessionem, in baptismo: coram multis testibus, coram sa
cerdotibus et ministris, atque virtutibus ccelestibus ac di-
vinis. 51 Ephrem. de Pcenitent. cap. 5.
52 Leo, Serm. 4. de Nativ. Domini, p. 17. Permanete
stabiles in fide, quam confessi estis coram multis testibus,
et in qu.a renati per aquam et Spiritum Sanctum, accepistis
chrisma salutis et signaculum vitae aeternae.
58 Aug. Confess, lib. 8. cap. 2. Ut ventumest ad horam
profitendae fidei, quae verbis certis conceptisque memonter
de loco eminentiore in conspectu populi fidelis Romte reddi
solet ab eis qui accessuri sunt ad gratiam tuam, oblatum
esse dicebat Victorino a presbyteris, ut secretius redderet,
sicut nonnullis qui verecundia trepidaturi videbautur, offem
mos erat : ilium autem maluisse salutem suam in conspectu

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

521

confession publicly in the church, in some eminent
place appointed for the purpose, that they might be
seen and heard by all the congregation. But some
times, to favour the modesty of some very bashful
persons, who could not speak without trembling in
such an awful assembly, the presbyters received
their confession in private : and this they offered to
Yictorinus, a famous rhetorician, upon his conver
sion ; but he chose rather to make his confession in
pubhc ; saying, there was no salvation in rhetoric,
and yet he had always taught that in public ; and
therefore it would not become him to be afraid of
making a pubhc confession of God's word before
the meek flock of Christ, who had never been afraid
to repeat his own words in the schools of the hea
then, who in comparison of Christians were only to
be reputed madmen.
SKtl0 Another circumstance which added
erfmoftifi to the solemnity of the action, was
the posture of the body, not only look
ing toward the east, but with hands and eyes lift up
to heaven, as if they were immediately fixed on
Christ, with whom they were now entering into
covenant, as their new Lord sitting on the throne
of his glory. For as they renounced the devil with
hands stretched out against him, or with colhsion
or striking them together in defiance of him ; so on
the contrary, they made their confession and cove
nant, and addresses to Christ, in the posture of pe
tition, with hands lift up to the Sun of righteous
ness, and ready to embrace him. So the author
under the name of Dionysius54 describes it, saying,
The priest bids the catechumen, after he has re
nounced Satan, to turn about to the east and make
his covenant with Christ, with hands and eyes lift
up to heaven. This confession also, for greater
Seet.ll. , . . , , i
Repeated three solemnity, is thought to have been
repeated three times, as we have heard
before, that it was usual to do in the renunciation
of Satan. Cyril of Alexandria55 says, It was the
custom of the church to require a triple confession
of Christ, of all those that proposed to love him, and
came to his holy baptism : and this after the ex
ample of St. Peter, to whom Christ said three times,
" Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me?" and Peter

answered thrice, " Lord, thou knowest that I love
thee." St. Ambrose56 says, That in the celebration
of baptism, three interrogatories were made, and a
triple answer was given to then. ; nor could any one
be otherwise baptized. Whence also Peter was
asked three times in the Gospel, whether he loved
the Lord ? that by answering thrice, he might loose
those bonds with which he had bound himself by
denying his Lord. But I am not sure that this
triple confession always means thrice repeating the
whole creed. For St. Ambrose57 in another place
makes this triple confession to be rather answering
three times, I believe, to the several parts of the
creed. Thou wast asked, says he, Dost thou be
lieve in God the Father Almighty ? And thou didst
answer, I believe. Thou wast asked again, Dost
thou believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, and his cross ?
And thou didst answer a second time, I believe-
Thou wast asked a third time, Dost thou believe in
the Holy Ghost? And thy answer was, I believe.
So thou wast thrice buried under water, that thy
triple confession might absolve thee from the mani
fold offences of thy former life. Where it is plain,
the triple confession means no more than answering
thrice, I beheve, to the several parts of the creed.
But there might be different customs in different
places ; for St. Cyril seems to mean something
more, when he makes these answers not only to be
a confession of the three persons of the Trinity, but
a triple confession of Christ, which implies a repe
tition of the creed three times over, if I rightly
understand him.
There was one circumstance more, Stct ,„
which, if true, added great weight to VVi(i,"dth°irsc„r:™d
,. . -, ., i. • i_ j.T_ x hands in the booha
the whole action : which was, that of the church, as
the party, after he had made his con
fession of faith, subscribed it also with his own
hand, if he were able to do it, in the books or regis
ters of the church. I cannot positively say, that
this was any certain or universal practice, but there
seem to be some footsteps of it in some ancient re
cords, and the allusions of writers to such a custom.
Gregory Nazianzen is thought to refer to it, when,
exhortingmen to continue stedfast to the faith which
they professed at baptism, he says, If thou wast
enrolled into any other faith 58 than what I have

sancta; multitudinis profiteri : non enim erat salus quam
docebat in rhetorica, et tamen earn publice professus erat.
Quanto minus ergo vereri debuit mansuetum gregem tuum,
pronuncians verbum tuum, qui non verebatur in verbis suis
turbas insanorum ?
54 Dionys. de Eccles. Hierarch. cap. 2. p. 253.
55 Cyril, lib. 12. in Joh. xxi. t. 4. p. 1119. Tbiros Si irdXtv
Tats pEv EKKXrjaiais ivTEvBev eIs tS XP^vat Tp'tTOv StEptoTav
Ti)v eis Xptiov bpoXoyiav Tobs dyairqv avTov iXopivovs,
Sid tb Kal itpoo-eXSeXv Tip iyitp fSairTio-paTt.
13 Ambros. de Spir. Sancto,' lib. 2. cap. 11. Ideo in
mysteriis interrogalio trina defertur, et confirmatio trina
celebratur: nee potest quis nisi trina confessione purgari.

Unde et ipse Petrus in evangelio tertio interrogatur, utrum
diligat Dominum, ut trina responsione vincula, quae Domi-
ir.;in negando ligavit, absolveret.
57 Id. de Sacram. lib. 2. c. 7. Interrogans es, Credis in
Deum Patrem omnipotentem ? Dixisti, Credo, &c. Iterum
interrogatus es, Credis in Dominum nostrum Jesum Chris
tum et in crucem ejus ? Dixisti, Credo, et mersisti.— Tertio
interrogatus es, Credis et in Spiritum Sanctum? Dixisti,
Credo. Tertio mersisti, ut multiplicem lapsum superioris
aetatis absolveret trina confessio.
53 Naz, Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 670. Ei piv aXXios iyyt-
ypaif/at, fi tos b ipds diraiTEX Xdyos, Sevpo Kal pETEyypdcp-
Bi)Tt.  Elwi toXs pETairEiBtio-i he, o yiypaipa, yiyputpa.

522

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

expounded, come and be enrolled again ; and then
tell those that would draw thee away from it,
" What I have written, I have written." St. Am
brose seems also to allude to this, when 59 he tells
_ the initiated, that their handwriting was recorded
not only in earth, but in heaven, because it was
taken both in the presence of men and angels.
And St. Austin60 says, The names of such as made
their profession, were written in the book of life,
not only by men, but by the heavenly powers above.
Yet I confess St. Chrysostom has a passage which
seems to go contrary to all this : for speaking of
the difference between earthly masters buying slaves,
and Christ taking us to be his servants, he reckons
this among others, that Christ requires no wit
nesses nor handwriting of us,61 but only our bare
word, to say, I renounce thee, Satan, and all thy
pomp. Whence it must be concluded, either that
this custom was not so universal as the rest, since
St. Chrysostom knew nothing of it; or that the
forecited evidences are not so cogent as at first sight
they may seem to be. For St. Ambrose and St.
Austin may be so interpreted, where they speak of
being written in the book of hfe, as to be understood
only in a figurative sense, for having their names
written in heaven. Yet Vicecomes is very positive
not only of this, but that men also set their seal62
to their subscription, and confirmed their profession
with an oath. But I do not find any sufficient au
thority for this, and therefore will not any further
insist upon it, which I had rather leave to the fur
ther disquisition of the critical and curious reader.
sect 13. But by wriat has been said we may
oeTelno„"sr.and'heen! easily perceive, that the design of the
Ssensibie'SfTheir church in all these ceremonies, and
obligation and sted- ,, ,. -, -, ... ,. ., .
fast to their profes- tne caution and deliberation used in
sion. - .
the whole action, was only to make
men truly sensible of the nature of the Christian
rehgion, (which admitted of no proselytes without
these formal and solemn professions,) and of their
great obligations to continue stedfast in that faith
and obedience to Christ, which they had so solemnly
promised with their mouths, and subscribed with
their own hands, not only before men, but in the
presence of God and the holy angels. This was the
greatest engagement imaginable upon them, and of
force to influence their whole lives. To which pur
pose St. Chrysostom often proposes and insists upon
it, to make men bear it perpetually in memory, and
use it as their best armour and weapon against aU
temptations. In his last discourse to the people of

59 Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 1. cap. 2. Chirographum tuum
tenetur, non in terra, sed in ccelo. It. de Initiatis, cap. 2.
Tenetur vox tua, non in tumulo mortuorum, sed in libro
viventium. 60 Aug. de Symbolo ad Catechumenos, lib. 2. cap. 1. No
mina profitentium in libro excipiuntur vitae, non a quolibet
homine, sed a superiore caslitus potestate.

Antioch, he expatiates upon this topic, inveighing
first severely against all the shows of the Roman
theatre and circus, and observation of days and
presages, and omens, which he reckons among the
pomps of Satan. To these he joins enchantments
and ligatures : for some Christians made no scruple
to hang golden medals of Alexander the Great about
their head or feet to cure diseases. With whom
he expostulates after this manner: Are these our
hopes63 and expectations, that after the cross and
death of our Lord, we should put our trust for
health in the image of a heathen king ? Knowest
thou not what wonders the cross hath done ? how
it hath destroyed death, extinguished sin, emptied
hell, dissolved the power of the devil ? And is it
not as fit to be rehed on to cure a bodily disease ?
It hath given resurrection to the world, and canst
not thou confide in it ? But thou not only pro-
curest ligatures, but also charms, bringing some old
drunken staggering woman to thy house for this
purpose, and payest reverence to these things, after
thou hast been disciplined in the religion of Christ.
Nay, when men are admonished of these things,
they plead in excuse, that the old woman the en
chanter is a Christian, and names nothing but the
name of God. For which she is the more to be
abhorred, because she abuses the name of God to
so scandalous a practice, and whilst she calls herself
a Christian, does the wdrks of the heathen. The
devils named the name of Christ, and yet were
devils for all that, and were rebuked and ejected by
our Saviour. Therefore I beseech you, keep yom>
selves pure from this deceit, and take this word as
your staff and armour. As none of you will choose
to walk abroad without his shoes or clothes ; so with
out this word, let none of you venture out in pubhc ;
but when you go over the threshold of your gate,
say first this word, I renounce thee, Satan,- and thy
pomp, and thy worship ; and I make a covenant
with thee, 0 Christ. Never go forth without this
word, and it will be your staff, your armour, your
invincible tower. And with this word, sign your
selves with the sign of the cross : and then not only
man, but the devil himself cannot hurf you, whilst
he finds you appearing guarded with this armour.
Thus St. Chrysostom exhorts men daily- to remem
ber their solemn profession of faith and baptismal
vow, wherein they renounced Satan and embraced
Christ, as the best preservative against sin and dan
ger. To which both he and Ephrem Cyrus add
this momentous consideration,64 That an account of

61 Chrys. Horn. 21. ad Populum Antioch. t. 1. p. 274. Oil
udpTvpas hpds, ovk 'iyypaepa vpds diraiTsX, dXX' dpKEl-
Tat ip'iXy Trj eptovy, Kav eXtt^s dub Siavoias, dirOTaaaopat
not SaTava, Sec.
62 Vicecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 2. cap. 27. p. 343.
63 Chrys. Horn. 21. ad Popul. Antiochen. t. 1. p. 275.
64 Ephrem. de Abrenunc. Baptismi, p. 150. Haec ipsa

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

523

this vow will be required of men at the day of judg
ment- for "by thy words shalt thou be justified,
and by thy words shalt thou be condemned." And
Christ will say to every wilful transgressor of it,
11 Out of thine own mouth will I condemn thee, O
thou wicked servant." As nothing therefore could
be more useful than this part of the church's disci
pline, in requiring such professions and promises of
every man before they entered the service of Christ;
as it was usual for masters to do, before they bar
gained65 with slaves and took them into their family :
so nothing could be more material than the con
tinued impressions of this vow upon men's minds,
to keep them under a quick sense of their obliga
tions, on which the whole conduct of their hves so
much depended, and their eternal interest at the
day of judgment. There is one thing more remains to
Sect 14. °
• anT>e£hticX°rblcon- he inquired into under this head, that
S£HrEa™ is, whether any public or particular
then baptism. • confessjon 0f sjns was required of men
at their baptism, besides what was implied in the
general renunciation of Satan and all his works and
service ? Now, this is plainly resolved by St. Chry
sostom in the negative. For discoursing of the dif
ference between God's choosing his servants, and
the choice which earthly princes and masters make
of their soldiers and slaves, he makes the difference
chiefly to consist in this : That before men were al
lowed to enter the lists in any of the famous exer
cises of the theatre, a pubhc crier must first lead
them about by the hand before all, and cry out,
saying, Does any one accuse this man ? though
there the engagement was only of the body, and not
of the soul. But in God's choice of us it is quite
otherwise : for though our engagement depends not
upon strength of arms, but on the philosophy and
virtue of our souls, yet the ruler and governor
thereof acts quite contrary : he does not take a man,
and lead him about, and say, Does any one accuse
him? but he cries out, Though aU men and devils
should rise up against him, and accuse him of secret
and horrible crimes, I do not reject, I do not abhor
him ; but I deliver him from his accuser, and ab
solve him from his iniquity, and so I lead him to
the combat. Nor is this the only admirable thing,
that he forgives our sins, but that he does not reveal
nor disclose them ; he neither makes open proclam
ation of them,68 nor compels those that come to him
to publish their own offences, but requires them to
give account, and confess their sins to him alone.
He does not, like earthly judges, oblige criminals to

make a public confession before all men in hopes
of pardon, but he forgives sins upon our private
testimony without any other witnesses. This is
undeniable evidence, that no pubhc confession was
required of men for their private offences, when they
came to baptism. And therefore when Gregory
Nazianzen67 speaks of confession of sins made at
baptism, he is to be understood either of a general
confession, or such a particular confession as men
voluntarily imposed upon themselves, to testify more
eminently the sincerity of their repentance ; which
some think was done at John's baptism, Matt. iii. 6,
and in the baptism of those mentioned Acts xix.
18, where it is said, that " many who believed came,
and confessed, and showed their deeds ;" though this
was not imposed upon men by any necessary law
or rule ofthe church. In case of public scandalous
crimes, they were obliged particularly to promise
and vow the forsaking of them ; but for private
crimes, no particular confession was required to be
made, save only to God, with a general renunciation
of all sin, in which every private crime was sup
posed to be included. Vid. Aug. Serm. 116. de
Tempore.

CHAPTER VIII.
OP THE USE OF SPONSORS OR SURETIES IN
BAPTISM.

Next to the conditions and promises
. . Sect. 1.
reauired of men in their baptism, we Three sorts of
1 *¦ sponsors in the prr
must examine the office and business n"11™ church.

i.

abrenunciatio et pulchra confessio exigetur a quocunque
Christiano in ilia die, &c. Chrys. Horn. 21. ad Pop. Antioch.
P, 274. Hoc igitur dicamus, abrenuncio tibi Satana : tan-
quam in ilia die hujus vocis rationem reddituri, ut salvum
tunc reddamus depositum. 65 Chrys. ibid. p. 273.
M Chrys. Horn. 21. ad Pop. Antioch. p. 270. Oi tovto

For children.
of sponsors or sureties, who had al
ways some concern in these obligations. And here
it is first to be observed, that there were three sorts
of sponsors made use of in the primitive church :
1. For children, who could not renounce, or profess,
or 'answer for themselves. 2. For such adult per
sons', as by reason of sickness or infirmity were in
the same condition with children, incapacitated to
answer for themselves. 3. For all adult persons in
general. For the church required sponsors also for
those, who were otherwise qualified to make their
own responses. Now, the office of sponsors was di
versified a little in its nature according to these dis
tinctions. They who were sureties or sponsors for,
children, were obliged first to answer in their names |
to all the interrogatories that were usually put in

Si povov 'eo-tI Sravpao-Tov, on depir)triv hpiv Ta apapTn-
paTa, dXX' oti abri obSi iKKaXiirTEi, ovSi woleX epavEpi

Si)Xa-, oiiSi dvayKd.X.Ei irapEXBdvTas e'is piaov 'e^eiiteX.
TrEirXrtppEX-npiva, dXX' avTtp pdvtp diroXoynaaaBai ke-
Xevei, Kal irpos avTov igopcXoyriaaaBat.
67 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 657.

Kat
Td itett.

524

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

baptism, and then to be guardians of their Christian
education. Some wiU also needs have it, that they
were obliged to give them a perfect maintenance,
and take them as it were for their own children by
adoption, in case their parents failed and left them
destitute in their minority.
But this I take to be a mistake.
Sect. 2.
^aon"orsCrorTheir P°r whoever were sponsors for chil-
own children. hen, tf ever fjjgy became destitute,
the burden devolved upon the church in general,
and not upon any others. Which will be evidenced
by these two considerations : first, That parents
V were commonly sponsors for their own children :
and in that case, there can be no dispute where the
obligation of maintenance lay so long as they were
alive. For they were obhged to maintain their own
children by a natural law, not because they were
sponsors, but because they were parents to them.
It was not indeed absolutely necessary that parents
should be sponsors for their own children, though
some in St. Austin's days were inclined to think so,
which he reckons an error,1 and shows, that in many
cases there was a necessity it should be otherwise.
But yet in most cases the parents were sponsors for
their own children; as appears from St. Austin,
who speaks of parents in all ordinary cases offering
their own children to baptism, and making the
I proper responses for them : 2 and the extraordinary
cases in which they were presented by others, were
commonly such cases where the parent could not,
or would not, do that kind office for them ; as when
slaves3 were presented to baptism by their masters ;
or children, whose parents were dead, were brought
by the charity of any who would show mercy on
them ; or children exposed by their parents, which
were sometimes taken up by the holy virgins of
the church, and by them presented unto baptism.
These are the only cases mentioned by St. Austin,
in which children seem to have had other sponsors,
and not their parents. Which makes it probable,
that in all ordinary cases parents were sureties for
their own children. Which may be collected also
from the author of the Hypognostics,4 under the
, name of St. Austin, who speaks of infants being
! presented to baptism by the hands of their parents,

and some of them dying in their arms before the
priest could baptize them. Whilst parents there
fore were sureties for their own children, they were
obliged to maintain them ; but this not by the law
of sureties, but by the law of nature ; and if they
failed, this duty devolved upon the whole church.
Secondly, In other cases, where g
strangers became sureties for chil- i^ndeutumaint2
dren, the burden of maintenance did ^^\£"
never devolve upon them by any law 8p°M0r8-
of suretiship, except they were obliged by some
antecedent law to take care of them. In case a
master was sponsor for his slave, he was obliged to
maintain him, because he was antecedently in the
nature of a father to him ; and this obligation arose,
not from his suretiship, but from his being his mas
ter. But in other cases it was not so. For sometimes
children, that were exposed, were taken up and
presented to baptism by mere strangers, and in that
case the burden of maintenance feU upon the church,
and not upon the sponsors. And in some cases, as
St. Austin5 informs us, such children were pre
sented unto baptism by the sacred virgins of the
church, who had no other maintenance but what
they themselves received from the church ; and in
that case it is evident the children's maintenance
must be derived from the same fountain as the
virgins' was, that is, from the pubhc stock of the
church. So that in all cases the church was charged
i with this care, and not the sponsors, except there
was some antecedent obligation. And there was
good reason for this ; for, as St. AjjstinlLoiseryes,
children were presented to baptism not so much by
tho|eIin_whose Rands they were irought, (though
by them too, if they were good and. faithful men,)
as by the whole society, of saints. The whole church
was their mother, she brought forth all and every
one by this new birth ; and therefore, if any were
to be charged with maintenance, it was but reason
able that the church should maintain her own chil
dren. So that they who lay so much stress upon
sponsors undertaking for children, as if they there
by undertook to give them maintenance too, have
no grounds for their assertion, since it appears from
the best light that we have, to have been otherwise

1 Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Illud autem nolo te fallat, ut
existimes reatus vinculum ex Adam tractum, aliter non
posse dirumpi, nisi parvuli ad percipiendam Christi gratiam
a parentibus offerantur.
2 Aug. ibid. Quid est illud, quod quando ad baptismum
offeruntur, parentes pro eis tanquam fidedictores respon
dent, &c.
8 Aug. ibid. Videas multos non offerri a parentibus, sed
etiam a quibuslibet extraneis, sicut a Dominis servuli ali
quando offeruntur. Et nonnunquam mortuis parentibus
surs, parvuli baptizantur, ab eis oblati, qui illis hujusmodi
misericordiam praebere potuerunt. Aliquando etiam quos
crudeliter parentes exposuerunt, nutriendos a quibuslibet,
nonnunquam a sacris virginibus colliguntur, et ab eis offe
runtur ad baptismum.

* Aug. Hypognostic. contra Pelag. lib. 6. cap. 7. t. 7. p.
633. Novimus etiam parvulos, quibus usus liberi arbitrii
non est, ut de bonis aut malis eorum mentis judicemus, pa-
rentum manibus ad gratiam sacri baptismatis deportatos : et
cum in uno eorum per manus sacerdotis mysterium fidei
adimpleretur, aliquoties alterum in parentum manibus fac
tum exanimem, fraudatum gratia salvatoris.
5 Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac.
» Aug. ibid. Offeruntur quippe parvuli ad percipiendam
spiritualem gratiam, non tamab eis quorum gestantur mani
bus, quamvis et ab ipsis, si et ipsi boni fideles sunt, quam ab
universa societate sanctorum atque fidelium  Tota hoc
mater ecclesia quae in Sanctis est, facit : quia tota omnes,
¦ tota singulos parit.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

525

in the practice of the primitive church. I have
not said this to excuse sponsors from any duty that
properly belongs to them, but only to take off the
force of an unreasonable objection, which some
have made against the present use of sponsors in
baptism, as if they were of a different sort from
those of the ancient church, because they arc not
under this particular obligation, which appears not
to have any other foundation but the bare surmise
of those who make the objection.
Two things indeed were anciently
Bat Tniy to an- required of sponsors as their proper
Ewer for them to the ¦*¦ , rn ., • N
several interrogate- duty : 1. lo answer in their names!
ries in bapUsm. •" _ . - \
to all the interrogatories of baptism.
This seems to be intimated by TertuUian,7 where he /
speaks of the promises which the sponsors made in j
baptism, and of the danger there was of their faihngf
to fulfil them, either by their own mortality, or by
the untoward disposition of the party. But if any
one thinks these promises related only to what the
sponsors promised for themselves, and not in the
name of the child, he may be informed more clearly
from others. Gennadius6 tells us, These promises
for infants and such as were uncapable of learning,
were made after the usual manner of interrogatories
in baptism. Andjit. Austin9 more particularly
acquaints us with the form then used, jfvhich was,
Doth this child beheyein God? Doth he turn to
(jo3? which is the same as renouncing the devil,
and making a covenant with Christ. In other
places16 he teUs us more expressly, That the spon
sors answered for them, that they renounced the
devil, his pomps, and his works. And disputing
against the Pelagians, he proves by this argument,
That children were Jinder the power of Satan and
the guilt of original sin, and needed pardon, because
if a Pelagian himself brought a chud to baptism, he
must answer for him,11 because he could not answer
for himself, that he renounced the devil, that he
turned to God, and that, among other things, he

believed the remission of sins; all which would
only be fallaciously said, if children had no concern
in them. And he professes, he would not admit
any child to baptism, whose sponsor he had reason
to beheve did not make these promises and re
sponses sincerely for him. Of the form and prac
tice, then, there is no dispute. Only it seemed a great
difficulty to Bishop Boniface, and as such he pro
posed it to St. Austin, How it could be said with
truth, that a child believed, or renounced the devil,
or turned to God, who had no thought or appre
hension of these things ; or if any, yet secret and
unknown to us ? If any one should ask us concern
ing a child, Whether he would prove chaste, or a
thief, when he became a man ? we should doubtless
in that case answer, We know not. Or if the question
was, Whether a child in his infancy thought good
or evil? we should make the same answer, We
know not. Since, therefore, no' one would promise
either for his future morals, or his present thoughts,
how is it that when parents present then- children
as sponsors in baptism, they answer and say, The
children do those things which that age does not
so much as think of? as, that they believe in God,
and are turned unto him, &c. To this St. Austin
answers, That the child is said to believe, because
he receives the sacrament of faith and conversion,
which entitles him to the name of a believer. For
the sacraments,12 because of the resemblance be
tween them and the things represented by them,
do carry the name of the things represented.
Christ was but once offered in himself, and yet he
is offered not only on the annual solemnity of the
passover, but every day for the people ; and no one
tells a lie, that says, He is offered. As therefore the
sacrament of Christ's body after a certain manner
is called his body, and the sacrament of his blood is
called his blood ; so the sacrament of faith is faith.
And upon this account, when it is answered, That
an infant believes, who has not yet any knowledge

7 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 18. Quid enim necesse est spon
sors etiam periculo ingeri ? Quia et ipsi per mortalitatem
destituere promissiones suas possint, et proventu malae in-
dolis falli.
8 Gennad. de Eccles. Dogmat. cap. 52. Si vero parvuli
sunt, vel hebetes, qui doctrinam non'capiant, respondeant
pro illis qui eos offerunt, juxta morem baptizandi.
' Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Interrogamus eos, a quibus
offeruntur, et dicimus, Credit in Deum ? de ilia eetate, quae
utrum sit Deus, ignoret: respondent, Credit; et ad camera
sic respondent singula quae quaeruntur, &c.
10 Aug. Serm. 116. de Tempore, 1. 10. p. 304. Fidejussores
pro ipsis respondent, quod abrenuncient diabolo, pompis et
operibus ejus.
11 Aug. de Peccator. Meritis, lib. 1. cap. 34. Vellem
ahquis istorum qui contraria sapiunt, mihi baptizandum
parvulum afferret. Ipse certe mihi erat responsurus pro
eodem parvulo quem gestaret, quia ille pro se respondere
non posset. Quomodo ergo dicturus erat eum renunciare
diabolo, cujus in eo nihil esset ? Quomodo converti ad Deum,

a quo non esset aversus ? Credere inter caetera remissionem
peccatorum, quae illi nulla tribueretur ? Ego quidem si con
tra eum haec sentire existimarem, nee ad sacramenta cum
parvulo intrare permitterem.
12 Aug. Ep.23. ad Bonifac. Nonne semel immolatus est
Christus in seipso ? Et tamen in Sacramento non solum
per omnes Paschae solennitates, sed omni die populis im-
molatur ; nee utique mentitur qui interrogatus eum respon
dent immolari. Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem
earum rerum quarum sacramenta sunt non haberent, sacra
menta non essent. Ex hac autem similitudine plerumque
etiam ipsarum rerum nomina accipi.unt. Sicut ergo se
cundum quendammodum sacramentum corporis Christi cor
pus Christi est, sacramentum sanguinis Christi sanguis
Christi est, ita sacramentum fidei fides est. Ac per hoc
cum respondetur parvulus credere, qui fidei nondum habet
affectum, respondetur fidem habere propter fidei sacramen
tum et convertere se ad Deum propter conversionis sacra
mentum, quia et ipsa responsio ad celebrationem pertinet
sacramenti.

526

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

or habit of faith, the meaning of the answer is,
That he has faith because of the sacrament of faith,
and is converted to God because of the sacrament
of conversion;. for these answers appertain to the
celebration of the sacrament. So that, according
to St. Austin, when an infant is said to have faith,
the meaning is only that he receives the sacrament
of faith, which faith he is bound to embrace when
he comes to understand it. In the mean time he is
called a behever, because he receives the sacrament
of faith, and is entered into the covenant of God by
his sponsors, who supply that part for him which he
cannot perform in his own person. This was the
' first duty of sponsors toward children.
The other was, that they were to
And lo be guard- be guardians of their spiritual life for
ians of their spirit- -, , , i r r
uai life for the fu- the future, and to take care by good
ture. .
admonitions and good instructions
that they performed their part of the covenant
they were now engaged in. St. Austin13 makes
sponsors themselves concerned in this covenant with
God, and therefore presses it as a duty upon them,
that they should not only by their examples, but by
their words and instructions, teach them the great
duties of chastity, humility, sobriety, and peace, for
asmuch as they had answered in their stead, that
they renounced the devil, his pomps, and his works.
And in another place " he more particularly specifies
their obligations : That they should admonish them
to live chastely, and preserve their virginity to mar
riage, to. refrain their tongues from evil-speaking
and perjury, not to accustom their mouths to filthy
and lascivious songs, not to be proud nor envious,
not to retain anger nor hatred in their hearts, not
to observe divination or soothsaying, nor to hang
phylacteries or diabolical characters upon their own
bodies or their relations ; to keep and hold the catho
lic faith, to frequent the church, to hear the Scrip
tures read with attention, to entertain strangers, and
wash their feet, according to what was said to them
in baptism, to live peaceably, to be peacemakers
among disagreeing brethren, and to honour the
priests and their parents with the love of sincere
charity. These were such things as they had pro
mised for children in baptism, and therefore they
were bound by compact with God to use their ut-

13 Aug. Serm. 116. de Tempore, t. 10. p. 304. Non so
lum exemplis, sed etiam verbis, eos ad omne opus bonum
admonere debetis. — Posteaquam baptizati fuerint, de casti-
tate, de humilitate, de sobrietate vel pace eos admonere vel
docere non desiuant, et agnoscant se fidejussores esse ipso
rum. Pro ipsis enim respondent, quod abrenuncient dia
bolo, pompis et operibus ejus.
14 Aug. Serm. 163. de Temp.
^ 1S Cyril. Com. in Joh. xi. 26. t. 4. p. 683. "Yirip Si Ttov
iaxaT-p voerep KaTEtX-nppivtov, pEXXovrtov te Sid thto fiair-
TtXlE<rBai, Kal diroTOTTOVTal tives Kal avvTaTTOvTat.
18 Fulgent, de Bapt. ^Ethiopis, cap. 7. p. 610. Factum
est, ut confessionem tempore praaterito reddilam, quia non

most endeavours to engage their spiritual pupils to
perform them.
Another sort of sponsors were such
, . Sect. «.
as were appointed to make answers A •>«** "on of
, , " , „ "Ponsors, for such
for such persons, as by reason of JJiSj^^"
some infirmity could not answer for tbemsel™!-
themselves. I have observed before, that such
adult persons as were suddenly struck speechless, or
seized with a frenzy by the violence of a distemper,
might yet be baptized, if any of their friends could
testify that they had beforehand desired baptism :
and in this case the same friends became sponsors
for them, making the very same answers for them
as they did for children. This we learn from Cyril
of Alexandria, who assures us, That when men were
seized with extremity of sickness,1" and it was
thought proper upon that account to baptize them,
there were some appointed to make both the re
nunciations and confessions in their name. And
so it is in the account which Fulgentius M gives of
the African negro, who just before his baptism fell
sick of a fever, which bereaved him of his senses,
and made him speechless : he was baptized, for all
this, having his sponsors to answer in his name, as
if it had been for an infant. So that all those ca
nnons which17 speak of baptizing dumb persons in
cases of extremity, though they do not expressly re
quire sponsors for them, yet are to be understood as
intending them, according to the usual practice of
the church. And if the party happened to recover
after such a baptism, it was the sponsor's duty, not
only to acquaint him, as a witness, with what was
done for him, but also, as a guardian of his behavi
our, to induce him to make good the promises, which
he in his name had made for him. For this was the
indispensable duty of sureties in all cases whatsoever.
The third sort of sponsors were for. ^
such sort of adult persons as were able The third sort of
sponsors for ail a-
to answer for themselves ; for these doit persons in ge
neral.
also had their sponsors, and no per
sons anciently were baptized without them. These
are spoken of not only by Dionysius 18 and the au
thor of the Apostolical Constitutions,16 but by many
other more unquestionable writers. Victor Uticen-
sis tells us20 of one Muritta a deacon, who was spon-
oor for Elpidiphorus at Carthage. And Palladius2'

potuit in hora baptismi reddere propter infirmitatem cor
poris, adjutorio fraternae redderet charitatis. Vid. Gennad.
de Eccl. Dogm. c. 52.
17 See chap. 5. sect. 2.
18 Dionys. Eccl. Hierarch. cap. 2. p. 252.
19 Constit. Apost. lib. 3. cap. 16.
20 Victor, de Persecut. Vandal, lib. 3. Bibl. Patr. t. 7.
p. 613. Hie dudum fuerat apud nos in ecclesia Fausti bap
tizatus, quem venerabilis Muritta diaconus de alveo fontis
susceperat generatum.
21 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 12. Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t.2.
p. 915. 'A-7roc5s'x£TaiTol/'P8cpIi'oi/6 A'-yios a7r6 t« axpavru
(3a7TTLO-paTOS.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

527

says, Evagrius Ponticus performed the same of
fice for Rufinus the great statesman, and prcs
fectus-prcstorio under Arcadius. St. Austin often
mentions them, but then he also acquaints us, that
it was no part of their office to make responses for
their pupils in baptism, as it was in the case of in
fants and sick persons who could not answer for
themselves. For though the church accepted it22
in the case of infante by reason of their disabihty,
yet she would not ahow adult persons to answer by
proxy, who were able to answer for themselves;
there being something of natural reason in that'
saying in the Gospel, " _He_is of age2 let Jtiim speak,
for himself." The most rustic capacities and mean
est understandings even in the weaker sex, would
not ordinarily excuse them from doing this in their
own persons, unless, as Gennadius23 says, theyj
were so heavy and duU, as not to be capable of!
learning, in which condition their sponsors were i
required to answer for them as for little children,
from whom they differed so little in understanding. ',
But in ordinary cases this was no
office of the sponsors, when men were
iiul ui answer 111, . /¦ i i
theirnames butoniy in a capacity to answer for themselves. ,
to admonish and in ¦ t l
itruct them before Therr only business was to be cura- 1
and after baptism. ^
tors and guardians of their spiritual |
hfe ; to which purpose, it was incumbent on them I
to take care of their instruction and morals, as well
before as after baptism. Upon this account the
deaconesses were usually employed in the private
instruction of women, to teach them how to make
their responses in baptism. And this was one quali
fication required in deaconesses by some ancient
canons,24 that they should be persons of such good
understanding as to be able to instruct the ignorant
and rustic women, how to make their responses to
the interrogatories which the minister should put
to them in baptism, and how to order their con
versation afterward, as has been observed in an
other place.25 And by some ancient rules this
Sect 9. J . .
imTosed° u™ ohdeflr omce was chiefly imposed upon dea-
.ssea. *"* deac°"" conesses, to be sponsors for women,
as the deacons were obhged to be for

Sect. S.
Whose doty '
not to answer in

men. For so the author of the Apostolical Consti
tutions seems to represent it, when he orders26 a
deacon to be susceptor for a man, and a deaconess
for a woman, in baptism. And we find the sacred
virgins often mentioned as concerned in this office.
St. Austin, as we heard before, speaks of them27 as
presenting exposed children to baptism, though they
had no children of their own, nor intended to have
any. And in the Life of Epiphanius28 we read,
that as one Lucian was his godfather in baptism,' so
Bernice, a sacred virgin, was godmother to his sister.
Whence it appears, that at first the sacred virgins
and monastics were thought as proper persons as
any to take this weighty office upon them. Though
afterward, in the French church, by a canon28 of
the council of Auxerre, monks are prohibited from
being sponsors in baptism. And so the prohibition
stands in the Romish church to this day.
But anciently there was no prohibi- Sect
tion of any sorts of men from per- hib™f ^"Sg
forming this charitable office, save 5ponsorB'
only of such as unqualified themselves, by going.
contrary to the rules of the Christian religion./
Fathers, as we heard before, were frequently spon
sors for their own children ; and I know of no pro
hibition of this before the time of Charles the Great,
when the council of Mentz80 made a decree against
it, forbidding fathers to be susceptors to their own
sons or daughters at the font in baptism. Ancient
ly also presbyters and deacons were allowed to be
sponsors, though this is also now prohibited in sonje'
provincial councils of the Romish church by Car
dinal BorromEeo,31 in the last age. But the only
persons whom the ancients excluded from this office,
were catechumens, energumens, heretics, and peni
tents ; that is, persons who either were yet never in
full communion with the church, as being them
selves unbaptized ; or else such as had forfeited the
privileges of their baptism and church-communion
by their errors, or crimes, or incapacity to assist
others, who needed assistance themselves. And by
some canons,32 persons who were never confirmed,
were excluded from being sponsors both in baptism
and confirmation.

22 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 4. cap. 24. Cum alii pro infantibus
respondent, ut impleatur circa eos celebratio sacramenti,
valet utique ad eorum consecrationem, quia ipsi respondere
non possunt. At si pro eo qui respondere potest, alius re
spondeat, nonitidem valet, &c.
23 Gennad. de Eccl. Dogm. c. 52. Si vero parvuli sunt,
vel hebetes, qui doctrinam non capiant, respondeant pro
uhs qui eos offerunt juxta morem baptizandi.
24 Cone. Carthag. 4. can. 12. Vidua? vel sanctimoniales
qua ad ministerium baptizandarum mulierum eliguntur, tarn
instruct*3 sint ad officium, ut possint apto et sancto sermone
uocere imperitas et rusticas mulieres, tempore quo baptizan-
dae sunt, qualiter baptizatori respondeant, et qualiter accep to
oaptismate vivant.
* See Book II. chap. 22. sect. 9.
,23 Constit. Apost. lib. 3. c. 16. Tdv piv avSpa OhoSe-

X^o-dai 6 StccKOVOS, ti)v Se yvvcuxa i) dLatcovos.
27 Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Aliquando etiam quos crude-
liter parentes exposuerunt, nutriendos a quibuslibet,. nonnun
quam a sacris virginibus colliguntur, et ab eis offeruntur ad
baptismum. Quae certe proprios filios non habuerunt ullos,
nee habere disponunt.
28 Vita Epiphan. n. 8. t. 2. p. 324. "Os Kal iruTT]p clutov
kyzvriQr] iiriTOv dyiov'tjxoTLO'fxaTO's.  BepviKijv ti)v ayiav
irapdivov, ¥j tis iytvsTO fi^VP *r^s dde\(j>ij9 '^.Trtcfyaviov.
29 Cone. Antissiodor. can. 25. Non licet abbati filium 8e
baptismo suscipere; nee monachis commatres habere.
30 Cone. Mogunt. an. 813. can. 55. Nullus igitur proprium
filium vel iiliam de fonte baptismatis suscipiat.
¦3I Borromee. Synod. Diceces. 2. Decret. 18.
82 Cone. Moguntinum, ap. Gratian. de Consecrat. Dist. 4.
cap. 102. In baptismate vel in chrismate, non potest alium

523

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

„ . „ From what has been said, the reader
Sect. 11.
reiBu'ifed°"anT0that wu^ a'so easily observe, that anciently
In™ ."w'SLi £?"' no more but one sponsor was required,
and that was a man for a man, and a
woman for a woman; for we never read of more
than one, in all the accounts of the ancients, and
¦ <' one of the same sex for adult persons. In the case
\ of infants, there was no regard had to the difference
of sex : for a virgin might be a sponsor for a man-
child, and a father for his own children, whether
they were male or female. And one sponsor was
sufficient in any case. Some rules forbid more than
one, either in baptism or confirmation : as that de
cree of Leo,83 cited by Gratian, which says, No more
than one, whether man or woman, shall be admitted
as surety for a child in baptism : and the like to be
observed in confirmation. "Which rule was renewed
and confirmed by the council of Metz,34 but upon a
reason which is something pecuhar. For they con
clude, that because there is but one God, one faith,
__one baptism, therefore an infant ought to have only
one sponsor, whether man or woman, at his bap
tism : which I mention not for the excellency of
the reason, but only to show what conformity it
bears to the ancient practice.
s t !2 Some perhaps will here be desirous
cn™eaflialitthat to know the original of that practice
X"r)Te^Sai"e! in the Romish church, which is the
lotion. /• -,• ..
occasion ot so many dispensations in
matrimonial causes, arising from the prohibition of
sponsors or godfathers marrying within the forbid
den degrees of spiritual relation. Now, that which
seems to have given the first tendency towards this,
was a law of Justinian, still extant in the Code,
wherein he forbids ffi • any man to marry a woman,
whether she be a slave or free, for whom he had
been godfather in baptism when she was a child ;
because nothing does induce a more paternal affec
tion, or juster prohibition of marriage, than this tie,
by which their souls are in a divine manner united
together. Now, this law extended no further than
to prohibit marriage in this immediate relation;
and it could not affect very many, whilst parents
were commonly sponsors for their own children,
and the sacred virgins, or the deaconnesses, or the
clergy, for others ; and men were sponsors for men,

and women for women. But afterward this was
, improved a little further : for the council of Trullo1*
t forbids the godfather not only to marry the infant,
| but the mother of the infant, for whom he answers !
i and orders them that have done so, first to be sepa
rated, then to do the penance of fornicators. This
prohibition was extended to more degrees in the
following ages, and grew so extravagant, that the
council of Trent thought it a matter worthy of their
reformation ; though still by their rules this spirit
ual relation37 was extended to more degrees than
either the. laws of Justinian or the canons of Trullo
had prohibited. For they forbid marriage not only
between the sponsors and their children, but also
between the sponsors themselves; and the father
and mother of the baptized is not to marry a spon
sor ; nor may the baptizer marry the baptized, nor
the father or mother of the baptized, because of the
spiritual relation that is contracted between them.
But they forbid above two sponsors to appear for a
child, and if more than two appear, they are not
bound by this law of spiritual relation, though the
canon law88 had determined otherwise in former
ages. Yet, after all their regulations about this
matter, there remain a thousand difficulties to ex
ercise the pens of the Roman casuists, which the
reader that is curious may find referred to by So-
teallus and Barbosa,39 in their Declarations and
Remissions on the council of Trent.
There is one thing indeed ordered gect 13
by that council, which was anciently J^Ib'SS
of good use, though not for the pur- SebbooS*leorfdtiie
pose for which they appointed it.
That is, that not only the names of the baptized,
but also the names of the sponsors, should be regis
tered in the books of the church. The council of
Trent orders it, only that men might know what
persons were forbidden to marry by this spiritual
relation. But anciently it had a much better use,
that the church might know who were sponsors,
and that they might be put in mind of their duty,
by being entered upon record, which was a stand
ing memorial of their obligations. This custom we
find mentioned in the author under the name of
Dionysius, where he describes the ceremony of ad
mitting catechumens together with their sponsors.

suscipere in filiolum, qui non est ipse vel baptizatus vel con-
firmatus. 33 Gratian. de Consecrat. Dist. 4. cap. 101. Non plures
ad suscipiendum de baptismo infantem accedant quam unus,
sive vir, sive mulier. In confirmations quoque id ipsum fiat.
81 Cone. Metense, cap. 12, cited by Vicecomes.
88 Justin. Cod. lib. 5. Tit. 4. de Nuptiis, Leg. 26. Ea
persona omnimodo ad nuptias venire prohibenda, quam
aliquis, sive alumna sit, sive non, a sacrosancto suscepit
baptismate ; cum nihil aliud sic inducere potest paternam
affectionem, et justam nuptiarum prohibitionem, quam hu-
jusmodi nexus, per quem, Deo mediante, animae eorum c'o-
pulatae sunt.
35 Cone. Trull, can. 53. "Eyvtopiv Ttvas 'ek tov fiairTia-

paTos iraXSas dvaSEXopivovs, Kal pETi tovto Tats ekeiviov
p-nTpaai yapiKov avvaXXdacrovTas o-vvoikeq-iov. bptt,opEV
airb tov irapovTOs pi)Siv toiovto irpaxBrtval.
37 Cone. Trident. Sess. 24. de Reform. Matrimon. cap. 2.
Inter susceptores ac baptizatum ipsum, et illius patrem ac
matrem, necnon inter baptizantem et baptizatum, baptiza-
tique patrem ac matrem, tantum spiritualis cognatio con-
trahatur. 38 Sext. Decretal, lib. 4. Tit. 3. de Cognat. Spirit, cap.
3. Si plures accesserint, spiritualis cognatio inde contrahi-
tur, &c.
89 Canon. Cone. Trid. cum Remissionibus Barbosa?, Co
lon. 1621.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

529

The bishop first explains to the catechumen the
laws and rules of a divine hfe and conversation,
and then asks him whether he purposes so to live ?
Which when he has promised, he lays his hand
upon his head, and orders the priest to register40
both the man and his sponsor. Afterward he speaks
of reciting their names out of these registers, when
men were presented by their sponsors immediately
to be baptized. And thus much of the use of
sponsors in the primitive church.

CHAPTER IX.
OF THE UNCTION AND THE SIGN OP THE CROSS
IN BAPTISM.
sent. 1. We nni^ m some 0I" the ancient ritual-
jKeUotSThS"- ists, but not in all, mention made of
an unction preceding baptism, and
used by way of preparation for it. They who first
describe it, speak of it as used either immediately
after the confession of faith, as the author ' of the
Constitutions ; or else between the renunciation and
the confession, as Cyril of Jerusalem2 describes it.
But there is no mention of this unction either in
Justin Martyr or TertuUian. For though Tertul- \
lian speaks of an unction among the ceremonies oil
baptism; yet, as Daille3 rightly observes, it was notf
this unction preceding baptism, but the unction
which followed after it in confirmation, accompa
nied with imposition of hands, which belongs to
another subject. For it is plain from Tertullian,
that neither of these were given before baptism, but
when men4 were come out of the water, then they
were anointed with the holy unction, and had im
position of hands, in order to receive the Holy
Ghost. Whence I think Daille's conjecture very
just and reasonable, that the unction preceding bap
tism is of later date, and was not as yet adopted
among the ceremonies of baptism in the time of
TertuUian. Sm( But the writers of the following
be^uiiSd"08 aSes sPeai distinctly of two unctions,
jjrjmtacniw the one before, the other after bap
tism ; which they describe by different

" Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccl. cap. 2. p. 253. 'lepdpxw
airoypdijracrdai keXsvel toXs UpEvtre t6v avSpa Kal tov
vaooxov. It. p. 204. Kal tivos 'tEpitos Ik tt]s diroypaepns
awrov te ical tou dvdSoxov Kt)pb£avTos, &c.
1 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 41.
8 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 2. n. 3.
' Dallae. de Confirmat. lib. 2. cap. 11. p. 181.
lertul. de Bapt. cap. 7. Exinde egressi de lavacro
perungiumur benedicta unctione de pristina disciplina, qua
ungui oleo de cornu in sacerdotium solebant, &c.
Constit Apost. lib. 7. cap. 42.
2 M

names and different ceremonies, to distinguish them
one from the other. The first they commonly call i
xpioiv pvoTucov iXaiov, the unction of the mystical
oil, and the other, xp'iaiv /ropou, or xpiapa, the unction i
of chrism. They both agree in this, that the bishop
only consecrated them, whether for the use of bap
tism or confirmation. The author of the Constitu
tions gives us a form of consecration to be used by
the bishop in sanctifying oil for this unction before
baptism, where he prays s to God, that he would
sanctify the oil in the name of the Lord Jesus, and
grant it spiritual grace, and efficacious power, that
it might be subservient to the remission of sins, and
the preparation of men to make their profession in
baptism, that such as were anointed therewith, be
ing freed from all impiety, might become worthy of
the initiation according to the command of his only
begotten Son. And this power of consecration is
reserved to the bishop in all the canons of the an
cient councils, of which more when we come to
speak of confirmation. In the mean time, I ob
serve, 1. That these two went by different names. ¦
The author of the Constitutions caUs the first3
mystical oil, and the other mystical chrism, and has
a distinct form of consecration for each of them.
And the same distinction in name is observed by
Cyril of Jerusalem,' and the authors under the name
of Justin Martyr,8 and Dionysius.9 2. They differed
in the time of administering them. For the one '
was given before the party went into the water, the
other after he came out of it again. Which is clear
from aU the forementioned authors, and from St.
Ambrose, who speaks of an unction with oil10 before
baptism. As also the author of the Recognitions
under the name of Clemens Romanus,11 who tells
persons that were to be baptized, that they were
first to be anointed with oU consecrated by prayer.
3. They differed in respect to the persons concerned
in the administration. For the unction before bap
tism was often done by a deacon or a deaconess ;
but that after baptism, by the bishop himself most
commonly, or at least by a presbyter in some pecu
har cases. The author of the Constitutions,12 speak
ing particularly of the unction before the baptism
of women, orders the bishop to anoint the head, the
deacon the forehead, and the deaconesses the other
parts of the body. But the chrism after baptism is ¦
reserved to the bishop only. Lastly, They differed

8 Constit. lib. 7. c. 42. TAvo-tikov iXaiov. Lib. 7. c. 44.
Mvo-tikSv pvpov. Vid. lib. 3. cap. 17.
7 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 2. n. 3. et Catech. 3. u. 3.
8 Justin. Resp. ad Orthod. qu. 137.
9 Dionys. de Eccl. Hierar. cap. 2. p. 253.
18 Ambros. de Sacramentis, lib. 1. c. 2. Venimus ad
fontem— Unctus es quasi athleta Christi, quasi luctamen
hujus saeculi luctaturus.
11 Clem. Recognit. lib. 3. u. 67. Baptizabitur autem
unusquisque vestrum — perunctus primo oleo per orationem
sanctificato. 12 Constit. Apost. lib. 3. c. 15 et 16.

530

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

in the design and intent of them. For the design
of the first unction was to prepare them for baptism,
and enter them on their combat with Satan; as
champions of Christ ; the other was to consummate
and confirm their baptism with the consignation or
seal of the Holy Spirit.
sect 3. Cyril of Jerusalem, speaking of
™Soriin2°thei'' the former unction,18 says, Men were
reason of it. anointed from head to foot with this
i exorcised or consecrated oil, and this made them
j partakers of the true olive tree, Jesus Christ. For
they being cut out of a wild olive tree, and ingrafted
into a good olive tree, were made partakers of the
fatness of the good olive tree. Therefore that ex
orcised oil was a symbol of their partaking of the
fatness of Christ, and an indication of the flight and
destruction of the adverse power. For as the in
sufflations of the saints, and invocation of God, do,
like a vehement flame, burn and put the devils to
flight ; so this exorcised oil, by prayer and invoca
tion of God, gains such a power, as not only to burn
up and purge away the footsteps of sin, but also to
repel all the powers of the invisible wicked one, the
devil. St. Ambrose compares it to the anointing
of wrestlers before they enter their combat : Thou
earnest to the font, says he, and wast anointed14
as a champion of Christ, to fight the fight of this
world. The author under the name of Justin
Martyr, distinguishing between the two unctions,
says, Men15 were first anointed with the ancient oil,
that they might be Christ's, that is, the anointed of
God; but they were anointed with the precious
ointment (after baptism) in remembrance of him
who reputed the anointing of himself with ointment
to be his burial. The author of the Constitutions
likewise uses the same distinction : Thou shalt first
of all 18 anoint him with the holy oil, then baptize
him with water, and afterward sign him with the
ointment : that the anointing with oil may be the
participation of the Holy Spirit, and the water may
be the symbol of death, and the signing with oint
ment may be the seal of the compact made with God.
But if there be neither oil, nor ointment, water is
sufficient both for the unction and the seal and the
confession of Him with whom we die. So that this
i was only a ceremony of baptism, which might be
i omitted without any detriment to the substance or
essential part of it. To these may be added the
testimony of St. Chrysostom, who says,17 Every per

son, before he was baptized, was anointed, as wres
tlers entering the field : and this, not as the high
priest was anointed of old, only on the head, or
right hand, or ear, but all over his body, because he
came not only to he taught, but to exercise himself
in a fight or combat. This is the account which
they give of this unction preceding baptism.
Dr. Cave 1B and some other learned
persons are of opinion, that together TheSB?gn4'of the
with this unction, the sign of the cross in0uie cEoni«.o!
,,, baptism. First, In
was made upon the forehead of the a" admission of«s-
*¦ techumens. And,
party baptized. And there is no 0fe3[0^,^,'h"i,M
question to be made of this, though
all the passages they refer to are not direct proofs
of it. For many of them relate to the sign of the
cross in the unction of chrism or confirmation. As
particularly, that unction which TertuUian speaks
of, and the sign of the cross accompanying it, was
not the unction before baptism, but that which fol
lowed in confirmation, as I have showed before in
the beginning of this chapter. Therefore, to under
stand this matter exactly, we are to distinguish at
least four several times, when the sign of the cross
f was used, during the preparation or consummation
of the ceremonies of baptism. 1. At the admission
| of catechumens to the state of catechumenship and
i the general name of Christians. 2. In the time of
: exorcism and imposition of hands, while they were
passing through the several stages of catechumens.
3. At the time of this unction before baptism. 4.
, And lastly, at the unction of confirmation, which
i was then usually the conclusion of baptism both in
adult persons and infants; and many of the pas
sages which speak of the sign of the cross in bap
tism, do plainly relate to this, as an appendage of
baptism, and closely joined to it, as the last cere
mony and consummation of it. The use of this
sign in the admission of catechumens, I have al
ready showed before from St. Austin, and the Life of
Porphyrius, bishop of Gaza.19 And the frequent use
of it in exorcism and imposition of hands and prayer,
during their catechetical exercises, has also been
noted20 in treating of them from St. Austin and
St. Ambrose, which I therefore need not here
repeat. The third use of it was in this unc- Sa..,j,
tion before baptism. For so the unetion'b'efore bap-
author under the name of Dionysius,
describing the ceremony of anointing the party be-

12 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 2. ... 3.
14 Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 1. cap. 2. Venimus ad fon-
tem. — Unctus es quasi athleta Christi, quasi luctamen hujus
saeculi luctaturus.
18 Justin. Respon. ad Orthodox, qu. 137. XpiopeBa Si Tip
iraXaitp IXaitp, 'Lva ytvtopEBa Xpiioi. Tip Si pbpto, irpbs
dvdpvnatv tb Til!/ xpiaiv th pvpu EVTatpiati pbv iavTH Xo-
yiQopEva. 16 Const. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 22. Xpio-Ets Si wpeoTovTto

iXaitp dyitp' EiTEiTa jQaTTTtcrets vSaTi, Kal teXeutolov trtppa-
yin-Eis pirpio' 'lva to piv xpiapa pETOxh V T^ ' Ayiti HvEvpa-
tos, to Si vStop a-vptSoXov tS SravaTtt, to Se pvpov trtppayis
Ttov trvvBr]Ktov, &c.
" Chrys. Horn. 6. in Colos. p. 1358. 'AXei^etiu, &oirep
ot dBXt]Tal eIs fdStov ip[3i)o-dpEvoi, Sec.
18 Cave, Prim. Christ, par. I. cap. 10. p. 318.
19 See Book X. chap. 1. sect. 3.
20 Book X. chap. 2. sect. 8.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

531

fore the consecration of the water, says, The bishop
begins the unction by thrice signing him21 with the
sign of the cross, and then commits him to the
priests to be anointed all over the body, whilst hej
goes and consecrates the water in the font. St.
Austin also may be understood of this, when he
says,22 The cross is always joined with baptism.
And by this we may interpret several passages in
Cyprian, as where he tells Demetrian, They only
escape who are born again, and signed with the
sign of Christ. And what that sign is, and on what
part of the body it is made, the Lord signified in
another place, saying, " Go through the midst of
• Jerusalem, and set a mark upon their foreheads."23
And so again in his book of the Unity of the Church,24
speaking of Uzziah's leprosy, he says, He was mark
ed for his offence against the Lord in that part of
his body, where those are signed who obtain his
mercy. Which seems plainly to refer to the sign
of the cross made in baptism. The author of the
Apostolical Constitutions is very express in this
matter. For explaining the meaning of the se
veral parts and ceremonies used in baptism, he
says,23 The water is to represent Christ's burial, the
oil to represent the Holy Ghost, the sign of the \
cross to represent the cross, and the ointment or s
chrism, the confirmation of men's professions. And
not improbably St. Jerom might refer to this, though
yhis words be not so restrained to this time of
inunction, when he says, He was a Christian, born of
^Christian parents, and carried the banner of the
'•* cross26 in his forehead. Some add also those words
of Cyprian,27 Let us guard our foreheads, that we
may preserve the sign of God without danger. And
those of Pontius28 in his Life, where speaking of
the Christian confessors who were branded by the
heathen in the forehead, and sent as slaves into the
mines, he says, They were marked in the forehead
a second time; alluding to the sign of the cross,
which, as Christians, they had received before.
But these passages do not necessarily relate to bap
tism, but are only general expressions that may refer

2J Dionys. de Hierar. Eccl. cap. 2. p. 253. 'O Si tPIs
XpiHEtos Sli tb atppaylaai Tpls dwap^dpEvos, t6 Xoiirbv
tois lEpEvai tov dvSpa xpiaai iravaeoptos irapaSbs, Sec.
22 Aug. Serm. 101. de Tempore, p. 290. Semper enim
cruci baptisma jungitur.
a Cypr. ad Demetrian. p. 194. Evadere eos solos posse,
qui renati et signo Christi signati fuerint, alio loco Deus lo
quitur  Quotl autem fit hoe signum et qua in parte cor
poris positum, manifestat alio in loco Deus, dicens, Transi
per mediam Jerusalem, et notabis signum super frontes vi-
rorum, &c.
24 Cypr. de Unit. Eccl. p. 116. In fronte maculatus est,
ea parte corporis notatus, oftenso Domino, ubi signantur qui
•Uominum promerentur.
* Constit. Apost. lib. 3. c. 17. Td Si VStop dvTl TatpHs,
""' r° &<"ov dvTl TlvEvpaTos 'Aytov, i; trtppayls dvTi tov
ffTttijjoS, Tb pbpov pEPaiaais TJjs bpoXoylas.
Hieron. Ep. 113. Praefat. in Job, t. 3. Ego Christia-

l

2 m 2

to the use of the sign of the cross upon any other
occasion; it being usual in those times to sign
themselves upon the forehead in the commonest
actions of their lives, upon every motion, as Tertul
lian expresses it,29 at their going out and coming
in, at their going to bath, or to bed, or to meals,
or whatever their employment or occasions called
them to. Yet thus far it may be argued from
them, that they who used it so commonly upon aU
other occasions, would hardly omit it in this solemn
unction of baptism. And therefore these allega
tions may be allowed to be a sort of collateral evi
dence of the practice.
Lastly, It was always used in the Se , 6
unction of confirmation. And that JS^'Jmw
being then an appendage to baptism, a"°°'
what was done in it, was many times said to be
done in baptism ; and so both the unction and sign
of the cross used in confirmation are ascribed to
baptism, and upon that account sometimes mistaken
for the former unction and consignation preceding
baptism. There was no unction before baptism in I
the time of TertuUian ; but there was one imme- j
diately after it, which, together with imposition of '
hands, had also the sign of the cross joined with it ;
and aU these were properly ceremonies of confirma
tion, which came after baptism, and are not to be
confounded with the former. Tertullian30 says, ,,
The flesh is washed, that the soul may be cleansed ; \
the flesh is anointed, that the soul may be conse- ,-
crated; the flesh is signed, that the soul may be
guarded ; the flesh is overshadowed by imposition of /
hands, that the soul may be illuminated by the Spi
rit ; the flesh is fed by the body and blood of Christ,
that the soul may receive nourishment or fatness
from God. Herejie describes all things in order as
they were done after baptism to the eucharist.
There was an unction, and a signing with the sign '
of the cross, and imposition of hands, and then the
eucharist. So that this sign of the cross plainly
relates to the unction which came after baptism,
and was a usual ceremony of imposition of hands

nus, et de parentibus Christianis natus, et vexillum crucis in
mea fronte portans.
27 Cypr. Ep. 50. al. 58. p. 125. Muniatur frons, ut signum
Dei incolume servetur.
23 Pontius. Vit. Cypr. p. 4. Confessores frontium notata-
rum secunda inscriptione signatos.
23 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3. Ad omnem progressum
atque promotum, ad omnem aditum et exitum, ad vestitum,
ad calceatum, ad lavacra, ad mensas, ad lumina, ad cubilia,
ad sedilia, quaecunque nos conversatio exercet, frontem
crucis signaculo tenemus. Vid. Cyril. Catech. 4. n. 10.
Catech. 13. n. 19. Chrysost. Horn. 21. ad Popul. Antioch.
38 Tertul. de Resur. cap. 8. Caro abluitur, ut anima
emaculetur. Caro unguitur, ut anima consecretur. Caro
signatur, ut et anima muniatur. Caro manus impositione
adumbratur, ut et anima Spiritu illuminetur. Caro cor
pore et sanguine Christi vescitur, ut et anima de Deo sa-
ginetur.

532

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

or confirmation. And thus we are to understand
that other passage in Tertullian,31 where he says,
The devil apes the ceremonies of the divine sacra
ments in his idol mysteries. He baptizes those that
believe in him ; he promises them expiation of sins
in his laver, as now it is in the mysteries of Mithra ;
he signs his soldiers in the forehead ; he celebrates
also the oblation of bread, &c. Where most proba
bly signing in the forehead relates to the sign of
the cross in confirmation, which comes between
baptism and the eucharist. And so in Pope Leo,32
All that are regenerated in Christ, the sign of the
cross makes them kings, and the unction of the
Spirit consecrates them priests ; meaning in the
same sense as St. Peter says, All Christians are a
royal priesthood. Which privileges are commonly
by the ancients ascribed to the unction in confirma
tion, as here by Leo, who makes the sign ofthe cross
an attendant of this unction after baptism. St.
Austin's words are a little ™ more general ; but yet
learned men think34 they refer to the sign of the
cross in confirmation, when he says, Several sacra
ments or sacred rites are received in different ways ;
I some, you know, are received in the mouth, mean
ing the eucharist ; others in the whole body, meaning
baptism, wherein the whole body is washed with
water; others in the forehead, as the sign of the
cross ; where, because he distinguishes the sign of
the cross, as a sacrament in the large sense of the
word, both from baptism and the eucharist, it seems
most reasonable to suppose that he intended the use
of it in confirmation. Which, therefore, the Greeks
often call mppayig, the sign or seal of the Holy
Ghost j35 and sometimes the sign of the cross is more
distinctly called <rraupo£i<5))c otppaytg, the sign made
in the form of the cross, which was used not only
in baptizing and confirming, but also in the ordina
tion of priests, as I have had occasion elsewhere36
to show out of Chrysostom and Dionysius,37 and in
the consecration of the waters of baptism, which
is the next thing that comes now in order to be
considered.

31 Tertul. de Prescript, cap. 40. Ipsas quoque res sa-
cramentorum divinorum in idolorum mysteriis aemulatur.
Tinguit et ipse quosdam, utique credentes et fideles suos.
Expiationem de lavacro repromittit, et sic adhiic initiat
Mithrae. Signat illic in frontibus milites suos, celebrat et
panis oblationem.
82 Leo, Serm. 3. in Anniversario Die suae Assumptions,
p. 3. Omnes in Christo regenerates crucis signum efficit
reges; Sancti vero Spiritus unctio consecrat sacerdotes.
83 Aug. Enarrat. Psal. cxli. p. 671. Multa sacramenta
aliter atque aliter accipimus. Quaedam, sicut nflstis, ore
accipimus, quaedam per totum corpus accipimus. Quia
vero in fronte erubescitur. — Crucem Christi quam pagani
derident, in loco pudoris nostri constituit.
34 Dallae. de Confirm, lib. 2. cap. 24. p. 294.
35 Cone. Gen. Constantinop. 1. can. 7.
86 Book IV. chap. 6. sect. 12.
37 Chrys. Horn. 55. in Matt. p. 475. Dionys. de Hierarch.
Eccl. cap. 5. p. 312 et 314.

CHAPTER X.
OF THE CONSECRATION OF THE WATER IN BAPTISM.
Immediately after the unction the Secl ,
minister proceeded to consecrate the ot'Iu\e,, c„Xr°?,aae
water, or the bishop, if he were pre- by T"l'7a'
sent, consecrated it, while the priests were finishing
the unction. For so the author under the name of
Dionysius represents it. While the priests, says
he,1 are finishing the unction, the bishop comes to
the mother of adoption, so he calls the font, and by
invocation sanctifies the water in it, thrice pouring
in some of the holy chrism in a manner represent
ing the sign of the cross. This invocation or con
secration of the water by prayer, is mentioned by
TertuUian ; for he says,2 The waters are made the
sacrament of sanctification by invocation of God.
The Spirit immediately descends from heaven, and
resting upon them sanctifies them by himself, and
they, being so sanctified, imbibe the power of sanc
tifying. And Cyprian3 declares, That the water
must first be cleansed and sanctified by the priest,
that it may have power by baptism to wash away
the sins of man. And so the whole council of Car
thage,4 in the time of Cyprian, says, The water is
sanctified by the prayer of the priest to wash away
sin. Optatus has respect to this, when, speaking of
the name of Piscis, 'IxOig, the technical name that
was given to Christ, from the several initial letters
of his titles, which signifies a fish, he says, This is
the Fish,8 meaning Christ, which is brought down
upon the waters of the font in baptism by invoca
tion and prayer. St. Austin often mentions this in
vocation in his books of baptism. That water" is
not profane and adulterated, over which the name
of God is invoked, though the invocation be made
by profane and adulterous men. In another place'
he says, This invoeation was used both in conse
crating the waters of baptism, and the oil for
unction, and the eucharist, and in giving imposition
1 Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccl. cap. 2. p. 253. Ainbs iirl
Ti]V pi]TEpa tijs vioBEtiias 'ipXETai, Kal to TauTijs vSeop
tols lEpais iiriKXritTEae KaBayidaas, Sec.
2 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 4. Sacramentum sanctificationis
consequuntur, invocato Deo. Supervenit enim statim Spiri
tus de coelis, et aquis superest, sanctificans eas de semetipso,
et ita sanctificatae vim sanctificandi combibunt.
3 Cyprian. Ep. 70. ad Januar. p. 190. Oportet vero mun-
dari et sanctificari aquam prius a sacerdote, ut possit bap
tismo sua peccata hominis, qui baptizatur, abluere.
4Conc. Carthag. ap. Cypr. p. 233. Aqua sacerdotis prece
sanctificata abluit delicta.
5 Optat. lib. 3. cont. Parmen. p. 62. Hie est Piscis, qui
in baptismate per invocationern fontalibus undis inseritur,
6 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 3. cap. 10. Non est aqua profana et
adultera, super quam nomen invocatur, etiamsi a profanis et
adulteris invocetur.
7 Id. de Bapt. lib. 5. cap. 20. Si ergo ad hoc valet, quod
dictum est in evangelio, Deus peccatorem non audit, ut per

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

533

of hands. And the sacraments were valid, though
it were a sinner or a murderer that made the prayer.
And again, answering the objection of the Cyprian-
ists and Donatists, that a wicked man or a heretic
could not sanctify the water, he says, Every error8
in the prayer of consecration does not destroy the
essence of baptism, but only the want of those
evangelical words (he means the form of baptizing
in the name of the Trinity) instituted by Christ,
without which baptism cannot be consecrated. For
otherwise, if the water were not consecrated when
the minister uses any erroneous words in his prayer,
then not only wicked men, but many good brethren
in the church, did not sanctify the water ; for many
of their prayers were daily corrected, when they
were rehearsed to those that were more learned,
and many errors were found in them contrary to
the cathohc faith. Yet they that were baptized
when such prayers were said over the water, were
not baptized again. This is a plain evidence, that
prayers of consecration were then generally used
both among the catholics and Donatists, though
neither the use nor the orthodoxy of them were
reckoned to be of absolute necessity to the very
being and essence of baptism, which might consist
with great errors in such prayers. It were easy to
add many other testimonies of this ancient practice
out of St. Ambrose,3 St. Basil,16 Theodoret," Gregory
Nyssen,12 Theophilus of Alexandria,13 Victor Uticen-
sis,uand some others. But I think it needless to re
peat them all at length, after such full evidence from
St. Austin and those writers that came before him.
a/ sect. i. Only I shaU add two or three ob-
ortiVpriyer uuhe servations more concerning this pray-
Constitutions. - , . , . , .
er ot consecration, which may give a
little light to some usages, and some doctrines also,
of the ancient church. And first we find, that as
they had forms for other parts of the Divine service,
so they had a form for this consecration prayer, or
benediction ofthe water, though that not so universal
and invariable as the form of baptism. For St.
Austin observes, that the one never varied, but the
other was subject to some errors and corruptions,
by reason of the liberty that was left to human
composures. One of these forms is now extant in

the Constitutions, which it will not be amiss here
to insert. It goes under the title of a thanksgiving
over the mystical water. The priest blesses 15 and
praises the Lord God Almighty, the Father of the
only begotten God, giving him thanks, for that he
sent his Son to be incarnate for us, that he might
save us ; that he took upon him in his incarnation
to be obedient in all things, to preach the kingdom
of heaven, the remission of sins, and the resurrec
tion of the dead. After this he adores the only be
gotten God, and for him gives thanks to the Father,
that he took upon him to die for all men upon the
cross, leaving the baptism of regeneration as a type
or symbol of it. He further praises God the Lord
of all, that in the name of Christ and by the Holy
Spirit, not rejecting mankind, he showed himself at
diverse times in diverse providences towards them;
giving Adam a habitation in a dehcious paradise ;
then laying upon him a command in his providence,
upon the transgression of which he expelled him in
his justice, but in his goodness did not wholly cast
him off, but disciplined his posterity in diverse man
ners, for whom in the end of the world he sent his
Son, to be made man for the sake of men, and to
take upon him all the affections of men, sin only
excepted. After this thanksgiving, the priest is to
call upon God, and say, Look down from heaven
and sanctify this water ; give it grace and power,
that he that is baptized therein, according to the
command of Christ, may be crucified with him, and
die with him, and be buried with him, and rise
again with him to that adoption which comes by
him ; that dying unto sin, he may live unto right
eousness. Any one that will compare the form in
our liturgy with this ancient form, will find a great
resemblance between them, both in the thanksgiv
ing, and the particular prayer of consecration.
Secondly, I observe, that together Sect 3
with this prayer, it was usual to make „Se„S°inf this
the sign of the cross also, not, as be
fore, upon the person to be baptized, but as a cir
cumstance of the consecration. This we learn not
only from Dionysius,16 but from St. Austin, who
says,17 The water of baptism was signed with the
cross of Christ. And St. Chrysostom says, They

peccatorem sacramenta non celebrentur : quomodo exaudit
nomicidam deprecantem, vel super aquam baptismi, vel super
oleum, vel super eucharistiam, vel super capita eorum qui
bus manus imponitur ? Quaa omnia tamen et fiunt et valent
etiam per homicidas, &c.
8 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 6. cap. 25. Si non sanctificatur aqua,
cum aliqua erroris verba per imperitiam precator effundit,
multi non solum maii, sed etiam boni, fratres in ipsa ecclesia
non sanctificant aquam. Multorum enim preces emendan-
tur quotidie, si doctioribus fuerint recitatee, et multa in eis
reperiuntur contra fidem catholicam. Nunquid si manifes-
tarentur aliqui baptizati, cum illse preces dictae super aquam
fuusent, jubebuntur denuo baptizari ?— Certa ilia evangelica
verba, sine quibus non potest baptismus consecrari, tantum
valent, ut per ilia sic evacuentur quaecunque in piece vitiosa

contra regulam fidei dicuntur, quemadmodum daemonium
Christi nomine excluditur.
9 Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 1. c 5. lib. 5. c. 2. De Spir.
Sancto, lib. 1. c. 7.
>° Basil, in Psal. xxviii. It. de Spir. Sancto, c. 27.
» Theodor. in 1 Cor. vi. 2. t. 3. p. 144.
'2 Nyssen. de Bapt. Christ, t. 3. p. 371. It. adv. eos qui
Baptism, differunt, t. 2. p. 219.
18 Theophil. Ep. Paschal. 1. Bibl. Patr. t. 3. p. 87.
11 Victor. Utic. de Persec. Vandal, lib. 2. p. 602. Gelas.
Cyzicen. et Pseudo-Athanas. de Communi Essentia, Sec.
>8 Const. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 43.
18 Dionys. de Hier. Eccl. cap. 2. p. 254.
" Aug. Horn. 27. ex 50. t. 10. p. 175. Quia baptismus,
id est, aqua salutis, non est salutis, nisi Christi nomine con-

534

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

used18 it in all their sacred mysteries; when they
were regenerated in baptism, when they were fed with
the mystical food in the eucharist, when they were
ordained, that symbol of victory was always repre
sented in the action, whatever religious matter they
were concerned in. To which we may add the au
thor under the name of St. Austin,19 who runs over
all the solemn consecrations of the church, and
tells us, the symbol of the cross was used in every
one, in catechising of new converts, in consecrating
the waters of baptism, in giving imposition of hands
in confirmation, in the dedication of churches and
altars, in consecrating the eucharist, and in pro
moting priests and Levites to holy orders.
Thirdly, I observe concerning the
The effecti and effects of this consecration, that the
change wrought by , -, .
this consecraUon, very same chancre was supposed to be
the same as in the J . 7 ,
bread and nine in wrought by it in the waters of bap-
the eucharist. ° J r
tism, as by the consecration of bread
and wine in the eucharist. For they supposed not
only the presence of the Spirit, but also the mystical
presence of Christ's blood to be here after consecra
tion. Julius Firmieus,20 speaking of baptism, bids
men here seek for the pure waters, the undefiled
fountain, where the blood of Christ, after many
spots and defilements, would whiten them by the
Holy Ghost. Gregory Nazianzen21 and Basil22 say
upon this account, That a greater than the temple, a
greater than Solomon, a greater than Jonas is here,
meaning Christ, by his mystical presence and the
power of his blood. St. Austin23 says, Baptism or
the baptismal water is red, when once it is conse
crated by the blood of Christ; and 'this was pre
figured by the waters of the Red sea. Prosper24 is
bold to say, That in baptism we are dipped in blood;
and therefore martyrs are twice dipped in blood,

first in the blood of Christ at baptism, and then in
their own blood at martyrdom. St. Jerom2* uses
the same bold metaphor, explaining those words of
Isaiah, " Wash ye, make ye clean :" Be ye baptized
in my blood by the laver of regeneration. And
again,28 speaking of the Ethiopian eunuch, he says,
He was baptized in the blood of Christ, about whom
he was reading. After the same manner, Caesarius
says,27 The soul goes into the hving waters, conse
crated and made red by the blood of Christ. And
Isidore28 says, What is the red sea, but baptism /
consecrated in the blood of Christ ? Others tell us,
that we are hereby made partakers of the body and
blood of Christ, and eat his flesh, according to what
is said in St. John's Gospel, " Except ye eat the flesh
of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no
hfe in you.'' Upon which words Fulgentius28
founds the necessity of baptism : Forasmuch as it
may be perceived by any considering man, that the
flesh of Christ is eaten and his blood drunk in the
laver of regeneration. Hence Cyril of Alexandria
says,88 We are partakers of the spiritual Lamb in
baptism. And Chrysostom,31 That we thereby put
on Christ, not only his Divinity, or only his hu
manity, that is, his flesh, but both together. And
Nazianzen,32 That in baptism we are anointed and
protected by the precious blood of Christ, as Israel
was by the blood upon the door-posts in the night.
St. Chrysostom33 says again, That they that are bap
tized, put on a royal garment, a purple dipped in
the blood of the Lord. Philo-Carpathius says, The
spouse of Christ, his church, receives in baptism
the seal34 of Christ, being washed in the fountain
of his most holy blood. Optatus,85 as we have
heard before, says, Christ comes down by the invo
cation, and joins himself to the waters of baptism.

secrata, qui pro nobis sanguinem fudit, cruce ipsius aqua
signatur. 18 Chrys. Horn. 54. al. 55. in Matt. p. 475. ed. Commelin.
TidvTa St1 avTti teXeitcu T<i KaB' npas" Kav dvayEvvt)Brivat
Sir], =raupds irapayivETat' Kav Tpatprjvat Ti)V pviiKrjv Ikei-
vi}v TpotprjV Kav XEipOTOvt)Br)vat, &c.
19 Aug. Horn. 75. de Diversis in Append, t. 10. p. 702.
Hujus crucis mysterio rudes catechizantur, eodem mysterio
fons regenerationis consecratur, ejusdem crucis signo per
manus impositionem baptizati dona gratiarum accipiunt.
Cum ejusdem crucis charactere basilicae dedicantur, alta
ria consecrantur, altaris sacramenta cum interpositione
dominicorum verborum conficiuntur : sacerdotes et Levitae
per hoc idem ad sacros ordines promoventur.
20 Firmic. de Error Profan. Relig. c. 28. Quaere fontes
ingenuos, quaere puros liquores, ut illic te post multas macu-
las cum Spiritu Sancto Christi sanguis incandidet.
21 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 657.
22 Basil, de Bapt. lib. 1. c. 2. t. 1. p. 558.
23 Aug. Tract. 11. in Joh. p. 41. Significabat Mare Ru-
brum baptismum Christi. Unde rubet baptismus Christi
nisi Christi sanguine consecratus ?
21 Prosper, de Promissis, lib. 2. cap. 2. In cocco bis
tincto martyria sancta rutilant, semel baptismo Christi san
guine tinguntur, atque suo effusionis cruore denuo retincti.

28 Hieron. in Esai. i. 16. Baptizemini in sanguine meo
per lavacrum regenerationis.
28 Id. in Esai. liii. 7. Statim baptizatus in Agni sanguine
quem legebat, vir meruit appellari, et apostolus genti yEthi.
opum missus est.
27 Caesar. Arelatens. Horn. 6. de Paschat. Bibl. Patr. t.
2. p. 276. Ingreditur anima vitales undas velut rubras
sanguine Christi consecratas.
29 Isidor. Hispal. in Exod. xix. Quid est mare rubrum,
nisi baptismum Christi sanguine consecratum ?
29 Fulgent, de Bapt. Aithiop. cap. 11. p. 611. Quisquis
secundum mysterii verifatem considerare poterit, in ipso
lavacro sanctae regenerationis hoc fieri providebit. — Quod
etiam sanctos patres indubitanter credidisse ac docuisse
cognoscimus. 88 Cyril, in Exod. xii. lib. 2. t. 1. p. 270. Metoxos tou
voetov irpofiaTov, &c.
81 Chrys. Serm. 27. de Cruce, t. 6. p. 293.
32 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 646.
33 Chrys. Horn. 60. ad IUuminandos, t. 1. p. 796.
31 Philo. in Cantic. iv. 12. Fons signatus sponsa dicitur,
quia in baptismate signaculum Jesu Christi accepit, ex ejus
sacratissimi sanguinis fonte perlota.
35 Optat. lib. 3. p. 62. Hie est Piscis, qui in baptismate
per invocationem fontalibus undis inseritur.

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

535

Nay, Chrysostom,36 in one of his bold rhetorical
flights, scruples not to tell a man that is baptized,
that he immediately embraces his Lord in his arms,
that he is united to his body, nay, compounded or
consubstantiated with that body which sits above,
whither the devil has no access. Some tell us, as
Isidore, that the water of baptism is the water37
that flowed out of Christ's side at his passion : and
others, as Laurentius Novariensis,38 that it is water
mixed with the sacred blood of the Son of God.
Others tell us,39 that the water is transmuted or
changed in its nature by the Holy Ghost, to a sort
of Divine and ineffable power. So Cyril of Alex
andria, who frequently uses the word p.tra^oixtiisio'ig ,
transelementation, both when he speaks of the water
in baptism, and the bread and wine in the eucha
rist, or of any other changes that are wrought in
the mysteries of the Christian rehgion. Cyril of
Jerusalem and Gregory Nyssen have the same ob
servation upon the change that is wrought in the oil,
after consecration, which they make to be the same
with that of the bread and wine in the eucharist.
Beware, says Cyril,40 that you take not this oint
ment to be bare ointment. For as the bread in the
eucharist, after the invocation of the Holy Spirit, is
not mere bread, but the body of Christ; so this
holy ointment, after invocation, is not bare or com
mon ointment, but it is a gift of God, that makes
Christ and the Holy Spirit to be present in the
action. In like manner, Gregory Nyssen makes the
same change to be in the mystical oil, and in the
altar itself, and in the ministers by ordination, and
in the waters of baptism, as in the bread and wine
in the eucharist after consecration. Do not con
temn, says he, the Divine laver, nor despise it as a
common thing, because of the use41 of water. For
great and wonderful things are wrought by it. This
altar, before which we stand, is but common stone
in its own nature, differing nothing from other stones,
wherewith our waUs are built ; but after it is con
secrated to the service of God, and has received a
benediction, it is a holy table, an immaculate altar,
not to be touched by any but the priests, and that
with the greatest reverence. The bread also is at
first but common bread, but when once it is sancti
fied by the holy mystery, it is made and called the
body of Christ. So the mystical oil, and so the
wine, though they be things of httle value before

the benediction, yet, after their sanctification by the
Spirit, they both of them work wonders. The same
power of the word makes a priest become honour-
ble and venerable, when he is separated from the
community of the vulgar by a new benediction.
For he who before was only one of the common
people, is now immediately made a ruler and presi
dent, a teacher of piety, and a minister of the secret
mysteries : and all these things he does without any
change in his body or shape ; for to all outward ap
pearance he is the same that he was, but the change
is in his invisible soul, by an invisible power and
grace. Pope Leo42 goes one step further, and tells
us, that baptism makes a change not only in the
water, but in the man that receives it ; for thereby
Christ receives him, and he receives Christ, and he
is not the same after baptism that he was before,
but the body of him that is regenerated is made the
flesh of him that was crucified. From all which it
is easy to observe, that in all these cases, the change
which they speak of is not made in the substance of
the things, but in the qualities only ; the water is
not the blood of Christ substantially and really, but
only symbolically and mystically; nor is a man
changed into the flesh of Christ thereby any other
way, than as he is made a living member of his
mystical body, participating of that Spirit whereby
he rules and governs his church, as the Head of it.
So that when the ancients speak of a Divine change
or transelementation (for as yet the word transub
stantiation was not known) in the bread and wine
in the eucharist, they are to be interpreted, as here
we do in baptism, of a change in qualities and
powers, and not in substance ; since all the words
they used to express that change, are equally veri
fied in the waters of baptism after consecration.
I must further observe, to avoid all Sect. 6.
mistakes, that when the ancients how far these
' prayers of consecra-
speak of an absolute necessity of in- j™ ^™ecdh™c„8-
vocation of God to consecrate the
waters of baptism, they then do not mean any new
forms of prayer instituted by the church, but the
very form of baptism instituted by Christ, which they
rightly suppose to be an invocation of the holy
Trinity ; in which sense, no baptism can be duly
performed without an invocation to consecrate the
water, though it may be performed, in times of exi
gence, without the additional43prayers ofthe church.

88 Chrys. Horn. 6. in Colos. p. 1359. Autoi/ evSritos ite-
piXapfldvEts tov SEtnroTnv, dvaKEpdvvvcai tw o-dipaTt,
avatpript], (leg. dvaepvprt) Tip crtopaTi Tip dvto KEipivto, &c.
"' Isidor. de Offic. Eccl. lib. 2. cap. 24. Aqua est, quae
tempore passionis Christi de latere profluxit.
33 Laurent. Novar. Horn. 1. de Poanitcntia. Bibl. Patr.
t. 2. p. 127. Asperges me aqua Filii tui sacro sanguine
mixta.— Abluitur Adam corpore Christi, &c.
" Cyril, in Joh. iii. 5. p. 147. Aid tjjs tou TIvEvpaTOS
EVEpytias to altrBiyrdv iiStop irpbs 3-Eiay Tivi Kal appr]TOV
ivattToixEiovTat Siivapiv. Vid. Albertinum de Eucharis

tia, lib. 2. p. 488, where he has collected all the passages
that speak of this transelementation.
48 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 3. n. 3. "Opa pn virovoiicrns IkeXvo
tS pvpov tfriXov Elvaf lotsirEp Kal b apTos ttjs EvXapiiias,
pETi Till/ iiriKXrjtliv tS 'A-yi'u UvEvpaTOS, hk eti apTos Xitos,
dXXi atXipa Xptii' htio to ay iovthto pvpov Uk eti \]/iX6v,Sec.
41 Nyssen. de Baptismo Christi, t. 3. p. 369.
42 Leo, Serm. 14. de Passione, p. 62. Susceptus a Christo,
Christumque suscipiens, non idem est post lavacrum, qui
ante baptismum fuit, sed corpus regenerati fit caro crucifixi.
48 Vid. Albertin. de Eucharist, lib. 1. cap. 5. p. 18.

536

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

CHAPTER XI.
OF THE DIFFERENT WATS OF BAPTIZING, BY IMMER
SION, TRINE IMMERSION, AND ASPERSION IN THE
CASE OF CLINIC BAPTISM.
Having thus far considered all things
aii pet'ons an- preceding the very act of baptizing,
ciently divested in . . • ...^ j.1  „
order to be bap- we are now to inquire into the man
ner how that was usually performed,
whether by dipping and total immersion, or by
aspersion and sprinkling, which is now the more
general practice of the church. There is no ques
tion made but that either of these ways does fully
answer the primary end of baptism, which is to
purify the soul, and not the body, by washing away
sin. But yet the ancients thought, that immersion,
or burying under water, did more lively represent
the death and burial and resurrection of Christ, as
well as our own death unto sin, and rising again to
righteousness ; and the divesting or unclothing the
person to be baptized, did also represent the put
ting off the body of sin, in order to put on the new
man, which is created in righteousness and true
hohness. For which reason they observed the
way of baptizing all persons naked and divested,
by a total immersion under water, except in some
particular cases of great exigence, wherein they
allowed of sprinkling, as in the case of clinic bap
tism, or where there was a scarcity of water. That
persons were divested in order to be baptized is evi
dent, partly from what has been said before of the
unction, which was administered not only on the
head, but on other parts of the body ; partly from
express testimonies which affirm it ; and also from
the manner of baptizing by immersion, which ne
cessarily presupposes it. St. Chrysostom, speaking
of baptism, says, Men were as naked as Adam in
paradise, but with this difference; Adam was
naked ' because he had sinned, but in baptism, a man
was naked that he might be freed from sin ; the one
was divested of his glory which he once had, but
the other put off the old man, which he did as easily
as his clothes. St. Ambrose2 says, Men came as
naked to the font, as they came into the world ; and
thence he draws an argument by way of allusion, to
rich men, telling them, how absurd it was, that a
man who was born naked of his mother, and re
ceived naked by the church, should think of going

rich into heaven. Cyril of Jerusalem takes notice of
this circumstance,3 together with the reasons of it
when he thus addresses himself to persons newly
baptized : As soon as ye came into the inner part of
the baptistery, ye put off your clothes, which is an
emblem of putting off the old man with his deeds ;
and being thus divested, ye stood naked, imitating
Christ, that was naked upon the cross, who by his
nakedness spoiled principalities and powers, pub
licly triumphing over them in the cross. 0 won
derful thing ! ye were naked in the sight of men,
and were not ashamed, in this truly imitating the
first man Adam, who was naked in paradise, and
was not ashamed. So also Amphilochius in the Life
of St. Basil,4 speaking of his baptism, says, He arose
with fear and put off his clothes, and with them the
old man. And Zeno Veronensis,5 reminding per
sons of their baptism, bids them rejoice, for they
went down naked into the font, but rose again
clothed in a white and heavenly garment, which
if they did not defile, they might obtain the kingdom
of heaven. Athanasius, in his invectives against
the Arians, among other things, lays this to their
charge, that by their persuasions the Jews and Gen
tiles broke into the baptistery, and there offered
such abuses to the catechumens as they stood with
their naked bodies,8 as was shameful and abomin
able to relate. And a hke complaint is brought
against Peter, bishop of Apamea, in the council of
Constantinople, under Mennas,' that he cast out
the neophytes, or persons newly baptized, out of
the baptistery, when they were without their clothes
and shoes. All which are manifest proofs that
persons were baptized naked, either in imitation of
Adam in paradise, or our Saviour upon the cross, or
to signify their putting off the body of sin, and the
old man with his deeds.
And this practice was then so ge-
, , - , . i Sect. 2.
neral, that we find no exception made, no eicejufon in
x this case eitherwith
either with respect to the tenderness "'gjf,^ 1"""™
of infants, or the bashfulness of the
female sex, save only where the case of sickness or
disability made it necessary to vary from the usual
custom. St. Chrysostom is an undeniable evidence
in this matter. For writing about the barbarous
proceedings of his enemies against him on the great
sabbath, or Saturday before Easter, among other
tragical things which they committed, he reports
this for one, That they came armed into the church,
and by violence expelled the clergy, Mlling many

1 Chrys. Horn. 6. in Coloss. p. 2358. 'EvTavBa yvpvoTt)s,
kclkeX yvpvoT-ns' dXX' 'ekeX piv dpapTiiaas iyvpvtoBt], i-nElSt)
ijpapTEV' ivTavBa Si, 'lva diraXXayfi yvpvovTai, Sec.
2 Ambros. Serm. 20. Nudi in saiculo nascimur, nudi
etiam accedimus ad lavacrum.  Quam autem incongruum
ac absurdum est, ut quem nudum mater genuit, nudum
suscipit ecclesia, dives introire velit in ccelum ?
3 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 2. u. 2.
4 Amphiloc. Vit. Basil, cap. 5.

5 Zeno, Invitat. 2. ad Bapt. Bibl. Patr. t. 2. p. 442. Gau-
dete, in fontem quidem nudi demergitis, sed aetherea veste
vestiti, mox candidati inde surgitis, quam qui non polluerit,
regna ccelestia possidebit.
8 Athan. Ep. ad Orthodoxos, t. 1. p. 946.
7 Cone. Constant. Act. 1. p. 53. ed. Crab. Cum essemus
in baptisterio neophytarum, sine tunicis et calceamentis
existentium, venit episcopus noster Petrus, et ejecit nos
foras una cum neophytis, &c.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

537

in the baptistery, with which the women,8 who at
that time were divested in order to be baptized,
were put into such a terror that they fled away
naked, and could not stay in the fright to put on
such clothes as the modesty of their sex required.
And that so it was in the case of children also, is
evident from the custom of immersion, which con
tinued in the church for many ages ; as also from
what is particularly said of infants in the Ordo Ro
manus,9 and Gregory's Sacramentarium, That after
the priest has baptized them with three immersions,
they are to be clojhed, and brought to the bishop to
be confirmed. For this clothing supposes that they
were unclothed before in order to be baptized.
But yet, that no indecency might
Tet matters were appear in so sacred an action, two
so ordered as that no .
Meeemy might be things were especially provided for
committed. ° r J r
by ancient rules. 1. That men and
women were baptized apart. To which purpose the
baptisteries were commonly divided into two apart
ments, the one for the men, the other for the wo
men, as I have had occasion to show from St.
Austin10 in another place." Or else the men were
baptized at one time and the women at another, as
Vossius12 observes out of the Ordo Romanus, Gre
gory's Sacramentarium, Albinus Flaccus, and other
writers. 2. There was anciently an order of dea
conesses in the church, and one main part of their
business was to assist at the baptism of women,
where, for decency's sake, they were employed to
divest them, and so to order the matter, that the
whole ceremony, both of unction and baptizing,
might be performed in such a manner as became
the reverence that was due to so sacred an action ;
of aU which I have given sufficient proofs in a
former Book,13 which I need not here repeat.
s«t. 4. Persons thus divested, or unclothed,
p.rfofid bfim7. were usuaUy baptized by immersion,
or dipping of their whole bodies un
der water, to represent the death and burial and
resurrection of Christ together; and therewith to
signify their own dying unto sin, the destruction of
its power, and their resurrection to a new hfe. There

are a great many passages in the Epistles of St.
Paul, which plainly refer to this custom : Rom. vi.
4, " We are buried with him by baptism ; that like
as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory
of the Father, even so we also should walk in new
ness of life." So again, Col. ii. 12, " Buried with
him in baptism, wherein ye are also risen with him,
through the faith of the operation of God, who
raised him from the dead." And as this was the
original apostohcal practice, so it continued to be
the universal practice of the church for many ages,
upon the same symbolical reasons as it was first
used by the apostles. The author of the Apostoh
cal Constitutions1' says, Baptism was given to re
present the death of Christ, and the water his burial.
St. Chrysostom proves the resurrection from this
practice : For, says he, our being baptized and im-
merged in the water,15 and our rising again out of
it, is a symbol of our descending into heU or the
grave, and of our returning from thence. Where
fore St. Paul calls baptism our burial. For, says he,
" we are buried with Christ by baptism into death."
And in another place,18 When we dip our heads in
water as in a grave, our old man is buried; and
when we rise up again, the new man rises therewith.
Cyril of Jerusalem makes it an emblem of the Holy
Ghost's effusion upon the apostles : For as he that
goes down into the water17 and is baptized, and sur
rounded on all sides by the water ; so the apostles
were baptized all over by the Spirit : the water sur
rounds the body externally, but the Spirit incom
prehensibly baptizes the interior soul. The fourth
council of Toledo keeps to the former reason,18 The
immersion in water is as it were the descending
into the grave, and the rising out of the water a
resurrection. And so St. Ambrose19 explains it:
Thou wast asked, Dost thou believe in God the Fa
ther Almighty ? And thou didst answer, I believe :
and then thou wast immerged in water, that is,
buried. It appears also from Epiphanius and others,
that almost all heretics, who retained any baptism,
retained immersion also. Epiphanius20 says, The
Ebionites received baptism as it was practised in

8 Chrys. Ep. 1. ad. Innocent, p. 680. rvvaXnEs irpos to
ptitTTitTpa diroSvtrdpEvai kut' avTov tSv Katp&v, yvpval
Etpvyov iiirb too tj>6(3ov ttjs xaXEirr)s TavTtns itpdSov' ovSi
Ttjv irpEirovaav yvvad^iv evtrxnpoo-vvnv avyxtopovpevat
VEptBitiBai. Vid. Moschum Prat. Spir. c. 104.
8 Gregor. Sacram. de Bapt. Infant. Baptizat cum sacerdos
«ub trina mersione, &c. Et vestitur infans. It. Ordo Roman.
Cap. de Die Sabbati S. Paschaa. Cum vestiti fuerint in
fantes, pontifex confirmet eos. Vid. Athanas. de Parabolis
Evangel, qu. 92. T<5 ydp KaTaSvaae tS watSiov, Sec.
10 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. c. 8.
11 Book VIII. chap. 7. sect. 1.
12 Voss. de Bapt. Disp. 1. p. 36.
13 Book II. chap. 22. sect. 8.
14 Const. Apost. lib. 3. c. 1 7. 'Eo-tI toiW to piv fidir-
Tinpa its Tov'SdvaTov too 'ItjtroD StSdpevov, to Si vStop
dvrl Tar^TJs.

15 Chrys. Horn. 40. in 1 Cor. p. 689. Td yap PairTi^Eer-
6al Kal KaTaSveaBat, Eixa dvavEVEiv, Tr)s eIs liSov KaTa/ia- ,
o-eios eo-tI o-ippoXov, Kal tjjs IkeXBev dvdSov, Sec.
18 Chrys. in Joh. iii. 5. Horn. 25. p. 656.
•' Cyril. Catech. 17. n. 8. p. 247.
18 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 6. In aquis mersio quasi ad in-
fernum descensio est : et rursus ab aquis emersio resurrec-
tio est.
w Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 7. Interrogatus es,
Credis in Deum, Patrem Omnipotentem? dixisti, Credo, et
mersisti, hoc est, sepultus es. Add also Tertul. de Bapt. c.
2. Homo in aquam demissus, et inter pauca verba tinctus,
non multo vel nihilo mundior resurgit. Paulin. Ep. 12. ad
Severum. Mira Dei pietas ; peccator mergitur undis, &c.
Nyssen. de Bapt. Christi, t. 3. p. 372. Athanas. de Para
bolis, qn. 94. t. 2. p. 422.
20 Epiphan. Haer. 30. Ebion. u. 2 et 16.

538

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

the churcn, but they added to it a quotidian baptism,
immerging themselves in water every day. So the
Marcionites were guilty of many errors in other re
spects about baptism : they would baptize no per
sons but either virgins21 or widows, or unmarried
men ; they repeated their baptism three times ;M and
introduced some other errors about it : but still the
baptisms which they administered, were in this re
spect conformable to those of the church, that they
baptized by a total immersion, as TertuUian23 wit
nesses of them. Other heretics, as the Valentinians,
to their baptism by water, added another baptism
by fire,24 which is mentioned by Tertulhan. But
yet we find no charge brought against them for their
first baptism, as if it were administered in any other
way than by a total immersion. The only heretics
against whom this charge is brought, were the
Eunomians, a branch of the Arians, of whom it was
reported by Theodoret,25 that they baptized only the
upper parts of the body as far as the breast. And
this they did in a very preposterous way, as Epi
phanius28 relates, rove. irbSag dvto, xai rrjv KetpaXnv Karen,
with their heels upward, and their head downward.
Which sort of men are called histopedes, or pederecti.
Whence the learned Gothofred27 conjectures, that
in one of the laws of Theodosius, where it is now
read, Eunomiani spadones ,- it should be Eunomiani
histopedes, which signifies men hanged up by the
heels, as he proves from Pausanias, Pollux, Hesy
chius, Harpocration, and others. So that these
were the only men among aU the heretics of the
ancient church, that rejected this way of baptizing
by a total immersion in ordinary cases.
Indeed the church was so punctual
Sect. 5. . r
Vet aspersion, or to this rule, that we never read of any
epnnkling, allowed *
Mr8°caia'!xtra°r<ii" exception made to it in ordinary cases,
no, not in the baptism of infants. For
it appears from the Ordo Romanus, and Gregory's
Sacramentarium, that infants, as well as others,
were baptized by immersion, and the rules of the
church, except in cases of danger, do still require it
But in two cases a mitigation of this rule was al
lowed. 1. In case of sickness and extreme danger
of life. Here that excellent rule, " I wiU have mercy
and not sacrifice," was always allowed to take place.

Therefore that which the ancients called chnic bap
tism, that is, baptism by aspersion or sprinkling upon
a sick bed, was never disputed against as an unlawful
or imperfect baptism, though some laws were made
to debar men who were so baptized, from ascending
to the dignities of the church. For if men by
neglect deferred their baptism to a sick bed, the
church, in her prudence and discipline, (because
this delay was a fault she always declaimed against,)
thought fit to deny such men the privilege of or
dination, as I have had occasion to show in a more
proper place.28 But yet she did not at any time
attempt to annul such baptisms, or judge them
imperfect as to what concerned the essence or sub
stance of the action. This very question was moved
by some, together with that of heretical baptism,
in the time of Cyprian : but Cyprian, who deter
mined against the validity of~heretical baptism,
makes no scruple in this case, but offers arguments
to prove such chnic baptism by aspersion, to have
all the necessary conditions of a true baptism. For
though this was the case of Novatian, who had not
been washed, but only sprinkled^ upon a sick bed;
yet Cyprian29 had no objection against his Chris
tianity upon that account : but declares, that as far
as he was able to judge, all such baptisms were per
fect, where there was no defect in the faith of the
giver or the receiver : for the contagion of sin was
not washed away, as the filth of the body is, by a
carnal and secular washing. There was no need
of a lake or other such hke helps to wash and
cleanse it. The heart of a believer was otherwise
washed, the mind of a man was cleansed by the
merit of faith. In the sacraments of salvation, when
necessity requires, God grants his indulgence by a
short way of performing them. This lawfulness of
aspersion in such cases he proves from those words
of God in Ezekiel xxxvi. 25, " I will sprinkle clean
water upon you, and ye shaU be clean : from all '
your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse
you." And from several other texts, Numb. xix.
19 ; viii. 7; and xix. 9, where the water of sprink
ling is called the water of purification. Whence
he concludes, that the sprinkling of water was as
effectual as washing ; and what the church did in

21 Tertul. cont. Marc. lib. 1. c. 29. Non tinguitur apud
ilium caro, nisi virgo, nisi vidua, nisi ccolebs, &c.
22 Epiph. Haer. 42. n. 3. Ov povov trap' avTto 'iv XovTpbv
SiSorat, dXXd Kal 'itos Tptiov XovTpiov, See.
23 Tertul. cont. Marc. lib. 1. cap. 28. Carnem mergit
exsortem salutis.
24 Tertul. Carmen cont. Marc. lib. 1. cap. 7. Namque
Valentino Deus est insanus. — Bis docuit tingui, transducto
corpore flamma. Vid. Hieron. in Ephes. iv.
25 Theod. Haer. Fab. lib. 4. cap. 3.
28 Epiphan. Hasr. 76. Anomceorum, p. 992.
27 Gothofred. in Cod. Theod. lib. 16. Tit. 5. de Haereticis,
Leg. 17. a Book IV. chap. 3. sect. 11.
29 Cypr. Ep. 76. al. 69. ad Magnum, p. 165. Quaesisti

etiam, fili charissime, quid mihi de illis videatur, qui in in
firmitate et languore gratiam Dei consequuntur, an habendi
sint legitimi Christiani, eo quod aqua salutari non loti sint,
sed perfusi.  Nos quantum concipit mediocritas nostra,
aestimamus in nullo mutilari et debilitari posse beneficia
divina, nee minus aliquid illic posse contingere, ubi plena
et tota fide et dantis et sumentis accipitur, quod de divinis
muneribus hauritur. Neque enim sic in sacramento salutari
delictorum contagia, ut in lavacro carnali et seculari sordes
cutis et corporis, abluuntur, &c. Aliter pectus credentis
abluitur, aliter mens hominis per fidei merita mundatur. In
sacramentis salutaribus, necessitate cogente, et Deo indul-
gentiam suam largiente, totum credentibus conferunt divina
compendia.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

539

this case in compliance with necessity and men's
infirmities, was neither displeasing to God, nor de
trimental to the party baptized, who received a full
and complete sacrament by the power of God, and
the truth of his own faith together. And therefore
he blames those who nicknamed these men clinics,
instead of Christians. It further appears from the
canons which'speak of these,30 that they were only
denied orders, not the name of Christians. The
council of Neocsesarea allows them in time of great
exigence, or in case of great merit, to be ordained,
as Novatian was- for his pregnant parts, and the
hopes which the church had conceived of him, as
Eusebius31 out of the epistle of Cornehus informs
us. The council of Laodicea32 appoints such, if
they recover, to learn the creed, but says not a word
of rebaptizing them. And it appears from the
council of Auxerre,33 that these chnics were aUowed
to be baptized at any time when necessity re
quired, without a solemn festival. So that many
things were indulged to them, which were not al
lowed by the ordinary rules of the church. 2. An
other case in which sprinkling was accepted instead
of immersion, was in times of difficulty, when a
sufficient quantity of water could not be procured ;
as when a martyr was to be baptized in prison, or
was to baptize any other under such a confinement.
Thus we read in the ancient Acts of St. Laurence,
referred to by Walafridus Strabo,34 how one Roma
nus, a soldier, was baptized by him in a pitcher of
water. And again, how one Lucillus was baptized
by the same martyr35 only by pouring water upon
his head. But as both these were extraordinary
cases, they only show us, how far the church could
dispense with this rule upon reasons of necessity or
charity, not what was her standing and ordinary
practice. Some learned persons36 think TertuUian
alludes to the allowance of sprinkling in extraordi
nary cases, when, speaking of men's pretending to be
baptized without true repentance, he says, No man
would grant such false penitents37 so much as one
aspersion of water. And Gregory Nyssen perhaps
refers to it also in that famous story, which he tells
of one Archias, who having neglected his opportu

nity of receiving baptism, was at last suddenly sur
prised with death at a season when there was no
possibihty of obtaining it : and then he cried out in
that languishing condition, O ye mountains38 and
woods, baptize me ; O ye trees, and rocks, and foun
tains, give me this grace : and with these words,
being wounded to death, he expired in the hands of
his enemies. This man's condition he compares to
those, who have the sudden summons of death upon
a sick bed : they then begin to call for a vessel of
water, a priest, and words to prepare them for bap
tism; but the violence of their disease prevents
them from obtaining it. This seems to imply, that
such a sprinkling as men might have upon a sick
bed, in cases of extremity, was reputed a saving
baptism ; and it was an unhappiness in some, that
they could not obtain even that at their last hour,
which the chm-ch aUowed as the last refuge only in
such extraordinary cases.
But I must observe further, that
they not only administered baptism Trine'immersion,
. . . , the general practice
by immersion under water, but also forseverniap™. The
reasons of this.
repeated this three times. Tertullian
speaks of it as a ceremony99 generally used in his
time : We dip not once, but three times, at the nam
ing every person of the Trinity. The same is as
serted by St. Basil,40 and St. Jerom,41 and the author
under the name of Dionysius,42 who says likewise,
that it was done at the distinct mention of each
person of the blessed Trinity. St. Ambrose is most
particular in the description of this rite : Thou wast
asked,43 says he, Dost thou believe in God the Fa
ther Almighty ? And thou repliedst, I beheve, and
wast dipped, that is, buried. A second demand was
made, Dost thou believe in Jesus Christ our Lord,
and in his cross ? Thou answeredst again, I be
heve, and wast dipped. Therefore thou wast bu
ried with Christ. For he that is buried with Christ,
rises again with Christ. A third time the question
was repeated, Dost thou beheve in the Holy Ghost ?
And thy answer was, I believe. Then thou wast
dipped a third time, that thy triple confession might
absolve thee from the various offences of thy former
hfe. Two reasons are commonly assigned for this

30 Cone. Neocaesar. can. 12.
31 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43. » Cone. Laod. can. 47.
33 Cone. Antissiodor. can. 18. Non licet absque Paschae
solennitate ullo tempore baptizare, nisi illos quibus mors
vicina est, quos grabatarios dicunt.
' Acta Laurentii, ap. Surium, t. 4. Unus ex militibus,
Romanus nomine, urceum afferens cum aqua, opportuni-
tatem captavit, qua earn orferret B. Laurentio, ut baptiza-
retur. Vid. Strabo, de Rebus Eccles. cap. 26.
Acta, ibid. Cum exspoliasset eum, fudit aquam super
caput ejus.
38 Vid. Bevereg. Not. in Can. Apost. 30.
37 Tertul. de Pcenitent. cap. 6. Quis enim tibi tarn in-
nda poenitentiae vlro asperginem unam cujuslibet aquae
commodahit ?
"Nyssen. de Bapt. t. 2. p. 220.

89 Tertul. cont. Prax. cap. 26. Non seme], sed ter, ad
singula nomina in personas singulas tinguimur. Id. de Coron.
Mil. cap. 3. Dehinc ter rr.ergitamur, &c.
48 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, c. 27.
41 Hieron. adv. Lucif. c. 4.
42 Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccles. cap. 2.
43 Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 7. Interrogatus es
Credis in Deum, Patrem Omnipotentem ? Dixisti, Credo, et
mersisti, hoc est, sepultus es. Iterum interrogatus es, Credis
in Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum? Dixisti, Credo,
et mersisti. Ideo et Christo es consepultus. Qui enim
Christo consepelitur, cum Christo resurgit. Tertio interro
gatus es, Credis et in Spiritum Sanctum ? Dixisti, Credo.
Tertio mersisti, ut multiplicem lapsum superioris xtatis ab
solveret trina confessio.

540

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

practice. 1. That it might represent Christ'sjhree
days' burial, and his resurrection on the third day.
We cover ourselves in the water, says Gregory Nys
sen,44 as Christ did in the earth, and this we do three
times, to represent the grace of his resurrection per
formed after three days. In hke manner Cyril of Je
rusalem45 and the author of The Questions upon
the S cripture,46 under the name of Athanasius. Thus
likewise Pope Leo among the Latins:47 The trine
immersion is an imitation of the three days' burial,
and the rising again out of the water is an image of
Christ rising from the grave. 2. Another reason
was, that it might represent their profession of faith
in the holy Trinity, in whose name they were bap
tized. St. Austin48 joins both reasons together, tell
ing us there was a twofold mystery signified in this
way of baptizing. The trine immersion was both a
symbol of the holy Trinity, in whose name we are
baptized, and also a type of the Lord's burial, and
of his resurrection on the third day from the dead.
For we are buried with Christ by baptism, and rise
again with him by faith. St. Jerom49 makes this
ceremony to be a symbol of the Unity as well as the
Trinity. For, says he, we are thrice dipped in
water, that the mystery of the Trinity may appear
to be but one : we are not baptized in the names of
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but in one name,
which is God. And therefore he adds, that though
we be thrice put under water to represent the mys
tery of the Trinity, yet it is reputed but one baptism.
The original of this custom is not
The original of exactly agreed upon by the ancients.
this practice. ... . -
Some derive it from apostolical tradi
tion ; others, from the first institution of baptism by
our Saviour ; whilst others esteem it only an indif
ferent circumstance or ceremony, that may be used
or omitted, without any detriment to the sacrament
itself, or breach of any Divine appointment. Ter
tulhan,59 St. Basil,51 and St. Jerom,52 put it among
those rites of the church, which they reckon to be

handed down from apostohcal tradition. St. Chry
sostom seems rather to make it part of the first in
stitution. For he says, Christ delivered to his dis
ciples53 one baptism in three immersions of the
body, when he said to them, " Go, teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." And Theodjaiet51
was of the same opinion : for he charges Eunomius ~
as making an innovation upon the original institu
tion of baptism, delivered by Christ and his apos
tles, in that he made a contrary law, that men should
not be baptized with three immersions, nor with in
vocation of the Trinity, but only with one immer
sion into the death of Christ. Pope Pelagius
brought the same charge against some others in his
time,55 who baptized in the name of Christ, only with
one immersion, which he condemns as contrary to
the gospel command given by Christ, who appointed
every one to be baptized in the name of the Trinity,
and that with three immersions, saying to his dis
ciples, " Go, baptize aU nations, in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." And this was so
far esteemed a Divine obligation by the authors of
the Apostohcal Canons,58 that they order every
bishop or presbyter to be deposed, who should ad
minister baptism not by three immersions, but only
one in the name of Christ ; because Christ said not,
Baptize into my death, but, " Go, baptize aU nations
in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost."
It is plain, all these writers thought this a necessary
circumstance from our Saviour's institution. And
the Eunomians, who first rejected this, are con
demned by Theodoret and Sozomen, as making a
new law of baptizing, not only against the general
practice, but against the general rule and tradition
of the church.
Yet there happened a circumstance Sect 8
in the Spanish churches in after ages, dST aEred eof
which gave a little turn to this affair. *ny
For the Arians in Spain, not being of the sect of

44 Nyssen. de Bapt. Christi, t. 3. p. 372.
45 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 2. n. 4.
45 Athan. de Parabolis Script, qu. 94.
47 Leo, Ep. 4. ad Episc. Siculos, cap. 3. Sepulturam tri-
duanam imitatur trina demersio, et ab aquis elevatio resur-
gentis instar est de sepulchro.
48 Aug. Horn. 3. ap. Gratian. de Consecrat. Dist. 4. cap.
78. Postquam vos credere promisistis, tertio capita vestra
in sacro fonte demersimus. Qui ordo baptismatis duplici
mysterii significatione celebratur. Recte enim tertio mersi
estis, qui accepistis baptismum in nomine Trinitatis. Recte
tertio mersi estis, qui accepistis baptismum in nomine Jesu
Christi, qui die tertia resurrexit a mortuis. Ilia enim tertio
repetita demersio typum Dominica? exprimit sepulturae, &c.
19 Hieron. lib. 2. in Ephes. iv. p. 222. Ter mergimur, ut
Trinitatis unum appareat sacramentum, et non baptizamur
in nominibus Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, sed in uno
nomine, quod intelligitur Deus. — Potest et unum baptisma
ita diei, quod licet ter baptizemur propter mysterium Trini
tatis, tamen unum baptisma reputetur.

50 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c. 3.
51 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, c. 27.
82 Hieron. cont. Lucif. cap. 4. It. Sozomen. lib. 6. c. 26.
53 Chrys. Horn, de Fide, t 7. p. 290. Edit. Savil. 'Ev
Tpial KaTaSvo-Eat tov croopaTos ev (idirrtopa reus Eavrov
paBi]Tais irapaSiStoKE, &c.
54 Theod. Haeret. Fab. lib. 4. c. 3. p. 236. Aire.! kui tb
dyiov fiairTio-paTos dvETpEij/E tov dvEKaBEV 7rct/>a tov Ku-
piov Kal diroo-ToXtov irapaSoBivTa SrEtlpov, Kal avrtKpvs
lvopoBiTT]o-£, pr] XPVvai Xiytov Tpls KaTaSveiv tov fiaie-
TitfipEvov, Sec.
65 Pelag. Ep. ad Gaudentium, ap. Gratian. de Consecrat.
Dist. 4. cap. 82. Multi sunt qui in nomine solummodo
Christi, una etiam mersione se asserunt baptizare. Evan-
gelicum vero praaceptum, ipso Deo et Domino Salvatore
nostro Jesu Christo tradente, nos admonet, in nomine Trini
tatis, trina etiam mersione sanctum baptisma unicuique tri-
buere, dicente Domino discipulis suis, Ite, baptizate omnes
gentes in nomine Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti.
88 Canon. Apost. can. 49. al. 50.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

541

the Eunomians, continued for many years to baptize
with three immersions : but then they abused this
ceremony to a very perverse end, to patronize their
error about the Son and Holy Ghost's being of a
different nature or essence from the Father ; for
they made the three immersions to denote a differ
ence, or degrees of Divinity, in the three Divine per
sons. To oppose whose wicked doctrine, and that
they might not seem to symbolize with them in any
practice that might give encouragement to it, some
catholics began to leave off the trine immersion, as
savouring of Arianism, and took up the single im
mersion in opposition to them. But this was like
to prove matter of scandal and schism among the
catholics themselves. And therefore, in the time
of Gregory the Great, Leander, bishop of Sevil,
wrote to him for his advice and resolution in this
case. To which he returned this answer : Con
cerning the three immersions in baptism, you57 have-
judged very truly already, that different rites and
customs do not prejudice the holy church, whilst
the unity of faith remains entire. The reason why
we use three immersions, (at Rome,) is to signify the
mystery of Christ's three days' burial, that whilst
an infant is thrice hfted up out of the water, the
resurrection on the third day may be expressed
thereby. But if any one thinks this is rather done
in regard to the holy Trinity, a single immersion
in baptism does no way prejudice that ; for so long
as the unity of substance is preserved in three per
sons, it is no harm whether a chUd be baptized with
one immersion or three ; because three immersions
may represent the Trinity of persons, and one im
mersion the unity of the Godhead. But forasmuch
as heretics use to baptize their infants with three
immersions, I think you ought not to do so ; lest
this multiplication of immersions be interpreted a
division of the Godhead, and give them occasion to
glory that their custom has prevailed. Yet this
judgment of Pope Gregory did not satisfy all men

in the Spanish church ; for still many kept to the
old way of baptizing by three immersions, notwith
standing this fear of symbolizing with the Arians.
Therefore, some time after, about the year 633, the
fourth council of Toledo, which was a generaTcbun-
cil of all Spain, was forced to make another decree
to determine this matter, and settle the peace of the
church. For while some priests baptized with three
immersions, and the others but with one, a schism
was raised,58 endangering the unity of the faith.
For the contending parties carried the matter so
high, as to pretend, that they who were baptized in
a way contrary to their own, were not baptized at
all. To remedy which evil, the fathers of this coun
cil first repeat the judgment of Pope Gregory, and
then immediately conclude upon it, That though
both these ways of baptism were just and unblam
able in themselves, according to the opinion of that
great man ; yet, as well to avoid the scandal of
schism, as the usage of heretics, they decree, that
only one immersion should be used in baptism, lest
if any used three immersions, they might seem to
approve the opinion of heretics, whilst they followed
their practice. And that no one might be dubious
about the use of a single immersion, he might con
sider, that the death and resurrection of Christ were
represented by it. For the immersion in water was
as it were the descending into hell or the grave,
and the emersion out of the water was a resurrec
tion. He might also observe the Unity of the Deity,
and the Trinity of persons to be signified by it;
the Unity by a single immersion, and the Trinity
by giving baptism in the name of Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost. Some learned persons59 find fault with
this councU for changing this ancient custom upon
so slight a reason, as that of the Arians using it :
which, if it were any reason, would hold as well
against a single immersion, because the Eunomians,
a baser sect of the Arians, were the first inventors
of that practice. And therefore the exception made

" Gregor. lib. 1. Ep. 41. ad Leand. De trina mersione
baptismatis nil responderi verius potest, quam quod ipsi sen-
sistis, quod in una fide nil ofEcit sanctae ecclesiae consuetudo
diversa. Nos autem quod tertio mergimus, triduanae sepul
ture sacramenta signamus, ut dum tertio infans ab aquis
educitur, resurrectio triduani temporis exprimatur. Quod
si quis forte etiam pro summae Trinitatis veneratione existi-
met fieri; neque ad hoc aliquid obsistit baptizando semel in
aquis mergere : quia dum in tribus personis una substantia
est, reprehensibile esse nullatenus potest, infantem in bap
tismate vel ter, vel semel immergere ; quando et in tribus
mersionibus personarum Trinitas, et in una potest Divini-
tatis singularitas designari. Sed quia nunc hucusque ab
naereticis infans in baptismo tertio mergebatur, fiendum apud
vos esse non censeo : ne dum mersiones numerant, Divini-
tatem dividant; dumque quod faciebant faciunt, se morem
vestrum vicisse glorientur.
58 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 5. De baptismi autem sacramento,
propter quod in Hispaniis quidam sacerdotes trinam, sim-
plam quidam mersionem faciunt, a nounullis schisma esse

conspicitur, et unitas fidei scindi videtur. Nam dum partes
diversae in baptizandis aliqua contrario modo agunt, ab aliis
non baptizatos esse contendunt.  Quapropter, quia de
utroque sacramento, quod fit in sancto baptismo, atantoviro
reddita est ratio, quod utrumque rectum, utrumque irrepre-
hensibile in sancta Dei ecclesia habeatur : propter vitandum
autem schismatis scandalum, vel hocretici dogmatis usum,
simplicem teneamus baptismi mersionem ; ne videantur apud
nos, qui tertio mergunt, hajreticorum approbare assertionem,
dum sequuntur et morem. Et ne forte cuiquam sit dubium
hujus simpli mysterium sacramenti, videat in eo mortem et
resurrectionem Christi significari. Nam in aquis mersio,
quasi ad infernum descensio est: et rursus ab aquis emersio,
resurrectio est. Item videat in eo unitatem Divinitatis, et
Trinitatem personarum ostendi. Unitatem, dum semel mer
gimus : Trinitatem, dum in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus
Sancti baptizainus.
59 Strabo de Offic. Eccl. cap. 26. Vossius de Bapt. Disp.
2. Thes. 4. p. 46.

542

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XI.

by this Spanish council in the seventh century,
cannot prejudice the more ancient and general prac
tice of the church, which, as Strabo observed, still
prevailed after this council ; and if Vossius says
true, the trine immersion, or what corresponds to it,
the trine aspersion, is the general practice of all
churches upon earth at this day. And such a cus
tom could not well be laid aside, without some
charge of novelty, and danger of giving offence and
scandal to weaker brethren. I have now gone over
the several circumstances and ceremonies accom
panying baptism, so far as to make it a complete
sacrament, and the instrument of salvation to all
worthy receivers, if they happened to die without
any further consummation, as sometimes they did,
when baptism was administered to them with less
solemnity, either in times of sickness, or at some
distance from the mother-church; in both which

cases they had the substance of the sacrament, but
not all the ceremonies that were appointed to at
tend it. They were supposed to be made partakers
of Christ's body, and to eat his flesh, and to be
washed in his blood, which was drinking it by faith
in baptism as well as in the eucharist. And if they
survived, they were also admitted immediately to
the symbols of Christ's body and blood in the eu
charist. But there were some other ceremonies
following baptism, as it were to finish the solemnity
of it; some of which were introductory and pre
paratory to the eucharist, as the second unction
accompanying baptism, which we commonly call
imposition of hands or confirmation. Of which
because it will be necessary to speak a httle more
distinctly, I shaU make it, and the remaining cere
monies of baptism, the subject of another Book.

BOOK XII.

OF CONFIRMATION, AND OTHER CEREMONIES FOLLOWING BAPTISM, BEFORE MEN WERE
MADE PARTAKERS OF THE EUCHARIST.

CHAPTER I. v '
OF THE TIME WHEN, AND THE PEESONS TO WHOM, CONFIEMATION WAS ADMINISTERED.

Immediately after the persons came
confirmation an- up ou(; 0f the water, if the bishop was
cieotly given imrne- 1- ' sr
h^Vtebiiho'p present at the solemnity, they were
wm present. presented to him in order to receive
his benediction, which was a solemn prayer for the
descent of the Holjufihost upon such as were bap
tized: and to this prayer there was usually joined
the ceremony of a second unction, and imposition
of hands, and the sign of the cross ; whence the
whole action many times took these names, %P'ffMa!
the unction, x*<-poQiaia, the imposition of hands, and
mjipaylg, the sign or seal of the Lord, which are
names much more common among the ancients
than that of confirmation. But by all these names
they understood one and the same thing, which was
the bishop's prayer for the descent of the Spirit
upon persons newly baptized. This was always
administered together with baptism, if the bishop,
who was the ordinary minister of it, were present
at the action. But if he was absent, as it usuaUy
happened to be in churches at a distance from the
mother-church, or when persons were baptized in
haste upon a sick bed, then confirmation was de
ferred till the bishop could have a convenient op
portunity to visit them. This we learn from St.
Jerom, who speaks1 of it as customary in the
church, for bishops to go and invocate the Holy
Spirit by imposition of hands on such as were bap
tized by presbyters and deacons in villages and
places remote from the mother-church. And it

Hieron. cont. Lucifer, cap. 4. Non abnuo hanc esse
ecclesiarum consuetudinem, ut ad eos qui longe in minori-
bus urbibus per presbyteros et diaconos baptizati sunt, epis
copus ad invocationem Sancti Spiritus manum impositurus
excurrat. And a little after, In villulis aut in castellis, aut
in remotioribus locis per presbyteros aut diaconos baptizati,
ante dormierunt, quam ab episcopis inviserentur. Vid.
Cone. Eliber. can. 77.
2 Cone. Lucens. Cone. t. 5. p. 874.
3 Tertul. de Bapt. c. 7. Exinde egressi de Iavacro per-
ungimur benedicta. uactione.  Cap. 8. Dehinc manus

many times happened, that such persons died be
fore the bishop could come to give them imposition
of hands. To prevent which inconvenience, the
canons in some places obliged bishops to visit their
whole dioceses once every year ; and if they were
so large that they could not do so, then they were
to divide their dioceses and make them less, as we
find it decreed and practised in some of the Spanish
councils.2 But in case persons were baptized in
the presence of the bishop, then without any delay \
they were immediately confirmed with imposition
of hands and the holy unction. Tertullian says3
very plainly, That as soon as they came out of the i
water, they were anointed with the oil of consecra
tion, and then received imposition of hands, invit
ing down the Holy Spirit by that benediction. And
so Cyril of Jerusalem represents it, when he teUs |
the neophytes, that as soon as they come up out
of the waters of the font,4 they received the chrism
or unction, with the antitype of which (that is, the
Holy Ghost) Christ was anointed when he came up
out of Jordan. In hke manner the author of the
Constitutions, describing the ceremonies of baptism,
orders the priest,6 as soon as he has baptized any one,
to anoint him with the holy chrism, and give him im
position of hands, saying a prayer which is there ap
pointed. Thus we find in the Life of St. BasU,6 how
Maximinus the bishop, who baptized him and Eu-
bulus together, immediately clothed them with the
white garments, and anointed them with the holy

imponitur, per benedictionem advocans et invitans Spiri
tum Sanctum.
4 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 3. u. 1. 'YpXv bpoitos dvatetriKo-
aw died Tl}S KoXvptr/Bpas Tuil/ UpSiv vapaTtov, iSoBt) XpiV-
pa, to avTirvieov 3 ixpioBr} Xpfiis' tbto Si ill to" Aytov
IlvEvpa. 6 Const. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 43 et 44. Mera tbto /3air-
Tttras outoi/, xPl"dTtp pvpto, iiriXiytov, Sec.
6 Amphiloch. Vit. Basil, c. 5. Baptizavit Maximinus
episcopus Basilium et Euburum, et vestivit albis, atque un-
geus eos sancto chrismate, tradidit eis communionem.

544

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

chrism, and gave them the communion. The same
may be observed in the description of the ceremo
nies of baptism given by the author under the name
of Dionysius,7 St. Ambrose, Optatus, Pacian, and
all others amongst the ancients, who have made any
mention of the time of administering confirmation.
Nor was this only true with respect
AndSthis2as T,eii to adult persons, but also with respect
^rSna^vThiohla to infants, who were anciently con-
prom some piaui firmed by imposition of hands, and
testimonies. ,
the holy chrism or unction, as soon
as they were baptized. Which perhaps will seem
a paradox to many, who look no further than to the
practice of later ages; but it may be undeniably
evidenced these two ways : 1. From plain testimo
nies of the ancients declaring it so to be ; and, 2.
From that known custom and usage of the church
in giving the eucharist to infants, which ordinarily
presupposes their confirmation. First, For the
testimonies of the ancients, nothing can be plainer
than those words of Gennadius, If they be infants
that are baptized,8 let those that present them to
baptism, answer for them according to the common
way of baptizing : and then let them be confirmed
with imposition of hands and chrism, and so be ad
mitted to partake of the eucharist. In like manner
Pope Innocent, in one of his decrees,9 says, Infants
are not to be consigned or confirmed by any but the
bishop. And in the Collection of Canons made by
Martin Bracarensis 10 out of those of the Greek
church, this is one, That a presbyter may not con
sign infants in the presence of the bishop, except
he be particularly appointed by the bishop to do it.
This practice continued in the church for many
ages. For it is mentioned by Pope Gregory both
in his Sacramentarium and in his Epistles,11 and
after him by all the writers in the eighth and ninth
centuries. Alcuin, who wrote about the offices of

the church in the time of Charles the Great, speak
ing of infant baptism,12 says, After an infant is bap
tized, he is to he clothed and brought to the bishop,
if he be present, who is to confirm him with chrism
and give him the communion ; and if the bishop be
not present, the presbyter shall communicate him.
The same is in the Ordo Romanus, a book written
and used as a hturgy about the same time ; where
after the bishop has given the white garment to
infants, he lifts up his hand and lays it upon then-
heads,13 praying for the descent of the Holy Ghost
upon them, and sighing them with the sign"oTthe
cross in the forehead, he says, I confirm thee in the
name ofthe Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Baluzius,
in his Notes upon Regino,14 gives us two ancient
manuscript Pontificals of the ninth century, where
in this order for confirming infants is continued.
And to these he adds ls an epistle of Jesse, bishop
of Amiens, describing the order of baptism, where
the rule is for the bishop, After the chnd has been
baptized. with three immersions, tfJ~connrm " hilir
wifhchrism in the forehead", and then' to "confirm
him (for so it is worded) or communicate him with
the body and blood of Christ. These testimonies
are so plain and convincing, that aU learned men,
who have exactly considered this matter, as well
papists as protestants, are agreed, that this was the
ancient and general practice of the church, to con
firm infants .as soon as they were baptized. For so
I find not only Baluzius, but Peter de Marca,16
Hugo Menardus,17 Maldonat,18 Estius,19 Galenus,20
among the papists, and Bishop Taylor21 and DaUle22
among the protestants, readily consenting. And
some23 tell us the same practice continues among
the Greeks to this day. The learned reader may
add to the former testimonies the authority of St,
Austin, who witnesses for this practice in his own
person. For he says,24 He himself was used to

7 Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccl. cap. 2. p. 260. Ambros. de
Sacram. lib. 3. c. 2. Optat. lib. 4. p. 81. Pacian.Serm.de
Baptismo, Bibl. Patr. t. 3. p. 77.
8 Gennad. de Dogmat. Eccles. cap. 52. Si parvuli sint —
respondeant pro illis qui eos offerunt, juxta morem bapti-
zandi, et sic manus impositione et chrismate communiti,
eucharistiae mysteriis admittantur.
9 Innoc. Ep. 1. cap. 3. De consignandis vero infantibus,
manifestum est non ab alio quam ab episcopo fieri licere.
10 Martin Bracar. Collec. Canon, cap. 52. Presbyter prre-
sente episcopo non signet infantes, nisi forte ab episcopo
fuerit illi praeceptum.
11 Gregor. lib. 3. Ep. 9.
12 Alcuin. de Offic. cap. de Sabbato Paschae, Bibl. Patr.
t. 10. p. 259. Postea vestiatur infans vestimentis suis. Si
vero episcopus adest, statiin confirmari eum oportet chris
mate, et postea communicare ; et si episcopus deest, com-
municetur a presbytero.
16 Ordo Roman, cap. de Bapt. Bibl. Patr. t. 10. p. 63.
Pontifex elevata et imposita manu super capita omnium,
dat orationem super eos cum invocatione septiformis gratiae
Spiritus Sancti.  Et tincto pollice in chrismate faciat
crucem in frontibus singulorum, ita dicendo, Confirmo te in

nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti.
14 Baluz. Not. in Regino, lib. 1. cap. 69. Ex pontificali
vet. MS. Statim autem confirmetur infans, et communice-
tur ab episcopo, ita dicente, Corpus et sanguis Domini.
Item ex altero pontificali ; Si episcopus adest, statim con
firmari eum oportet chrismate, et postea communicari.
15 Jesse Ambianens. Ep. de Ordine Baptismi, ap. Baluz.
ibid. Post trinam mersionem episcopus puerum chrismate
confirmet in fronte, novissime autem corpore et sanguine
Christi confirmetur seu communicetur, ut Christi memhrum
esse possit.
16 Marca, Not. ad Concil. Claramontan. p. 312.
17 Menard. Not. ad Librum Sacramentor. p. 144.
18 Maldonat. de Confirmat. qu. 2.
19 Estius, Sentent. lib. 4. Dist. 7. n. 23. p. 101.
20 Galen. Catechism, ap. Dallae. de Confirm, p. 21.
21 Taylor's Worthy Communicant, chap. 3. sect. 2. p.
209. 22 Dallae. de Confirmat. lib. 3. cap. 13.
23 Pet. du Moulin's Buckler of Faith, p. 381.
24 Aug. Tract. 6. in 1 John iii. t. 9. p. 254." Quando im-
posuimus manum istis infantibus, attendit unusquisque ves-
trfim utrum Unguis loquerentur ? Et cum videret eos unguis

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

545

Sect. 3.
And secondly,
From the custom of

give imposition of hands, or confirmation, to infants,
that they might receive the Holy Spirit,
If this matter needed further proof,
we might insist upon that known
&"fln&fofnSr.y practice and custom in the ancient
"se8, church, of giving the eucharist to in
fants, which continued in the church for several
ages. It is frequently mentioned in Cyprian, Aus
tin, Innocentius, and Gennadius, writers from the
third to the fifth century. Maldojiat- confesses it
was in the church for six hundred years. And some
ofThTauffiorities just now aUeged, prove it to have
continued two or three ages more, and to have been
the common practice beyond the time of Charles
the Great Now, aU men know, that in the commonf
course of things confirmation always preceded the]
eucharist, unless there was some special cause, as;
sometimes it happened in the case of chnic baptism,
or the bishop's absence, to prevent it. For in these
two cases the eucharist was many times given be
fore confirmation, as now it is in our large dioceses,
where the bishop's presence cannot always be had
to give confirmation, in places at a great distance,
before the communion. But in aU other cases, the
usual way was to let confirmation usher in the com-,
munion. And therefore since it is evident, that the*
communion itself was given to infants, and that
immediately from the time of their baptism ; ity
would be reasonable to conclude from hence, were
there no other evidence, that confirmation also was
given to infants, together with baptism, because this
rite by aU ordinary rules and custom was prior and
introductory to the communion.
This observation may help us to un-
¦whenceitai>peai», derstand some difficult passages in the
that confirmation . Jr o
»as not esteemed a ancients, and answer an objection
proper sacrament **
dutact from hap- which the Romanists draw from them, j
as if confirmation were a proper sa-,
crament distinct from baptism. The ancients, it'
must be owned," sometimes gjy^it_the_namejaf,..a
sacraxaet^jmi call baptism and confirmation two
sacraments. But then it is very evident, they take
the word sacrament in a large sense, for any sacred
ceremony, rite, or mystery, belonging to baptism :
in which sense they suppose two sacraments, or
chief mysterious ceremonies, to be in baptism, that
is, the immersion in water, and the unction with the

non loqui, ita perverso corde aliquis vestrum fuit, ut diceret,
non acceperunt isti Spiritum Sanctum ?
23 Cone. Carthag. ap. Cypr. n. 5. p. 231. Male sibi qui
dam mterpretantur, ut dicant, quod per mantis impositionem
Spiritum Sanctum accipiant, et sie recipiantur : cum mani-
festum sit utroque sacramento debere eos renasci in ecclesia
catholica. 26 Cypr. Ep. 72. ad Stephan. p. 196. Parum est eis ma
rram imponere ad recipiendum, Spiritum Sanctum, nisi ac
cipiant et ecclesiae baptismuirl. Tunc enim demum plene
sanctificari et esse Filii Dei/Tossint, si sacramento utroque
nascantur. / 2 N

holy chrism, both which are spoken of as sacra
ments or ceremonies belonging to baptism. Thus
in the council of Carthage, under Cyprian, Neme-
sianus k Tubunis says, It was not sufficient for men
to be regenerated only by imposition of hands, but
they ought to be born again25 by both the sacra
ments in the catholic church ; that is, as well by
washing in water, as imposition of hands, both
which he makes sacraments, that is, sacred rites of
the same sacrament of regeneration. InjrJie_jarae ,
sense Cyprian himself26 says, bpth_ the sacraments /
of regeneration were required to complete men's S
sanctification. Which plainly shows, that by two
sacraments he means no more but two of the prin
cipal ceremonies that belonged to a complete and
perfect baptism, because he says men were regene
rated or born again by them both. In hke manner i
Optatus27 makes imposition of hands and unction J
to be only parts and ceremonies completing baptism. '
For, speaking of the baptism of Christ, he says,
He went not into the water, as if any thing in God
could need cleansing ; but Rwas necessary the water
should go before the unction that was to follow
after, to initiate and order and complete the myste
ries or sacramental rites of baptism. When he was
washed by the hands of John, the order of the
mystery was settled ; the Father fulfiUed what the
Son had asked, and what the Holy Ghost had fore
told. The spiritual oil immediately descended in
the image of a dove, and sat upon his head, and
anointed him; from whence he began to be called I
Christ, because he was anointed of God the Father. I
And that imposition of hands might not seem to
be wanting, the voice of God was heard from the
cloud, saying, " This is my beloved Son, in whom I
am well pleased." Here Optatus professes to de
scribe the order, and parts, and mysteries of baptism,
from the similitude of the baptism of Christ. In
each of these he makes three sacraments or principal
mysteries, the washing, the unction, and imposition
of hands ; which are not properly three distinct sacra
ments, but three parts or rites of the same sacrament
of baptism, which, according to Optatus, were or
dered, and shadowed, and completed in the baptism
of Christ. Unless we take sacrament in this large
sense, we shall have three proper sacraments in bap
tism, which neither Optatus nor any of the ancients

27 Optat. lib. 4. p. 81. Descendit in aquam, non quia erat
quod in Deo mundaretur, sed venturum oleum aqua debuit
antecedere, ad mysteria initianda et ordinanda et complenda
baptismatis. Lotus cum in Joannis manibus haberetur,
secutus est ordo mysterii, et complevit Pater quod'rogaverat
Filius, et quod nunciaverat Spiritus Sanctus. Apertum est
ccelum, Deo Patre ungente. Spiritale oleum statim in
imagine eolumbae descendit, et insedit capiti ejus et per-
f ud it eum; unde ccepit diei Christus, quando unctus est a
Deo Patre. Cui ne manus impositio defuisse videretur,
vox audita est Dei de nube dicentis, Hie Filius est meus,
&c.

546

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

ever thought of, when they speak of the mysteries of
baptism; but they allow both unction and imposition
of hands to be sacraments, as they are parts or rites
of the mystery of baptism. After this manner Pa-
cianus, bishop of Barcelona, makes also three sacra
ments of the mystery of baptism, viz. the laver or
washing of water, the unction of the Spirit, and the
i hand and mouth of the priest. For he says, The seed
of Christ, that is, the Spirit of God, brings forth a new
man, by the hands of the priest, out of the womb
\ of the church, which is the font, faith being the
H bridemaid to all this.28 And without these three
\ sacraments, the laver, the chrism, and the priest,
: this new birth is not effected. For by the laver,
sin is purged away ; by the chrism, the Holy Spirit
is poured down upon us ; and both these we obtain
by the hand and mouth of the priest ; and so the
whole man is regenerated and renewed in Christ.
Here we must of necessity say, either that the laver,
the chrism, and words and action of the priest, are
three sacraments, or else that they are but three
parts or ceremonies of the same sacrament of bap
tism, which is what Pacian plainly intended; for
he is speaking of the manner how men are regene
rated in baptism, and he makes chrism to be one
means of this regeneration ; whence it is evident,
he had no other notion of it, but as of an integral
part of baptism, though not absolutely essential to
it. This, then, is one plain reason why the ancients
t sometimes call the immersion in the water and the
' unction of chrism two sacraments, because they are
parts, or rites, or ceremonies of the mystery of bap
tism. And there is nothing more usual with the
ancients than this way of speaking, to call every
sacred rite or ceremony used in the church, by the
name of a sacrament or mystery. As St. Austin
calls exorcism29 a sacrament. And the salt which
was given to the catechumens before baptism, is
called the sacrament of the catechumens, both by
St. Austin30 and the third council of Carthage,31 as
has been observed in another place, where I speak
particularly of this sacrament of the catechumens.
Cyprian32 speaks of sacraments in the Lord's prayer.
And to insist no longer upon these, it is usual also
with the ancients to divide the proper sacraments,

baptism and the eucharist, each of them into two
or more, meaning the several parts or rites belong
ing to them. Thus Isidore speaks of four sacra
ments33 in the church, which are, baptism, chrism
, the body of Christ, and the blood of Christ. As
therefore the bread and wine are called two sacra
ments, though they be but two parts of the sam&
eucharist ; so the washing and the unction are call
ed two sacraments, though they be but two rites of
the same sacrament of baptism. The hke style is
used by Pope Innocent,34 when he calls the bread
and wine sacraments, in the plural. And Fulbertus
Carnotensis35 is more express, when he says, There
are two sacraments of life, the body and blood of
Christ. No wonder therefore the same author"
should call the immersion in water and the unction
of chrism, conveying the Spirit, by the name of the
two sacraments of baptism. For nothing ean be
plainer, than that immersion and chrism are not
< properly two sacraments of baptism, but only two
i rites of it : as the bread and wine are not strictly
two sacraments of the eucharist, but only different
parts of the same communion. It were easy to add
abundance more of such expressions out'of other
authors, many of which the reader may find collect
ed together by the learned Daille ;37 I shall only add
the words of Haimo Haberstatensis, where he ex
pressly makes confirmation a rite or ceremony of
baptism, always accompanying, and administered
at the same time with it, as the consummating act
and perfection of it : The gift of the Holy Spirit,
says he,38 is given in baptism by the imposition of
the bishop's hands. So that when the ancients call
confirmation a sacrament, they always mean, that
it is a part or ceremony of the sacrament of bap
tism. In which sense, they give the name of sacra
ments to many other things, which were only parts,
or ceremonies, or attendants on it, such as exorcism,
and the sign of the cross, which were sacraments in
the same sense as confirmation.
But it may be said, that confirma
tion, imposition of hands, or unction, No, not' when it
was separate from
was many times given to men at some baptism a. i. ihe
•- o case of heretics who
years' distance from baptism, as in the ^S.81"""0'
case of heretics and schismatics, who

29 Pacian. Serm. de Bapt. Bibl. Patr. t. 3. p. 77. Christi
semen, id est, Dei Spiritus, novum hominem, alvo matris
agitatum, et partu fontis exceptum, manibus sacerdotis ef-
fundit, fide tamen pronuba. — Haec autem compleri alias
nequeunt, nisi lavacri, et chrismatis, et antistis sacramento.
Lavacro enim peccata purgantur, chrismate Sanctus Spi
ritus superfunditur ; utraque vero ista manuet ore antistitis
impetramus ; atque ita totus homo renascitur et innovatur
in Christo.
29 Aug. Horn. 83. de Diversis. Exorcismi sacramento
quasi molebamini.
36 Aug. de Peccator. Meritis, lib. 2. cap. 26.
31 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 5. See these cited, Book X.
chap. 2. sect. 16. s2 Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p. 142.

83 Isidor. Origin, lib. 6. c. 19. Sunt autem sacramenta
baptismus, et chrisma; corpus et sanguis Christi.
34 Innoc. Ep. 1. ad Decent, cap. 5. Non longe portanda
sunt sacramenta.
35 Fulbert. Ep. 1. Bibl. Patr. t. 3. p. 434. Duo vitae sa
cramenta, id est, Dominici corporis et sanguinis.
36 Fulbert. ibid. p. 436. Requiritur sane in baptismatis
sacramentis aqua propter sepulturam, et Spiritus Sanctus
propter vitam aeternam.
37 Dallas, de Confirm, lib. 1. cap. 8. p. 150. It. lib. 3.
cap. 13. p. 386.
38 Haimo in Hebr. xiii. cited by Daille. Donum Spiritus
Sancti datur in baptismate per impositionem manus epis
coporum.

Chap. IL

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

547

were baptized in infancy out of the church, and
were received by imposition of hands when they
returned to the church afterwards. To which I
answer, that the imposition of hands which the
church gave in this case separate from baptism, was
what could not be avoided, because the church had
no opportunity of administering it before ; and
therefore no argument is to be drawn from what she
was forced to do upon such an exigence, being only
an exception to her ordinary practice. It is owned,
that the church gave imposition of hands to all
heretics upon their return to the church : and this,
as I have showed at large in another39 discourse,
was to supply the deficiencies of that outward form
of baptism, which could'not grant them the graces
of the Spirit, whflst they remained in heresy or
schism. And there I also observed, that some here
tics retained the unction and imposition of hands
as weU as baptism, and administered it to infants
together with baptism ; which was the practice of
the Donatists, and, it may be, of several others. But
yet the church, though she neither repeated the
outward form of baptism, nor always the unction of
chrism ; especiaUy in the western parts, where St.
Austin, Optatus, Alcimus, and Avitus lived ; yet she
always gave a new imposition of hands with prayer,
to implore the descent of the Holy Ghost upon
them; And though this was separating confirm
ation from baptism, yet it was only in an extraordi
nary case, when the church was not capacitated to
do otherwise. In other cases she always joined
these two ceremonies together, as well in infants as
adult persons, as I suppose the aUegations and
proofs aUeged in this chapter, do abundantly show
to any candid reader, beyond possibility of contra
diction. sect. «. But some will be apt to object, that
awnsconSion if this were the case, then all churches
morettanX' 7Z at present, as weU protestant as pop-
•mpie of the primi- ish, differ from the practice of the
tire church. . . ' *
primitive church in this particular,
that now they never administer confirmation to
infants, but only to adult persons, who can confirm
their baptismal vow in their own persons. And
this difference is readily owned, as to practice. But.
then, if the question be about right, which is the )
more suitable and agreeable practice ? and whether''
we ought not to conform in every circumstance to
the practice of the primitive church ? I suppose
every church in this case is best judge for herself,
what is most for the edification of her children.
And as no church now thinks herself under any

33 Scholast. Hist, of Lay Baptism, chap. 1. n. 21.
40 See Bishop Usher's Letters, Ep. 163. p. 442.
J1 Galen. Catechism, ap. Dallas, de Confirm, lib. 1. p. 21.
Cone. Carth. 2. can. 3. Memini praeterito concilio
statutum fuisse, ut chrisma, vel reconciliatio pcenitentium,
necnon et puellarum consecratio a presbyteris non fiant,
2 n 2

obligation to give the eucharist to infants, because
the primitive church for eight hundred years did so ;
so neither does any church judge herself bound to
give confirmation to infants from the same exam
ple : though some learned persons have pleaded for
both, as Bishop Bedel,40 among the protestants, for
the communion of infants, and Matthew Galen,41
among the papists, for giving them confirmation.
Whilst others judge the modern practice the more
edifying way, and think there are no sufficient ar
guments to engage the church to make an alteration.

CHAPTER II.
OF THE MINISTER OF CONFIRMATION.
Next to the persons to whom con- Sect. ,.
firmation was given, we are to make 0fTchrism8res«red
inquiry about the ministry of it, and MsJops by a»ceca.
see by whom it was usually given.
And here it will be necessary to distinguish the
several parts and ceremonies of confirmation, and
cases ordinary and extraordinary ; as also the con
secration of the chrism from the use of it, and the
practice and custom of some churches from others :
for one rule was not precisely observed in all these.
Confirmation consisted of several acts, as we shall
see in the next chapter : there was first the conse-\
cration ofthe chrism, which was always the bishop's 1
act ; then there was the unction itself, or the use of 1
it, with consignation or the sign of the cross on the j
forehead or other parts of the body ; then imposition [
of hands with prayer : there were also cases ordi
nary, when the'bishop was present at baptism, and
cases extraordinary, when he was absent, and the
party in danger of death : there were also different
practices according to the rules of different churches :
and according to these distinctions the answer must
be given to this general question. The consecra
tion of the chrism was generally reserved to the
bishop in all churches, and so the use of it was de
rived from his authority in all cases whatsoever.
The second council of Carthage1 forbids presbyters
to have any concern in it, and refers to a former
council, wherein the hke prohibition was made be
fore. The third council of Carthage allows pres
byters, by the commission of the bishop, to conse
crate virgins, but never2 to consecrate the chrism.
The fourth council of Carthage3 obliges presbyters
in country churches to go to the bishop yearly be-

2 Ibid. 3. can. 36. Ut presbyter inconsulto episcopo
virgines non consecret, chrisma vero nunquam conficiat.
37 Ibid. 4. can. 36. Presbyteri, qui per dioeceses ecclesias
regunt, non a quibuslibet episcopis, sed a suis, nee per mino-
rem clericum, sed omni anno aut per seipsos, aut per ilium qui
sacrarium tenet, ante Paschae solennitatem chrisma petant.

548

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

fore Easter, or else to send their sacrist to him for
the chrism. In some churches of Spain the pres
byters took upon them to consecrate it themselves,
which occasioned the first council of Toledo to
renew the decree against this as a usurpation,4 for
bidding any beside the bishop to do it from that
day forward, and obliging presbyters, as before, to
go to their own bishop for it before Easter. The
like injunctions are made in the first council of
Vaison,5 the council of Auxerre,6 the council of
Barcelona,7 the first and second council of Bracara,8
and in the Collection of Greek Canons made by
Martin Bracarensis ;9 as also in the Roman Decrees
made by Pope Innocent,10 Leo,11 and Gelasius,12
which I need not repeat at length upon this occa
sion. So that by this means the bishop's authority
was secured, even in such cases where presbyters
were allowed to have their share in this holy unction.
Se t 5"V Now, this unction or consignation,
chSm divided £- m many churches, (particularly in the
brhops'afid0Jresbj-f Roman church,) was distinguished
into two sorts, the consignation of the
forehead, and the consignation of the other parts of
the body. And the former, in such churches where
this distinction was made, was generally reserved to
the bishop, to be administered with imposition of
hands ; but the latter was given by presbyters also.
All churches did not allow of this distinction of
chrism into two sorts, but such as did allow of two,
granted authority to presbyters to administer the
one, but not the other. The double chrismation
was first brought in by Pope Innocent, and he thus
divides the office between bishops and presbyters.
A presbyter, says he,'3 baptizing either in the bi
shop's presence or absence, may anoint the baptized
party with chrism, provided it be consecrated be
forehand by the bishop ; but he may not sign him
in the forehead with the same oil, beeause it belongs

to bishops only when they give the Holy Ghost.
And so it is in the decrees of Gelasius,1* and Pope
Gregory,15 his successor in the Roman see. But
this double chrismation was not received in France
nor in any of the Eastern churches. In France it
was the office of presbyters, and the imposition of
hands was only reserved to the bishop. This is
undeniably evident from the council of Orange,16
which orders every minister, who had received the
office of baptizing, wherever he went, to have the
chrism with him, because it was agreed, that chrism
should only be once used in baptism. But if by
any necessity it had been omitted in baptism, then
the bishop should be put in mind of that omission
in confirmation. For it was agreed to have only
one chrismation. This canon is repeated and re
ferred to again in the second council of Aries,17 and
Valesius adds18 to them an inscription in Gruter,
confirming the same thing, That the bishop did not
minister the chrism, except it had been omitted by
the presbyter before. In the Eastern churches they
had but one unction after baptism, and that per
formed by the bishop, except in some particular
and extraordinary cases. The author of the Apos
tohcal Constitutions makes this the office" of the
bishop, to anoint those that were baptized with the
holy chrism. And this, he says, was the confirm
ation of the professions which they had made in
baptism.29 The author under the name of Diony
sius says the same,2' That after the presbyters
have baptized a man, they bring him to the bishop,
and he anoints him with the divine chrism, and
pronounces him capable of partaking of the holy
eucharist. Now, this episcopal unction was not
only in the forehead, as was usual in the Roman
church, but in aU other parts of the body. For, as
Cyril of Jerusalem22 tells those that were baptized,
They were first anointed in the forehead, to wipe

4 Cone. Tolet. 1. can. 20. Quamvis pene ubique custodia-
tur, ut absque episcopo chrisma nemo conficiat, tamen quia
in aliquibus locis vel provineiis, presbyteri dicuntur chrisma
conficere, placuit, ex hac die nullum alium nisi episcopum
chrisma conficere, et per dicecesim destinare, ita ut de sin
gulis ecclesiis ad episcopum ante diem Paschae diaeoni des-
tinentur, aut subdiaconi, qui confectum chrisma ab episcopo
destinatum ad diem Paschae possint ad tempus deferre.
5 Cone. Vasense, 1. can. 3. 6 Cone. Antissiodor. can. 6.
7 Cone. Barcinon. can. 2.
8 Cone. Bracar. 1. can. 37. Bracar. 2. can. 4.
9 Martin Bracar. Collect. Can. cap. 51.
10 Innoc. Ep. 1. ad Decentium, cap. 3.
11 Leo, Ep. 88. ad Gallos.
12 Gelas. Ep. 9. ad Episcopos Lucaniae, cap. 6.
13 Innoc. Ep. 1. ad Decent, c. 3. Presbyteris, seu extra
episcopum, seu praesente episcopo, baptizant, chrismate
baptizatos ungere licet, sed quod ab episcopo fuerit conse-
cratum ; non tamen frontem ex eodem oleo signare, quod
solis debetur episcopis, cum tradant Spiritum Sanctum Pa-
racletum. " Gelas. Ep. 9. c. 6. 15 Greg. Ep. 9. lib. 3.
15 Cone. Arausican. 1. can. 2. Nullus ministrorum, qui

baptizandi recipit officium, sine chrismate usquam debet pro-
gredi, quia inter nos placuit semel in baptismate chrismari.
De eo autem, qui in baptismate, quacunque necessitate
faciente, non chrismatus fuerit, in confirmatione sacerdos
commonebitur. Nam inter nos chrismatis ipsius non nisi
una benedictio est.
17 Cone. Arelaten. 2. can. 27. Nullum ministrum, qui
baptizandi recepit officium, sine chrismate usquam debere
progredi, quia inter nos juxta synodi constitutionem, pla
cuit semel chrismari.
13 Vales. Not. in Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 43. p. 135. ex Gruter.
p. 1177. de Marea, has this distich ;
Tuque sacerdotes docuisti, chrismate sancto
Tangere bis nullum, judice posse Deo.
19 Constit. Apost. lib. 3. cap. 16. Met<4 tovto b inimo-
iros XPtETto tovs (SairTLaBivTas Tip pvptp,
20 Ibid. cap. 17. To pvpov fHEfSaimtris tjjc bpoXoyias.
Vid. lib, 7. cap. 43.
21 Dionys. de Hier. Eccl. c. 2. p. 254. '0 lepdpXI' Tl?
pvpto tov dvSpa ceppayiadpEvos, Sec.
22 Cyril, Catech. Myst. 3. n. 3. IlpmTOV ixpiEtiBt iirl to
peTeoirov, &c.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

549

away that shame which the first man by his trans
gression had contracted ; and that they might now
with open face behold the glory of the Lord. Then
they were anointed on the ears, that they might
have ears to hear the Divine mysteries. After that
on the nose and breast, that they might be a sweet
savour unto the Lord, and being armed with the
breastplate of righteousness, might be able to with
stand all the insults of the devil. Thus23 also all
such heretics as were to be received into the church
without rebaptization, as having been baptized in
due form before, are appointed to be received by
consignation or unction of the holy chrism; first
on the forehead, then on the eyes, nose, mouth, and
ears, with this form of words, The seal of the gift
of the Holy Spirit. But though this whole cere
mony of unction m the Eastern church was ordi
narily to be performed only by the bishop, and not
divided (as in the Roman) between the bishop and
presbyters ; yet in some special cases, in some par
ticular churches this office devolved upon the pres
byters. For at Alexandria, if the bishop was absent,
it was usual for the presbyters to give this con
signation at the same time that they baptized. As I
think the words of the author under the name of
St. Ambrose24 are to be understood, when he says,
In Egypt the presbyters consign in the bishop's ab
sence. And this another author under the name
of St. Austin26 calls consecration. Which some
learned persons, I know, take for the consecration
of the eucharist. But that was nothing singular,
but common to all the world, for presbyters to con
secrate the eucharist in the bishop's absence in all
churches, and therefore needed not to be noted as
a pecuhar custom in Egypt. Therefore I rather
judge it to mean some consecration, which presby
ters in many other churches were not allowed in
the absence of the bishop, as the consecrating or
consigning such as were baptized, with the chrism
of confirmation, which a presbyter might not do in
the Roman churches. But in some of the Eastern
churches this was allowed, for the author of the
Constitutions, speaking of the celebration of bap
tism, addresses himself both to bishops and presby
ters, telhng them in what order they should perform
it : Thou bishop, or presbyter, shalt first anoint the
party to be baptized with the holy oil ; then thou

shalt baptize him with water ; and last of all28 thou
shalt sign him with the holy chrism. Where we
see not only the unction preceding baptism, but
that which followed after, which was the unction
of confirmation, is commanded to the presbyter as
well as the bishop ; which must at least be inter
preted to mean his doing it in the absence of the
bishop ; or in his presence, if he has a particular
command and delegation. So that as to what con
cerned this first ceremony of confirmation, the unc
tion of chrism, the practice of different churches
varied much upon it. Some churches, as the Ro
man, divided the office between bishops and pres
byters : others, as those of France, committed it
wholly to presbyters, reserving to the bishop only
the consecration of the oil, and imposition of hands
in confirmation : others, as those of the East, re
served not only the consecration of the chrism, but
the use of it, to the bishop entirely, when he was
personally present, and in all ordinary cases ; only
allowing it to be used by presbyters in his absence,
or some such extraordinary cases.
As to the other ceremony, of impo- Secl 3
sition of hands in confirmation, we J^I^S
find that more universally and strictly Ire^riVTIhe
reserved to the office of bishops ; yet offlce of bisf">ps'
not so absolutely and entirely, but that the canons
authorized presbyters to do it in subordination to
their bishop in some certain cases. It is certain
Cyprian27 speaks of it as the ordinary office of bi
shops or chief ministers of the church. For men
tioning the imposition of hands given by the apos
tles to those whom Phihp had baptized, Acts viii.,
he says, The same custom was now observed in the
church, that those who were baptized, were pre
sented to the governors of the church, that by their
prayer and imposition of hands, they might receive
the Holy Ghost, and be consummated with the seal
of the Lord. In hke manner, Firmilian, bishop of
Ceesarea in Cappadocia, who was contemporary
with Cyprian, makes bishops the ordinary ministers
of this office,28 whilst he draws a comparison be
tween St. Paul giving imposition of hands to those
whom he baptized at Ephesus, Acts xix., and the
bishop's giving imposition of hands to such as re
turned from heresy or schism to the unity of the
catholic church. So likewise the anonymous w

a Cone. Constant. 1. can. 7.
21 Ambros. in Ephes. iv. II. Denique apud ASgyptum
presbyteri consignant, si praesens non sit episcopus.
a Aug. Quaest. in Vet. et Nov. Test. qu. 101. In Alexan
dria et per totam iEgyptum, si desit episcopus, consecrat
presbyter. 26 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 22. TQ iirio-KoirE n irpEtr-
™TfPEi irpurrov XP'tms iXaitp dy'ttp, eiteitu fiairTta-Eis
vobt(, Kal teXevtoIov o-ebpayio-Eis pvptp.
- "Cypr. Ep. 73. ad Jubaian. p. 202. Quod nunc quoque
apud nos geritur, ut qui in ecclesia baptizantur, praepositis
ecclesias offerantur, et per nostram orationem ac manus im-

positionem Spiritum Sanctum consequantur, et signaculo
Dominico consummentur.
28 Firmil. Ep. 75. ap. Cypr. p. 221. Nisi si his episcopis,
de quibus nunc, minor fuit Paulus ; ut hi quidem possint
per solam manus impositionem venientibus haereticis dare
Spiritum Sanctum ; Paulus autem idoneus non fuerit, quia
Joanne baptizatis Spiritum Sanctum per manus impositio
nem daret, nisi eos prius etiam ecclesiae baptismo baptizasset.
29 Anonym, de Bapt. Haereticorum, ap. Cypr. p. 23. in
Appendice. Per manus impositionem episcopi daturunicui-
que credenti Spiritus Sanctus, sicut apostoli circa Samarita-
nos post Philippi baptisma manum eis imponendo fecerunt-

550

¦ ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

author, who writes of the baptism of heretics, at the
end of St. Cyprian's works, makes imposition of
hands the office of bishops, in imitation of the
apostles giving imposition of hands to those who
were baptized by Philip the deacon, Acts viii. And
in another place30 he says, If bishops were present
at baptism, they gave imposition of hands together
with baptism ; but if any were baptized by the
inferior clergy in time of necessity, then the bishops
supplied this afterwards, or else the Lord supplied it
as he saw fit. The council of Eliberis not long
after made two canons to this purpose. In one of
which3' it is ordered, That if a layman baptized a
catechumen, when he was dangerously sick at sea,
or where there was no church near at hand, he
should afterward bring him to the bishop, that he
might perfect his baptism by imposition of hands.
And in the other canon it is also ordered, That in
case a deacon governing a country people,32 where
there is no bishop or presbyter present, shall bap
tize any of them, the bishop shall afterwards perfect
them by his benediction. Or if they chanced to
die before this could be done, they were to be re
puted in a salvable condition by the faith in which
they were baptized. We have heard St. Jerom33
before testifying of this, as the general practice of
the church, for bishops to go about the country
viUages and remoter places in their dioceses, to give
imposition of hands to such as were baptized by
presbyters and deacons : and some of these died
before the bishop could come to them ; which im
plies, not only that it was the bishop's ordinary
office, but that presbyters and deacons did not ad
minister imposition of hands, even in such cases of
necessity ; otherwise the party who wanted it, could
not have died without it. This was evidently the
practice of the Roman church, where, though the
office of chrismation was in part allowed to pres

byters, yet the consignation in the forehead, with
imposition of hands, was still reserved to the bishop
as his pecuhar office in confirmation : as we learn
from the Letters of Pope Innocent,34 Gelasius,35 and
Gregory38 the Great, which have already been men
tioned in the last section. To which we may add
the testimony of Cornelius, who lived before all
these in the time of Cyprian, as it is recorded by
Eusebius. He there, speaking37 of Novatian, who
was baptized only with clinic baptism upon a sick
bed, says, When he recovered from his distemper,
he never received those things, which by the laws
of the church he was obliged to receive, to wit, con
signation by the hands of the bishops, &c. All
those testimonies likewise, which require heretics to
have imposition of hands from the bishop, in order
to obtain the gift of the Holy Ghost, are a further
evidence of this practice. To which purpose we
have the decrees of Pope Leo,38 and Siricius,3" who
particularly observes this to have been the general
practice of the whole church, both Eastern and
Western, as well as the church of Rome, in the re
ception of those who had been baptized in any
heresy or schism. And as to all persons baptized in
the church, St. Austin is a further witness, who
says, That in propriety of speech, neither the apos
tles nor any other man, but Christ alone, as he is
God, could give the Holy Ghost : for the apostles
only40 laid hands on men, that the Holy Ghost by
their prayers might descend upon them; which
custom the church now observed and practised by
her bishops or governors also. In like manner,
St. Ambrose41 says, The spiritual seal, or seal of
the Spirit, which was the completion of baptism,
camp after the font, when by the prayer of the
priest, that is, in his language, the bishop, the Holy
Ghost was poured upon them. From aU which
testimonies it is most undeniably evident, that the

30 Id. p. 26,. Et ideo cum salus nostra in baptismate Spi
ritus, quod plerumque cum baptismate aquae conjunctum,
sit constituta, si quidem per nos baptisma tradetur, integre
et solemniter et per omnia qua! scripta sunt adsignetur,
atque sine ulla ullius rei separatione tradatur: aut si a
minore clero per necessitatem traditum fuerit, eventum ex-
pectemus, ut aut suppleatur a nobis, aut a Domino sup-
plendum reservetur.
31 Cone. Eliber. can. 38. Peregre navigantes, aut si ec
clesia in proximo non fuerit, posse fidelem, qui lavacrum
suum integrum habet, nee sit bigamus, baptizare in necessi
tate positum catechumenum : ita ut si supervixerit, ad epis
copum eum perducat, ut per manus impositionem perficere
possit. 32 Ibid. can. 77. Si quis diaconus regens plebem, sine
episcopo vel presbytero aliquos baptizaverit, episcopus eos
per benedictionem perficere debebit. Quod si ante de se
culo recesserint, sub fide qua quis crediderit, poterit esse
Justus. 33 Hieron. Dial. cont. Lucifer, cap. 4. See before, chap.
1. sect. 1.
81 Innocent. Ep. 1. ad Decentium, cap. 3.

35 Gelas. Ep. 9. ad Episc. Lucan. cap. 6.
36 Gregor. lib. 3. Ep. 9.
37 Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43. OvSl tiXiv Xoiir&v £ti/xe> Situpv-
ytov ti)V vdtrov, tov XPV pETaXapfidvEtv KaTa tov ttjs £h>
KXr)arias Kavdva, tu te aeppayiaBr)val vied tu iiritiKoiru.
38 Leo, Ep. 37. ad Leonem Raven, cap. 2. Si ab bajreti-
cis baptizatum quempiam fuisse constiterit  hoc tantum
quod ibi defuit, conferatur, ut per episcopalem manus im
positionem virtutem Sancti Spiritus consequatur.
39 Siric. Ep. 1. ad Himerium, cap. 1. Arianos nos cum
Novatianis  per invocationem solam septiformis Spiritus,
episcopalis manus impositione catholicorum conventui so-
ciamus. Quod etiam totus Oriens Occidensque custodit.
40 Aug. de Trin. lib. 15. cap. 26. Neque enim aliquis
discipulorum ejus dedit Spiritum Sanctum. Orabant quippe
ut veniret in eos quibus manum imponebant, non ipsi eum
dabant. Quem morem in suis preepositis etiam nunc servat
ecclesia. " Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 3. cap. 2. Sequitur spirituale
signaculum, quod audistis hodie legi, quia post fontem su-
perest ut perfectio fiat quando ad invocationem sacerdotis
Spiritus Sanctus infunditur.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

551

bishop in aU ordinary cases, was the only standing
and regular minister of this part of confirmation,
which consisted in imposition of hands and prayer,
to invocate the gift of the Holy Ghost.
sect i. Yet there were some special and
ciatmespSytlrV extraordinary cases, in which some
^r^iSerl. churches, if not all, granted a licence
Sop*parSiicuiarij by canon to presbyters, to minister
required their pres- * ¦ » . ¦ , «
byters to do it, to {jy^ part of confirmation also. As
such aswere bantu- sr
ed in the church. wnen bishops, either in their presence
or absence, appointed a presbyter by a particular
delegation or command to do it. This was no en
croachment upon the bishop's authority, nor in
fringement of his privilege and power, because what
was done, was only done in subordination to him,
and in pursuance of his command. This licence
we find sometimes granted to presbyters, even in
the bishop's presence ; as is clear from that canon42
in the coUection of Martin Bracarensis, out of the
canons of the Greek church, A presbyter shaU not
consign infants in the presence of his bishop, unless
it be particularly enjoined him by his bishop. Here
three things are manifestly imphed: 1. That this
consignation, or imposition of hands with the sign
of the cross and prayer, was ordinarily the sole
office of the bishop. 2. That by a special commis
sion he might authorize presbyters to do it even in
his presence. 3. That in his absence they werei
authorized to do it by a general commission, rather j
than infants or any other baptized persons should!
die without confirmation. And this agrees very well!
with what has been said before in the last section, '
concerning the practice of the churches of Alex
andria and Egypt ; though in the Western churches
it was otherwise, as is evident from what has been
alleged before out of Pope Innocent43 and St. Je
rom,44 who teU us, That presbyters neither in the
presence of the bishop, nor in his absence, .were
allowed to do it, but many men were forced to die
without confirmation or imposition of hands, be
cause the bishop did not come time enough to ad
minister it to them.
sect 5. Yet also in the Western churches
m^ht'adrSKfc? » there were some special cases, in which
' this consignation was allowed to be
performed by presbyters. Nay, and in one case by

42 Martin. Bracar. Collect. Canon, can. 52. Presbyter,
praesente episcopo, non signet infantes, nisi forte ab epis
copo fuerit illi praeceptum.
4! Innoc. Ep. 1. ad Decent, cap. 3.
44 Hieron. cont. Lucif. cap. 4.
45 Innoc. Ep. 1. ad Decent, c. 6. De his vero baptizatis,
qui postea a daemonio, aut vitio aliquo, aut peccato interveni-
ente, arripiuntur, quaesivit dilectio tua, si a presbytero vel
diacono possint aut debeant consignari : quod hoc nisi epis
copus concesserit, non licet : nam eis manus imponenda non
est, nisi episcopus authoritatem dederit id faciendi. Ut autem
fiat, episcopi est imperare, ut manus eis vel a presbytero,
lA a ceteris clericis imponatur. Nam quomodo id fieri sine

deacons also. As it was in the case of energumens, \
or persons possessed with evil spirits after baptism ; i
concerning whom Pope Innocent makes this decree, '¦
in the same epistle where he prohibits presbyters
from consigning in all ordinary cases : That if any
one was seized45 with an evil spirit after baptism,
the bishop might give orders to a presbyter or a
deacon to consign him in that condition. It was
not to be done but by the bishop's authority ; for he
only had the power of imposition of hands ; but
because an energumen, who was at a great distance
from the bishop, might have several chances in his
journey, it was therefore thought more proper for
the bishops to grant a commission to a presbyter or
deacon, to give him imposition of hands at home,
than to venture his falling into his distemper, by
either coming to the bishop, or returning.
Another extraordinary case in which t
this office of imposition of hands was J^liXifl°Ji°ii
granted to presbyters, was, when any cSf 'thl/^erj' £
who had been baptized by heretics or a°s'!ro
schismatics, were, upon their return to the church,
seized with a violent sickness, and in imminent |
danger of death, before they could go to the bishop, I
or the bishop come to them, to give them imposition '
of hands, and confirm them with that grace of the
Spirit, which they could not have in heresy or
schism. In that case, rather than such persons
should die without this office, a commission was
granted to presbyters to administer it. This we find
most expressly in the first council of Orange,40 That
heretics, if they be in extremity and apparent dan
ger of death, when they desire to become catholics,
shall, in the bishop's absence, be consigned by the
presbyters with chrism and benediction, that is, im
position of hands in the benediction prayer. And
the like decree is made in the council of Epone,"
That if any heretics, who lay desperately sick, upon
a death-bed, desired suddenly to be converted, in
that case, for the salvation of their souls, which
was heartily desired, a presbyter should be permitted
to give them the consolation of chrism; which
they that were in health were to go to the bishop
for, at their conversion. Where we may observe,
that the chrismation here spoken of, was not the
chrismation which presbyters were ordinarily al-

magno labore poterit, ut longe constitutus energumenus ad
episcopum deducatur, cum, si talis casus ei in itinere accide
nt, nee perferri ad episcopum, nee referri ad sua facile possit ?
« Cone. Arausican. 1. can. 2. Haereticos in mortis discri-
mine positos, si catholici esse desiderent, si desit episcopus, a
presbyteris cum chrismate et benedictione consignari placet.
« Cone. Epaunens. can. 86. Presbytero, propter saltitem
animarum, quam in cunctis optamus desperatis et in lecto
recumbentibus haereticis, si conversionem subitam petant,
chrismate subvenire permittimus. Quod etiam omnes con-
vertendi si sani sunt, ab episcopo noverint expetendum.
Vid. Pontifical. Damasi, Vit. Sylvestri. p. 229. ap. Crab.
t. 1.

552

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

lowed to give in the Western church, but that
which was joined with imposition of hands, which
was pecuharly reserved to the bishop, except in
such cases of extremity, when a presbyter was allow
ed to give it, rather than a converted heretic should
die without it. And the reason of this concession
was, because heretics, who were baptized out of
the church, were supposed to be without the grace
of the Spirit, till they received it by imposition of
hands in the catholic church. For which reason,
aU heretics, as well those who used imposition of
hands at baptism, as those that did not, received a
new benediction when they returned to the unity
of the church, as I have showed from St. Austin,48
Optatus,49 and Alcimus Avitus,50 in another place.
See Scholast. Hist, of Lay Baptism, part I. p. 86.

CHAPTER III.

OF THE MANNER OF ADMINISTERING CONFIRMA
TION, AND THE CEREMONIES USED IN THE CELE
BRATION OF IT.
Having thus far considered both the
The first' ceremo- subject of confirmation, or persons to
ny of confirmation, J # t
was the unction of whom it was administered, and the
chrism. persons by whom it was administered,
we are in the next place to take a view of the
form and manner of its administration ; in which
we may observe four distinct ceremonies besides
the consecration of the chrism, which were, the
unction, the sign of the cross, imposition of hands,
and prayer. The unction was commonly first in
order, as we learn from that of Tertullian,1 As soon
as we are come out of the water, we are anointed
with the blessed unction. And then we receive
imposition of hands, invocating the Holy Spirit by
a benediction. Sp[ The first rise and original of this
Tth'is"llcUo1nof unction in the church is not exactly
known, and the sentiments of learned
men are various about it. The late famous writer,

under the feigned name of Petrus Aurelius, in his
book called Orthodoxus, against Sirmond, takes a
great deal of pains to prove it an apostohcal prac
tice. But Habertus2 calls this a dream and a mad
undertaking, against the general stream and current
of learned men. And Estius says,8 The common
opinion is, that the apostles, in the beginning of
their preaching, used no chrism in the administra
tion of this sacrament, as he calls it. So that what
the Romanists now make the matter of their new
sacrament, is confessed to be without any founda
tion in Scripture. Bishop Pearson4 is of opinion,
that the use of it came into the church shortly after
the time of the apostles. Basnage5 and DaiUe"
think not till the third century, when it is first
mentioned by Origen7 and TertuUian. Some in
deed allege an author more ancient than either of
these, which is Theophilus Antiochenus,3 who says,
That we are therefore caUed Christians, because
we are anointed with the oil of God. But the
unction he speaks of is a spiritual and mystical
unction, such as, he says, the whole air and earth
under heaven is anointed with, viz. the unction of
hght and the Spirit of God. So that there being no
author before Tertulhan, who mentions the material
unction as used in confirmation, it is most probable
it was a ceremony first begun about his time, to re
present the unction of the Holy Ghost.
But when it was once admitted, it
was usually magnified as the symbol, The eform' and
" . manner of adminis*
and sometimes the instrumental cause, 'cring it, together
1 withtheeffectaofit.
of very great effects. The consecra
tion of it was supposed to work a mystical change
in its nature, answerable to the change wrought in
the waters of baptism, and the bread and wine in
the eucharist, which Cyril of Jerusalem compares
together.9 It was this unction, as the completion of
baptism, to which they ascribed the power of making
every Christian, in some sense, partaker of a royal
priesthood. Which is not only said by Origen in
the passage last mentioned, but by Pope Leo,10 St
Jerom,1' and many others.12 To it they also ascribed
the noble effects of confirming the soul with the
strength of all spiritual graces on God's part, as
well as the confirmation of the professions and

48 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 3. c. 16.
19 Optat. lib. 7. p. 109.
50 Avitus, Ep. 24. ad Stephanum.
1 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 7. Exinde egressi de lavacro
perunguimur benedieta unctione. — Cap. 8. Dehinc manus
imponitur, per benedictionem advocans et invitans Spiritum
Sanctum. 2 Habert. Archieratic. p. 702. Quod divinare quidam nos
volunt, apostolos in libro Praxapostolor. confirmasse cum
chrismate, id rationem fugit. Praefracte id contra summos
theologomm persuadere nititur Petrus Aurelius in Ortho-
doxo contra Sirmondum.
3 Estius in Sent. lib. 4. Dist. 7. sect. 7. Coinmnnior sen-
tentia est, apostolos initio suae praedicationis non usos fuisse
chrismate in administratione hujus sacramenti.

1 Pearson, Lect. in Act. v. n. 6. p. 69.
5 Basnag. Critic, in Baron, p. 76.
6 Daill. de Confirm, lib. 2. cap. 2. p. 116, &c.
7 Origen. in Levit. Horn. 9. p. 156. Omnes quicunque
unguento sacri chrismatis delibuti sunt, sacerdotes effecti
sunt, sicut et Petrus ad omnem dicit ecclesiam, Vos regale
sacerdotium. 8 Theophil. ad Autolycum, lib. 1. Bibl. Patr. G. L. t. 1.
p. 110. XaXovpEBa XpiuTtavol, oti xpiopEBa iXaiov Qeov.
9 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 3. n. 3.
10 Leo, Ser. 3. de Assumptione sua, p. 3.
" Hieron. cont. Lucif. cap. 2.
12 Vid. Prosper. Sentent. 342. Ambros. de Initiatis, cap.
6. Aug. Ser. 3. post 40. a Sirmondo editis, in Appendice,
t. 10. p. 847.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

553

covenant made on man's part. The author of the
Constitutions makes it to be on man's part /SejSaiw-
tnc rijc bjioXoyiag, Kal ovvBiitdZv, the confirmation13
of the confessions and compacts made with God in
haptism ; and on God's part, the collation of the
Holy Spirit, represented by this ceremony of
anointing. Which is so frequently mentioned in
every Greek writer upon this subject, that it is su
perfluous to refer any learned reader to them. It
will be sufficient only to hint the forms of prayer
which they used upon this occasion ; for these will \
evidently show what spiritual effects they expected )
from this unction." Now, of these we have two an-/
cient forms remaining, a shorter and a longer, the
one an express, and the other an implicit prayer.
The shorter form was conceived in these words,
Jtypriyic Stopeag ItvcipaTog 'Ayiov, The seal of the gift
of the Holy Spirit, as we find it in the first general
councU of Constantinople,14 where they order such
as were baptized by heretics, to be confirmed by
the unction of chrism in this form of words. And
so again, in the council of Trullo ls and some private
writers.16 Not to mention now, that this is the
form still in use in the Euchologium of the present
Greek church. But beside this shorter form, (which
was only an implicit prayer, as if they had said, Let
this unction be unto thee the seal of the gift of the
Holy Spirit,) they had also some larger forms, which
were more express prayers ; one of which is in the
author of the Apostohcal Constitutions, under the
title of an ebxapt-ia irEpi row pvzucoi pvpov, a thanks
giving or benediction to be used in the unction of
the mystical chrism, where the bishop is ordered to
anoint the party baptized, saying these words,17 O
Lord God, the unbegotten, who hast no Lord, who
art Lord of aU, who madest the sweet savour of the
knowledge of the gospel to go forth among aU na
tions : grant now, that this chrism may be effectual
in this baptized person, that the sweet savour of thy
Christ may remain firm and stable in him, and that
he being dead with him, may rise again and hve
with him. Now, this unction, in the Greek church,
was not only in the forehead, but in several other
parts of the body, all performed by the bishop in'
one and the same act; but the Latins divided the
office in some places between the bishop and pres
byters, as has been observed before : but whether
united or divided, it was all reckoned the unction
of confirmation. Which is evident from that canon
of the council of Barcelona, which, speaking of

presbyters receiving the consecrated chrism from
their bishops, which they themselves were to use,
says expressly,18 that it was for confirming neo
phytes,, or persons newly baptized. Which is a
manifest proof, that that part of the ceremony of
unction, which was committed to presbyters, was
reckoned a part of confirmation. And so much of
it might be committed to presbyters, acting in sub
ordination to their bishop, as the rules of every
church allowed. For this part of confirmation be
ing wholly of ecclesiastical institution, it was in the
power of the church to make orders in all things
concerning it, both in what manner, and by what
persons she would have it performed. Which is
the true reason of so much variety, as we have ob
served, in different churches in the administering
this first ceremony of confirmation.
Together with this unction they
usuaUy joined the sign of the cross.

Sect. 4.
The second cere
mony of confirm-
For this ceremony they used upon all ation was the sign

18 Constit. Apost. lib. 3. cap. 17. lib. 7. u. 22.
14 Cone. Constant. 1. can. 7. 15 Cone. Trull, can. 95.
" Asterius Amasen. de Filio Prodigo, ap. Photium, Cod.
271. p. 1499.
17 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 44.
Cone. Barcinon. can. 2. Statutum est, ut cum chrisma
presbyteris dicecesanis pro neophytis confirmandis datur, ni
hil pro liquoris pretio accipiatur, Ste.

of the cross.
occasions, and therefore would not
omit it in this solemn act of confirmation. Of this
we have several clear proofs in Tertullian, Pope
Leo, and others, which, because they have been
already recited at large,19 in speaking of the use of
the sign of the cross in baptism, I will not here re
peat them ; but only add, that the name consigna
tion, which is so often used by the Latin writers to
denote confirmation,20 seems to have had its rise
from this ceremony and custom of signing with the
sign of the cross, when they gave the unction to
persons baptized. And this in some measure an
swers to the Greek name otppaylg, which many times,
though not always, denotes the sign of the cross,
as used in baptism or confirmation, or any other of
fice of rehgion ; of which I need not here be more
particular. The most noted ceremony in this S(,ct 5
whole affair, and that which most „2lSS?™i"- .
., . • ... position of hands; .
universally prevailed, was imposition and fonnhiy, prayer
t • n joined therewith.
of hands ; a ceremony used in all sorts
of benedictions, but more peculiarly applied to or
dination, reconciling of penitents, and confirmation.
The Latin writers commonly speak of confirmation '
under this title. But some think it was not in use
among the Greeks, who, they say, only used chrism,
and not imposition of hands, in confirmation. But
this is a great mistake : for the author of the Con
stitutions,21 in the same chapter where he rehearses i
the prayer of the mystical chrism, immediately sub- f

>» Book XI. chap. 9. sect. 6.
20 Innoc. Ep. 1. ad Decent, c. 3. De consignandis vero
infantibus, &c. Martin. Bracaren. can. 52. Presbyter non
signet infantes, &c.
2' Constit. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 44. 'Emo-rov ydp r, Siva-
pis ttJs X"P°e£<"'<IS' iiv ?*? ^ Ek 'i-ieo-eiTov tovtiov i>
inUXnais ylvriTai irapi tov evue^ovs lepitos TotavTi] x.s,
eIs vStop pdvov KaTaQaivEi b PaimlopEvos, tis lovSaXot, Sec.

554

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

joins, This is the power of imposition of hands ne
cessary for every one : for unless he that is baptized
have this invocation of the holy priest, he only goes
j into the water as a Jew, and puts off the filth of the
! body, but not the filth of the soul. Therefore,
though this imposition of hands be not so frequently
mentioned in the Greek writers, yet it is always to
be understood, as chrism is in the Latin writers,
where only imposition of hands is mentioned.
sect s The antiquity of this ceremony is
thuhecer,emo"y of by all ancient writers carried as high
impositionof hands. ag the apostleSj and founcied upon their
example and practice. There are three passages in
Scripture from which they generaUy deduce it: Acts
viii., where mention is made of the apostles' laying
hands on those whom Philip had baptized. Acts
xix., where St. Paul laid his hands on those whom
he baptized after John's baptism. And Heb. vi. 2,
where mention is made of imposition of hands
among the first principles of religion. Cyprian de-
j rives it from the practice of the apostles22 laying
1 their hands on those whom Phihp baptized : For,
says he, the same custom is now observed in the
church, that they who are baptized, are presented
to the governors of the church, that by their prayer
and imposition of hands they may receive the Holy
Ghost. And in other places,23 he refers it in general
to apostolical institution and practice. The anony
mous author of the book concerning heretical bap
tism, at the end of Cyprian,24 deduces it hkewise
from the same example of the apostles' laying hands
on the Samaritans whom Philip baptized. Firmi
lian compares the bishop's imposition of hands to
invocate the Holy Spirit, to that of St. Paul,25 upon
those whom he baptized at Ephesus. St. Jerom
owns the Luciferian's argument to be good, when he
derives this custom28 from the Acts of the Apostles,
and the case of the Samaritans receiving imposition
of hands after Philip had baptized them : though

he thinks the practice and tradition of the church
sufficient to authorize such a custom in this case as
well as in several other rites belonging to baptism
and other things, which had the authority of laws
though they were no where expressly commanded
in Scripture ; as the triple immersion in baptism,
and the tasting of milk and honey in token of a
new birth. St. Austin in like manner affirms27 this
observation descended to the governors of the church
from the apostles, who prayed over those on whom
they laid their hands, that they might receive the
Holy Ghost. And because it might be objected,
that the apostohcal practice was for a quite different
lend, to confer on men the miraculous gift of the
"[Spirit, empowering them to speak with new tongues ;
he is very careful once or twice to answer this ob
jection, and show, that notwithstanding any such
difference, this practice of imposition of hands in
order to obtain the Holy Spirit, might be said to
descend from the apostles. For, says he,28 by the
Holy Ghost, which is given only in the cathohc
church by imposition of hands, our forefathers
would have us to understand that which the apos
tle says, " The love of God is shed abroad in our
hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given us.'' For
that is the charity, which they have not who are
cut off from the communion of the catholic church;
and though they speak with the tongues of men
and angels, and know all mysteries and all know
ledge, it profits them nothing. For they have
not the love of God, who love not the unity of the
church ; upon which account it is rightly said, that
the Holy Spirit is not received but only in the ca
tholic church. For now the Holy Spirit, which is
given by imposition of hands, does not appear with
sensible and temporal miracles to attest it, as it was
heretofore given to recommend the first plantation
of faith, and to dilate the church in its infancy. For-
who now expects, that they to whom imposition of

22 Cypr. Ep. 73. ad Jubaian. p. 202, Quod nunc quoque
apud nos geritur, ut qui in ecclesia baptizantur, praepusitis
ecclesiae offerantur, ut per nostram orationem et manus im
positionem Spiritum Sanctum consequantur.
23 Cypr. Ep. 72. ad Stephan. p. 196.
24 Anonym, de Bapt. Heretic, ap. Cypr. in Append, p.
23. Per manus impositionem episcopi datur unicuique cre-
denti Spiritus Sanctus, sicut apostoli circa Samaritanos
post Philippi baptisma manum eis imponendo fecerunt.
25 Firmil. Ep. 75. ap. Cypr. p. 221.
26 Hieron. cont. Lucifer, cap. 4. An nescis et jam eccle
siarum hunc esse morem, ut baptizatis postea manus impo-
natur, et ita invocetur Spiritus Sanctus ? Exigis ubi scrip
tum sit? In Actibus Apostolorum. Etiamsi Scripturae
auctoritas non subesset, totius orbis in hac parte consensus
instar praecepti obtinet. Nam et multa alia quae per tradi-
tionem in ecclesiis observantur, auctoritatem sibi scriptaj
legis usurpaverunt ; velut in lavacro ter caput mergitare ;
deinde egressos lactis et mellis praegustare concordiam ad
infantiae significationem.
27 Aug. de Trin. lib. 15. «.-. 26. Orabant ut veniret in eos
quibus manus imponebant, non ipsi eum dabant. Quem

morem in suis praepositis etiam nunc servat ecclesia.
29 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 3. cap. 16. Spiritus autem Sanctus,
quod in sola catholica per manus impositionem dari dicitur,
nimirum hoc intelligi majores nostri voluerunt, quod apos
tolus ait, Quoniam caritas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris
per Spiritum Sanctum, qui datus est nobis. Ipsa enim est
caritas, quam non habent qui ab ecclesiae catholica? com-
munione praecisi sunt; ac per hoc etiamsi linguis hominurn
loquantur et angelorum, si sciant omnia sacramenta et om
nem scientiam, &c., nihil eis prodest. Non autem habent
Dei charitatem, qui ecclesiae non diligunt unitatem; ac per
hoc recte intelligitur diei, non accipi nisi in catholica Spi
ritus Sanctus. Neque enim temporalibus et sensibilibus
miraculis attestantibus per mantis impositionem modo datur
Spiritus Sanctus; sicut antea dabatur ad commendationem
rudis fidei, et ecclesiae primordia dilatanda. Quis enim
nunc hoc expectat, ut ii quibus manus ad accipiendum Spi
ritum Sanctum imponitur, repente incipiant linguis loqui?
Sed invisibiliter et latenter intelligitur per vinculum pacis
eorum cordibus divina caritas inspirari, ut possint dicere
Quoniam caritas, &c.

Chap. III.

¦ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

555

hands is given to receive the Holy Spirit, should
immediately begin to speak with new tongues ? But
the love of God is supposed to be inspired into their
hearts invisibly and latently by the bond of peace,
so as they may truly say, " The love of God is shed
abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost that is given
us." He gives the same answer to this pretended
difficulty in another place.29 " Hereby," says he, " we
know that he dwells in us, by the Spirit which, he
hath given us." If thou findest in thy heart the
love of God, thou hast the Spirit to give thee know
ledge. Which is a very necessary thing. In the
first age the Holy Ghost fell on them that believed,
and they spake with tongues, which they had never
learned, as the Spirit gave them utterance. These
were signs proper for that time ; for then it was ne
cessary that the Holy Ghost should be thus demon
strated in aU kinds of tongues, because the gospel
was to run throughout the whole world in all sorts
of languages. But this demonstration once made,
it ceased. For does any man now expect to hear
them speak with new tongues, who receive imposi
tion of hands as a means to obtain the Holy Spirit ?
Or, when we laid hands on these infants, did any of
you look when they should speak with tongues ?
And when they did not speak with tongues, was
any one so perverse in heart, as to say, They have
not received the Holy Ghost ? For if they had re
ceived it, they would have spoken with tongues,
as was done heretofore. If, therefore, there be no
such miracles now, to testify the presence of the
Spirit, how knows any man that he has received
the Holy Ghost ? Let him ask his own heart : if he
loves the brethren, the Spirit of God abideth in
in him. Thus St. Austin derives imposition of hands i
for conveying the Spirit from the practice of the!
apostles, though there were very different effects?
then from what there are now : though men had!
not the gift of tongues conferred upon them, as in
the days of the apostles ; yet they might have other
graces, sufficient both to testify the presence of the
Spirit, and to entitle the act of imposition of hands
to the dignity of an apostohcal institution. From
whence also we may observe, that charity and unity,

or stedfastness in the love of God and religion, was
a particular grace of the Spirit given by imposition
of hands : which because heretics could not have,
who were baptized out of the church, therefore they
always received imposition of hands upon30 their
return to the church, whether they had received it
in pretence among their own party before or not.
For some heretics gave imposition of hands together
with baptism, and others did not ; but both of them
received imposition of hands again upon their return
to the catholic church. There is one passage more,
upon which some of the ancients found this prac
tice, which is Heb. vi. 2, where the apostle joins 1
imposition of hands with baptism. Upon which,!
the author under the name of St. Ambrose31 notes,
That it means that imposition of hands, which is
supposed to confer the Holy Ghost, which is ordi
narily given by the chief priests or bishops after
baptism, for the confirmation of men in the unity of
the church of Christ. Which exposition is repeated
by Haymo32 and some later writers, and allowed as
probable by Grotius and Calvin. There is one
writer more, who seems to derive it from the descent
of the Holy Ghost upon the apostles at the day of
Pentecost. He goes under the name of Eusebius
Emissenus; but learned men suppose him to be
Eucherius of Lyons, or Hilary of Aries, or some
other writer about the time of Pope Leo, in the
middle of the fifth century. Whoever he was, the
account he gives of confirmation is very particular
and instructive, and therefore the whole passage
may be worth translating. That which imposition
of hands,33 says he, now gives to every one in con
firming neophytes, the same did the descent of the
Holy Ghost then confer on all believers. But be
cause we have said, that imposition of hands and
confirmation confers something on him that is born
again and regenerated in Christ ; perhaps some one
will be ready to think with himself, and say, What
can the ministry of confirmation profit me after the
mystery of baptism ? If, after the font, we want
the addition of a new office, then we have not re
ceived all that was necessary from the font. It is
not so, beloved. For, if you observe, in the mihtary

29 Aug. Tract. 6. in 1 Joan. iii. t. 9. p. 254. In hoc cog-
noscimus quia manet in nobis, de Spiritu quem dedit nobis.
Si enim inveneris te habere caritatem, habes Spiritum Dei
ad intelligendum. Valde enim necessaria res est. Primis
temporibus cadebat super credentes Spiritus Sanctus, et lo-
quebantur linguis quas non didicerant, quomodo Spiritus
dabat eis pronunciare. Signa erant tempori opportuna.
Oportebat enim ita significari in omnibus linguis Spiritum
Sanctum ; quia evangelium Dei per omnes linguas cursurum
erat toto orbe terrarum. Signification est illud, et transiit.
Nunquid modo quibus imponitur manus ad accipiendum
Spiritum Sanctum, hoc exspectatur, ut linguis loquantur?
Aut quando imposuimus manum istis infantibus, attendit
unusquisque vestrum, utrum linguis loquerentur ? Et cum
videret eos linguis non loqui, ita perverso corde aliquis ves
trum fuit, ut diceret, Non acceperunt isti Spiritum Sanctum ?

Nam si accepissent, linguis loquerentur, quemadmodum
tunc factum est. Si ergo per haec miracula modo testimo
nium praesentiae Spiritus Sancti non fit: unde cognoscit
quisque accepisse se Spiritum Sanctum ? Interroget cor
suum: si diligit fratrem, manet Spiritus Dei in illo.
30 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 5. cap. 23. Propter charitatis co-
pulationem, quod est maximum donum Spiritus Sancti,
sine quo non valeant quaecunque alia sancta in homine fue
rint, manus correctis haereticis imponitur.
31 Ambros. in Heb. vi. 2. Imposition^ manuum per
quam Spiritus Sanctus accipi posse creditur : quod post bap-
tismum ad confirmationem unitatis in ecclesia Christi a
pontificibus fieri solet.
32 Haymo in Heb. vi. 2.
33 Euseb. Emissen. Horn, de Pentecost.

556

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

hfe, when the emperor has chosen any one to be a
soldier, he does not only set his mark or character
upon him, but furnishes him with competent arms
for fighting : so it is in a baptized person, the bene-
! diction is his armour. Thou hast made him a sol
dier ; give him also the weapons of warfare. What
F doth it profit, though a father confer a great estate
i upon his child, if he do not also provide him a
| tutor? Now, the Holy Ghost is the keeper, and
! comforter, and tutor to those who are regenerated
j in Christ. As the Scripture saith, " Except the Lord
\ keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain."
Therefore the Holy Ghost, which descends with his
saving presence on the waters of baptism, there
gives us the plenitude of perfection to make us in
nocent; but in confirmation he gives us an aug
mentation of grace. Because in this world we are
to live all our lives among invisible enemies, and to
walk in the midst of dangers ; in baptism we are
born again to hfe, but after baptism we are confirm
ed to fight ; in baptism we are washed, but after
baptism we are strengthened. And so the benefits
of regeneration are sufficient for those who pre
sently leave this world ; but to them who are to live
in it, the auxihary aids of confirmation are also ne-
. cessary. Regeneration by itself alone saves those
who are presently received in peace into a better
world; but confirmation arms and prepares those
who are reserved to fight the battles and combats of
¦ this world. He that, after baptism, goes immaculate,
with the innocence which he has acquired, to death,
is confirmed by death ; because he cannot sin after
death. If here we shall ask, what advantage the
apostles had by the coming of the Holy Spirit after
the passion and resurrection of Christ? the Lord
himself evidently shows us, saying, " I have many
things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them
now : howbeit, when he the Spirit of truth is come,
he will guide you into all truth." You see, when
the Holy Ghost is given, the heart of a believer is
dilated and enlarged with prudence and constancy.
Before the descent of the Holy Ghost, the apostles
were terrified even to the denial of Christ ; but after
his visitation they were armed with a contempt of
death, even to suffer martyrdom for his sake. Thus
it is that we have redemption by Christ, but the
I Holy Ghost gives us the gift of spiritual wisdom,
by which we are illuminated, edified, instructed, and
consummated to perfection. This is the account
which the ancients generaUy give of the original

of imposition of hands ; which ceremony is now
wholly laid aside and disused in the Roman church,
though they pretend to make another sacrament of
confirmation. But this only by the way.
From the account given by this
author, we clearly learn, what the an- what opinion the
, j, ancients had of the
Icients supposed confirmation super- necessity or conirm-
/ added to the benefit of regeneration.
The new birth gave innocence and pardon of sins ;
but the invocation of the Spirit added wisdom and
strength to preserve and estabhsh men in innocence
i to perfection. He also shows us what opinion the
ancients had of the necessity of confirmation. It
was not absolutely the same as that of baptism. For
if men died' immediately after baptism without im
position of hands, they were saved by their inno-
:!cence which they had acquired in baptism: they
needed no other confirmation but death, which was
a security against all other dangers. Confirmation •
was only necessary to those who were to hve and
fight with the world and invisible powers. And
this is the sense of all other writers, who speak the
highest of the necessity of confirmation. The coun
cil of Eliberis having said,34 That it was necessary
for the bishop to consummate those by his benedic
tion, who were baptized by deacons ; adds, Yet if
any one die before this can be done, he is justified
by the faith which he professed in baptism. And
so the author of the Apostolical Constitutions says,35
If there be neither oU nor chrism, the water alone
is sufficient both for the unction of the Holy Ghost
and the seal of the covenant. By which we are to
i molhfy that other harsh expression of his in an-
| other place,36 where he says, That baptism without
this imposition of hands and prayer of the priest,
is only a bodily washing, hke that of the Jews,
purging the filth of the body, but not of the soul.
For unless some very candid interpretation be put
upon this expression, it will be highly injurious and
derogatory to the saving power of baptism, which
purges away sin by a spiritual regeneration. And
therefore it is but reasonable to let the harsh ex
pressions of this author be interpreted by himself,
when he owns that the water of baptism is suffi
cient to answer all the ends of chrism or confirma
tion, where that is omitted not by any contempt,
but for want of opportunity to receive it. And this
is plainly St. Jerom's meaning, when he says, That
| though the practice of imposition of hands descends
from the acts of the apostles;87 yet in many places

31 Cone. Eliber. can. 77. Si quis diaconus regens plebem,
sine episcopo vel presbytero, aliquos baptizaverit, episcopus
eos per benedictionem perficere debebit. Quod si ante de
seculo recesserint, sub fide ; qua quis crediderit, poterit esse
Justus. 35 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 22. Ei Si priTE IXaiov fj, priTE
pvpov, dpKEi vStopi Kal irpds xpiaiv, Kal irpds vtppayiSa.
30 Constit. lib. 7. c. 44.

37 Hieron. cont. Lucifer, c. 4. Quod si obloqueris, Quare
in ecclesia baptizatus nisi per manus episcopi non accipiat
Spiritum Sanctum, quem nos asserimus in vero baptismate
tribui ; disce hanc observationem ex ea auctoritate descen-
dere, quod post ascensum Domini Spiritus Sanctus descen
dit. Multis in locis id tamen esse factum reperimus ad
honorem potius sacerdotii, quam ad legis necessitatein.
Alioquiu si episcopi tantum imprecatione Spiritus Sanctus

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

557

it was observed rather for the honour of the chief
priesthood, than for any absolute necessity of the
thing. For otherwise, if the Spirit was only obtain
ed by the prayer of the bishop, those men must be
in a deplorable condition that were baptized in vil
lages, and castles, and remote places, by presbyters
and deacons, and died before the bishop could come
to visit them. All, therefore, that was necessary to
salvation was conferred in baptism, which minis
tered such a portion of the Spirit, as was sufficient to
cleanse men from sin, and qualify them for eternal
life. So that when some of the ancients say, That
baptism does not minister the Spirit, which was
only given by imposition of hands in confirmation ;
as Cornehus pleads in his letter38 against Novatian ;
and Tertullian,39 who says, That we do not obtainy
the Holy Ghost in baptism, but are only cleansed
in the water and prepared for the Holy Ghost ; they
are to be understood' as meaning only that the
Holy Ghost is not given in that fuU measure in
baptism, as afterward by imposition of hands. They ,
do not deny that baptism grants men remission of j
sins by the power of the Holy Ghost, but only that
there are some further effects and operations of the
Holy Spirit, which are not ordinarily conferred on
men, but by the subsequent invocation of the Spirit,
the increase of which men were to desire, and to
receive imposition of hands in order to obtain it.
In which sense it is said in the Gospel, that " the
Holy Ghost was not yet given," because the apostles
had not yet received that plentiful effusion of it in
the gift of tongues, which they afterwards had on
the day of Pentecost, though they had before re
ceived such a measure of it as both enabled them to
work several sorts of miracles, and also qualified
them in every respect for the kingdom of heaven.
sects. But though the ancients did not
ed"Cbl,rnis: think this imposition of hands so ab
solutely necessary, as that the want
of it should exclude those who were baptized from \
the kingdom of heaven; yet they thought fit to
punish the neglect of it, by setting some marks of
disgrace and public censure upon such as volun- j
tarily and carelessly omitted it, when they had op
portunity to receive it. Such men were ordinarily
denied the privilege of ecclesiastical promotion and
holy orders. As appears from the objection made
against Novatian, that he ought not to be ordained,

because being baptized privately with clinic bap
tism, he had afterward neglected to receive his con
summation from the hands of the bishop, which40
he ought to have done by the laws of the church.
And to this purpose the council of Neocsesarea41
has a canon, forbidding such to be ordained ; which
is made part of the code of the universal church.
The council of Eliberis also42 excludes such as have
not lavacrum integrum, their own baptism completed
by imposition of hands, from the privilege of giving
baptism to others, which in cases of necessity they
allowed to all other laymen. So far they thought
fit to discountenance the contempt and neglect of
confirmation, though they neither esteemed it a
distinct sacrament from baptism, nor of absolute
necessity to salvation, but only as a proper means
to strengthen men in their Christian warfare.

CHAPTER IV.

OF THE REMAINING CEREMONIES OF BAPTISM FOL
LOWING CONFIRMATION.
Much about the same time as the Secl ,
unction of confirmation was adminis- ti^TXthed1inbap"
tered to persons newly baptized, they ,rhite garme"'s'
were also clothed in white garments. In the Latin
church it came immediately before confirmation, but
in the Greek church it seems to have followed after.
For Cyril of Jerusalem speaks of it as following the
unction.1 This was to represent their having put off
the old man with his deeds, and having put on the
new man Christ Jesus. Hence they were called
XtvxeipovovvTtg, and grex Christi candidus et niveus,
the white flock of Christ,2 as we find in Lactantius
and many others. PaUadius, in the Life of St.
Chrysostom,3 notes it particularly, as a great piece
of barbarity in Arcadius, that when St. Chrysostom's
presbyters in his exile had baptized three thousand
persons at one festival, the emperor sent his sol
diers to disperse them, as they were XevxeiuovovvTeg,
clothed in their white garments. This was other
wise called, the garment of Christ, and the mystical
garment. For so Socrates4 and Sozomen,5 speaking
of the ordination of Nectarius, bishop of Constan-

defluit, lugendi sunt qui in villulis aut in castellis aut in re-
motioribus locis per presbyteros et diaconos baptizati ante
dormierunt, quam ab episcopis inviserentur.
Ap. Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 43. Tovtov prj tvxoiv, irios dv
tou 'Aytov HvEvpaTos etu^s ;
39 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 6. Non quod in aqua Spiritum
Sanctum consequamur, sed in aqua emundati, sub angelo
Spiritui Sancto praeparamur.
40 Euseb. lib. 6. u. 43. " Cone. Neocaesar. can. 12.
42 Cone. Eliber. can. 38.
1 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 4. n. 2. 'Ei/cWa/ieiros Ta irvEvpa-

TtKd \EUKti, xpr) XevxeipoveXv StairavTos, Sec.
2 Lactant. Carmen de Resur. Dom.
Fulgentes animas vestis quoque Candida signat;
Et grege de niveo gaudia pastor habet.
Mischus, Prat. Spir. cap. 207. 'ISovtes aii-riji/ XEVKotpo-
povaav, Sec. Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever, p. 145.
Unde parens sacro ducit de fonte sacerdos
Infantes niveos corpore, corde, habitu.
3 Pallad. Vit. Chrysost. cap. 9. 4 Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 8.
5 Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 8. Ti> pvTiKi]v iaBfjTa eti hpcptEa-
pivos, &c.

558

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

J3ook XII.

tinople, which was immediately given him after his
baptism, say, He was ordained whilst he had his
mystical garment on; meaning this white robe,
which had just before been given him at his bap
tism. St. Jerom6 also, writing to Fabiola, seems to
allude to this, when he says, We are to be washed
with the precepts of God, and when we are prepared
for the garment of Christ, putting off our coats of
skins, we shall put on the linen garment, that hath
nothing of death in it, but is all white, that rising
out of the waters of baptism, we may gird about
our loins with truth, and cover the former filthiness
of our breasts. Some also allege two other passages
of his in his epistles to Pope Damasus,7 where he
speaks of his having put on the garment of Christ
at Rome. But others, who have more exactly 'con
sidered the time of St. Jerom's baptism, and the
same phrase as used by him in other places, more
probably conclude, that he means the monastic
habit, which he elsewhere11 calls the garment of
Christ, and not the albes of baptism. However, not
insisting on those dubious passages of St. Jerom,
the ancient custom is sufficiently attested from
other authors. Some of which also tell us, that
ThesY'sometimee these garments were wont to be de-
»Vh Tsoiemn form livered to the neophytes with a so
lemn form of words, in the nature of
a charge: such as that in Gregory's Sacramen
tarium,10 Receive the white and immaculate gar-
i ment, which thou mayest bring forth without spot
before the tribunal of our Lord Jesus Christ, that
thou mayest have eternal life. Amen.
sect 3. These garments were commonly
srltenlunpS worn eight days, and then laid up in
the ohnrch. the chmch_ gL Austin, or some one
under his name," speaks ofthe Sunday after Easter,
as the time appointed for this purpose. That was
the conclusion of the Paschal festival, and then the
neophytes changed their habit ; whence that day is
thought to have the name of Dominica in Albis ; and
"Whit- Sunday is said to be so called from this cus
tom of wearing white robes after baptism. These,
being laid aside, were carefully preserved in the

vestries of the church, as an evidence against men,
if afterward they violated those professions which
they had made in baptism. A remarkable instance
of which we have related in Victor Uticensis, con
cerning one Elpidiphorus, a citizen of Carthage,
who having a long time lived in the communion of
the church, at last turned Arian, and became a bit
ter enemy to the orthodox in the Vandalic persecu
tion. Among others, whom he summoned before
him as their judge, was one Muritta, a deacon, who
had been sponsor for him at his baptism. He, being
ready to be put upon the rack, produced against
him those white robes with which he had been
clothed at his baptism ; and with words '* melting
all the whole city into tears, he thus bespoke him:
These are the garments, 0 Elpidiphorus, thou min
ister of error, which shall accuse thee, when the
majesty of the great Judge shall appear; these I
will diligently keep as a testimony of thy ruin,
which shall depress thee to the bottom of the lake
that burns with fire and brimstone. These are they
that were girt about thee, when thou earnest im
maculate out of the holy font ; these are they that
shall bitterly pursue thee, when thou shalt begin to
! take thy portion in the flames of hell ; because thou
hast clothed thyself with cursing as with a garment,
\ and hast cast off the sacred obligation of thy bap
tism, and the true faith which thou didst then pro
fess and take upon thee. So that the design of
this significant ceremony was, first to represent that
innocence and angelical purity, which every man
obtained by the remission of his sins in baptism,
and then to remind them of the obligations and
professions they had entered into, which, if they
violated, would rise up as so many accusers at the
day of judgment.
To this ceremony of wearing white
robes, they added another of the like The ceremony m
' J lighfs and tapers.
nature, which was the carrying of ™'A^td^h^
lighted tapers in their hands. I can- *»^?]^.the,e
not say this was so universal a practice
as the former, but. it is mentioned by Gregory Na
zianzen among other ceremonies following baptism.
The station, says he, when immediately after bap-

6 Hieron. Ep. 128. ad Fabiol. Preeceptis Dei lavandi
sumus, et cum parati ad indumentum Christi, tunicas pelli-
ceas deposuerimus, tunc induemur veste linea, nihil in se
mortis habente, sed tota Candida, ut de baptismo consur-
gentes, cingamus lumbos in veritate.
7 Id. Ep. 57. ad Damas. Cathedram Petri, et fidem apos
tolico ore laudatam censui consulendam ; inde nunc anini-e
postulans cibum, unde olim Christi vestimenta suscepi. It.
Ep. 78. ad Damas. Christi vestem in Romana urbe sus-
cipiens, nunc barbaro Syriae limite teneor.
8 See Wall of Infant Baptism, par. ii. chap. 3. sect. 10.
9 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 1.
10 Gregor. Sacrament, de Bapt. Infant. Vestitur infans
dicente presbytero, Accipe vestem candidam et immacula-
tam, quam perferas sine macula ante tribunal Domini nostri
Jesu Christi, ut habeas vitam aeternam. Amen. Ordo Ro

man, de S. Sabbato. Bibl. Patr. t. 10. p. 83. Deportantur
ipsi infantes ante eum, et dat singulis stolara candidam et
decern siliquas et chrismale, dicens, Accipe vestem candi
dam, &c.
11 Aug. Horn. 86. de Diversis, in Octavis Paschae, t. 10.
p. 709. Paschalis sollennitas hodierna festivitate conclu-
ditur, et ideo hodie neophytorum habitus coriJmutatur ; ita
tamen, ut candor, qui de habitu deponitur, semper in corde
teneatur. 12 Victor, de Persec. Vandal, lib. 5. Bibl. Patr. t. 7. p. 613.
Haec sunt linteamina, Elpidiphore, minister erroris, quae te
accusabunt, dum majestas venerit judicantis; custodiente
diligentia mea ad testimonium tuae perditiouis, ad demer-
genduin te in abysso putei sulphurantis. Hojc te immacu-
latum cinxerant de fonte surgentem ; hase te acriter perse-
quentur, flammantem Gehennam cum cceperis possidere, &c.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

559

tism thou shalt be placed before the altar, is an
emblem of the glory of the hfe to come ; the psalm
ody with which thou shalt be received, is a foretaste
of those hymns and songs of a better life ; and the
lamps which thou shalt light,13 are a figure of those
lamps of faith, wherewith bright and virgin souls I
shall go forth to meet the Bridegroom. Others refer
it to another reason, that it might be a symbol of
their own present Ulumination, and as done in allu- ;
sion to that saying of our Saviour, " So let your
light shine before men, that they may see your
good works, and glorify your Father which is in
heaven." In some baptisms also of great men, we
find these ceremonies enlarged and set off with
greater pomp ; for not only they themselves, but
all their retinue and attendance were clothed in
white garments, and aR carried lamps in their
hands. As it was in the magnificent baptism of the
•younger Theodosius, related in an epistle of Marcus
Gazensis14 published by Baronius ; where he says,
The procession from the church to the palace was
extremely splendid ; for the leaders of the people
were all clothed in white, which made the company
look as if it had been covered with snow ; and aU
the senators, and men of quahty, and soldiers in
their ranks carried lamps in their hands, that one
would have thought the stars had appeared upon
earth. The expense of these things, especially
when so very sumptuous and magnificent, we may
reasonably suppose, was defrayed by every person
at his own proper cost and charge. And so the ob
jection which some make in Gregory Nazianzen
against baptism, upon the account of the charge at
tending it, plainly intimates. For thus they object
against it : Where is the gift that I shall offer at
baptism? where is the garment15 of light in which
I must shine? wherewithal shall I entertain my
baptizers? To which Nazianzen rephes, That in
great things men should not be concerned about
such small matters as these. For the sacrament
•itself was far above these visible objects. Therefore
offer thyself for a gift, put on Christ for a garment,
• and let thy entertainment of me, the minister, be a
holy conversation. God requires no great thing of
us, which the poor cannot give. From whence we
may conclude, that either these ceremonies were

13 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 672.
11 Ap. Baron, an. 401. t. 5. p. 134. Baptizato juniori
Theodosio, et ab ecclesia egresso in palatium, licebat rursus
intueri decorem eorum qui praeerant multitudini, et vestem
eorum refulgentem. Erat enim omnes candidati, ut existi-
maretur ruultitudo esse nive repleta. Praecedebant autem
patricii, illustres, et omnis dignitas cum ordinibus militari-
bus, omnes portantes cereos, ut putarentur astra cerni in
terra. _ " Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 655. lTov Si iptbtoTeios
toQys, ij XapirpvvB/iaopai, Sec.
18 Greg. lib. 7. Ep. 24. ad Faustin. Quoscunque ex iis
pauperes, et ad vestem sibi emendam non sufficere posse

omitted in the baptism of poor men, or else the
church herself was at the charge of them. Which
some think may be inferred from the donations of
Constantine made to the baptisteries of Rome, men
tioned in the Pontifical, in the Life of Pope Sylves
ter; but it may more certainly be proved from the
epistles of Pope Gregory,16 where he often mentions
his giving these garments to the poor, who could
not provide them for themselves.
Another ceremony used to congra- Sec( 5
tulate such as were newly baptized, ^ *£ °'v}rZll ,
upon their admission and incorpora- °ewllr ba>>tized-
tion into the church, was the kiss of peace. Which
was observed even towards infants, as we learn from
that objection raised against it in Cyprian ; where
the opponents pleaded for deferring baptism till the
chUd was eight days old, because children at their
birth were unclean, and every one abhorred to kiss
them, as was necessary to be done after baptism, to ,
testify their right of fraternity upon their adoption
into God's family. To which Cyprian replied, That
this was no impediment to their baptism ; for all
things were clean to them that were clean. No '
one ought to abhor that which God had vouchsafed
to make. For though an infant was but just born,
yet he was then in such a condition, as no one
ought to abhor17 in giving him the grace of bap
tism, or imparting to him the kiss of peace. This
custom is also mentioned by St. Austin,1" and it
seems to be founded upon that apostolical rule, ob
served in the eucharist and other holy offices, of
saluting one another with a holy kiss, in token of
their most cordial affection, and acknowledging
one another as brethren. St. Chrysostom gives
another reason why it was called, the peace, or
the kiss of peace, because men were now reconciled :
to God by baptism, and restored to his peace and ;
favour. For elegantly comparing the two nativities
of man together, the natural and the spiritual, he
says, The first birth is always attended with tears
and lamentations,- nature as it were presaging the
subsequent sorrows and miseries of life : but in the
second birth it is otherwise: here are no tears or
mournings, but salutations, and kisses, and em-
bracings of the brethren, who acknowledge the person
baptized as one of their own members, and receive

cognoscis: te eis vestem, quam ad baptisma habeant, com-
parare volumus ac praebere. Vid. lib. 4. Ep. 16.
>' Cypr. Ep.59.al.64.adFidum, p. 160. Nametquod ves
tigium infantis in primis partus sui diebus constituti, mundum
non esse dixisti, quod unusquisque nostrum adhuc horreat
exosculari ; nee hoc putamus ad coelestem gratiam dandam
impedimento esse oportere ; scriptum est enim, Omnia mun-
da sunt mundis. Nee aliquis nostrum id debet horrere,
quod Deus dignatus est facere. Nam etsi adhuc infans a
partu novus est, non ita est tamen, ut quisquam ilium in
gratia danda atque in pace facienda exosculari horrere de-
beat, &c.
19 Aug. cont. Epist. Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 8.

560

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

him as one returning from a long peregrination out
of his own country. For because before his bap
tism he was an enemy, but after baptism is made a
friend of our common Lord, we therefore all rejoice
with him: and upon this account, the19 kiss has
the name of peace, that we may learn thereby, that
God has ended the war, and received us into fami
liarity and friendship with himself. Hence it is, that
to give the peace to any one, is the same thing many
times in the writings of the ancients, as to salute
him with the holy kiss, in the phrase of the apostle.
They were used also to give to the
And « taste of newly baptized a httle taste of honey
honey and milk, in , , n 1
token of their new and milk : which Salmasius and some
birth. others20 suppose to be given them in
stead of the eucharist ; but that is a mistake, for the
eucharist was given them at the same time. The
ancients themselves give another reason for it. St.
Jerom21 and Tertulhan22 say it was to signify their
new birth, and that they were now as children
adopted into God's family. TertuUian says more
over,13 That the Marcionites retained the custom for
the same reason as they did many other usages of
the church. St. Jerom24 says further, That in some
of the Western churches, the mixture was made up
of milk and wine instead of honey, and this in allu
sion to those passages of the apostle, " I have fed you
with milk, and not with strong meat ; " and St. Pe
ter's saying, " As new-born babes, desire the sincere
milk of the word." For milk denotes the innocency
of children. Clemens Alexandrinus also25 takes
notice of this custom, saying, As soon as we are
born, we are nourished with milk, which is the nu
triment of the Lord. And when we are born again,
we are honoured with the hope of rest by the pro
mise of Jerusalem which is above, where it is said
to rain milk and honey. For by these material
things we are assured of that sacred food. We learn
further, from the third council of Carthage, that
this milk and honey had a pecuhar consecration
distinct from that of the eucharist. It is there said
to be offered at the altar,28 on a day most solemn,
(which means the great sabbath, or Saturday be
fore Easter, which was the most solemn time of
baptism,) and there to have its proper benediction

for the mystery of infants, (that is, persons newly
baptized, who are commonly caUed infants in the
mystical sense,) that it might be distinguished from
the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ.
This part of the canon indeed is omitted in some
collections, but Labbe says it was in the ancient
manuscripts, and it is now so read in the body of
the African2' Code; which puts the matter beyond
aU dispute. I have given this canon with a httle
explanatory paraphrase, because some learned men
complain of the obscurity of it, and profess them
selves to be in the dark about the mystery of infants,
which seems to me evidently to refer to this custom
of giving milk and honey to the newly baptized.
When persons were thus adopted Sect7
into God's family, and acknowledged „7fte Eff to
as brethren in Christ, then they were ptarer'
admitted as sons to caU upon God their Father, and
immediately required to do it in the form of words
taught us by Christ. The author of the Constitu
tions28 bids them repeat the Lord's prayer standing
upright, because they were now risen with Christ
from the dead : and after that repeat this other short
form : " Almighty God, the Father of Christ, thy
only begotten Son, give me an immaculate body, a
pure heart, a watchful soul, an unerring knowledge,
with the influence of the Holy Ghost, that I may
possess and enjoy the fulness of the truth, through
thy Christ, by whom all glory be to thee in the
Holy Ghost for ever. Amen." St. Chrysostom2'
also mentions their repeating the Lord's prayer pre
sently after their coming up out of the water ; and
that standing also, not falling upon their faces, but
looking up to Christ, to whose body they are united,
as he sits above in heaven, where Satan has no ac
cess. And this was the first time they were aUowed
to use this prayer. For tiU men were baptized, and
made sons of God by regeneration, they were not
allowed to call God their Father. And though they
learned the Lord's prayer before baptism, yet they
were not permitted till after baptism to use it as a
prayer publicly in the church.
Among other ceremonies after bap-
. ~, -T . . Sect. 8.
tism, Ureeory Nazianzen mentions Received with
° J t psalmody
their reception with psalmody,80 which,

19 Chrys. Serm. 50. de Util. Legends! Scripturae, t. 5. p.
686. Aid tovto Kal to <piXt]pa Elprivr) koXeXtui, "va pd-
QtopEV oti irdXEpov KaTiXvo-EV b Qeos, Kal irpds ti)v oIkel-
totrtv iiruvriyayE Ti]v iavTov.
20 Salmas. ap. Suicer. Thesaur. Part. 2. p. 1136.
21 Hieron. cont. Lucif. cap. 4. Deinde egressos lactis
et mellis prxgustare concordiam ad infantias significa-
tionem. 22 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c. 3. Inde suscepti lactis et
mellis praigustamus concordiam.
23 It. cont. Marcion. lib. 1. cap. 14. Sod et ille usque
nee aquam reprobavit creatoris, qua suos abluit, nee oleum
quo suos unxit, nee mellis et lactis societatem, qua suos in-
fantat, nee panem, quo ipsum corpus suum repraesentat.
24 Hieron. in Esai. Iv. 1. Lac significat innocentiam

parvulorum. Qui mos ac typus in Occidentis ecclesiis hodie
usque servatur, ut renatis in Christo vinum lacque tribuatur.
De quo lacte dicebat et Paulus, Lac vobis potum dedi, non
solidum cibum. Et Petrus, Quasi modo nati parvuli, ratio
nale lac desiderate.
25 Clem. Alex. Paedagog. lib. 1. cap. 6. p. 103.
26 Cone. Carth. 3. can. 24. Primitia, vero, seu mel et
lac, quod uno die solennissimo pro infantis mysterio solet
offerri, quamvis in altari offeratur, suam tamen habet pro-
priam benedictionem, ut a sacramento Dominici corporis
ac sanguinis distinguatur.
27 Codex Eccles. Afric. can. 37. ap. Justellum.
28 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 44 et 45.
29 Chrys. Horn. 6. in Colos. p. 1953.
30 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 672.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

561

he says, was a prcsludium or foretaste of those
hymns and praises which should be the employment
of the hfe to come. But whether this means any
particular psalms appointed to be sung at baptism,
or the common psalmody of the church, he does
not inform us. If I may be allowed to conjecture,
I should conclude for the former, because the com
mon psalmody of the church was no more than
what catechumens were allowed to hear .before, as
being part of the missa catechumenorum, or first
service, at which not only catechumens, but pro
fessed Jews and heathens might be present. Per
haps they sung the 1 18th Psalm, in which are these
words, " This is the day which the Lord hath made,
we will rejoice and be glad in it;" because St. Aus
tin," speaking of the Easter festival, seems to refer
to it, saying, This is the day which the Lord hath
made, higher than all, brighter than all, in which
he hath acquired to himself a new people by the
Spirit of regeneration, and hath filled our minds
with joy and gladness. And Paulinus82 speaks of
singing haUelujahs upon this occasion. Butin doubt
ful matters I will not be over-positive to determine.
It is more certain, that as soon as
And admitted im- the ceremonies of baptism were fin-
medistely to the
commuoion of the ished, men were admitted to a partici
pation of the eucharist. For this was
the to t'eXewv, the perfection or consummation of a
Christian, to which he was entitled by virtue of his
baptism. Therefore aU the ancient writers speak of
this as the concluding privilege of baptism, which
in those days was always immediately subjoined to I
it And this was observed, not only with, respect
to adidt_Jersons,T)ut children also. For proof of
which custom, at present it will be sufficient to al
lege the testimony of Gennadius,38 who joins the
baptism of infants, and confirmation, and the eu
charist all together. And this continued to the ninth
century, as appears from the rituals of that age,
some of which have been produced before,84 and
many others might be added ; but these belong to
another place, where it will be more proper to treat
of the communion of infants among other things

that relate to the subject of the eucharist, which,
together with the ancient psalmody, reading of the
Scriptures, preaching, and prayers, which make up
the whole ordinary service of the church, under
the name of missa catechumenorum, and missa fide
lium, will be the subject of the next volume, which
is intended to give an account of the liturgy of the
church. There was one ceremony more, used
in some churches, but rejected by or the ceremony
. . . , . ... . of washing the feet,
Others, Which it Will not be improper retained in some
^ r churches.
to give some account of here in the
close : that was the custom of washing the feet of
the baptized. Vicecomes85 thinks, at first it was a
ceremony preceding baptism, and used on Maundy
Thursday, or the same day that our Saviour (from
whose example it was taken) washed his disciples'
feet. And this seems to be clear, he says, from St.
Austin's words, who has occasion to mention it in
two of his epistles. But in the former epistle,86 St.
Austin is speaking of the custom of bathing the
whole body before Easter, that the catechumens, who
had neglected themselves in the observation of Lent,
might not appear offensive when they came to be
baptized : therefore Maundy Thursday was chosen
as the day to cleanse themselves, by bathing, from
the bodily filth which they had contracted. And
because this was allowed to the catechumens, many
others chose to bathe themselves with them on that
day also, and relax their fast, because fasting and
bathing would not agree together. So that this
washing was not the washing of the feet, however
Vicecomes came to mistake it, but the bathing ofthe
whole body ; and not used as a religious ceremony,
but as a ceremony of convenience and civil decency,
that they might not be offensive to the senses of
others, when they came to baptism. In the other
epistle he speaks particularly of washing the feet,
but that was after baptism, on the third day, or the
octaves, or such other time as those churches which
retained the ceremony thought fit to appoint it. For
many churches,87 he says, would never admit of this
custom at all, lest it should seem to belong to the

81 Aug. Serm. 163. de Tempore, t. 10. p. 332. Hie est
dies, dilectissimi, quem fecit Dominus, celsior cunctis, luci-
dior universis, in quo sibi novam plebem, ut videtis, regene
rationis Spiritu conquisivit, &c.
32 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever, p. 145.
Hinc senior sociae congaudet turba catervae ;
Alleluia novis balat ovile choris.
33 Gennad. de Eccles. Dogm. cap. 52. Si parvuli sint, qui
doctrinam non capiant, respondeant pro illis qui eos offe
runt, juxta morem baptizandi : et sic manus impositione et
chrismate communiti, eucharistiae mysteriis admittantur.
34 Book XII. chap. 1. sect. 2.
85 Vicecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 3. cap. 20.
33 Aug. Ep. 118. ad Januarium, p. 213. Si autem quaeris,
cur etiam lavandi mos ortus sit : nihil mihi de hac re cogi-
tanti probabilius occurrit, nisi quia baptizandorum corpora
per observationem quadragesimae sordidata, cum offensione
2 O

sensus ad fontem tractarentur, nisi aliqua die lavarentur.
Istum autem diem potius ad hoc electum quo ccena Domini
anniversarie celebratur. Et quia concessum est hoc baptis
mum accepturis, multi cum his lavare voluerunt, jejunium-
que relaxare.
87 Aug. Ep. 119. ad Januar. cap. 18. De lavandis vero
pedibus, cum Dominus hoc propter formam humilitatis,
propter quam docendam venerat, commendaret, sicut ipse
consequenter exposuit, quaesitum est, Quonam tempore po-
tissimum res tanta etiam facto doceretur, et in illud tempus
occurrit, quo ipsa commendatio religiosius inhasreret. Sed
ne ad ipsum sacramentum baptismi videretur pertinere,
multi hoc in consuetudinem recipere noluerunt. Nonnulli
etiam de consuetudine auferre non dubitarunt. Aliqui au
tem, ut hoc sacratiore tempore commendarent, et a bap
tismi sacramento distinguerent, vel diem tertium octava-
rum, quia ternarius numerus in multis sacramentis maxime

562

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII

sacrament of baptism, when our Saviour only in
tended it as a lesson of humility. And other
churches, for the same reason, abrogated the-cus-
tom, where it had been received. And others, who
retained it, that they might recommend it by fixing
it to some more sacred time, and yet distinguish it
from the sacrament of baptism, chose either the
third day of the octaves, or the octave after bap
tism itself, as most convenient for this purpose.
Among the churches which wholly refused, or ab
rogated this custom, the Spanish church is one,
which in the council of Eliberis made a canon
against it; forbidding at once the exacting any
gift or reward for administering baptism, lest the
priest should seem to sell what he freely received ;
(of which I have given a full88 account, in speak
ing of the revenues of the church ;) and also forbid
ding the priests,89 or any other of the clergy, to
wash the feet of such as were baptized. Among
those churches which never received this custom,
we may reckon the Roman church ; and among
those which always received it, the church of Milan,
whose practice is opposed to the Roman by St.
Ambrose, or whoever was the author of the books
De Sacramentis, and De iis qui Mysteriis initiantur,
among his works. He says,40 In the church of
Milan the bishop was used to wash the feet of the
baptized. But the Roman church had not this
custom. And he thinks they might decline it, be-
caase of the multitude of those that were baptized.
But they of the Roman church pleaded, that it was
not to be done by way of mystery in baptism or re
generation, but only by way of humility, as the
custom of washing the feet of strangers. But on
the contrary, the church of Milan pleaded, that it
was not merely a business of humility, but of mys
tery and sanctification, because Christ said to Peter,
" Except I wash thy feet, thou hast no part with
me." This I urge, says our author, not to repre
hend others, but to commend my own office. For
though we desire to follow the Roman church, yet
we are men that have our senses about us. And
therefore we observe that practice, which we con
ceive to be righter in other churches. He adds
further, That this was not done41 to obtain remission

of sins, for that was already done in baptism : but
because Adam was supplanted by the devil, and the
serpent's poison was cast upon his feet, therefore
men were washed in that part for greater sanctifica
tion, that he might have no power to supplant them
any further. These were the reasons given by the
church of Milan, for their adhering to this practice:
but they were not so strong as to prevail with
others, and so this custom never got any great foot
ing in the Christian church.
I have now gone over the most
material ceremonies and usages of a generai'reSec-
the church, observed about the ad- precedfnJdil.,* °'°
. . . -. ... course, with relation
ministration ol baptism, as well those tothepracticeoiuu
* present church.
that went before, as those that ac
companied the action itself, and those that followed
after ; and, as near as I could, delivered them in the
same order andmanner as sheherself observed them.
And shall here close the discourse only with one ge
neral reflection, which may be of some use to vindi
cate the practice of the present church, and give satis
faction to such sober dissenters as scruple our office
of baptism for the sake of an innocent, significant
ceremony or two retained in it. The candid reader
may observe throughout this discourse, that not
only one or two, but many significant ceremonies
were observed by the ancient church in the ad
ministration of baptism; particularb21^thejign_pf
the cross was used at least four or five times in the
whole process of the action. Therefore they who
now raise objections against the present office, had
they lived in the primitive times, must have had
much more reason to complain of the ancient prac
tice. And yet we do not ordinarily find objections
raised against the baptism of the church, upon the
account of the ceremonies she used therein, no, not
even by those who in other things differed from
her. Which consideration, methinks, should a httle
satisfy those, who really value the peace and unity
of the chm-ch, and be an argument to them not to
dissent from the practice of the present church, for
those things which must more forcibly have obliged
them to have been dissenters in all ages. I know
not how far this consideration may prevail upon
any, but I know how far it ought to prevail upon

excellit, vel etiam ipsum octavum, ut hoc facerent, ele-
gerunt. 38 Book V. chap. 4. sect. 14.
39 Cone. Eliber. can. 48. Emendari placuit, ut hi qui bap-
tizantur (ut fieri solet) nummos in concham non mittant,
ne sacerdos, quod gratis accepit, pretio distrahere videatur.
Neque pedes eorum lavandi sunt a sacerdotibus vel clericis.
40 Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 3. cap. 1. Succinctus summus
sacerdos pedes tibi lavit.  Non ignoramus, quod ecclesia
Romana hanc consuetudinem non habeat, cujus typum in
omnibus sequimur et formam : hanc tamen consuetudinem
non habet, ut pedes lavet. Vide ergo ne propter multitu-
dinem declinarit. Sunt tamen qui dicant, et excusare
conentur, quia hoc non mysterio faciendum est, non in bap

tismate, non in regeneratione : sed quasi hospiti pedes la
vandi sunt. Aliud est humilitatis, aliud sanctificationis.
Denique audi, quia mysterium est, et sanctificatio. Nisi
lavero tibi pedes, non habebis mecum partem. Hoc ideo
dico, non quod alios reprehendam, sed mea officia ipse com-
mendem. In omnibus cupio sequi ecclesiam Romanam, sed
tamen et nos homines sensum habemus. Ideo quod alibi
rectius servatur, et nos recte custodiinus.
41 Ibid. In baptismate omnis culpa diluitur. Receditergo
culpa : sed quia Adam supplantatus a diabolo est, et vene-
num ei suffusum est supra pedes, ideo lavas pedes, ut in ea
parte, in qua insidiatus est serpens, majus subsidium sancli-
ficationis accedat, quo postea te supplantare non possit.
He repeats this reason in his Book de Initiatis, cap. 6.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

5C3

aU that love the peace and study the quiet of the
church, and therefore I could not but in this place
here seasonably suggest it.

CHAPTER V.

OF THE LAWS AGAINST REBAPTIZATION BOTH IN
CHURCH AND STATE.
To what has been said about baptism,
But one baptism, it will not be improper to add some-
properly so called, ^ -,-,,.
auowed by the thing about the laws made both in
church. And why. °
church and state against the repetition
of it, when once duly performed. The ancients
generaUy determine against a repetition of baptism;
though Vossius thinks1 their reasons are not always
strictly conclusive. Some argued, that baptism was
not to be repeated, because we are baptized into the
death of Christ, who died but once. So St. Basil,2
and St. Austin.8 But Vossius thinks there is no
weight in this argument, because that which is but
once done, may be often represented ; as the sacra
ment of the eucharist is often repeated, though it
also be in remembrance of the Lord's death tiU he
come. Others prove it from those words of our Sa
viour, John xiii. 10, " He that is washed needeth
not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit."
This argument is used by Optatus, St. Austin, Ful
gentius, Pacianus, and St. Ambrose. But Vossius
thinks there is as httle force in this reason as the
former ; because men may become polluted and un
clean after baptism, and so have need of a second
washing, if there were no other reason against it.
Others argued from those words of the apostle, Heb.
vi. 4, " It is impossible for those who are once en
lightened, if they shaU faU away, to renew them
again unto repentance." The ancient expositors,
Chrysostom, Theodoret, Primasius, Sedulius, and
Haimo, understand this as a prohibition of renew
ing men to repentance again by a second baptism ;
for they do not deny absolutely the possibility of a
second repentance or pardon, but only upon a second
baptism. And so Vossius says it is also expounded
by Epiphanius,4 Cyril of Alexandria,5 St. Jerom,6
St. Austin,7 and St. Ambrose.8 But he thinks their
exposition not so agreeable to this place, as that of
others, who interpret the falling away, either to
mean the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, or

1 Voss. de Bapt. Disp. 17..'n. 5. p. 210.
2 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 15.
8 Aug. de Vera et Falsa Poenit. cap. 3.
4 Epiphan. Haer. 59. Novatianor.
" Cyril, lib. 5. in Joan. xvii.
' Hieron. cont. Jovin. lib. 2. 7 Aug. Com. in Rom.
^ Ambros. de Poenit. cont. Novat. lib. 2. cap. 2.
Hieron. cont. Lucifer, cap. 8. De Apocalypsi quoque
2 o 2

what St. John calls " a sin unto death," or a total
apostacy from the Christian rehgion, for which
there is no renewal of repentance. But I wiU not
be so positive as Vossius, that any of these are
better interpretations of that text, which is so una
nimously urged by the ancients agamst the Nova
tians, as a prohibition, not simply of a second re
pentance, but of a repentance by a second baptism.
Others made use of those words of the apostle, Eph.
iv. " One faith, one baptism." Which is the argu
ment urged by Cyril of Jerusalem and Pope Leo
against rebaptization. But this, as Vossius ob
serves, probably was not intended as a prohibition
of a second baptism, but only to declare the com
munity of that baptism, which is received one and
the same by all, without exception. As the apostle
caUs the eucharist " one bread," not because it was
only once to be received, but because it was that
common bread, of which all were partakers. The
true reason, Vossius thinks, why baptism is not to
be repeated, is the Divine wiU that so appointed it.
For there is no command to reiterate baptism, as
there is to repeat the eucharist, in the words of in
stitution. Neither is there any example of any re
baptization in Scripture, though we often read of
men's falling into gross and scandalous sins after
baptism. To which may be added, that baptism
succeeds in the room of circumcision, being the en
trance and seal of the covenant, which, on God's
part, is never broken : so that as circumcision was
never repeated, though the passover was yearly ; in
like manner, men enter into the covenant by bap
tism, and their breaches of the covenant are not to
be repaired by repeated baptisms, but by confession
and repentance, which is the method prescribed by
the apostle for restoring fallen brethren. St. Je
rom" observes, that though there were many here
tics in the apostles' days, as the Nicolaitans and
others, yet there was no command given to rebap-
tize them upon their repentance. And Optatus10
makes the unity of circumcision a good argument
for the unity of baptism, in which both the catho
lics and Donatists agreed. For though the Dona
tists rebaptized the catholics, yet they did it not
under the notion of a second baptism, but as sup
posing they had received no true baptism before.
Indeed, among all the ancient here
tics, we find none for a plurality of only theMarcion-
. . ites allowed baptism
baptisms, but only the Marcionites. to be thrice repeat-
Which Epiphanius observes to have
been an invention of Marcion, their first founder,

approbernus, haereticis sine baptismate debere pcenitentiam
concedi. Nunquid dixit, Rebaptizentur qui in Nicolaitarum
fidem baptizati sunt ?
10 Optat. lib. 1. p. 35. Quid magis diei pro nobis, et nos
trum esse potest, quam quod dixisti, in comparationem
baptismatis semel factum esse diluvium? Et singularem
circumcisionemsalubriter profecisse populo Judaeorum, ma
gis pro nobis, quasi noster locutus es.

564

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

in regard to his own conversation : " for he having
been guilty of deflowering a virgin, invented a se
cond baptism, asserting, that it was lawful to re
peat baptism three times for the remission of sins. So
that if any man fell, he might receive a second bap
tism after the first, and a third after that, upon his
repentance. Which he pretended to ground upon
those sayings of our Saviour, " I have a baptism to
be baptized with, and I have a cup to drink;"
which have no reference to any other baptism in
water, but to his baptism in blood, that is, his death
and passion. Of which the ancients speak much,
as they do of some other sorts of baptism, which
are only metaphorical, as the baptism of afflictions,
the baptism of tears and repentance, and the bap
tism of fire at the last day. But here the question
is only about proper baptism by water, which the
Marcionites affirmed might be repeated three times
in the same way, which the church never allowed of.
It is true, indeed, there were some
whifuhe3church doubtful cases, in which it might hap-
didindoubtfulcnses, . -, , .. ,. , . , , ,
not reckoned a re- pen accidentally that a man might be
baptization. . .
a second time baptized ; but these
were such cases only, in which the party was re
puted not to have received any former baptism at
all. As when a man could neither give any account
of his own baptism, nor were there any other credi
ble witnesses that could attest it. Which often
happened to be the case of those who were taken
captives in their infancy, and made slaves by the
heathen. When any such were redeemed or re
covered by the Christians, the church made no
scruple to baptize them ; because, though they
might perhaps have received a former baptism, yet
no evidence of it appeared. And so this was not
reputed a rebaptization. A decree was made to this
purpose in the fifth council of Carthage,12 upon a
question put by the bishops of Mauritania, who
affirmed that they redeemed many such captive
children from the hands of the barbarians : the
council ordered, That in this case, as often as it hap
pened, that there were no certain witnesses found,
who could give undoubted testimony of their bap
tism ; nor were they able of themselves to affirm,
by reason of their age, that they ever had received
it; they should be baptized without any scruple,
lest a hesitation in this case should deprive them

of the purgation of the sacraments. The like de
termination was also given in one of the Roman
synods under Leo upon the same case, where it was
concluded,18 That in such a doubtful case, neither
the baptizer nor the baptized incurred the crime of
rebaptization. And Leo resolves the matter14 him
self after the same manner in other places. Nei
ther was it reckoned any crime, though it afterward
appeared that the party had been baptized be
fore, because it was done in ignorance: but yet,
like clinic baptism, it was a sort of blemish to him,
that deprived him of ecclesiastical promotion, ex
cept in some extraordinary case, as we learn from
Theodore's 15 Pcenitentiale, cited by Gratian.
Neither was it reckoned properly
a second baptism, when the church ^t&JKjj
baptized any who had before been un- £ beiR JSE
duly baptized in heresy or schism. •"*"**-¦
For then she did it only on presumption that they
had received no true baptism before. Some here
tics corrupted baptism by altering the necessary
form, and others corrupted it by changing the mat
ter of it into some other substance of their own ap
pointing; and the baptisms of aU such were looked
upon as no baptisms ; and therefore the church or
dered aU those to be baptized upon their return to
her communion, in the very same manner as Jews
and Gentiles, as supposing their former pretence of
baptism to be nothing at all, but her own baptism
the first true baptism that was given them. And
even the Cyprianists, who baptized aU that had
been baptized in any heresy or schism whatsoever
without distinction, did it still only upon this sup
position, that the baptism which they had received
before, was no baptism at all, but a mere nullity.
But if any had been baptized in the catholic church,
and after that turned heretics or schismatics, or
even apostates, Jews or GentUes, they never gave
such another baptism upon their return to the
church again.
For the Cyprianists in this agreed Sect, 5.
with the rest of the catholic church, rehaPp°tized 'itvtK
that catholic baptism was never to be
repeated in the greatest apostates. This doctrine
is not only inculcated by St. Austin,16 but even by
Cyprian himself and his followers, where they plead
so much for baptizing those who had been baptized

11 Epiphan. Haer. 42. Marcionit. n. 3.
12 Cone. Carthag. 5. can. 6. Placuit de infantibus, ut
quoties non inveniuntur certissimi testes, qui eos baptizatos
esse sine dubitatione testentur, neque ipsi sint per aetatem
idonei de traditis sibi sacramentis respondere, absque ullo
scrupulo eos esse baptizandos, ne ista trepidatio eos faciat
sacramentorum purgatione privari. Hinc enim legati Mau-
rorum fratres nostri consuluerunt, quia multos tales a bar-
baris redimunt. Vid. Cod. Eccl. Afric. can. 72. et Cone.
Trull, can. 84.
13 Leo, Ep. 37. ad Leon. Raven. Non potest in itera-
tionis crimen devenire, quod factum esse omnino nescitur.

14 Id. Ep. 92. ad Rustic, cap. 16. Si nulla existant in
dicia inter propinquos aut familiares, nulla inter clericos
aut vicinos, quibus hi, de quibus quaeritur, baptizati fuisse
doceantitr; agendum est ut renascantur, ne manifeste per-
eant, in quibus quod non ostenditur gestum, ratio non sinit
ut videatur iteratum.
15 Theodor. Poenitent. ap. Gratian, Dist. 4. de Consecrat.
cap. 117. Qui bis ignoranter baptizati sunt, non indigeut
pro eo pcenitere : nisi quod secundum canones ordinari mm
possunt, nisi magna aliqua necessitas cogat.
16 Aug. de Bapt. lib. 2. cap. 1. Cont. Liter. Petit, lib. 2.
cap 7 et 4S. Cont. Crescon. lib. 2. cap. 16.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

5G5

in any heresy or schism ; they stiU except those
heretics who had originally been baptized in the
cathohc church : though they turned apostates they
were not to be received again by baptism,1' but only
by repentance, as was determined in the council of
Carthage, over which Cyprian presided. St. Austin
refers us to this very passage, and thence concludes
this was a point agreed upon universally in the
catholic church, that no lapse or crime could make
it necessary to give a second baptism to any who
had once been truly baptized within the pale of the
church. A longer penance indeed was imposed
upon such deserters and apostates as had been bap
tized in the church, than upon those who had been
baptized among heretics originally, as the Rules of
Pope Innocent18 inform us; the one were obhged
to go through a long course of penance for their
apostacy, but the other were admitted immediately
by imposition of hands upon their recantation : yet
still the church kept strict to her rule, that whatever
way she admitted them she would not do it by a
second baptism.
sect. 6. Several heretics pretended to ob-
b.^hihe'cath£ serve trie same rule ; f°r they rebap
tized the catholics ; yet they said this
was not a second baptism, because the catholics
were reputed heretics with them, and therefore their
baptism of no value in their account. Upon this
ground the Novatians rebaptized the catholics, as
we learn from Cyprian,19 and the epistle of Pope
Innocent last cited. The Donatists foUowed the
Novatians in this sacrilegious practice, as the charge
is often brought against them by St. Austin,20 and
many others. And the Eunomians not only re
baptized the catholics, but all others of the Arian
sects that were not of their own particular faction,
as is noted by Epiphanius21 in his account of them.
And the other Arians, though they were at first
averse to this practice, (as Papebrochius22 and Pagi23

rightly observe, in order to refute the story of Con
stantine's being baptized by Pope Sylvester, and re
baptized by Eusebius of Nicomedia ; for at that time
the Arians had not taken up the practice of rebap
tizing the catholics,) yet afterwards they gave
way to it about the time of St. Austin. For he
charges it upon them more than once,24 that they
rebaptized the cathohcs. And it appears from
Victor Uticensis,25 that they insisted stiffly upon it in
the time of the Vandalic persecution, and we after
wards meet with the same in the epistles of Vigili
us.26 Valesius27 cites the Life of Fulgentius, and
the author of the Breviarium Fidei, published by
Sirmondus, to the same purpose. By which last
author28 we find, that the Arians not only rebaptized
the catholics, but also made an argument of it, (as
some Romanists in another case have since argued
against the protestants,) that their baptism was bet
ter than the cathohcs', because the cathohcs never
rebaptized those that came over from the Arians,
but reconciled them only by imposition of hands ;
but the Arians, whenever they could seduce any
from the cathohcs, always gave them a second
baptism. Now, to prevent this petulant hu
mour from spreading in the church, what punishments
, , were inflicted on re-
many and severe laws were made baptize™ by the 1™
. . of church and 6tate.
against it, both by the ecclesiastical
and the secular power. The church by her canons29
not only censured and condemned all such rebap-
tizations, as impious and sacrilegious, as a crucify
ing of Christ again, a doing despite to the Spirit?
as a mockery of the Divine mysteries, and derision
of holy things; but also inflicted penalties on all
those who were either actively or passively con
cerned in them. The council of Lerida30 forbids
the faithful so much as to eat with persons that suf
fered themselves to be rebaptized. The canons of
Pope Innocent enjoin them a long penance to

17 Cone. Carthag. ap. Cypr. n. 8. p. 232. Censeo omnes
haereticos et schismaticos, qui ad catholicam ecclesiam vo-
luerint venire, non ante ingredi, nisi exorcisati et baptizati
prius fuerint; exceptis his sane qui in ecclesia catholica
fuerint ante baptizati, ita tamen ut per manus impositionem
in pcenitentiam ecclesiae reconcilientur. See the same,
ibid. n. 22. And Cypr. Ep. 71. ad Quintum, p. 194. Ep.
74. ad Pompeium, p. 216.
18 Innoc. Ep. 2. ad Victricium, cap. 8. Ut venientes a
Novatianis vel Montensibus, per manus tantum impositio
nem suscipiantur. Quia quamvis ab haereticis, tamen in
L-hristi nomine sunt baptizati : praeter eos, si qui forte a
nobis ad illos transeuntes, rebaptizati sunt: hisiresipiscen-
tes, et ruinam suam cogitantes, redire maluerint, sub longa
pocnitentiie satisfactione admittendi sunt.
'* Cypr. Ep. 73. ad Jubaian. p. 198. Nee nos movet, quod
ra literis tuis complexus es, Novatianenses rebaptizare eos,
quos a nobis sollicitant.
Aug. cont. Fulgent, cap. 7. Da mihi aliquem sancto
rum post Trinitatem rebaptizare, quod facis. It. de Haeres.
c. 69. Audent etiam rebaptizare catholicos, &c. Vid. Cod.
Theodos. lib. 16. Tit. 6. Ne sanctum baptisma iteretur.

Leg. 4. Honorii.
21 Epiphan. Haer. 76. Anomoeor. p. 992.
22 Papebroch. Vit. Constant. Mai. 21. t. 5. p. 17.
23 Pagi, Critic, in Baron, an. 324. u. 12.
24 Aug. de Haeres. cap. 49. Rebaptizari quoque ab his
catholicos novimus, utrum et non catholicos nescio. It. de
Haares. cap. 7. Baptizato ingerit baptismum, &c.
25 Victor, de Persec. Vandal, lib. 1. Bibl. Patr. t. 7.
p. 590.
26 Vigil. Ep. 2. ad Euther. cap. 3. It. Cone. Tolet. 3.
Prafat. 27 Vales. Not. in Sozomen. lib. 6. cap. 26.
28 Breviar. Fidei adversus Arianos. Dicere etiam solent
de baptismo, quod in eo melius sit ipsorum baptismum,
quam nostrum ; quia qui de illis ad nos convertuntur, non
eos rebaptizamus, sed per manus impositionem reconcilia-
mus. Illi vero, si quos de nostris seducere possint, incon-
sideranter rebaptizant.
23 Vid. Cod. Eccles. Afric. can. 48. Constit. Apost. lib
6. cap. 15.
30 Cone. Ilerdens. can. 14. Cum rebaptizatis fideles rel:-
giosi nee in cibo participent.

'566

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XII.

make satisfaction.81 And those of Pope Leo82 require
even those who through fear or terror were rebap
tized against their wUls, to do penance at the dis
cretion of the bishop, before they were admitted
again to communion. If they were bishops, pres
byters, or deacons, who thus suffered themselves to
be rebaptized, then they were to be degraded, and
obliged to do penance all their lives, without being
suffered to communicate with the church either in
the prayers of the faithful, or the prayers of the
catechumens, and were only to be admitted to lay
communion at the hour of death, because they had
not only denied their orders, but their Christianity,
and openly professed themselves pagans, by being
rebaptized. This we find in the decrees of Felix
III., made in a Roman council,83 with respect to the
African churches, where such rebaptizations were
often practised, by the power of the Arians, who
compelled the catholics to be rebaptized. This was
the ancient discipline of the church toward those,
who were only passive in admitting a second bap
tism, after they had once been truly baptized with
catholic baptism before. Then again for those who
were actively concerned in such rebaptizations, the
Canons appointed, that if any bishop or presbyter
presumed to give a second baptism after a true one
once received,34 he should be degraded: and this
penalty was confirmed by the civil law; for Valen
tinian put forth an edict against such rebaptizers,
declaring them unworthy of the priesthood.85 But
because such sort of penalties did not much affect
either the Donatists or the Eunomians, who were
already out of the church, and httle regarded her
censures ; therefore Honorius reinforced the former
laws by adding a civil penalty to them. For in two
laws made against the Donatists, who were chiefly

concerned in this crime, he enacted,86 That it should
be confiscation of all a man's goods, whoever was
found to rebaptize another. And Theodosius j iinior "
laid the same penalty upon the Eunomians, and
those that were rebaptized by them, commanding
their goods to be confiscated, and their persons to
be banished. Such was the care both of the civU
and ecclesiastical governors to preserve the unity of
baptism in the catholic chm-ch. But as Gothofred
I think, rightly observes, these laws seem only in
tended against heretics rebaptizing cathohcs. For
if heretics rebaptized heretics, as the Eunomians
did the other Arians, it does not appear, that in
that case the penalties of these laws affected them,
but only were designed to restrain their insolencies
against the catholic church. Some cathohcs con
tinued still, after the Cyprianic way, to rebaptize
all heretics and schismatics whatsoever, without dis
tinguishing those that were baptized in the nameaf
the Trinity from those that were not : and tirrftrgh
this was contrary to the general custom afA disci
pline of the church, yet I conceive the penKties of
these laws did not affect them neither. And the
same may be said of those, who thought themselves
obhged to rebaptize those who were only baptized
by laymen. For though it was reckoned a rebap
tization by those churches which practised other
wise, yet it was not that criminal rebaptization,
against which these laws were chiefly intended:
and these being something more of doubtful and
disputed cases, about which good cathohcs them
selves were divided, a greater aUowance was made in
these, so long as men only observed the custom and
practice of the churches in which they hved, about
them : which was St. Basil's advice to the churches
of Asia, which were divided upon these questions.

"' Innoc. Ep. 2. ad Victric. cap. 9. Qui rebaptizati sunt,
sub longa pcenitentia et satisfactione admittendi sunt.
82 Leo, Ep. 79. ad Nicetam, cap. 6. Qui ad iterandum
baptismum vel metu coacti sunt  non nisi per poenitentiao
remedium, et per impositionem episcopalis manus, commu
nionis recipiant unitatem.
83 Felix, Ep. 7. cap. 2. Eos, quos episcopos, presbyteros,
vel diaconos fuisse constiterit, et seu optantes forsitan, seu
coactos lavacri illius'unici salutarisque claruerit fecisse
jacturam ; et Christum, quem non solum dono regenerationis,
verum etiam gratia percepti honoris induerant, exuisse ; cum
constet neminem ad secundam tinctionem venire potuisse,
nisi se palam Christianum negaverit, et professus fuerit se
esse paganum;  usque ad exitus sui diem, si resipiseunt,
jacere conveniet, nee orationi non modo fidelium, sed nee
catechumenorum omnimodis interesse, quibus communio
laica tantum in morte reddenda est.

34 Vid. Canon. Apost. can. 47.
85 Theod. lib. 16. Tit. 16. de non Iterando Bapt. Leg. 1.
Antistitem, qui sanctitatem baptismi iterata usurpatione ge-
minaverit, et contra instituta omnium earn gratiam iterando
contaminaverit, sacerdotio indignum esse censemus.
36 Ibid. Leg. 4. Quisquis post haec fuerit rebaptizasse detec-
tus  Facultatum omnium publicatione multatus, inopiai
pcenam expendat. Vid. ibid. Leg. 5. Honorii.
87 Ibid. Leg. 7. Theodosii. Nefarios Eunornianorum cre-
tus, ac funesta conventicula penitus arceri jubemus. Eos
qui episcoporum, seu clericorum, vel ministrorum nomine
usurpato, hujusmodi ccetibus praesunt  cum in hoc fuerint
scelere deprehensi, stilum proscriptionis incurrere, et bono-
rum amissione coerceri. Eos vero qui fide, ut dictum est,
imbutos immani furore rebaptizare deteguntur, cum his qui
rebaptizantur (arceri jubemus).

BOOK XIII.

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS RELATING TO DIVINE WORSHIP IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
SOME NECESSAEY EEMAEKS UPON THE ANCIENT NAMES OF DITINE SERVICE, WHICH MODEEN
COEETJPTIONS HATE EENDEEED AMBIGUOUS.

We have hitherto seen the method of
Ih—pution of introducing men into the church,
• ^f through the various steps of their
catecflHenship, and baptism, and confirmation:
we are now to view their practice in the worship
of God after their admission, and to examine into
the manner of their holding religious assembhes,
and performing there the several public offices of
Divine service. Some things of this kind are ge
neral considerations, that run through all offices, and
relate to every part of Divine worship ; such as the
object of their worship, and the _ circumstances of
language, and forms, and habits, and gesture, and
time ; and therefore of these general things I shall
discourse first in this Book. After this I shall con
sider the several parts of their most solemn worship
on the Lord's day ; such as their psalmody, and
reading of the Scriptures, and preaching, and
prayer, and receiving the communion, which were
their solemn acts of worship on every festival.
And because some of these were such as the cate
chumens and all others were allowed to be present
at, for their benefit and edification ; whilst other
parts of Divine service were more restrained to per
sons baptized, who were complete and perfect Chris
tians (who were therefore called communicants,
because they had a more peculiar right to aU the
privfleges of Christian communion) ; I shall upon
this account speak of their worship under these two
heads, according to their own distinction ; the missa
catechumenorum, and the missa fidelium, the service
of the catechumens, and the service of the com-

1 Cone. Carthag. 4. can. 84. Ut episcopus nullum pro-
nibeat ingredi ecclesiam, et audire verbum Dei, sive Gen-
tilem, sive haereticum, sive Judseum, usque ad missam cate-
. chumenorum. 2 Cone. Arausican. 1. can. 18. Evangelia placuit dein-
ceps catechumenis legi apud omnes provinciarum nostrarum
ecclesias. 8 Cone. Valentin, can. 1 Ut sacrosancta evangelia ante

municants; or, as we may otherwise term them,
the ante-communion service, and the communion

The missa catechumenorum compre
hended all that part of the service,

Sect. 2.
Of the missa cale-
... -. -, 1 chumenorum, or
which preceded the common prayers first part of Divine
service, to which aU
orders of men were
admitted.

of the communicants at the altar;
that is, the psalmody, the reading of
the Scriptures, the sermon, and the particular praj'-
ers that were made over the catechumens and other
orders of penitents, energumens, &c, before they
were dismissed. For by the ancient rules and dis
cipline of the church, the method of Divine service
was so ordered that aU persons, except some very
scandalous sinners, had liberty to be present at some
parts of it. The psalms, and lessons, and sermons
were for the instruction, not only of believers, but
also of catechumens and heathens, Jews and in
fidels, unbelievers and heretics: and therefore by
some canons all these had hberty to stay in the
church, till this part of the service, called missa
catechumenorum, was ended. The fourth council of
Carthage1 has a rule to this purpose, That the
bishop shall not prohibit any one to enter the
church, and hear the word of God, whether he be
Gentile, Jew, or heretic, till the service of the cate
chumens was ended. A like canon was made by
the fir6t council of Orange, That the catechumens2
should have the liberty to stay and hear the Gospels
read in all their churches. The council of Valentia 8
in Spain extends the privilege to heretics and hea
thens, as well as catechumens, and therefore orders

munerum illationem, in missa catechumenorum in ordine
lectionum post legantur, quatenus salutaria praecepta Do
mini nostri Jesu Christi, vel sermones sacerdotis, non solum
fideles sed etiam catechumeni ac pcenitehtes, et omnes qui
e diverso sunt, audire licitum habeant. Sic enim ponti
ficum prasdicatione audita, nonnullos attractos ad fidem
evidenter scimus.

568

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

that the Gospel should be read before the oblation
was brought forth, in the usual order of the lessons ;
so that not only the communicants, but the cate
chumens, and penitents, and Gentiles, and heretics,
who were of the contrary part, might have liberty
to hear the saving precepts of the Lord Jesus
Christ, and the sermons ofthe bishops. For they had
learned by experience, that by the bishops' preaching
many had been brought over to the faith. And by
this we may interpret an obscure canon'1 of the
council of Lerida, which orders, That incestuous
persons, so long as they continued in their sin,
should not be permitted to stay any longer in the
church, save only during the service of the cate
chumens, that is, to hear the psalmody, the lessons,
and the sermon. St. Chrysostom abundantly con
firms this observation : for in many of his homilies5
he speaks not only of catechumens, but of heretics
and heathen being present as part of his auditory.
Particularly in his homily6 upon the forty-fourth
Psalm, he wishes all the Jews and heathens had
been then present to have heard him expound that
prophetical Psalm of Christ. In another homily'
upon the forty-eighth Psalm, he brings in a heathen
using this form of complaint against Christians : I
went into a Christian church, and there I heard
Paul say to their women, that they should not adorn
themselves with gold or pearl ; but I saw every
thing contrary in their practice. And, says Chry
sostom, will not the heathen, when he comes into
the church, and sees the women thus adorned in
the galleries above, and hears Paul thus speaking
below, be ready to say, our rehgion is mere page
antry and fable ? It is not so indeed ; but the hea
then is scandalized and offended at this contrariety
in our practice. This plainly imphes, that the hea
thens had free liberty to come into the Christian
churches, and hear the Scriptures read, and the
sermon preached. And it is very remarkable, what
Sozomen8 observes of St. Chrysostom, that by this
means he brought over many of those who heard
him in the church, to acknowledge the Divinity of
Christ. Which some understand of the scholars of
Libanius, but Valesius, I think, more truly inter
prets it of heathens and heretics in general, who
flocked to St. Chrysostom's church to hear him.
There is but one thing that can be said against all
this, and that is, that the council of Laodicea has a
contrary canon, which absolutely forbids" the per-

4 Cone. Ilerden. can. 4. De his qui incesta pollutione
se commaculant, placuit, ut quousque in ipso detestando et
illicito carnis contubernio perseverant, usque ad missam
tantum catechumenorum in ecclesia admittantur.
5 Chrys. Hom.-41. de Pelagia, t. 1. p. 560. Horn. 72. de
Phoca. t. 1. p. 878. Horn. 8. t. 5. p. 124. Horn. 1. in Mat.
p. 5. Horn. 27. in Mat. p. 271. Horn, de Prophet. Obscuri-
tate, t. 3. p. 926. Horn. 2. p. 946. Horn. 40. in 1 Cor. p. 688.
6 Horn, in Psal. xliv. al. xlv. t. 3. p. 20U.
7 Horn, in Psal. xlviii. al. xlix. p. 806.

mitting of heretics to enter into the house of God,
But this is only a local ordinance ; and the thin"
being a matter of pure discipline, there might be
prudential reasons for denying heretics in some
places the privUege that was aUowed them in others.
Or else the canon may be understood of not permit
ting them to come into the church for prayers or
communion, which was a thing forbidden by aU
canons whatsoever, till after their recantation. Some
indeed think, that in TertuUian's time the catechu
mens were excluded before sermon, because he ob
jects it to the heretics,10 that there were such confu
sions in their assembhes, that no one could tell who
was a catechumen, and who was a communicant,
because they aU met, and heard, and prayed toge
ther. And heathens, if they came in among them,
were not excluded from the very mysteries of their
religion. But in this, as Schelstrate11 has observed
against Albaspinseus and Christianus Lupus, Ter
tullian does not object to the heretics, that they ad
mitted catechumens to hear their sermons, but that
they made no distinction in their assembhes, as the
church did ; but without any observation of decency
or order, suffered their catechumens to mingle them
selves with communicants, whom the cathohcs
always confined to a separate place in the church,
while heretics admitted them confusedly, not only
to hear sermons, but to be present at their prayers,
and the oblation of the eucharist also. So that this
passage of Tertullian rather confirms the thing as
serted, that the missa catechumenorum, or service of
the catechumens, lasted to the end of the sermon,
After which, it was usual for the deacon to caU to
the heathens and heretics, if there were any pre
sent, to be gone : Mrj rig toiv aKpotopevtov' u#j rig tuv
dirioTtov : Let none that are only hearers, none of the
unbelievers, be present, as the author of the Consti
tutions 12 words it. Then followed the prayers for
the catechumens, of the order called prostrators ;
and after their dismission, prayers for the energu
mens; and after them, the prayers for the candi
dates of baptism ; and last of aU, the prayers for the
penitents. All which was included in the general
name of missa catechumenorum, the service of the
catechumens, or ante-communion service.
After this was ended, it was usual SecL 3
for the deacon to make another solemn B^!*ormX!n£
proclamation to all orders of non-com- 1™° to
municants to withdraw : Ol dtcoivtavnToi

nion service, pecu-
communi-
cants only.

8 Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 2.
9 Cone. Laodic. can. 6. ITe-pi tou pi] trvyxtup^v toXs
alpETtKoXs Elaiivai eIs tov oXkov tov Qeov.
10 Tertid. de Praescript. advers. Haereticos, cap. 41. In
primis quis catechumenus, quis fidelis, incertum est: pariter
adeunt, pariter audiunt, pariter orant : etiam ethnici si su-
pervenerint, sanctum canibus, et porcis margaritas, licet non
veras, jactabunt.
11 Schelstrat. de Concilio Antiocheno, p. 200.
12 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 5.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

569

7rtpnrarijrran, Ye that cannot communicate, walk off
and be gone. Let no catechumen be present, no
hearer, no infidel, no heterodox or heretical person,
as the author of the Constitutions words it.18 And,
as St. Chrysostom acquaints14 us, he was used to add
further, tmyivtiaictTt dXXriXovQ, Ye that are communi
cants, discern and know one another : see that there
be no catechumen, none of those that cannot eat of
the sacrifice, no spy, no one that cannot see the
heavenly blood shed for the remission of sins, no
one unworthy of the hving sacrifice, no unbaptized
person, no one that may not touch the tremendous
mysteries with his polluted Ups. And here began
the missa fidelium, or communion service, so called,
because none might be present at it but communi
cants only, as appears from these solemn forms of
dismissing aU others before it began. This contains
all those prayers which were said at the altar, and
were properly caUed (ixal mr&v, prayers of the faith
ful or communicants, in opposition to the prayers of
the catechumens, which went before : these were
the prayers for the whole state of the church, and
peace of the world, which preceded the oblation and
consecration ofthe eucharist; and then the consecra
tion prayers, and prayers again for all orders of men
in the church, with proper forms of communicating,
and doxologies, hymns, and thanksgivings after re
ception ; of which we discourse particularly in the
last of these Books, under the general title of missa
fidelium, or communion service. This part of the
service being whoUy spent in prayers, and that by
the communicants only, is therefore peculiarly dis
tinguished by the name of tiixoil irwriov, the prayers
of the faithful, by the council of Laodicea,15 which
speaks of them as coming after the prayers of the
catechumens and their dismission. In other canons
they are caUed the common prayers of the people, and
absolutely, the prayers, without taking notice of any
other prayers in the church. Whence in the coun
cU of Nice,18 speaking of penitents, the phrase, com
municating in prayers with the people without the
oblation, denotes joining in this part of the service
ofthe church, distinguished by the name of prayers,
or communion service, which belonged not to the
catechumens, but the body of the people, in which
the penitents ofthe highest class, caUed co-standers,
were allowed to join, though they might neither
make their oblations, nor partake of the eucharist
with the faithful. And in the same sense the coun

cil of Ancyra 17 speaks of penitents, who, as they were
to be three years substrators among the catechu
mens, and bow down under the bishop's hands for
benediction ; so were they for two years to commu
nicate in prayers only, without the oblation. And
so communicating in prayers with the people is
taken in the council of Antioch, when they say, All
such as come to church, and hear the Holy Scrip
tures read, but will not communicate 18 in prayers
with the people, or withdraw themselves disorderly
from partaking of the eucharist, shall be cast out of
the church. Where, as reading of the Scriptures
is put for the whole service of the catechumens,
which was the first service ; so communicating in
prayers and the eucharist, denotes the second part
of the service, peculiar to communicants, or persons
baptized ; from which, as catechumens were debar
red, so others might not withdraw themselves, under
pain of ecclesiastical censure. This was the true
order of the first and second service in the ancient
church, and the true distinction between the missa
catechumenorum and missa fidelium, of which I in
tend to give a fuU account in the two next Books.
At present we may observe, how Seota.
shamefully they have abused the an- and meaning of the
, ~ . -, ,. n ,« ancient name, mis-
cient name missa, under the appellation sa, the mass, which
in its primitive use
ofmass,whoapplyitonlytodenotethe denote, every pan
t irr J J „f DIvme service ;
office of consecrating bread and wine j™' ™ "^"j*" '*;
into the body and blood of Christ, and ">e quick a"d dead-
offering that as an expiatory sacrifice for the quick
and dead. For anciently the name missa signified
no such thing, but was a general name for every
part of Divine service. It signified, as we have
seen already, the service of the catechumens, as
weU as the service of the altar, and is often used
for the psalmody, for the lessons, and for the prayers
at evening, when there was no communion, as well
as for the prayers used in time of celebration of the
eucharist. Thus Cassian19 often mentions the missa
nocturna, by which he means the morning prayers
and psalmody before day, when it is certain they
had no communion. The council of Agde20 speaks
of evening mass, as well as morning, which meant
no more but morning and evening prayer, without
any communion. For they had no communion either
morning or evening at their daily prayers, but only
on festivals, at a distinct hour from both those. So
the emperor Leo, in his Tactics,21 speaks of the
piaai ioirepiva't, a word plainly borrowed from the

18 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 12.
" Chrys. Horn. 1. cont. Judasos, t. 1. p. 440. et Horn. 37.
de Filio Prodigo, t. 6. p. 375.
15 Cone. Laodic. can. 19.
16 Cone. Nicen. can. 11. Avo Si etij x<»P's irpocrebopas,
Kotviavrjtrovtii Tip Xatp toiv irpoo-Evxibv.
Cone. Ancyr. can. 24. 'Yirb tov Kavdva irtirTETtotrav'
Tpta eti) viroirTtiio-Euis, Kal Svo eti) evxys xwPL^ ifpoar-
(popds. Cone. Antioch. can. 2. HdvTas Tobs EltiidvTas its tuv

iKKXr)triav, Kal Ttov 'lEpiov ypatpiov aKoiiovTas, pi) Koivto-
vovvras Si EVXV? apa Top XatS, f] diroaTpEtpopivovs Tt)V
piTdXrplnv tt}s EvxapttrTias raxa Tiva aTaitav, tovtovs
dirofUXrJTOvs y'tvEtjBai Tins iKKXy]trias.
m Cassian. Institut. lib. 2. cap. 13. lib. 3. cap. 5 et 6.
20 Cone. Agathen. can. 30. In conclusione matutinarum
vel vespertinarum missarum, post hymnos capitella de
psalmis diei, &c.
21 Leo, Tactic, cap. 11. num. 18, cited by Bishop Usher.

570

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

Latin missa, (for the Greeks had originally no such
name,) to signify only evening prayer. And Bishop
Usher, in his Religion of the Ancient Irish,22 gives
us another such instance out of Adamnanus, who
uses the name vespertinalis missa for what is com
monly called evening prayer. And the late learned
Mabillon28 has observed out of the Rules of Ceesa-
rius Arelatensis and Aurelian, that the word missa
is sometimes used for the lessons also. For it is
one of Aurelian's Rules, That they should take six
missas, that is, lessons, out of the prophet Isaiah,
Faeite sex missas de Esaia propheta. And Mabillon
very judiciously remarks further,24 That the word
miisii has at least three significations. It sometimes
signifies the lessons, sometimes the collects or
prayers, and sometimes the dismission of the people.
And indeed the third sense is the original notation
of the word. For missa is the same as missio. And it
was the form used in the Latin church, Ite missa est,
which answers to the Greek ' AiroXveaBe and ITposA.-
0e7-e, the solemn words used at the dismission of the
catechumens first, and then of the whole assembly
afterwards, at the end of their respective services.
Whence the services themselves at last took their
names from these solemn dismissions, the one being
called missa catechumenorum, and the other missa
fidelium, neither of which ever signify more than
the Divine service, at which the one or the other
attended. In vain, therefore, do many learned men labour to
deduce its original from foreign languages, to make
it signify something agreeable to the modern notion
of the Roman mass, when it is so plainly of Latin
extraction. Baronius,25 after Reuclin and Genebrard,
would have it come from the Hebrew word missah,
an oblation : but Durantus26 has a good reason
against that ; because if it had been of Hebrew ex
traction, the Greeks would have retained it in their
language, as they do the words hosanna, sabaoth,
aUelujah, and amen: whereas there is no Greek
writer uses it till the time of Leo Sapiens, who first
borrows it from the Latin in his Tactics. Albas
pinseus has still a wilder conjecture ; he says, the
word mess, among the northern nations, signifies a
festival, and therefore he imagines the name missa
and mass might come from that : which is only to
invert the origination, and make the daughter to
become the mother; since it is evident the name
mess comes from missa, and not missa from that.

22 Usher, Relig. of the Ancient Irish, chap. 4. p. 26. ex
Adamnani Vita Columban. lib. 3. cap. 31.
28 Mabil. de Cursu Gallicano, lib. 2. p. 107.
21 Ibid. p. 393. ffi Baron, an. 34. n. 59.
26 Durant. de Ritibus, lib. 2. cap. 1. u. 1. So also Bellar
mine and Bona both refute it.
27 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 1. sect. 6, where he cen
sures Genebrard, as nimis addictus rebus Hebraicis.
28 Hieron. Ep. 7. ad Lajtam. Accensa lucerna reddere
sacrificium vespertinum.

Cardinal Bona27 takes a great deal of pains to con
fute these and all other false opinions, and estab
lishes the true one with undeniable evidence from
Alcimus Avitus, and all the ancient ritualists, Isi
dore, Rabanus Maurus, Florus Magister, Remigius
Altissiodorensis, Alcuinus, Gregory's Sacramenta
rium, Hugo Victorinus, and Bernoldus, who aU agree
in this, that missa comes from the dismission of the
people, and not from any other original. So that I
think it needless to trouble my reader with any of
these authorities, since the matter is now cleared be
yond aU contradiction by Mabillon and Bona, two
such eminent writers of the Roman communion.
Another general name of the an
cient service, which in later ages has .inwhS'sen.eni.
... , ¦ . . „ . vine service ancient-
met witn some abuse, is sacrificium, 'y called racrj/s-
^ ciHHI.
sacrifice ; a name borrowed from the
Jewish carnal sacrifices, and apphed to the spiritual
sacrifices of Christians, viz. their prayers and
praises, and preaching, and devoting themselves en
tirely, body and soul, to the service of Christ by the
sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper. Hence
every part of Divine worship had the name of sacri
fice, and not only the service of the altar. For they
commonly call their evening hymns and prayers by
the name of evening sacrifice. Thus St. Jerom bids
Lseta accustom her daughter not only to the morn
ing hymns, and daily hours of prayer, the third, the
sixth, and the ninth, but also when night comes,
and the lamps are lighted, then in like manner to
render to God her evening sacrifice.28 And so St.
Hilary, upon those words of the psalmist, " Let the
lifting up of my hands be an evening sacrifice," says,
The sacrifice of Christians is their prayers, recom
mended to God by stretching forth their hands to
reheve the poor. For we, says he, upon whom28 the
ends of the world are come, do not sacrifice to God
with blood or burnt-offerings : but the evening
sacrifice which is pleasing to God, is that which
Christ teaches in his Gospel, " I was an hungry,
and ye fed me ; thirsty, and ye gave me drink," &c.
This is the evening sacrifice, that is, the sacrifice of
the last times. In this we are to lift up our hands;
for by such prayers the inheritance of the kingdom
of heaven is prepared for those that are blessed of
God, from the foundation of the world. In the same
sense Eusebius caUs the prayers of Christians the
rational sacrifices,80 that are offered without blood to
God. And Clemens Alexandrinus says, The sacri-

29 Hilar, in Psal. cxl. p. 330. Non enim sanguine et holo-
caustis nos, in quos consummatio saeculorum devenit, sacri-
ficamus Deo : sed quod sacrificium vespertinum placitum
sit, audiamus Dominum  Hoc sacrificium vespertinum,
id est, temporum novissimorum est. In hoc manus elevandae
sunt : quia istiusmodi orationibus jam ab initio mundi bene-
dictis Dei, regni ccelestis praeparata possessio est.
80 Euseb. de Laud. Constant. Orat. p. 659. Tds avaipus
Kal XoyiKas Srvtrtas Tas St' evxiov. Vid. de Vit. Constant.
lib. 4. cap. 45. Qvcriais dvaipvis, Sec.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

571

fices of Christians are their prayers and praises,81
and reading of the Scriptures, and psalms and
hymns before meals, and at their meals, and at bed
time, and in the night. And there are hundreds of
passages in the ancients, both of public and private
prayers, to the same purpose, besides what is said
of the sacrifice of the eucharist, or communion ser
vice, of which we shall have reason to say some
thing more upon another occasion. Here it is
sufficient to have hinted the grounds, upon which
the ancients gave the general name of sacrifice to
aU parts of Divine service.
Sect 6 Another name, though neither so
And sacramenta. ancient nor so common as the former,
is that of sacramenta, which in some authors signi
fies not what we now call sacraments, but the order
or manner of performing Divine offices, and that as
well the prayers and service in general, as the parti
cular offices of administering baptism and the Lord's
supper. For the word sacramentum, answering to
the Greek pviripiov, is a word of a large extent, de
noting not only the proper sacraments, but all sacred
ceremonies and usages of the church, that have any
thing of symbolical or spiritual significancy in them,
representing something more to the understanding
than appears to the outward senses ; and in a more
restrained, though not the strictest sense, it denotes
the manner or method of performing Divine offices
in the church, whether relating to the sacraments
properly so called, or any other parts of Divine ser
vice, as the prayers, hymns, lessons, in morning or
evening service. In this sense, it is observed by
learned men,82 that the book of Divine offices com
posed by Gregory the Great for the use of the Ro
man church, bears the title of Liber Sacramento-
rum, The Book of Sacraments, that is, a book or
method for performing Divine offices in the church.
And Gelasius did the same thing before him under
the title of Codex Sacramentarius, lately published
by Thomasius at Rome, 1680. And Gennadius88
says, Musaeus, a presbyter of MarseiUes, composed
Volumen Sacramentorum, a large Book of Sacra
ments, that is, Divine offices, to direct what lessons,
and psalms, and hymns were to be used in the com
munion service, according to the seasons of the
year, and what prayers and thanksgivings were to
make up the service of the church. And it is the

opinion of two very learned men, Menardus and Bi
shop Stillingfleet,81 that both St. Austin and St.
Ambrose give the name of Sacramenta to the books
of liturgie offices used in their time. And they ob
serve that the old Missal published by Illyricus,
bears the name of Ordo Sacramentorum, which can
mean nothing but the manner of performing Di
vine offices in the administration of the eucharist
and other parts of public worship.
These offices are by other writers
styled cursus ecclesiasticus, the order And curius'eccie-
. siasticus.
or course of Divine offices. For un
der this title, Gregory Turonensis is said to have
composed a book, De Cursibus Ecclesiasticis, for
the use of the Gallican church, which is now lost ;
but he himself85 mentions it in his history. And
Bishop Usher88 cites an ancient manuscript out of
the Cotton library, which says, that Germanus and
Lupus brought Ordinem Cursus Gallorum, the Gal
lican liturgy, into Britain with them. And this was
the liturgy of the British churches for some ages,
till by degrees the Cursus Romanus was brought in
upon them. Bede says,87 In the time of Pope Aga-
tho, Joannes Abbas, the Roman precentor, was
sent over to settle the Roman cursus, or psalmody
for the whole year, according to the usage and way
of St. Peter's church at Rome. And the council
of Calchuth,88 some time after Bede, speaks of the
liturgy under the same title, ordering all churches at
the canonical hours reverently to perform their
cursus. And Mabillon S9 cites the Lives of Walaricus
and Senericus, where there is frequent mention of
the Cursus GaUicanus.
Among the Greek writers we sel-
. . Sect. s.
dom meet with any of these names, The names *el-
but they usuaUy style all holy offices, via. lea'a, and
in i j. -r,- • • -1 j.x. Uoiavoivia, most
and all parts ot Divine service, by tne usual in the Greek
r -1 church.
general name of Xtirovpyia, and lepovp-
yia, liturgy, and sacred service. Though liturgy in its
extended sense denotes any public office or minis
tration, as the apostle uses it, Phil. ii. 30, and 2 Cor.
ix. 12, for the ministration of charity ; and ecclesi
astical writers do the same, often applying it both to
civil and sacred functions, as to the office of a ma
gistrate or a bishop, as Casaubon" shows at large;
yet in a more hmited sense it is put to signify those
sacred offices which make up the several parts of

81 Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. lib. p. 860. Ed. Oxon. Ovcriat -™
6ew, Evxal te Kal divoi, Kal al irpb tt]s ETtdtXEeos Ey-reu^Eis
tuv ypatpiiv, Sec. Vid. Cassian. Instit. lib. 3. c. 3. Cone.
Aurelian. 3. can. 23. Martin. Bracarensis Capitul. c. 63.
32 Menard. Not. in Sacrament. Gregor. p. 1. et Stilling
fleet, Orig. Britan. p. 225.
''.Gennad. de Scriptor. cap. 79. Composuit Sacramen
torum egregium et non parvum volumen, per membra qui
dem pro opportunitate officiorum et temporum, pro lectio-
num textu, psalmorumque serie et decantatione discretum,
&c. Id. cap. 78. de Voconio. Composuit Sacramentorum
Volumen.

81 Menard, ibid. Stillingfleet, ubi supra.
85 Greg. Turon. Hist. lib. 10. cap. ult. De Cursibus Ec
clesiasticis unum librum condidi.
86 Usser. de Primord. Eccles. p. 185.
87 Bede, Hist. lib. 4. c. 18. Quatenus in monasterio suo
cursum canendi annuum, sicut ad Sanctum Petrum Romae
agebatur, edoceret.
88 Cone. Calchuthens. can. 7. Cone. t. 6. p. 1865. Ut om
nes ecclesiie publica! canonicis horis cursum suum cum re-
verentia habeant.
39 Mabil. de Cursu Gallican. p. 420.
10 Casaub. Exercit. in Baron. 16. u. 41. p. 471.

5/2

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

Divine worship, as prayers, reading, preaching, and
administration of the sacraments. But it is never
used, as the Romanists would appropriate it, for
the business of sacrificing only. The council of
Ephesus speaks both of evening" and morning
liturgies, which doubtless mean evening and morn
ing prayers only. And so Casaubon observes, that
Justinian42 takes it for the office of reading the
Scripture as well as administering the eucharist,
when he says of a certain monastery, that the Di
vine liturgy was performed in it, as it was used to
be in the churches, both by reading the Holy Scrip
tures and receiving the holy communion. And
Antiochus48 applies the name of liturgy, not only to
morning prayer, but also to the service of their
midnight assemblies. Neither of which was in his
time the ordinary hours of the communion service.
So that Erasmus and others are governed more by
prejudice than reason, who would have that pas
sage of Acts xiii. 2, XeiTovpyovvTuiv avT&v, to be
rendered, sacrificantibus illis, as if there were no Di
vine service without sacrifice in their notion of it ;
when yet. the Vulgar translation renders it minister
ing, and the old Syriac and Arabic, as Beza ob
serves, have it praying ; which is agreeable to the
notion of liturgy for Divine service. Yet when the
epithet of mystica was added to liturgia, then it
commonly signified the communion service. As
when Theodoret says, that the salutation of St.
Paul, 2 Cor. xiii. 14, " The grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ," &c, is the beginning ofthe mystical liturgy,44
he means the communion office, where this form of
salutation was always used. And so in the Cle
mentina Epitome,45 the sacred liturgy denotes the
service of the altar, which came after the evxnv tuiv
Upibv vpvuiv, prayers used in psalmody, or the ser
vice of the catechumens. And it is Bona's observ
ation" out of Vincentius Riccardus,47 that except
the words sacred, or mystical, be added to the name
liturgy, it is never to be taken for the sacrifice of
the altar, but for some other part of Divine service :
though, I think, this is more than can be fairly
proved. As on the other hand, when the epithet of
mystical is added, it does not always, but only for
the most part, as I said before, mean the eucharis-
tical service. For the service of baptism was ever
esteemed a mystical service, as weU as that of the

eucharist. And the name pv^aytoyia, communion in
the sacred mysteries, is upon that account frequent-
lygiven by St. Chrysostom,48 Theodoret,48 and others,
to baptism, as weU as the Lord's supper; as may
be seen at large in Suicerus's50 CoUections upon
that subject. It is certain the author under the
name of Dionysius the Areopagite, uses the title of
mystagogia, as well when he is describing the cere
monies and service of baptism, as the eucharist:
and Cyril's Mystagogical Catechisms are equally an
exposition of the rites observed in administering
baptism and confirmation, as of those of the other
sacrament ; these being the two great mystical ser
vices of the Christian church. The names Upi,
Upovpyia, and Svaia, are all words of the same im
portance : they most commonly signify the commu
nion service, or the sacrifice of prayers at the altar.
But sometimes they denote the offices of baptism,
preaching, reading the Scripture, and psalmody;
these being the spiritual sacrifices of Christians. It
is certain the apostle calls preaching the gospel by
the name of Upovpyia, Rom. xv. 16, and the conver
sion of the Gentiles thereby, the offering them up
or sacrificing them to God. Upon which words
Chrysostom 51 observes, That the apostle does not
call this service barely Xarpeia, but Xetrovpyia, and
Upovpyia, sacrifice, or sacred service. For this is my
priesthood, to preach and publish the gospel ; this
the sacrifice that I offer to God. And St. Ba
sil52 gives the same names of Upovpyia and Swia to
the duty of praise and thanksgiving : " I wUl offer
unto thee the sacrifice of praise." And we have
seen before (sect. 5.) how the evening prayer is
commonly styled sacrificium vespertinum, evening
sacrifice, by the Latin writers.
It is further to be observed, that as Secf 9i
the Latins, by the names missa, cur- times"t?Ln°?o'r set
T -, ty. . . , forms of prayer.
sus, ordo, and officium, mean not only
the Divine worship itself, but also the books con
taining the method and prescriptions for the regular
performance of it, which we usuaUy call set forms
of prayer ; so the Greeks sometimes understand the
same thing by the name of liturgy ; and that not
only when they speak of the forms of administering
the sacraments, but of any other parts of Divine
service. It is plain the author of the Constitutions58
takes the word in this sense, when he_ applies it to

41 Cone. Ephes. Epist. Synod, ad Imperat. ap. Casaubon.
ibid. Tis io-lTEplvis r) Trio ioiBivis XElTupyias.
42 Justin. Novel. 7. 'Iepa yiyovE XetTupyia  Ttov te
Seiiov dvay ivtotTKopevtov ypatpiov, T7,s te lEpas Kal dppriTU
pETaSlSopivrjs KOtvtovias.
43 Antioch. Horn. 19. Bibl. Patr. G. L. t. 1. p. 1056. 'EJe'-
yEipov vpas irpds Tas WKTEpivds Kal ieoBtvds XEiTupyEtas.
44 Theod. Ep. 146. p. 1032. 'Ev irdaais TaXs EKKXrjo-i'ats
tt)s ituTiKT/s XEtTupytas irpooiptov.
45 Clementina Epitome de Gestis Petri, ap. Coteler. t. 1.
p. 796. Ta iraTptdpxu ti]v 'tEpdv iKTEXicravTos XEiTupyiav.
40 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 3. n. 3.

47 Riccard. Comment, in Proclum de Tradit. Missae.
18 Chrys. Hom.21. t. 1. ad Popul. Antioch. p. 272.
49 Theod. in cap. 1. Canticorum.
50 Suicer. Thesaur. voce ~MvTaytoyia.
51 Chrys: Horn. 29. in Rom. p. 302. Oiix dirXUs XaTpEtav
Xiyeov, dXXd XeiTupyiav Kal lepupyiav' atiTtj yap pot
lEptotrvvn, to KtjpuTTEtv Kal KaTayyiXXEtv' TavTtvi irpoa-
tpipto Tt]V Svtriav.
52 Basil, in Psal. cxv. p. 275. 'iEpapyrjo-w trot tx]v ti,«
alvicEcos Slvcriav.
53 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 6. 'H Ssia XEiTOupyfa, iv >J tepoa-
tptovi)o-ts virEp tSiv KaTt]Xovpivaiv.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

573

the forms of prayer then made for the catechumens.
And Casaubon observes,54 That all those forms of
worship which go under the names of Peter, James,
Andrew, Chrysostom, and Basil, bear the name of
liturgies, which the Latins call ordo, and officium,
and the modern Greeks, dxoXovBla. These were
sometimes also, among the ancient Greek writers,
termed tvxuv omra?sic, the order of prayers ; which
is the name that Nazianzen gives the liturgy of St.
Basil,55 composed by him by the direction of his
bishop, whilst he was presbyter of Caesarea; and
those forms and orders of Divine worship collected
by the author of the Constitutions, bear the same
title, SiardUig. In Chrysostom they are styled vo-
iioi, the rules or appointments of the church ; and
the prayers particularly are distinguished into two
sorts of forms, both by him58 and the council of
Laodicea,5' the one caUed tvxal KaTiixovpkvi»v, the
prayers of the catechumens, and the other, eixal
irmTSv, the prayers of the faithful, or believers.
But I shaU say no more of liturgies here, considered
as set forms or prescriptions of worship, because
they wiU come to be discoursed of more fully here
after in their proper place.
There is one general name more,
Sect. 10. & '
Tta'aTfirst a which the first writers use to denote
fra,^."Hov,foid all sorts of pubhc prayers, but the
rppropriatedlo cer- middle ages have appropriated it to a
tain particular forms -, n n , . ,, , .
of worship, called particular form ot worship, that is,
rogations. . .
htanies, in Greek caUed Xiravtiai, and
Xirai : in Latin, supplicationes, and rogationes. These
words, in their original signification, are but another
name for prayers in general, of whatever kind, that
either were made publicly in the church, or by any
private person. Eusebius, speaking of Constantine's
custom of making his solemn addresses to God in
his tent, before he went out to battle, says, He en
deavoured to render God propitious to him by sup
plications and htanies,58 that he might obtain his
favour, assistance, and direction in his enterprises.
And again, he says,59 A httle before his death he
spent some time in the house of prayer, making
supplications and htanies to God. In which places,
litany seems to be a general name, and not to in
tend any particular sort of prayers. So Chrysostom
also uses the word litany, when he says60 to his
people, To-morrow I shall go forth with you to make
our litany, that is, the pubhc service. And again,8'
speaking of the solemn form of words, Pax vobis,

Peace be with you, he says, The bishop used it in all
offices when he first entered the church, when he
made the prayers and litanies, and when he preach
ed. And Arcadius, in one of his laws m made against
heretics about the same time, takes litany in the
same sense for prayers in general, when he forbids
heretics to hold profane assemblies in the city,
either by night or by day, to make their litany.
Where it is plain, his intent was, not to prohibit
heretics from making any particular sort of prayers,
but all prayers in general within the city, and to
cut off all opportunities of meeting either by night
or by day for that purpose : and so Gothofred un
derstands him. For this law was made with a direct
view to the Arian assemblies for psalmody in their
night stations, which had occasioned some tumults
and murder in the city, as Socrates68 and Sozomen
inform us. So that the morning hymns, and psalm
ody, and prayers then came all under the general
name of litany, and the Arians were forbidden in
this sense to make any litanies within the city by
this law of Arcadius. What Hamon L'Estrange64
aUeges out of St. Austin, Cyprian, and Tertullian,
proves nothing; but that there were always prayers
made in the church to implore God's mercy and fa
vours; which no one ever denied: neither is the
name litany used by any of them. It is more to
the purpose, what St. Basil65 says to the church of
Neocsesarea, where Gregory Thaumaturgus was
bishop ; that though in Gregory's time they had no
litanies, yet afterward, before St. Basil's time, they
had admitted the use of them. By which argument,
he defends the nocturnal prayers, and psalmody, and
vigils, against those who objected that they were not
used in St. Gregory's time. For neither were lita
nies used in his time, and yet now they were in use,
and no one objected novelty against them. This
shows, that St. Basil takes htanies for a peculiar
sort of prayers lately set up in the church. For it
cannot be doubted, but that they had prayers before,
though not of this particular kind.
Some think, that litanies, in this new limited
sense, were first introduced by Mamercus, bishop of
Vienna in France, about the year 450. But St.
Basil's testimony proves them to be earher in the
East. And it is a mistake in those who assert Ma
mercus to be the first author of them in the West :
for Sidonius Apollinaris, who lived in the time of
Mamercus, and wrote some epistles to him, says

54 Casaubon. Exerc. 16. in Baron, n. 41. p. 472.
55 Naz. Orat. 20. in Laud. Basil, p. 340.
58 Chrys. Horn. 2. in 2 Cor. p. 740.
57 Cone. Laodic. can. 19.
58 Euseb. Vit. Const, lib. 2. cap. 14. Tov OeSv 'iKET-npiais
Kat XtTaXs IXeovpevos, &c.
Id. lib. 4. cap. 61. EvKTi]pitp ivStaTpiij/as oikio, Ike-
Ttminus EbX'lS TE Kal XlTOVEtaS ivETTEpiTE Tip 0ttp.
00 Chrys. Horn, antequam iret in exilium, t. 4. p. 965.
Avptov els XituveXov ijrEXEVtropat peB' bpuiv.

61 Chrys. Horn. 3. in Colos. p. 1338. 'Ev TaTs E/CK-Xrio-i'ats
Eipr)vr)V, iv Tats ivxais, iv TaXs XtTaXs, Sec.
62 Cod. Theod. lib. 16. Tit. 5. de Haereticis, Leg. 30.
Interdicatur his omnibus, ad litaniam faciendam intra civi-
tatem noctu vel interdiu profanis coire conventibus.
63 Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 8. Sozomen. lib. 8. cap. 8.
64 L'Estrange's Alliance of Divine Offices, cap. 4. p. 100.
65 Basil. .Ep. 63. ad Neocaes. p. 97. 'AXX' ovSi at Xt-
TaveXal iirl Fpnyopiov, as vpiis vvv iirlT-nSEVETE.

574

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII

expressly, that he was not the first inventor of them,
but only of the Rogation fast days before Ascension,
to which he applied the use of these litanies, which
were in being long before, though not observed with
such solemnity, nor fixed to any stated times, but
only used as exigences required, to deprecate any
impending judgment. This he declares at large in
an epistle to Mamercus himself,66 styling him the
author of the Rogation days, and showing both the
reasons of their institution, and the manner of ob
serving them, with ardent supplications and fast
ings, in imitation of the Ninevites, to avert the
threatening judgments of fire, or earthquakes, or
inundations, or hostile invasions. But that we may
not think Mamercus was the first author of litanies,
because he applied their use particularly to the Ro
gation days, he speaks more expressly in another
epistle,67 where he says, that Mamercus indeed
first brought in the observation of the Rogation
solemnities, which spread by his example : but sup
plications or htanies were in use before, when men
had occasion to pray against excessive rains or
droughts ; though they were observed but in a cold
and disorderly manner, without fasting or full as
sembhes : but those which he instituted, were ob
served with fasting, and praying, and singing, and
weeping. What Sidonius says here, proves that
Mamercus was the author of the Rogation fast in
France ; but litanies were in use before : and if Sa
varo judge right of one of St. Austin's homilies,68
the Rogation fast must have been observed long
before in the African churches. For among his
homihes de Tempore, there is one upon the vigil of
the Ascension, where he speaks of a fast69 observed
for three days before Ascension day, advising aU

men to keep those days with fasting, prayer, and
psalmody. However, from the time of Mamercus
we are sure these Rogation days and litanies were
celebrated with great solemnity in the church, being
frequently mentioned by Alcimus Avitus,™ Caesarius
Arelatensis,71 Eucherius Lugdunensis junior,72 and
Gregory of Tours,73 to name no later writers. The
first councU of Orleans, anno 511, estabhshed
them74 by a decree, ordering the three days before
Ascension to be kept a fast with abstinence after
the manner of Lent, and with rogations or litanies,
and that on these days servants should rest from
their labours. In the Spanish churches they defer
red these rogations to the week after Pentecost: for
they kept to the old rule of the ancient church, not
to have any fast during the fifty days between
Easter and Whitsuntide ; therefore, as Walafridus
Strabo observes of them,75 they would not observe
the Rogation fast in the time that the Bridegroom
was with them. But by an order of the council of
Girone,76 these htanies and this fast was put off to
the week after Whitsuntide. And they ordered a
second litany to be used on the first day of No
vember. The fifth council of Toledo77 appointed
another such litany and fast to be celebrated yearly
for three days, commencing on the thirteenth day
of December. The sixth council of Toledo78 con
firmed this decree about two years after, anno 638,
and made it a general rule for all the churches of
Spain and Gallicia, and Gallia Narbonensis, which
was at this time under the government of the Go
thic king Chintillan. And in the seventeenth coun
cil of Toledo,79 anno 694, under King Egicanes, amore
general decree was made, That such htanies should
be used in every month throughout the year. And so

66 Sidon. lib. 7. Ep. 1. ad Mamercum. Solo tamen in-
vectarum, te auctore, Rogationum palpamur auxilio, quibus
inchoandis, instituendisque populus Arvernus ccepitinitiari,
&c. 67 Id. lib. 5. Ep. 14. Rogationum nobis solennitatem pri
mus Mamercus pater et pontifex, reverentissimo exemplo,
utilissimo experimento, invenit, instituit, invexit. Erant
quidem prius (quod salva fidei pace sit dictum) vagae, te-
pentes, infrequentesque, utque sic dixerim, oscitabundae
supplicationes, quae saepe interpellantium prandiorurn obici-
bus hebetabantur, maxime aut imbres aut serenitatem depre-
caturae -.  In his autem, quas suprafatus summus sacerdos
nobis et protulit pariter et contulit, jejunatur, oratur, psalli-
tur, fletur.
68 Savaro, Not. in Sidon. lib. 5. Ep. 14. p. 354.
68 Aug. Horn. 173. de Temp. t. 10. p. 338. Sine dubio
peccatorum suorum vulnera diligit, qui in istis tribus diebus,
jejunando, orando, etpsallendo medicamentasibispiritualia
non requirit.
70 Avitus, Horn, de Rogationibus.
71 Caesar. Horn. 33.
72 Eucher. Horn, de Litaniis.
73 Greg. Turon. lib. 2. cap. 34.
74 Cone. Aurelian. 1. can. 27. Rogationes, id est, litanias,
ante ascensionem Domini placuit celebrari, ita ut praemis-
suin triduanum jejunium in Dominicae ascensionis solen

nitate solvatur, &c.
75 Strabo, de Offic. Eccles. cap. 28. Hispani autem,
propter hoc quod scriptum, Non possunt filii sponsi lugere,
quamdiu cum illis est sponsus, infra Quinquagesimam Pas
chae recusantes jejunare, litanias suas post Pentecosten po-
suerunt. 76 Cone. Gerunden. can. 2. Ut litaniae post Pentecosten
a quinta feria usque in sabbatum celebrentur. So it is in
the title of the canon : and in the body of it, Ut per hoc
triduum abstinentia celebretur. Ibid. can. 3. Item secunda
litania facienda est kalendis Novembris.
77 Cone. Tolet. 5. can. 1. Ut a die iduum Decembrium
litania triduo ubique annua successione peragatur, &c.
78 Cone. Tolet. 6. can. 2. Universalis authoritate cense-
mus concilii, ut hi dies litaniarum, quae in synodo proamissa
sunt instituti, annuo recursu omni observatione habeantur
celeberriini. 79 Cone. Tolet. 17. can. 6. Quando priscorum patrum in
stitute, per totum annum, per singulorum mensium cursum,
litaniarum vota decreverit persolvenda  decernimus, ut
deinceps per totum annum, in cunctis duodecim mensibus,
per universas Hispaniae et Galliarum provincias pro statu
ecclesiae Dei, pro incolumitate principis nostri, atque satva-
tione populi, et indulgentia totius peccati, et a cunctorum
fidelium cordibus expulsione diaboli, exomologeses votis
gliscentibus celebrentur.

Chap. I.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

575

by degrees these solemn supplications came to be
used weekly, on Wednesdays and Fridays, the an
cient stationary days, in aU churches.
In the mean time, Gregory the
Sect. 11. ° J
leSemp^Md Great instituted some such rogations
tor htanies. at Romej an(j one particularly on the
twenty-fifth day. of April, which goes by the name
of litania septiformis, because he ordered the church
to'go in procession in seven distinct classes ; first
the clergy, then the laymen, next the monks, after
them the virgins, then the married women, next the
widows, and last of all the poor and the children.
This is mentioned both by Gregory80 himself and
Walafridus Strabo,81 who give it the name of litania
major: whence some have been led into a mistake,
to think the Roman htanies were distinguished by
the name of the greater litanies from those of
Mamercus, which they caU the less. So Hamon
L'Estrange,82 and others, in their accounts of these
things. But the French writers do not allow of this
distinction. CeUotius ¦" says, The rogation or litania
of Mamercus, was always dignified with the title of
litania major by their old writers, as well as that of
Gregory, and that Gregory's litany was of httle use
among them. It is certain, the council of Mentz,84
and the Capitulars of Charles the Great,85 which re
peat the words of that council, apphed the name of
litania major to their own rogations before Ascen
sion. And CeUotius says, Gaulterus Aurelianensis
and Strabo both give it the same title. But still he
does not teU us what they mean by the litania minor,
the lesser htany, in contradistinction to the greater.
If the reader will take my conjecture, it is no more
but the known form, Kyrie, eleison, as the Latins
read it, from the Greek, K«pt£ ixkqaov, Lord, have
mercy upon us, or, Lord, have mercy upon them, if
they were praying for others. As this was the con
stant response made by the people to each petition
of their larger supplications for the catechumens
and others (as we shall see hereafter) ; so it was
used sometimes by itself, in all their offices, as a
shorter form of supplication : and then it had the
nature of a htany by itself, and was not a part of a
larger prayer. This is evident from the order made
in the council of Vaison,85 for introducing the use of
it into the French churches : Whereas, say they, it
is a very useful and agreeable custom in the Roman
church, and aU the provinces of Italy and the East,

to use the frequent repetition of the Kyrie, eleison,
Lord, have mercy upon us, with great affection and
contrition ; we therefore decree, That the same holy
custom be introduced' into all our churches, both at
morning and evening prayer, and in the commu
nion service. The Greeks usually said, Lord, have
mercy upon us, without adding the other part, Christ,
have mercy upon us: but the Latins used both
clauses, and repeated them alternately, as we now
do, first the minister, and then the people ; whereas
by the Greeks the supplication was made by the
common voice of all together. This difference is
noted by Gregory the Great ;87 but it does not detract
from our observation, but rather confirms it, that
this was a short form of supplication used one way
or other in all churches, and that as a part of all
their daily offices ; whence it borrowed the name of
the lesser htany, in opposition to the greater htanies,
which were distinct, complete, and solemn services,
adapted to particular times, or extraordinary occa
sions. I must note further, that the greater litanies
are sometimes termed exomologeses, confessions ; ss
because fasting, and weeping, and mourning, and
confession of sins, was usually joined with supplica
tion to avert God's wrath, and reconcile him to a
sinful people.
Sometimes to these solemn suppli- Secl ,,
cations they added processions, which of the" i"™"5™""-
at first had nothing of harm or superstition in them .
for they were only of the same nature with their
processions at a funeral, when they carried a corpse
with the solemnity of psalmody to its interment.
They sometimes made their processions, and some
times their litanies, as occasion required, in the open
field : but here was no pomp of rehcs, nor exposing
of the eucharist to adoration, in such solemnities ;
they only carried the cross, as they did also in some
of their night processions for psalmody, as the badge
of their profession, before them. Of this indeed
there are some instances as early as Chrysostom ;
for it is noted in his Life by Palladius,89 that his
enemies trampled under foot the sign of the cross,
which the people carried on their shoulders as they
made their litanies in the field. And in those vigils
which he set up at Constantinople in opposition to
the Arians, the historians90 say, they had silver
crosses given them by the empress for this purpose.
And the laws of Justinian91 expressly provided, That

80 Greg. lib. 11. Ep. 2. 81 Strabo de Offic. Eccles. cap. 28.
82 L'Estrange, Alliance, cap. 4. p. 100.
88 Cellot. Not. in Capitula Gualteri Aurelianensis. Cone.
t. 8. p. 649.
84 Cone. Moguntin. an. 813. can. 33.
85 Carol. Capitular, lib. 5. c. 85.
86 Cone. Vasens. 2. can. 3. Quia tam in sede apostolica,
quam etiam per tolas Orientis atque Italiae provincias, dulcis
et nimium salubris consuetudo intromissa est, ut Kyrie, elei
son, frequentius cum grandi affectu ac compunctione dicatur :
placuit etiam nobis, ut in omnibus ecclesiis nostris ista con

suetudo sancta, et ad matutinum, et ad missas, et ad ves
peram, Deo propiciante, intromittatur.
87 Greg. lib. 7. Ep. 64. ad Joan. Syracusan.
88 Vid. Cone. Moguntin. can. 32.
89 Palladius, Vit. Chrysost. cap. 15. p. 27. in Appendice,
t. 2. Crucis signum venerabile, quod illi ferentes in hume-
ris litanias in campo agebant, pedibus suis concultantes.
80 Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 8. Sozomen. lib. 8. cap. 8.
01 Justin. Novel. 123. cap. 32. Omnibus laicis interdici-
mus litanias facere sine Sanctis episcopis, et qui sub eis sunt
reverendissimis clericis,  sed et ipsas honorandas cruces

576

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

as these litanies should not be celebrated without
the bishop or the clergy ; so the crosses to be used in
these solemnities should not be reposited in any
places but the churches, nor be carried by any but
such as were appointed. And because in these so
lemn processions some were inclined to appear in
pomp unsuitable to the occasion, with gay clothing,
and on horseback ; therefore both these things were
particularly forbidden. Sidonius92 notes it as a
great absurdity for men to appear, castorinati ad
litanias, dressed up in their rich beaver cloths at a
htany, because sackcloth and ashes were more be
coming such solemnities, which were intended for
fasting, and mourning, and supplication, and hu
miliation, and confession of sins, after the example
of the Ninevites, in their solemn addresses to God.
And for this reason the canons98 forbade any one to
appear on horseback or in rich apparel at the ro
gation solemnities, but rather discalceate in sack
cloth and ashes, unless he had the excuse of in
firmity to hinder him. For these rogations were
intended to implore God's mercy in the most humble
manner; and, with the most ardent affections of
soul, to beseech him to avert all sicknesses, and
plagues, and tribulations ; to repel the evils of
pestilence, war, hail, and drought ; to compose the
temper of the air, so that it may be for the health of
men's bodies, and fertility of the earth; that he
would keep all the elements in due order and har
mony, and grant men peaceable times; as Euche-
rius94 relates the chief heads of them in his sermon
upon this subject. Whereas, yet, we may observe,
no prayers or intercessions were made to saints or
angels, as in the modern htanies of the Romish
church, but to God only, as shaU be showed at
large in the following chapter.

CHAPTER II.
THAT THE DEVOTIONS OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH
WERE PAID TO EVERY PERSON OF THE BLESSED
TRINITY. Having thus distinguished the ambi-
Sect. 1. °
Proofs or the™-- guity of the names of the ancient
snip or Christ as
t'hesSe™nd,p?r°„„of worsriiP. and settled the true mean-
inlheSue^o"^' ™S of them, our next inquiry must be
into the object of the Christian wor
ship, to see what persons they were to whom they
paid their devotion. That which makes this in-

(cum quibus et in litaniis ingrediuntur) non alibi nisi in
venerabilibus locis reponi, &c.
92 Sidon. lib. 5. Ep. 7. ad Thaumastum. p. 327. Libenter
incedunt amiati ad epulas, albati ad exequias, pelliti ad
ecclesias, pullati ad nuptias, castorinati ad litanias.

quiry necessary, which otherwise might have been
omitted, is the prevalency of two contrary errors
too much reigning in these later ages ; one of which
asserts, that the Father alone was the sole object of
true Divine worship, and not the Son or Holy Ghost •
and the other, that saints and angels had also a share
in it. To show the falseness of both which pretences
I shall a Uttle detain the reader with the proofs
and evidences of the contrary assertions. And first
to show, that Christ, as the Son of God, and the
second person of the ever blessed Trinity, was the
object of Divine worship in all ages, we will begin
with the original of Christian worship, and carry
the inquiry through the three first centuries. For
the first age, the Scripture is sufficient evidence of
the Christians' practice. For not to insist on the
precept of honouring the Son, as they honoured the
Father ; or the form of baptism, in which they are
commanded to join the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost
in one act of worship ; or the injunction to beheve
in the Son, as they believed in the Father; with
many other acts of internal worship pecuhar to God
alone ; I only argue from their example and practice.
St. Stephen, the protomartyr, when he was sealing
his confession with his blood, breathed out his last
in a prayer to Christ, " Lord Jesus, receive my spi
rit :" and, " Lord, lay not this sin to their charge,"
Acts vii. 59, 60. St. Paul professes he never baptized
any but only in the name of Christ, 1 Cor. i. 13.
And his common forms of blessing were with invo
cation of the name of Christ : " Grace be to you and
peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Je
sus Christ ;" and, " The grace of the Lord Jesus
Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of
the Holy Ghost, be with you aU :" as the solemn
forms run almost in all his epistles, both in the be
ginning and the conclusion of them. Nay, so com
mon was this practice, that among other titles of
the believers, at their first rise and appearance in
the world, they were distinguished by the character
of those that called on the name of Christ, Acts ix.
14, 21 ; 1 Cor. i. 2; 2 Tim. ii. 22. Some critics, I
know, would have the phrase, iiriKaXoiptvoi rb bvopa
Xpiarov, to be taken passively only for those who were
named by the name of Christ, that is, Christians ;
but this criticism is of no weight ; for they were
called invokers, or worshippers of Christ, before the
name Christian was known in the world : for this
name was not used till some time after St. Paul's
conversion, when, as St. Luke says expressly, Acts
xi. 26, " the disciples were first called Christians in
Antioch." But they were worshippers of him be
fore, and therefore were distinguished by the cha-

Ds Cone. Mogunt. can. 33. Sicut sancti patres nostri in-
stituerunt, non equitando, nee preciosis vestibus induti, sed
discalceati, cinere et cilicio induti, nisi innrmitas impedie-
rit. Vide Burchard. lib. 13. cap. 7.
91 Eucher. Horn, de Litaniis.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

577

racter of the men that called upon his name. Many
other such like evidences are obvious to any one
that reads the New Testament : I only add that of
Revelation v. 8—13, where the church in heaven
and earth together is represented as offering both
prayers and hymns to Christ : " When he had taken
the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders
fell down before the Lamb, having every one of
them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which
are the prayers of saints. And they sung a new
song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and
to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and
hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every
kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation ; and
hast made us unto our God kings and priests : and
we shall reign on the earth. And I beheld, and I
heard the voice of many angels round about the
throne and the beasts and the elders : and the num
ber of them was ten thousand times ten thousand,
and thousands of thousands; saying with a loud
voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to re
ceive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength,
and honour, and glory, and blessing. And every
creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and
under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all
that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and
honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sit
teth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever
and ever."
sect. 2. We have here seen the model of the
inX'sec„bndSem- worship of Christ, as begun and set
tled in the practice of the church in
the first age. And we shall find it continued in the
same manner in those that followed immediately
after. For Pliny, who Uved in the beginning of the
second century, and, as a judge under Trajan, took
the confessions of some revolting Christians, says,
They declared to him, they were ' used to meet on
a certain day before it was light, and among other
parts of their worship, sing a hymn to Christ, as to
their God. Which is a plain indication of their
worship of Christ on the Lord's day. Not long
after this lived Polycarp, who2 joins God the Father
and the Son together in his prayers for grace and
benediction upon men: The God and Father of

our Lord Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ himself,
the eternal High Priest, the Son of God, build you
up in faith and truth, and in all meekness, to live
without anger, in patience, in long-suffering, and
forbearance, and give you a lot and part among the
saints, and to us with you, and to all them that are
under heaven, who shall believe in Jesus Christ our
Lord, and in his Father, who raised him from the
dead. And so he begins his epistle, Mercy and
peace from God Almighty, and from the Lord Jesus
Christ, be multiplied unto you. And when he came
to his martyrdom, he made a prayer to God at the
stake, before he was burnt, concluding it with this
doxology to the whole Trinity:' I praise thee, I
bless thee, I glorify thee for all things, together
with the eternal and heavenly Jesus Christ, thy
beloved Son ; with whom unto thee, and the Holy
Spirit, be glory both now and for ever, world with
out end. Amen. When Polycarp was dead, the
church of Smyrna wrote a circular epistle to other
churches, to give an account of his sufferings,
wherein they relate this remarkable occurrence,
that as soon as he was dead, the Jews suggested to
the heathen judge, that he should not suffer the
Christians to take Polycarp's body and bury it, lest
they should4 leave their crucified Master, and be
gin to worship this other. Not considering, says
the epistle, that we can never either forsake the
worship of Christ, who suffered for the salvation of
all those who are saved in the whole world, the just
for the unjust ; or worship any other. For we wor
ship him as being the Son of God ; but the martyrs
we only love, as they deserve, for their great affection
to their King and Master, and as being disciples and
followers of their Lord, whose partners and fellow
disciples we desire to be. This is an unanswerable
testimony, to prove both the Divine worship of
Christ, as the true Son of God, and that no martyr
or other saint was worshipped in those days. Not
long after this lived Justin Martyr, who, in his
second Apology, to wipe off the charge of atheism,
brought against them by the heathens, who object
ed to them, That they had cast off the worship of
God; answers, That they worshipped and adored
still the God of righteousness, and his Son, (that

1 Plin. lib. 10. Ep. 97. Affirmabant, quod essent soliti
stato die ante lucem convenire ; carmenque Christo, quasi
Deo, dicere secum invicem.
2 Polycarp. Ep. ad Philip.n. 12. Deus autem etPater Do
mini nostri JeBU Christi ; et ipse sempiternus Pontifex, Dei
Filius, Christus Jesus, aedificetvos in fide et veritate, et in
omni mansuetudine, &c. ; et det vobis sortem et partem inter
sanctos suos, et nobis vobiscum, et omnibus qui sunt sub
coelo, qui credituri sunt in Dominum nostrum Jesum Chris
tum et in ipsius Patrem.
8 Martyrium Polycarpi, ap. Coteler. Patr. Apostol. t. 2.
p. 199. JlEpl irdvTWV alvio o-e, EvXoyiii o-£, So%dX,to as, trbv
Tip altovitp Kal iirupavitp 'Irjo-S Xpiitp, dyairiyrto ub iratSl,
Pev k trot Kal UvEvpaTL ' Ayitp i) 8d£a Kal vvv, Kal eIs Tobs
ftEAXoiiTas altovas' ' Api]v. Eusebius, lib. 4. c. 15. ex Epist.
2 P

Ecclesiae Smyrnensis, reads this with a little variation of the
particles : Aid tu almoin dpxiepiios 'Irjo-a XptiB tu aya-
irtjTu o-a iratSbs' Si 5 crot avvaiiTtp iv HvEVpaTt' Ayitp h S6£a,
Sec. But this makes no alteration in the sense ; for still it
concludes with a doxology to the three Divine persons:
By whom and with whom unto thee and the Holy Spirit be
glory for ever and ever. Amen.
4 Smyrn. Eccles. Epist. ap. Euseb. 1. 4. >.-. 15. etap. Co
teler. p. 200. Mi), <pi]trlv, dtpivTES tov iTavptopivov, tbtov
dp^eovTat erlpEoBar  dyvoivTES, oti Ste tov Xpo=rdv
itote KaTaXtTTEXv SvvncrdpEBu, too virip Tr]S tb iraVTOs
Koapu tZv atot,opEvtov traiTtipias iraBovTa, dptopov virip
dpapTooXiov, bte ETtpdv Ttva tripEcBaf tutov yap, Ylov
SvTa tu Oeu, irpotTKVvupEV Tobs Si pdpTvpas, dis iza9ljTds
Kal ptpi)Tds tb Kupi'u, dyaireopEV djt'ais, &c.

5/8

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

came from him, and taught both them and the host
of good angels, who followed him, and were made
like unto him,) as also the Holy Spirit of prophecy:5
to these they paid a rational and true honour, as they
always frankly owned to all such as were disposed
to learn. Bellarmine6 very fraudulently urges this
place, to prove the worship of angels : as if Justin
had said, that they worshipped the Father, the Son,
the angels, and the Holy Spirit ; whereas he says
nothing of the worship of angels, but that the an
gels were taught by the Son, and that the Son, to
gether with the Father and Holy Spirit, were the
object of Christian worship. Which he repeats
again in his foresaid Apology,7 saying, in answer to
the same objection, that they could demonstrate,
that as they worshipped God the Creator of all
things, so with equal reason they worshipped Jesus
Christ in the second place, and the Holy Spirit of
prophecy in the third, knowing Jesus Christ to be
the Son of the true God. For whereas the heathens
objected further, that it was madness in them, next
to the immutable and true God, Maker of all things,
to give the second place to a crucified man, he tells
them, They understood not the mystery of this prac
tice. Which shows, that as they worshipped Christ,
so they worshipped him as the true Son of God,
and not as a creature : for he tells the emperors a
little after,8 they held it unlawful to worship any
but God alone. Therefore in their practice they
also showed their belief of his true Divinity ; since
they worshipped him only upon this foundation and
supposition, that he was truly God, and not a mere
man ; and to have done it upon any other supposi
tion, had been gross idolatry by their own confes
sion. Which I wish were duly considered by those
who now write against the Divinity of Christ, and
absurdly pretend that all the fathers of the three
first ages were of their opinion. For this is only to
make them guilty of the grossest idolatry, and in
volve them in a monstrous contradiction; whilst
they pretended to worship none but God alone, and
yet gave Divine honour to one, whom (if our mo

dern representers say true) they did not believe to
be truly God by nature, but only a creature.
But to go on with the inquiry, as to what con
cerns the object of their worship in practice. Athe
nagoras answers the charge of atheism, after the
same manner as Justin Martyr had done before him :
We are no atheists," who worship the Creator of
all things, and his Word that proceedeth from him.
Minucius Felix, to another objection, That they
worshipped a crucified man, answers, That they
were mistaken in the charge; for he whom they
worshipped10 was God, and not a mere mortal man :
miserable is he whose hope is only in man ; for his
help is at an end, when the life of man is extinct.
About this time Uved Lucian the heathen, who, in
one of his Dialogues, takes notice of the Christian
worship. For, bringing in a Christian instructing
a catechumen," he makes the catechumen ask this
question, By whom shall I swear? And he that
personates the Christian, answers, By the God that
reigns on high, the great, immortal, heavenly God,
and the Son of the Father, and the Spirit proceed
ing from the Father, one in three, and three in one.
Take these for your Jupiter, imagine this to be your
God. Which evidently shows, that Lucian had
learned this from the Christian institutions, that
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, were the object
of their Divine worship. And he elsewhere objects
to them the worship of their crucified impostor,12 as
he blasphemously terms our blessed Lord. Not long
after IrenEeus, speaking of the miracles which the
church wrought in his time, particularly in casting
out devils, says, She did this 13 not by invocation of
angels, nor by enchantments, nor by any other wicked
piece of curiosity, but by directing her prayers, clean,
and pure, and openly, to the God over all ; and by
invocating the name of Jesus Christ she works
miracles for the benefit of men, and not for their
seduction. And that this was so, appears further
from some of the forms of prayer used then in the
church for the energumens in the public service,
one of which is recorded by the author of the Con-

5 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 56. 'AU' IkeXvov te, teal tov irap'
avTov Ylov iXBdvTa, Kal StSdfcaVTa upas TavTa, Kal tov
Ttov aXXtov iiropkviov Kal i^opotovpivtov dyaBuw dyyiXuiv
o-TpaTOV, TivEvpd TE TO IT pO(fll)T ikov o-EpopEBa Kal irpoa-
ivvovpEv, Sec.
6 Bellarm. de Beatitud. Sanctor. lib. 1. cap. 13. t. 1.
p. 1957.
7 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 60. Tov S-npiovpyov — Kal 'lr)trovv
XpicrTov, Ytdv avTov tov ovtcos Qeov paBSvTES, Kal iv Sev-
TEpa xd>pa EXOyTES, UvEvpd te irpoepryTlKov iv TptTi] Ta^Ei,
tiTt peTa Xoyov TtpiopEV, diroSEt^opEV. It. Dial, cum
Tryph. p. 302, he styles him Qeov laxvpov Kal irpoo-Kvvi]-
tov, the mighty God that was to be adored.
6 Ibid. p. 64. Qeov piv povov irpoaKvvovpEV, Sec.
0 Athenag. Legat. pro Christianis, Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat.
t. 1. p. 76. Oii«: itrpiv oBeoi, dyovTEs tov iron]Ti)v tovSe
tov iravros, Kal tov irap' avTov Aoyov.
19 Minuc. Dial. p. 88. Quod religioni nostra, hominem

noxium et crucem ejus adscribitis, longe de vicinia veritatis
erratis, qui putatis Deum credi aut meruisse noxium, aut
potuisse terrenum. Nae ille miserabilis, cujus in homine
morlali spes omnis innititur: totum enim ejus auxiliurn cum
extincto homine finitur.
11 Lucian. Philopatris, prope finem.
'Yip-tpiSovTa Qeov, piyav, dpflpoTov, ovpavitova,
Ylov HaTpos, TivEvpa Ik TLaTpbs iKiropEvdpEvov,
Ev Ik Tptiov, Kal i£ ivbs Tpia,
TavTa vdptX,E 2.t]va, tov S' riyov Qeov.
12 Lucian. de Morte Peregr. p. 277. Tov dvEtrKoXoirio-
pElov ekeXvov o-otplaTi)v irpocrKWEtv.
13 Iren. lib. 2. cap. 57. Nee invocationibus angelicis facit,
nee incantationibus, nee aliqua prava curiositate, sed munde
et pure et manifeste orationes dirigens ad Dominum, qui
omnia fecit, et nomen Domini nostri Jesu Christi invocans,
virt.utes secundum utilitates hominum, sed non ad seduc-
lionem periicit.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

579

stitutions,14 directed personally to Christ, under the
title of the only begotten God, who binds the strong
one, that is, the devU : which prayer I need not re
peat here, because the reader may find it at length
hereafter15 in the service of the catechumens.
About the same time with Irenseus lived Theo
philus, bishop of Antioch, who, though he does not
expressly mention the worship of Christ, yet he ac
knowledges him to be God of God,16 and says the
world was made by him : For when the Father said,
" Let us make man in our own image," he spake
this to no other,17 but to his own Word and his own
Wisdom, that is, the Son and Holy Spirit. Whom
he expressly styles by the name of Trinity18 in the
Godhead; and says elsewhere, that God is to be
worshipped, and nothing19 else besides him, who is
the true God, the ordainer of kings j* who may be
honoured, but not worshipped, because they are
only men, and not God. From aU- which it is easy
to infer, that Theophilus thought Christ the object
of Divine worship, as the living and true God; and
that it would be idolatry to give Divine worship to
Christ, upon any other supposition, than that he
is true God as weU as man.
In the same age, Clemens Alexandrinus is an
illustrious witness of this practice. For in his ex
hortation29 to the Gentiles, he styles him the living
God, that was then worshipped and adored : Beheve,
says he, 0 man, in him who is both man and God :
believe, 0 man, in him who suffered death, and yet
is adored as the living God. In the end of his
Paedagogue, he himself addresses his prayers to the
Son jointly with the Father, in these words : Be
merciful to thy children, 0 Master, 0 Father, thou
Ruler of Israel, 0 Son, and Father, who are both
One, our Lord.21 And in the conclusion of the
book, he has this doxology to the whole Trinity :
Let us give thanks22 to the only Father and Son, to
the Son and the Father, to the Son, our Teacher and
Master, with the Holy Spirit ; one in all respects ;
in whom are all things ; by whom all things are one ;
by whom is eternal existence ; whose members we
are; whose is the glory and the ages; who is the
perfect good, the perfect beauty, all-wise, and all-just :
to whom be glory, both now and for ever. Amen.

Contemporary with Clemens was Athenogenes the
martyr, who suffered about the year 196. St. Ba
sil28 says, He composed a sacred hymn, setting forth
the glory of the Holy Ghost. From whence we
may collect, that it did the same for Christ as the
Son of God. The learned Doctor Cave,21 by a little
mistake of what St. Basil says, supposes Atheno
genes to have been the author of those two ancient
hymns, called the Morning and Evening Hymns,
which the reader will find related at length25 here
after, under the titles of the Great Doxology, " Glory
be to God on high," &c., and the Hymnus Lucernalis.
But it is plain from St. Basil, that the hymn of
Athenogenes was distinct from these. For he
makes no mention of the Morning Hymn, and says
expressly of the Evening Hymn, that he knew not
who was the author of it. However, it was a hymn
of ancient use in the church, addressed immediately
to Christ, and containing this doxology to the whole
Trinity, 'Ypvovpiv Uarkpa, Kal Yibv, Kal "Aytov llvivpa
Qeov, We laud the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of
God. Which St. Basil urges, as we do here, as a
distinct testimony from that of Athenogenes, and as
a, further instance of the church's ancient practice
in giving Divine honour and worship, not only to
the Father, but to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost.
About the same time, suffered Andronicus the
martyr : in the Acts of whose passion it is objected
to him by the heathen judge,26 that Christ whom he
invocated and worshipped, was a man that had suf
fered under the government of Pontius Pilate, and
that the Acts of his passion were then extant. Their
worship of Christ was so well known to the hea
thens, that at every turn, we see, it was objected to
them. And their answer was always the same, that
they worshipped him indeed, but not as a mere
man, but God, the Son of God by nature, and of
the same substance with the Father. Which is the
answer that Tertullian (who is the last writer of the
second age) makes to this objection. For whereas
it was objected,27 that they were worshippers of a
man, whom all the world knew to be a man, and
the Jews had condemned as a man : to this he an
swers,28 not by denying that they worshipped him,
but by explaining the reasons and foundation of

14 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 7. " Book XIV. chap. 5. sect. 7.
16 Theoph. ad Autolyc. lib. 2. p. 130. 0e<Ss tov b Adyos,
Ktti ek Qeov iTEtpVKtlis.
Ibid. lib. 2. p. 114. O'vk aXXtp Si tivi e'lp-nKE, Tloiriaeo-
P-ev, dXX r) Tip iavTov Adytp, Kal xf; iavTov 2orpiq.
18 Ibid. lib. 2. p. 106. Tvirot TpidSos toXi Qeov, Kal tou
Ao'you avTov Kal tjjs 2ot/>tas avTov.
3 Ibid. lib. 1. p. 30. QeiS Si Tip oktws QeiS Kal dXrjfiet
TrpOtTKVVtO, &C.
^ ffl Clem. Cohort, ad Gent. p. 84. Edit. Oxon. JT/o-teuo-ok,
ampunt, ivBpeoirtp Kal 0euV ir'tiEvtrov, dvdpuiirE, Tip ira-
Bovti, Kal irpoaKVvopivip 0eb> X,mvTl.
21 Id. Paadagog. lib. 3! >:. \% p. 311. "IXaflt toXs aoXs,
itatSaytoyl, TlaTip, i]vioXE 'Itrpai]X, Yll Kal ITaTip, 'iv
aptpto, KvptE. 2 p 2

22 Ibid. p. eadem. Tip pdvtp Tla-rpi Kal Ylw, Ylto Kal
Ilarpt, iratSaytoyip Kal StSac-KaXtp Ylto, aiiv Kal Tip 'Ayitp
HvEupaTi' irdvTa Tto ivi iv to Ta irdvTa, Sec. eo n S6£a Kal
vvv, Kal eis tovs altovas- ' Apriv. Vid. Strom, lib. 7. cap. 7.
p. 851. Se'jSEin lyKeXEvdpEBa tov Adyov, Sec.
23 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 29. t. 2. p. 359.
« Cave, Hist. Liter, vol. 1. p. 60.
25 See chap. 10. sect. 9. chap. 11. sect. 5.
20 Acta Andronici, ap. Baron, an. 290. n. 26. Non scis,
quem invocas Christum, hominem quendain factum, sub
custodia Pontii Pilati punitum ; cujus extant Acta passion is ?
27 Tertul. Apol. cap. 21. Sed et vulgus jam seit Chris
tum, ut aliquein hominum, qualem Judaei judicavemnt, quo
facilius quis nos hominis cultores existimaverit.
38 Ibid. Hunc ex Deo prolatum didicimus, et prolatione

580

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

their worship, because they knew him to be the true
natural Son of God, by a spiritual generation, and
therefore called God and the Son of God, because he
was of one and the same essence or substance. For
God was a Spirit ; and the Son was Spirit of Spirit,
and God of God, as Light is of Light. In that
manner he was begotten of God, so as to be God
and the Son of God, as they were both one. In
another place, dissuading Christian women from
marrying with unbelievers, among other arguments,
he uses this,20 That in such a family there could be
no mention of God, no invocation of Christ, no
cherishing of faith by their joint reading of the
Scripture. At the same time,he tells us,80 a Christian
could pray to no other but the eternal, the living,
and true God : he could not ask such things, as
they were wont to ask in prayer, of any other but
him, from whom he knew he could obtain them,
and who alone was able to give them. Now, this
had been absurd and ridiculous arguing to the hea
thens, had not Christians believed Christ to be the
eternal, living, and true God. Their arguments
might easily have been retorted, and charged with
contradiction ; and they would have stood self-con
demned by their own practice, if, whilst they were
arguing against the heathen idols upon this foot
that nothing was to be worshipped but the eternal,
living, and true God, they themselves had wor
shipped one who fell short of that character. There
fore we must conclude, that as it is plain from
the foregoing testimonies, that Christians did give
Divine worship to Christ in this age, so they did
it only upon this supposition, that he was the
eternal, hving, and true God, as the eternal Son of
the eternal Father ; and that however they differed,
as far as it was necessary for a Father and Son to be
distinct, yet they were but one Creator, and one God.
sect 3 We are now come to the third cen-
*hT™rch™??„7h. tury, where we have first an illus
trious testimony for the worship of
Christ as God, in the Fragments of Caius, a Roman
presbyter, preserved by Eusebius, out of his book
called The Labyrinth, written against Artemon, one
of the first that appeared against the Divinity of
our Saviour. Here, among many other things,
showing the novelty of that heresy, he observes,31
There were anciently many psalms and hymns com

posed by the brethren, and transcribed by the faith
ful, setting forth the praises of Christ as the Word
of God, and ascribing Divinity to him. And that
such sort of hymns were used in the service of the
church, we learn from another passage in the same
Eusebius, taken out ofthe council of Antioch against
Paulus Samosatensis, the heretical bishop of An
tioch, about the middle of this century. For there
he is charged as giving orders " to forbid the use of
such psalms or hymns as were used to be sung in
the church to the honour of our Lord Jesus Christ,
under pretence that they were only the novel
compositions of late and modern authors : whilst, in
the mean time, he suborned women on the great
day of the Lord's passion, (or the resurrection, for
pascha will signify both,) to sing hymns composed to
his own honour; where, among other things, he
that would not allow Christ any other but an
earthly original, was not ashamed to hear himself
blasphemously extolled as an angel come down from
heaven ; which, as those holy fathers observe, was
enough to make a hearer tremble. And for this
insolent attempt against the Divinity and worship
of Christ, that heretical bishop was anathematized
and deposed.
A little before this time, Nepos, an Egyptian bi
shop, composed psalms and hymns for the use ofthe
church, which are commended by Dionysius,81 bishop
of Alexandria, as a useful work for the edification
of the brethren. And, probably, they might be some
of those hymns which Paulus Samosatensis dis
carded as novel inventions of modern authors,
though hymns of the like nature had been in use
from the first foundation of the church. Dionysius
of Alexandria was one of those who opposed the
practice of Paulus Samosatensis by his letters, though
he was not present in the council ; and he is com
mended by St. Basil,34 as one that always used this
form of doxology : To God the Father, and the Son,
our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit, be
glory and dominion now and for ever, world with
out end. Amen. But we have more pregnant testi
monies from the works of Origen in the beginning of
this century. In his fifth Book against Celsus, he
tells us, That they could not lawfully worship angels,
but they might and did worship the Son of God. All
prayers, says he, and supplications,85 and interces-

generatum, et idcirco Filium Dei, et Deum dictum ex unitate
substantiae : nam et Deus Spiritus.  Ita de Spiritu Spi
ritus, et de Deo Deus, ut lumen de lumine accensum, 
ita quod de Deo profectum est, Deus est, et Dei Filius, et
unus ambo.
29 Tertul. ad Uxor. lib. 2. cap. 6. Quae Dei mentio? quae
Christi invocatio ? ubi fomenta fidei de Scripturarum inter-
lectione ?
30 Id. Apol. cap. 30. Nos pro salute imperatoris Deum
invocamus asternum, Deum verum, Deum vivum, &c. Haec
ab alio orare non possum, quam a quo me scio consecutu-
rum, quoniam et ipse est qui solus praestat.

31 Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 28. tyaXpol SI oeroi Kal dSal dSiX-
tpiov, dirapxejs bird irtTtov ypatpEXtrat, tov Adyov tb Qeb tov
Xpt^tou vpvuat &EoXoyBVTES.
32 Cone. Antioch. Epist. Synod, ap. Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 30.
WaXpus Si Tobs eis tov Kvpiov rlpiov 'Ir]crBV Xpiarbviravtras,
(is Si) vEaiTEpBs Kal vEtoTEptov dvSpiov trvyy pdppaTa, Sec.
33 Dionys. de Promission. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 2-1.
' Ayairio NiiraiTa — rfjs te \|raX/iwfitas, i) pEXP1 vvv noXXot
toiv dSlXtpiov EvBvpBVTal.
31 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 29.
35 Origen. cont, Cels. lib. 5. p. 233. ndaav piv yip
Sir]o-iv, Kal irpoaEvxhv, Kal evtev£iv, Kal ebxapidtTiav,

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

581

sions, and thanksgivings, are to be sent up to God
the Lord of all, by the High Priest who is above all
angels, being the living Word and God. And we
can also pray to the Word himself, and make inter
cessions to him, and give thanks, and make suppli
cations to him, if we rightly understand how prayer
is to be taken in propriety of speech, or with some
restriction. He means, that prayers offered to the
Son of God, considered as a Son, redound to the Fa
ther, as the fountain of the Deity : as Bishop Bull86
judiciously explains, and vindicates this passage
from the unjust exceptions which Huetius makes
against it. As he does also another passage in the
eighth Book, where Origen more largely asserts the
worship of Christ against the common objection
renewed by Celsus, That the Christians worshipped
one that had but lately appeared in the world.
Celsus had thus formed the objection with all the
art and force he was able : If the Christians, says
he, worshipped no other but one God,87 their argu
ments might be of some weight and force against
others; but now they give immense honour and
worship to this new upstart, who so lately made his
appearance in the world, and yet think they commit
no offence against God, though they give Divine
worship to his servant. To this Origen replies,
not by dissembling, or denying, or diminishing the
worship of Christ, but by asserting it upon such
grounds and principles, as show that Father and
Son can be but one God ; and that to worship two
persons under such relation and economy of real
Father and Son, cannot be to worship two Gods.
If Celsus, says he, had understood the meaning of
this, " I and the Father are one ;" or what the Son
of God says in his prayer, "As I and thou are one,"
he would never have imagined that we worship any
but the God who is over all. For he saith, " The
Father is in me, and I in the Father." But that no
one may think that, in saying this, we run over to
those who deny the Father and Son to be two hy
postases or persons, (meaning the Sabellians,) let
him consider that which is said, "All they that be
lieved were of one heart and one soul," that he may
understand this, " I and the Father are one." We
therefore worship one God, as I have showed, the
Father and the Son ; and our reasoning stands still
in fuU force against others ; neither do we give Di
vine honour to an upstart being, as if he had no
existence before. For we believe him, when he says,
" Before Abraham was, I am ;" and again, " I am the
Truth." Neither is any of us of so mean and servile
understanding, as to imagine, that the substance of

avaiTEpirTEOv Top iirl irdert Qeio, Sid tov iirl irdvTtov dyyi-
Xtav apxttpitos, lp\j/vxov Adyov Kal Qeov' SEr)crdpE8a Si Kal
aiiTov tov Aoyov, Kal ivTEv^dpEBa avTto, Kal irpoaEv^dpE-
"a Se, say SvvdipEda KaTaKOVEtv ttjs irEpl irpoaEvxi)s
KvptoXE^tas Kal KaTaxptiaEoos' dyyiXovs yap KaXio-ai —
oiiK svXoyov.

Truth had not a being before the appearance of'
Christ in the flesh. Therefore we worship the
Father of Truth, and the Son, who is the Truth,
two things in personal subsistence, but one in agree
ment, and consent, and identity of will, bvra Ivo
ry virocrTdosi irpdypara, 'iv Si ry bpovoia, Kal ry~ avp-
tpiovia, Kal Tij TavTOTt]ri tov j3ovXijpaTog : SO that who
ever sees the Son, who is the brightness of the
glory of God, and the express image of his person,
sees God in him, as being the true image of God.
Now Celsus imagines, that because together with
God we worship his Son, it follows upon our own
principles, that we may not only worship God,
but his ministers and servants. And, indeed, if he
meant the true servants of God, after his only be
gotten Son, such as Michael and Gabriel, and the
rest of the angels and archangels, and stood up for
the worship of these ; perhaps, taking worship, and
the acts of the worshippers, in a sound and quali-.
fied sense, (he means the common respect of love
and honour, which is due to good angels,) we might
say something proper upon this head; but now,
when he understands by the servants of God, only
the devils whom the Gentiles worship, he does not
oblige us by any just consequence to worship such
as these, whom the Scripture assures us to be only
servants of the wicked one, the prince of this world,
and the author of apostacy from God. We refuse
to worship all such, as knowing them to be no serv
ants of God ; for had they been servants, we should
not have called them devils ; but we worship one
God, and his only Son, and Word, and Image, with
.supplications and prayers to the utmost of our
power, offering our prayers to God over all by his
only begotten Son ; to whom we first present them,
beseeching him who is the propitiation for our sins,
as our High Priest, to offer our prayers, and sacri
fices, and intercessions to God, the Lord of all
things. Therefore our faith relies only upon God,
by his Son who confirms it in us. And therefore
Celsus has no reason or colour for his charge of
sedition, or departing from God upon the account
of his Son ; for we worship the Father, whilst we
admire and adore the Son, who is his Word, and
Wisdom, and Truth, and Righteousness, and what
ever else we are taught to believe ofthe Son of God,
begotten of such a Father.
I have recited this passage at length, not only
because it is such a full proof of the matter of fact,
that the Christians did give Divine honour and wor
ship to the Son ; but also because it shows us upon
what principle and foundation they did it ; viz. as

38 Bull. Defens. Fid. Nicen. sect. 2. cap. 9. u. 15. p. 199.
87 Orig. cont. Cels. lib. 8. p. 385. Celsi verba : EI piv Si]
p-nSiva dXXov IBEpdirEvov oiitoi, irXi)V lva Qeov, i)v dv tis
aiiToXs terms -TTfios -roiis dXXovs uteviis Xdyos' vvvl Si -row
ivayxos tpavivTa tovtov viroBpi]trKEVBo-i, Sec. Vid. Ong
Tlepl Euxrjs, n. 49 et 50; and Bp. Fell's note upon it.

582

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

being the true Son of God, and one God with the
Father. For though Huetius has excepted against
some words in this passage, as derogatory to the
Son ; and the modern Arians have abused it to
patronize their heresy; and the Romanists would
fain draw it into a proof for the worship of angels ;
yet I dare be bold to say, there is not a tittle in it,
when rightly understood, to countenance any of
their suggestions : but as it is a solid proof of the
matter of fact, so it is an illustrious evidence of
Origen's belief, and clear explication of the unity of
the Godhead. For excepting that sort of unity,
which Origen and aU catholic writers reject as in
consistent with a real Trinity, that is, the unity of
hypostases, or persons, which none but Sabellians
and their followers maintain ; he asserts all other
kinds of unity, in opposition to Arians, who denied
the unity of essence or nature, and made the Son
to be of a different substance from the Father, as a
created Being; in opposition to the Marcionites,
and such other heretics, as maintained contrary
principles, one good, and another evil, in the God
head ; in opposition to the Tritheites, who brought
in the proper doctrine of three Gods, by denying
the subordination and relation of Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost, and asserting three co-ordinate and
independent principles, and baptizing in the name
of three such dvapxot, dvairtoi, and dykvvnroi, (as the
Apostolical Canons38 call them,) three unoriginated
and unbegotten principles, wholly independent of
one another ; in opposition to Hieracas and the
Triformians, who absurdly divided the Trinity into
three parts of one whole ; and finally, in opposition
to all that swarm of heretics, who distinguished,
with the Cerdonians, between the God of justice
and the God of goodness, styling the one the God
of the law and the prophets; and the other, the
Father of Christ and God of the gospel. Origen, I
say, in opposition to all these, asserts every sort of
unity, except the Jewish and Sabellian notion of
unity, which confines the Divine nature to one per
son. For, in saying first that the Son is the express
and true image of God the Father, he asserts the iden
tity of nature, against Arius ; and so could not believe
him to be a creature of a different substance or na
ture, but as a true Son, of the same essence with his
Father, and equal to him in all infinite and Divine
perfections. 2. In saying that he was a Son, deriv
ing his original from the Father, and not another
independent being, he maintains the unity of prin
ciple, and reserves to the Father the privilege of
being the fountain of the Deity ; and, consequently,
opposes the heresy of the Tritheites, who maintain
three co-ordinate and independent principles, and
destroy the monarchy, and make three Creators in-

38 Canon. Apost. c. 49.
35 Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 3. p. 131.

stead of one, by destroying the due subordination
and relation of the Son to the Father. 3. In say
ing that the Father and Son are one in agreement
and consent, and identity of wiU, he asserts the
unity of operation, creation, and government : which
destroys the heresy of those who maintained con
trary principles in the Godhead. 4. In saying
that the Son was equal to the Father in aU infinite
perfections, he rejects the absurdity of those who
dreamed of three parts in the Divine nature. 5.
In asserting Christ to be the Son of the Creator and
God of the Old Testament, he maintains the unity
of Providence, and refutes the heresy of those who
maintained that the Creator and God of the Old
Testament was a different God from the Father of
our Lord Jesus Christ. So that he maintains all
sorts of unity, except personal unity, which cannot
consist with a real Trinity in the Godhead. And
upon this foot he answers the objection of Celsus,
who charged the Christians with polytheism, for
giving Divine honour to Jesus Christ.
Having made this short and useful digression
upon this celebrated passage of Origen, to vindicate
it from the abuses of the modern Arians, I now re
turn to the history of fact, to show that Divine
worship was given to Christ as the Son of God.
And of this there is further evidence in Origen : for
this is not the only place in which he is put to vin
dicate the worship of Christ from the charge of
polytheism, which is frequently repeated by Celsus.
In the third Book38 Celsus objects, That they wor
shipped one who was apprehended and put to
death ; in which respect they were no better than
the Getee, who worshipped Zamolxis ; and the Ci-
licians, Mopsus ; and the Acarnanes, Amphilochus ;
and the Thebans, Amphiaraus ; and the Lebadians,
Trophonius. In replying to which, Origen says,
They offered their prayers to Christ, as Mediator
between God and men, who conferred the blessings
of the Father upon men, and presented their prayers,
as High Priest, to the God over aU. Not long after,
Celsus40 repeats the charge again, That they who
ridiculed the heathens for worshipping Jupiter,
whose sepulchre the Cretians could show, did them
selves worship one that was laid in the grave. In
the seventh Book, he renews the impeachment three
times, bidding the Christians'11, not be so ridiculous
as to revile the heathen gods as idols, whilst they
worshipped a God of their own more wretched
than any idol, and not so much as an idol, for that
he was truly dead. If they had a mind to innovate
in worshipping a dead man,42 they might with more
reason, he thinks, have chosen Hercules, or iEscu-
lapius, or Orpheus, or Anaxarchus, or Epictetus, or
Sibylla, rather than have made a god of one who

40 Ibid. lib. 3. p. 136.
42 Ibid. p. 367, 368.

41 Celsus, lib. 7. p. 358.

Chap. It.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

583

lived an infamous life, and died a miserable death.
Yea, they might have chosen among their own pro
phets, Jonas under the gourd, or Daniel in the lions'
den, as more worthy of this honour. He whom
they worshipped, he cries again,43 is no demon, but
a dead man. Thus, from the charges of Celsus, and
Origen's rephes, we may coUect what worship was
given to Christ as the Son of God, and also as Me
diator between God and men.
It is further observable, that Origen, in his first
Book,4' speaking of the wise men who came to wor
ship Christ, by the leading of a star, says, They
offered gifts to him suited to his different qualities,
who was compounded, as one might say, of God
and mortal man : they therefore presented him with
gold, as a king; with myrrh, as a mortal man that
should die ; and with frankincense, as a God. And
Origen himself, in his other works, frequently speaks
of his own prayers offered to Christ. In one of his
homilies45 he addresses him in these words : O Lord
Jesus, grant that I may be found worthy to have
some monument of me in thy tabernacle. I could
wish to offer gold, or silver, or precious stones, with
the princes of the people : but because these things
are above me, let me at least be thought worthy to
have goats' hair in the tabernacle of God, only that
I may not in all things be found empty and unfruit
ful. In another homily :46 We must pray to the Lord
Jesus and the Holy Spirit, that he would take away
that mist and darkness, which is contracted by the
filth of our sins, and dims the sight of our souls.
And again :47 I must pray to the Lord Jesus, that
when I seek he would grant me to find, and open
to me when I knock. And in another homily :48 Let
us pray from our hearts to the Word of God, who is
the only begotten of the Father, that reveals him
to whom he will, that he would vouchsafe to reveal
these things unto us. And he has many the like
prayers in his other discourses.49 But especially
that passage in his Comment on the Epistle to the
Romans is most remarkable, where he proves Christ
to be God, from his being called upon in prayer :
The apostle, he says, in those words, 1 Cor. i. 2,
" With aU that call on the name of the Lord Jesus
Christ," declares him to be God,56 whose name was

called upon. And if to call upon the name of the
Lord, and to adore God, be one and the self-same
thing; then as Christ is called upon, so is he to be
adored : and as we offer to God the Father first of all
prayers, so must we also to the Lord Jesus Christ ;
and as we offer supplications to the Father, so do
we also to the Son ; and as we offer thanksgivings to
God, so do we offer thanksgivings to our Saviour.
For the Holy Scripture teaches us, that the same
honour is to be given to both, that is, to God the
Father and the Son, when it says, " That they may
honour the Son, as they honour the Father."
Not long after Origen lived Novatian at Rome,
and Cyprian at Carthage, who both speak of the
prayers of the church, as offered up to Christ to
gether with the Father. Novatian51 makes it an
argument of his Divinity, that he is present in all
places to them that call upon him ; which belongs
not to the nature of man, but God. And he argues
further from the church's praying to him as Media
tor ; which kind of prayers would be of no use, if
he were a mere man : and from our obligations to
fix our hope on him, which would be a curse rather
than a blessing, if he were not God, as well as man.
For cursed is the hope that is placed only in man.
St. Cyprian in like manner speaks of his being wor
shipped in many places. In his book of the Ad
vantage of Patience, he styles him,62 the Lord God
of hosts, the God of the Christians : and particu
larly tells us, That God the Father has commanded
his Son to be worshipped ; and in regard to that
command, the apostle Paul says, " That God hath
highly exalted him, and given him a name above
every name ; that at the name of Jesus every knee
should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth,
and things under the earth:" and in the Revela
tion, when 'St. John would have worshipped the
angel, the angel opposed it, and said, " I am thy
fellow servant, and of thy brethren : worship the
Lord Jesus." So Cyprian reads it, Jesum Dominum
adora. And he uses this as an argument to per
suade men to patience, that the Lord Jesus, who
is worshipped in heaven, bears with many indigni
ties on earth, and does not avenge himself till his
second coming in glory. Again, in one of his epis-

43 Celsus, lib. 7. p. 976. « Ibid. lib. 1. p. 46.
45 Orig. Horn. 13. in Exod. xxv. t. 1. p. 102. Domine
Jesu, praesta mihi, ut aliquid monumenti habere merear in
tabernaculo tuo, &c.
3 Horn. 1. in Levit. p. 106. Ipse nobis Dominus, ipse
Sanctus Spiritus deprecandus est, ut omnem nebulam, ran-
riemque caliginem, quae peccatorum sordibus concreta, visum
nostri cordis obscurat, auferre dignetur, &c.
Horn. 5. in Levit. p. 126. Dominum meum Jesum in-
vocare me oportet, utquaerentem me faciat in venire, et pul-
santi aperiat, &c.
Horn. 26. in Numer. p. 271. Nos autem oremus ex
corde Verbum Dei, qui est unigenitus ejus, et qui revelat
Patrem quibus vult, ut et nobis haec revelare dignetur.

19 Orig. Horn. 3. in Ezek. p. 627. Praesta mihi, Christe,
ut disrumpam cervicalia in animarum consuta luxuriam. It.
t. 32. in Joan. p. 404. Utinam nobis adsit columna ilia
lucidae nubis Jesu, &c.
50 Orig. Com. in Rom. x. lib. 8. p. 587.
51 Novat.de Trin. cap. 14. Si homo tantummodo Christus;
quomodo adest ubique invocatus, cum haec hominis natura
non sit, sed Dei, ut adesse omni loco possit? Si homo tan-
tummndo Christus ; cur homo in orationibus Mediator m-
vocatur, cum invocatio hominis ad praestandam salutem m-
efficax judicetur? Si homo tantummodo Christus: cur
spes in ilium ponitur, cum spes in homine maledicta re
feratur ?
52 Cypr. De Bono Patientiae, p. 220.

584

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

ties, he speaks of their offering prayers to him as
Mediator58 first, and then by him to God the Fa
ther ; and that upon this double foundation, that he
was their Advocate and Intercessor, and also their
Lord and their God. In another place,54 writing to
Lucius, bishop of Rome, who had been a confessor
for Christ, he teUs him, They would not cease, in
their sacrifices and prayers, to give thanks for him
to God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ his
Son, and also make supplications and prayers for
him, that he who was the Author of all perfection,
would keep and consummate in him the glorious
crown of his confession. Not long after Cyprian,
Arnobius wrote in vindication of the Christian wor
ship, and here again he brings in the heathens
forming their usual charge against the worship of
Christ. Our gods,55 say they, are not displeased
with you for worshipping the Almighty God, but
that ye make a God of one that was born a man,
and put to death by the punishment of the cross
(an infamous punishment, only inflicted on vile
men) ; and because ye believe him to be yet alive,
and make daily supplications unto him. To this
he answers, first, upon their own principles, That
admitting it were so, that Christ were only a man,
yet he might with more reason deserve to be wor
shipped for his good deeds to mankind, than either
their Bacchus, or Ceres, or iEsculapius, or Minerva,
or Triptolemus, or Hercules, because there was no
comparison between their actions and his for the
benefit of the world. But, secondly, he answers
more closely upon true Christian principles, That
the reason of their worshipping Christ,56 was indeed
their certain knowledge that he was the true God,
whom they could not but worship and honour as
the Head of their body. And though an angry
heathen would rave at his being called God, yet
they must answer plainly, that he was God, and
God, too, of the interior powers of the soul ; that is,
" the searcher of the hearts and reins," which is

the peculiar property of God. The same objection
is once more proposed,57 and answered by Lactan
tius. They are wont, says he, to object to us his
passion, by way of reproach, that we worship a
man, and one that was put to a notorious death by
men. In replying to which, after having largely
set forth the reasons of his incarnation and suffer
ings, he at last answers that part of the objection
which concerns their worshipping him, and pleads,
that they worshipped him as one God with the Fa
ther. For, says he, when we speak of God the Fa
ther, and God58 the Son, we do not speak of diverse
natures, or separate the one from the other; for
neither can he be a Father without a Son, nor the
Son be divided from the Father : forasmuch as he
cannot be called a Father without a Son, nor the
Son be begotten without a Father. Seeing there
fore a Father makes a Son, and a Son makes a Fa
ther, they have both one mind, and one spirit, and
one substance : but the Father, as the fountain and
original; and the Son, as the stream flowing from
the fountain. A little after, he explains their58 unity
by this similitude : When any one hath a son, who
is his dearly beloved, as long as he is in his father's
house and under his hand, although he allow him
the name and power of lord, yet it is called but one
house, and one lord. So this world is one house
of God; and both the Son and the Father, who
unanimously dwell therein, are but one God; be
cause the one is as two, and the two as one. Mean
ing two persons, and one God. Nothing can be
plainer than these two things from the words of
Lactantius ; first, that Christians gave Divine wor
ship to Christ; secondly, that they gave him this
worship, as one God with the Father: and there
was no other way to avoid the charge of polytheism,
which they objected to the heathens, and the hea
thens were so desirous to recharge and throw back
upon them.
There is one thing more may be observed as very

53 Cypr. Ep. 8. al. 11. p. 25. Primo ipsum Dominum
rogare, turn deinde per ipsum Deo Patri satisfacere debe-
mus. Habemus Advocatum et Deprecatorem pro peccatis
nostris, Jesum Christum Dominum et Deum nostrum.
54 Cypr. Ep. 58. al. 61. p. 145. Hie quoque in sacrificiis
atque in orationibus nostris non cessantes Deo Patri et
Christo Filio ejus gratias agere, et orare pariter ac petere,
ut qui perfectus est atque perficiens, custodiat et perficiat in
vobis confessionis vestrae gloriosam coronam.
05 Arnob. cont. Gentes, lib. 1. p. 30. Sed non (inquitis)
idcirco dii vobis infesti sunt, quod omnipotentem colatis
Deum: sed quod hominem natum, et (quod personis in-
fame est vilibus) crucis supplicio interemptum, et Deum
fuisse contenditis, et superesse adhuc creditis, et quotidianis
supplicationibus adoratis.
56 Arnob. ibid. p. 36. Cum vero Deus sit re vera, et sine
ullius rei dubitationis ambiguo, inficiaturos arbitramini nos
esse, quam maxime ilium a nobis coli, et prasidem nostri
corporis nuncupari ? Ergone, inquiet aliquis furens — Deus
ille est Christus ? Deus, respondebinius : et interiorum
potentiarum Deus.

57 Lact. lib. 4. cap. 16. Venio nunc ad ipsam passione.m,
quae velut opprobrium nobis objectari solet, quod et homi
nem, et ab hominibus insigni supplicio affectum et excruci-
atum, colamus.
58 Ibid. cap. 29. De mortalitate jam diximus, nunc
de unitate doceamus. Cum dicimus Deum Patrem, et
Deum Filium, non diversum dicimus, nee utrumque secer-
nimus : quia nee Pater esse sine Filio potest, nee Filius
a Patre secerni : siquidem nee Pater nuncupari sine Filio,
nee Filius potest sine Patre generari. Cum igitur et Pater
Filium faciat, et Filius Patrem ; una utrique mens, unus
spiritus, una substantia : sed ille quasi exuberans fons est,
hie tanquam defluens ex eo rivus."
59 Ibid. Propiore exemplo uti libet : Cum quis habet
filium, quem unice diligit, qui tamen sit in domo, et in manu
patris, licet ei nomen domini potestatemque concedat,
civili tamen jure et domus una et unus dominus nominatur.
Sic hie mundus una Dei domus est : et Filius ac Pater, qui
unanimes incolunt mundum, Deus unus est; quia et unus
tanquam duo, et duo tanquam unus.

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

5S5

remarkable in this age, which was an age of great
persecution : that is, that the martyrs, who suffered
in it, commonly directed their last prayers, as St.
Stephen did, personally to Christ, in whose cause
they laid down their lives, and into whose hands
they resigned their spirit, commending then- souls to
him, as unto a faithful Creator and Redeemer. Thus
Eusebius observes of a whole city in Phrygia in the
time of the Diocletian persecution, that being all
met together in the church, men, women, and chil
dren, magistrates and people, (for the city was en
tirely Christian,) they were surprised by their ene
mies, and barbarously burnt all together in the
church, as they were at their devotions, calhng60
upon Christ, the God over all, rov iirl lrdvTtov Qebv
Xpitbv lirijlotopkvovg. So in a former persecution in
France under Antoninus, Blandina, one of the mar
tyrs, when she was put into a net, to be tossed by a
wUd bull, is said not to have been sensible of any
pain, whilst she made her prayers to Christ, Sid r-nv
bpiXiav irpdc tov Xpizbv."1 And Eusebius himself,
who gives us these particular relations, makes a
more general observation concerning the worship of
Christ, That the highest powers on earth confessed
and adored him,62 not as a common king, made by
men, but as the true Son of the supreme God, as
the true and very God ; who had preserved his
church against aU the opposition of so many fierce
persecutions ; there being nothing that was able to
withstand the wUl of that Word, who was the uni
versal King and Prince of all things, and very God68
himself. We see, in the opinion of Eusebius, the
ground of their worship was no other than his being
the hving and true God, and the great King of all
the earth. Which is the title that is given him in
the Acts of St. Felix, an African bishop, who suf-.
fered in the Diocletian persecution : O Lord God of
heaven and earth, Jesus Christ, I bow my neck64 to
thee as a sacrifice, who livest to all eternity : to
whom belongs honour and power for ever and ever.
Amen. And in the Acts of Thelica :63 1 give thanks
to the God of aU kingdoms. Lord Jesus Christ, we
serve thee : thou art om- hope : thou art the hope of
Christians : most holy God, most high God, God

Almighty, we give thanks to thee for thy great
name. So again, in the Acts of Emeritus i66 I be
seech thee, 0 Christ : I give thanks to thee : deliver
me, O Christ. In thy name I suffer, I suffer for a
moment, I suffer willingly : let me not be con
founded, 0 Christ. The curious reader may find
many other prayers in the like terms in the Pas
sions of Glycerius,87 Olympius,68 Ampelius,63 Eu-
plius,'6 Dativus,71 Saturninus 72 senior and junior,
recorded in Baronius, which I need not here tran
scribe. I only add two further instances out of
Eusebius and St. Ambrose. Eusebius,78 speaking of
the passion of Porphyrius, a Palestine martyr, and
one of the scholars of Pamphilus, says, When he
was surrounded with flames, he called upon Jesus
the Son of God to be his helper, and with those
words he gave up the ghost. And St. Ambrose74
tells us, Vitalis the martyr made this his last prayer :
O Lord Jesus Christ, my Saviour and my God,
command that my spirit may be received; for I de
sire to obtain the crown which thy holy angel hath
showed me.
It were easy to add many other testimonies of
the like nature, but these are abundantly sufficient
to show what was the practice of the church, in
reference to the worship of Christ, during the three
first ages, before Arianism appeared in the world,
or any of those difficult questions were raised, which
afterwards perplexed men with unintelligible subtle
ties, occasioned by the restless endeavours and so
phistry of the Arian party. The Christians of the
three first ages, we see, in their disputes with the
heathens, always, with a great deal of honest plain
ness and simplicity, freely owned that they worship
ped Christ as their Creator and their God ; not as a
creature, but as the true and living God ; equal to
the Father in all Divine perfections, as a genuine
Son ; who, as a Son, could not be another God, but
only one God with the Father. For they declared,
that so long as he was owned to be a true Son, he
could neither be a creature, nor another God, which
would imply another co-ordinate and independent
being, which was inconsistent with his being the
Son of God. They declared at the same time, that

" Euseb. lib. 8. cap. 11.
61 Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 1. p. 164. ex Epist. Eccles. Lugdun.
et Vien.
62 Ibid. lib. 10. cap. 4. p. 375. OvX ola koivov e£ dv-
Bptoirmv fiatnXia yEvopsvov bpoXoyEXerBeti, dXX' ola tb ra-
vo\u 0e5 iraXSa yvriaiov Kal avToBeov irpoerKWEtaBat, Sec.
Ibid. p. 376. Tt ydp epeXXE tu irapfiaatXEtos, Kal
ieavt)yEpovos Kal avTu 0e5 Xdya ivinaEoBai to) itvev-
pari. 64 Acta Felic. ap. Baron, an. 302. n. 124. Domine Deus
cosli et terrae, Jesu Christe, tibi cervicem meam ad victi-
mam flecto, qui permanes in aeternum : cui est claritas et
magnifieentia in saecula saeculorum. Amen.
65 Acta Thelicae, ap. Baron, an. 303. n. 41. Gratias ago
Deo regnorum. Domine Jesu Christe, tibi servimus : tu es
spes nostra : tu es spes Christianorum : Deus sanctissime,

Deus altissime, Deus omnipotens, tibi laudes pro nomine
tuo agimus.
66 Acta Emeriti, ap. Baron, an. 303. u. 50. Rogo, Christe :
tibi laudes : libera me, Christe. In nomine tuo patior, bre-
viter patior, libenter patior: Christe non confundar.
67 Acta Glycerii, ap. Baron, an. 301. n. 28.
68 Acta Olympii, ap. Baron, an. 259. u. 30.
69 Acta Ampelii, ap. Baron, an. 303. n. 52.
™ Acta Euplii, ibid. n. 148. 71 Acta Dativi, ibid. n. 44, 45.
72 Acta Saturnin. ibid. n. 48 et 54.
'3 Euseb. de Martyr. Palaest. c. 11. p. 339. Ton Ylov tu
Qeb 'IrjcrSy fior)Bdv iirtfiotopEvos.
74 Ambr. Hortat. ad Virgines, t. 1. p. 105. Domine Jesu
Christe, Salvator meus, et Deus meus, jube suscipi spiritum
meum; quia jam desidero ut accipiam coronam, quam
angelus tuus sanctus mihi ostendit.

586

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

it was unlawful and idolatry to give Divine worship
to any creature, or any being, how excellent soever,
that was not the hving and true God ; as we shall
see more fully in the next chapter : and that is
such a sensible and intelligible argument of their
believing the Son to be the living and true God, as
any one of the meanest capacity may understand ;
and it is such an argument of his Divinity, as all
the art and sophistry in the world cannot evade,
without charging those holy men with the grossest
idolatry, and self-condemnation, and a flat contra
diction of their principles in their practice, if they
gave Divine honour to one, whom they did not be
lieve to be by nature the living and true God. And
for this reason I have insisted a little the longer
upon this plain way of proving their belief of the
Divinity of our blessed Lord, from their constant
and universal practice in giving Divine worship to
him as their God. And as to those distinctions be
tween absolute, relative, and mediatorial worship ;
or those of latria, dulia, and hyperdulia, (hard words
invented to solve the idolatry of later ages,) whatever
shelter modern idolaters may think to find in them ;
the ancients had no occasion to lay the stress of
their cause upon any such subtleties and distinctions.
For they knew no distinction between latria, dulia,
and hyperdulia, when they spake of religious worship,
but plainly said all religious worship was solely due
to God: and though they distinguished between
absolute, relative, and mediatorial worship, yet they
gave all these to the Son ; worshipping him with
mediatorial worship, as the only proper Mediator in
both natures between God and man; beseeching
him by his own merits, as their great High Priest,
to present their prayers to the Father ; and with
relative worship, as the Son of God, whose honour
redounds to the Father ; and with absolute worship,
as their Creator and Author of their being ; de
claring it to be idolatry to give any such honour
to any mere creature. So that either they believed
Christ to be the living and true God, or else it is
impossible to understand men by their words or
practice. sect. 4. We are now to see whether they
shfp°°oi 0theheiMJ gave the same Divine honour to the
Holy Ghost. And for this the reader
only needs to look back into the former proofs ; for
many of the preceding allegations join the Son
and Holy Ghost together. Polycarp's doxology75
is to the whole Trinity : To Thee (the Father) with
him (the Son) and the Holy Spirit, be glory now
and for ever. Amen. Justin Martyr76 declares
also to the heathen, that the object of their wor

ship was the whole Trinity : We worship and adore
the God of righteousness, and his Son, and the
Holy Spirit of prophecy. And again he proves,77
That Christians were no atheists, as the heathens
objected, because they worshipped the Creator of
all things, and his Son Jesus Christ in the second
place, and the Holy Spirit of prophecy in the third
place : only observing the natural order of the per
sons, not distinguishing them into one God and two
creatures ; for then it had been unlawful to wor
ship them upon their principles, which denied Di
vine worship to any thing that by nature was not
God. We have heard Lucian before, representing
the Christian worship,78 as the worship of the great
God of heaven, and the Son of the Father, and the
Spirit proceeding from the Father, three of one, and
one of three. Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, express
ly mentions the Trinity,73 under the title of the Fa
ther, his Word, and his Wisdom ; and says further,
That it was his Word and his Wisdom to whom he
said80 in the beginning, " Let us make man." So that
if the Holy Ghost was the Creator of man, there can
be no dispute but that he was worshipped as his
Creator together with the Father and Son. We
have heard Clemens Alexandrinus concluding his
Pedagogue81 with this doxology, To the Father,
and the Son, with the Holy Spirit, be glory now
and for ever. Amen. We have heard St. Basil
testifying of Athenogenes the martyr,82 that he
composed a hymn to the glory of the Holy Ghost ;
and that the church, time out of mind, used that
known doxology in her evening hymn at setting
up lights, We laud the Father, and the Son, and the
Holy Spirit of God. Which hymn was so ancient,
that St. Basil professes he knew not who was the
author of it. He testifies further in the same place,
that Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, was always
wont to use this form of doxology; To God the
Father, and the Son our Lord Jesus Christ, with
the Holy Ghost, be glory and dominion now and
for ever. Amen. We have heard Origen saying,88
That we are to pray to the Lord, to the Holy Spirit ;
that he would vouchsafe to take away that mist and
darkness, which is contracted in our hearts by the
defilement of sin, and dims the sight of our minds.
They that said such things as these, did certainly
own and practise the religious adoration and worship
ofthe Holy Ghost. And all this we have seen proved
in the former allegations. To which we may here
add that plain testimony of Origen upon the first
chapter to the Romans, where he compares the prac
tice of the heathens and Christians.94 It is the pro
perty of those only to dishonour their bodies, says he,

75 Polycarp. Martyr, ap. Coteler. t. 2. p. 199.
™ Justin. Apol. 2. p. 56. " Ibid. p. 60.
78 Lucian, Philopatris.
79 Theoph. ad Autolyc. lib. 2. p. 106. » Ibid. p. 114.
81 Clem. Pecdagog. lib. 3.

82 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 29.
83 Orig. Horn. 1. in Levit. p. 106.
81 Orig. in Rom. i. lib. 1. p. 468. Eorum est contume-
liis afficeie corpora sua, qui deserviunt simulacris ; et eorum
colere creaturam, qui dereliquerunt Creatorem. Nos autein

Chap. II.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

587

who serve idols ; and of them only to worship the
creature, who have forsaken the Creator. As for us,
who worship and adore no creature, but the Father,
and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as we do not err
in our worship, so neither let us offend in our ac
tions and conversation : but, looking to what the
apostle says, " Know ye not, that your bodies are
the members of Christ?" and again, "that your
bodies are the temples of the Holy Ghost?" let us
keep our bodies in aU holiness and purity, as mem
bers of Christ, and as temples of the Holy Spirit.
St. BasU, who wrote in defence of the worship of
the Holy Ghost, cites another passage of Origen,
out of his Commentaries85 upon St. John, wherein
he speaks of the worship of the whole Trinity in the
celebration of baptism, saying, Baptism, by virtue
of the invocations there made, is the fountain and
spring of spiritual graces to every one that dedicates
himself to the Divine Majesty of the adorable
Trinity. In which words Origen, by invocations,
seems to refer to two things : first, the consecration
of water to a mystical use, which was always per
formed by prayer, (as I have showed at large in
another place,86) and secondly, the form of baptism,
which was always administered in the name of the
holy Trinity ; in like manner as bread and wine in
the eucharist was consecrated by invocation of the
three Divine persons. Which is expressly said by
St. Cyril,87 That before invocation of the adorable
Trinity it is common bread and wine, but after in
vocation it is made the body and blood of Christ.
Where he uses the same expression about the con
secration of the eucharist, as Origen does about
baptism, saying, that it was done by invocation of
the adorable Trinity. And this is what Justin Mar
tyr88 means, when he says, That the minister, in
consecrating the eucharist, sent up praise and glory
lo the Father of aU by the name of his Son and
Holy Spirit. Optatus,99 speaking of the sacrilege
of the Donatists, says, They had broken down the
altars, where God Almighty was wont to be invo-
cated, and the Holy Ghost prayed to, that he might
come down and sanctify the oblation. Theophilus

of Alexandria says, in like manner,90 That the bread
and wine in the eucharist was consecrated by the
invocation and descent of the Holy Ghost. And
we are told, that in the old Gallican liturgy the ob
lation prayer91 was conceived in this form : Receive,
O holy Trinity, this oblation, which we offer unto
thee, in memory of the passion, resurrection, and
ascension. And, probably, Origen might have re
spect to some such invocation of the holy Trinity
in the consecration of the waters of baptism. How
ever, the form of administering baptism in the name
of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, was ever
esteemed an act of adoration of the Trinity, both as
a profession of faith in three Divine persons, and
as a dedication of the party to the service of the
holy Trinity, and as a solemn invocation of their
benediction. The ancient author of The Recogni
tions, who lived before Origen, says expressly,92 That
baptism was anciently given by invocation of the
name of the blessed Trinity. By which we can
understand nothing but joining the Holy Ghost as
God with the Father and the Son in the same act
of adoration, expressed either in the prayers or form
of baptism. And hence the ancients were used to
prove the Holy Ghost98 to be God, because he was
joined in the same Divine worship with the Father
and the Son in the administration of baptism. And
that baptism was generaUy esteemed null and void,
which was given to any person without mentioning
the Holy Ghost, as well as Father and Son, as I
have fully showed in another place.94
It is further observable, that in Tertullian's time,
the worship of the Holy Ghost was so common in
the church, that Praxeas and other Unitarians were
ready to charge the cathohcs with tritheism, or the
worship of three. Gods, upon this account. They
boasted that95 they were the only persons who truly
worshipped one God, and preserved the Divine mon
archy entire ; whilst all other Christians, by wor
shipping three persons, introduced the worship of
three Gods : As if, says Tertullian, the Unity ab
surdly collected, might not make a heresy ; and a
Trinity rationally conceived, might not consist with

qui nullam creaturam, sed Patrem, Filium, et Spiritum
banctum colimus et adoramus, sicut non erramus in cultu,
ita nee in actibus quidem et conversatione peccemus, &c.
* Orig. t. 6. in Joan. ap. Basil, de Spir. Sanct. cap. 29.
lip EpiraptxovTl iavTov Trj Beottjti tt/s irpoaKvvijTrjs
iptaSos, Sti Ttjs SvvdpEtos Ttov EiriKXriaEtov, xaptapaTuov
<VX'I" 'X" Kal irt)yr)v.
33 Book XI. chap. 10. sect. 1, 2.
87 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 1. n. 4. Upb Ti)s dyias iwi-
KXtitrEtos Tils irpotrKvvr)Tr]s TpedSos apTos f)v Kal dlvos XtTtis,
&c. It. Catech. 3. n. 3. MetA ti\v iiriKXrio-tv tov 'Ayiov
IlmuitaTos, Ik eti apTos Xitos.
__ ¦ Justin. Apol. 2. p. 97. Alvov Kal Sdgav Tip TlaTpl Ttov
oKuv, Sid tov SvdpaTos tov Ylov Kal tov ITvEupaTos tov
Ayiov dvairipiTEt.
Optat. lib. 6. p. 93. Quid tam sacrilegum, quam altaria
ei fraugere, quo Deus omnipotens invocatus sit, quo postu

late descendit Spiritus Sanctus ?
99 Theophil. Ep. Paschal. 1. Bibl. Patr. t.3. p. 87. Panem
Dominicum  per invocationem et adventum Sancti Spi
ritus consecrari.
91 Microlog. de Observat. Eccles. cap. 11. Suscipe sancta
Trinitas hanc oblationem, quam tibi offerimus in memoriam
passionis, resurrectionis, ascensionis.
92 Clemen. Becognit. lib. 3. cap. 67. Baptizabitur unus
quisque vestrum in aquis pereunibus, nomine trinae Beati-
tudinis invocato super se.
93 Vid. Idaciurn, lib. 3. contra Varimundum, Bibl. Patr. t.
4. p. 300. Basil, de Spir. Sanct. cap. 29.
91 Book XI. chap. 3. sect. 2.
85 Tertul. cont. Prax. cap. 3. Duos et tres jam jactitant
a nobis pradicari, se vero unius Dei cultores praesumunt :
quasi non et unitas irrationaliter collecta, haeresin faciat ;
et Trinitas rationaliter expensa veritatem constituat.

588

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

Unity. He there explains how these three are one
God,95 by unity of original, by unity of substance,
condition, and power. And he adds, That as the
Father was God, so the Son96 was God, and the
Holy Ghost God. And says in another place,97
That the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, was a
Trinity in one Godhead, or Divine nature. So that
it is plain, the difference then between the Praxean
heretics and the catholics was, that the Praxeans
worshipped but one person as God ; but the catho
lics worshipped three persons, Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost, under the title and appellation of one
God. And Erasmus was wonderfully mistaken,
when he asserted, that the name, God, was never
given to the Holy Ghost before the time of St.
Hilary, in the middle of the fourth century ; when
it is so evident he had both the name and worship
of God given him in the time of TertuUian, and in
effect by all Christians in former ages, whilst they
joined him in all acts of Divine worship and glorifi
cation with the Father and Son as one God.
Cyprian expressly styles him God, when, dis
puting against the validity of heretical baptism, he
uses this argument:98 If a man can be baptized by
heretics, he may obtain remission of sins ; if he
may obtain remission of sins, he may be sanctified
and be made the temple of God. I ask, of what
God ? If it be said, the Creator ; he cannot be his
temple, who believes not in him. If Christ ; neither
can he be his temple, who believes not Christ to be
God. If the Holy Ghost ; seeing the three are
one, how can the Holy Spirit be reconciled to him
who is an enemy to the Father or the Son ? As the
Holy Ghost is here plainly styled God, so every
true Christian is said to be the temple of the Holy
Ghost, as God ; and temples being for the worship
of God, it may be concluded, that, according to
Cyprian, the Holy Ghost was then worshipped in
all his living temples as God.
At the same time with Cyprian lived those two
shining lights of the Asiatic church, Firmilian,
bishop of Csesarea, and Gregory, of Neocaesarea,
from his power in working miracles, surnamed
Thaumaturgus. Of both these St. Basil99 testifies,
That in their prayers and books they were always
wont to use this doxology, To God the Father, and
his Son our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Holy
Ghost, be glory and dominion for ever and ever.
And this is the doxology that most commonly
occurs in the author of, the Constitutions, which,

though I do not, with a late author, take for an in
spired writing, nor for the genuine work of Clemens
Romanus, yet I believe it to be a very good collec
tion ofthe rituals and liturgy ofthe ancient church
for the three first ages, and not infected with those
pernicious principles of Arianism, which some would
fain father upon him, who pervert his words, as
they do the other Ante-Nicene writers, from their
proper meaning to an heretical sense. This author,
I say, commonly uses that doxology which is so
much commended by St. Basil, as expressing the
true worship of the holy Trinity. Of which I shall
give a few instances out of his eighth Book, which
is a collection of the forms of prayer used in the
ancient service. In the twelfth chapter of that
Book the oblation prayer is thus concluded : We
beseech thee to gather us into the kingdom of thy
Christ, the God of the whole nature of things both
visible and invisible, and our King ; for to thee be
longs all glory, and worship, and thanksgiving, and
honour, and adoration, the Father, and the Son,
and the Holy Ghost, now and for ever, throughout
all ages, world without end. In the thirteenth
chapter, the prayer after consecration ends in the
same manner : By thy Christ, to whom, with thee
and the Holy Ghost, be glory, honour, and praise,
doxology, and thanksgiving, for ever and ever. In
the same chapter all the people sing this hymn to
Christ : There is one holy, one Lord Jesus Christ,
blessed for ever, to the glory of God the Father.
Glory be to God on high, and on earth peace, good
will towards men. Hosanna to the Son of David:
blessed be God the Lord, who came in the name of
the Lord, and was manifested unto us : hosanna in
the highest. In the fourteenth chapter, after the
communion, the deacon says, irapaBtbptBa, Let us
commend ourselves to God, the only unbegotten
God, and to his Christ. Now the irapaBkong, or
commendations, were one sort of prayers, as I shall
show hereafter.100 Then the bishop makes a thanks
giving in the fifteenth chapter, which he concludes
in these words : By Jesus Christ our Lord, to whom,
with thee and the Holy Ghost, be glory, honour,
and adoration, now and for ever. Amen. And in
his invocation in the same chapter, he says, To thee
and thy Son Jesus, thy Christ, our Lord, and God,
and King, and to the Holy Ghost, be glory, praise,
majesty, worship, and adoration, now and for ever,
world without end. Amen. There are many other
such doxologies in other prayers throughout this

95 Tertul. cont. Prax. cap. 2. Tres sunt unius substantias,
et unius status, et unius potestatis : quia unus Deus, ex quo
(tres) in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti deputantur.
96 Ibid. cap. 13. Et Pater Deus, et Filius Deus, et Spi
ritus Sanctus Deus, et Deus unusquisque.
97 Tertul. de Pudicitia, cap. 21. Trinitas unius Divinita-
tis, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus.
98 Cypr. Ep. 73. ad Jubaian. p. 203. Si baptizari quis
apud haereticos potuit, utique et remissam peccatorum con-

sequi potuit. Si peccatorum remissam consecutus est, et
sanctificatus est, et templum Dei factus est; quaoro, cujus
Dei? Si Creatoris; non potuit qui in eum nun credidit.
Si Christi ; nee hujus fieri potest templum, qui negat Deum
Christum. Si Spiritus Sancti; cum tres unum sint, quo
modo Spiritus Sanctus placatus ei esse potest, qui aut Pa
tris aut Filii inimicus est ?
99 Basil, de Spir. Sanct. cap. 29.
109 Book XV. chap. 3. sect. 29.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

589

this Book,101 which I need not here repeat. For
if these be not plain instances of the worship
of the Holy Ghost, together with the Father and
the Son, it is hard to say what words can ex
press it. Now, then, by all this we may inter-
in iK'sense aii pret the meaning of that African
pravers are ordered i_- i_ J n .. il
to be directed to the canon, which orders all prayers at the
altar to be directed to the Father.102
For that was not intended to exclude the worship
of the Son and Holy Ghost together with the Fa
ther; for the hymns and doxologies before men
tioned, which were used at the altar, plainly show
the contrary : but it was designed, that when the
sacrifice of Christ was commemorated, he should
be considered as the great Mediator, by whose sa
crifice we apply to the Father, and have access by
his merits and intercession to the throne of grace
and mercy. And therefore all prayers at the altar
are ordered to be directed to the Father in his name :
which very application was a worship of the Son
as Mediator, and an honour peculiar to him, and in
communicable to any creature. In other prayers,
direct applications were made to the Son, as we
have seen before in that of the Constitutions,103 for
the dispossessing of devils : and in these prayers at
the altar, the glorification was in common to the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Whence Fulgentius,
who was an African bishop, and therefore may be
presumed to understand the meaning of the African
canons, tells us,104 That all worship and adoration of
honour and sacrifice was equally given to the Fa
ther, Son, and Holy Ghost, that is, to the holy
Trinity, by the catholic church. And that it was no
prejudice to the Son or the Holy Ghost, that the
minister at the altar directed the prayers to the per
son of the Father ; for in the end of them, the
names of the Son and Holy Spirit were always ex
pressed ; and that showed, that there was no differ
ence in the holy Trinity : because when the words
were only directed to the person of the Father, yet
the whole Trinity was honoured by the faith of the
true believer; and whilst the intention ofthe sacri
fice was more peculiarly fixed upon the Father, the
sacrifice itself was by one and the same act offered
to the whole Trinity. From all which it is evident
to a demonstration, that the three persons of the
holy Trinity were always the object of Divine ador
ation from the first foundation of the Christian
church, and that the giving of Divine honour to the

Son and Holy Ghost, as God, was not the invention
or addition of any later ages.

CHAPTER III.

THAT IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
WAS GIVEN TO NO CREATURE, SAINT OR ANGEL,
BUT TO GOD ALONE.
It has been observed in the foregoing
chapter, that the worship of Christ This'posi'tio'nprov-
. ..... ed first from their
in the primitive church was esteemed general declarations
against giving rcli-
a good argument of his Divinity, be- g'°us worship to any
00 J ' creature.
cause it was then an undoubted prin
ciple, that no creature, how excellent soever, was
to be worshipped with religious worship, but only
the living and true God. And an Arian or a So-
cinian can never answer or evade this argument
from antiquity, so long as both these assertions stand
good, that Christ was worshipped with religious
worship, and that nothing is to be worshipped with
religious worship but only the living and true God.
The force of this argument has been much weakened,
and indeed wholly enervated and destroyed, by the
writers of the Romish church, in whose mouths the
argument signifies nothing to an Arian or Socinian,
because their own practice, in giving religious wor
ship to saints and angels, is a sufficient answer to it.
For upon supposition that saints and angels may be
worshipped, the worship of Christ can be no argu
ment of his Divinity, no more than it is of the Di
vinity of saints or angels, because they are worship
ped in the Romish church. But upon the principles
of the primitive church, the argument is unanswer
able : for, at the same time that they asserted the
worship of Christ, they asserted, likewise, that re
ligious worship was not to be given to any creature,
but to God alone. And in this view, the argument
for Christ's Divinity was very rational and solid.
As, therefore, we have seen the truth of the first po
sition, That Christ was religiously worshipped in
the primitive church, made good from their unde
niable assertions and practice ; so now we will a
little examine the truth of the second, That nothing
is to be religiously worshipped but only the living
and true God. Which position is designed to be
handled here, only as an illustration and confirm-

101 Vid. Constit. lib. 8. cap. 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 29, 37, 38,
39,41. 102 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 23.
103 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 7.
104 Fulgent, ad Monimum, lib. 2. cap. 5. Omne cujus-
bbet honorificentiae et sacrificii salutaris obsequium, et Patri
et Filio et Spiritui Sancto, hoc est, sancta! Trinitati ab ec
clesia catholica pariter exhiberi.  Neque enim prayudi-

cium Filio vel Sancto Spiritui comparatur, dum ad Pati is
personam precatio ab offerente dirigitur. Cujus consum-
matio dum Filii et Spiritus Sancti complectitur nomen,
ostendit nullum esse in Trinitate discrimen. Quia dum ad
solius Patris personam sermd dirigitur, bene credentis fide
tota Trinitas honoratur: etcum ad Patrem litantis destina-
tur intentio, sacrificii munus omni Trinitati uno eodemque
offertur litantis officio.

590

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

ation of the argument for the Divinity of Christ,
drawn from the practice of the primitive church in
giving religious adoration to him. And the truth of
this proposition I shall confirm briefly these three
ways : I. By showing, in general, that the ancients de
clare universally against giving religious worship or
adoration to any creature, or being which by nature
is not God. 2. That in particular they rejected the
worship of saints and angels, as idolatry and unlaw
ful. 3. That there is no mention made of it but in
the practice either of heretics or heathens, whose
idolatry is aggravated upon the account of this prac
tice. In the first place it is observable, that the
ancients in general declare against giving religious
worship to any creature, or being which by nature
is not God. It would fill a whole volume to cite
all that is said by the ancients upon this head, there
fore I shall content myself to select a few plain
passages out of an infinite number that might be
alleged to this purpose. Justin Martyr1 often tells
the emperors in his Apology, That Christians could
worship none but God alone : and that Christ had
taught them so in saying, Thou shalt worship the
Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve with
all thy heart, and with all thy strength, the Lord
God that made thee ; and again in saying, " Render
to Caesar the things that are Ceesar's, and to God the
things that are God's." Therefore we worship God
alone, but in all other things we cheerfully serve
you. In like manner Theophilus, bishop of An
tioch : I will honour the king, says he, not by wor
shipping him, but praying for him. But I will
worship God, the living and true God, knowing that
by him the king is ordained. You will say then,
Why do you not worship the king? Because he is
not made to be worshipped, but to be honoured with
lawful honour. For he is not a, God, but a man.
And as he will not suffer any other to assume the
title of king but himself; so neither is it lawful2 to
worship any other but God alone. In another
place3 he says, God's laws forbid not only the wor
ship of idols, but all other creatures, the sun, moon,
and stars, heaven, earth, and sea ; and command
the worship of the true God alone, who is the Crea
tor of all things. After the same manner Tertul
lian, speaking of the Christians' prayers for the em

perors and the peace of the world,4 says, They asHed
these things of the hving and true God, and they
could ask them of no other but him, of whom they
were sure to obtain them, because he alone was
able to give them. And he repeats the same in
several5 other places of his writings. This was the
answer which the martyrs commonly gave to the
persecuting judges, when they solicited them to
worship other gods. When Fructuosus (a Spanish
bishop and martyr, who suffered at Tarragone about
the year 262) was commanded to sacrifice, he re
plied, I only worship one God,6 the Maker of heaven
and earth, and of all things that are therein. And
so Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, answered Mmy-
lian the prefect, as he himself tells us in an epistle
recorded by Eusebius :7 I have publicly testified,
says he, that I worship none but the true God alone,
neither can I ever depart from this practice, or cease
to be a Christian. And when iEmylian urged him
further to worship the gods of the empire together
with his own God, his answer was still the same,
We worship him and no other. There are many the
like expressions in Irenaeus,8 Clemens Alexandrinus,"
Origen,10 Cyprian," Lactantius,12 the author of the
Recognitions under the name of Clemens Ro
manus,18 Athenagoras, Tatian, and others; which,
because the learned reader may have recourse to
himself, or read them collected together in one view
in that excellent book of Mr. Daille,14 against the
idolatry of the church of Rome, I shall here omit
them, and proceed
To the second observation ; which is,
That the ancients not only in general 0,%""^^''^
reject the worship of any creature, but "7^ <nT»*
reject the worship of saints and angels demnihgl™ «¦ looi-
in particular, as idolatry and unlaw- " n'
ful. And of this we cannot have a plainer proof
than was given in the answer of the church of
Smyrna to the suggestion of the Jews, when, at the
martyrdom of Polycarp, the Jews desired the heathen
judge, that he would not permit the Christians to
carry off the body of Polycarp, lest they should
leave their crucified Master, and begin to worship
this man in his stead. This suggestion, says the
answer, proceeded purely from ignorance, that we
could neither forsake Christ, nor worship any15

1 Just. Apol. 2. p. 63. Tov Qedv pdvov SeX wpoo-kweXv,
Sec. It. p. 64. "08Ef Qeov povov irpoaKwovpev, Sic.
2 Theoph. ad Autolyc. lib. 1. p. 30. OvSk dKXtp i%bv eVt
irpocrKVVEiceBai, dXX' v pdvtp Geoj.
8 Id. lib. 2. p. 173. Movtp ™ ovtios Oeri Kal irotr)T,j Ttov
tiXtov XPV XaTpEVEtv.
1 Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Nos pro salute imperatorum
Deum invocamus aeternum, Deum verum, Deum vivum.
 Haec ab alio orare non possum, quam a quo me scio
consecuturum, quoniam et ipse est qui solus praestat, &c
5 Tertul. Scopiac. cap. 4. Praiscribitur mihi, ne quem
alium adorem, aut qunquomodo venerer, praeter unicum
ilium, qui ita mandat. Vid. Apol. c. 17. et ad Scapul. c. 2.

6 Acta Fructuosi, ap. Baron, an. 262. n. 62. Ego unum
Deum colo, qui fecit coelurn et terrain, et omnia quae in eis
sunt. 7 Dionys..Epist. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. <.. 11. Ton Qeov tou
iivTa povov, Kal ovSiva ETEpov crifluiv.
9 Iren. lib. 5 cap. 22.
9 Clem. Strom. 6. p. 825.
10 Orig. cont. Cels. lib. 1. p. 10. lib. 8. p. 395. et passim.
11 Cypr. Ep. 58. It. ad Demetrian. p. 130.
12 Lactant. lib. 2. cap. 1. lib. 4. •.-. 14.
13 Recognit. lib. 5. c. 16.
" Dallse. de Objecto Cult. Religiosi, lib. 1. cap. 2, 3, 4.
15 Martyr. Polycarp. ap. Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 15. p. 131.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

591

other. For we worship him, as being the Son of
God ; but the martyrs, as the disciples and followers
of the Lord, we love with a due affection, for their
great love of their own King and Master; with
whom we desire to be partners and fellow disciples.
A like answer was given at the martyrdom of Fruc-
tuosus in Spain. For when the judge asked Eulo
gius, his deacon, whether he would not worship
Fructuosus ? as thinking, that he who refused to
worship the heathen idols, might yet perhaps be
inclined to worship a Christian martyr: to this
Eulogius plainly rephed, I do not worship 16 Fructu
osus, but I worship him whom Fructuosus worships.
We are beholden to Baronius himself for this testi
mony : and we cannot desire a clearer evidence, that
in those early times the Christians did not worship
the martyrs, but only the God of the martyrs, to
whom the martyrs offered their own bodies in sacri
fice, whilst they died for his name, and sealed their
confession with their blood. Before this, Origen, in
his answers to Celsus, positively denies that ever
the Jews or Christians gave any religious worship
to angels. He says, They are ministering spirits,
that bring the gifts of God to us, but there is no
command in Scripture to worship1' or adore them.
For aU prayers, supplications, intercessions, and
giving of thanks, are to be sent up to God by the
great High Priest, the hving Word of God, who is
superior to aU angels. He says again,18 Allowing
what Celsus pleaded to be true, that the angels were
God's heralds and heavenly messengers ; yet still
the heralds and messengers were not to be worship
ped, but he whose heralds and messengers they
were. He repeats this frequently in his eighth Book
in several places,18 which for brevity's sake I here
omit, only reciting one passage more, because it so
handsomely meets with that common pretence of
the Romanists, that we are to worship angels, be
cause they are the friends of God. We must endea
vour, says he,20 to please God alone, who is above
aU things, and labour to have him propitious unto
us, procuring his good will with piety and all kind
of virtue. And if Celsus will yet have us to pro
cure the good will of any others, after him that is
God over all ; let him consider, that as, when the
body is moved, the shadow follows its motion ; so,
in like manner, when we have God, who is over all,

favourable unto us, it follows, that we shall have all
his friends, both angels, and souls, and spirits, fa
vourable unto us also. For they have a fellow feel
ing with them that are thought worthy to find fa
vour from God. Neither are they only favourable
to such as are thus worthy, but they labour with
them also that are willing to worship God over all,
and are friendly to them, and sympathize with
them, and pray with them. So that we may be
bold to say, that when men, who with resolution
propose unto themselves the best things, do pray
unto God, many thousands of the sacred powers
pray together with them unspoken to, a/c\<jroi, with
out any invocation. A hke answer is given to the
same pretence by the author under the name of St
Ambrose. Men are wont, says he,21 when they are
ashamed of their neglecting of God, to use this
miserable excuse ; that by these they might go to
God, as by officers we go to the king. To which
he answers, Is any man so mad, or so unmindful of
his salvation, as to give the king's honour- to an
officer ; when if any shall be found but to treat of
such a matter, they will be justly condemned as
guilty of high treason ? And yet these men think
themselves not guilty, who give the honour of God's
name to a creature, and forsaking the Lord, adore
their fellow servants ; as though there were any
thing more that could be reserved to God. For
therefore men go to the king by tribunes or officers,
because the king is but a man, and knows not with
whom he may intrust the affairs of the common
wealth. But to obtain the favour of God, (from
whom nothing is hid, for he knows the merits of all
men,) we have no need of an advocate or spokesman,
but only a devout mind. For wheresoever such a
one shall speak unto him, he will answer him. We
have heard before out of Irenteus,22 that the church
in his time, though she wrought many miracles for
the benefit of men, yet did nothing by invocation of
angels, but only by prayer to God and the Lord Je
sus Christ. And that thus it continued to be in the
time of Athanasius, appears plainly from his way of
disputing with the Arians, when he proves the
unity of the Father and Son, from the apostle's
joining them together in prayer, 1 Thess. iii. 11,
" God himself and our Father, and our Lord Jesus
Christ, direct our way unto you." No man, says he,28

16 Acta Fructuosi, ap. Baron, an. 262. n. 62. Ego F-ruc-
tuosum non cob, sed ipsum colo, quem et Fructuosus. Vid.
Aug. Serm. 101. de Diversis, p. 571.
17 Orig. cont. Cels. lib. 5. p. 233. Ovx ioaTE irpoo-Tua-
VEtiBai hpivTobs StaKovovvTas — aipEiv teal irpoaKWEXv dvTt
tov GeoD, &c. is Ibid. p. 239.
18 Lib. 8. p. 416. » Ibid. p. 420.
21 Ambros. in Rom. i. Solent tamen pudorem passi neg-
lectiDei,miseraeauti excusatione, dicentes, Per istos posse
ire ad Deum, sicut per comites pervenitur ad regem. Age,
nunquid tam demens est aliquis, aut salutis suae immemor,
ut honorificentiam regis vindicet comiti, cum de hac re si

qui etiam tractare fuerint inventi, jure ut rei majestatis
damnentur? Et isti se non putant rcos, qui honorem no-
minis Dei deferunt creaturae, et relicto Domino conserviis
adorant ; quasi sit aliquid plus, quod reservetur Deo. Nam
et ideo ad regem per tribunos aut comites itur, quia homo
utique est rex, et nesciat quibus debeat rempublicam cre
dere. Ad Deum, (ante quem nihil latet, omnium enim
merita novit,) promerendum suffragatore non opus est, sed
mente devota. ,..,-.
22 Iren. lib. 2. c. 57. Nee invocatiombus angelicis tacit,
nee incantationibus, &c.
23 Athan. Orat. 4. cont. Arian. t. 1. p. 464.

592

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

would pray to receive any thing from the Father
and the angels, or from any other of the creatures :
neither would any man say, God and the angel give
me this. And whereas the Arian might have said,
that Jacob joined God and the Angel together in
prayer, Gen. xlviii. 16 ; Athanasius obviates this
exception, by saying, He did not join one of the
created angels, who are angels by nature, with God,
who was their Creator; neither did he, omitting
God that fed him, desire a blessing from an angel
upon his children : but in saying, " the Angel which
redeemed me from all evil," he showed that it was
not any of the created angels, but the Word of God,
whom he joined with the Father, and prayed unto
him. There had been no force in this argument,
had the church used invocation of angels in her
prayers in the time of Athanasius : the Arian
might easily have replied, that his argument was
refuted by experience in the church's daily practice.
But that neither men nor angels were the object of
religious adoration in his time, appears further from
another discourse of his against the Arians,24 where
he argues thus : Peter the apostle did forbid Cor
nelius, when he would have worshipped him, saying,
" I myself am also a man," Acts x. 26. And the
angel likewise did forbid John, when he would have
worshipped him, in the Revelation, saying, " See
thou do it not ; for I am thy fellow servant, and of
thy brethren the prophets, and of them who keep
the sayings of this book : worship God," Rev. xxii.
9. Wherefore it belongs to God only to be wor
shipped. And this the angels very well know, that
though they excel others in glory, yet they are all
but creatures, and not in the number of those that
are to be worshipped, but of those that worship the
Lord. We cannot have clearer evidences than these
either of the church's doctrine or practice. Both
which are equally attested by St. Austin, in his
book of True Religion ; where he makes it a dis
tinguishing character and property of true religion,
to worship no sort of creature, particularly neither
angels, nor saints after death, but the sovereign
majesty of God alone. Let not our religion,25 says

he, consist in the worship of dead men : because if
they lived piously, they are not esteemed such as
would desire that kind of honour ; but would have
Him to be worshipped by us, by whose illumination
they rejoice to have us partners with them in their
merit. They are, therefore, to be honoured for imi
tation, not to be worshipped for religion. A httle
after he says, That which the highest angel wor
ships, the same is to be worshipped by the meanest
man. And this we are to believe, that the very
greatest of angels, and most excellent ministers of
God, would have us worship one God with them.
And therefore we honour angels with love, not with
religious service : neither do we build temples to
them ; for they desire not to be so honoured by us ;
because they know, that we ourselves, when we are
good, are the temples of the most high God. And
therefore it is well recorded, that the angel forbade
the man to worship him, and bid him worship God,
under whom he was his fellow servant, Rev. xxii. 9.
It is true, indeed, the Manichees about this time
began to charge the catholics with worshipping
their martyrs : Faustus objected to them, That they
had only exchanged the heathen idols for martyrs,
whom they worshipped with the same devotions,
offering sacrifice of wine and meats to the ghosts
and shades of dead men. Had this been a true
charge, though it could not have affected the argu
ment, as drawn from the practice of the chm-ch in
former ages, yet it would have proved the corruption
of saint-worship to have crept a little earlier into the
church than will now be allowed. But the truth
of the matter is, it was a mere calumny of Faustus's
own inventing ; and St. Austin rejects it with the
utmost scorn and indignation. Therefore he says,28
in answer to it, That the Christian people did cele
brate the memories of the martyrs with religious
solemnity, both to excite themselves to their imita
tion, and to be partners in their merits, and to have
the benefit of their prayers : yet so, as that we never
offer any sacrifice to » martyr, but to the God of
martyrs, although we erect altars in the memories
of the martyrs, meaning churches called by their

"* Athan. Orat. 3. cont. Arian. p. 394.
25 Aug. de Vera Relig. cap. 55. t. 1. p. 317. Non sit nobis
religio cultus hominum mortuorum : quia si pie vixerunt, non
sic habentur, ut tales quaerant honores : sed ilium a nobis
coli volunt, quo illuminante laetantur meriti sui nos esse con-
soi-tes. Honorandi sunt ergo propter imit'ationem, non
adorandi propter religionem.  Quod colit summus ange-
lus, id colendum est etiam ab homine ultimo.  Hoc etiam
ipsos optimos angelos, et excellentissima Dei ministeria
velle credamus, utunum cum ipsis colamus Deum.  Quare
honoramus eos charitate, non servitute; nee eis templa con-
struimus : nolunt enim se sic honorari a nobis, &c.
26 Aug. cont. Faust, lib. 20. cap. 21. t. 6. p. 156. Populus
Christianus memorias martyrum religiosa solennitate con-
celebrat, et ad excitandam imitatiouem, et ut meritis eorum
consocietur, atque orationibus adjuvetur: ita tamen ut nulli
martyrum, sed ipsi Deo martyrum sacrificemus, quamvis in

memoriis (al. in memorias) martyrum constituamus altaria.
Quis enim antistitum in locis sanctorum corporum adsistens
altari, aliquando dixit, Offerimus tibi, Petre, vel Paule, vel
Cypriane ? Sed quod offertur, offertur Deo, &c. Colimus
ergo martyres eo cultu dilectionis et societatis, quo et in hac
vita coluntur sancti homines Dei, quorum cor ad talem pro
evaugelica veritate passionem paratum esse sentimus.  ¦
At vero illo cultu, quae Graece latria dicitur, Latine uno
verbo diei non potest, cum sit quaedam proprie Divinitati
debita servitus, nee colimus, nee colendum docemus, nisi
unum Deum. Cum autem ad hunc cultum pertineat oblatio
sacrificii, unde idololatria dicitur eorum, qui hoc etiam idolis
exhibent : nullo modo tale aliquid offerimus, aut offerendum
praecipimus, vel cuiquam martyri, vel cuiquam sancta? ani-
mae, vel cuiquam angelo : et quisquis in hunc errorem dela-
bitur, corripitur per sanam doctrinam, sive ut corrigatur,
sive ut condemnetur, sive ut caveatur.

Chap. III.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

593

names. For what priest, standing at the altar in
the places where the holy bodies lie, ever said, We
offer unto thee, Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian ? But
whatever is offered, is offered unto God that crown
ed the martyrs, at the memories of those whom he
crowned, that by the very admonition of the places
our affection may rise higher, to quicken our love
both toward them, whom we may imitate, and to
ward Him who enables us to imitate them. There
fore we worship the martyrs with that worship of
love and society, wherewith we worship holy men
of God in this hfe, whose heart we perceive to be
prepared to suffer in like manner for the gospel
truth. But with that worship, which the Greeks
call latria, and the Latins cannot express by one
word, being a service proper to God, we neither
worship, nor teach any one to worship any other
but God alone. And whereas the offering of sa
crifice appertains to this kind of worship, whence
it is called idolatry in those that give it to idols ;. we
neither offer, nor teach any to offer such worship,
either to any martyr, or any holy soul, or any
angel; but whoever falls into this error, is rebuked
by sound doctrine, either to correct him, or condemn
him, or to make him be avoided by others.
It is plain from this answer of St. Austin's, that
the charge of giving religious worship to saints and
angels was false, and a mere calumny upon the
church in those days ; and that the only persons
then guilty of it, were such as were disowned and
discarded by the church. Which brings me to the
third and last consideration proposed to confirm
this position, That the ancient church did not give
religious worship either to saints or angels, because
she condemned the practice both in heathens and
heretics, and aggravated their idolatry upon this
account. Secl 3 St. Austin in another place makes
ih™'Sar»i>g°the a severe remark upon aU such as
Heretics "and IS" sought to angels by prayer for their
thensonly. ° ° ,
assistance : he says they were dis
tracted with strange curiosities and illusions. Take
it in his own words, as he delivers it in a pious re
flection upon his own happiness in escaping the
snare at his own conversion, and a thankful ac
knowledgment of God's mercy in delivering him
from such a delusion. Whom, says he, should I
have found, that might reconcile me unto thee ?
Should I have gone unto27 the angels ? With what

prayer ? with what sacraments ? Many, endeavour
ing to return unto thee, and not being able to do it
by themselves, as I hear, have tried these things ;
and have fallen into the desire of curious visions,
and were accounted worthy of illusions. St. Chry
sostom has a more severe reflection on this sort of
men ; for he not only says,28 That no creature is to
be worshipped by man, neither of things above, nor
things below, whether man, or demons, or angels, or
archangels, or any other supernal powers, but only
God the Lord of all ; and that the apostle,- in the
second chapter of his Epistle to the Colossians,
discourses against such as taught, that man was to
come to God by angels, and not by Christ ; for that
was too great for him : M but he adds, in pursuance
of the same matter, that it was the devil80 which
introduced this having recourse to angels, whilst he
envied the honour of man. These be the enchant
ments of devils. Though it be an angel, though an
archangel, though they be cherubims ; endure it
not. For neither will these powers themselves re
ceive it, but reject it, when they see their Lord dis
honoured. I have honoured thee, saith God, and
bid thee call upon me. And dost thou then dis
honour him ? Where we see plainly, that invocation
of God and invocation of angels are opposed to one
another ; and as the one is made the character of
true religion, so the other is said to be the doctrine
of devils.
The persons here reflected on by Chrysostom,
were probably the same as had been known in the
church, and condemned, from the apostles' days, as
heretics, under the name of angelici, or angel-wor
shippers. For so St. Austin 81 describes them, call
ing them angelici, from their inclination to worship
angels. And so Isidore82 after him. Ireneeus 88 seems
to insinuate that heretics were wont to invocate
angels, when he opposes the church's practice to
them, telling them, that many miracles were wrought
in the church, not by invocation of angels, but by
prayer to God and the Lord Jesus Christ. And
TertuUian84 says expressly ofthe followers of Simon
Magns, that they worshipped angels in the exercise
of their magical art, which idolatry was condemned
by St. Peter in their first founder. Now, "there being
such footsteps of angel-worship in the practice of
so many heresies ; and it being a thing that some
were fond of, because it had a show of humihty in
it ; the council of Laodicea, to prevent the growing

27 Aug. Confess, lib. 10. cap. 42. Quem invenirem, qui
me reconciliaret tibi? An eundem mihi fuit ad angelos?
Qua prece? quibus sacramentis? Multi conantes ad te
redire, neque per seipsos valentes, sicut audio, tentaverunt
base; et inciderunt in desiderium curiosarum visionum, et
digni habiti sunt illusionibus.
28 Chrys. Horn. 5. in Colos. p. 1348.
29 Horn. 7. in Col. p. 1360.
^ Horn. 9. in Col. p. 1381. '0 StdfioXos tA tiov dyyiXiov
2 u

iirEitrriyayE, fiacrKaivuiv vpXv ttjs Ttpris' Ttov Satpovtov
ToiaiiTai at iirtoSai, Sec.
81 Aug. de Haeres. cap. 39. Angelici, in angelorum cultu
inclinati. 32 Isidor. Origin, lib. 8. cap. 5. Angelici vocati, quia
angelos colunt. 80 Iren. lib. 2. cap. 57.
34 Tertul. de Pracscrip. cap. 33. Simonianae autem magiae
disciplina angelis serviens, utique et ipsa inter idololatrias
deputabatur, et a Petro apostolo in ipso Simone damnabatur

594

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

malady, made a severe canon under the denunciation
of anathema to restrain it. Christians, say they,85
ought not to forsake the church of God, and go
aside, and hold conventicles, to invocate or caU
upon the names of angels. Which things are
forbidden. If any one therefore be found to ex
ercise himself in this private idolatry, let him be
accursed ; because he hath forsaken our Lord Jesus
Christ, the Son of God, and gone over to idol
atry. The first publishers of this canon in the Latin
editions, changed the word arigelos into angulos,
corners instead of angels : but the Greek admits of
no such corruption, and therefore the fraud is easily
discovered ; and nothing but the shame of seeing
their practice so plainly condemned in this canon,
could have induced any men to have attempted such
a childish corruption. Theodoret, in his Comment
upon the Epistle to the Colossians, has occasion
twice to mention this canon. Where he says, That
because some in the apostles' days commanded men
to worship angels, therefore the apostle enjoined36
the contrary, that they should adorn their words
and deeds with the commemoration of the Lord
Christ, and send up thanksgiving to God and the
Father by him, and not by the angels. And that
the synod of Laodicea, following this rule, and de
siring to heal that old disease, made a law that men
should not pray to angels, nor forsake our Lord Je
sus Christ. And again,87 This vice continued in
Phrygia and Pisidia for a long time, for which cause
also the synod assembled in Laodicea, the chief city
in Phrygia, made a law to prohibit praying to an
gels. But yet, even to this day, among them and
their neighbours, there are oratories of St. Michael
to be seen. Cardinal Perron uses a great deal of
art and sophistry to pervert the sense of the apostle
and this canon together, which the reader may find
sufficiently exposed and refuted by the learned
Daille,88 with the false glosses of Petavius and
others, with which I shaU not trouble this dis
course. I only observe further, that as the church
condemned heretics as guilty of idolatry for wor
shipping of angels, so did she likewise for worship
ping of their leaders and martyrs. ApoUonius, who
wrote against the Montanists, objects it to them,

that they worshipped one Alexander, a martyr
among them.88 And St. Austin reckons it among
the errors of Simon Magus,40 that he left his own
image, and the image of his harlot Selene, to his
disciples, to be worshipped by them. They objected
the same to the heathen, that they worshipped such
gods as were only men, and dead men : as may be
seen in all the apologies made by Minucius Felix,41
Tertullian,42 Clemens Alexandrinus,43 Arnobius,44
Cyprian,45 and the rest that wrote against them:
which had been a very weak argument, and easily
retorted, had Christians worshipped their martyrs,
whom they could not deny to be mortal men. The
heathens further pretended, that their demons, or
gods whom they worshipped, were good angels, and
worshipped only as the ministers of the supreme
God, and attendants of the court of heaven. Not
withstanding which pretence, they charge them with
idolatry, as giving the worship of God -to the crea
ture. He that would see this argument managed to
just advantage, may consult the learned discourses
of Mr. Daille,46 and Bishop Stillingfleet,47 where he
will find the pretences of the heathen, and the an
swers of the Christians, collected and set in their
proper light. I shall only detain my reader with
one citation out of St. Austin, as a specimen of all
the rest, where he introduces the heathen making
this apology for themselves : We do not worship
wicked devils, say they ; it is the angels you speak
of that we worship,48 the powers of the great God,
the ministers of the great God. To which St. Aus
tin answers, I wish you would worship them, for
they would quickly teach you that they are not to
be worshipped. Hear the instruction of an angel,
He taught a certain disciple of Christ, and showed
him many miracles in the Revelation of St. John ;
who having seen a certain miracle in a vision, was
astonished, and cast himself down at the feet of the
angel. But the angel, who sought nothing but the
glory of his Lord, said, Arise; what dost thou?
Worship God : for I am thy fellow servant, and of
thy brethren. How is it then, my brethren ? Let
no one say, I fear lest the angel should be angry at
me, if I do not worship him for my God. He is
then only angry at thee, when thou art inclined to

35 Cone. Laodic. can. 35. Ov ScX Xpt-iav'us iyKaTaXEt-
iteiv Ti]v iKKXyoiav tb Qeu, Kal dirtivai, Kal dyyiXus
ovopd^Eiv, Kal trvvd^Eis iroteXv, Sec.
36 Theod. in Col. iii. 17. 3J Theod. in Col. ii. 18.
33 Dalls. de Objecto Cult. Relig. lib. 3. cap. 31.
39 Apollon. ap. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 18.
10 Aug. de Haeres. cap. 1. Imagines et suam et ejusdem
meretricis discipulis suis priebebat adorandas.
11 Minuc. Dial. p. 88. 42 Tertul. Apol. cap. 10, 12, 29.
43 Clem. Protreptic. p. 26. « Arnob. lib. 1. p. 32.
"5 Cyprian, de Idol. Vanit. p. 11.
46 Dallae. de Cultu Relig. lib. 3. cap. 25.
47 Stilling. Defence of the Discourse of Idol, part 1.
chap. ].
18 Aug. in Psal. xcvi. t. 8. p. 415. Respondent, Non co

limus mala daemonia. Angelos quos dicitis, ipsos et nos
colimus, virtutes Dei magni, et ministeria Dei magui, Uti
nam ipsos colere velletis, facile ab ipsis disceretis non illos
colere. Audite angelum doctorem. Docebat quendam dis-
cipulum Christi, et ostendebat illi multa miracula in Apoca-
lypsi Joannis. Ille autem, quodam sibi demonstrato mira-
culo visionis, expavit, et misit se ad pedes angeli. Et ille
angelus, qui non quaerebat nisi gloriam Domini sui, Surge,
quid facis ? inquit, ilium adora : nam et ego conservus tuus
suum, et fratrum tuorum. Quid ergo, fratres mei ? Nemo
dicat, Timeo, ne irascatur mihi angelus, si non ilium colo pro
Deo meo. Tunc tibi irascitur, quando ipsum colere volu-
eris. Bonus est enim, et Deum amat. Quomodo enim
daemones irascuntur, si non colantur : sic angeli indignan-
tur, si pro Deo colantur.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

595

worship him. For he is good, and loves God : and
as the devils are angry, if they he not worshipped ;
so the angels are highly displeased, if they be wor
shipped instead of God. At last he concludes with
this admonition to the pagans : Let the pagans learn
to adore God. They have a mind to adore angels :
let them imitate angels, and adore him whom the
angels adore.49 And with these words I shall con
clude this whole discourse of religious worship,
knowing no better admonition that can be given to
the angel-worshippers of the present age, than to
advise them to imitate the angelical practice of the
primitive church, who had God, and only God, for
the object of their adoration.

CHAPTER IV.

THAT ANCIENTLY DIVINE SERVICE WAS ALWAYS
PERFORMED IN THE VULGAR TONGUE, UNDER
STOOD BY THE PEOPLE.
Having thus considered the nature
This proved, first, and object of Christian worship, I
rrom plain testiroo-
nies of the ancients come now to speak of the circum-
asserting it. Jr
stances and manner of performing
Divine service. And here it wiU be proper to ex
amine in what language the ancients performed
their worship; and to inquire into the use and
original of what we commonly caU liturgies, or set
forms of prayer ; and to take notice of the habits,
and modes, and gestures, and different rites and
ceremonies observed without any breach of faith
or Christian unity in different churches ; together
with the solemn times of prayer and religious as
sembhes, whether weekly or daily, generally ob
served and set apart for the exercise of pubhc
devotion. As to the first of these, there is nothing more
certain in history, than that the service of the an
cient church was always performed in the vulgar or
common language of every country, that is, such as
was either commonly spoken, or at least commonly
understood. And so it continued for above a thou
sand years in the church. And it is even monstrous
to think, that in so inquisitive an age as the pre
sent is, there should be any men of learning to de
fend, or whole nations so tamely to submit to, the
imposition and tyranny of the contrary practice ; so

absurd and unreasonable in itself; so prejudicial to
devotion ; so contrary to the use of speech, whose
end is edification ; so reproachful to human nature,
as if men were asses indeed, as Thomas Aquinas
once made the comparison; so derogatory to the
Christian's birthright; so flatly contradictory to
the apostle's reasoning; and so diametrically op
posite to the universal practice of the church for so
many ages. But I shall not think myself obliged
to dispute against it upon aU these topics, nor to
say all that might be said in an historical way
against it. He that pleases may see that done
already in an excellent book1 of Bishop Usher's,
published by Mr. Wharton. I shall content myself
to suggest a few things agreeable to the design of
treating matters succinctly, which will be sufficient
to satisfy any candid reader as to the sense and
practice of the primitive church.
And first I observe, That the ancients declare
unanimously, that Divine service was performed in
the vulgar tongue of every nation. The Grecians,
says Origen,2 use the Greek language in their
prayers, and the Romans the Roman, and so every
one in his own dialect prays to God, and gives
thanks as he is able ; and the God of all lan
guages hears them that pray in all dialects, un
derstanding their different languages as well as if
they all spake with one tongue. This he says in
answer to an objection of Celsus, who charged them
with using of barbarous and unintelligible names
and words in their prayers. Justin Martyr says,3
The Scriptures were first read in their assemblies-
to the people, and then the president made a dis
course to them, exhorting them to observe and fol
low the good instructions they had heard out of the
prophets and apostles. Which had been an absurd
admonition, had not the lessons been read in a lan
guage which they understood. St. Jerom tells us,4
That at the funeral of the famous Lady Paula, the
psalms were sung in Syriac, Greek, and Latin, be
cause there were men of each language present at
the solemnity. And for the same reason Caesarius,
bishop of Aries, is said5 to have appointed the
people to sing the psalms and hymns, some in Greek,
and some in Latin : no doubt, that the Divine ser
vice might be understood by men of different lan
guages then present in the assembly. Aurelius Cas-
siodore, writing upon those words of the psalmist,
" She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of
divers colours," says, This variety signified that

49 Aug. in Psal. xcvi. Discant pagani adorare Deum.
Angelos volunt adorare: angelos imitentur, et ilium ado-
rent qui ab angelis adoratur.
1 Usserii Historia Dogmatica de Scripturis et Sacris Ver-
naculis, cum Auctario H. Wharton. Lond. 1690, 4to.
2 Orig. cont. Cels. lib. 8. p. 402. 'Ev TaXs ebxaXs ol piv
t,XXt)VEs 'EXXt)vtKoXs xpd>UTat, ol Si 'PwpaXoi 'Pwpdi-
koXs, &c.
2u2

3 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 98.
1 Hieron. Epitaph. Paulae. Graeco, Latino, Syroque ser-
mone psalmi in ordine personabant.
5 Cyprian. Vit. Caisar. Arelat. apud Surium. Aug. 27.
vol. 4. p. 947. Compulit laicos et populares homines psalmos
et hymnos promere, altaque et modulata voce, instar cleri
corum, alios Graece, alios Latine, prosas'et antiphonas de-
cantare, &c.

596

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

diversity of tongues,6 wherewith every nation sang
to God in the church, according to the difference of
their own country language. And it being then
the way of the church, that all offices should be
performed with the understanding and edification
of the people, Justinian provided for this in one of
his laws, obliging all bishops7 and presbyters to
repeat the prayers used in the communion and bap
tismal service, not in secret, but with an audible
voice, so as the minds of the hearers might be raised
to greater devotion, and stirred up to glorify the
Lord God. For so the holy apostle directs in the
First Epistle to the Corinthians, saying, " If thou
blessest only with the spirit, how shall he that oc-
cupieth the room of the unlearned, say the holy
Amen to God at thy giving of thanks ? For he
knoweth not what thou sayest. For thou verily
givest thanks well, but the other is not edified." It
is plain by this, that Justinian thought all prayers
which the people either could not hear, or could not
understand, were equally blamed by the apostle, as
not contributing to edification ; and therefore, as he
made a law against private muttering of prayers,
which ought to be public ; so he would no doubt
have been as severe against praying in an unknown
tongue, had there then been any occasion (as there
was not) for the like prohibition in the liturgy of the
church. Which may be collected from another of
his laws, which was made upon occasion of a dis
pute which, in his time, arose among the Jews,
Some of them, who were superstitiously inclined,
.were for having the law read only in Hebrew, though
not understood by the people: others were for having
it read in Greek, or any language which the peo
ple understood. The matter at last was brought
before Justinian, and he determined in favour of the
latter, that it should be read in Greek, or any other
language,8 which the place where they lived had
made more useful and known to the people. Hither
to therefore we are assured, this corruption had made
no attempt to gain admittance in the service of the
Christian church, since it was corrected by the civil
magistrate as soon as it was observed to be creeping
into the Jewish synagogue.
sect 2 Secondly, As a further evidence of
t!,eePc°onpdi!?. jomiiTg this matter, we may observe, that all
praye^Sd'Liiiiu'g the people anciently were allowed to
their responses. ... i i r r
join in psalmody ana prayers, and

make their proper responses. The learned and un
learned, nay, even women, young virgins, and chil
dren, in those times, bare a part in the public ser
vice of the church. St. Chrysostom9 and the author
of the Constitutions,10 speak of children praying
with the rest of the congregation for the catechu
mens and the faithful also. And St. Jerom11 speaks
of young virgins singing the Psalter at morning and
evening, at the third, and sixth, and ninth hours,
and at midnight, in their course : and says, they
were obliged to learn the psalms, and some portion
of Scripture, every day. St. Basil 12 and many others
(as we shall see hereafter, when we speak of psalm
ody) say, all the people sung the psalms alternately :
and Basil particularly takes notice18 of children
performing this office in common with the rest of
the people. And we shall meet with the people's
. prayers and responses almost in every part of the li
turgy, such as the Kbpte, ixkijaov, " Lord, have mercy,"
subjoined to every petition of the deacon's prayers ;
and in those mutual prayers of minister and people,
" The Lord be with you : And with thy spirit.
Lift up your hearts : We lift them up unto the
Lord ; " with abundance more that need not here
be mentioned. All which suppose the service to be
in the vulgar and known language ; else it were ab
surd to think, that the people should know how
and when to make their responses ; or that children
and young virgins should learn the psalms and
Scripture by heart, and join in psalmody and other
parts of the service of the church.
Thirdly, There is nothing more Sect 3
common among the ancients in their ^.^^SSL'
discourses to the people, than to ad- to°"u,e" p»p*«. "«
• i t i .., l.iil. hear, and read, and
momsh and exhort them both, to hear, praj with oper
and read, and pray with understand
ing, attention, and fervency of spirit. Which had
been very incongruous admonitions, obliging them
to impracticable rules, had the lessons and prayers
been in an unknown tongue. St. Basil thus ex
horts his people,14 Thou hast the psalms, thou hast
the prophets, the precepts of the gospel, the preach
ings of the apostles ; let thy tongue sing and thy
mind search the meaning of what is spoken ; that
thou mayest sing with the spirit, and sing with un
derstanding also. In another, homily he tells them,15
That the Divine oracles were God's gifts to the
church, to be read in every assembly, as the food

6 Cassiodor. in Psal. xliv. al. xlv. Hie varietatem aut
lino-uas multiplices significat ; quia omnis gens secundum
suam patriam in ecclesia psallit auctori ; aut virtutum pul-
cherrimam diversitatem.
7 Justin. Novel. 137. cap. 6. Jubemus omnes episcopos
et presbyteros, non in secreto, sed cum ea voce quae a fide-
lissimo populo exaudiatur, Divinam oblationem, et preca-
tionem quae fit in sancto baptismate, facere; ut inde audi
entium anirni in majorem devotionem, et Dei laudationem
et benedictionem efterantur, &c.
8 Justin. Novel. 146. 9 Chiys. Horn. 71. in Mat. p. 624.

10 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 6.
11 Hieron. Epitaph. Paulao. Mane, hora tertia, sexta,
nona, vespere, noctis medio, per ordinem Psalterium canta-
bant. Nee licebat cuiquam sororum ignorare psalmos, et
non de Scripturis Sanctis quotidie aliquid discere.
12 Basil. Ep. 63. ad Neocaesarienses.
>3 Basil. Procem. in Psalmos. Venet. Fortunat. lib. 2.
Poem, in Laud. Cleri Parisiaci :
Poutificis monitis clerus, plebs psallit, et infans.
u Basil. Horn, in Psal. xxviii, Serm. 1. t. 1. p. 154.
15 Ibid. Horn, in Psal. lix. p. 253.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

597

which the Spirit afforded us for the nourishment of
our souls. And in another place,16 putting the ques
tion, How a man prays with the- spirit, whilst his
understanding is unfruitful ? he answers, That this
was spoken of those that prayed in a tongue un
known to the hearers. For the apostle says, "If
I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit indeed
prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful." For
when the words of the prayer are not known to
them that are present, the understanding of him
that prayeth is unfruitful, because his prayer is of
no use or advantage : but when they that are pre
sent understand the prayer, which is of advantage
to the hearers, then he that prays reaps the fruit
of it, namely, the edification of those who receive
benefit by it. And we are to conceive in like man
ner of all utterance of the words of God. For it is
written, If any be useful for edification in the faith.
By all this it is evident, the Scriptures and psalms
and prayers were read in a known tongue ; for other
wise it were in vain to exhort men to give diligence
and attention to understand what they heard, if
every thing was spoken in a language which they
did not, or could not, understand.
Fourthly, The fathers in their ser-
Fourthiy, From mons frequently refer to the prayers
the references made _ . . , ., . - .
b. the fathers to the of the church, and to the lessons read
prayers and lessons
chorch!er,ice of th° Derore> as things the people were per
fectly well acquainted with. They
often argue from matters contained in the prayers,
as Chrysostom does commonly from aU parts of the
liturgy : and their sermons, for the most part, were
upon such portions of Scripture as had just been
read before, as I shall show when I come to the
office of preaching. Now this supposes, that both
the prayers and lessons of Scripture were in a known
tongue ; else it were absurd for the pieachers to ap
peal to their .auditors as well acquainted with them,
or draw arguments from thence, as motives ground
ed upon their own experience, if yet indeed they
had no knowledge of them.
Fifthly, This is evident from that
Firthiy, From the pious care which the church took to
Scriptures being *
translated mio aii have the Bible translated into all lan-
languages from the
eh»,cfCaU°" of guages; and as soon as any nation
was converted, that spake an uncom
mon tongue, immediately to procure a new version
of the Scriptures into their language. Eusebius17
says, They were translated into all languages, both
of Greeks and barbarians, throughout the world, and

18 Regul. Brev. qu. 278.
17 Euseb. de Praepar. Evang. lib. 12. cap. 1. Praesertim
de Laud. Constant, cap. 17. p. 662.
18 Chrys. Horn. 1. in Joan. al. 2. Edit. Savil. t. 2. p. 561.
19 Theod. de Curand. Graacor. Affect. Serm. 5. t. 4. p. 555.
20 Hieron. Praefat. in 4 Evangel.
21 Aug. Ep. 48. ad Vincent.
22 Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 33. Sozom. lib. 6. cap, 37.
22 Hieron. Ep. 134. ad Sophronium.

studied by all nations as the oracles of God, Chry
sostom assures us, That the Syrians,18 the Egyptians,
the Indians, the Persians, the Ethiopians, and a
multitude of other nations, translated them into then-
own tongues, whereby barbarians learned to be
philosophers, and women and children with the
greatest ease imbibed the doctrine of the gospel.
Theodoret '9 says the same, That every nation under
heaven had the. Scripture in their own tongue : the
Hebrew books were not only translated into Greek,
but into the Roman, Egyptian, Persian, Indian, Ar
menian, Scythian, and Sauromatic languages, and,
in a word, into all tongues used by all. nations in
his time. The like is attested by St. Jerom,20 and
St. Austin,21 and many others. Ulphilas is said, by
all the historians,22 to have translated the whole
Bible into the Gothic tongue. St. Jerom translated
it into the Dalmatic, as he himself23 seems to inti
mate, when he calls it his own tongue ; as Scaliger
and most others understand him; though Bishop
Usher24 thinks he meant the Latin rather by his own
tongue. St. Chrysostom25 sometimes mentions the
Syriac translation ; and he is said, by the author of
his Life,26 to have procured, during his exile at Cu
cusus in Armenia, a translation of the Psalms and
New Testament for the use of the Armenian churches.
Not to mention that of Methodius, or Cyril, into
the Slavonian tongue, or any others of later ages.
Of which the curious reader may find exact ac
counts in Bishop Usher,27 Bishop Walton,29 Dr.
Milles,29 and Hottinger,30 and others, upon this pe
culiar subject of the Scripture versions.
As to the ancient practice, it may
be evidenced further, and confirmed, siumy, From the
use of the order of
from the use of interpreters in the SSeler8 ia ""•
church ; whose office, as has been
showed in another place,31 out of Epiphanius,92 and
other writers, was to render one language into an
other, as there was occasion, both in reading the
Scriptures and in the homilies that were made to
the people. For it happened sometimes that there
were men of different languages in the same church :
as in the churches of Syria and Palestine, some un
derstood Syriac only, and others Greek ; and in the
African churches, some spake Latin and others
Punic : in which cases, whatever was said in one
language, was immediately rendered into the other
by the interpreter for the benefit of the people. In
confirmation of which custom, to what has been
said before, I shall here add the observation of

21 Usser. de Sacris Vernac. p. 220.
ffi Chrvs. Horn. 3. in 2 Cor. p. 754.
23 Gregor. Alexandria. Vit. Chrys. n. 59. t. 8. Edit. Savil.
2' Usser. de Script. Vernac. p. 220.
28 Walton. Prolegom. cap. 5.
29 Millii Prolegom. in .Nov. Test.
99 Hottinger. de Translat. Biblior. Heidelberg. 1660.
3' Book III. chap. 13. sect. 4.
32 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. n. 21.

59S

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

Theodoret " upon the practice of Chrysostom, who,
by the help of such an interpreter, often preached
to the Arian Goths in Constantinople, whom by that
means he reduced to the catholic faith.
Another custom observed in the an-
sevenujy!' From cient church, was to have Bibles in
in| CB?bte» "aid in the vulgar tongue laid in a convenient
churches for the . -
people to read in part of the church, lor the people at
private. rtheir leisure to employ themselves, as
they were piously inclined, in reading of the Scrip
tures before or after the times of Divine service.
Of which custom those verses of Paulinus,84 which
he wrote upon the wall of the secretarium of the
church of Nola, are an infallible proof, which were
in these words :
Si quem sancta tenet meditandi in lege voluntas;
Hie poterit residens sacris intendere libris:
If any one is piously disposed to meditate in God's
law ; here he may sit, and employ himself in read
ing the holy books. Thus Constantine himself, as is
observed by Eusebius,35 was wont to employ himself
in the church, partly by joining in the public
prayers with the people, and partly by taking the
books of the Divine oracles into his hands, and ex
ercising his mind in the contemplation of them.
And probably for this reason he ordered Eusebius
to prepare fifty copies of the Bible for the use of
the church of Constantinople,39 as his letter to Eu
sebius witnesses : for it is observed and spoken to
his praise by Eusebius in another place,37 that by
his means innumerable multitudes both of men and
women exchanged the food of their bodies for that
of their souls, that rational food, which was so agree
able to rational minds, and which they obtained by
reading the Holy Scriptures. This must necessarily
relate, either to their reading the Scriptures by the
help and benefit of his copies in the church, or else
wUl argue that they were encouraged by him to
read them at home in their private houses ; which
had been denied them under pain of banishment or
death before, in the preceding reigns of the perse
cuting princes. And this leads us to another plain
Sect. 8. *
Eighthly, From evidence of the primitive practice ;
the general allow- st r i
mecn IT have '"and which was, the privilege and encou-
,„atheir Set™ ragement all Christians had to read
vueirvVaYnever'ta- the Scriptures at home, for the exer-
frins-cd hy any but . j? j_t_ r . r. ...
the heathen perse- cise ot themselves and families in
cutors. , ,
private devotion, and better prepara
tion for the public. None ever denied them this
privilege, but those persecuting tyrants, who in

tended to destroy the name and faith of Christians
together with their Bibles, out of the world: for
which reason they made the strictest search after
them, and used all imaginable art and force to make
them deliver them .up to be burnt : which they who
did, were branded by the infamous name of tradi-
tores, traitors, and betrayers of their religion. A
certain argument, that then private Christians had
the use of the Scriptures ; else they could not have
been impeached for delivering them up to the
enemy. It cannot be pleaded here, that the Scrip
tures were then only in the hands of the bishops,
and readers, and others of the clergy : for Baronius
himself has published the Acts of several martyrs,
where not only private men, but women, confess to
the inquisitors that they had the Holy Scriptures
in their houses with them. I will give a single in
stance out of the Acts of Agape and Irene,38 and
their companions. Where the grand inquisitor asks
this question of Irene, Who advised you to keep
those parchments and Scriptures to this time ? To
which Irene answered, God Almighty, who has
commanded us to love him unto the death; for
which cause we durst not betray him ; but had
rather be burnt alive, or suffer any other things
that may befall us, than treacherously deliver up
those writings. It is plain from this, that private
Christians, both men and women, then enjoyed the
Scriptures as their birthright, and none pretended
to ravish them from them but only the persecuting
heathens. The fathers of the church were so far
from doing this, that, on the contrary, they used all
manner of arguments to induce men to read and
study them ; exhorting them not only to hear them
with attention in the church, but to read them pri
vately at home with their wives and famihes ; com
mending those that studied them, and reproving
those that neglected them ; making large encomi
ums upon the use and excellency of them, and re
quiring men to peruse them privately as the best
preparation for the public service and instruction :
answering aU objections and pretences that men
could make to the contrary ; as, that they were ig
norant and unlearned, and that the Scriptures were
difficult and hard to be understood ; that they were
only for the use of monks and religious, and not for
secular men, and men of business : assuring them
that the Scriptures were for the use of all men, and
that it was the neglect of them that was the cause
of all ignorance, heresies, errors, and irreligion.
These were the general topics, upon which the
fathers then pressed the common people to read the

33 Theod. lib. 5. cap. 30. 31 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Severum.
35 Euseb. Vit. Constant, lib. 4. cap. 17.
3S Ap. Euseb. ibid. lib. 4. cap. 36. et ap. Theod. lib. 1.
cap. 16. et Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 6.
37 Euseb. Orat. de Laudibus Constant, cap. 17. p. 661.
33 Acta Agapes et Sociarum, ap. Baron, an. 304. u. 46.

Quisnam tibi auctor fuit, ut membranas istas atque Scrip-
turas in hodiernum usque diem custodires ? Irene inquit,
Deus omnipotens, qui jussit nos ad mortem usque ipsum
diligere, qua de causa non ausi sumus eum prodere, sed
maluimus aut viventes comburi, aut, quaecunque alia nobis
acciderint, perpeti, quam talia scripta prodere.

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

599

Scriptures, which are diametrically opposite to the
arguments used in later ages to dissuade and deter
men from the use of them. A man cannot look
into the fathers, but he will see such arguments
every where running through their writings. So
that it is needless here to insist upon them : the
reader that pleases, may see them collected to
gether from first to last by Bishop Usher and
Mr. Wharton. I shall only relate one passage of
Chrysostom, out of his famous sermons upon Laza
rus, where he at once proposes the several argu
ments, and answers the several objections, I have
now mentioned. For this reason, says he,39 we
often acquaint you many days beforehand with
the subject of our discourse, that, taking the Bible
into your hands in the mean time, and running
over the whole passage, you may have your minds
better prepared to hear what is to be spoken. And
this is the thing I have always advised, and shall
still continue to exhort you to, that you should not
only hear what is said- in this place, but spend your
time at home continually in reading the Holy
Scriptures. And here let no one use those frigid
and vain excuses, I am a man engaged in the busi
ness of the law, I am taken up with civil affairs, I
am a tradesman, I have a wife, and children to
breed up, I have the care of a family, I am a secu
lar man : it belongs not to me to read the Scrip
tures, but to those that have bid adieu to the world,
and are retired into the mountains, and have no
thing else to do but to exercise themselves in such
a way of hving. What sayest thou, O man ? Is it
not thy business to read the Scriptures, because
thou art distracted with a multitude of other cares ?
Yes, certainly, it belongs to thee more than them.
For they have not so much need of the help of the
Holy Scriptures, as you have, who are tossed in the
waves of the multiplicity of business. Then, enu
merating what sins and temptations secular men
are exposed to, he infers, that they have perpetual
need of Divine remedies, as well to cure the wounds
they have ah-eady received, as to ward off those they
are in danger of receiving ; to quench the darts of
the devil whilst they are at a distance, and drive
them away, by continual reading of the Holy Scrip
tures. For it is impossible that a man should attain
salvation without perpetual exercise in reading spi
ritual things. But some again will say, What if we
cannot understand the things that are contained
therein ? Why, says he,40 even in that case, though
you do not understand every thing that is contained
therein, yet by reading you shall obtain much sanc
tification. For it is impossible that you should be
equaUy ignorant of all things in those books. For
the grace of the Spirit so ordered it, that they should
originally be composed and written by publicans;

1 Chr}-

;s. Horn. 3. in Lazar t. 5. p. 59.

and fishers, and tent-makers, and shepherds, and
private and illiterate men, that none of the most
ignorant and unlearned might have this excuse of
difficulty to fly to ; that the things there spoken
might be easy to be looked into by all men ; that
the handicraftsman, the servant, the widow, the
most illiterate and unlearned among men, might
reap benefit and advantage by hearing them read.
The apostles and prophets, he says, wrote not, like
the philosophers of the Gentiles, in obscure terms,
but ma'de things plain to the understandings of all
men, as being the common teachers of the world,
that every man by himself might learn by reading
alone the things that were spoken. To whom are
not all things in the gospel manifest and plain ?
Who is there that, hearing those sayings, " Blessed
are the meek, Blessed are the merciful, Blessed are
the pure in heart," and the like, would desire a
teacher, to understand the meaning of them ? More
over, the signs, and miracles, and histories, are they
not all intelligible and plain to any ordinary reader ?
This, therefore, is only a pretence, and excuse, and
cloak for idleness. Thou dost not understand the
things contained in the Scripture. How shouldst
thou understand them, when thou wilt not so much
as look into them ? Take the book into thy hands,
read the whole history, and remember those things
that are intelligible and easy ; and those things that
are more obscure and dark, read over and over
again : and if thou canst not by frequent reading
dive into the meaning of what is said, go to a wiser
person, betake thyself to a teacher, and confer with
him about any such passage ; show thy diligence
and desire to be informed. And when God sees thy
willingness and readiness of mind,' he will not de
spise thy vigilance and care ; but though man in
form thee not in the things about which thou
makest inquiry, he himself will certainly reveal
it unto thee. Remember the eunuch of the Ethi
opian queen, who, though he was a barbarian, and
immersed in a multitude of cares and business, and
understood not what he read, yet he read for all
that, sittingin his chariot. And if he showed so
great diligence by the way, consider how he be
haved himself at home. If he would not omit
reading in the time of a journey, much less would
he omit it when he sat quietly in his own house.
If, when he understood nothing of it, he still con
tinued to read, much more would he do it when
he came to understand it. Wherefore, because he
read when he had no guide, he quickly found a
guide. God knew the willingness of his mind, and
accepted his diligence; and presently sent him a
teacher. But Philip you will say, does not now
stand by us. No ; but the Spirit that moved Philip
is still by us. Let us not neglect our own salva-

*> Chrys. Horn. 3. in. Lazar. t. 5. p. 62.

GOO

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

tion, beloved. These things were written for our
salvation, upon whom the ends of the world are
come. The reading of the Scriptures is our great
guard against sin. Our ignorance of them is a
dangerous precipice, and a deep gulf : it is an ab
solute betraying of our salvation, to know nothing
of the Divine law. It is this that has brought forth
so many heresies ; this, that has brought so mnch
corruption into our lives ; this, that has turned all
things into confusion.
One would think St. Chrysostom had foreseen all
the little pleas and sophistry of the Romish church,
and was here disputing and inveighing against them.
So apposite is every word to refute their trifling
pretences ; That ignorance is the mother of devo
tion ; that the Scriptures are obscure ; that there
is need of an infallible guide on earth, besides the
Spirit, to understand them ; that the promiscuous
use of them is the cause of aU errors and heresies ;
that laymen and secular men are not fit to be in
trusted with them : each of which positions is as
plainly combated by St. Chrysostom, as if he had
been directly disputing against the insufferable ty
ranny and frivolous pleas of the present church of
Rome : and his whole discourse, with some hun
dreds of the like passages that might be alleged out
of him and other writers, do irrefragably show,
that it was as much the care and concern of the
primitive church to have the service of God and the
Scriptures to be understood by all, as now it is the
concern of the Roman church to have them con
cealed from their knowledge, and locked up in a lan
guage which the unlearned do not understand.
„ . „ For it is very observable further,
Sect. 9. J '
thrilbe1/tyFgr?aTnted that in the primitive church not only
techuime'r,"s,todi»i'" men and women> but children were
anahreadbthepscrip? encouraged and trained up from their
infancy to the reading of the Holy
Scriptures ; and the catechumens were not only ad
mitted to some of the prayers of the church pecu
liarly appropriated to their condition, but also
obliged to learn the Scriptures, as part of their dis
cipline and instruction. Of their obligation to learn
the Scriptures, we have treated before,41 in speak
ing of the method of training them up for baptism :
and of their admission to certain prayers of the
church, we shaU see more hereafter, in that part
of the worship called the service of the catechu
mens.42 AU, then, that is further here to be showed,
is, that children were trained up to the use of the
Holy Scriptures. And of this we have undoubted
evidence from many eminent instances of their
practice. Eusebius43 remarks of the great care of

Leonides the martyr, and father of Origen, in the
education of his son, that he made him learn the
Scriptures before he set him to the study of the
liberal arts and polite learning. And Socrates44
makes the like observation upon the education of
Eusebius, surnamed Emisenus, who was born of
noble parentage at Edessa, a city of Osroene in
Mesopotamia, that he was first taught the Holy
Scriptures from his infancy, and then human learn
ing : and Sozomen,45 in relating the same story,
says, this was done k-ar<i irdrptov Ifoc, according to
the custom of the country ; which shows that it was
no singular instance, but a general practice, to bring
children up from then- infancy to the use of the
Holy Scriptures. Gregory Nyssen49 notes it in the
Life of his sister Macrina, That the first part of her
instruction in her infancy, was to be taught the easy
portions of Scripture, that were most suitable to her
age : and he says also,47 she did the same for her
younger brother Peter, taking him from his mother's
breasts, and instructing him in the Scriptures, that
he might have no time to spend upon vain studies.
It is noted by Sozomen49 and PaUadius, of Marcus
the hermit, that he was so expert in the Scriptures
when he was but a youth, that he Could repeat all the
Old and New Testament without book. And it is ob
servable, that as there were many catechetic schools
in those times for explaining the Scriptures to the
catechumens, so there were also schools appointed
in many churches to instruct the youth in the know
ledge of the Scriptures. When Gregory, the apos
tle of the Armenians, first converted that nation, it
is said in his Life,49 That he set up schools in every
city, and masters over them, by the king's Command,
to teach the Armenian chUdren to read the Bible.
And Theodoret50 relates a remarkable story of Pro-
togenes the scribe, That when Valens the Arian
emperor banished him to Antinoe in Thebais, in the
utmost parts of Egypt, he, finding the greatest part
of the city to be heathens, set up a charity school
among them, and taught them the Holy Scriptures ;
dictating to them in writing short-hand David's
Psalms, and making them learn such doctrines of
the apostohcal writings) as were proper for them to
understand; by which means he brought many,
both of the children and parents, over to the Chris
tian faith. And it has been observed before,51 that
by the canons of some councils such sort of charity
schools were appointed to be set up in cathedrals
and other churches, where) no doubt, according to
the custom of those days, children were taught to
read the Scriptures.52 These, rules were renewed in
several councils under Charles the Great and the fol-

41 Book X. chap. i. sect. 6. 42 Book XIV. chap. 5.
43 Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 2. 41 Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 9.
45 Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 6.
46 Nyssen. Vit. Macrin. t. 2. p. 179. 4' Ibid. p. 185.
43 Sozom. lib. 6. cap. 29. Pallad. Hist. Lausiaca, cap. 21.

49 Acta Gregorii, ap. Simeon. Metaphrast. Sept. 30, cited
by Bishop Usher.
50 Theod. lib. 4. cap. 15. al. 18.
51 See Book VIII. chap. 7. sect. 12.
52 Cone. 6. General, can. 4 et 5

Chap. IV.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

G01

the ordination of
readers hit he
church.

lowing princes. Particularly in the second councU
of Chalons,53 anno 813, it was appointed, That ac
cording to the order of Charles the emperor, bishops
should set up schools to teach both grammar and
the knowledge of the Scriptures. And in the coun
cU of Toul, or Savonieres,54 in Lorrain, the decree was
renewed, That schools of the Holy Scripture and
human learning should be erected ; forasmuch as,
by the care of the religious emperors in former days,
by this means both ecclesiastical knowledge and
human learning had made a considerable progress
in the world. And.Mr. Wharton55 wUl furnish the
inquisitive reader with many other rules and canons,
made about the same time, to promote and encou
rage the learning of the Scriptures.
Sect 10 I only observe one thing more, that
f"liifta*f the very form and/ tenor of the ordin
ation of readers anciently did mani
festly imply, that the service of the
ancient church was always performed in a known
tongue. For they were sometimes ordained with
prayer to God for his Holy Spirit, to qualify them
to read his word to the instruction and edification
of the people. The form of their ordination in the
book of the Constitutions, prays, That God56 would
give the reader wisdom, as he did to Esdras, to read
his laws to the people. Now, it is well known how
Esdras read the law to them, by causing them to
understand the reading. Neh. viii. 7> 8, " They
read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and
gave the sense, and caused them to understand
the reading." And if all readers read as Esdras
did, they certainly either read, or interpreted the
reading, in a known tongue. For he rendered that
which was written in the Hebrew tongue, into the
Chaldee or Syriac, which was, after the captivity,
the common language of the people. Cyprian twice
or thrice speaks of the ordination and office of
readers, and he plainly intimates, that the people
understood what they read out of the gospel to
them. In one place, speaking of Celerinus the
confessor, whom he had ordained a reader, he
says, It was very fitting he should read the gospel,57
who had so courageously and faithfully observed

it ; and that the same tongue which had confessed
the Lord, should be daily heard to repeat what the
Lord hath spoken ; since there was nothing wherein
a confessor could more advantage his brethren, than
to have them hear the gospel read by the mouth of
such a confessor and reader, whose faith was so
brave an example. In another epistle,59 speaking of
Aurelius the confessor, whom he also ordained aread-
er, he says, There was nothing more agreeable than
that that voice, which had so gloriously confessed
the Lord, should sound forth in reading the lessons
of the Lord : and after those lofty words, whereby
he proclaimed the martyrdom of Christ, he should
read the gospel of Christ, which makes martyrs.
The gospel was then so read that the hearers might
reap advantage by it, whilst they understood the
doctrines and precepts that were read to them out
of it. And such was the advantage which some
hearers in those days reaped from the benefit of
having the Scriptures read in their own tongue, that
it is very remarkable what is related of one or two
of them, that being men of good memories, they got
the Scriptures by heart, without any knowledge of
letters, only by hearing them constantly read in the
church or elsewhere. St. Austin59 remarks this of
St. Antony, the famous Egyptian monk, that with
out being able to read himself, he made such a pro
ficiency in the knowledge of the Scriptures, as both
by hearing them read, to be able to repeat them, and
by his own prudent meditation to understand them.
And Gregory the Great60 gives a like instance in
one Servulus, a poor man at Rome, who, though he
knew not a letter in the book, yet, purchasing a
Bible, and entertaining religious men, he prevailed
with them to read it continually to him, by which
means he perfectly learned the Holy Scriptures. It
is a yet more astonishing instance, which Eusebius61
gives in one of the martyrs of Palestine, a blind
man, called John, who had so happy a memory, that
he could repeat any part of the Bible as readily as
others could read it. And he sometimes supplied
the office of a reader in the church : and he did this
to so great perfection, that Eusebius says, when he
first heard him, he was perfectly amazed, and thought

53 Cone. Cabillon. 2. can. 3. Oportet etiam, ut sicut
dominus imperator Carolus praecepit, episcopi scholas con-
stituant, in quibus et literaria solertia disciplinae, et Sacrae
Scripturae documenta discantur.
51 Cone. Tullense, ad Saponarias, can. 10. Statuimus ut
schola! Sanctarum Scripturarum, et humanae quoque lite
rature, &c. constituantur.
55 Wharton. Auctarium ad Usserii Hist. Dogmat. cap. 4.
p. 346.
56 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 22.
57 Cypr. Ep. 34. al. 39. p. 77. Legat pracepta et evan-
gelium Domini, quae fortiter ac fideliter sequitar ; vox Do
minum confessa, in his quotidie, quae Dominus locutus est,
audiatur.  Nihil est in quo magis confessor fratribus
prosit, quam ut dum evangelica lectio de ore ejus auditur,
lectoris fidem quisquis audierit, imitetur.

58 Id. Ep. 38. al. 33. p. 75. Nihil magis congruit voci,
quae Dominum gloriosa praedicatione confessa est, quam
celebrandis divinis lectionibus personare : post verba sub-
limia quaa Christi martyrium prolocuta sunt, evangelium
Christi legere, unde martyres fiunt.
69 Aug. de Doctrina Christiana in Prologo. t. 3. p. 3.
Sineullascientialiterarum ScripturasDivinas, etmemoriter
audiendo tenuisse, et prudenter cogitando intellexisse prae-
dicatur. 60 Greg. Horn. 15. in Evangelia, t. 3. p. 40. Nequaquam
literas noverat, sed Scripturae Sacrae sibimet codices emerat ;
et religiosos quosque in hospitalitatem suscipiens, hos coram
se legere sine intermissione faciebat. Factumque est, ut
quantum ad mensuram propriam attinet, plene Sacram Scrip-
turam disceret; cum sicut dixi, literas funditus ignoraret.
61 Euseb. de Martyr. Palaestin. cap. 13. p. 314.

602

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

he had heard one reading out of a book, till he came
a little more curiously to examine him, and found
that he did it only by the eyes of his understanding,
having the Scriptures written not in books or tables
of stone, but in the fleshy tables of his heart.
These and such like examples, of which there are
many62 in ancient story, are enough to raise in a
man another sort of astonishment than that which
Eusebius speaks of: I mean, it would amaze a man
to think, that there should be a church in the world
pretending to the height of purity and devotion,
which yet runs counter to this indisputable practice
of the ancient church, whose public readers never
once pretended to read any part of Scripture in an
unknown tongue : that being as much against the
design of their ordination, as it is against the design
of the Scripture itself; for the one was written, and
the other ordained to read what was written, for
men's learning and instruction. Yea, the very form
of ordaining readers, as it stands still in the Roman
Pontifical, shows as much : for it is much ancienter
than the corruption that is now crept into their ser
vice, and only stands there as a monument of their
reproach, who oblige their readers to act directly
contrary to the design of their office, and the very
instructions that are given them in their ordination.
For there the bishop still, in conferring the order
of readers, uses this form: Study to pronounce03 the
word of God, that is, the sacred lessons, distinctly
and plainly, to the understanding and edification of
the faithful, without any error or falsehood; that
ye may teach your hearers both by word and ex
ample. This was a very proper form of exhortation
to be given to readers at their ordination, while the
ancient custom continued of reading in a known
tongue : but now it is no better than mockery, to
tell men they are obliged by the vow of their ordin
ation to read the Scriptures to the understanding,
and instruction, and edification of the people ; and
at the same time tie up their mouths, that they shall
not read a word that may be understood, but it
must all be in an unknown tongue. This monstrous
contradiction in their own practice, one would
think, might bring men to see their error, and (what
some in their communion54 have been so long plead
ing for) oblige them to return to the useful and
edifying practice of the primitive church.

CHAPTER V.
OF THE ORIGINAL AND USE OF LITURGIES, IN
STATED AND SET FORMS OF PRAYER, IN THE
PRIMITIVE CHURCH.
The next inquiry is concerning the
ancient manner of performing Divine E™*cbui'op at
service ; whether they did it by stated ages Vorder the
,., . r • i -,, ,, . f°rm of Divine set-
liturgies, which we usually call set ™einhisom
forms of prayer, or by unhmited liberty
of prophesying and extempore conceptions ? The
question about set forms of worship has more dis
turbed the present church than any other ; and yet,
after all, there can be no public prayer, but it will
be a set form, at least to the congregation. For
though we suppose the minister to pray extempore,
and vary the method, the form, and the phrase, every
time he prays ; yet to make it common prayer to a
congregation, it will be a form to them, though a
new form every time, in spite of all contradiction.
And I have often wondered that discerning men
should not observe this, before they charged all
forms of prayer as void of the Spirit, or a stinting
of the Spirit : since, if they were so, extemporary
forms would be as much stinting the spirit of the
congregation as any other ; and, perhaps, in some
measure more so ; since, in stated forms, which every
one knows beforehand, men may be supposed to
make them their own hearty prayers by preceding
meditation; whereas in extemporary forms every
man must wait till he hears what is said, and then
join in that form, or else not pray at aU, but only
privately by himself, not in any public or common
prayer jointly with the rest of the congregation.
For which reason I shall not here inquire simply,
whether the public worship of the ancients was by
a form or no ? since it is impossible there should be
any public worship of a congregation, as a congre
gation, joining in common prayer to God, without
having a common form dictated to them some way
or other for all to join in : but the question shall
only be, whether they used stated forms of worship,
or new extempore forms in every church assembly ?
And here we must distinguish, 1 . Between Divine
forms, and forms of human institution. 2. Between
ordinary and extraordinary occasions. 3. Between
the times of extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, and
the times when those miraculous gifts abated. Now,
there is no doubt to be made, but that the forms of
Divine institution were always used in the church
without any variation : as the form of baptism, the

62 Vide Palladium, Vit. Chrvsost. cap. 17. Socrat. lib.
7. cap. 22.
63 Pontifical. Roman. Cap. de Ordinat. Lectorum. Stu-
d«te verba Dei, videlicet lectiones sacras, distincte et aperte
ad intelligentiam et aedificationem fidelium absque omni

mendacio falsitatis proferre. — Quatenus auditores vestros
verbo pariter et exemplo docere possitis.
64 Vid. Frederic. Turius Ceriolanus de Libris Sacris in
vernaculam linguam convertendis.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

603

Lord's prayer, the singing of David's Psalms, the
forms of benediction, such as, " The Lord be with
you," " The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ," &c.
The constant use of the form of baptism has been
demonstrated already.1 The use of the Lord's prayer
and the rest shall be showed hereafter.2 As to forms
of human institution, they were added by the bi
shops and governors of the church according to
their wisdom and discretion. And this with relation
to the ordinary service ; for still they were at hberty
to compose new forms for extraordinary emergencies
and occasions. And whilst the extraordinary gifts
of the Spirit continued, there is little doubt to be
made, but that prayers and hymns, immediately dic
tated by the Spirit, made up a part of the ordinary
service ; still retaining such forms as were antece
dently of Divine appointment. When the extra
ordinary Spirit of prophecy ceased, then the rulers
of the church supplied this want by proper forms
of their own composition, according to Christian
prudence and discretion. And this seems to have
been the true original of liturgies, or stated forms
of Divine service. But why, then, have we none of
these liturgies remaining entire and perfect to this
day ? I answer, there may be several reasons as
signed for this. One is, that the bishops at first
made every one their own liturgy for the private use,
as we may caU it, of their own particular churches.
And therefore the use of them not extending fur
ther than the precincts of their own dioceses, there
was little knowledge of them beyond the bounds of
those churches, and not much care to preserve them
but only for the use of such churches, for which
they were particularly designed. That every bishop
had at first this power and privilege to compose and
order the form of Divine service for his own church,
I have showed in another place,3 where I had occa
sion to discourse of the independency of bishops,
and their absolute power in their own church :
where, among other things, I observed, that as they
had the privilege to word their own creeds, so they
had the privilege to frame their own liturgy ; which
privilege they retained for several ages. As may be
confirmed by this further and most certain observa
tion, that when any new episcopal church was taken
and erected out of another, the new erected church
was not obhged to foUow the model and prescrip
tions of the old church, but might frame to herself
a form of Divine service agreeable to her own cir-

1 Book XI. chap. 3. * Book XIII. chap. 7.
* Book II. chap. 6. sect. 2. 4 Sozomen. lib. 5. cap. 3.
s Cone. Agathens. can. 30. Quia convenit ordinem ec
clesiae ab omnibus aequaliter observari, studendum est ubique
(sicut fit) et post antiphonas, collectiones per ordinem ab
episcopis vel presbyteris diei, &c.
' Cone. Epaunens. can. 27. Ad celebrandum divina offi-
cia, ordinem, quem metropolitani tenent, proviuciales eorum
observare debebunt.
' Cone. Veneticum. can. 15. Rectum quoque duximus,

cumstances and condition. Of which Sozomen4
gives a clear evidence in the instance of Maiuma, a
city raised from a village in Palestine, and once be
longing to the diocese of Gaza : for as soon as it
was erected into a distinct episcopal see, it was no
longer obliged to observe precisely the rules and
forms of the church of Gaza, but had, as he parti
cularly remarks, a calendar for the festivals of its
own martyrs, and commemorations of their own bi
shops and presbyters that had lived among them.
Which is the same thing as to say, they had a li
turgy and service of their own, independent of the
church out of which they were taken.
In after ages bishops agreed by con
sent to conform their liturgy to the in Sta'sa the
-, . ., . , , ,...• 11 if churches of a whole
model of the metropolitical church of province by consent
. conformed to the li
the province to which they belonged. '"i?y °r 'he metro-
* ^ o pohtan.
And then it was enacted into a law
by several councils, that the same order and uni
formity should be observed in all churches. The
rudiments of this discipline were first laid in the
French churches. For in the council of Agde5 a
canon was made about the year 506, That one and
the same order should be equally observed in all
churches of the province in all parts of Divine
service. And in the council of Epone6 it is more
expressly said, That in celebrating Divine offices,
the provincial bishop should observe the same order
as was observed by the metropolitan. And before
these, the council of Vannes in Britanny, in the pro
vince of Tours, made a like order for that whole
province, That one and the same ' custom in cele
brating Divine service, and the same order of psalm
ody, should be kept in all churches ; that as they
held one faith and confession of the holy Trinity,
so they should keep to one rule of Divine offices ;
lest if they varied- in their observations, that varia
tion should be interpreted as a disagreement in some
point or other. And the same rule was made and
concerted in the Spanish churches. Por in the
council of Girone, anno 517, a like decree was made
for the whole province of Tarragone or Catalonia,
That the same9 order of mass, and custom in psalm
ody, and other ministrations, should be observed in
all churches of the province, as was observed in the
metropolitical church. The fourth council of Toledo
enlarged the order for uniformity in all churches of
Spain and Gallicia,9 obliging all priests to perform
Divine offices in the same manner, that there might

ut vel intra provinciam nostram sacrorum ordo, et psallendi
una sit consuetudo ; ut sicut unam cum Trinitatis confessione
fidem tenemus, unam et officiorum regulam teneamus : ne,
variata observatione, in aliquo devotio nostra discrepare
videatur. 3 Cone. Gerundense. can. 1. Ut institutio missarum, sicut
in metropolitana ecclesia agitur, ita in Dei nomine in omni
Tarraconensi provincia tam ipsius missae ordo, quam psal-
lendo vel ministrando, consuetudo servetur.
3 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 2. Placuit omnes sacerdotes, qui

604

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

be no diversity among them, and that such differ
ence might neither offend the weak, nor look like a
schism in the church to ignorant and carnal men.
Therefore they appointed, that one order should be
observed in praying and singing, and the same
method be kept in the morning and evening ser
vice, because they were all of the same faith and
the same kingdom. And the first council of Braga
has four or five canons to the same purpose,1" ap
pointing the same order of psalmody, and lessons,
and salutations, and the same forms of celebrating
baptism and the eucharist, to be observed in all
churches. So that though every bishop at first had
liberty to frame a liturgy for the use of his own
church ; yet in process of time they agreed by con
sent to take the liturgy of the metropolitical church
as a standard for the whole province: and when
the Roman empire began to be cantonized and di
vided into different kingdoms, then came in the use
of national liturgies, whose use was commensurate
to the bounds and limits of their respective nations
and kingdoms. If it be inquired, why then none of
ivhySeno"J'of the the ancient liturgies are now remain-
IZ "mai'nilgper- ing, as they were at first composed for
11,'ey "Sere' in their the use of particular churches ? I
first original. *
answer, several reasons may be assign
ed for this. 1. The very liberty which every bishop
had to frame the liturgy of his own church, was
one reason why none of these are now remaining
perfect and entire, as they were at first composed
for the use of such a particular church. For the
design of them being only for the use of such a
particular church, there was no great reason to be
very solicitous, either to communicate and diffuse the
knowledge of them to other churches, or to preserve
them entire to posterity, who were not precisely tied
up to the use of them, but might frame others at
their own discretion. 2. It is not improbable, but
that, as a late learned French writer11 has observed,
the ancient liturgies were for some ages only cer
tain forms of worship committed to memory, and
known by practice, rather than committed to writ
ing, which is the only certain way of preserving
such sort of monuments to late posterity. This
seems very probable, because, in the persecutions
under Diocletian and his associates, though a strict
inquiry was made after the books of Scripture, and
other things belonging to the church, which were
often delivered up by the traditores to be burnt, yet

we never read of any ritual books, or books of Di
vine service, delivered up among them. Which is an
argument, that their forms of worship and adminis
tration of the sacraments were not then generally
committed to writing, or at least not compiled in
books distinct from the Psalms, or other books of
Scripture: otherwise, it is very probable, that as
the Scriptures, with other utensils and treasures of
the church, were often found by the heathens, or
betrayed by apostatizing Christians, and delivered
up to be burnt ; so we should have heard something
of their books of Divine worship undergoing the
same fate ; since they who were so curious in in
quiring after the cups, and lamps, and torches, and
vestments, and other utensils and vessels of the
church, (as in some of their calendars and breviates
we find they were,) would hardly have omitted
their books of worship, as being more proper ob
jects of their spite and malice, had they found any
such in the Christian churches. Mr. Daille12 ar
gues well upon this foot against the use of images
in the ancient church, because no such thing was
ever found or betrayed to the heathen in the times
of their most furious inquisition after any thing
that related to the Christian church or religion : and
I think the argument will hold as well against hav
ing their liturgies compiled into books and volumes,
since it is scarce possible that such things in difficult
times should have wholly escaped the notice and
fury of their enemies. We are not hence to conclude,
(as some weak men might perhaps be inclined to
do,) that therefore they had no liturgies or set forms
of Divine worship in these persecuting ages of the
church ; because there are undeniable evidences to
the contrary, as we shall see by and by; but we are
only to conclude, that they did not so generally com
pile them in books as in after ages, but used them
by memory, and made them famihar to the people
by known and constant practice, as many now use
forms of prayer at this day without committing
them to writing. And this is another reason, why
none of those ancient liturgies are come to our hands
perfect and entire, but only in scattered fragments,
as the fathers had occasion to mention them inci
dentally in their writings. Nor need we wonder at
this, since even those liturgies which were most cer
tainly compUed in books in the foUowing ages, are
now in a great measure lost also by the injuries of
time, as the old Gallican, Spanish, African, and
Roman liturgies, of which there is nothing but

catholicae fidei unitatem complectimur, ut nihil ultra diver-
sum aut dissonum in ecclesiasticis sacramentis agamus, ne
quaelibet nostra diversitas apud ignotos seu carnales schis-
matis errorem videatur ostendere, et multis existat in scan-
dalum varietas ecclesiarum. Unus ergo orandi atque psal-
lendi ordo a nobis per omnem Hispaniam atque Galliciam
conservfttur : unus modus in missarum solennitatibus, unus
in vespertinis officiis : nee diversa sit ultra in nobis ecclesi-

astica consuetudo, quia in una fide continemur et regno.
13 Cone. Bracar. 1. can. 19. Placuit ut unus atque idem
psallendi ordo in matutinis vel vespertinis officiis teneatur,
&c. Vid. can. 20—23. ibid.
11 Renaudotius, Collectio Liturgiar. Oriental. Dissertat.
1. p. 9. 1. 1. Paris, 1716.
12 Dallae. de Cultu Relig. lib. 1. cap. 25.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

605

fragments and dismembered parcels now remaining :
which is a third reason why none of those ancient
liturgies are extant at this day. The fourth and
last reason is, the interpolations and additions made
to the ancient liturgies in future ages. For though
those ancient liturgies which go under the name of
St. Chrysostom and St. Basil might originaUy have
something of their composition in them, yet so many
additions and alterations have been made in them
by the Greek church in following ages, that it is
not easy to discern, after they have passed through
so many hands, and so much new modelling, what
was the genuine composition of the first authors.
And therefore I have made httle use of them in this
work, but rather chosen to coUect the fragments of
the ancient liturgy from the scattered remains in
the genuine writings of the fathers; joining with
them such forms as we find in the ancient book,
called the Apostolical Constitutions : which though
it be not so ancient as the title pretends, nor of so
venerable authority as Mr. Whiston contends for,
who would have it to be truly apostolical, yet it is
owned to be a good coUection of the liturgy and
rituals of the church in the third and fourth centu
ries, and less corrupted than any other liturgy that
bears the name of an ancient writer ; the true reason
of which was, because it never being of that esteem
as to be used as a standing liturgy in any church,
the book came down to us with less alterations than
other liturgies, which were new modelled, according
to the different taste and sentiments of the ages
they passed through, as aU things of this kind are
commonly revised and altered by several hands,
when they are in constant use and practice. For
proof of which we need go no further than the
example of our own liturgy, which has received
many reviews, alterations, and additions from the
time it was first compiled in the days of King
Edward. Upon this score, those liturgies which
bear the names of ancient authors, are not to be
depended on, as the genuine, unmixed liturgies of
those authors, having undergone so many altera
tions, interpolations, and additions, by passing
through various hands in succeeding ages. Foras
much, therefore, as we have now no ancient liturgies
perfect and entire, as they were first composed, we
must take our accounts and estimate of them from
other fountains : and by the providence of God there
is so much of them remaining in the genuine writings
of the ancient fathers, as both to show us in general
that the church made use of stated forms of worship,
and also what was the particular order and method
of hef worship in the most considerable parts of her
sacred service and devotions. We will, therefore,
first give some account of the use of liturgies and

" See Book XV. chap. 1.
'•' Prideaux, Connexion of Scripture History, part I.

sacred rites in general, and then proceed to explain
in order the several parts of the ancient service in
the same natural method as we find it was per
formed, at several times, either in the daily or
weekly assembhes for that purpose.
As to the use of liturgies in general,
I shall begin with ' the apostohcal ?.,'.!»™ w<-re
° * used in the apostles'
times, and carry the history through fSntwf0«rf„"ed
the four first ages. The apostolical .l^St^S,
practice may be considered in a double i„™,hethtEd„
respect ; first, in their compliance
with the stated forms settled among the Jews ; and
secondly, in the new forms introduced into the
Christian service. As to the former, there seems to
be nothing more uncontested among learned men,
than that the Jews had set forms of worship in all
parts of Divine service, and that the apostles freely
used these in all instances, in which they thought
it necessary or becoming to join with them. Their
ordinary service was of two sorts, the service of the
temple, and the service of the synagogue. These
differed in many respects, but both agreed in this,
that the public prayers in both were offered up in a
certain constant form of words. For their private
prayers, which every man made particularly by
himself, (which were like those silent prayers we
shall hereafter 13 meet with in the Christian church,)
a late learned writer14 tells us, They had no public
forms to pray by, nor any public ministers to offici
ate to them herein ; but all prayed in private con
ceptions : but their public prayers were directed by
public forms, both in the service of the temple and
the synagogue. The temple service is very accu
rately described by Dr. Lightfoot, as it stood in the
time of our Saviour : the sum of his description is
this :15 First, before the offering of the sacrifice, the
president called upon them to go to prayers, which
they began with this form : Thou hast loved us, 0
Lord our God, with an everlasting love, with great
and abundant compassion hast thou had mercy on
us, O our Father, our King, for our fathers' sakes,
who trusted in thee, and thou taughtest them sta
tutes of life. So be gracious to us also, O our Fa
ther, O most merciful Father, O thou compassion
ate One, pity us. And put into our hearts to know,
understand, obey, learn, teach, observe, do, and per
form all the words of the doctrine of thy law in
love, and enlighten our eyes by thy law, and cause
our hearts to cleave to thy commandments, and
unite our hearts to love and to fear thy name, &c.
After this prayer, they rehearsed the ten command
ments, and after the ten commandments they said
over their phylacteries, in Hebrew called tephillin,
which contained four portions of the law, written
in four parchments. The first out of Exodus xiii.,

chap. 6. p. 382.
¦3 Lightfoot, Temple Service, chap. 9. sect. 4. p. 108.

C06

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

from ver. 3 to 10. The second out of Exod. xiii.,
from ver. 11 to 16. The third out of Deut. vi., from
ver. 4 to 9. The fourth out of Deut. xi., from ver.
13 to 21. After this prayer, and rehearsal of the
decalogue and of their phylacteries, at the time of
offering incense, they had three or four prayers
more : the first of which was in this form, referring
to their phylacteries : Truth and stability, and firm
and sure, and upright and faithful, and beloved and
lovely and delightful, and fair and terrible and glo
rious, and ordered and acceptable, and good and
beautiful, is this word for us for ever and ever. The
truth of the everlasting God our King, the rock of
Jacob, the shield of our salvation, for ever and ever.
He is sure, and his name sure, and his throne set
tled, and his kingdom and truth established for
evermore, &c.
The second prayer was in this form : Be pleased,
0 Lord our God, with thy people Israel, and with
their prayer, and restore the service to the oracle of
thy house, and accept the burnt offering of Israel,
and their prayer in love and complacency ; and let
the service of thy people Israel be continually well-
pleasing unto thee. And they concluded thus : We
praise thee, who art the Lord our God, and the God
of our fathers, the God of all flesh, our Creator, and
the God of all creatures : glory and praise be to thy
great and holy name, because thou hast preserved
and kept us ; so preserve and keep us, and bring
back our captivity to the courts of thy holiness, &c.
A third prayer ran thus : Appoint peace, good
ness, and blessing, grace, mercy, and compassion, for
us, and for all Israel thy people. Bless us, 0 our
Father, even all of us as one man, with the light of
thy countenance; for in the light of thy counte
nance thou, O Lord our God, hast given us the law
of life, and loving mercy and righteousness, and
blessing and compassion, and life and peace : let it
please thee to bless thy people Israel at all times.
Let us, and all thy people the house of Israel, be
remembered and written before thee in the book of
life, with blessing and peace, &c.
A fourth prayer was used on the sabbath as a
blessing, by the course that went out of their ser
vice, upon those that came in to do the service of
the following week, in these words : He that caused
his name to dwell in this house, cause love and
brotherhood, and peace and friendship, to dweU
among you.
After these things, the priests lifted up their
hands, and blessed the people in that form of words,
which is in Numb. vi. 24 — 26, " The Lord bless thee,
and keep thee : the Lord make his face shine upon
thee, and be gracious unto thee : the Lord lift up
his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace."
To which the people answered, "Blessed be the Lord

God, the God of Israel, from everlasting to ever
lasting.'' After this blessing, the meat offering and the
drink offering was offered, and then began the sing
ing of psalms, and the music. The constant and
ordinary psalms which they sung were these :
On the first day of the week, Psalm xxiv., " The
earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof," &c.
On the second day, Psalm xlviii. ; " Great is the
Lord, and greatly to be praised in the city of God," &c.
On the third day, Psalm lxxxii., " God standeth in
the congregation of the mighty, and judgeth among
gods," &c.
On the fourth day, Psalm xciv., " 0 Lord God,
to whom vengeance belongeth," &c.
On the fifth day, Psalm lxxxi., " Sing aloud unto
God our strength; make a joyful noise unto the God
of Jacob."
On the sixth day, Psalm xciii., " The Lordreign-
eth; he is clothed with majesty."
On the sabbath day they sang Psalm xcii., which
bears the title of " A Psalm or Song for the sabbath
day," both in the Hebrew Bibles, and the translation
of the Septuagint.
These were the known, and constant, and fixed
psalms for the several days of the week throughout
the year.16 But upon some certain days they had
additional psalms and hymns. For on the sabbath,
as there was an additional sacrifice appointed,
Numb, xxviii. 9 ; so at the time of this additional
sacrifice, the Levites sang the song of Moses, Deut.
xxxii., " Hear, 0 heavens, and I will speak ;''
which they divided into six sabbaths for the morn
ing service : and at the evening service they sang
that other song of Moses, Exod. xv., " I will sing
unto the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously : the
horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea," &c.
By which custom of singing the songs of Moses
upon the ¦ sabbath, Dr. Lightfoot observes,1' that
that passage in Rev. xv. 3 may be illustrated,
where the saints are said to " sing the song of Moses,
the servant of God ;" because they were now come
to their everlasting sabbath, having " gotten the vic
tory over the beast, and over his image, and over
his mark, and over the number of his name," and
having the harps of God in their hands. Which
allusion to the sabbath service in the time of St.
John, is a good argument for the antiquity of the
practice. Besides this, there was an additional sacrifice ap
pointed on the first day of the year, called the Feast
of Trumpets, Numb. xxix. 1 ; and at this time they
sang the eighty-first Psalm, " Sing aloud unto God
our strength," &c. And at the evening service of
this day, the twenty-ninth Psalm, " The voice of
the Lord shaketh the wilderness," &c.

Lightfoot, Temple Service, chap. 7. p. 59.

" Ibid. p. 61.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

607

Also at the Passover, besides many other forms,
they were used to sing the hymn called the
Egyptian Hallel, because it was sung in remem
brance of their delivery out of Egypt : which con
sisted of Psalms cxui. cxiv. cxv. cxvi. cxvii. and
cxviii. And this, as some observe,19 was sung also
at the beginning of every month, and on the Feast
of Dedication, and the Feast of Weeks, and the
Feast of Tabernacles. And the latter part of it is
generally supposed to be the hymn which our Sa
viour sung with his disciples at the conclusion of
his last supper.
This is the sum of the Jewish temple service, as
it stood in our Saviour's time, with which, notwith
standing its stated forms, both he and his disci
ples complied, whenever they had occasion upon
any such solemnities to frequent the temple.
The service of the synagogue was something dif
ferent from that of the temple. For here were no
sacrifices, but only these three things : 1. Prayers.
2. Reading of the Scriptures. 3. Preaching and
expounding upon them. Their public prayers, like
those of the temple, were aU by stated forms.
Among these, the most ancient and solemn were
those which are called Shemoneh Eshreh, that is,
the eighteen prayers, which are said to have been
appointed by Ezra, and the great synagogue, from
the time of the captivity. These have been lately
translated and published by Dr. Prideaux, in his
Connexion of Scripture History,19 which, because it
is a work that deserves to be in every one's hands,
I shaU not here transcribe, but refer the reader
thither for the knowledge of them. Only whereas
he observes rightly, That another prayer, called the
nineteenth, was added a little before the destruction
of Jerusalem, against the Christians, who are therein
meant under the names of apostates and heretics ; I
shaU confirm his observation from a passage in
Epiphanius,20 who tells us, That the Jews in their
synagogues were used to pray against the Christians
in this form: 'EirtKarapdaai b Qtbg rovg "Na^apatouc,
0 God, curse the Nazarenes. And the same thing
is intimated by Justin Martyr,21 who says, Imme
diately after our Saviour's resurrection, the Jews
sent forth their chosen emissaries to all the syna
gogues in the world, to tell them, That there was a
certain impious, lawless sect risen up under one
Jesus, a Gahlean impostor, whom they had crucified,
but his disciples came by night, and stole him away
out of the grave, and deceived men by saying, He
was risen from the dead, and ascended into heaven :
and he adds, That after their city was demolished
they repented not, but even dared KarapdaBai avrov,
to curse him, and all that believed on him. Which
plainly refers to this additional prayer inserted into

Otho. Lexicon. Rabbin, p. 236.
Part 1. book 6. p. 375.

their liturgy against the Christians. But except
ing this prayer, which was of later date, all the
other seem to have been in use in the time of our
Saviour and his apostles. And as we are sure they
frequented the synagogues, so there is no doubt to
be made, but that they joined in these usual forms
of prayer, which were one part of the synagogue
service. The other parts of this service, were the reading
of the law and the prophets, and expounding of
them to the people. Which was also done by a cer
tain rule and order. For the five books of Moses
were divided into as many sections, or lessons, as
there are weeks in the year, one of which was read
every sabbath, and half of the same every Monday
and Thursday, which were their days of assembly
for the synagogue service. At these our Saviour
was usually present, and sometimes assisted and
officiated in reading, according to custom, as a
member of the synagogue, as is expressly said of
him, Luke iv. 16, and at other times taught in their
synagogues, Mark i. 39; Luke iv. 15, 44; which is
also noted of St. Paul, Acts xiii. 15 ; xvi. 13 ;
xvii. 2 ; xviii. 4, that it was his manner on the sab
bath days to go into the synagogues, where prayer
was wont to be made, and there, after the reading
of the law and the prophets, to preach to the people
and dispute or reason with them. So that, not
withstanding the public service of the synagogue
was" all performed by order and form, yet this was
no reason to the apostles to refrain from it, as a
thing simply sinful or unlawful ; but they com
plied with it for some time, probably to gain upon
the Jews the better, and make them lay aside their
prejudices against the Christian doctrine.
But besides their compliance with the stated
forms of the Jewish liturgy and worship, they had
some forms of their own in constant use among
themselves. Among which we may safely venture
to reckon, 1 . The Lord's prayer, as a form appoint
ed by Christ to be used by all his disciples ; of which
the primitive Christians never made any dispute, as
we shall see more fully hereafter. 2. The form of
baptism, constantly used without any variation, as
has been showed in a former22 Book. 3. The forms
of professing their faith in baptism„or the forms of
sound words settled in every church. 4. The forms
of renouncing Satan and covenanting with Christ
in baptism. 5. The forms of Scripture hymns and
psalms, and glorifications of God. To which the
ancients seem to add, 6thly, The forms of benedic
tion, such as, " The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,"
&c. And lastly, The repetition of the history of
Christ's institution of the last supper, as a neces
sary part of consecration, which, together with the

20 Epiphan. Haar. 29. Nazaraaor. in fine.
" Justin. Dial. cumTryph. p. 335. 22 Book XI. chap. iii.

GO'S

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

use of the Lord's prayer in the celebration of the
eucharist, is generaUy thought to descend from
apostolical practice. These things are sufficient to
show, that even the apostles themselves, notwith
standing the extraordinary gift of inspired prayer,
whether in matter, or method, or words, or lan
guages, sometimes confined themselves to forms,
without any reflection on their gifts, or stinting of
the Spirit, or want of edification to their hearers.
If these things be rightly considered, some of them
at least will evince, that the use of well chosen and
well appointed forms, are no ways disagreeable to
apostolical practice, since the apostles themselves
both complied with the forms in use in the Jewish
temple and synagogue, and used some others of
Christian institution. I now proceed to carry this
inquiry through the three or four following ages of
the church.
And here, first, we may add what Josephus says
of the Essenes,23 That they were used to rise before
the sun was up, and offer unto God warping nvag
evxdg, certain prayers, according to the custom of
their forefathers, or such as they had received from
them : and what Philo says" of the Therapeutee of
Alexandria, the ascetics, whether Jews or Chris
tians, that lived there in his time, That the president
among them, after he had made a sermon, first be
gan to sing a hymn to the praise of God, either
such as he had composed himself, or one taken out
of the ancient prophets, in the close of which they
all, both men and women, joined in concert with
him. Again, in their vigils,25 they divided them
selves into two quires, the one of men, the other of
women, each of which had their precentor ; and so
they sang hymns to the glory of God, composed in
divers sorts of metre, sometimes one side singing and
sometimes the other, in imitation of the children of
Israel, under the conduct of Moses and Miriam, their
precentors, at the Red Sea. This was so much a re
semblance of the ancient Christian way of psalmody,
that Eusebius,26 who transcribes a great many things
out of this curious tract of Philo, was clearly of
opinion, that it was a description of the worship of
such Jews as had embraced the Christian religion :
in which opinion he is followed not only by St.
Jerom,27 but by many learned writers of this last age
also. I shall not need to determine this question,
whether they were Jews or Christians : it is suffi
cient to our present purpose, that their way of wor
shipping God by certain forms of praise, and those
of human composition, was the same, or so much
alike, that it was not easy to distinguish the one
from the other.

In the beginning of the second cen
tury lived Pliny, a Roman proconsul what evident
m Bithynia, who giving Irajan the or»t »in™ in m.
emperor an account of the Christian
way of worship, which he had from the mouth of
some apostates, says, They were used to meet on a
certain day before it was light, and sing a hymn al
ternately to Christ as God, binding themselves by
an oath or sacrament (not to any wicked thing, but)
that they would not steal, nor rob, nor commit
adultery, nor break their faith, nor withhold the
pledge.28 The word, carmen dicere, which Pliny
uses, will signify a solemn form of prayer, as well
as praises, as Vossius29 and Brissonius30 have ob
served out of the Roman writers : and then it will
denote, that their whole Divine service was by a
stated form. However, in the most restrained sense
it implies, that they used certain forms in some part
of their service in their alternate hymnody, which
could not otherwise be performed but by compo
sition and prescription. And that makes it proba
ble, that the rest of their service was then of the
same nature and order.
In the beginning of the same century, Ignatius is
said by the ancient historians to have brought in
the way of alternate singing" into the church of
Antioch ; that is, hymns sung alternately to the
praise of the holy Trinity. For they speak not of
the alternate singing of David's Psalms, as intro
duced by Ignatius, but of hymns composed by him
to set forth the Divinity of Christ : which appears
to have been a very ancient practice, not only from
what has been already observed out of the account
given by Pliny, but from what is said by that an
cient author in Eusebius,32 who wrote against the
heresy of Artemon in the latter end of the second
century ; where, among other arguments which he
brings for the church's constant belief of our Sa
viour's Divinity, he urges this for one, That from
the beginning there were psalms and hymns com
posed by the brethren, and written by the faithful,
setting forth the praises of Christ as the Word of
God, and declaring the Divinity of his person.
Among these hymns we may reckon those of Igna
tius, composed for the service of the church of An
tioch, which probably might continue in use till
Paulus Samosatensis removed them out of the
church, and introduced others in their room, as the
fathers of the council of Antioch, mentioned in Eu
sebius,38 object against him.
It is not improbable, likewise, but that Ignatius,
as he made hymns, so might compose a whole form
of prayers for the use of his own church, as was

23 Joseph, de Bello Jud. lib. 2. cap. 12.
21 Philo de Vita Contemplativa, t. 2. p. 1214.
25 Philo, ibid. p. 1215. » Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 17.
2' Hieron. de Scriptor. cap. 21. a Plin. lib. 10. Ep. 97.
29 Voss. Comment, in loc. p. 97.

30 Brisson. de Formulis, p. 97.
31 Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 8. Hist. Tripartita, lib. 10. cap. 9.
32 Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 28. See this cited before, chap. 2.
sect. 3.
33 Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 30.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

609

customary for bishops to do in those days. To
which custom he seems to refer in his epistle to the
Magnesians, when he bids them do nothing with
out the bishops and the presbyters ; nor attempt
any thing seemingly agreeable to their private fan
cies; but when they met together,34 to have one
prayer and one supplication. Which not only for
bids them to break out and divide into schisms and
separate assemblies, but also to conform to the
order of prayers agreed upon by the bishop and
presbytery of the church.
Not long after Ignatius, we meet with the coUa-
teral evidence of Lucian the heathen, who had
some knowledge of the Christian service. For in
one of his dialogues, describing his coming into e,
religious assembly, he says, he there heard that
prayer which began with the Father, and ended
with the hymn of many names.35 It is more than
probable, that by the prayer beginning with the
Father, he means the Lord's prayer, which was of
known and general use in the eucharistical service :
but it is not so clear what he means by the hymn
of many names, that came after it. Bishop Weten-
hall85 takes it for the- lesser or common doxology,
" Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the
Holy Ghost : " Dr. Smith37 and others, for the great
doxology, "Glory be to God on high;" which I
think more probable : though it is not necessary
in our present inquiry, to determine what hymn it
was; it being sufficient to our purpose, that he
speaks of some prayers and hymns then of such
common and vulgar use in the Christian worship,
as that they were known to the very heathens.
Justin Martyr's authority is commonly alleged
on both sides, both for and against liturgies. The
defenders of prescribed forms urge his mentioning
Koiv&g ibxdg, common prayers i38 the opposers, with
great vehemence, argue for extempore prayer, be
cause he says, The bishop offered prayers and thanks
givings oo-n Sivapic, with aU his might and power.39
Now, to speak freely, I think there is no demonstra
tion in either of these expressions : for they are both
ambiguous. Common prayer does not always im
ply, that the minister prayed by a prescribed form :
for inspired prayer was doubtless common prayer,
when offered in a public congregation : and though
it was then a form prescribed to the people, yet it
was not so to the minister ; but conceived by im
mediate inspiration. Therefore we cannot argue
barely from the mentioning of common prayer,
that the minister prayed by a prescribed form, un-

Ignat. Ep. ad Magnesian. n. 7. MtjSe irEipdo-nTE evXo-
yov ti tpatvEtrQai ISia bpXv' dXX' iirl to avTO pia irpoa-Evxh,
pia Sii]trts.
Luc'ian. Philopatris, p. 1128. Tnv evxvv diro iraTpos
"PiixEvos, Kal Tt)v iroXvtovvpov ipSrjV e'is teXos iirtBEts.
jfVetenhalfs Gift of Singing, chap. 11. p. 273.
¦Smith's Account of the Greek Church, p. 226. Comber,
2 B

less it be added, as usually it is in Chrysostom, that
the congregation prayed aid tpwvy, with one voice,
joining vocally in the whole prayer, or alternately,
by way of responses, with the minister ; for that
implies, that the people understood beforehand the
words of their common prayers, before they were
uttered by the minister. On the other hand, there
is no solidity in the argument brought against litur
gies, from Justin's saying, That the bishop prayed
and gave thanks, 8o-,, Svvapig, with all his ability or
power. _For this may not at all relate to the inven
tion of words, but to the ardency and intenseness
of devotion, which may be in the use of prescribed
forms as well as those of immediate conception.
And so it is plain the very same phrase is used by
Nazianzen, when he exhorts the Christians to sing
oo-ij Mvapig, with all their might, that triumphal
hymn40 upon the death of Julian, which the chU-
dren of Israel sang when the Egyptians were drown
ed in the Red Sea. Which was not an extempore
hymn, but a form composed by Moses, and appoint
ed to be sung alternately by the congregation of
Israel, Exod. xv. So that, after all the pains that
has been taken by some late writers to draw an
argument against liturgies out of this passage of
Justin, there is no reason for such a conclusion :
and yet this is the only passage that is brought
against them. But it is more material to consider,
that Justin lived among the Jews, who certainly
used set forms of prayer, one of which he condemns,
as I have showed before, as an execration inserted
against the Christians, but says nothing against the
other, which yet doubtless he would have done, had
he believed the use of liturgies to have been only a
piece of Jewish superstition, unbecoming the spirit
of a Christian. But he too well understood the
practice of our Saviour and his apostles, in comply
ing with the forms of the Jewish service, to put any
such mark or brand of infamy upon them. And
therefore this is of more weight with me, to persuade
that Justin believed the known forms both of the
Jewish and Christian service to be lawful, than any
ambiguous expressions are to persuade the contrary.
Not long after Justin, lived Ireneeus, bishop of
Lyons in France. And he takes notice of a certain
form used in the Christian worship, so well known
to the Valentinian heretics, that they made use of it
as an argument to prove their own fabulous doctrine
of the csones .- For, said they, you yourselves of the
church, in your thanksgivings, say, For ages of
ages,41 or csones of csones; thereby intimating the

Orig. of Liturgies, chap. 2. p. 30, takes it for the trisagion.
33 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 97.
w Justin, ibid. p. 98.
10 Naz. Orat. 3. quie est 1. Invectiv. cont. Julian. 1. 1. p. 54.
" Iren. lib. 1. c. 1. 'AXXri Kal iipas iirl -rjjs EVxapttrTtas
XiyovTas, e'is tovs alwvaSTtov altiviov, ekeivovs tovs aliovas
tjt)ixaivEiv.

610

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

aones which we contend for. This plainly refers
to some form of thanksgiving then of known use
in the church. Dr. Comber and some others take
it for the Gloria Patri, because it ends as that in
Ireneeus did, with the words, " world without end.
Amen." But I rather conceive, with Dr. Grabe,42 that
it was the conclusion of the great thanksgiving in
the eucharist ; where the glorification of the Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, ends with the words tig robg
aiuivag tuv aitovtov, world without end ; to which the
people always answered, Amen, as appears from the
form remaining in the Constitutions,43 of which
more in its proper place.
About the same time lived Clemens of Alexandria,
who, speaking of the church, says, It was the con
gregation of those who prostrated themselves in
prayers, having, as it were, tjnnvr]v ti)v koivijv, one
common voice ;44 which implies, that their prayers
were such as that (yhey could join vocally in them,
either by repeating the whole, or at least by alternate
responses. He also mentions a form of prayer used
over the penitents by the Valentinians, in imposition
of hands, in the close of which were these words,45
That they may obtain angelical absolution. Not to
mention that common form of doxology, which he
uses at the end of his Paedagogue, To whom be glory
both now and for ever, world without end. Amen.
Next after him Tertullian often tells us, that
they used the Lord's prayer as a form enjoined by
Divine command, of which I shall say more in a
following chapter.48 He also says,47 That the form
of baptism was appointed and prescribed by Christ
to be always in the "name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." And not only so,
but to this the church added several other ceremo
nies and observations, which were not enjoined ex
pressly in so many words by Christ. As the form
of renouncing the devil,48 and his pomp, and his
angels ; the trine immersion ; the interrogatories and
responses, which were made in a certain form to the
articles of the creed ; the giving of milk and honey
to the newly baptized; the obligation to abstain
from bathing for a whole week after : aU which
observations were only of ecclesiastical institution
and prescription. So, again, their receiving the
eucharist in their morning49 assembhes before day,
which Christ instituted after supper ; their annual

oblations and commemorations for the dead; their
avoiding fasting, and refusing to pray kneeling, on
the Lord's day, and the fifty days between Easter
and Pentecost ; their signing themselves with the
sign of the cross upon all occasions ; and their ap
pointing of occasional fasts,60 together with the fast
of Lent, and stationary days. None of which were
of express Divine command, but were instituted by
the church, with many other observations of the
like nature, for the edification of her children, as
her rules of disciphne, and psalmody, and singing
a particular psalm at the eucharist, which is men
tioned by our author.51 Again he intimates,52 that
in aU their assemblies they had not only sermons
and prayers, but also the Scriptures read, and psalms
sung to the glory of God. Which must be aUowed
to be forms of praise and glorification. Nor would
it be material to suggest, that TertuUian, when he
wrote this, was a Montanist; for both the church and
heretics commonly agreed in singing of David's
Psalms, and even vied in hymns of their own com
position and prescription. Tertullian indeed does
not expressly say, that their prayers, like their
psalms, were offered in a certain form of words ; but
he says what may incline a man reasonably to believe
it. For, as a proof of the Christians' loyalty, he
says,53 They met together, and as if they were drawn
up in battle, did jointly set upon God with their
prayers, which violence was acceptable to him.
They prayed for the emperors, for their officers and
powers, for the state of the world, for the peace of
their government, and for the continuance of their
empire. And again he says, They prayed constantly
for all the emperors, that they might have a long
life and quiet reign ; that their family might be safe,
their armies valiant, their senate faithful, their
people virtuous, and that the whole world might be
in peace. Now these, as we shall see hereafter,
were known parts of the church's liturgy ; and if
they had not been of constant use, they had been
but poor arguments of the Christians' loyalty, for
which Tertullian here produces them. In another
place, he expressly mentions the same doxology as
Ireneeus does before him ; for, speaking against
Christians frequenting the Roman theatres, he asks
them, With what face they could go5* from the
church of God into the church of the devU ? and

42 Grabe, Not. in loc. Irenaei.
43 Constit. Apostol. lib. 8. cap. 12.
44 Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. cap. 6. p. 848. Edit. Oxon.
45 Clem. Epitome, p. 974. 'Ev tij xEtpoBEtiia Xiyovtriv
iirl teXovs, eIs XiiTptocriv dyyEXtKijv.
48 Chap. 7.
47 Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 13. Lex tinguendi imposita est,
et forma praescripta. Ite, &c.
18 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3 et 13. It. de Bapt. cap. 6.
49 Tertul. de Coron. cap. 3.
50 Tertul. de Jejun. cap. 13.
51 Tertul. ibid.

52 Tertul. de Anima, cap. 9. Jam vero prout Scriptural
leguntur, aut psalmi canuntur, aut adlocutiones proferuntur,
aut petitiones delegantur: ita inde materiae visionibus sub-
ministrantur. 53 Tertul. Apol. cap. 39. Coimus in coetum et congregatio-
nem, ut ad Deum, quasi manu facta, precationibus ambi-
amus orantes. Haec vis Deo grata est. Oramus etiam pro
imperatoribus, pro ministris eorum et potestatibus, pro statu
saeculi, pro rerum quiete, pro mora finis. It. cap. 30. Pre-
cantes sumus semper pro omnibus imperatoribus, &c.
54 Tertul. de Spectac. cap. 25. Quale est enim de ecclesia
Dei in diaboli ecclesiam tendere f  Ex ore illo. quo A.meu

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

611

with that mouth, wherewith they had said Amen
at the consecration or reception of the eucharist,
give testimony to a gladiator ; or say, " world with
out end," to any besides God and Christ, or to any
besides Christ their God ? I do not take this, with
some learned men, to mean that common form of
doxology, " Glory be to the Father," &c, at the end
ofthe psalms, but the conclusion ofthe consecration
prayer in the communion service, which, as I noted
before, always ended with those words, tig altHvag,
" world without end," to which the people subjoined
their Amen. And then it is an evident proof, that
the African churches had a certain form of prayer
for consecrating the eucharist, the known words of
which TertuUian could aUege to the people as an
argument to dissuade them from frequenting the
heathen theatres. He also intimates, that they
sang psalms and hymns alternately in private;55
for, to dissuade Christian women from marrying
heathen husbands, he uses this argument, What will
such a husband sing to his wife, or the wife to her
husband ? but if they married Christian husbands,
then they would sing psalms and hymns between
themselves, and mutually provoke one another, and
strive58 who should make the sweetest melody to
their God. And there is no doubt to be made, but
that this private psalmody was an imitation of the
pubhc psalmody of the church. So when he says,
That at their feasts of charity, after the communion
was ended, in the close of all, when they had wash
ed their hands, and brought in lights,57 every one
was excited either to sing something out of Scrip
ture, or some hymn of his own composing ; this as
plainly argues, that they made use of forms in this
part of their private devotions. For the psalms of
Scripture are undoubtedly forms, and hymns of
private composition are no less so, unless we will
suppose every one that sings, has words suggested
to him by immediate inspiration ; which still will
be a form to the congregation that hears it, though
not to the person who is so extraordinarily in
spired by the Holy Ghost.
But there is one expression in Tertullian which
the opposers of liturgies lay great stress upon, be
cause he says, The Christians prayed for the em
peror,58 sine monitore, quia de pectore, without any
monitor, because they prayed from their heart;
which they expound, praying extempore. But if
this be interpreted rigidly, it wiU prove much more

in sanctum protuleris, gladiatori testimonium reddere ? eIs
aiwj/ac alii omnino dicere, nisi Deo Christo ? or, as other
copies have it, nisi Deo et Christo ?
55 Tertul. ad Uxor. lib. 2. cap. 6. Quid maritus suus illi,
vel marito quid ilia cantabit ?
58 Ibid. cap. 9. Sonant inter duos psalmi et hymni, et
mutuo provocant, quis melius Deo suo canet.
5' Tertul. Apol. cap. 39. Ut quisque de Scripturis Sanctis,
vel de proprio ingenio potest, provocatur in medium Deo
canere.
2 e 2

than the objectors design. For if they prayed simply
without any monitor, then it wiU exclude even the
minister's dictating to them his own conceptions,
because these will be an admonition or direction to
the people; and so all public prayer must cease,
and all devotion be resolved into the private prayers
of the people. Which is such an absurdity, as
neither TertuUian ever thought of, nor the ob
jectors themselves will allow. Whatever, therefore,
be meant by this phrase, praying from the heart
without a monitor, it cannot mean, that the people's
prayers were simply their own conceptions. Among
the many interpretations which are put upon these
words by learned men, (which may be seen in Dr.
Faulkner,59 or Dr. Comber,) I take these two to be
the most natural; either, first, That they prayed
memoriter, saying their prayers by heart, and need
ing no prompter, as the heathens did ; which is the
sense that Rigaltius80 and Bishop Fell61 put upon
it : in which sense it is an argument for liturgies,
and not agamst them: or, secondly, That they
prayed sincerely from the heart, and freely out of
the loyalty of their own heart without compulsion,
as Hamon L'Estrange and Dr. Comber82 interpret
it. Which seems to be the truest sense : for the
heathens were neither sincere, nor hearty, nor zeal
ous in their prayers for the emperor ; but the
Christians offered their prayers with all those due
qualifications, as became the character of truly
pious votaries and loyal subjects. The sense of
this dark passage being thus cleared, it remains no
argument against liturgies, unless a man wUl say,
there can be no such thing as sincerity and hearti
ness in a form of prayer ; which would be to con
demn the whole catholic church in the time of Ter
tulhan, from whose testimonies it is evident, that
forms were generaUy used in most parts of Divine
service. I have nothing further to add in this century,
but only one or two small observations out of the
Acts of St. Perpetua and Felicitas, two African
martyrs, who suffered in the latter end of this age.
There it is remarked of Perpetua,83 that seeming in
a vision to receive the eucharist into her hands and
eat it, all that stood round her said, Amen : al
luding to the custom of saying Amen at the recep
tion of it from the hands of the minister in the
church. There is a like allusion to the use of
the Trisagion, Holy, holy, holy, which the angels

33 Ibid. cap. 30.
33 Faulkner, Libertas Eccles. Book I. chap. 4. sect. Z.
Comber, Orig. of Liturgies, chap. 2. p. 47.
63 Rigalt. in Tertul. cap. 30.
«' Fell. Not. in Cypr. de Orat. p. 152.
32 L'Estrange, Smectymniomastix, p. 5. Comber of Litur-
B'«>'passio Perpetuae, ad calcem Lactant. de Mort. Persec.
p. 10. Ego accepi junctis manibus, et manducavi : et uni-
versi circumstantes dixerunt, Amen.

612

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

used in heaven.84 And a further intimation of the
solemn custom of giving the peace, and the kiss of
peace, in the communion : for it is said,65 That
Perpetua and her brother Saturus saluted one an
other with a kiss before they suffered, that they
might consummate their martyrdom by the solemn
rites of giving the peace.
In the beginning of the third centu-
-whateevide'noe ry, about the year 220, lived Hippolytus
there is for the use . ,
of set forms in the the martyr, and bishop of Adana, or
third century. * x
Portus Romanus in Arabia. Among
other learned works, he wrote a book called,' A7ro?o\i-
kjJ IlapacWic irepl Xapiopdrtov, The Apostolical Tradi
tion concerning Ecclesiastical Offices ; which, ac
cording to the general opinion of the most learned
critics, Dr. Bernard, Dr. Gale, and others,68 is no other
than the eighth book of those called the Apostolical
Constitutions, which they think were compiled and
pubhshed at Rome by this author. And if so, there
can be no question what his opinion was about the
use of forms in Divine service : for that book is no
thing else but a collection of such forms, as either
were in use, or made in imitation of those that were
then in use in the church. I will not allege any
of them here, because I do it in every part of this
work, and it would be very needless and superfluous
here to repeat them.
Besides this, Hippolytus wrote a book of odes or
hymns upon several parts of Scripture, some of
which most probably were of use in the public ser
vice. For in another treatise, of the Consummation
of the World and Antichrist,87 he commends the
use of doxologies, and psalms, and spiritual odes ;
and makes it one of the signs of the reign of anti
christ, that liturgy shall be extinguished, psalmody
shall cease, and reading of the Scriptures shall not
be heard. It is true indeed, some learned men,
Bishop Usher,83 Combefis, and Du Pin, reject this
as a spurious tract, composed by some modern
Greeks; but as learned critics, Labbe69 and Bishop
Bull,70 have undertaken to defend it, and answer all
the arguments that are produced against it. I will
not enter into this debate* but only say, that as
there is nothing in this passage now alleged dis
sonant to the sense of Hippolytus's other works, we
may be allowed to cite it in this cause, till some

clearer evidence can be produced against it. Hip
polytus wrote also a book, called Canon Paschalis
which Scaliger71 and Gothofred'2 take to be a
calendar, showing what lessons were to be read on
several festivals ; as the first of St. Matthew, called
rheotg, the generation of Christ, on the vigil of
Christ's nativity ; and the ndeoc, or the history of
his sufferings out of the Gospel of St. Matthew, on
the day of his crucifixion : and it is certain from
many passages in St. Chrysostom, St. Austin, and
others, that such calendars were used in the church
as shall be showed in another place,'3 when I come
to speak of the ancient method of reading the Holy
Scriptures by a certain rule and order in Divine
service. But because iEgidius Bucherius, who has
since republished this Paschal Cycle, and Dr. Cave,'4
give another interpretation of it, I wiU lay no
greater stress upon it than it will bear, contenting
myself in so critical a point to have suggested the
sense of learned men, and leave the matter to the
further disquisition of the curious reader; having
otherwise given sufficient evidence, that the church
in the time of Hippolytus used stated forms of
prayer and praises in her public service.
N ot long after Hippolytus, lived Origen, who was
one of his scholars, and took some of his opinions
from him. Now this writer, in his Homilies upon
Jeremy,75 expressly mentions one of the prayers of
constant use in the church : We frequently say in our
prayers, says he, Grant us, O Almighty God, grant
us a part with thy prophets ; grant us a part with
the apostles of thy Christ ; grant that we may be
found at the feet of thy only begotten Son. Which
is a testimony so clear, that the Centuriators'8 made
no scruple to conclude hence, that forms of prayer
were undoubtedly used in the church in the time
of Origen. He elsewhere" says, The Christians
used the ordered or prescribed prayers, as became
them, continually night and day, whereby they were
preserved against the power of magic and the devil.
For Celsus, in his spiteful way, had advanced an
egregious calumny against the Christians, pretend
ing that he had seen in the hands of some of their
presbyters certain barbarous books, containing the
names of the devils and their impostors; hereby
insinuating, that the prayers which the Christian

64 Passio Perpetual, ad calcem Lactant. de Mort. Persec.
p. 23. Introivimus et audivimus vocem unitam, Hagios, ha-
gios, hagios, sine cessatione.
65 Ibid. p. 35. Ante jam osculati invicem, ut martyrium
per solennia pacis consummarent.
86 Vid. Cave, Hist. Literar. vol. 2. p. 45.
87 Hippol. de Consummat. Mundi. Bibl. Patr. Gr. Lat. t.
2. p. 357 et 362.
83 Usser. Biblioth. Theol. ap. Cave, Hist. Liter, t. 1. p.
70. Combefis, Auctarium, Bibl. Patr. p. 51. Du Pin,
Biblioth. vol. l.p. 104.
69 Labb. de Scriptor. Eccl. p. 471.
70 Bull. Defens. Fid. Nic. sect. 3. chap. 8. p. 369.

71 Scaliger, de Emendat. Temp. lib. 7. p. 726.
72 Gothofred. Not. in Cod. Theodos. lib. 15. Tit. 5. De
Spectaculis, Leg. 5. p. 356.
73 Book XIV. chap. 3. sect. 3.
74 Vid. Cave, Hist. Literar. vol. 2. p. 47.
75 Orig. Horn. 11. in Jerem. p. 606. Frequenter in ora-
tione dicimus, Da Omnipotens, da nobis partem cum pro-
phetis; da cum apostolis Christi tui; tribue ut inveniamut
ad vestigia Unigeniti tui.
76 Centur. Magdeburg. Cent. 3. cap. 6. p. 94.
77 Orig. cnnt. Cels. lib. 6. p. 302. Tals irpoTaxBEtaais te
EvxaXs avvEXETEpov Kal Seovteos vvktos Kal ypipasxpto-
pivot, Sec.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

613

presbyters had in their books, were only magical
enchantments: which calumny Origen not only
rejects with scorn, appealing to the experience of
the world, which knew it to be a fiction ; but also
teUs his adversary further, that the prayers which
they used by order and appointment, were such as
rendered them invincible, and proof against all the
force of magic and power of the devils. Now, con
sidering that the objection of Celsus lay against the
service books of the Christian presbyters, it is rea
sonable to conclude, that Origen's answer relates
to the same : for Origen does not deny that they
had any such books, but only says, then- prayers,
which they were ordered to use, were of a differ
ent nature from what the adversary had represent
ed them.
To this we may add what Origen says in his
Comments upon Job, that by ancient custom of the
church,79 the Book of Job was always read in Lent,
and particularly in the Passion Week, as most pro
perly adapted to that occasion. The reader may
find this passage at length hereafter,79 and therefore
it is sufficient to hint in this place, that the Scrip
tures in his time were methodized and brought
under rule, being read by some certain order and
prescription. Not long after Origen, St. Cyprian testifies not
only that the Lord's prayer was used as a form, and
as a spiritual form, most acceptable to God, as we
shaU see hereafter ; but also mentions several other
forms of common and noted use in Divine service.
As in the administration of baptism, every one was
to renounce the devil and the world in a certain
form of words,80 then vulgarly known in the church,
which Cyprian more than once has occasion to
mention. They were likewise to make profession
of the several articles of the Christian faith in a
certain form of words, which every church had for
that purpose, and for this particular use, collected
into a creed. Cyprian81 often specifies both the
interrogatories and the answers that were made
upon this occasion; and he assures us, they were so
precise to a form, that the Novatians themselves82
used the very same words in their questions and
responses, as the catholics did : they observed the
same rule as the church did : they baptized with

78 Origen. in Job, lib. 1. p. 366.
79 Book XIV. chap. 3. sect. 3.
80 Cypr. de Lapsis, p. 125. Stare illic potuit Dei servus,
et loqui et renunciare Christo, qui jam diabolo renunciaret
et sacculo ? It. Ep. 7. al. 13. ad Rogat. p. 37. Saeculo re-
nunciaveramus, cum baptizati sumus.
8I Ibid. Ep. 70. ad Episcopos Numidas, p. 190. Sed et
ipsa interrogatio quae fit in baptismo, testis est veritatis.
Nam cum dicimus, Credis in vitam aeternam, et remissionem
peccatorum per sanctam ecclesiam? Intelligimus remis
sionem peccatorum non nisi in ecclesia dari, &c.
82 Ibid. Ep. 69. al. 76. ad Magnum, p. 183. Eandem No-
vatianum legem teuere, quam catholica ecclesia teneat eo-

the same creed ; they asked the party, Whether he
believed in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ? Whether
he believed in the remission of sins, and eternal life,
by the holy church ? which were the first and last
words in the creed. So they kept close to the same
form of words, though they differed about the sense
of them in some particulars relating to remission of
sins, and the church : which is so clear an argu
ment for the observation of a form in baptism, that
I see not what can reasonably be replied to it.
Then, again, for the prayers in the administration
of the eucharist, nothing can be more evident, than
that the people bare a part in them. I will not in
sist on those expressions of his, that they had pub
lic and common prayer,93 because they are capable
of an evasion : but what he says of the people's an
swering to the priest, is not to be evaded. For, per
suading the people to use diligence and attention in
their prayers, he puts them in mind of a usual form
of speech, which the whole church used to raise
their souls to a spiritual and heavenly temper. The
priest, says he, before prayer prepares the hearts94
of the brethren, by premising a preface, and saying,
" Lift up your hearts ;" that whilst the people an
swer, " We lift them up unto the Lord," they may
be admonished at that time to think of nothing but
the Lord only. What Cyprian says here of this
preface coming before the prayer, is not so to be
understood, as if it came before all the prayers of
the church, but immediately before the prayer of
consecration in the communion service : for, as we
shall see hereafter, there came before this both the
prayers for the catechumens and penitents, and the
prayers for the faithful, or the whole state of Christ's
church ; but when the solemn prayer of the oblation
was to be made, then it was that the priest called
upon the people in this form, " Lift up your hearts;"
and they answered, " We lift them unto the Lord :"
the priest went on again, and said, " Let us give
thanks to our Lord God ;" and the people answered,
" It is just and right so to do.". Then followed the
eucharistical or consecration prayer, and the Lord's
prayer ; and after that the salutation, Pax vobis,
" Peace be with you;" to which the people answer
ed, " And with thy spirit." After which they gave
one another mutually the kiss of peace, and then

dem symbolo, quo et nos baptizare ; eundem nosse Deum
Patrem, eundem Filium Christum, eundem Spiritum Sanc
tum :  Dicunt, Credis remissionem peccatorum et vitam
aeternam per sanctam ecclesiam?
33 Cypr de Orat. Dom. p. 141. Publica nobis et com
munis oratio est. It. Ep. 8. al. 11. ad Cler. p. 26. Oratione
communi et concordi prece pro omnibus jussit orare.
34 Ibid, de Orat. Dom. p. 152. Ideo et sacerdos ante
orationem, praefatione pramissa, parat fratrum mentes, di-
cendo, Sursum corda: utdum respondet plebs, Habemus ad
Dominum, admoneatur, nihil aliud se quam Dominum co-
gitare debere.

614

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

proceeded to receive the holy sacrament. This was
the form and order of the communion service in St.
Austin's time in the African church ; and it is very
probable it might be much the same in the time of
Cyprian : but Cyprian had no occasion to mention
any other part of the prayers, but only that which
related to his particular subject ; which one is suf
ficient to prove, that stated forms of prayer were
then allowed in the public service of the church of
Carthage, and probably in the rest of the African
churches. At the same time with Cyprian lived Firmilian,
bishop of Ceesarea in Cappadocia, who, having oc
casion to speak of a certain woman, an impostor,
who pretended to the spirit of prophecy, he says,
She took upon her95 to consecrate the eucharist
with the venerable invocation, and ceremony of
predication then commonly used in the church : he
mean's the commemoration of God's great blessings
bestowed upon man, and the repetition of the his
tory of the first institution of the Lord's supper,
which by the ancients is called dvdpvijoig, and solita
preedicatio, a thing seldom or never omitted in the
consecration of the eucharist. He adds also, that
the same impostor baptized many, using the com
mon and appointed interrogatories, that she might
not seem to vary in any thing from the rule of the
church. She made them answer to every article of
the creed, the creed (as he calls it) of the holy
Trinity ; she put the usual questions to them pre
scribed by the church, that is, Whether they re
nounced the devil, his angels, his pomp, and his
service ? and, Whether they made a covenant with
Christ ? and she did every thing ad imaginem ve-
ritatis, according to the exact method and form that
was observed in the church. Now, though all this
was done by the devil, speaking in an impostor ;
yet, being done according to the exact rules of the
church, it argues, that the church at that time had
a stated rule and order for administering both the
sacraments, and that the forms were so well known,
that this woman could imitate them so exactly, as
in nothing to vary from the usual solemnities either
of prayers, or other ceremonies then observed in the
church. And if we consider, that the administra
tion of the two sacraments was then the most con
siderable part of the church's service, this is as clear
an evidence as we can desire, to prove that pre
scribed forms were now in use in the Asiatic
churches.

Gregory Thaumaturgus, bishop of Neocsesarea in
Pontus, was contemporary with Firmilian, and he
was a man famous for working miracles by the Spi
rit, whence he had the name of Thaumaturgus, the
wonder-worker. There is no doubt but that he
prayed also by the Spirit, yet he prayed by a forrrtj
which shows, that praying by a form, and praying
by the Spirit, are not inconsistent. As he was the
founder of his church, (finding but seventeen Chris
tians when he came thither, and leaving but seven
teen heathens when he was taken from it,) so he left
them a liturgy or form of Divine service, which
they were so tenacious of, that, as St. Basil96 testi
fies of them, they would not suffer one ceremony,
or one word, or one mystical form, to be added to
those which he had left among them. He settled
the way of singing psalms, not alternately, but by
the common voice of the people all joining together:
and the clergy of Neoceesarea were such admirers
of this rule, that when St. Basil had introduced the
alternate way into his own church, they were of
fended at it, and objected against him, that it was
not so in the days of Gregory the Great. Upon
which St. Basil was forced to write an apologetical
epistle to them in vindication of his practice, wherein
he shows, That the way of alternate song was now
conformable to the practice of all the Eastern
churches, except that of Neoceesarea; and that,
however tenacious that church had formerly been of
the ways and forms of Gregory, yet in one particu
lar they had now made, an alteration : for in the
days of Gregory they97 had none of that peculiar
form of prayers, called htanies, which now in St.
Basil's time they had admitted into their service,
and were very zealous in the use of it, notwith
standing that it was neither of St. Gregory's com
position, nor used at all in his days. As this shows
that the use of htanies was brought into the church
of Neoceesarea some years after the time of St. Gre
gory ; so it as evidently proves that their other forms
were instituted by him, and derived their original
from his composition, who was the first founder of
the church.
Not long after this, we find a complaint made by
the council of Antioch, anno 270, against Paulus
Samosatensis, the heretical bishop of that place,
that he had forbidden the use of such psalms99 or
hymns as were used to be sung in the church to the
honour of our Lord Jesus Christ, under pretence
that they were only the novel compositions of late

85 Firmil. Ep. 75. ad Cypr. p. 223. Hoc frequenter ausa
est, ut invocatione non contemptibili sanctificare se panem
et eucharistiam facere simularet, et sacrificium Domino non
sine sacramento solitae praedicationis offerret ; baptizaret
quoque multos, usitata et legitima verba interrogationis
usurpans, ut nil discrepare ab ecclesiastica regula videretur.
— Nunquid et hoc Stephanus, et qui illi consentiunt, com-
probant ? Maxime cui nee symbolum Trinitatis, nee inter-
rogatio legitima et ecclesiastica defuit? Potest credi aut

remissio peccatorum data, aut lavacri salutaris regeneratio
rite perfecta, ubi omnia quamvis ad imaginem veritatis, ta
men per daemonem gesta sunt, &c.
86 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 29. p. 360. 06 irpd^iv
Ttvd, ov Xdyov, ov tvitov Tivi pvtTTiKdv, irap' ov iKEtvois
KaTtXiiTE, tij iKKXt)o-ia irpocriBr]Kav.
87 Basil. Ep. 63. ad Neocaesar. 'AW ovSi o! Xi-raw-iai
Eirl Vpi]yop'iov, fis vpEis vvv iiriTr]SEVETE.
88 Cone. Antioch. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 30.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

615

and modern authors. I have already produced this
passage more at length89 to prove the worship of
our Saviour : and here it serves to prove, that they
worshipped him by certain forms of praise, which
the bishop cast out of the church, upon a pretence
of novelty : which was but a mere pretence ; for
such forms of praise had been in use in the church
airapX'JSi fr°m the beginning, as the ancient writer
against the heresy of Artemon in Eusebius90 words
it And about the same time Nepos, an Egyptian
bishop, composed hymns of the hke nature for the
service of the church, for which he is commended
by Dionysius,81 bishop of Alexandria; who also him
self used a certain form of doxology to the whole
Trinity, as is reported by St. Basil,92 who also tells
us, in the same place, That Athenogenes the martyr
•composed hymns to the glory of the Holy Ghost ;
and adds, that the hymn called Hymnus Lucernalis,
the hymn to be sung at hghting of candles in the
evening service, containing a glorification of the
holy Trinity, was of ancient use in the church ; so
ancient, that he knew not who was the author of it.
But I have already alleged these more at large93 in
vindicating the worship of our Saviour, and there
fore content myself barely to hint them as accus
tomed forms of praise in this place.
I shall only note one thing more in this century,
out of the epistle of Cornelius, bishop of Rome, to
Fabian, bishop of Antioch, recorded by Eusebius :
which is, That it was customary, in those days, for
the minister to use a form of words at the delivery
of the bread and wine in the eucharist, saying, The
body of Christ, or the blood of Christ, to which the
people always answered, Amen. For Cornelius,94
speaking of the wickedness of Novatian, says, When
he delivered the eucharist to the people, he obliged
them, instead of saying Amen, at the naming of it,
reswear by the body and blood of Christ, that they
would not desert his party, nor return to Cornehus :
which custom of saying Amen, in answer to the
minister, when he named the body or blood of
Christ, is both an ancient and universal practice.
For TertuUian,95 as has been showed already, men
tions it long before ; and we find it frequently in
the writers of the next age, St. Ambrose, St. Cyril,

St. Austin, St. Jerom, and the author of the Con
stitutions ; of which I shall have occasion to speak
more in another place.
In the beginning of the fourth cen- Sect
tury, Arnobius, apologizing for the J^^t
Christian devotions, tells the heathens, "" '°mlh """"^
They might know that they worshipped the supreme
God, and called upon him for what they desired, by
the sound of their voice,86 which they used in prayer.
He says, they all prostrated themselves before him,
adoring him with joint supplications.0' And he
gives us the general heads of their prayers, which
are very agreeable to the ancient forms of the
church, viz. That God would grant98 peace and
pardon to all men, to the magistrates, to the armies,
and to the emperors ; to their friends and to their
enemies ; to those that were alive, and those that
were set at liberty from the bonds of the body.
Which petitions are so conformable to the method
and order of the ancient liturgies, that one might
have imagined them to be offered by a form, though
Arnobius had said nothing of their joint prayers, or
vocal consent in their devotions.
Lactantius and Eusebius wrote after the great
persecution under Diocletian and his associates was
over ; and they both take notice of forms of prayer
appointed by the first Christian emperors for their
soldiers to use, in imitation of those of the church.
Lactantius says expressly, that when Licinius was
about to join battle with Maximinus, Maximinus
made a vow to Jupiter, that if he got the victory, he
would utterly extinguish and blot out the very name
of Christians. Upon which, the night after an an
gel of God came and stood by Licinius as he lay at
rest, bidding him rise quickly, and pray to the most
high God with all his army, promising him the vic
tory if he did so. As soon as he heard this, he
thought with himself that he arose and stood with
the angel who gave him this warning, and who then
taught him after what manner and in what words
they should pray. Therefore, awaking out of sleep,
he ordered a notary to be brought to him, to whom
he dictated the prayer99 in these very words, as he
had heard them : O thou most high God, we be
seech thee. O holy God, we beseech thee. We

69 Chap. 2. sect. 3. •» Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 28.
91 Dionys. Epist. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 24.
92 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 29. M See chap. 2. sect. 2.
94 Cornel. Ep. ad Fabian, ap. Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 43. p. 245.
95 Tertul. de Spectac. cap. 25.
Arnob. lib. 1. p. 24. Summum invocare nos Deum, et
ab eo quod postulamus orare, vel auribus poterit scire, vel
ipsius vocis sono, qua utimur in precibus, noscitare.
Ibid. p. 25. Huic omnes ex more prosternimur, hunc
collatis precibus adoramus.
Id. lib. 4. p. 181. Cur nostra meruerint immaniter con-
venticuladirui ? In quibus summus oratur Deus, pax cunctis
et venia postulatur, magistratibus, exercitibus, regibus, fa-
niiliaribus, inimicis, adhuc vitam degentibus, et resolutis
corporum vinctione.

89 Lact. de Mort. Persecut. cap. 46. Discusso somno
notarium jussit asciri, et sicut audierat, hiec verba dicta vit.
Summe Deus, te rogamus. Sancte Deus, te rogamus. Om
nem justitiam tibi commendamus; salutem nostram tibi
commendamus ; imperium nostrum tibi commendamus.
Per te vivimus, per te victores et felices existimus. Summe
sancte Deus, preces nostras exaudi. Brachia nostra ad te
tendimus. Exaudi, sancte summe Deus. Scribuntur haec
in libellis pluribus, et per praepositos tribunosque mittuntur,
ut suos quisque milites doceat.  r-Erat jam utraque acies
in conspectu. Liciniani scuta deponunt, galeas resolvunt,
ad ccelum manus tendunt, praeeuntibus praepositis, et post
imperatorem precem dicunt : audit acies pentura precan-
tium murmur. Illi oratione ter dicta, virtute jam plem,
&c.

616

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

commend all the justice of our cause to thee : we
commend our safety unto thee: we commend our
empire unto thee. By thee we hve, by thee we are
victorious and happy. O most high and holy God,
hear our prayers. We stretch forth our arms unto
thee. Hear us, O most high and holy God. These
words were written in many books, and sent by the
generals and tribunes, that they might teach them
to their soldiers. When the day of battle came, the
soldiers laid aside their shields, and put off their
helmets, and lifting up their hands to heaven, said
the prayer after the emperor, their generals repeat
ing it before them. And this they did so loudly,
that the adverse army, ready to be sacrificed, heard
the echo of their prayer. Which when they had
repeated three times, they were inspired with cou
rage, and resuming their arms, though they were but
a few, they without any loss gained a complete
victory over their enemies ; whom the most high
God, says our author, delivered up to be slaughtered,
as if they had come not to engage in battle, but as
men devoted to death and destined to destruction.
It is not many years since this httle golden tract
of Lactantius came to light, and therefore probably
this testimony may not very often have fallen under
the observation of every ordinary reader. But as
there is no dispute to be made of the truth of the
relation upon the authority of Lactantius, so it is
an illustrious evidence both of the opinion of Lac
tantius and the general sense of Christians, that
they did not think forms of prayer unlawful, be
cause they were written in a book, nor the repeti
tion of them any offence, for this prayer was thrice
repeated. If it should be said, that this prayer
was dictated immediately by an angel, the same
and more may be said of the Lord's prayer, that it
was dictated by Christ himself, and the Psalms were
written as forms of prayer and praise by an inspired
penman ; and yet there are those, who, for no other
reason but because they are forms, despise the
use of them, when inserted into any liturgy of the
church. Parallel to this testimony of Lactantius is that
other relation of Eusebius concerning Constantine,
That he ordered all his soldiers, as many of them
as were heathens, to go forth into the field on the
Lord's day, and there, with hands and hearts lift up
to heaven, to offer up to God ptpe\ernpkvr)v tiixhv,133
a certain prayer which they had learned and pre
meditated before. The prayer was to be said in the
Latin tongue, which was the vulgar language, and
in this express form of words : We acknowledge
thee to be the only God ; 101 we profess thee to be
our King ; we call upon thee as our helper. It is

100 Euseb. de Vita Constant, lib. 4. cap. 19.
101 Ibid. cap. 20.
102 Ibid. cap. 17. EIt' evxas ivBitrpovs avv toXs tSv

from thee we have our victories ; by thee we are
superior to our enemies. We give thee thanks for
the by-past favours and benefits we have already re
ceived ; and we hope in thee for those that are to
come. We are all humble supplicants unto thee
beseeching thee to preserve Constantine our king,
with all his pious children, and grant him long to
reign over us with safety and victory. This was
the prayer which he enjoined the heathens in his
army to use every Lord's day.
As for those that were Christians, he commanded
them to follow his own example, and attend the
prayers of the church on the Lord's day, setting
them a pattern in his own practice. He ordered
his own palace after the manner of a church, first
taking the Bible into his hands, and reading and
meditating therein, and then repeating the pre
scribed prayers 102 with all his royal family. Which
shows that forms of prayer were then generally
used in the church, since Constantine used the pre
scribed prayers in his own family, and thereby made
it to resemble the church.
Eusebius highly extols and applauds Constantine
for all this; which argues that Eusebius himself
was no enemy to prescribed forms. And indeed we
are beholden to his history both for the knowledge
of this of Constantine, and many other forms,
which had been lost, had it not been for his care
and diligence in preserving them ; of which any
reader may be sensible, that considers how many
things have already been alleged out of his treasury,
especially the account which he gives of the Es
senes, and their way of worship, out of Philo
Judeeus ; for as it is evident that they worshipped
God by certain forms, so it is as evident that Euse
bius took them for Christians, and their worship
for the way of worship settled by the first Chris
tians at Alexandria.103 It may not be improper
also to observe, that Eusebius, in one of his letters
recorded by Socrates,104 expressly says, That in the
church of Caesarea, where he was bishop, they
always had a creed in a certain form of words
(which he there repeats) whereby their catechumens
were to be instructed, and their answers in baptism
to be made in the words of it ; and that thus it was
that he himself had been there both catechised and
baptized. And if his church allowed a form in bap
tism, there is reason to beheve, from what has been
said, that she was not averse to it in other parts of
Divine service. Moreover, from the time of the
council of Nice, we are weU assured, that the creed
composed in that council was used in most of the
Eastern churches, as a precise form by which aU
catechumens were to make their responses in bap-

fiacriXEiov oikov irXrjpovtriv dlTESlSov.
m Vid. ibid. lib. 2. c. 17.
101 Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 8.

Chap. V.

.ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

617

tism, as I have proved105 elsewhere upon another
occasion, though it was not presently admitted as a
form to be repeated, as now it is, in the ordinary
service of the church ; but its being allowed as a
form in baptism, is an argument that the church
had then no exception against forms, since she en
joined them in the administration of her sacraments,
which are the most considerable part of Divine
service. Athanasius, as well as Eusebius, was a member of
the council of Nice, and there are plain footsteps
of a liturgy in his writings. In one place he de
clares, that when he said, Let us pray for the safety108
of the most religious emperor Constantius, all the
people immediately with one voice answered, Christ
help Constantius. Which is exactly agreeable to
the ancient way of praying for kings and others in
the prayer for the whole state of Christ's church,
where the people were used to answer to every
petition, Kwpit, IXeijcov, or tsioaov, Lord, have mercy
upon them, or, Lord, save and help them, as will be
showed in its proper place.
Again, speaking of the communion service,107 he
says, The people offered up their prayers with one
voice, and without any manner of disagreement ; and
that in that great multitude there was but one voice,
when they unanimously answered, Amen. It is
evident also, that in his time psalmody was in great
request at Alexandria; for Sozomen109 takes notice,
that it was by the advantage of this practice, that
Athanasius, when he was beset in the church by his
enemies, escaped their hands, whilst he got out
secretly in the company of those that were singing
psalms. St. Austin also speaks of it, and tells us,109
That Athanasius made some regulation in the way
of singing, and brought in the custom of plain song,
ordering the readers of the psalms to pronounce
their words with so httle inflexion or variation of
the tone, that it looked more like reading than sing
ing. It is further observable out of Ruffinus110
and the other historians, who relate the story of
Athanasius baptizing the catechumens whilst he
was but a youth, that the questions and answers,
and all other ceremonies of baptism, were then per
formed by such a certain rule and order in the
church, that Athanasius was able to imitate them
exactly, and omit nothing that was used to be done,
but observed every rite to a tittle, as Alexander the

bishop found upon inquiry, when he came more
strictly to examine them. And this shows, that not
only in the time of Athanasius, but in the days of
Alexander his predecessor, such sort of forms were
of constant use in the church. Athanasius himself
also not only mentions their psalmody, but tells us,
that it was so ordered, the people might bear a part
in it. For though the antiphonal way of singing
verse for verse, by way of alternate song, was not
yet brought into the church in repeating David's
Psalms, yet it was usual sometimes for the people
to join in the close of a verse, and repeat it together
with the reader. And this was called virnxiiv, and
inraKovav, to come into the concert at the close.
Whence Athanasius, speaking111 of that great as
sault made upon his church, mentioned before by
SoCrates and Sozomen, says, He commanded the
deacon to read a psalm, to which the people did
viraKovuv, that is, not barely hearken, as the un
skilful translator renders it, but repeat in the close
these words, " For his mercy endureth for ever." Of
which way of singing I shall say more hereafter in
its proper place, Book XIV. chap. i. sect. 12. Here
I shall only note further, that Athanasius, describing
the great barbarities and indignities which the
Arians showed to the matrons and virgins in the
very church, mentions one virgin112 whom they de-
spitefully used, having her Psalter in her hand.
Which no doubt she had to join in singing David's
Psalms, according to the custom of the church.
And the book De Interpretatione Psalmorum, is
nothing else but a direction how to use the Psalms
as forms of prayers and praises upon all particular
occasions, where, among other things, he observes,119
That the 62nd or 63rd Psalm, " 0 God, my God,
early will I seek thee," was always a psalm to be
used at morning prayer. And the author of the book
of Virginity,114 among his works, says the same ;
which is also mentioned by St. Chrysostom and
some others about this time, of whom we shall have
occasion to speak more particularly in considering
the order and method of morning service, Book
XIII. chap. x. sect. 2.
Athanasius lived forty-six years bishop of Alex
andria, and continued in being tiU the year 371.
During which interval, we have the concurrent tes
timony of Juvencus and Pachomius, and all the
Egyptian monasteries ; of Flavian, bishop of An-

105 Book X. chap. 4. sect. 17.
133 Athanas. Apol. ad Constant, p. 679. Mdvov ydp IXe-
y»K, Eii£iopEBa irEpl Trjs atoT-npias, Sec. Xal irds b Xaos
EvBbs pia (pirn/;? l/3o'a, Xpto-TE, /3or,8i>t KoovtrTavTitp.
Athan. ibid. p. 683. Miav Kal Tt]v avTijv peTi txvp-
Qtovias t5i/ Xa&v yEvicrBat Tr)v tpmvhv, Sec.
108 Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 6. 'S.vptptovov Si ttjs xjraXptpSias
yevopivns, Sec. Vid. Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 11. npoo-Tii'fas
SiaKovtp Kt]pv£ai eixdv, Sec. Theod. lib. 2. cap. 13.
109 Aug. Confess, lib. 10. cap. 33. Tarn modico flexu vocis
faciebat sonare lectorem psalmi, ut pronuncianti vicinior

esset quam canenti.
113 Ruffin. lib. I. cap. 14. Diligenter inquirens, quid in-
terrogati fuerint, quidve responderint, videt secundum re
ligionis nostra ritum cuncta constare, &c.
111 Athan. Apol. ad Constant, p. 717. TIpoETpEirov tov
piv SiaKovov dvayivuia-KEtv \j/aXpov, tovs Se Xaovs vira-
koveiv, oti eIs toi/ aliova to eXeos avTov, Sec.
"2 Ibid. Epist. ad Orthodoxos, p. 947.
»» Ibid, de Interpr. Psalmor. ad Marcellin. t. 1. p. 975.
111 Ibid, de Virgin, p. 1075.

618

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

tioch ; Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, Hilary, bishop of
Poictiers ; Optatus, Epiphanius, Gregory Nazianzen,
Ephrem Syrus, St. Basil 'and Apollinaris, the sup
posed author of the books under the name of Diony
sius the Areopagite, together with the councU of
Laodicea. And not long after, St. Ambrose, St.
Jerom, St. Austin, and St. Chrysostom, with several
African councils, all within the compass of this
fourth age, in which Athanasius lived.
Juvencus flourished under Constantine in Spain,
and being a poet, turned the history of the gospel
into verse ; and St. Jerom adds, that he wrote a
book115 in the same way, giving an account of the
order of the sacraments of the church. Now, if we
consider, what has been observed before,116 that, in
ecclesiastical style, Ordo Sacramentorum commonly
denotes a book of Divine offices, it is most probable
that this work of Juvencus was no other but. the
offices or forms of Divine service turned into verse.
Pachomius, about the year 340, brought the
Egyptian monks into communities, and settled them
under rules ; one of which was, to meet twice a day,
and sing a certain number of psalms, with prayers
intermixed, as may be seen in the accounts which
Cassian,117 PaUadius,118 and St. Jerom119 give of them.
Now, it must be owned, that whatever their prayers
were, their psalmody was matter of form, whether
sung singly or alternately : and though they did not
repeat the usual doxology, " Glory be to the Father,"
as was usual in the Western church, at the end of
every psalm, yet they did it at other times at the
end of their antiphoncs, as Cassian,120 an eye wit
ness of their service, informs us.
About the year 350, lived Flavian, first a pres
byter, and then bishop of Antioch. Whilst he was
presbyter, it happened that Leontius, the Arian bi
shop, made an alteration in the common doxology,
" Glory be to the Father," &c, to make it favour his
heresy. Upon this, Flavian and Diodorus withdrew
from his communion, and assembled with the peo
ple at the monuments of the martyrs ; where, di
viding the people into two parts, they taught them
to sing the Psalms of David alternately ; 121 which
custom beginning first at Antioch, was from thence
propagated all the world over. After this manner
Theodoret relates the story ; where it is easy to ob
serve, 1. That the form of glorification was an an
cient thing, and only Leontius made an innovation
in it. 2. That the singing of David's Psalms was
ancient too, which are forms both of prayers and
praises ; and Flavian was not the author of that
service, but only of the alternate way of singing

them. And whereas it is said by Socrates, that Ig
natius had introduced the antiphonal way of sing
ing before, that is not to be understood of David's
Psalms, but of other hymns composed to the glory
of the holy Trinity ; which, as we have seen before,
were always in use in the Christian church. And
Theodoret adds, 3. That this way of singing was so
taking to the people of Antioch, that they all de
serted Leontius, and he was forced to beg of Fla
vian, that he would bring back this XeiTovpyiav, this
liturgy or service into the churches.
About the same time lived Cyril, bishop of Jeru
salem, who, in his Catechetical Discourses to the
newly baptized, takes notice of many forms that had
been of ancient use in the church. In his first
catechism,122 he tells them the meaning of the cere
monies used in baptism : Ye were first brought in,
says he, into the ante-room of the baptistery, and
placed towards the west in a standing posture, and
then commanded to renounce Satan, by stretching
out your hands against him, as if he had been pre
sent. A little after he explains the meaning of
their doing this toward the west. The west, says
he, is the place of darkness, and Satan is darkness,
and his strength is in darkness. For this reason
ye symbolically look toward the west, when ye re
nounce that prince of darkness and horror. For
what did every one of you then say, standing ? I
renounce thee, Satan, and all thy works, and aU
thy pomp, and all thy worship and service. After
this, he tells them,123 they turned from the west to
the east, which is the region of light and place of
paradise, and then were commanded to say, I be
heve in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy
Ghost, and in one baptism of repentance. In his
second discourse, he reminds them of their unction
in the baptistery,124 and their repeated confession of
the holy Trinity, and their trine immersion. In
his third discourse, he treats of125 the second unc
tion with the holy chrism, which was then used in
confirmation, immediately after they were come out
of the waters of baptism. In his fifth discourse,
he treats of the ceremonies used in the communion
service, where first he speaks126 of the deacon's
bringing water to the bishop and presbyters to
wash their hands, in token of men's obligation to
purify themselves from sin. Then the deacon cries
out, Embrace and salute127 one another with a holy
kiss. After this, the priest cries out,129 Lift up your
hearts ; and ye answer, We lift them up unto the
Lord. He says again, Let us giye thanks to the
Lord; and ye answer, It is meet and just so to do.

1,5 Hieron. de Script. Eccl. cap. 84. Nonnulla eodem
metro ad sacramentorum ordinem pertinentia composuit.
113 Book XIII. chap. i. sect. 6.
117 Cassian. Institut. lib. 2. cap. 5.
118 Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. cap. 38.
119 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. c. 15.

120 Cassian. lib. 2. cap. 8.
121 Theod. lib. 2. cap. 24.
122 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 1. n. 2. p. 278.

123 Ibid. n. 6. p. 283.
125 Ibid. 3. n.2et3.
™ Ibid. n. 2.

>2Mbid.2.n. 3et4.
» Ibid. 5. n. 1.
128 Ibid. n. 3.

Chap. V.

. ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

619

After this, we make mention of heaven, and earth,
and sea, the sun, moon, and stars, and the whole
creation, rational and irrational, visible and invisi
ble, angels and archangels, dignities, dominions,
principalities and powers, thrones and cherubims,
and with them we sing the seraphical hymn, Holy,
holy, holy, Lord God of sabaoth. After which,
we beseech the merciful God, that he would send
forth his Spirit upon the elements, and make the
bread the body of Christ, and the wine the blood of
Christ. Then, after this spiritual and unbloody sa
crifice and service is performed, we beseech God for
the common peace of the church, for the tranquillity
of the world, for kings and their armies and allies,
for the sick and afflicted ; and, in a word, for aU
that want assistance, saying, We beseech thee for
them, and offer this sacrifice unto thee. Then we
make mention of those that are fallen asleep, first,
patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and martyrs, that
God, through their prayers and intercessions, may
receive our prayers ; and after, we pray for our holy
fathers and bishops, and all that are departed this
life before us. Then we say that prayer, which our
Saviour gave to his disciples, calhng God by the
name of Father, and saying, " Our Father which art
in heaven." After which, the priest says, Holy
things for those that are holy. And the people
answer, There is one holy, one Lord Jesus Christ.
Then one is appointed to sing those words of the
thirty-third Psalm, " 0 taste and see that the Lord is
gracious," as an excitement to receive the commu
nion; and every one communicates, saying Amen
twice, when first he receives the body of Christ into
his hand, and afterward the cup of his blood. Fi
nally, when aU have communicated, he tells them,
they are to wait for prayer again, and give God
thanks for making them partakers of so great mys
teries. Now, one must he blind that cannot see the plain
footsteps and forms of a stated liturgy in all this ;
and, therefore, I shall make no other descant upon
them, but only this, that, undoubtedly, before St.
Cyril wrote those lectures, there was a prescribed
liturgy, and offices in form for the administration
both of baptism and the eucharist, in the church of
Jerusalem, and those handed down from their fore
fathers, though it be not possible to trace every thing
precisely to its first original.
Contemporary with Cyril was Hilary, bishop of

Poictiers, of whom St. Jerom129 says, That he wrote
a book of hymns and mysteries, which most pro
bably were the forms of the holy offices then used
in the church. It is certain, his hymns, together
with those of St. Ambrose, were afterwards in great
request in the church ; and when some excepted
against them, as only of human composition, the
fourth council of Toledo ordered130 them to be re
tained in the church's service, together with the
hymns, " Glory be to the Father," and, " Glory be to
God on high;" threatening excommunication to any
who in the churches of Spain and Gallicia should
reject them. Hilary himself plainly intimates, that
both the prayers and hymns were such, as aU the
people with an audible voice might join in them.
Let every profane hearer, says he,131 be terrified with
the words of our confession: let us fight against
the devil and his weapons with the sound of our
.prayers, and let the victory of our war be proclaim
ed with the voice of exultation. Let him that
stands without the church hear the voice of the
people praying ; let him perceive the glorious sound
of our hymns, and hear the responses of our devout
confession in the offices of the Divine sacraments.
He that can make out all this from the people's
silent consent in heart only to the minister's prayer,
without any vocal joining in forms of prayer and
praises, may make any thing out of any thing, and
it were not worth while to produce any manner of
evidence for such a man's conviction. I only note
further out of Hilary, that these prayers and
hymns were both for morning and evening ser
vice : 132 The church had her outgoings both morn
ing and evening to praise God : she began the day
with prayers, and ended the day with hymns to God.
Chronologers are not exactly agreed about the
time of the council of Laodicea. Labbe and others
place it before the councU of Nice, about the year
319; Bishop Beverege, about the year 365; but on
all hands it is agreed to be within this century.
Now, here are several canons, which plainly show
the use of prescribed forms in the service of the
church. The seventh canon orders, That such as
returned from the heresies of the Novatians, the
Photinians, and the Quartadecimani, should first
learn the creeds of the church, and be anointed with
the holy chrism, before they were admitted to the
communion of the holy mysteries. Which implies,
that the creeds were then in a certain form, since

129 Hieron. de Scriptor. cap. 140. Liber hymnorum et
mysteriorum. 130 Cone. Tolet. 4 can. 13. Quia nonnulli hymni hu-
mano studio in laudem Dei, atque apostolorum et martyrum
tnumphos compositi esse noscuntur, sicut hi, quosbeatissimi
doctores Hilarius atque Ambrosius ediderunt, quos tamen
quidam specialiter reprobant, pro eo quod de scripturis sanc
torum canonum, vel apostolica traditione non existunt, &c.
IS1 Hilar, in Psal. lxv. p. 232. Terrendus est confes
sions nostra sermone omnis profanus auditor : et adversus

diabolum armaque ejus orationum nostrarum sonitu cer-
tandum est, et belli nostri victoria exultationis voce mon-
stranda est. Audiat orantis populi consistens quis extra
ecclesiam vocem ; spectet celebres hymnorum sonitus ; et
inter Divinorum quoque sacramentorum officia responsionem
devotaa confessionis accipiat.
132 Id. in. Psal. lxiv. p. 231. Progressus ecclesiae in ma-
tutinum (leg. matutinorum) et vespertinorum hymnorum
delectatione maximum misericordiae Dei signum est. Dies
in orationibus Dei inchoatur, dies hymnis Dei clauditur.

620

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

they were obliged to learn them. The fifteenth
canon orders, That none should sing in the church
except the canonical singers, who went up into the
ambo, or reading desk, and sang from a book, diro
SttpBipag. The seventeenth canon forbids the con
tinuing of psalms one after another, and orders a
lesson to be read after every psalm. The eighteenth
orders the same liturgy of prayers to be used at the
nones, that is, three o'clock in the afternoon, and at
evening service. The nineteenth orders the method
of Divine service, That after the bishop's sermon
should follow the prayers for the catechumens ; and
after they were gone, the prayers for the penitents ;
and when they had been under the bishop's hand,
and were retired, then the three prayers for the
faithful or communicants ; the first whereof were
to be in silence, the second and third by way of
bidding prayer and audible invocation. Then the
presbyters were to give the kiss of peace to the
bishop, and laymen to one another; after which,
the holy oblation was to be made, those only of the
clergy communicating within the rails of the altar.
This canon plainly describes the order and method
of the ancient service, as it was performed in that
age ; and though the several forms of prayer here
mentioned are not set down, yet we are sure they
were in use at that time; and therefore a brief refer
ence, such as was suitable to the compass of a short
canon, is made to them, as shall be showed more at
large in another place.133 The twenty-second canon
orders, That the subdeacon shall not wear the ora
rium, which was a scarf or tippet belonging to the
deacons, by which they were used to give the signal
or directions to the people in the performance of
the several parts of Divine service. The forty-sixth
canon orders those that are to be baptized, to learn
the creed, and on the Thursday before Easter to re
hearse it to the bishop or presbyters. The forty-
seventh canon appoints those that were baptized in
sickness, afterwards to learn the creed also ; which
implies, that the creed was then in a certain form
of words. The fifty-ninth canon orders, That no
psalms composed by private men should be sung in
the church ; which argues, that hymns composed
by private men were only to be discarded, but others
were allowed that were authentic. And this is fuU
proof, that forms of Divine service were in use at
the time of this council.
About the year 368, Epiphanius was made bishop
of Salamis, or Constantia, in Cyprus. And that he
approved forms of prayer, appears from the frequent

testimony he gives to the book called the Apos
tolical Constitutions, the eighth Book of which is
nothing but a collection of such forms. Cotelerius 134
has compared the several places in the Constitu
tions, with those that Epiphanius alleges out of
them, and showed them to be the same in substance:
particularly he observes, that Epiphanius in one
place135 gives the Constitutions this character, That
they contain all canonical order, and nothing con
trary to the faith, or confession, or the administra
tion and rules of the church. Which no man could
say, that did not approve of the several forms of
worship contained therein. And therefore when
Epiphanius says 136 in another place, That the
church observed her morning hymns and prayers,
and her evening psalms and prayers, it is reason
able to suppose, that aU these were according to
prescribed forms, as it is certain at least the psalms
and hymns were. But there is one place in Epi-
phanius's epistle to John, bishop of Jerusalem,
which evidently proves that the communion service
was then performed by a prescribed office and form.
For Epiphanius having been accused to John, as if
he had reflected on him in his prayers, saying thus,
Lord, grant that John may believe aright : to clear
himself of the accusation, he denies that ever he
prayed so for him in public, (though he did so pri
vately in his heart,) and for the truth of this, he
appeals to the words of the communion offices then
in public use : When we offer up prayers in the
communion office, says he,137 we use these words for
all bishops, and for you also ; Keep him who preach-
eth the truth : or certainly thus, Lord, grant our
requests, and keep him that he may preach the word
of truth ; as the occasion of the words requires, and
as the order of the office for prayer directs. To
understand which aright, we are to consider, that
anciently in the communion service there were two
prayers where bishops were prayed for, one in the
prayer for the whole state of Christ's church before
the oblation, and the other in the prayer immediately
after the oblation, when aU states of men were
again solemnly commemorated and recommended
to God ; as we shall see hereafter. Now, in refer
ence to these two prayers, Epiphanius says, they
prayed either thus or thus, as the occasion of the
words required, and the order of the office directed.
Which is a manifest reference to the two prayers in
which these words were contained, and as plain an
argument for prescribed forms as can be required.
And indeed the word consequentia, which in Greek,

133 Book XV. chap. 1.
134 Coteler. Testimonia Veterum praefixa Constitut. Apos-
tol. 135 Epipb. Haer. 70. Audianor. n. 10. Ilao-a iv avrii
KavovtKt) Tafcts iptpipETat, Kal ovSiv irapaKEXapaypivov
TT}S iritTTEtOS, OvSl T7,S SpoXoyiaS, OvSi Tr)S EKKXl]OTiaTlKi}S
StotKritiEuis, Kal Kavdvos.

186 Epiph. Expos. Fid. n. 23. t. 1. p. 1106.
137 Epiphan. Epist. ad Joan. Hierosol. t. 2. p. 313.
Quando autem complemus orationem secundum ritum mys-
teriorum, et pro omnibus, et pro te quoque dicimus, Custodi
ilium qui prajdicat veritatem : vel certe . ita, Tu praesta,
Domine, et custodi, ut ille verbum praedicet veritatis : sicut
occasio sermonis se tulerit, et Imbue rit oratio consequential.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

621

no doubt, was ctKoXovBia, shows as much ; for that
always signified a stated form or prescribed order
of prayers. Of which the reader may find examples
enough in Suicerus's Thesaurus, or Meursius's
Glossary, which need not here be inserted.
Optatus, bishop of Milevis, was contemporary
with Epiphanius, and he has a great many plain re
ferences to the forms then used in the public service.
He tells the Donatists, that by confining the church
to their own party they had frustrated the intent of
the Holy Spirit, which had presignified that the
name of God should be praised with psalms and
hymns over aU the earth, " from the rising of the
sun to the going down thereof;" and that, in effect,
they had defrauded God138 of his praise ; for if they
only were the true church that was to praise him,
the rest of the world, " from the rising of the sun
to the going down thereof," must be silent : they
had shut the mouth of Christian nations, and im
posed silence upon all people, however desirous to
praise God at the proper seasons. Which mani
festly imphes, that psalmody was then a part of the
people's devotions all the world over, and that the
Donatists were injurious to God, whose principles
tended to defraud him of it. Again, he speaks of the
prayer for the whole church in the time of the obla
tion, as a form so firmly established by law, that
the Donatists themselves would not venture to
make any alteration in it. Who doubts, says he,139
but that you continue to use that settled form of
words in the celebration of the sacrament, and
never omit to say, that you offer for that one
church which is diffused over all the world ? He
says the same of the use of the Lord's prayer140 in
the communion service, that the Donatists con
tinued to use it as weU as the catholics ; for he ob
serves, that though they gave imposition of hands
and absolution to sinners in such a haughty and
supercilious manner, as if they themselves had
had no sin ; yet not long after, when they turned
to the altar, they could not omit the Lord's prayer,
wherein they said, " Forgive us our trespasses and
sins." The Lord's prayer, he says, was of one and
the same use with them both. He says also, The
common form of salutation, estabhshed by law, was

138 Optat. lib. 2. p. 47. Fraudatis aures Dei. Si vos soli
laudatis, totus tacebit orbis, qui est ab ortu solis usque ad
occasum. Clausistis ora omnium Christianarum gentium :
indixistis silentiura populis universis, Deum per momenta
laudare cupientibus, &c.
139 Ibid. p. 53. Quis dubitet vos illud legitimum in sa
cramentorum mysterio praeterire non posse ? Afferre vos
dicitis pro una ecclesia, quae sit in toto terrarum orbe
diffusa. Ibid. p. 57. Inter vicina momenta, dum manus im-
ponitis et delicta donatis, mox ad altare conversi, Domini-
cam orationem praetermittere non potestis, Sec. It. lib. 3.
p. 72. Oratio Dominica apud nos et apud vos una est.
141 Ibid. lib. 3. p. 73. Non potuistis omittere quod legi
timum est: utique dixistis, Paxvobiscum.  Quidsalutas,

likewise retained by the Donatists ; for they could
not omit saying, Peace be with you;141 they re
tained the name when they had lost the substance.
He says further, That the catholics and Donatists
used the same interrogatories in baptism ; they
asked the catechumen,142 whether he renounced the
devil ? and whether he believed in God ? And he
answered, I renounce, I beheve. Only the Donatists
did one thing amiss, in repeating these things over
again, and rebaptizing those whom the catholics had
baptized before. He seems also to hint something of
the ancient form of exorcising catechumens before
baptism, when he tells the Donatists, That by re
baptizing catholics, who were already baptized, and
in whom119 God dwelt, they said in effect to God,
Go out, thou cursed one. For this was the phrase
then used in exorcism, which was a prayer, as St.
Cyril144 calls it, for expelling Satan out of the cate
chumen : and these words of Optatus seem plainly
to be taken out of the prayers of exorcism then
commonly used in the church. There is one thing
more very observable in Optatus : he says, A rumour
was once spread in Africa, that the emperor's offi
cers were to come and make strange alterations in
the church, by placing images upon the altar in
time of Divine service. Which flying report put
the people into great consternation and confusion.
But they were presently quieted again, when they
saw those officers come, and no such alterations
made by them, but the ancient purity and solemn
custom145 and usual rites were still observed, and
nothing was either changed, or added, or diminish
ed in the Divine sacrifice. Which shows, that the
public service was then in a certain form, and not
left to every man's hberty to make alterations in it,
or lengthen or shorten it, by adding or diminishing
at his pleasure.
About the year 370, St. Basil was made bishop
of Ceesarea in Cappadocia ; but before he was bishop
he lived a presbyter in the same church, under Eu
sebius, his predecessor in the see. During which
time, as Nazianzen assures us,146 among other ser
vices done for that church, he composed forms of
prayer and orders of decency for the communion
service, which, by the consent and authority of his

de quo non habes ? Quid nominas quod exterminasti ? Sa-
lutas de pace, qui non amas.
•« Ibid. lib. 5. p. 86. Quocunque interrogante, qui credidit,
Deo credidit: et post illius unum credo, tu exigis alterum
credo. It. p. 89. Interrogemus gentilem, an renunciet di
abolo et credat Deo. Et dicat, Renuncio, et credo.
i'3 Ibid. lib. 4. p. 79. Vos rebaptizando exorcizatis homi
nem fidelem, et dicitis Deo habitanti, Maledicte, exi foras.
>» Cyril. Catech. 16. u. 9. p. 234. '0 Saipmv, Xdyots
EUYfjs iKpaTrlBr). _
lis Optat. lib. 3. p. 75. Visa est puritas, et ritu solito
solennis consuetudo perspecta est; cum viderent Diviru's sa-
crificiis nee mutatum quicquam, nee additum, nee ablatum.
i« Naz. Orat. 20. in Laud. Basil, p. 340. ESx«>» *«"-
Td£ eis Kal EVKoapias toxi jiripaTOS, &c.

622

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

bishop, Eusebius, were used in the church. We are not
bound to assert, that any of the liturgies which now
go under his name, are exactly the same with that.
It is certain they have received many additions and
alterations, and in many things differ from one an
other : and some things are alleged by ancient
writers out of St. Basil's genuine liturgy, which a
learned man147 assures us are not to be found at
present in any of these. As that prayer which is
cited by Petrus Diaconus, who lived about the year
520, in whose time St. Basil's liturgy was used al
most all the East over. For he says,143 Among other
things, they then prayed thus, according to St. Ba
sil's liturgy : Grant us, Lord, thy defence and pro
tection ; we beseech thee, make the evil to become
good, and keep those that are good in their good
ness. For all things are possible unto thee, and no
one can contradict thee : when thou pleasest, thou
canst save, and there is no one that can resist thy
will. Some fancy these words are to be found in
the present copies, but whether that be so or not,
we may be pretty well assured they were in the
original liturgy of St. Basil, whence the author cites
them. And that is an argument that St. BasU com
posed a liturgy, which was then of general use in
the East, and known to the Africans also. Proclus,
bishop of Constantinople, was within half an age of
St. Basil's time, and he gives this account of his
composing a liturgy : St. Basil, seeing men's sloth
and degeneracy made them weary of a long liturgy,
thought there was nothing unnecessary or tedious
in that of St. James, which was used before ; yet to
prevent the weariness of priests and people, he de
livered a shorter form.149 And it is also cited under
St. Basil's name by Leontius150 and the council of
Trullo.151 So that though many things be inserted
into the present copies of St. Basil's liturgy, and
others wanting in them ; yet these are no arguments
against the original composition, of which there is
such clear evidence in the ancient writers.
But St. Basil not only composed a form for the
communion service, but often speaks of other forms
as generally used upon other occasions. In his sixty-
third epistle he gives a large account of the people's
joining in alternate psalmody and prayers, and of
their repeating the psalm of confession, that is, the
fifty-first psalm," at morning prayer. And he there

also speaks of the liturgy of Gregory Thaumaturgus
with approbation, and of the litanies which the
church of Neoceesarea had admitted since the time
of Gregory. In his two hundred and forty-first
epistle he mentions several particulars of the usual
prayer for the whole state of the church, teUing his
friend whom he writes to, that he must needs re
member them in the deacon's bidding prayer, for
aU that were gone to travel ; for the soldiers ; for aU
that profess the name of Christ, &c. Which, as I
shaU show hereafter,152 were the usual forms of sup
plication in the prayers for aU states of men in the
church. In his sixty-eighth epistle he mentions
other forms, which were as evidently parts of the
ancient liturgies: We pray that the rest of our days
may continue in peace ; we desire that our death
may also be in peace. We have heard him before l5S
speak of the hymns of Athenogenes, and the even
ing hymn to the holy Trinity. And we shall hear
him hereafter speaking154 of particular psalms ap
pointed for particular hours of canonical prayer.
AU which are such manifest indications of the use
of stated forms, as nothing but prejudice can incline
a man to except against them.
Gregory Nazianzen was St. Basil's dear friend,
and of him it were enough to say, that he commends
his friend for making forms of prayer for the use of
the church, as we have heard already. But he also
says, his own father155 consecrated the eucharist with
the solemn words that were wont to be used upon that
occasion. And speaking of Julian the apostate, he
says, He admired the church for her forms 156 of wor
ship, which were anciently delivered and stiU pre
served among them : and therefore he intended that
his heathen priests should imitate the Christians,
and have a form of prayers157 in parts, that is,
prayers so composed as that the people might make
their responses. Which is also taken notice of by
Sozomen, who says, That Julian, admiring the order
of Christian worship, appointed that the heathen
temples should be adorned after the same manner,
with prescribed prayers 15S upon set days and hours.
Nazianzen also mentions the usual form of re
nouncing the devU in baptism, and the solemn cove
nant or compact made with Christ, which he says159
they did, Kal role Gxijpaoi Kal rdig p-rjpaai, both by
words and gestures ; that is, renouncing the devil

117 Cave, Hist. Liter, vol. 1. p. 194.
118 Petr. Diacon. de Inearnat. inter Fulgentii Opera, cap.
8. p. 633. Basilius Caesariensis in oratione sacri altaris,
quam pene universus frequentat Oriens, inter caetera, Dona,
inquit, Domine, virtutem ac tutamentum ; malos, quaesu-
mus, bonos facito ; bonos in bonitate conserva : omnia
enim potes, et non est qui contradicat tibi; cum enim vo-
lueris, salvas, et nullus resistit voluntati tuae.
149 Proclus de Tradit. Divin. Liturg. cited by Comber, of
Liturgies, p. 168.
150 Leont. cont. Nestor, lib. 3. Bibl. Patr. t. 4. part 2. p.
1006.

151 Cone. Trull, can. 32.
152 Book XV. chap. 1. sect. 3.
153 Book XIII. chap. ii.
154 Basil. Regul. Majores, quaest. 37.
155 Naz. Orat. 19. p. 305. EIra lirEtirdiv Ta tX)s Eix"-
pio-Ttas pripaTa ovtios, eos trvvi)Bis, &C.
156 Ibid. Orat. 3. p. 101. Tots -wapaSESopivots Kal eis
toSe TETr)pt]pivois tvitois Ttjs iKKXr)trias.
157 Ibid. p. 102. Ebxibv tvttov iv pipet.
158 Sozom. lib. 5. cap. 16. 'Qpcbv te pt]Ttov Kal hpEpiiiv
TETaypivais EvxaXs, Sec.
159 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 671.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

623

with their faces to the west, and then turning about
to the east, by which they signified their turning to
Christ the Sun of righteousness. Both which words
and gestures were evidently matter of form and
ecclesiastical prescription. As was also the form of
professing their faith, the triple immersion, and
many other such rites and observances, which we
meet with in Nazianzen, and all other ecclesiastical
writers almost, that have any occasion to speak of
the ancient manner of administering baptism.
There is one author more which was famous
about this time, before the death of Athanasius,
which was Ephrem, deacon of Edessa, commonly
called the prophet of the Syrians. Theodoret 160 says,
That he composed a great many hymns, in opposi
tion to those that had been formerly made by Har-
monius, the son of Bardesanes the heretic, and that
they were used upon the festivals of the martyrs.
Sozomen161 mentions Iris Divine hymns also, as well
as those that were made upon the martyrs. And
these, no doubt, were some of those famous writings
of his, which St. Jerom162 says were used to be
rehearsed in the church after the reading of the
Scriptures. Here it wiU not be improper also to observe, that
the practice of heretics in endeavouring to corrupt
and alter the ancient forms of the church, is often
a manifest evidence and testimony of the antiquity
of them. Thus Theodoret takes notice 163 that, in
the beginning of this century, Arius, transgressing
the ancient laws of giving glory to God, which had
been handed down by those who lived and served
in the ministry of the word from the beginning, in
troduced a new form, teaching those whom he de
ceived, to say, Glory be to the Father, by the Son,
in the Holy Ghost : and that though he did not pre
sume to alter the form of baptizing in the name of
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, yet he forbade to
use the glorification according to the rule of bap
tism. Does not this prove, that the form of this
doxology was long before Arius, since he presumed
to introduce a new one ? So again, when the same
Theodoret164 tells us, That Eunomius subverted the
ancient law of baptism, delivered by Christ and his
apostles, and brought in a contrary law, that men
should not be baptized with a triple immersion, nor

160 Theod. lib. 4. cap. 29. ,61 Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 16.
162 Hieron. de Scriptor. cap. 115. Ad tantam venit clari-
tatem,ut post lectionem Scripturarum publice in quibusdam
ecclesiis ejus scripta recitentur.
193 Theod. Haeret. Fabul. lib. 4. cap. 1.
184 Theod. ibid. cap. 3.
185 Tertul. cont. Prax. cap. 26. It. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3.
Vid. Con. Apostol. 49.
166 Naz. Orat. 4. in Julian, p. 118.
187 Vid. Constit. Apost. lib. 6. cap. 30.
198 Ambr. Orat. cont. Auxeut. ad calcem Epist. 32.
Hymnorum quoque meorum carminibus deceptum populum
ferunt. Plane ne hoc abnuo. Grande carmen istud est,

by invocation of the Trinity, but only by a single
immersion in the name of Christ; does not this
innovation as plainly prove, that the rite of trine
immersion was the ancient form and custom of the
church ? as Tertullian,165 and all that speak of it
before Eunomius, have constantly asserted. So that
whether we consider the testimonies ofthe catholics,
or the practices and innovations made by heretics,
they both concur to prove, that within this period
of time, viz. during the hfe of Athanasius, the
church made use of forms in every considerable
part of Divine service, baptism, psalmody, and the
most solemn worship at the Lord's table. And so
she did also in her funeral rites, where nothing is
more common than to hear of psalmody in their
solemn processions to any interment, as may be seen
in the writings of Gregory Nazianzen,165 and the
Constitutions,167 to mention no other at present, that
come not within the prefixed term of the hfe of
Athanasius. It was not above three years after the death of
Athanasius, that St. Ambrose was made bishop of
Milan, anno 374. He was a zealous defender of the
catholic faith against the Arians, in opposition to
whom he composed several hymns in Latin to the
glory of the holy Trinity, for the people to sing in
the church. Of which he himself gives this account
in his tract against Auxentius : They accuse me,
says he, for deceiving168 and alluring the people with
the poetry of my hymns. And I do not altogether
deny the charge. For what can be more powerful
and alluring than the confession of the Trinity,
which is daily sung by the mouth of all the people ?
They all zealously strive to make profession of the
faith ; they all know how to celebrate the Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost in verse. These hymns are
mentioned also by Prosper in his Chronicon,169 as
the first that were sung in the church in Latin
measures. St. Austin frequently speaks of them,
and says,170 They were sung as then the psalms were,
in the alternate way, verse for verse, by the people,
to alleviate the tediousness of their sorrow: and
from this example the custom of alternate hymnody
and psalmody spread almost all over the Western
churches. One of these is particularly cited171 by
him, as an evening hymn, and others are among

quo nihil potentius. Quid enim pbtentius quam confessio
Trinitatis, quae quotidie totius populi ore celebratur ? Cer-
tatim omnes student fidem fateri; Patrem et Filium et Spi
ritum Sanctum norunt versibus praedicare.
133 Prosper. Chronic, an. 386. ap. Pagi Critic, in Baron.
an. 387. u. 7. Hymni Ambrosii compositi, qui nunquam
ante in ecclesiis Latinis modulis canebantur.
"» Aug. Confess, lib. 9. cap. 7. Tunc hymni et psalmi
ut canerentur secundum morem Orientalium partium, ne
populus maeroris taedio contabesceret, institutum est ; et ex
illo in hodiernum retentum, multis j am ac pene omnibus
gregibus tuis et per caetera orbis imitantibus.
'" Ibid. cap. 12. Recordatus sum veridicos versus Am-

624

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

his works : and these we are sure in the following
ages continued in use ; for the172 hymns of St. Am
brose and St. Hilary are mentioned by the fourth
council of Toledo, anno 633, as parts of the daily
service in the Spanish churches. St. Ambrose him
self also speaks of the use of that ancient hymn
called the Trisagion, telhng us, that, in most of the
Eastern and Western churches,173 when the sacrifice
was offered to God, the priest and people with one
voice said, " Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of hosts,
all the earth is full of thy glory." He mentions also
the common form of salutation, " The peace of God
be with you." 174 He says the music spoken of in
the parable of the prodigal son, Luke xv., means the
whole church singing together the psalms alternate
ly,175 men, women, and children, with different voices,
but all conspiring, as the strings of an instrument,
in one harmonious concord. And this was the
symphony which the apostle had reference to, when
he said, " I will sing with the Spirit, and I wiU sing
with the understanding also." His books De Sa
cramentis, if we allow them to be his, are so full of
forms and ceremonies relating to the administration
of baptism, confirmation, and the eucharist, that a
man cannot look into them, but he must conclude,
he wrote his accounts of these things from the
known and settled forms of the church. For which
reason I think it needless to recite any of them ;
but they that please may see them related in Dr.
Comber.178 If any one should except against these
books, as none of St. Ambrose's genuine offspring,
it is sufficient to have evidenced the use of forms
from his undoubted writings. St. Jerom testifies
concerning the use of the psalms, as forms of
prayer and praises, that they were used both pub
licly and privately upon all occasions. In the
Egyptian monasteries, he says,177 the singing of the
psalms was a principal part of their devotions at
every solemn meeting. He directs Rusticus 17B to

learn the Psalter by heart, and to repeat the psalm
in his turn, as the monks were obliged to do one
by one in their assembhes. He says of himself,1"'
that he thus learned the psalms by heart, when he
was young, and sung them when he was old every
day. He directs Leeta, a noble lady, so to accustom
her daughter to the singing of psalms and hymns
at aU the canonical hours of prayer,199 and teach
her this by her own example. And after the same
manner IB1 he writes to Demetrias, a virgin, to ob
serve the order of psalmody and prayers at every
such stated hour. There may be some dispute about
the observation of canonical hours seven times a
day in the pubhc service of the church, but there is
none about the use of psalmody in general ; for St.
Jerom, writing to Sabinianus,182 a deacon, who had
been guilty of some indecent behaviour toward a
consecrated virgin, reminds him of the immodest
signs he had made to her even whilst he stood in
the quire of the singers. And a httle before193 he
speaks of the whole church sounding forth hymns
to Christ their Lord in her nocturnal vigils, a great
part of which, as we shall see hereafter, was always
spent in psalmody. This was always a part of
their funeral service : for, speaking of the great
concourse of bishops and people at the funeral of
the Lady Paula, he says,184 Some of the bishops led
up the quire of singers, and the people sounded
forth the psalms in order, some in Greek, some in
Latin, some in Syriac, according to the different
language of every nation. He says the same in his
Epitaph of Fabiola,185 That the people made the gild
ed roof of the temple shake and echo again with
their psalms and hallelujahs. It is also observable,
that in St. Jerom's time, and long before, the church
had a peculiar order among her clergy, called sing
ers, which he himself mentions,186 and of which I
have given a more particular account187 in a former
Book. He also frequently speaks188 of the clergy

brosii : Deus Creator omnium, polique rector, vestiens diem
decoro lumine, noctem soporis gratia : artus solutos ut quies
reddat laboris Usui, mentesque fessas allevet,luctusque solvat
anxios. Vid. Retractation, lib. 1. cap. 21.
172 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 12.
173 Ambros. de Spir. Sancto, cited by Comber, of Litur
gies, p. 183.
174 Ibid, de Dignit. Sacerd. cap. 5. Pronunciat episcopus
hujusmodi ad populum, dicens, Pax vobis, &c.
175 Ibid. lib. 7. in Luc. xv. t. 5. p. 125. H»c est sym-
phonia quando concinit in ecclesia diversarum aetatum atque
virtutum, velut variarum chordarum indiscreta Concordia,
psal inus respondetur ; Amen dicitur. Haec est symphonia,
quam scivit et Paulus ; ideo ait, Psallam spiritu, psallam
et mente.
176 Comber, Origin of Liturg. p. 182.
177 Hieron. Ep. 22. ad Eustoch. cap. 15. Post horam no-
nam in commune concurritur, Psalmi resonant, scripturae
recitantur ex more, &c. Vid. Ep. 27. cap. 10.
178 Ep. 4. ad Rustic. Monach. Discatur Psalterium ad
verbum.  Dicas psalmum in ordine tuo.
1,8 Invect. 2. cont. Ruffin. c. 7. Psalmos jugiter canto, &c.

180 Epist. 7. ad Lactam. Assuescat exemplo ad orationes
et psalmos nocte consurgere, mana hymnos canere, tertia,
sexta, nona, &c.
181 Ep. 8. ad Demetr. Considerans propter psalmorum et
orationis ordinem, quod tibi hora tertia, sexta, nona, ad ves-
perum, media nocte et mane semper est exercendum.
182 Ep. 48. cont. Sabinian. Stabas deinceps in choro
psallentium, et impudicis nutibus loquebaris.
133 Ibid. Tota ecclesia nocturnis vigiliis Christum Domi
num personabat, &c.
184 Hieron. Ep. 27. Epitaph. Paulae. Alii choros psal
lentium ducerent in media ecclesia.  Graeco, Latino, Sy-
roque sermone psalmi in ordine personabant.
135 Ibid. Ep. 30. Epitaph. Fabiolae. Sonabant psalmi, et
aurata tecta templorum reboans in sublime quatiebat Al
leluia. 186 Ibid. Com. in Ephes. v. 19. Audiant haec adolescen-
tuli : audiant hi, quibus psallendi in ecclesia officium
est, &c.
187 Book III. chap. 7.
189 Hieron. Ep. 3. ad Heliodor. Ep. ad Praesidium. Com.
in Ezech. c. xliv. lib. 2. cont. Pelag.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

625

as ministering in a peculiar habit, a white garment,
in imitation of the angels, of which more will be
said hereafter. At present I only observe, that this
could not be done without some rule or order, pre-
, scribing the ceremonies of decency in Divine wor
ship. He does not say much of the other parts of
the liturgy, yet he frequently mentions the form of
renunciation used in baptism, and the use of the
creed,199 as does also Pelagius, in his Comments upon
the Epistles of St. Paul, under the name of St. Je
rom,190 and Hilary the Roman deacon,under the name
of St. Ambrose,191 whose authorities are good in this
case, because they were contemporaries with these
writers. He mentions also the use of the Lord's
prayer in the communion office, as given by Christ
to his apostles, from whom the church192 learned to
use it every day in the sacrifice of his body. He
speaks likewise of the Trisagion, or cherubical hymn,
" Holy, holy, holy,193 Lord God of sabaoth," which
they sung as a confession of the holy Trinity. And
he mentions a part of one of the church's prayers,194
which was, Lord, grant us thy peace, for thou hast
given us all things. And again,195 Thus saith the
church, In rest and in tribulation I have been mind-
fid of thee : commenting on that psalm, which the
ancients called their morning psalm, " My God, my
God, early wiU I seek thee." And on another psalm,196
the church says, " From the remembrance of out
former sins, our hearts are hot within us." Speaking
also of wicked priests, he says,107 They act impi
ously against Christ, whilst they think that a good
hfe is not as necessary to the eucharist, as the
solemn prayer or words of the priest. Where he
seems plainly to reflect on those, who trusted to the
bare form of prayer without moral qualifications.
He also mentions the solemn rite of giving each
other the kiss of peace in the eucharist,198 and the
people's known custom of answering, Amen, at the
reception of it. All which are plain indications of
the use of certain forms in Divine worship ; though
St. Jerom only mentions them incidentally, and
had no occasion to enlarge much upon them.

St. Austin and St. Chrysostom, as they are more
voluminous writers, so they are more copious and
exact upon this subject. I have given the reader a
specimen of what may be coUected of the Eastern
liturgy out of the writings of St. Chrysostom in the
following chapter. And some learned men are of
opinion, that if anyone wiU be as curious in examin
ing St. Austin's works, he mayfind the whole African
liturgy in his writings. I wiU not pretend to be so
exact in this coUection, but only make some short
references' to what he says upon some parts of it.
He divides the whole liturgy, or service of the
church, into five parts,199 viz. psalmody, reading of
the Scriptures, preaching, prayers of the bishop,
and the bidding prayers of the deacon. All which,
except preaching, were done by certain forms and
prescriptions. And, first, For psalmody, he says, it
was the exercise of the people at all times, when no
other part of the service was performing. For there
was no time, he says, unseasonable for the people
to sing holy psalms and hymns in the church, ex
cept when either the Scriptures were read, or the
sermon was preached, or prayers were made by the
bishop, or the common prayers were dictated by the
voice of the deacon. We have heard him before
speak with approbation of the ways of singing
psalms arid hymns introduced by Athanasius and
St. Ambrose.200 Which argues, not only that he
allowed the singing of psalms and hymns, that is,
forms of prayer and praises, in general ; but also
that he liked the several ways of singing then in
use, the plain song, and the symphoniacal concert
at the conclusion of every verse, used by Athana
sius, and the new alternate way introduced by St.
Ambrose. Though he intimates that the plain way
generally was more agreeable to the slow genius201
of the African people, whose singing he vindicates
from the scurrilous objections which the Donatists
made against their practice. And he wrote a book
particularly against one Hilarius, a secular tribune,
who pretended to quarrel with the custom of the
church of Carthage, for singing hymns202 out of the

189 Hieron. Com. in Amos vi. 14. et in Mat. v. 26. et Dial.
cont. Lucifer.
190 Pelag. Com. in 1 Tim. vi. 12.
131 Ambros. in 1 Tim. vi. 12.
m Hieron. cont. Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 5. Sicut docuit apos
tolos suos, ut quotidie in corporis illius sacrificio credentes
audeant loqui, Pater noster qui es in ccelis, &c.
193 Ibid, de 42. Mansionibus, in initio. In confessionem
sanctae Trinitatis erumpimus, dicentes, Sanctus, sanctus,
sanctus, Dominus Deus sabaoth.
194 Ibid. Epist. 4. ad Rusticum. Utinam audiatur vox
ecclesiae implorantis, Domine, pacem tuam da nobis : omnia
enim dedisti nobis.
19S Ibid. Com. in Psal. lxii. Die-it haec ecclesia, Et in requie
et in tribulatione non fui tui oblitus.
199 In Psal. xxxviii. Concaluit cor meum intra me. Dicit
ecclesia, A recordatione delictorum priorum.
107 In Zephan. iii. Impie agunt in legem Christi, putantes
2 s

evxapt-iav imprecantis facere verba, non vitam ; et neces-
sariam esse tantum solennem orationem, et non sacerdo
tum merita.
433 Hieron. Ep. 62. ad Theophil. cap. 1. Qnisquamne
inter sacras epulas, Judae osculum porrigit ?  Qua consci
entia ad euchaf istiam Christi accedam, et respondebo Amen,
cum de charitate dubitem porrigentis ?
109 Aug. Epist. 119. ad Januar. cap. 18.
233 Ibid. Confes. lib. 9. cap. 7 et 12. lib. 10. cap. 33.
« Ibid. Ep. 11 9. ad Paulin. eap. 19. Donatistae nosrepre-
hendunt quod sobrie psallimus in ecclesia divina cantica
prophetarum, &c.
232 Ibid. Retractat. lib. 2. cap. 11. Hilarius quidam, vir
tribunitius laicus— morem qui tunc esse apud Carthagiiiem
caeperat, ut hymni ad altare dicerentur de psalmorum libro,
sive ante oblationem, sive cum distribueretur populo quod
esset oblatum, matedica reprehensione, ubicunque poterat,
lacerabat, &c.

626

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

Book of Psalms at the altar, either before the ob
lation of the eucharist was made, or whilst it was
distributed to the people. This book of St. Austin's
is now lost, but he mentions it in his Retractations.
He also speaks203 of the evening hymns : and of the
singing of the hallelujah204 in some churches every
day, and in others, only the fifty days between
Easter and Pentecost. And Possidius tells us in his
Life,205 That in the great irruption of the Vandals
into Africa, a little before his death, nothing grieved
him more than to see the hymns and praises of God
destroyed out of the churches, and the solemnities
of God's worship, with the sacrifice and sacraments,
to fail in the places where they were used to be
celebrated. And he adds,209 That in his last sick
ness, he ordered some of the penitential Psalms of
David to be written for him in large sheets, and
hanged up against the wall, which he read and used
as forms proper for penitential devotion. All which
shows, that St. Austin thought the Psalms of David
were not unlawful to be used as forms of prayers
and praises in the service of God.
Secondly, For the reading of the Scriptures, he
acquaints us in many places, that this was done by
a certain rule and calendar, appointing proper les
sons for particular occasions and seasons. There
were some festival days, he says,207 on which they
were bound to read certain appropriated lessons out
of the Gospel, which were so fixed to those anniver
sary solemnities, that no other lessons might be read
in their room. Thus, he says, in Easter week, they
constantly read208 four days, one after another, the
history of Christ's resurrection out of the four Gos
pels ; on the first day St. Matthew, on the second
St. Mark, on the third St. Luke, and on the fourth
St. John. So likewise on the day of Christ's pas
sion, he says, they read the history of his suffer
ings209 out of St. Matthew only, because it was all
but one day : and when he would have had all the
four Gospels read at that time also, the people were

disturbed at it, because they had not been accus
tomed to it. In the time between Easter and Pen
tecost, he says,210 they always read the Acts of the
Apostles. St. Chrysostom will give us the reason
of this hereafter : and we shall see that this was a
universal custom, obtaining throughout the whole
church, when we come to consider this rule more
fully exemplified211 in the church's general practice.
Thirdly, For the prayers made by the bishop in
the communion office, St. Austin gives us such a
description of them, as shows they must needs be
made by a certain order and form. For he thus
describes one part of them, while he instructs the
newly baptized in the method and meaning of them :
Ye understand, says he, the sacrament in the order
of its administration.212 First, after prayer, (mean
ing the prayer for the whole state of the church,
which went before,) ye are taught to lift up your
hearts. Therefore when it is said, " Lift up your
hearts," ye answer, '' We lift them up unto the
Lord." The bishop or presbyter who officiates, goes
on and says, " Let us give thanks to our Lord God:"
and ye give in your attestation, and say, " It is meet
and right so to do." Then, after the consecration
of the sacrifice, we say the Lord's prayer. And
after that, the priest says, " Peace be with you," and
Christians salute one another with a holy kiss.
Here we have not only the method of the commu
nion service, but the several forms of it in order,
one after another. And these forms are frequently
mentioned by St. Austin in other places. The
Lord's prayer, he says,213 was always used by the
whole church almost, as the close of the consecra
tion service, and at other times as the daily prayer
of the faithful,214 peculiarly belonging to them, and
not to the catechumens, as we shall show more
fully hereafter.215 The form, Sursum corda, " Lift up
your hearts," &c, he says,216 was used by all Chris
tians throughout the world, who daily answered
with one voice, " We lift up our hearts unto the

203 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. cap. 8.
204 Ep. 119. ad Januar. u. 17. Ut autem halleluia per
illos solos dies quinquaginta cantetur, non usquequaque ob-
servatur. Nam in aliis diebus varie cantatur alibi ; ipsis
autem diebus ubique.
205 Possid. Vit. Aug. cap. 28. Cernebat etiam hymnos
Dei et laudes de ecclesiis deperisse : solennia quoque quae
Deo debentur, de propriis locis defecisse, &c.
206 Possid. ibid. cap. 30. Jusserat sibi Psalmos Davidi-
cos, qui sunt paucissimi, de poenitentia scribi, ipsosque qua-
terniones jacens in lecto contra parietempositos diebus suae
infirmitatis intuebatur et legebat, et jugiter ac ubertim
flebat. 207 Aug. Expos, in 1 Joan, in Praefat. t. 9. p. 235. Inter-
posita est solennitas sanctorum dierum, quibus certas ex
evangelio lectiones oportet in ecclesia recitari, quae ita sunt
annuae, ut aliae esse non possint.
233 Serm. 139. de Temp. It. 140, 141, 144, 148.
209 Serm. 144. de Temp. p. 320. Passio, quia uno die le-
gitur, non solet legi nisi secundum Matthaeum, &c.

210 Tract. 6. in Joan. Evang. t. 9. p. 24. Actus Aposto
lorum, &c. Anniversaria solennitate post passionem Domini
nostris ilium librum recitari. Vid. Aug. Horn. 227. Nov.
Edit. Benedictin. quae est 83. de Diversis.
211 Book XIV. chap. 3. sect. 3.
212 Aug. Horn. 83. de Diversis, t. 10. p. 556. Tenetis sa
cramentum ordine suo. Primo post orationem admonemini
sursum habere cor, &c. Ideo cum dicitur, Sursum cor, re-
spondetis, Habemus ad Dominum. — Sequitur episcopus vel
presbyter, qui offert, et dicit, Gratias agamus Domino Deo
nostro : et vos attestamini, Dignum et justum est, dicentes.
Deinde post sanctificationem sacrificii dicimus orationem
Dominicam. Post istam dicitur, Pax vobiscum : et oscu-
lantur se Christiani osculo sancto.
213 Aug. Ep. 59. ad Paulin.
214 Ep. 121. ad Probam. Enchirid. ad Laurent, cap. 71.
Homil. 42. inter 50.
213 Chap. 7. sect. 9.
216 Aug. de Vera Relig. cap. 3. Serm. 54 et 64. De Temp.
Ep. 156. ad Probam.

Chap. V.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

627

Lord," as he speaks in his book of True Religion,
and other places. And to this he says the priests
added that other form, " Let us give thanks to our
Lord God :" to which the people answered, " It is
meet and right so to do :" as he speaks in his epis
tles2" to Dardanus and Honoratus, and in his book of
the Gift of Perseverance, against the Pelagians, and
de Spiritu et Litera, and de Bono Viduitatis ; which
being aU to the same purpose, need not here be re
peated. He also mentions in his other writings
the solemn form of the priesfs saying, " Peace be
with you," and the people's giving one another there
upon the kiss of peace, which was a symbol219 of
that innocency and peace, which ought to be the
qualification of true Christian doves. And this
rite, he says, was observed not only by the catho
lics, but by the Donatists also.219 So that here is
unquestionable evidence for the use of all these
forms in the writings of St. Austin. And though
he does not give us the whole forms of the longer
prayers made by the bishop at the altar, yet he
mentions some parts of them, and makes such re
ferences and appeals to them both in his discourses
to the orthodox, and confutations of heretics, as
plainly shows they were common forms which they
were weU acquainted with, and by remembering
them might understand the doctrine of the church.
Thus, in his book of Perseverance,220 he says, Those
of the church need not any operose disputations to
convince them of the necessity of God's grace to
persevere; they need only remember her daily
prayers, how she prays, that infidels may believe,
and that believers may persevere. And again,221 he
tells them, it is the safest way for weak men, in this
dispute, to look upon these prayers, which the
church always had, and always wiU have to the end
of the world. For when did not the church pray
for infidels and her enemies, that they might beheve ?
Or, who ever, when he heard the priest praying
over the faithful, and saying, Grant, O Lord, that
they may persevere in thee unto the end, durst
either in word or thought find fault with him, and
not rather, with faith in his heart, and confession in
his mouth, answer Amen to such a benediction ?
when the faithful pray no otherwise in the Lord's
prayer, especiaUy when they say, " Lead us not into
temptation." By aU which it appears, that both the

larger and the shorter prayers in the communion
office of the African church, in St. Austin's time,
were offered up in such forms, as the people could
easily remember, when he referred to them as evi
dence in some disputes, which this was an easy way
to determine.
Fourthly, There was one sort of prayers more.
which St. Austin distinguishes from the former, by
the name of the common prayers dictated or indited
to the people by the voice of the deacon. Now,
these prayers, as I shall show more fuUy hereafter,222
differed from the bishop's prayer in this, That the
bishop's prayer was a direct and continued invoca
tion of God, to which the people answered only
Amen in the conclusion ; but the deacon's prayer
was a sort of bidding prayer, or direction to the
people what particulars they were to pray for ; the
deacon going before them, and repeating every pe
tition, to which they made answer, Lord, hear us,
or, Lord, help us, or, Lord, have mercy, or the like.
And this sort of prayer St. Austin expressly223 calls
communis oratio voce diaeoni indicta, common prayer
dictated by the voice of the deacon. And he seems
in one of his epistles224 to specify some of the par
ticular petitions contained in that prayer. For,
writing to one who was infected with the Pelagian
doctrine, (maintaining that infidels were only to
be preached to, and not prayed for, because faith.
was not the work of God's grace, but the effect of
man's own free will,) he urges him with the known
prayers of the church, which the man himself fre
quented. Exercise, says he, your disputations against
the prayers of the church ; and when you hear the
priest of God at the altar exhorting the people of
God to pray for unbelievers, that they may be con
verted to the faith ; and for catechumens, that
God would inspire them with a desire of regenera
tion; and for the faithful, that by his gift they
may persevere in that wherein they have begun ;
mock at these pious words, and say, you do not do
what you here are exhorted to do. And again,
When you hear225 the priest of God at the altar ex
horting the people to pray to God, or else hear him
praying with an audible voice, that God would
compel the unbelieving Gentiles to come in to his
faith, do you not answer and say, Amen ? These
seem to be usual parts of the prayer for the whole

217 Ep. 57. ad Dardanum, et Ep. 120. ad Honoratum. De
Bono Persever. cap. 13. De Spiritu et Litera, lib. 1. c. 11.
De Bono Viduitatis, cap. 16.
Aug. Horn. 6. in Joan. t. 9. p. 21. Habere cum fratri-
bus veram pacem, quam significant oscula columbarum, &c.
219 Cont. Literas Petilian. lib. 2. cap. 23. Ilium com-
memoro, (Optatum Gildonianum,) cui pacis osculum inter
sacramenta copulabatis.
De Bono Perseverantiae, cap. 7. In hac re non opero-
sas disputationes expectet ecclesia, sed attendat quotidianas
orationes suas. Orat, ut credentes perseverent.
Ibid. cap. 23. Ut magis intuerenter orationes suas,
2 S 2

quas semper habuit et habebit ecclesia.— Quando enim non
oratum est in ecclesia pro infidelibus atque inicimis ejus, ut
crederent ? — Aut quis sacerdotem super fideles Dominum
invocantem, si quando dixit, Da illis Domine in te perse-
verare usque in finem, non solum voce ausus est, sed saltern
cogitatione reprehendere ; ac non potius super ejus talem
benedictionem, et corde credente et ore confite»te respon
ds Amen : cum aliud in ipsa oratione Dominica non orant
fideles, &c.
222 Book XV. chap. 1. sect. 2.
223 Aug. Ep. 1 19. ad Paulin. cap. 18.
224 Ep. 107. ad Vitalem, p. 187. 225 Ibid. p. 191.

628

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

state of the world, in which infidels were prayed
for as well as others, to which St. Austin refers, as
things well known to all that frequented the prayers
of the church.
Besides these, there were some occasional offices,
such as the offices of exorcism, and the institution
of the catechumens, and baptism, in which many
forms, and rites, and ceremonies were observed,
agreeable to the practice then obtaining in the
church ; but of these I have had occasion to speak
largely out of St. Austin and other writers in a
former Book,226 and therefore think it needless to
repeat them in this place. AU I shall further add,
is two or three canons of the African councils held
in St. Austin's time, at some of which he was pre
sent and assisted. He was a membe'r of the third
council of Carthage, in one of whose canons there
are several orders and directions given concerning
the public prayers,227 That no one in prayers should
name the Father for the Son, or the Son for the
Father. And when they stood at the altar, all
prayers should be directed to the Father. And
whatever prayers any one wrote out for himself, or
from other books, he should not use them before
they were examined by his more learned brethren.
This is as plain an argument for set forms as can
be given, and yet some, I know not by what means,
make it an argument against them. The design of
the canon was plainly to prevent all irregularities
and coiTuptions creeping into the devotions of the
church ; and therefore the fathers made an order,
That no bishop should use any prayers in his church
but such as were first examined and approved by
his fellow bishops in a council. As another canon
in the African Code explains it,228 That such prayers
should be used by all, as had been authorized and
confirmed in synod, whether they were prefaces, or
commendations, or impositions of hands ; and that
no other should be brought in against the faith, but
those only be said which were collected or examined
by men of greater abilities and understanding.
And this is repeated again in the council of Milevis229
almost in the same words. These African fathers
probably had observed, that there were some country
bishops who had not sufficient abilities to compose
orthodox forms for the use of their own churches ;
and therefore they a little restrained the ancient
hberty which every bishop had of composing a form

of prayer for his own church, and obliged them to
use such as were composed by men of greater abUi-
ties, or such as had been approved in synod, that
no heretical opinion might creep into the pubhc
worship, either by their ignorance or want of care
in their compositions. By all this it appears, that the
public devotions of the African church were at this
time directed by certain forms of worship, and those
not left to every bishop to compose for himself, but
he must use such prayers as were first approved by
his brethren, or estabhshed and confirmed in coun
cil. And this seems to be the first beginning of
that custom, which afterward prevailed all over the
church, as has been observed before in this chapter,230
that all provincial bishops should use the same form
of prayer that was established in the churches of
their metropolitans.
I need not now insist upon these same councils,
speaking of the solemn interrogatories231 and an
swers to be made in baptism ; nor of their mention
ing the Lord's prayer, as a form of so necessary
and general a use,232 that the Pelagians themselves,
who did not like one petition in it unless interpreted
to a very perverse sense, durst not presume to lay
aside the use of it. For, as the first of these is a
known practice, so the second will have a more par
ticular handling, when we come to consider the use
of the Lord's prayer in a chapter by itself. And so
I put an end to this chapter, concerning the use
of liturgies in the ancient church.

CHAPTER VI.

AN EXTRACT OF THE ANCIENT LITURGY OUT OP
THE GENUINE WRITINGS OF ST. CHRYSOSTOM.
It has often been wished by learned
, , J Sect 1.
men, that some one would represent Parts of the ntnr-
*¦ gy in tbe first tome.
the ancient liturgy, in its several parts
and offices, as it may be collected out of the genuine
and undoubted writings of St. Chrysostom ; foras
much as that liturgy which goes under his name,
cannot be so certainly depended on as his genuine
offspring : but there are a great many parts of an
cient liturgy of unquestionable credit, which may be

226 Books IX. and X.
227 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 23. Ut nemo in precibus vel
Patrem pro Filio, vel Filium pro Patre nominet. Et cum
ad altare assistitur, semper ad Patrem dirigatur oratio. Et
quicunque sibi preces aliunde describit, (al. quascunque
sibi preces aliquis describit) non eis utatur, prius quam eas
cum instructioribus fratribus contulerit.
228 Cod. Afric. can. 3. "Qo-te -rds KEKvpuipivas iv t{]
truvdStp iKEa-'tas, eite irpoolpta, eXte irapaBicrEts, eIte Ttis
tt)s XEtpds iirtQitTEis, dirb irdvTtov iirtTEXEXtrdat, Kal irav-
teXois d\Aas /caret -rf/s iritTTEoos pr]SiiroTE irpoEVExBi)vat'

dXX' a'tTtvES SrtiroTE dirb Ttov arvvETtoTEpoov trvvtixBr)o-av,
XExBrjaovTai. 228 Cone. Milevit. can. 12. Placuit etiam illud, ut preces
vel orationes seu missae, quae probatae fuerint in synodo, sive
praefationes, sive commendationes, sive manus impositiones,
ab omnibus celebrentur. Nee aliae omnino dicantur in
ecclesia, nisi quae a prudentioribus tractatae, vel compro-
batEe in synodo fuerint, ne forte aliquid contra fidem, vel
per ignorantiam, vel per minus studium sit compositum.
230 See before in this chap. sect. 2.
231 Cone. Carthag. 3. can. 34. m Cone. Milevit. can. 8.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

629

gathered up out of his other discourses. Mr. Hales of
Eton, a dihgent reader of Chrysostom, is said to
have designed such a collection, but he did not ef
fect it. Therefore, till some one else pursues his de
sign more completely, I think it not improper, for
its relation to the present subject, to give the reader,
in one view, a specimen of such passages as plainly
refer to the several parts of the ancient liturgy, ob
serving the order of St. Chrysostom's works accord
ing to the Paris edition, 1609, and that of Com-
melin, 1617-
In the first tome, Horn. I. p. 1, he plainly inti
mates, that the Scriptures were read then in some
order by a stated rule of the church, because his
sermon that day was upon a passage that had been
read in the course of morning service, 1 Tim. v. 23,
"Drink no longer water, but use a little wine." In
his second homily, p. 32, he says again his text was
taken out of the Epistle then read for the day, which
was 2 Tim. vi. 17, " Charge them that are rich in
this world, that they be not high minded." In his
third homily, p. 45, he says, The Lord's prayer was
by appointment of, the church the peculiar privUege
of those only who were baptized. For before their
initiation in the holy mysteries, they were not al
lowed to use it. In his seventh homily, p. 106, he
observes, That the Book of Genesis was always ap
pointed to be read in Lent : and, accordingly, it was
then read for the day, and he preached upon the
first words of it, " In the beginning God created
heaven and earth." In his fifteenth homily, p. 191,
he says, The whole city met together, and with one
common voice, ry pid Koivy tpuivy, made their litany,
or supplications to God. And in the same discourse
he intimates, that a portion of the prophet Zecha-
riah, chap, v., concerning the flying roll against
swearers, had then been read for the day, which he
accommodated to the subject of vain oaths, against
which he was then discoursing. In his eighteenth
homily, p. 226, he says, He preached upon the Epis
tle which had been read that day, Phil. iv. 4, " Re
joice in the Lord always, and again I say, rejoice."
And in his sixteenth homily, p. 234, he notes the
same, That the words upon which he preached out
of the Epistle to Philemon, " Paul, the prisoner of
Jesus Christ," &c, had been read that day. In his
twenty-first homily, p. 266, he takes notice of the
use of the hymn called the Trisagion, or cherubical
hymn, " Holy, holy, holy," in the celebration of the
eucharist ; arguing to his hearers in this manner
upon it : What an absurdity is it for a man, after
he has heard that mystical song that was brought
down from heaven, brought down, I say, by the
cherubims, to pollute his ears with the songs of
harlots, and the effeminate music of the theatre !
In the same homily he twice takes notice of the
form of renouncing the devil in baptism, p. 267:
We are commanded to say, 'AieoTd.atsoy.ai troi, 'S.arava,

I renounce thee, O Satan, that we may never more
return to him. And again, p. 273, Remember, says
he, those words which you spake when you were
initiated in the holy mysteries, I renounce thee, 0
Satan, and thy pomp, and thy worship and service.
In his twenty-second homily, upon anger and for
giving enemies, he argues for the necessity of
pardoning offences, from the necessary obligation
that is laid upon all men to say the Lord's prayer.
For this reason, says he, p. 287, we are commanded
to say, " Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive
them that trespass against us." And again, p. 288,
when you say, " Forgive us, as we forgive :" if you
do not forgive, you ask nothing else of God, but
that he would deprive you of all excuse and pardon.
And whereas some pleaded, that they did not say
the whole prayer, but omitted that clause, " as we
forgive them that trespass against us," he rebukes
them for it, and bids them not be so vainly cautious,
as to think they were excused by curtailing the
prayer, but advises them to use the whole prayer, as
Christ appointed it to be used, that the necessity of
this petition might daily terrify them from revenge,
and compel them to grant pardon to their neigh
bours. In his twenty-fourth homily, of the baptism
of Christ, p. 317, he again speaks of the cherubical
hymn in the communion service. Do you think,
says he, that you have any secular business at that
hour ? Do you then imagine yourself to be upon
earth, or conversing among men ? Whose heart is
so stony, as to think, that at that time he stands
upon the earth, and is not rather in a quire of an
gels, with whom you sing that mystical hymn, with
whom you send up that triumphal song to God ?
In his twenty-eighth homily, (which is the third of
the incomprehensible nature of God,) p. 363, he
speaks of the common prayer, as sent up with one
common voice of the whole congregation, speaking
and crying aloud to God with one accord. Some
would have excused themselves from these prayers
of the church, by this frivolous plea, that they
could pray at home, but they could not hear a
sermon or discourse of instruction in their own
houses ; and therefore they would come to sermon,
but not to prayers. To whom he makes this reply :
You deceive yourself, O man ; for though you may
pray at home, yet you cannot pray there in that^
manner as you do in the church, where there are
so many fathers together, and where the cry of
your prayers is sent up to God with one consent.
You are not heard so well, when you pray to God
by yourself alone, as when you pray with your bre
thren. For there is something more here, consent
of mind, and consent of voice, and the bond of cha
rity, and the prayers of the priests together. For
the priests for this very reason preside in the church,
that the people's prayers, which are weaker of them
selves, laying hold on those that are stronger, may

630

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

together with them mount up to heaven. This is
a plain description of such common prayers, wherein
both priests and people joined not only in heart,
but in one common form of words, whereby they
cried aloud to God together. A httle after, p. 365,
he describes these prayers again by the people's
sending up their tremendous cry aU at once, jiodai
ttiv fpiKviSt^drnv j3ot;v. And he makes this differ
ence between the manner of the energumens' sup
plicating God, and that of the people, that the one
spake not a word, but only supplicated by the pos
ture of their bodies, bowing down their heads ;
whilst the people, who were aUowed to speak audi
bly in prayers, spake aloud for those who could not
speak for themselves. For this reason, says he, the
deacon at the time of the oblation brings forth the
energumens, or those that are possessed with evil
spirits, and bids them bow their heads only, and
signify their supplications by this bodily gesture :
for they are not permitted to pray with the common
assembly of the brethren: therefore he presents
them before the congregation, that you, pitying both
their vexation, and their disability to speak for
themselves, might, by the freedom and hberty of
speech which is allowed you, grant them your pa
tronage and assistance. From this it appears, that
these prayers for the energumens were in a certain
form, in which all the people vocally joined to
gether. In his twenty-ninth homily, which is the
fourth de Incomprehensibili, p. 374, he repeats the
same account of the deacon's calling forth the ener
gumens, and bidding them bow their heads, and
the people's praying to God buoBvpadbv kuI perd atpo-
Spag jSoijc, with one consent and with strong cries,
that he would show mercy on them. A little after,
in the same homily, p. 375, he mentions another
form used by the deacon, as the herald of the
church, who was appointed to call upon the people
every now and then, and excite them to fervency in
devotion, by using this form of words, bpBol ^S-piv
Ka\<Sc, Let us elevate our minds, and attend with
decency to our devotions. For, as he there explains
it, this admonition did not so much respect the
body, as the mind. When the deacon, says he,
calls upon us, and says, Let us stand elevated with
decency, it was not without good reason that this
^ admonition was by the rule of the church appointed,
but that we should elevate our thoughts that lie
grovelling upon the ground ; that, casting away the
distraction that arises from secular affairs, we
should be able to present our souls upright and
raised to a spiritual sense in the presence of God.
Let no man therefore, adds he, join in those sacred
and mystical hymns with remissness of mind ; let
no man entertain the thoughts of this life at that
time ; but driving away all earthly concerns, let
him translate himself whoUy into heaven, as stand
ing then close. by the throne of glory, and flying

with the seraphims : and so let him offer up rbv
iravdytov 'ipvov, that most holy hymn (meaning the
Trisagion, or else the hymn called " Glory be to God
on high") to the God of majesty and glory. It is
upon this account we are called upon at this time,
fcdvat KaX&g, to compose ourselves decently, as it
becomes men who stand in the presence of God,
with fear and trembhng, with a vigilant and ele
vated soul. In his thirty-fourth homily, which is
the first against the Jews, p. 440, he speaks of an
other form used by the deacon, and that frequently,
before the participation of the holy mysteries : he
then cried out, iiriyiviio-KtTc aXXtiXag, Discern and
know one another : which was an admonition to the
people, that they should suffer no Jew, infidel, here
tic, catechumen, or penitent, to communicate among
them. In his fortieth homily, upon the martyrs,
Juventinus and Maximus, p. 550, he says, The
church kept her vigils aU the night with continual
psalmody, which was nothing but forms of prayers
and praises out of the Holy Scriptures. In the
forty-seventh homily, upon Julian the martyr, p.
613, he again mentions the solemn form of re
nunciation in baptism. You renounced, says he,
all this kind of pomp, (harlots, songs, and obscene
words used in the theatre,) and made a covenant
with Christ, in that day when you were initiated in
the holy mysteries. Remember, therefore, those
words, and your covenant, and beware you do not
transgress it. In his fifty-first homily, upon Ber-
nice, p. 635, he says, They used hymns, and pray
ers, and psalms at the funerals of Christians ; and
particularly the words of Psalm cxvi., " Return
unto thy rest, O my soul, for the Lord hath dealt
bountifully with thee : " implying, that the death of a
Christian was a kindness and a rest : " for he that
is entered into that rest, hath ceased from his own
works, as God did from his." In his fifty-fifth ho
mily, which is the fifth of repentance, p. 672, he
plainly intimates, that his discourse was made upon
the Epistle that had been read for the day, 2 Cor.
xii. 21, "Lest when I come again, I shall bewail
many who have sinned, and have not repented."
In his sixtieth homily, which is his catechetical in
struction to those that were preparing for baptism,
he takes notice of several forms and rules made by
the church, relating to that matter, p. 797- As, first,
the solemn words by which every man entered into
covenant with Christ. For, speaking of the danger
and ill consequents of deferring baptism to a sick
bed, he says, When he that is baptized knows none
that are about him, when he cannot hear a word
that is spoken, when he cannot utter those words
wherewith he should make the blessed covenant
with our common Lord, but lies hke a stock or a
stone, differing nothing from a dead man ; what ad
vantage is it to such a one to be initiated in the holy
mysteries in such a state of insensibility? This

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

631

imphes, that the party baptized was to make his
compact with God in a solemn and usual form of
words, which a man at the point of death was not
able to utter. After this he goes on to show, that
the church had appointed the time of Lent chiefly
above other times for exorcism and baptism ; and
that the catechumens, after they were instructed,
were remitted over to the exorcists, to have their
exorcisms or prayers said over them ; and that during
this time they were obhged to walk discalceate, and
wear only one coat : which were appointments of
the church, he says, established for good reasons,
and not without their mystical signification. In his
seventy-fourth homily, in which is a panegyric upon
the martyrs, p. 900, he speaks again of the Trisagion,
or cherubical hymn, as used to be sung in the cele
bration of the eucharist The martyrs, says he,
are now joining in concert, and partaking in the
mystical songs of the heavenly quire : for if, whilst
they were in the body, whenever they communi
cated in the holy mysteries, they made part of that
quire, singing with the cherubims the Trisagion
hymn, " Holy, holy, holy ;" as all ye that are initiated
in those mysteries very well understand : much
more now, being joined with them whose partners
they were in the earthly quire, they do with greater
freedom partake in those solemn blessings and glo
rifications of God in heaven above.
The second tome of St. Chrysos-
Partsofthe'raurgj tom's works, is his Homilies upon
in the second tome ... -r
or st. chrjsostom's Genesis, which were preached m Lent,
works. ' sz '
when that book was always read in
the church, as appears from his first homily, p. 10,
and from what has been observed before out of his
seventh homily to the people of Antioch, in the
foregoing section. In his twenty-seventh homily
upon this book, he plainly intimates, that the Lord's
prayer was always a part of the communion office.
For, speaking of the duty of forgiving enemies, he
says, p. 358, If we do this, we may then, with a pure
conscience, come to this holy and tremendous table,
and boldly say the words that are contained in that
prayer. They who are initiated in the holy myste
ries know what I mean. He covertly intends that
petition of the Lord's prayer, " Forgive us our tres
passes, as we forgive them that trespass against us."
In his thirty-third homily, p. 478, he acquaints us,
That though the Book of Genesis was by the order
of the church read in Lent, yet when they came to
the Thursday in the Passion Week, the day on which
our Saviour was betrayed, then they had proper
lessons for that day, and Good Friday, and Easter
day, and all the time between Easter and Pentecost,
when it was customary to read the Acts of the
Apostles, as a demonstration of our Saviour's resur
rection. In his fifty-fourth homily, p. 731, he says,
Christ commanded the use of the Lord's prayer,
prescribing us therein the bounds and rules of pray

ing for temporal things, whilst he enjoins us to say
those words, " Give us this day our daily bread." In
his second homily upon the prayer of Hannah, in
the same volume, p. 965, he says, When Christ com
manded his disciples not to pray after the manner
of the heathen, using vain repetitions, he also
taught us the measure of prayer, meaning the form
which he appointed. He repeats the same in the
third homily upon Saul and David, p. 1053. Al
though, says he, you are guilty of a thousand crimes,
yet if you sincerely offer up that prayer, which pro
mises, that if you forgive your enemies, your Father
will forgive your trespasses ; you shall, with great
confidence, obtain the remission of all your sins.
The third tome contains St. Chry- Sei± 3
sostom's Commentaries and Homilies dcp„atrmu4y"in t"o
on the Psalms and the Prophet Isaiah, third """"¦
where he frequently refers to the known parts of
the liturgy then in use in the church. In his Com
ment upon Psalm cxii., he three times mentions
the necessary use of the Lord's prayer, p. 369.
As Christ, says he, when he would induce us to
unanimity and charity in our prayers, enjoins us to
make common prayer, and obliges the whole church,
as if it were but one person, to say, " Our Father ;"
and, " Give us this day our daily bread ; and forgive
us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass
against us ; and lead us not into temptation, but
deliver us from evil ;" always using a word of the
plural number, and commanding every one, whether
he pray alone by himself, or in common with others,
stUl to make prayer for his brethren : so here the
prophet David calls all men to a consent in prayer,
saying, " Praise the Lord, O ye servants : praise the
name of the Lord." Again, p. 370, speaking of glo
rifying God, he says, Christ hath commanded us to
pray for this, saying, whenever we pray, " Hallowed
be thy name." And, p. 372, Christ, in his gospel,
hath commanded us to pray, and say, " Thy will be
done on earth, as it is in heaven." In like man
ner, on Psalm cxiv., p. 394, speaking of the hfe to
come, and how we ought to desire it, and make all
our actions tend that way, he adds, For this reason
we are commanded to say in our prayer, " Thy king
dom come;" that we may always have respect to
that day. He repeats the same words on Psalm
cxix., p. 425. And on Psalm cxxvii., p. 465, We
are commanded to use a prayer, in which there is
but one petition relating to this life, " Give us this
day our daily bread ;" which he repeats again on
Psalm cxl., p. 551. On Psalm cxliv., p. 595, he
says, We are commanded to say in our prayer,
" Hallowed be thy name." And on Psalm cxlix.,
p. 633, he calls it the prayer which was offered up
by all in common, and always in the plural number,
" Our Father," &c. On Psalm cl., p. 636, he says,
This prayer was peculiar in its use to the sons of
God only, who could call God their Father, by virtue

632

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

of their regeneration and adoption. Our prayer,
says he, is prefaced with this title ; for it belongs
to them only to say, " Our Father," who can .give
him thanks for the gifts which they have received,
and show forth them all in that name. For he that
calls God his Father, confesses the adoption of sons :
and he that confesses the adoption of sons, owns
and declares both justification, and sanctification,
and redemption, and remission of sins, and the gifts
of the Holy Spirit. For all these must go before,
that we may thereby enjoy the adoption of sons,
and be thought worthy to call God our Father. By
which reasoning of St. Chrysostom it appears, that
he was so far from thinking the Lord's prayer a
carnal form, not proper to be used by spiritual men,
because it was a form, that, on the contrary, he
thought none were truly qualified to use it, but such
as were regenerate, and adopted, and endowed with
the gifts of the Holy Spirit, who alone had the true
title to call God their Father. And this, I shall
show in the next chapter, was the general sense of
all the ancient writers.
But to return to St. Chrysostom. In his Com
ment on Psalm cxvii., p. 406, he takes notice, that
the people were used in their responses to return
one verse of this psalm, which was, " This is the
day which the Lord hath made, we will rejoice and
be glad in it." This kind of responses he calls
virnxHv, and viroipaXXEiv, because it was the people's
subjoining their response to something that the
minister had read before out of the same psalm.
And it seems to have been appointed for the service
of Easter day, or Christmas day, or the Lord's day,
because he adds, The people were wont to make
this response chiefly on that spiritual assembly and
heavenly festival ; plainly referring to some eminent
festival then well known to the people. And that
this custom was introduced by a law and order of
the church, is evident from what follows : for he
says, Their forefathers had appointed the people to
sing this verse, innjxtTi/ ivopoB'trnoav, both because it
was sonorous, and also contained a sublime doc
trine, that forasmuch as they knew not the whole
psalm, they might from this one verse be perfectly
instructed in the mystery of it. This was the wis
dom of the ancient church, according to Chrysos
tom, to teach the people the mysteries of religion,
by obliging them to bear a part in the usual service.
In his Comment on Psalm cxxxvii., p. 518, he
declares again, That the psalmody was performed
partly by the priests, and partly by the people's
joining with them : the priests began, and the peo
ple answered to them. On Psalm cxl. he notes, p.
544, That this psalm was constantly sung in the
order of the daily evening service, whence it had
the name of the evening psalm ; as the lxii. had the

name of the morning psalm, because it was always
sung in the morning service. Of which, because I
have given a more particular account hereafter,1 I
say no more in this place. On Psalm cxliv., p. 594,
he acquaints us, that this psalm was always sung
alternately by the priest and people at the Lord's
table, chiefly upon the account of these words in it,
" The eyes of all wait upon thee, and thou givest
them their meat in due season." Of which custom
we shall have another occasion to speak further in
its proper place. See Book XV. chap. 5. sect. 10.
In his sermon on Psalm cxlv., p. 823, he tells us,
That psalm was used to be sung in the Passion
Week, " Praise the Lord, 0 my soul ; while I hve,
will I praise the Lord," &c. In his first sermon on
Isaiah, p. 834, he says, The Trisagion, or cherubical
hymn, " Holy, holy, holy," was sung by the sera-
phims in heaven above, and by men on earth be
neath. And, p. 836, he takes notice of the angelical
doxology, "Glory be to God on high," as used in
the church : and the forms, Kiipu, iXirio-ov, and oHoov,
" Lord, have mercy upon us," and, " Lord, save us,"
as usual prayers and responses of the people : and
reproving the people's clamours, and negligence,
and indecent gesticulations in the church, he repri
mands them in this manner : How dare you mix the
devil's sport with this doxology of angels ? Why
do you not revere the words, which you yourselves
use in that place, " Serve the Lord in fear, and re
joice unto him with reverence?" Is this to serve
him in fear, when you thus theatrically toss and
stretch your bodies, and know not what you say
yourselves for your disorderly vociferation ? This
plainly imphes, that th« people bare their part,
though sometimes without a just decorum, in all
these doxologies, prayers, and responses. In his
sermon upon the seraphims, which is the sixth
upon Isaiah, p. 890, he gives a large account again
of the use of the seraphical hymn, " Holy, holy,
holy," at the communion table : which, because I
shall recite at length hereafter, I only just barely
hint it in this place. See Book XV.
In his second homily upon the obscurity of the
ancient prophecies, p. 946, in answer to that vulgar
plea, that men could pray at home, he replies in
such a manner, as shows that the people bare a
part with their own tongues in the common prayers
of the church. You may pray at home, says he,
but your prayer is not of that efficacy and power, as
when the whole body of the church, with one
mind, and one voice, bpoBvpudbv /iip tjitovy, send up
their prayers together, the priest assisting, and of
fering up the prayers of the whole multitude in com
mon. He there also speaks of the deacon's form in
bidding prayer for aU orders of men in the world,
which I shaU not recite here, because I have done

1 See Book XIII. chap. 10. and 11.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

633

it more fully in its proper place. Book XV.
chap. 1. The fourth volume of St. Chrysos-
Purhf'ot'tte an- tom's works consists chiefly of private
tarth'tome of st! discourses, which have not much re
lation to the pubhc liturgy of the
church : yet some few passages are worthy to be
noted among these. In his famous discourse upon
Eutropius, p. 554, among other arguments, where
by he presses the people to lay aside their anger
against him, and pardon the injury he had done
them, he urges this : How wiU you otherwise, says
he, take the holy sacrament into your hands, and
use the words of that prayer, wherein we are com
manded to say, " Forgive us our trespasses, as we
forgive them that trespass against us," if you exact
punishment of your debtor? This shows that the
Lord's prayer was used then as a usual part of the
communion service. In the third homily of repent
ance, p. 562, he speaks of the seraphical hymn un
der the title of pvriKov pkXog, the mystical song,
because it was used in the celebration of the holy
mysteries. And again, in his second epistle to Olym-
pias, p. 715, he mentions -it under the same title.
And in his sermon after his return from banish
ment, p. 97L he speaks of the form Eiprivn irdoi,
Peace be to you all, as a solemn form used frequent
ly in the church. The fifth volume of his works af
fords us many more examples. Here
he no less than eight times mentions the Lord's
prayer as a form in common use by the command
ment of Christ. In his sixth homily, upon Laza
rus, p. 107 : We are commanded in our prayer to
say, " Forgive us our trespasses," that, by the con
tinual use of that prayer, we may be put in mind
that we are hable to punishment. In his eighth
homily, on our Saviour's prayer, " Father, if it be
possible, let this cup pass from me," p. 134, he says,
Christ prayed, to teach his disciples to pray. But
they were to learn not only to pray, but after what
manner to pray : and therefore he delivered them
a prayer in these words, commanding them and us
to say, " Our Father which "art in heaven," &c. In
his tenth homily, p. 154, he says, Christ taught us
what we are to say in prayer, and in a few words
instructed us in all manner of virtue. In his six
teenth homUy, upon those words, " If thine enemy
hunger, feed him,'' p. 237, he urges forgiveness of
injuries with this argument, For this reason we are
taught to say, " Forgive us, as we forgive," that we
may learn, that the measure pf forgiveness takes
its rise from ourselves. In his thirty-sixth homily,
upon Pentecost, p. 552, he says praying by the
Lord's prayer is praying by the Spirit : his words
are these, If there was no Holy Ghost, we that are
behevers could not pray to God : for we say, " Our
Father which art in heaven." As therefore we could

not say, that Jesus was the Lord, so neither could
we call God our Father, without the Holy Ghost. .
How does that appear ? From the same apostle, who
says, "Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the
Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba,
Father." In his thirty-eighth homily, of repentance
and the eucharist, p. 570, he thus again argues for
forgiving enemies : When we go into the church, let
us approach God as becomes his majesty; lest if we
have designs of reverige in our hearts when we
pray, we pray against ourselves, saying, " Forgive
us, as we forgive them that trespass against us."
These are terrible words, and the same as if one
said to God, Lord, I have forgiven my enemy, for
give thou me ; I have loosed him, loose thou me ; I
have pardoned my enemy, pardon me ; if I have
retained his sins, retain thou mine ; if I have not
loosed my neighbour, do not thou loose my offences ;
what measure I have meted to him, measure to me
again. In his fifty-first homily, upon the prayers of
Christ, p. 691, he says, Christ taught his disciples
to pray both in words and actions ; meaning the
words of the Lord's prayer, together with his own
example. And in the sixty-second homily, upon
the paralytic, p. 934, he says, This prayer was the
peculiar privilege of the faithful, and not allowed
to any unbaptized catechumen : for before we have
washed away our sins in the font of the holy waters,
we cannot call God our Father ; but when we re
turn from thence, having put off the burden of our
sins, then we say, " Our Father which art in heaven."
Besides this account of the various use of the
Lord's prayer, he mentions several other parcels of
the liturgy in this volume. In the sixteenth homily,
p. 229, he takes notice of the use of the seraphical
hymn in the eucharistical service. Consider, says
he, you that are initiated, what a mystical service
you have been employed in, with whom you have
sent up that mystical song, with whom you have
cried out Tpiodywg, " Holy, holy, holy." In the
thirty-sixth homily, upon Pentecost and the Holy
Spirit, p. 553, he treats at large of that ancient form
of salutation used in every office, " Peace be with
you," or, " The Lord be with you;" and the people's
answering always, "And with thy spirit." Our
common father and teacher, says he, meaning the
bishop, when he goes up into his throne, says,
" Peace be to you aU," and you all make answer
with one common voice, " And with thy spirit.''
Neither do you make this answer only when he goes
into his throne, or when he preaches to you, or
when he prays for you, but when he stands by the
holy table ; when he is about to offer that tremen- •
dous sacrifice, (they that, are initiated know what I
say,) before he touches the elements lying upon the
table, he prays, " The grace of the Lord be with
you," and ye reply, " And with thy spirit : " remind
ing yourselves by this answer, that it is not the

634

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

minister that effects any thing in this matter, neither
is the consecration of the gifts the work of human
nature ; but that it is the grace of the Spirit then
present, and descending upon the elements, which
consummates that mystical sacrifice. In the thirty-
eighth homily, on the eucharist and repentance, p.
569, he takes notice of another known form in the
communion service, where the priest says, " Let us
lift up our minds and hearts," and the people an
swer, "We lift them up unto the Lord," 'Exoptv
npbg tov Kvpwv. This is the same form as we have
seen before in Cyprian, Sursum corcla, and Habemus
ad Dominum. In the forty-seventh homily, p. 632,
he speaks again of the seraphical hymn, taken out
of Isaiah, under the name of pvotikov pkXog, the
mystical song. And homily fifty-second, in eos qui
Pascha jejunant, p. 713, persuading men to peace
and unity, he argues again from the frequent use of
the form Elpi)vn vexoiv, "Peace be with you all,"
in every office of the church. There is nothing,
says he, can be compared with peace and concord.
Therefore the bishop, when he first enters the
church, before he goes up into his throne, prays,
saying, " Peace be with you all :" and when he rises
up, he does not begin to preach, before he says
again, " Peace be with you all." And the priests,
when they are about to say any prayer of benedic
tion, do not begin the blessing before they have
used the same form of salutation. And the deacon,
when he bids men pray with others, enjoins them
this in their prayers, that they should pray for the
angel of peace,2 and that all their purposes may be
directed to a peaceable end : and when he dismisses
you from this assembly, he prays thus, saying, riopati-
toBt iv itprivy, " Go in peace ;" and nothing is said
or done without this. So that it seems this was a
form that had its return in every particular office,
and was sometimes used six or seven times at one
assembly of the church. In his thirty-fifth homily,
upon the Ascension, p. 535, he more particularly
takes notice of this form of the deacon's bidding
men pray for the angel of peace. In his admonition
to those that are scandalized at the evils which be
fall the church, cap. 4. p. 863, he has again occa
sion to mention the seraphical hymn, under the
foresaid title of the mystical song of sanctifica
tion. In his sixty-third homily, p. 949, he shows
us how, by the order of the church, on the day of
our Saviour's passion, all such portions of Scripture
were read as had any relation to the cross ; and
on the great sabbath, or Saturday following, such
scriptures as contained the history of his being be
trayed, crucified, dead, and buried. And he adds,
p. 951, that on Easter day they read such passages
as gave an account of his resurrection, and on every
festival the things that happened at that season.

Only the Acts of the Apostles, which contain the
history of the miracles done by the apostles after
Pentecost, after the Holy Ghost was come upon
them, were for a particular reason ordered to be read
before Pentecost, that is, immediately after Easter
because the miracles of the apostles, contained in that
book, were the great demonstration of our Saviour's
resurrection ; for which reason the church appointed
the Book of the Acts always to be read in the time
between Easter and_ Whitsuntide, immediately after
the resurrection of Christ, to give men the evidences
and proofs of that holy mystery, which was the com
pletion of their redemption. Thus, according to
Chrysostom, the church, in great wisdom, ordered
and methodized her liturgy by exact rules, for the
better instruction and edification of the people.
The sixth tome is chiefly made up Sect 6
of such tracts as do not acknowledge In ^o si^th tome.
Chrysostom for their author ; and therefore among
these we shaU not be very curious in searching for the
forms of the ancient liturgy. Some of them are sup
posed, by learned men, to be written by Severianus,
bishop of Gabala, contemporary with Chrysostom,
and these may be reckoned of the same authority
as Chrysostom's own writings. Among the homi
lies of this sort is reckoned the thirty-seventh,
upon the parable of the prodigal son, where the
author, p. 375, commenting upon those words,
"They began to be merry," thus discourses: Ye
know what spiritual mirth is, who have tasted of
it, who have been partakers of the holy mysteries,
and have seen the deacons or ministers of Divine
service, imitating the wings of angels with their
httle veils lying upon their left shoulders, and tra
versing the church, and crying, Let no catechumen
be present, none of those that may not eat, no spy,
none of those that may not see the feast of the fatted
calf, none of those that may not look upon the hea
venly blood shed for the remission of sins, no one
that is unworthy of the living sacrifice, no one
that is yet unbaptized, no one that may not with his
polluted lips touch the tremendous mysteries : ye
remember how, after this, the angels from heaven
sing the hymns and praises, saying, Holy is the
Father, who willed the fatted calf to be slain, who
knew no sin, as saith the prophet Isaiah, " who did
no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth :" holy
is the Son, the calf that is always willingly slain,
and always lives : holy is the Comforter, the Holj
Ghost, which perfects the sacrifice. These are
plain references and allusions to the usual forms of
the church, viz. to the deacons, vested in their
proper habit and badge, calling to all non-commu
nicants to withdraw ; and to the seraphical hymn,
" Holy, holy, holy," which was always sung in the
communion service. The same writer, a httle after,

2 See this form explained, Book XIV. chap. 5. sect. 4.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

635

p. 377, as plainly alludes to the use of the Lord's
prayer at the eucharist, when he brings in the fa
ther thus speaking to the elder son : Son, thou
art ever with me : thou standest by the altar, and
there criest out with freedom, " Our Father which
art in heaven, haUowed be thy name." In the first
homily in this volume, entitled, De Uno Legislatore,
p. 10, there is mention made of the ceremony of
laying the book of the Gospels upon a bishop's head
at his ordination. For this reason, says the author,
when priests are ordained in the church, the gospel
of Christ is laid upon their heads, that he that is
ordained, may learn that he receives the true tire or
covering of the gospel ; and that he may be taught,
that though he be the head of all, yet he is subject
to those laws ; though he rules over all, he is under
the rule of those laws ; though he gives laws to all
others, he is to be governed by the law himself.
The critics are not agreed upon the author of this
discourse. Du Pin* rejects it as none of Chrysos
tom's : but Photius quotes it under his name, and
Bishop Pearson4 has a long dissertation to vindicate
the authority of it, out of Photius, and several other
ancient writers before him, where he answers all
the objections that Bishop Usher and some other
learned men had raised against it. Without de
ciding this controversy, it is sufficient for our pre
sent purpose, that the homily either acknowledges
Chrysostom or some such other ancient writer for
its author ; and the ceremony here spoken of was
certainly a custom observed in the ordination of
bishops in the time of Chrysostom, as appears not
only from other places in Chrysostom, but also
from the authors of the Constitutions and the Ec
clesiastical Hierarchy, and the canon of the fourth
councU of Carthage, which I have had an occasion
to produce in a former5 Book, to which I refer the
reader, and go on with Chrysostom in order.
In the fifty-second homily, upon the Circus in this
volume, p. 491, the author makes mention of that
ancient custom of saying, uoSa coi, Kipu, " Glory be
to thee, 0 Lord," at the reading of the gospel.
When we are met together, says he, in the eccle
siastical theatre, as soon as the deacon opens the
book of the Gospels, we all look upon him with
silence ; and when he begins to read, we presently
rise up, and say, " Glory be to thee, O Lord."
Se(.t. 7. In his eleventh homily on St. Mat-
tome of his'iiornu thew, p. 108, he mentions the people's
lies on St. Mattherr. .... , - , ..
joining in psalmody and the accus
tomed prayers. When ye have borne your part in
singing two or three psalms, Svo if/aXpovg r\ rpiig
iwtixheavTEg, and have made your usual prayers,
rdg awiiBeig ti/x&g iroioiipevoi, ye think ye have done
enough for your salvation. In the thirty-third

3 Du Pin, Bibliothec. Cent. 5. p. 22.
4 Pearson, Vindic. Ignat. part 1. cap. 9. p. 311.

homily, p. 318, he notes the customary form of the
minister's saying, E/p i) vn buXv, " Peace be unto you all,"
when he first enters the church : and he forms this
exhortation upon it : When I say, " Peace be unto
you ;" and ye answer again, " And with thy spirit ;*
do not say this only in words, but in mind ; not
with your mouth, but with your heart. For if you
say here in the church, " Peace be with thy spirit ;"
but as soon as you are gone out, begin to oppugn
me, despise me, accuse me, and load me with a
thousand reproaches, what peace is this ? In his
sixty-ninth homily, p. 600, speaking of the monks,
and their manner of worshipping God, he says, As
soon as they were out of their beds, they made a
quire, and sang hymns to God, ovptpJivuig Siravng,
ebtjirfp m ivbg oToparog, aU together with one voice,
and as it were with one mouth : and among these
they particularly addressed that angelical hymn to
God, " Glory be to God on high, on earth peace,
good will towards men. In his seventy-second
homily, p. 624, he speaks of three prayers, one of
which was for the demoniacs, the second for the
penitents, and the third for the faithful, or commu
nicants, all conceived in a certain form of words;
which is evident from this circumstance, which he
there subjoins, that in the last of these prayers the
children of the church joined with the rest of the
people in crying to God for mercy. The people
prayed alone without the children, when they pray
ed for the demoniacs and penitents ; but when they
prayed for themselves, they strengthened their pray
ers with the cries and intercessions of their chil
dren, whose innocence and simplicity they esteemed
to be prevailing motives with God to hear them.
By this account it is plain, these prayers must be
in certain forms known both to the people and the
children ; otherwise it. is impossible to imagine, how
they should all join vocally in crying to God for
mercy. In his twentieth homily, which is upon the
Lord's prayer, he not only mentions the use of this
form of prayer, but says it was the peculiar privi
lege of communicants or baptized persons to use it.
That this prayer, says he, p. 200, belongs to the
faithful only, is evidenced both from the laws of
the church, and the first words of the prayer itself;
for no unbaptized person can call God his Father.
In the same homily, he takes notice of the cere
monies used in the reception of the eucharist, par
ticularly the custom of giving one another the holy
kiss of peace. And in the seventh homily, p. 70,
he alludes to the custom of the priest's saying, liyia
roig dyioig, in the celebration of the eucharist, when
he says, Christ gives holy things to holy men.
The eighth tome of St. Chrysos- s t „
o . . ,T ... „ Inlheeigtilhtome,
tom's works contains his Homilies on

3 Book II. chap. 11. sect. 8.

636

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII

on st. John and the St. John and the Acts of the Apostles.
ties? ° ' p°" In his preface to St. John, he men
tions the form of renouncing the devil, and cove
nanting with Christ. Ye which are initiated, says
he, know what compact ye made with us, or rather
with Christ, when he admitted you to his holy mys
tery, what you said to him concerning the pomp of
Satan ; how, after you had renounced Satan and his
angels, you renounced this also, and promised never
to look toward it again.
Homily forty-second, he speaks of the Lord's
prayer as a form of spiritual prayer, which Christ
taught, his disciples and all Christians.
Homily forty-fourth, he says, Every good Chris
tian used this prayer daily, saying those holy words,
" Thy kingdom come ; " implying a belief of the re
surrection. Homily sixty-first, he makes mention of hymns
and psalmody, as the honour of Christian funerals.
Homily seventy-seventh, he takes notice of the
kiss of peace, and the common prayers made for the
whole state of the world in the communion service.
We salute one another, says he, in the holy mys
teries, that being many, we may be made one ; and
we make common prayers for those that are un
baptized, and supplications for the sick, and for the
fruits of the world, both by sea and land. Which
plainly refers to the known forms then commonly
used in the church.
In his nineteenth homily on the Acts of the
Apostles, he speaks of several customary forms ob
served in the reading of the Scriptures : The dea
con, the common minister of the church, first stood
up, and cried with a loud voice, T\p6ox«>pev, Let us
give attention -. and this he repeated over and over
again. After that, the reader names the prophet
Esaias, or the hke, and before he begins to read, he
cries out, TdSe Xkyti o Xvptog, Thus saith the Lord.
HomUy twenty-first, he refers to the bidding
prayer of the deacon, in which he was used to ad
monish the people in these words, among many
other petitions, Let us pray for those that sleep in
Christ, and for those that make commemorations
for them, for the church, for the priests, for the
people, for the martyrs, &c.
Homily twenty-fourth, he mentions the hymns
that were used by all in common at the communion
table. Know you not, that you then stand with
angels, and sing with them, and send up hymns
and praises to God with them ? Meaning the Tri
sagion, or cherubical hymn, " Holy, holy, holy, Lord
God of hosts," &c, which was a known part of the
eucharistical service. The ninth tome of his works con-
in the ninth' touie, tains his Homilies on the Epistle to
on Romans, and , ,
First and second to the Romans, and the r irst and Second
the Corinthians. to the Corinthians. In his seventh
homily, on Romans, p. 68, he speaks of common

prayer sent up to God with one voice for the ener
gumens, or persons vexed with evU spirits. Which
was by a certain form, as we have seen before, in
his seventy-first homily on St. Matthew, and is
evident from the very manner of expressing it here :
for the people could not pray with one voice, unless
a form of words was some way or other dictated to
them. This dictating of prayers to be used by the
whole assembly was commonly the office of the
deacon, as Chrysostom informs us in the fourteenth
homily upon this same epistle, p. 165, where he
shows the different state of the church in the apos
tles' days from that of his own time. For, explain
ing those words, " The Spirit maketh intercession for
us with groanings that cannot be uttered," he says,
This was an obscure expression, because many of
the miraculous gifts, which were then in being,
were since ceased : as the gift of prophecy, the gift
of wisdom, the gift of healing the sick, the gift of
raising the dead, the gift of tongues ; and among the
rest, the gift of prayer, which was then distinguished
by the name of the Spirit : and he that had this
gift, prayed for the whole congregation. Upon
which account, the apostle gives the name of the
Spirit both to this gift, and to the soul that was en
dowed with it, who made intercession with groan
ings unto God, asking of God such things as were
of general use and advantage to the whole congre
gation : the image or symbol of which is now the
deacon, who offers up prayers for the people. Here,
according to Chrysostom, the spirit of praying
was an extraordinary gift, like that of tongues ;
and the difference between the apostolical age and
his own was this, that at first both the matter and
words of their prayers were inspired in an ex
traordinary way, but afterward the deacons prayed
by ordinary forms, without any such immediate in
spiration. In his Comments upon the First Epistle to the Co
rinthians, homily twenty-four, p. 532, he rehearses
the heads of the solemn thanksgiving at the consecra
tion of the eucharist. We rehearse, says he, over
the cup the ineffable blessings of God, and whatever
benefits we enjoy ; and so we offer it at the holy
table, and communicate, giving him thanks that he
hath delivered mankind from error ; that when we
were afar off, he hath made us near ; that when we
had no hope, and were without God, he hath made
us brethren and fellow heirs with himself: for these
and all the hke blessings we give him thanks, and so
come to his holy table. Homily thirty-five, p. 640, he
notes the words, elg Toiig aiwvag riiiv aiiiviov, for ever
and ever, to be the common conclusion of their eu
charistical thanksgivings,to which a layman, if they
were said in an unknown tongue, could not answer
Amen. In his thirty-sixth homily, p. 652, he men.
tions the form, " Peace be with you all," to which
the people answered, " And with thy spirit ;" which

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

637

he derives from apostolical practice, when both
minister and people were used to speak by immediate
inspiration of the Holy Ghost. He further observes,
p. 653, that they aU sang in common, both in the
apostles' days, and in his own time ; and that the
bishop, at the entrance into the church, said always,
" Peace be to you all," as a proper salutation when
he came into his Father's house ; though he laments,
that whilst they retained the name of peace, they
had lost the thing. Again, p. 655, he takes notice,
that when a single reader sung the psalms, all the
people, as it were with one mouth, did mrjjxelv, re
turn their answer to him, that is, either by singing
the verses alternately, or by joining in the close of
every verse ; of which more in the next Book, chap.
1. Homily forty, p. 688, he observes, that every per
son at his baptism was, by the rule of the church,
obhged to make profession of his faith in the so
lemn words of the creed ; and among other articles,
particularly said, " I believe the resurrection of the
dead :" by which form of profession Chrysostom ex
plains that noted passage of St. Paul, " Why are
they then baptized for the dead?" That is, if the
dead rise not, why do they profess at their baptism,
that they "believe the resurrection of the dead?"
Homily forty-one, p. 702, he mentions part of the
solemn form of prayer for the dead, then in use in the
church. It is not without reason, says he, that he
that stands at the altar, when the holy mysteries are
celebrated, says, We offer for all those who are dead
in Christ, and for all those who make commemora
tions for them. And a httle after, We at that time
also make prayers for the whole world, and name
the dead with martyrs, and confessors, and priests :
for we are all one body, though some members ex
ceed other members in glory.
In his second homUy upon the Second Epistle to
the Corinthians, p. 740, he styles the Lord's prayer
tbxfiv vevopiapkvtiv, the prayer which Christ brought
in, and estabhshed by law in his church ; and says
it was the peculiar privilege of the faithful to use it,
for the catechumens were not allowed so great a
favour before baptism. There also he mentions
several forms of the deacons calling upon the peo
ple to pray : as that, St-w/xsj/ KaXibg, Se-nBuipev, Let us
stand devoutly, and pray : which, he says, was ad
dressed not only to the priests, but also to the peo
ple : and again, Let us pray ardently for the cate
chumens: after which admonition the deacon re
cited the particular petitions they were to make for
them, which Chrysostom there relates at length in
the very form that was used, which I shall omit to
recite here, because the reader may find it whole
hereafter in the service of the catechumens, Book
XIV. chap. 5. A httle after, in this same homily,
p. 743, he mentions the usual form of renunciation
in baptism: Ye that are initiated, says he, know
what I say; for ye easily remember those words,

whereby ye renounce the tyranny of the devil, fall
ing upon your knees, and going over to Christ your
King, and uttering those tremendous words, whereby
we are taught to pay no manner of obedience to the
tyrant. And, p. 745, he adds, That in the service
of the faithful, that is, the communion service, the
deacon again bid them supplicate and address God
for bishops, for presbyters, for kings, for emperors,
for all by sea and land, for the temperature of the
air, and for the whole world. Which are but so
many hints of the deacons bidding prayer in the
service of the faithful, more fully related in Book
XV. chap. 1. Homily fifth, p. 775, he speaks of the
obligation men have to use the Lord's prayer.
Homily eighteenth, p. 872, he intimates a form of
prayer used by the people" at the time of ordaining
ministers. The suffrage of the people, says he, is
no little ornament to those who are called to any
spiritual dignity. And therefore he that performs
the office of ordination, then requires their prayers,
and they join their suffrage, and cry out those words,
which they that are initiated know, for it is not
lawful to speak aU things before the unbaptized. A
little after, p. 873, he says, The people had a consi
derable share in the prayers of the church. For
common prayers were made both by priest and peo
ple for the energumens and penitents, and they all
say one and the same prayer for them, the prayer is
so full of mercy. Again, when we dismiss those
who may not participate of the holy table, another
prayer is to be made, in which we all fall down upon
the ground together, and all rise together. He means
the prayer for the whole state of Christ's church,
which was said jointly by the priest and people to
gether. Again, when the salutation of peace is
mutually to be given and received, we all in like
manner use this salutation. He means either the
kiss of peace, or the form of salutation used between
priest and people, " The peace of God be with you,
And with thy spirit." But more probably he means
the former, because it immediately follows after,
When we come to the tremendous mysteries ; then,
as the priest prays for the people, so the people
pray for the priest ; for these words, " And with
thy spirit," signify nothing else. Again, that prayer
wherein we give thanks, is common to both. For
not only the priest gives thanks, but all the people.
For he first receives their answer, they rejoining,
" It is meet and right so to do," and then he begins
the thanksgiving. And why should any man won
der that the people should speak together with the
priest, when they even join with cherubims and the
powers above to send up in common those sacred
hymns to heaven ? meaning the hymns, " Holy,
holy, holy," and, " Glory be to God on high," which
were sung by all the people in the communion ser
vice. Chrysostom has a good remark upon all
these forms, and the people's obligation to bear a.

638

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

part in them, which, therefore, I may not here omit,
because it shows us the reason why the ancient
church so ordered her service. I have mentioned
all these things, says he, on purpose to excite the
vigilance of those that are in an inferior station,
that we may learn that we are all one body, and
only differ as one member may differ from another ;
and that we should not cast all upon the priests,
but ourselves be concerned in the care of the whole
church, as of one common body.
sect 10. The last volume of St. Chrysos-
m tne tenth tome. tomis WOTxls contains his homilies
upon the remaining Epistles of St. Paul. In his
first homily on the Ephesians, p. 1037, he speaks
of the forms of profession used in baptism : What
is more gracious, says he, than those words by
which we renounce the devil ? by which we cove
nant with Christ ? What more gracious than that
profession which we make both before and after
baptism? In the third homily, p. 1051, he tells us
the deacons were wont to use this form of words to
all those that were under the church's censures, to
withdraw from the Lord's table, Ye that are in the
state of penance, depart. And, p. 1052, when they
were gone they said again to the communicants, Let
us pray in common all together. And there also
he speaks of the hymns that were sung at the
Lord's table. Homily fourteenth, p. 1127, he
argues from the use of the Lord's prayer, that
men should not revile those whom they therein
owned to be their brethren. If he is not thy
brother, how dost thou say, " Our Father ? " for
that word, " our," denotes many persons. And
further to show the indecency of such contumelious
language, he reminds them of their known cus
tom in singing the sacred hymns with cherubims
and seraphims at the communion. Consider with
whom you stand in the time of the holy mysteries.
With cherubims, with seraphims. For the sera
phims use no reviling. Their mouth is continually
employed in fulfilling one necessary office, that of
glorifying and praising God. How then can you
say with them, " Holy, holy, holy," who use your
mouth to revile your brethren ? He adds, You say,
" Our Father ;" and what follows that ? " which art
in heaven." As soon as you say, " Our Father which
art in heaven," the word raises you up, and gives wings
to your soul, and shows that you have a Father in
heaven. Therefore do nothing, say nothing of those
things that are upon earth. You stand in heaven,
and do you use reviling ? You converse with angels,
and do you use reviling ? You are honoured with
the kiss of the Lord, and do you use reviling ? God
adorns your mouth so many ways with angelical
hymns, with meat, not angelical, but above angels,
with his own kisses and embraces, and do you still
accustom yourself to reviling ?
Homily twenty-third, p. 1190, he says, Jesus, the

Son of the hving God, hath brought down to us the
celestial hymns. For what the cherubims say above
he hath commanded us to say, " Holy, holy, holy."
On the Philippians, homily fifteenth, p. 131 1, he
positively asserts, that Christ delivered the Lord's
prayer as a form of prayer, 'opov tvxvg, teaching us
to say, " Give us this day our daily bread."
On the Colossians, homily third, p. 1337, We
pray, saying, " Thy will be done on earth, as it is in
heaven." We give thanks, saying, " Glory be to
God on high, on earth peace, good will towards
men." We petition in our prayers for the angel of
peace, and we pray for peace upon all occasions,
for nothing can he compared unto it. The bishop
in the church gives the benediction of peace, say
ing in every office, in prayers, in supplications, in
his homilies, once, twice, thrice, and oftener, " Peace
be with you all." Again, p. 1338, When the bishop
enters the church, he immediately says, " Peace be
with you aU :" when he preaches, " Peace be with
you all :" when he gives the blessing, " Peace be
with you all :" when he bids you salute one another,
"Peace be with you all:" when the sacrifice is
offered, " Peace be with you all :" and in the inter
vals, " Grace and peace be with you." Is it not,
therefore, absurd, that when we so often hear peace
mentioned, we should stiU be at war among our
selves ? We receive the salutation of peace, and
return it to him that gives it, and yet are at war
with him. You answer, "And with thy spirit;"
yet, as soon as you are gone out of the church, you
calumniate and revile him. He adds, p. 1339, That
it was not the bishop, properly speaking, that gave
the peace, but Christ, that vouchsafes to speak by
his mouth.
Homily sixth in Colossians, p. 1358, he compares
the forms of renunciation in baptism, and covenant
ing with Christ, to a hand-writing or bond, say
ing, Let us beware that we be not convicted by it,
after we have said those words, " We renounce thee,
Satan, and we make a covenant with thee, O Christ."
Again, p. 1359, You are taught to say, " I renounce
thee, and thy pomp, and thy worship, and thy
angels." He adds, That every new baptized person,
as soon as he came up out of the water, was ap
pointed to say, " Our Father" which art in heaven.
Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven."
Homily ninth in Coloss., p. 1380, on those words,
" Admonishing one another in psalrns, and hymns,
and spiritual songs," he says, The faithful know
what is the hymn of the spirits above ; what the
cherubims above say ; what the angels said, " Glory
be to God on high :" meaning that these two
hymns were sung by the faithful in the communion
service. Homily tenth, p. 1385, he gives the Lord's prayer
the title of lixn mtrruiv, " the prayer of the faith
ful," because it was their pecuhar privilege to use it.

Chap. VI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Homily third in 2 Thess., p. 1502, he mentions
two usual forms, relating to the reading of the les
sons in the church. When the reader rises up, and
says, " Thus saith the Lord ;" and the deacon, stand
ing np, commands all men to keep silence ; he does.
not say this to honour the reader, but God, who
speaks to all by him.
Homily sixth in 1 Tim., p. 1553, he proves, that
infidels are prayed for as well as others, from the
use of the Lord's prayer. For when he that prays
says, " Thy wiU be done in earth, as it is in heaven,"
the meaning is, that as there is no infidel in heaven,
so we pray, that there may be none on earth neither.
Homily second in 2 Tim., p. 1638, he says, The
words whereby the priests consecrate the eucharist,
were the same that Christ spake.
Homily fourth on Hebrews, p. 1785, he intimates,
that they had set psalms in their funeral service.
Consider, says he, what you sing at that time,
" Turn again unto thy rest, O my soul, for the Lord
hath rewarded thee." And again, " I will fear no
evil, for thou art with me." And again, " Thou art
my refuge from tribulation, which compasses me
about." Consider what those psalms mean. You
say, " Turn again unto thy rest, O my soul ;" and
do you stiU weep ? Is not this mere pageantry and
hypocrisy ? If yon believe the things to be true,
which you say, it is superfluous to lament.
HomUy fourteenth, p. 1852, speaking of the
nymns sung at the eucharist, he says, Do not we
sing the same celestial hymns, which the quires of
incorporeal powers sing above ?
HomUy seventeenth, p. 1870, he mentions a part
of the oblation prayer : In the oblation we offer, or
bear and confess our sins, and say, " Forgive us our
transgressions," whether voluntary or involuntary :
that is, we first remember them, and then ask par
don. There also, p. 1872, he mentions the deacon's
solemn form of words, admonishing the people to
come holy to the holy sacrament : for this reason,
the deacon cries out, and caUs upon the saints, and
by these words prompts aU men to consider their
offences, that no one come unprepared.
Homily twenty-second, p. 1898, he tacitly refers
to the form, Sursum corda, " Let us lift up our
hearts." For having mentioned those words of the
psalmist, " Let the lifting up of my hands be an
evening sacrifice," he adds, With our hands let us
also lift up our hearts. Ye which are initiated,
know what I say ; you perhaps understand what is
spoken, and perceive what I have obscurely hinted.
" Let us lift up our souls on high."
Beside these passages collected out of Chrysos
tom's works, pubhshed by Fronto Duceeus, there are
several others in those homilies, which Sir Henry
Savil set forth in Greek, and others in the Latin

639
editions only. Neither of which I have had oppor
tunity perfectly to examine, and therefore I shall
leave them to the more diligent inquiry of the cu
rious reader; only noting, that in the sixth homily
of repentance,10 he observes this difference between
David's Psalms and the rest of the Scriptures, that
the others were read only twice a week in public,
but the Psalms were used by all sorts of men, in all
places, and upon all occasions. In ecclesiis pernoc-
tantibus primus et medius, et novissimus est David.
When they held their vigils aU night in the church,
David's Psalms were in the beginning, and middle,
and end of all their service. The same was ob
served in their morning prayer; in their funeral
obsequies ; by virgins at their needle; by the illite
rate and unlearned, who could not read a letter in
the book, yet could repeat David's Psalms by heart.
David was always in their mouths, not only in the
cities and the churches, but in the courts, in the
monasteries, in the deserts and the wilderness. He
turned earth into heaven, and men into angels, be
ing adapted to all orders, and all capacities, chU-
dren, young men, virgins, old men, and sinners.
In the beginning of the same homily, he says the
Book of Genesis was by appointment of the church
read only once a year, at a certain season, which
was the time of Lent ; as we have heard before in
several places of this author, and as we shall see
more fully demonstrated from other writers in the
next Book.
Among those pubhshed in Greek by Sir H. Savil,
the hundred and twenty-third homily, t. 5. p. 809,
speaks of the priests using this form of admonition
to all communicants, in the time when the holy
mysteries were celebrated, "A -via ToXg dyiotg, " Holy
things are only for holy men." And whoever will
bestow the pains to peruse the rest of the homilies
which are in that edition, may doubtless find many
other such fragments of the ancient liturgy, which,
as appears from this collection, so much abound in
this celebrated writer.

CHAPTER VII.
OF THE USE OF THE LORD'S PRAYER IN THE
LITURGY OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH.
If there were no other argument to
DrOVe the lawfulness Of Set forms The Lord's' prayer
r by all the ancients
of prayer in the judgment of the an- «t«med *jo,m,
cients, the opinion which they had Be^ed by hi, dis-
of the Lord's prayer, and their prac
tice pursuant to that opinion, would sufficiently do

13 De Poenitent. Horn. 6. t. 7. p. 116. Basil. 1525,

640

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

it. And therefore, though several things have been
occasionally hinted already about this matter, yet
it will not be amiss to give it a distinct handling in
this chapter. And first of all I observe, that the
ancients did not only esteem it as a rule and pattern
to conform our prayers to, but looked upon it as a
particular form of prayer, which Christ enjoined all
his disciples to use in the same words that he de
livered it. Tertullian says,1 Our Lord prescribed
a new form of prayer for his new disciples of the
New Testament : and that though John had taught
his disciples a form of prayer, yet all that he did
was only as a forerunner of Christ : when Christ was
increased, (as John had foretold, " He must increase,
but I must decrease,") then the whole work of the
servant passed over to the Lord. And therefore it
is not so much as extant now in what words John
taught his disciples to pray, because earthly things
were to give way to heavenly. So again, The re
ligion of prayer was ordained by Christ himself,
and this prayer being animated by his Spirit from
the time that it came out of his heavenly mouth,
ascends up to heaven with a privilege, commend
ing to the Father what the Son taught. But be
cause our Lord, who foresaw the necessities of man,
after he had given this rule of praying, said also,
" Ask, and ye shall receive ; " and there are many
things which men's particular circumstances oblige
every one to ask ; therefore we have a right to make
additional requests, and build other prayers upon
this, always premising this appointed and ordinary
prayer as the foundation. So that, according to
Tertullian,2 it was not only a rule prescribing the
method and matter of prayer, but a form to be used
in the words in which Christ delivered it, and to be
added to all other prayers as the foundation of
a superstructure. After the same manner St. Cy
prian says, That Christ, among other wholesome

admonitions and Divine precepts, by which he pro
vided for the salvation of his people, has given us
also a form of prayer,8 teaching and admonishing
us what we are to pray for. And a little after,1
-We are to learn from our Lord's information, what
we are to pray for ; for he said, Pray thus, " Our
Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy
name," &c. St. Austin assures us, That as the
church always used this prayer, so she. used it by
the command of Christ.5 He said, Pray thus : he
said to his disciples, Pray thus : he said to his dis
ciples, he said to his apostles, -and to us who are
the lambs he said, and to the rams of his flock he
said, Pray thus. In another place, This prayer6 is
necessary for all, which the Lord gave to the rams
of his flock, that is, to his apostles, that every one
of them should say, " Forgive us our trespasses, as
we forgive them that trespass against us." For if
there is any one to whom these words in the prayer
are not necessary, he must be said to be without
sin. And if Christ had foreseen that there would
have been any such, so much better than his apos
tles, he would have taught them another prayer, in
which they should not have asked forgiveness of
sins for themselves, who had already obtained re
mission of all in baptism. Again he says,7 If any
one say that this prayer is not necessary in this life
for every saint of God, that knows and does the will
of God, except one, the Holy of holies, he is in a
manifest error, and pleases not that God whom he
pretends to praise. For this prayer "which we use,1
was given as a rule to the apostles by the heavenly
lawgiver, who said to them, Pray thus. He enjoined
the rams of his flock, the leaders of his sheep, the
chief members of the great Shepherd, to use it;
and they thence learned to say, " Forgive us our
trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against
us." In his Retractations9 he confirms all this,caUing

1 Tertul. de Orat. cap. 1. Dominus nosier novis disci-
pulis Novi Testamenti novam orationis formam determi-
navit. — Docuerat et Joannes discipulos suos orare. Sed
omnia Joannis Christo praestruebantur, donee ipso aucto
(sicut idem Joannes praenunciabat, ilium augeri oportere,
se vero diminui) totum preeministri opus cum ipso Spiritu
transiret ad Dominum. Ideo nee extat, in quae verba do-
cuerit Joannes orare, quod terrena ccelestibus cesserint.
2 Ibid. cap. 9. Ab ipso ordinata est religio orationis, et
de Spiritu ipsius jam tunc, cum ex. ore Divino ferretur, ani-
rnata suo privilegio ascendit in cesium, commendans Patri
quae Filius docuit. Quoniam tamen Dominus prospector
humanarum necessitatum, seorsum post traditam orandi dis-
ciplinam, Petite, inquit, et accipietis, et sunt, quae petantur
pro circumstantia cujusque, praemissa legitima et ordinaria
oratione quasi fundamento, accidentium jus est desiderio-
rum, jus est superstruendi extrinsecus petitiones.
3 Cypr. de Orat. Domin. p. 139. Inter caetera salutaria
sua monita et praecepta Divina, quibus populo suo consu-
luit ad salutem, etiam orandi ipse formam dedit; ipse quid
precaremur, monuit et instruxit.
' Ibid. p. 141. Cognoscamus, docente Domino, et quid

oremus. Sic, inquit, orate, Pater noster qui es in ccelis, &c.
5 Aug. Horn. 29. de Verbis Apost. 1. 10. p. 150. Ecclesia,
oratio est, vox est de magisterio Domini veniens. Ipse dixiti
Sic orate : discipulis dixit, Sic orate : discipulis dixit, apos
tolis dixit, et nobis, qualescunque agniculi sumus, dixit,
arietibus gregis dixit, Sic orate.
6 Aug. Ep. 89. ad Hilarium. Omnibus necessaria est
oratio Dominica, quam etiam ipsis arietibus gregis, id est,
apostolis suis Dominus dedit, ut unusquisque Deo dicat,
Dimitte nobis dehita nostra, sicut nos dimittimus debitoribus
nostris, &c.
' Aug. de Peccator. Meritis, lib. 3. cap. 13. Quam ora
tionem quisquis cuilibet etiam homini sancto, et Dei volun
tatem scienti atque facienti, praeter unum sanctum sancto
rum, dicit in hac vita necessariaiu non fuisse, multum errat,
nee potest illi ipsi placere quem laudat.
8 Aug. in Psal. cxlii. p. 675. Ipsi didicerunt orare quod
oramus, ipsis data est regula postulandi a jurisperito coelesti.
Sic orate, inquit, &c.
9 Aug. Retractat. lib. 1. cap. 19. In eisdem mandatisest
etiam quod jubemur dicere, Dimitte nobis debita nostra, &c.
Quam orationem usque ad finem sacculi tota dicit ecclesia.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

641

it one of Christ's commands to use this prayer,
which the whole church will continue to use to the
end of the world. St. Chrysostom, in two volumes
of his works, the third and fifth, repeats this almost
twenty times, that the Lord's prayer was a common
form in use among them by the express command
of Christ. And there are many other scattered pas
sages throughout his writings to the same purpose,
which, because I have produced them at large in the
last chapter, I need not here repeat them.
Evident it is beyond dispute, that
And accordingly the whole primitive church constantly
it was used by the st j
KrVofEc»reJaS used it in all her holy offices, out of
SStion'cJbap"- consciousness and regard to Christ's
command. This, as we have heard
TertuUian word it, was laid as the foundation of all
other prayers.10 It is the prayer of the church :
the whole church says, " Forgive us our trespasses,"
as we have it before in the testimony of11 St. Aus
tin. And the practice was so universal and well
known from the beginning, that Lucian the heathen
is thought to refer to it in one of his dialogues,12
where he speaks, in the person of a Christian, of the
prayer which began hub tov iTarpog, with " Our
Father." But we have more certain evidence from
the records and offices of the church. For there
was no considerable Divine office, in the celebration
of which this prayer did not always make a solemn
part. Particularly in baptism, as soon as the per
son baptized came up out of the water, he was en
joined to say, " Our Father which art in heaven."
Immediately after this, says the author of the Con
stitutions,13 let him stand and pray the prayer which
the Lord hath taught us. And so Chrysostom,14 As
soon as he rises out of the water, he says those
words, " Our Father which art in heaven," &c.
Secfi 3, In like manner in the celebration of
b™ti?n'"ththec'ieul the other sacrament of Christ's body
and blood, it was commonly used at
the close of the consecration prayer. So it is ex
pressly more than once noted by St. Austin: After
the sanctification of the sacrifice 15 we say the Lord's
prayer: and again,16 The whole church almost con
cludes the prayer of benediction and sanctification
with the Lord's prayer. Upon this account he tells
his hearers, that all who were communicants " heard
this prayer said daily at the altar. And he ex
pressly makes this difference between the Lord's

prayer and the creed, that men might remember the
former by hearing it daily repeated at the altar ; but
the creed was not so, for as yet it was never pub
licly used, but only in the occasional service of
baptism ; whereas the Lord's prayer was of constant
use by being a daily part of the communion service.
Cyril, in his Mystagogical Catechism to the iUumi-
nated,18 gives the same account of it : After the obla
tion prayer Ve say that prayer which our Saviour
delivered to his disciples, calling God our Father
with a pure conscience, and saying, " Our Father
which art in heaven." And St. Jerom,19 though he
do not so precisely note what part of the commu
nion office it was used in, yet, in general, he says
Christ taught his apostles this prayer, that believers
might every day in the sacrifice of his body have
boldness to say, " Our Father which art in heaven."
And St. Chrysostom20 in a covert way intimates
the same, when he tells his hearers, that if they
forgive their enemies, they may come with a pure
conscience to the holy and tremendous table, and
boldly say the words that are contained in the
prayer. The initiated know what I mean. He
means that petition of the Lord's prayer, " Forgive
us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass
against us." Which he expresses thus covertly, be
cause of non-communicants, catechumens, or infi
dels, that might be present at a popular discourse in
a general assembly. He speaks more plainly in his
sermon upon Eutropius,21 where, pressing the people
to forgive the injury which that great statesman
had done the church, he uses this argument to
them : How otherwise will you take the holy sacra
ment into your hands, and use the words of that
prayer, wherein we are commanded to say, " Forgive
us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass
against us ? " This plainly shows, that the Lord's
prayer was then used as an ordinary and constant
part of the communion service. Only with this
difference, that in the Greek church and the Galli-
can church it was said by the priest and all the peo
ple together, as Mabillon22 proves out of Gregory
of Tours, and Leontius, in the Life of Joannes Elee-
mosynarius, bishop of Alexandria, and the epistles
of Gregory the Great, who expressly notes the dif
ference between the Greek and Latin church in this
particular : Among the Greeks the Lord's prayer a
is said by all the people, but with us by the priest

10 Tertul. de Orat. cap. 9. cited above.
11 Aug. Horn. 29. de Verbis Apost. p. 150.
12 Lucian. Philopatris.
13 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 41.
14 Chrys. Horn'. 6. in Colos. p. 1359. It. Horn. 62. in Pa-
ralyticum, t. 5. p. 934.
Aug. Horn. 83. de Diversis, p. 556. Post sanctifica-
tinnem sacrificii dicimus orationem Dominicam.
"Aug. Ep. 59. ad Paulin. quaest. 5. Quam totam pe-
htionem fere omnis ecclesia Dominica oratione concludit.
17 Horn. 42. inter 50. t. 10. p. 197. In ecclesia ad altare
2 T

quotidie dicitur ista oratio Dominica, et audiunt illam fideles.
18 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 5. p. 298.
>» Hieron. lib. 3. cont. Pelag. cap. 3. Docuit apostolos
suos, ut quotidie in corporis illius sacrificio credentes aude-
ant loqui, Pater noster qui es in ccelis, &c.
20 Chrys. Horn. 27. in Genes, p. 358.
2' Chrys. Horn, in Eutrop. t. 4. p. 554.
22 Mabill. de Liturg. Gallic, lib. 1. cap. 5. n. 22. ex Gre
gor. Turon. de Mirac. Martini, lib. 2. cap. 30.
a Greg. lib. 7. Ep. 64. Sed et Dominica oratio apud Graa-
cos abomni populo dicitur: apud nos vero a solo sacerdote.

642

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

alone. And in this the Gallican church chose to
follow the way of the Greek church, as we now fol
low the Gallican church, and not the Roman. The
manner of the Mosarabic liturgy in Spain, is noted
also by Mabillon to be different from both these ;
for there the priest repeated every petition by itself,
and the people answered to each petition separately,
" Amen." But these differences in the manner of
using it only serve ' to confirm the Use of it in
general, and show us that it was never omitted by
any church in the public service of the altar, at
least from the beginning of the fourth century,
when Cyril of Jerusalem lived, whose Mystical
Catechisms are a clear evidence for it.
Sect 4 It also made a part in their daily
inland "evenTn™" morning and evening prayers, dis-
prajers. tjnc(. fyom Tne communion office. Of
which we have instances in the canons of the coun
cils of Girone24 and Toledo,25 which shall be recited
hereafter, when we come to consider more exactly
the several parts of the morning and evening service.
They used it also in their private
devotions. As is evident from that
passage in St. Chrysostom upon the
112th Psalm, where he says,26 That Christ, to induce
us to unanimity and charity, enjoins us to make
common prayer, and obliges the whole church, as
if it were but one person, to say, " Our Father ;"
and, " Give us this day our daily bread ; and forgive
us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass
against us ; and lead us not into temptation, but
deliver us from evil ;" always using a word of the
plural number, and commanding every one, whether
he pray alone by himself, or in common with others,
still to make prayer for his brethren. This implies,
that in their private devotions, as well as public,
they thought themselves obliged, by the command
of Christ, to use the Lord's prayer. In another
place he gives us an instance in the practice of a
holy man, who, to the form of his private devotions,
(which he also there recites,) always added the

Sect. 5.
And in their pri
vate devotions.

Lord's prayer, or the prayer of the faithful,2' as he
styles it, for a particular reason, of which more by
and by ; making it both the conclusion and uniting
tie of all his other prayers for all men. In compli
ance with this general practice it is, that the author
of the Constitutions28 orders every one to use the
Lord's prayer three times a day. And this, Cotele
rius thinks, was done in honour of the holy Trinity,20
citing Theodoret and Isidore for his opinion. St.
Ambrose also, writing instructions to virgins,80 di
rects them to sing psalms in bed, and say the Lord's
prayer between every psalm. And the fourth coun
cil of Toledo makes it deprivation for any clergy
man to omit31 using the Lord's prayer daily, either in
his public or private offices of devotion, censuring
him as a proud contemner of the Lord's injunction.
Now, this being the constant use Sect
that was daily made of the Lord's th^ifiX
prayer, it hence took the name of oratio cwSSs' daily
quotidiana, the daily prayer, as is ob- prai'
served in the foresaid canon of that council. And so
we find it styled in Cyprian, who thought that
petition in the Lord's prayer, " Give us this day our
daily bread," might be taken in a spiritual as well
as a literal sense, and refer to the eucharist, or the
body and blood of Christ, the celestial bread,32 which
they then desired to receive every day. And the
council of Toledo cites St. Hilary to the same pur
pose i33 " Give us this day our daily bread." God
desires nothing so much as that Christ may dwell
in us daily, who is the Bread of hfe, and the Bread
that comes from heaven. And because this is our
daily prayer, we therefore pray daily that this bread
may be given us. St. Austin also34 means the
Lord's prayer, when he says, That the Christian's
daily prayer makes satisfaction for those lesser and
daily failings, without which no man lives. Upon
which account he says in another place,85 That this
daily prayer is a sort of daily baptism, because in the
pious use of it men obtain daily remission of sins,
as they did at first in baptism. Possidius also35

21 Cone. Gerundens. can. 10.
25 Cone. Toletan. 4. can. 9.
25 Chrys. Com. in Psal. cxii. p. 369.
27 Chrys. Horn. 10. in Coloss. p. 1385. 'EirtBels tiji/
EVXVV Ttov irttTTtov, tos KoptoviSa Ttva Kal avvSEtrpov virip
irdvTtov EVxi]V iroti)trdpEvos.
23 Constit. lib. 7. cap. 21. Tpls tT]s iipipas outoj irpoa-
evxehBe. 29 Coteler. in loc. ex Theodor. Ep. 145. et Isidor. Orio-.
lib. 6. cap. ult.
30 Ambros. de Virgin, lib. 3. p. 115. In ipso cubili
volo psalmos cum oratione Dominica frequenti contextos
vice. 31 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 9. Quisquis ergo sacerdotum vel
subjacentium clericorum hanc orationem Dominicam quo
tidie aut in publico aut in privato officio praeterierit, prop
ter superbiam judicatus, ordinis sui honore privetur.
32 Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p. 147. Hunc panem dari nobis
quotidie postulamus, ne, qui in Christo suinus, et eucharis-

tiam quotidie ad cibum salutis accipimus, a Christi corpore
separemur. 33 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 9. Sanctus Hilarius dicit, Panem
nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie. Quid enim tarn vult
Deus quam ut quotidie Christus habitet in nobis, qui est
Panis vitae et Panis e ccelo ? Et quia quotidiana oratio
est, quotidie quoque ut detur, oratur.
34 Aug. Enchirid. cap. 71. De quotidianis autem brevi-
bus levibusque peccatis, sine quibus haec vita non ducitur,
quotidiana oratio fidelium satisfacit. Eorum enim est di
cere, Pater noster, qui es in ccelis, &c.
35 Aug. Horn. 119. De Tempore,, p. 306. Remissio pec
catorum non est in sola ablutione baptismatis sacri, sed
etiam in oratione Dominica et quotidiana. In ilia invenie-
tis quasi quotidianum baptismum.
33 Possid. Vit. Aug. cap. 27. De bono Domino se dicit
magis quam de meritis suis confidere. Cui etiam in ora
tione quotidiana Dominica dicebat, Dimitte nobis debita
nostra, &c.

Chap. VII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

6-13

makes this remark in his Life, upon his practice
and that of St. Ambrose, that they both trusted
more in God's mercy than their own merits, being
used to pray in the words of our Lord's daily prayer,
" Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that
trespass against us." From all which, and much
more that might be alleged upon this head, it ap
pears, that this prayer, in the very words which
Christ delivered it in, was not only an allowed form,
but a prayer of daily use both in their public and
private devotions. Neither were there any sects or
and ms used by heresies, that pretended in those times
schismatics as v»eu to obiect the least thing against the
as catholics. J . , , „.
use of it. The Donatists broke off
from the church, and set up conventicles of their
own, but they did not alter the way of worship :
they still thought themselves obliged, as Optatus
says, to use the Lord's prayer at the altar.37 The
Pelagians could not relish well one petition in it,
"Forgive us our trespasses;" for they proudly
thought the saints were without sin, and had no
thing to ask forgiveness of : yet they also continued
to use it, and accounted for their practice, by putting
this false gloss upon it, that they then prayed not
for their own sins, but the sins of others. We find
this often objected to them in the African councils,38
but never any charge brought against them, as if
they omitted the Lord 's prayer in whole, or even
this single petition in it. St. Austin indeed often
says, that their impious tenets and disputations tend
ed89 to take away the use of the Lord's prayer ; but
then he explains himself to mean, not that they laid
aside the use of it, but that they taught that a man
might come to such perfection in righteousness in
this hfe, by observing aU the commands, and that
by his own free-wUl, without the help of the grace
of Christ, that he needed not to say, " Forgive us our
trespasses," for himself, but only for others. They
owned,40 that the apostles used the Lord's prayer ;
but then they said, they were so holy and perfect
without all manner of sin, that they did not say for
themselves, "Forgive us our trespasses," but only
for other sinners that were yet imperfect. St. Chry
sostom mentions another sort of men, who were also
offended at this petition because of the condition

that was in it, "Forgive us, as we forgive others ;"
and therefore they curtailed the prayer by dropping
this petition when they said it: but he rebukes
them41 for this, and bids them not be so vainly cau
tious, as to think they were excused by curtailing
the prayer, but advises them to use the whole pray
er, as Christ appointed it to be used, that the neces
sity of this petition might daily terrify them fr«m
revenge, and compel them to grant pardon to their
neighbours. So that though there were some here
tics and other ill men, who did not hke this one
petition for different reasons, yet they all continued
to use the prayer either in whole or in part, and there
is no instance of any that totally rejected it.
There was no objection against it Secl 8
in those days, that it was a form, or elalilYnTatlT,:
that it was not a spiritual prayer, be- ritaidf'»™<">aJe'-
cause it was used in the very words in which Christ
had delivered it; but on the contrary.it was re
commended as the most spiritual and prevalent
prayer that could be used, because of the dignity of
its Author. St. Cyprian thus argues for the use of
it : Christ, says he, had foretold, that the hour was
coming, when the true worshippers should worship
the Father in spirit and in truth : and he fulfilled
what he had promised before, that we who had re
ceived the Spirit' and truth by his sanctification,
might worship in spirit and truth by his tradition,
or the prayer which he delivered to us. For what
prayer can be more spiritual, than that which is
given us42 by Christ, by whom the Holy Spirit is
sent to us ? What can be esteemed a truer prayer
with the Father, than that which came out of the
mouth of his Son, who is* truth itself? So that to
pray otherwise than he has taught us, is not only
ignorance, but a crime, since he has laid it down,
and said, " Ye reject the commandment of God, to
establish your own tradition." Let us therefore, my
dearly beloved brethren, pray as our God and Mas
ter taught us. It is a friendly and familiar way of
praying, to beseech God in his own words, to let the
prayer of his Son come up to his ears. Let the
Father hear and acknowledge the words of his Son :
when we make our prayers, let him that dwells in
our , heart, be also in our voice. And forasmuch
as we have him our Advocate with the Father for

Optat. lib. 2. p. 57. Ad altare conversi Dominicam
orationem praetermittere non potestis. It. lib. 3. p. 72.
Oratio Dominica apud nos et apud vos una est.
33 Cone. Milevitan. can. 8. Quicunque dixerit, in ora
tione Dominica ideo dicere sanctos, Dimitte nobis debita
nostra, ut non pro seipsis hoc dicant, quia non est eis jam
necessaria ista petitio, sed pro aliis, qui sunt in populo pec-
catores. Et ideo non dicere unumquemque sanctorum,
• DllI"tte mihi debita mea, sed, Dimitte nobis debita nostra,
ut hoc pro aliis potius, quam pro se Justus petere intelliga-
tur, anathema sit. Vid. can. 9. ibid, et Cod. Can. African.
»• 115, 116.
Aug. Ep. 92. ad Innocent. Nobis etiam Dominicam
2 T 2

orationem impiis disputationibus conantur auferre. — Dicunt
posse hominem in hac vita, praeceptis Dei cognitis, ad tan-
tam perfectionem justitiae sine adjutorio gratiae salvatoris
per solum liberum voluntatis arbitrium pervenire, ut ei non
sit jam necessarium dicere, Dimitte nobis debita nostra.
40 Id. de 1'eccator. Meritis, lib. 2. cap. 10. Quidam con
tra orationem Dominicam argumentantur : quia etsi ora-
bant earn, inquiunt, sancti et perfecti jam apostoli, nullum
omnino habentes peccatum, non tamen pro seipsis, sed pro
imperfectis adhuc peccatoribus dicebant, Dimitte nobis,
&c. Vid. Aug. Ep. 94. ad Hilarium.
11 Chrys. Horn. 22. t. 1. p. 288.
42 Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p. 139.

6-14

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

our sins, when we sinners pray for the pardon of
our sins, let us bring forth the words of our Advo
cate. For since he has said, that "whatever we
ask the Father in his name, he will give it us ; "
how much more efficaciously shall we obtain what
we ask in the name of Christ, if we ask it in his
prayer ! He introduces all this discourse with these
wotds : He that made us live, taught us to pray, by
the same kindness that he confers all other things
upon us ; that whilst we speak to the Father in the
prayer and orison which the Son taught us, we
should more easily be heard. So far was this holy
man from thinking the Lord's prayer a dead form,
that could not be offered with the true spirit of
prayer, that, on the contrary, he labours with all his
might to convince men, that no prayer could be
more justly styled worshipping God in spirit and in
truth, or with greater efficacy and advantages be
presented to the Father. St. Chrysostom was of the
same mind, that praying by the Lord's prayer might
justly be termed, praying by the Spirit. For he uses
this as an argument for the Holy Spirit's operation
upon us. If there were no Holy Ghost,43 says he,
we that are believers could not pray to God; for
we say, " Our Father which art in heaven." As
therefore we could not say, that Jesus was the Lord,
so neither could we call God our Father without the
Holy Ghost. How does that appear ? From the
same apostle, who says, " Because ye are sons, God
hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your
hearts, crying, Abba, Father." And St Austin,44 ex
pounding those words ofthe apostle, Rom. viii. 26,
" We know not what to pray for as we ought ; but
the Spirit helpeth our infirmities ; " concludes, that
the Spirit's helping and teaching them to pray as
they ought, could not mean his helping them to new
words and expressions ; for both the apostle, and
they to whom he wrote, were well acquainted al
ready with the Lord's prayer ; so that there could
be no want of the Spirit's assistance in that respect:
but the want was this ; men are commonly ignor
ant of the real benefit of temporal tribulation and
affliction, which tends either to cure the tumour of
pride, or exercise and try men's patience, and crown
it with a. greater reward, or else to chastise and
abolish sucrT other sins as they are subject to: men
being ignorant of these advantages, are usually
most inclined to ask a perfect freedom and immu
nity from temporal affliction. But the Spirit cor
rects this ignorance, and helps this infirmity, and
teaches men rather to ask patience of God, and
submission to" his will, that they may not think
themselves neglected of God, though he do not re

move such afflictions, but with a devout and pious
patience hope for greater good arising from them.
This is St. Austin's exposition of that famous pas
sage of the apostle, concerning the assistance of
the Spirit in prayer : by which he is so far from de
rogating from the Lord's prayer, as void of the
Spirit, that he supposes the very knowledge of it to
be antecedently a work of the Spirit : and he says
further,45 That when men believe, and hope, and
desire, and consider the things they ask of God in
the Lord's prayer, they are then qualified with
those graces of the Spirit, faith, hope, and charity,
which are necessary to bring a pious votary unto
God. Men that say such things as these of the
Lord's prayer, could not conceive any mean thing
about it, derogatory to the spirit of prayer; but
must be presumed to entertain the most high and
venerable notions of it, of any that can possibly be
imagined. And that they did so, is evident Secl 9
from one thing further, very observ- a *"u,ll,re ™fv°™
able in the ancient discipline and fiffi1?
practice; that is, that then the use of
the Lord's prayer was not a mark of infamy or re-i
proach, but an honorary privilege, allowed to none
but communicants, or complete and perfect Chris
tians. For, as I have had occasion to remark once
or twice 4£ in former parts of this work, all catechu
mens, or persons unbaptized, were absolutely debar
red from the use of this prayer; they were not al
lowed to call God, " Our Father," till they were
regenerated and made sons by the waters of baptism.
I have noted several passages out of St. Austin, St.
Chrysostom, and Theodoret to this purpose, which
need not here be repeated. To these I shall only add
one passage out of Chrysostom,47 in his homily upon
the paralytic, where, speaking of baptism, he says,
Before we have washed away our sins in the font of
the holy waters, we cannot call God, " Our Father;"
but when we return from thence, having put off the
load of our sins, then we say, " Our Father which
art in heaven." And upon this account, as has been
also noted before, this prayer was peculiarly called
tbxv iri^Siv, the prayer of communicants or believers,
because none had a right to use this prayer, but
only such as had a right to communicate at the al
tar, and there hear it daily repeated.

43 Chrys. Horn. 36. in Pentecost, t. 5. p. 552.
14 Aug. Ep. 121. ad Probam, cap. 14. Neque enim ullo
modo credendum est, vel ipsum, vel quibus ista dicebat, Do
minicam nescisse orationem.
45 Ibid. cap. 13. Fides, ergo, et spes et charitas ad Detim

perducunt orantem, hoc est, credentem, sperantem, desi-
derantem, et quae petat a Domino in Dominica oratione
considerantem. 48 Book I. chap. 4. sect. 7. and Book X. chap. 5. sect. 9.
17 Chrys. Horn. 62. t. 5. p. 934.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

645

CHAPTER VIII.
OF .THE USE OF HABITS, AND GESTURE, AND OTHER
RITES AND CEREMONIES IN THE SERVICE OF
THE ANCIENT CHURCH. '
The next things to be spoken of, are
No certain evi- tjjg circumstances and ceremonies of
dence for the use of
S'apttoM ag'° habits, gestures, and times appropri-
orthet»o Mowing. ated tQ Divine service. Of all these
it may be said in general, that as they are matters
of indifferent usage in their own nature, so the
church used her hberty in the appointment and ob
servation of them. The writers of the Romish
church, Baronius, Du Saussay, and Bona, who will
have every ceremony to be apostohcal, pretend that
the apostles themselves wore a distinct habit in all
their sacred ministrations. Bona is very confident1
that St. Paul's cloak which he left at Troas, was a
sacerdotal vestment. And others speak of St. Peter's
planeta, which is said to be sent from Antioch to
Paris, and kept there as a sacred relic in the temple
of St. Genouesa. And others mention St. John's,
which is said to be sent to Gregory the Great. But
Bona himself will not undertake to vouch for these,
because of the silence of all ancient writers about
them.2 Yet he is very angry with Nicholas Aleman-
nius, for saying, that neither the apostles nor apos
tohcal men used any sacred vestments,3 and that
the opinion which maintains it, is to be exploded as
ridiculous, and as what is rejected by learned men.
Vicecomes was a diligent inquirer into antiquity,
and yet he could find no ground for this assertion,
but has some arguments against it, which Bona is
put to answer. And till some better arguments can
be produced to support it, I think it most prudent
to leave uncertain tradition to shift for itself, and
proceed to an age wherein we have more light and
certainty in the matter.
sect 2 In the beginning, then, of the fourth
twX rmS fa age, when the church was quietly
e onrth century. comp0serl Dy Constantine, and settled
in peace, we are sure a distinction was made in the
habits and vestments of Divine service. For Con
stantine himself is said4 to have given a rich vest
ment embroidered with gold to Macarius, bishop of

Jerusalem, to be worn by him when he celebrated
the service of baptism. And it was one of the ac
cusations that the Arians afterward brought against
Cyril, that he had sold it. Valesius thinks that it
was not intended for an ordinary habit, whenever
the bishop celebrated the office of baptism, but only
when he performed the service of the great day of
our Lord's baptism, which was the festival of Epi
phany, held in great veneration at Jerusalem. This
is not so likely in my opinion, but be it as it will, it
makes no alteration in the case ; for still it was a
sacred vestment to be used in the celebration of the
liturgy or Divine service, which is enough to the
present purpose. Not long after, we find Atha
nasius accused by his enemies for laying a tax upon
the Egyptians, to raise a fund for the linen vest
ments of tKe church. The thing is mentioned both
by Athanasius himself5 and Sozomen,6 the one call
ing them linen sticharia, and the other linen tunicles,
which are the same thing. Where we are to ob
serve, that the accusation was not that he used such
vestments in the church, but only that he laid a tax
upon the people to provide them ; which supposes
them to be in use, else there had been no colour or
foundation for such a charge against him. St.
Jerom often mentions this distinction of habits as
generally observed in his time. I urge not those
words which he has in his Commentary upon Eze
kiel, The religion of God has one habit in its minis
try,7 and another for the common uses of life ; be
cause I think he is there speaking of the Jewish
priests in opposition to the idol-priests of Isis and
Serapis. But what he says in his book against Pe
lagius, plainly relates to the Christians : What harm
or enmity, I pray, is it against God, if I use a more
cleanly garment ? If a bishop, presbyter, or deacon,
or any other of the ecclesiastical order, come forth
in a white8 vestment, when they administer the
sacraments ? He says also in his epitaph upon Ne
potian, that Nepotian for his ordinary wearing used
ihepallium, the cloak thatwas in common use among
Christian philosophers : but in his ministrations he
used a tunicle,9 which he ordered his uncle Heliodore
to send as his legacy to St. Jerom. St. Chrysostom
also intimates that the deacons wore a peculiar habit
in their ministrations, when he says, Their honour,
crown, and glory, did not consist so much in their

1 Bona, Rer. Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 24. n. 1.
2 Ibid. lib. 1. cap. 5. n. 2.
8 Aleman. de Parietinis Lateran. cap. 9. ap. Bonam,
ibid.r 4 Theod. lib. 2. cap. 27. Tr)v Updv toXijo, 'lva TavTi)v
irEptf3aXX6pEvos, tv,v tb Beiov fBairTio-paTos XEiTovpyiav
eititeXij, Sec.
5 Athan. Apol. 2. p. 778. TiXaTTovTat irptoTr)v koti}-
yoplav irspl fixap'tuiv Xivwv, cos ipu Kavdva toXs A'tyvir-
Tiots iirtfiaXXovTos.
6 Sozom. lib. 2. cap. 22. TlptoTi]v biropivEt ypatprjv, tos
XtTtoviwv XiviXiv epdpov iirtTiBEls AlyvirTiots.

7 Hieron. Com. in Ezek.'cap. xliv. p. 668. Religio divina
alterum habitum habet in ministerio, alterum in usu vitaque
communi. 8 Id. lib. 1. cont. Pelag. Quae sunt, rogo, inimicitiae con
tra Deum, si tunicam habuero mundiorem ? Si episcopus,
presbyter, diaconus, et reliquus ordo ecclesiasticus in ad-
minislratione sacramentorum Candida veste processerint ?
9 Id. Ep. 3. ad Heliodor. Hanc tunicam, qua utebar in
ministerio Christi, mitte dilectissimo, &c. It. Epist. ad
Pracsidium Diaconum. Difficile est locum Stephani im-
plere, et populos subjacentes candenti desuper veste de-
spicere.

645

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

walking about the church10 in a white and shining
garment, as in their power to repel unworthy com
municants from the Lord's table. This implies that
they had a distinct habit when they ministered in
Divine service. And so it is remarked by Sozomen,11
when speaking of the assault that was made upon
the church by the enemies of Chrysostom, he says,
The priests and deacons were beaten and driven out
of the church, as they were in the vestments of
their ministration. And there is among St. Chry
sostom's works a homily upon the prodigal son,
written by Severianus, bishop of Gabala, contem
porary with St. Chrysostom, who, speaking of the
deacons ministering in the sacred mysteries, says,
They resembled 12 the wings of angels, with their
veils or tippets on their left shoulders, running
about the church, and crying out, Let none of the
catechumens be present at the celebration of the
mysteries, &c. In like manner Nazianzen, in his
Vision of the Church of Anastasia, represents the
deacons standing15 iv e'tpaoi iraptpavoiootv, in their
bright and shining garments. And in his will he
leaves to his deacon Evagrius a Kdpaaov and a T'xa-
pmv, which were then the common names for these
surplices or white garments used in Divine14 ser
vice. The council of Laodicea has two canons
concerning the little habit called the orarium?3
which was a scarf or tippet to be worn upon the
shoulders, and might be used by bishops, presby
ters, and deacons, but not by subdeacons, singers, or
readers, who are expressly debarred the use of it in
that council. The fourth council of Carthage 16
speaks of the alba or surplice, which the deacon is
ordered to wear when the oblation is made, or the
lessons are read. The council of Narbo " mentions
the same. The first council of Braga speaks of
the tunica and the orarium'3 as both belonging to
deacons. And the third council of Braga 19 orders
priests to wear the orarium on both shoulders
when they ministered at the altar. By which we
learn, that the tunica or surplice was common to
all the clergy, the orarium on the left shoulder pro
per to deacons, and on both shoulders the distin
guishing badge of priests.

The fourth council of Toledo is most particular
in these distinctions. For in one canon it says,
That if a bishop, presbyter, or deacon be unjustly
degraded, and be found innocent by a synod,.yet
they shall not be what they were before, unless
they receive the degrees they had lost from the
hands of the bishops before the altar. If he be a
bishop, he must receive20 his orarium, his ring, and
his staff; if a presbyter, his orarium and planeta ;
if a deacon, his orarium and alba. And in another
canon,21 that the deacon shall wear but one orarium ;
and that upon his left shoulder, wherewith he is to
give the signal of prayers to the people. Where
we may observe also the reason of the name orarium
in the ecclesiastical sense, ab orando, from praying;
though in common acceptation it signifies no more
than a handkerchief to wipe the face, and so comes
from ore, in which signification it is sometimes
used by St. Ambrose,22 and St. Austin,28 as well as
by the old Roman authors. But here we take it in
the ecclesiastical sense, for a sacred habit appro
priated to bishops, priests, and deacons in the so
lemnities of Divine service, in which sense it ap
pears to have been a habit distinct from that of
civil and common use, by aU the authorities that
have been mentioned. The author of the Questions
upon the Old and New Testament, under the name
of St. Austin, speaks also of the dalmatica,24 as
worn both by bishops and deacons : but whether it
was then a garment of sacred use, is not said by
him or any other ancient writer, that I know of;
and therefore I content myself with the proofs al
ready alleged, as sufficient to show that in the fourth
age a plain distinction of habits was made in the
sacred service of the church.
The next considerable circumstance sect. 3.
in their worship, was the posture ob- devSnpaSved of
. . ,, . -, -, . ¦, by the ancients.
served in their addresses and adora- First, standing,
which was particu-
tlOnSOfGod; and Of this We find four larlyenjoinedonthe
' Lord's day, and all
kinds generally practised and aUowed, EaesierTndbp'en£
viz. standing, kneeling, bowing, and C08t-
prostration : for sitting, which some add as a fifth
sort, was never allowed by the ancients as an or
dinary posture of devotion. Standing was the

10 Chrys. Horn. 82. al. 83. in Mat. p. 705. Aevkov xitio-
vio-Kov Kal diroo-TtXfiovTa iTEptftaXXopEvot, &c.
11 Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 21. 'lepitov Si Kal Siukoviov tvitto-
piveov te, Kal irpds fiiav, dis Etxov crxnpaTos, iXavvopivtov.
12 Chrys. Horn. 37. ffe Filio Prodigo, t. 6. p. 375. Tiov
plpovpivoiv Tas Tiov dyyiXtav iTTEpvyas TaXs XETTTaXs
SBovats -reus iirl Ttov dptiEpiov topuiv KEipivats, Sec.
13 Naz. Somnium Anastas. t. 2. p. 78.
14 Id. in Testamento, ap. Brisson. de Formulis, lib. 7.
15 Cone. Laodic. can. 22 et 23.
16 Cone. Carth. 4. can. 41. Ut diaconus in tempore obla-
tionis tantum vel lectionis alba induatur.
" Cone. Narbon. an. 589. can. 12.
18 Cone. Bracar. 1. can. 27. Quia diacones absconsis in
fra tunicam utuntur orariis, ita ut nihil differre a subdiacono
videantur, de cxtero superposito scapulas, sicut decet, utan-

tur orario.
19 Cone. Bracar. 3. can. 3. Non aliter accedat quam ora
rio utroque humero circumseptus.
20 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 28. Episcopus, presbyter, aut dia
conus, si a gradu suo injuste dejectus, in sancta synodo in-
nocens reperiatur, non potest esse quod fuerat, nisi gradus
amissos recipiat coram altario de manu episcoporum. Si
episcopus est, orarium, annulum, et baculum. Si presbyter,
orarium et planetam. Si diaconus, orarium et albam.
21 Can. 40. Unum orarium oportet levitam gestare in
sinistro humero, propter quod orat, id est, praedicat.
22 Ambros. de Obitu Satyri Fratris. Et Epist. 54.
23 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. cap. 8. Vid. Pontium Vit.
Cyprian. 24 Aug. Quaest. Vet. et Nov. Test. qu. 4. t. 4. Quasi non
hodie diaeoni dalmaticis induantur sicut episcopi.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

617

general observation of the whole church on the
Lord's day, and the fifty days between Easter and
Pentecost, in memory of our Saviour's resurrection.
This custom may be traced as high as IrenEeus,
who derives it from apostolical authority. For the
author under the name of Justin Martyr25 gives this
account of the use of both postures in prayer : For
asmuch as we ought to remember both our fall by
sin, and the grace of Christ, by which we rise again
from our fall ; therefore we pray kneeling six days,
as a symbol of our fall by sin : but our not kneeling
on the Lord's day is a symbol of the resurrection,
whereby through the grace of Christ we are de--
livered from our sins, and from death, that is morti
fied thereby. And this custom took its original
from the times of the apostles, as St. Irenaeus says
in his book concerning Easter, wherein he also
makes mention of Pentecost, during which time we
kneel not, because it is of the same nature with the
Lord's day, according to the reason that has been
given. Not long after, Tertulhan speaks of it,26 as
an observation, among many others, handed down
from ancient tradition. And Cyprian may be sup
posed to hint it,27 when he speaks of their standing
in prayer.
It is mentioned also by Clemens of Alexandria,28
and Peter, bishop of Alexandria,29 who died some
years before the council of Nice. He says, We keep
the Lord's day as a day of joy, because then our Lord
rose from the dead, and our tradition is not to kneel
on that day. In the time of the council of Nice
there was some disagreement about this practice,
and therefore that council made a canon to bring
all churches to a uniformity in this matter : s° Be
cause there are some who kneel on the Lord's day,
and in the days of Pentecost ; that all things may be
uniformly performed in every parish or diocese, it
seems good to the holy synod, that prayers be made
to God standing. After this St. Hilary31 speaks
of it again as an apostolical practice, neither to
fast nor worship kneeling on the Lord's day, or the

fifty days between Easter and Pentecost. Epipha
nius says,32 that on the appointed days they prayed
kneeling, but during the whole fifty days of Pente
cost they neither fasted nor kneeled. St. Jerom
reckons it38 among the traditions of the universal
church, neither to fast nor kneel on the Lord's
day or Pentecost. St. Austin is a little doubtful as
to the practice of the church universal,84 but he as
sures us, that as far as he knew, all churches in
Africa forbore fasting, and prayed standing, and
sung hallelujah at the altar every Lord's day, and
all the days of Pentecost, in token of our Saviour's
resurrection. We find the same in St. Basil,35 who
derives it from apostolical practice. And Cassian89
testifies of the Egyptian churches, that from Satur
day night to Sunday night, and all the days of Pen
tecost, they neither kneeled nor fasted. And* in
another place37 he gives the reason of this, because
kneeling was a sign of deep repentance and mourn
ing, which they omitted on those days out of re
spect and reverence to our Saviour's resurrection.
Hence it was, that the author of the Constitutions38
makes it one of his apostolical orders, that all men
should pray three times, or three prayers, on the
Lord's day standing, in memory of him who rose
the third day from the dead. And from hence came
that usual form so often mentioned by St. Chry
sostom39 and others, of the deacon's calling upon
the people in prayer, "OpSriog ¦zuipev KaXwg, Let us stand
upright with reverence and decency ; alluding to
the posture then commonly used in prayer on the
Lord's day. How long this custom continued in
the church, is not easy to determine : but we may
observe it to be mentioned by Martin Bracarensis40
in the sixth century, and the council of Trullo 41 in
the seventh century, and the third council of Tours42
in the time of Charles the Great. Nor do we meet
with any exception to this rule all this time, save
only one relating to the penitents, or those that
were under the discipline of the church ; who being,
by their falling into scandalous sins, reduced to a

25 Justin. Quaest. et Respons. ad Orthodox, qu. 115.
28 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3. Die Dominico jeju-
nium nefas ducimus, vel de ge'niculis adorare. Eadem im-
munitate a die Paschae in Pentecosten usque gaudemus.
27 Cypr. de Orat. p. 152. Quando stamus ad oratio
nem, &c.
28 Clem. Strom. 7. p. 854. » Pet. Alex. can. 15.
33 Cone. Nic. can. 20.
31 Hilar. Prolog, in Psal. p. 189. Et haec quidem sabbata
sabbatorum ea ab apostolis religione celebrata sunt, ut his
quinquagesima, diebus nullus neque in terram strato cor
pore adoraret, neque jejunio festivitatem spiritualis hujus
heatitudinis impediret : quod id ipsum etiam extrinsecus
in diebus Dominicis est constitutum, &c.
32 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. u. 22 et 24.
88 Hieron. Dial. cont. Lucifer, cap. 4. Die Dominico et
per omnem Pentecosten, nee de geniculis adorare, et jeju-
nium solvere soleant.
84 Aug. Ep. 119. ad Januarium, cap. 17. Ut autem stantes

in illis diebus et omnibus Dominicis oremus, utrum ubique
servetur ignoro. Ibid. cap. 15. Propter hoc etjejunia re-
laxantur, et stantes oramus ; quod est signum resurrectionis.
Unde etiam omnibus diebus Dominicis id ad altare obser-
vatur, et halleluia canitur.
85 Basil, de Spir. Sanct. cap. 27.
36 Cassian. Institut. lib. 2. cap. 18. Hoc quoque nosse
debemus, a vespera sabbati, quaa lueescit in diem Domini
cam, usque in vesperam sequentem apud jEgyptios genua
non curvari ; sed nee totis quinquagesima; diebus, &c.
37 Cassian. Collat. lib. 21. cap. 20. Ideo in ipsis diebus
nee genua in oratione curvantur, quia inflexio genuum velut
pcenitentiae ac luctus indicium est, &c.
38 Constitut. lib. 2. cap. 59. Tpls vel TpsXs ebxis etuites
iiriTEXipEV, pvvpi]S xdpiv tu Sti Tptiov ivaiaVTOS bpspiov.
39 Chrys. Horn. 29. al. 4. de Incomprehensibili Dei Na-
tura, t. 1. p. 375. Horn. 2. in 2 Cor. p. 740.
40 Martin. Bracar. Collect. Canon, cap. 57. _
»i Cone. Trull, can. 90. 42 Cone. Turo'h. 3. can. 37

648

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

"Book XIII

state of penance, were not allowed .this privilege of
standing at prayers on the Lord's day, but were
obliged in token of their humiliation to kneel at all
times, not excepting the days of relaxation, as the
fourth council of Carthage48 words it in a canon
made in this behalf. And so we have seen the con
current testimony of all writers for the antiquity
and universality of this practice.
At other times kneeling was the
secondly 'kneel- most common and ordinary posture of
ine; at all other . __,. . , , -, -,
times, especially on devotion. 1 his may be concluded
the stationary days .
and other times of from the former exception of the
devotion. *¦
Lord's day and Pentecost from this
posture; for that implies, that at other times they
¦used a different posture in their addresses to God.
This was the usual posture of their ordinary morn
ing and evening service on the weekly days, and on
the stationary or fast days, which were called sta
tionary days, not from their standing at prayer, but
from their continuing and prolonging the exercise,
in imitation of the military stations. The only
difference between these days and the Lord's day
was, that on the Lord's day all prayers were per
formed standing, but on other days some were said
standing, some kneeling. In this sense we must un
derstand St. Chrysostom,44 when he speaks of the
people's falling on the ground when they said the
prayer for the whole state of the church, and their
rising again at the bishop's invocation. And so the
author of the Constitutions45 represents them kneel
ing at the first prayer, and standing up at the second.
In like manner Cassian46 says the people performed
their private prayers kneeling, and then rose up to
the minister's collect or prayer, in which all joined
standing. This is to be understood of their prayers
on ordinary days, and not of the Lord's day, on
which (as we have seen before) all their prayers
were performed standing. As to the posture of
kneeling upon other occasions, it would be endless
to cite all the testimonies that may be alleged for
it. It was so common among them, that the author
of The Acts of Thecla47 gives prayer the name of
KXiVic. yovdroiv, bending the knees. And Arnobius,
when he would describe to the heathen the manner
of Christians performing their divine offices to God,
does it by saying, They all fell down 48 upon the earth,
as their custom was, and made their common prayers

to him. Eusebius,™ speaking of the great devo
tion of St. James, bishop of Jerusalem, says, He was
wont to go into the temple alone, and there pray
assiduously upon his knees, making intercession for
the sins of the people, tUl his knees were grown as
hard and callous as those of camels, by continual
exercise of his devotions. And so again, speaking
of the thundering legion, (who in the time of MaV-
cus Aurelius procured rain by their prayers, to save
the Roman army, and thunder to destroy their ene
mies,) he says, They fell upon their knees, as was the
usual50 custom of Christians in their prayers, and so
made their supplications to God at the head of the
army as it was going forth to battle. TertuUian
had his eye upon this very story, when he tells Sca
pula,51 That the geniculations, or prayers on the
bended knee, together with the fastings of Christians,
were always effectual in driving away drought and
famine. It were easy to give a thousand other in
stances52 of the like practice out of the ancient writ
ers ; but in a case so clear and uncontested, I think
it next to impertinence to trouble my reader with
them. I only note, that though these two postures
of prayer were very indifferent in their own nature,
yet it was always esteemed an instance of great neg
ligence, or great perverseness, to interchange them
unseasonably one for the other ; that is, to pray
kneeling on the Lord's day, when the church re
quired standing ; or standing on other days, when
the rules and custom of the church required men to
kneel. And therefore, as the canons of Nice and
Trullo reflect upon those who were superstitiously
bent upon kneeling on the Lord's day ; so others,
with equal severity, complain of the remissness and
negligence of such, as refused to kneel at other times,
when the church appointed it. It is a very indecent
and irregular thing, says Csesarius of Aries,53 that
when the deacon cries out, Let us bend the knee, the
people should then stand .erect as pillars in the
church. These were but small observations in them
selves, but of great consequence, we see, when done
perversely, to the scandal and disorder ofthe church,
whose great rule in all such cases, is that of the apos
tle, " Let aU things be done decently and in order."
A third posture of devotion was
bowing down the head, or an inclina- Thirdly, bowing
° down the head.
tion of the body between the postures

43 Cone. Carthag. 4. can. 82. Pcenitentes etiam diebus
remissionis genua ilectant.
¦44 Chrys. Horn. 18. in 2 Cor. p. 873. JUvtes bpoieos iir'
iSdcpBS KEtpEBa, Kal irdvTES bpoieos dvtcrTapEBa.
45 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 9. "Oaoi irto-Tol, kX'iviopev ydvv.
It. cap. 10. 'EyEipdipEBa Sei)Bevtes, Sec.
46 Cassian. Institut. lib. 2. cap. 7. Cum is qui orationem
collecturus est, e terra surrexerit, omnes pariter surgunt, &c.
47 Acta Theclae, ap. Grabe, Spicileg. 1. 1. p. 98.
48 Arnob. lib. 1. p. 25. Hie propositus terminus divi
norum officiorum, hie finis, huic omnes ex more prosterni-
mur, hunc collatis precibus adoramus.

49 Euseb. 1. 2. cap. 23. K.EipEvos iirl toXs ydvatrt, Sec.
50 Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 5. Tdvv 3-tWas iirl t?}v yt]v KaTd
TO o'lKEtOV TjpXv TOIV EVX^V eBoS, &C.
51 Tertul. ad Scapul. cap. 4. Quando non geniculationi-
bus et jejunationibus nostris etiam giccitates suntdepulsae ?
52 Vid. Hermis Pastor, part I. Vision. 1. u. 1. Genibus
positis, &c. Clem. Roman. Ep. 1. ad Corinth, n. 48. Xipotr-
iritruipEv, Sec. Passio Ignatii, t. 2. p. 176. Cum genufiex-
ione, &c. Passio Cypriani, p. 13. Euseb. Vit. Constant.
lib. 4. cap. 61. Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. cap. 8. Chrys.
Horn. 22.de Ira, t. l.p.278. Prudent. Cathemerin. Hymn. 2.
53 Cajsar. Arelatens. Horn. 34.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

649

-of standing and kneeling. This was chiefly used
in receiving the bishop's or priest's benedictions, in
all direct and formal addresses to God for his mercy
and favour upon the people, whether catechumens,
penitents, or any other. Thus we find in the Con
stitutions,54 the catechumens are bid to bow the head
in order to receive the bishop's benediction in a
form of invocation there appointed to be said over
them.. So likewise the energumens55 have the same
direction : Bow down your heads, ye energumens,
and receive the benediction. In hke manner the
candidates of baptism56 and the penitents57 are bid
to rise up, after the deacon's prayer, and bow their
heads to receive the benediction. And this may be
confirmed out of Chrysostom, who says,58 The dea
con in the time of the oblation presented the ener
gumens, and bid them bow their heads only, to in
dicate, at least by the habit and gesture of the body,
that they were in a praying posture. And this he
repeats58 in other places, where he particularly
speaks of those that were possessed of evil spirits.
The last posture of devotion was
Sect. 6. .... ...
Fourthly, prostra- prostration, or lying along in the hum
blest manner upon the ground. This
seems to have been the proper posture for extraor
dinary humUiations, when men had some singular
request more earnestly to recommend to God. We
often read of Moses and other saints falling upon
their faces in Scripture, when they were to make
some extraordinary intercession for the sins of the
people. And in imitation of them the same gesture
was sometimes used in the Christian church. Some
lapsers, when they sued for admission to a state of
penance, did not only fall down upon their knees,
but prostrate themselves before the faithful, to beg
their prayers as they entered into the church.
Which is particularly noted by Socrates60- of Ece-
bolius the sophist, who having lapsed in the time of
Julian, desired favour under Jovian ; and the more
to move compassion, he put himself into the mourn-
fullest posture, falling upon his face before the gate
of the church, and crying out, Cdlcate me ut sal in-
sipidum, Tread me under foot as salt that has lost
its savour. But this was not the only case in
which they used this mournful posture, but they
also practised it upon other occasions, whenever
any great necessity urged them with greater ardency
to prefer their petitions to God. Thus Socrates ob-

54 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 6. KXtvdvTtov Si avTwv Tas KEtpa-
Xds, EvXoyEiTta avTovs b iiritrKoiros EuXoytav TotdvSE, Sec.
Ibid. X\ivaTE ol ivEpyBpEvot, Kal EvXoyeXcrBE.
Ibid. cap. 7. KXivavTEs EvXoyEiaBeocrav, Sec.
Ibid. cap. 8. ' AvatdvTEs KXivaTe Kal EvXoyEXaSfE.
33 Chrys. Horn. 28. sive 3. de Incomprehensibili, t. 1. p.
ODD. KeXeo-el KXivat Tr)v KErpaXnv pdvov, Kal Too axripaTi
irotEXaBai tu atopaTos Tas iKETspias.
59 Chrys. Horn. 29. t. 1. p. 374.
oocrat. lib. 3. cap. 13. 'Pi'i/ras iavTov irprjvr] irpb t-?,s
lrvXr)s tu EiiKTr)piu olkb, iraT-ntruTE ps, itoa, to dXas to

serves of Alexander, bishop of Constantinople,81
That when he was in a great strait about the admis
sion of Arius into the church, he prostrated him
self upon his face under the communion table, and
there prayed to God for many days and nights to
gether, that God would give some token to determine
which of their doctrine was true : if the doctrine of
Arius was true, he desired that he himself might
not live to see the day appointed for the disputation :
but if his own were true, then he desired that Arius
might suffer the punishment due to his impiety.
Which he accordingly did, voiding his entrails as
he had occasion to go to stool, whilst he was going
triumphantly to the church. Theodoret62 makes a
like a remark upon -the behaviour of Theodosius
the Great, That when he first entered the church,
after he had been for some time excluded by St-
Ambrose, he would neither pray to God standing,
nor kneeling, but prostrate with his face to the
ground; using those words of the psalmist, "My
soul cleaveth to the dust, O quicken thou me ac
cording to thy word." By which we learn, that
this posture was chiefly appropriated to deep humi
liations, and expressions of shame or sorrow upon
some very remarkable occasion, but scarce ever used
as a general practice of the church.
There is one posture more, which
some plead for as a posture of ador- sitting,™ allowed
L x posture of devotion.
ation ; but it never had any allowance
in the practice of the ancient church : that is, sit
ting, which Cardinal Perron and some others in the
Romish church pretend was the posture in which
the apostles received the communion at its first in
stitution, and this was then a common posture of
adoration used among the heathens. But the
learned Mr. Daille ™ has abundantly exposed this
pretence, and showed the falsity of it in every par
ticular. For neither did the heathens sit at their
devotions, as the cardinal imposed upon himself by
a false interpretation of Plutarch and Tertullian ;
neither did the apostles communicate sitting, but
lying along on beds or couches, which all men know
to be a different posture ; neither did they worship
the eucharist in any posture ; neither did the pri
mitive Christians ever use or take sitting for a pos
ture of devotion. Tertullian indeed says,64 There
were some superstitious persons in his time, admir
ers of the book called Hermes Pastor, who made it

dvditrBr)Tov. «> Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 37. 'YirS t!)V lepdv Tpdirslav iav
Tov iirl rdpa iKTEtvas, EVXETal, &C.
32 Theod. lib. 5. u. 19. Tlpt]vi)S iirl tu SairiSu KEipEVOs,
Sec. 33 Dallae. de Objecto Cultus Relig. lib. 2. cap. 2.
64 Tertul. de Orat. cap. 12. Item, quod adsignata oratione
assidendimosestquibusdam, non perspicio rationem, nisi si
Hennas ille, cujus scriptura fere Pastor inscribitur, trans-
acta oratione non super lectum assedisset, verum aliud quid
fecisset, id quoque ad observationem vindicaremus, &c.

650

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

a matter of conscience to sit down for some time
adsignata oratione, that is, not in time of prayer, as
some falsely render it, but when prayer was ended,
because they found the example of the pastor in
that book to that purpose. For as he sat down upon
a bed after prayer, so they thought themselves ob
liged to do the same in compliance with his example.
But this is no proof of their sitting at prayer, but
only after prayer was ended : and that too grounded
upon a very weak and superstitious opinion, that
every circumstance of an action or narration, how
ever indifferent in itself, was to be drawn into ex
ample, and to be made matter of necessary duty.
According to which way of reasoning, as Tertullian
observes, they must have worshipped no where but
where there was a bed, nor sat upon a chair or bench,
because this would have been a deviation from their
example. He adds, That the heathens only were
used to sit after prayer before their idols, and for
that very reason it was not fit for Christians to imi
tate65 their practice. All which shows, that the
Christians then were so far from using sitting as a
posture of devotion, that they did not think it pro
per to sit even after prayer in the presence of God,
whilst the angel of prayer (it is his phrase) stood
by them ; and because it looked more like a hea
thenish than a Christian practice.
sect s Tertullian in the same book takes
PScteSsTdl™i„Un notice of some other superstitious ob-
y ert im. gerva£onSj which some ran into in
their devotions in imitation of the heathen. Some
thought it necessary to put off their cloaks when
they went to prayer, which he condemns as symbol
izing with idolaters; for so the heathen65 were
used to do in reverence to their idols. This was
superstition, not religion ; and more an affectation
and curiosity, than any thing of rational and manly
service. Others would not pray without washing
the whole body in water, as if that made them more
acceptable to God ; whereas the true purity was that
of the spirit, to lift up holy hands, free from deceit,
murder, cruelty, witchcraft, idolatry, and other such
corruptions67 which defile both flesh and spirit. A
man that is free from these, is always clean, being
once washed in the blood of Christ : but he that is
inwardly polluted, is unclean, though he wash every
member of his body every day. It is the supersti
tion of these practices that Tertulhan complains of:

for otherwise, the Christians themselves had their
fountains before the church in many places, for men
to wash their hands, as a matter of decency, before
they went to worship God, as has been showed68 in
another place. And the evil of such practices con
sists not in the bare use of such things, but in lay
ing the opinion of necessity upon them,' and affix
ing holiness to the usage, and making them become
essential parts of Divine service.
Such practices, therefore, as were
attended with superstition, they dis- That the ancients
. uncovered their
claimed ; but retained such other rites hi-«o •" tteir devo-
' Uons.
and ceremonies, as were either proper
expressions of decency in their own nature, or by
their significancy and symbolical use might be im
proved to a spiritual advantage. They prayed with
the head uncovered, according to the apostle's direc
tion, as esteeming it a great indecency to do other
wise. So Chrysostom, in his comment on the place.
TertuUian adds another reason in his Apology to the
Gentiles,69 We pray uncovered, because we are not
ashamed to appear with open face ; making it a sort
of testimony and symbol of their innocency in their
addressing God without covering. On the other
hand, as both nature and custom had made it decent
for women to be covered, so they were very precise
in requiring this to be observed especially in reli
gious assemblies. Some pleaded an exemption for
virgins in the case, which gave occasion to Tertul
lian to write his book De Velandis Virginibus,
wherein ™ he argues both virgins and matrons to be
under the same obligation of being veUed or covered
in time of Divine service ; and he severely inveighs
against those who hanged a fringe or riband about
their heads, and pretended to call that a covering.
But some learned persons71 think he was too severe
in this reflection, and almost singular in applying
it to the case of virgins, who were then aUowed a
greater liberty in this matter above matrons or mar
ried women, by the general discipline of the African
church. It is more uncontested, what Ter-
,,. „ - Sect. 10.
tulhan observes of another ceremony, And lift up their
hands toward hea-
that they usually prayed with their ^¦t^'0ff%0^.
arms expanded, and their hands hft
up72 to heaven, and that sometimes in the form of a
cross, to represent our Saviour's passion. For this
is also noted by Minucius, when he says, They

65 Tertul. de Orat. cap. 12. Porro cum perinde faciant na-
tiones adoratis sigillaribus suis residendo, vel propterea in
nobis reprehendi meretur, quod apud idola celebratur, &c.
68 Tertul. ibid. Hujusmodi non religioni, sed supersti-
tioni deputantur, coacta et affectata, et curiosi potius quam
rationalis officii, certe vel eo coercenda, quod gentilibus
adaequent. Ut est quorundam positis penulis orationem
facere : sic enim adeunt ad idola nationes.
67 Tertul. ibid. cap. 11. Hae sunt verae munditiac, non
quas plerique superstitiose curant, ad omnem orationem
etiam cum lavacro totius corporis aquam sumentes, Sec

68 Book VIII. chap. 3. sect. 6.
69 Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Capite nudo, quia non erubes-
cimus, precantes sumus semper, &c.
7» Tertul. de Veland. Virgin, cap. 17. Quantam castiga-
tionem merebuntur etiam illae, quae inter psalmos, vel in
quacunque Dei mentione retectae perseverant ? &c.
71 Vid. Du Pin, Bibliothec. t. 1. p. 95.
72 Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Manibus expansis, quia inno-
cuis, &c. It. de Orat. cap. 11. Nos vero non attollimus
tantum, sed etiam expaudimus, et Dominica passione modu-
lautes, et orantes Christo confitemur.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

651

worshipped God with a pure mind, and their hands
stretched forth in the form of a cross.73 And by
Asterius Amasenus, in a fragment of his homily
concerning prayer, preserved in Photius,74 who says,
The Christian represents the passion of the cross
by his gesture, whilst he expands his arms and lifts
them up in the figure of a cross. After this man
ner Paulinus describes St. Ambrose,75 in his last
minutes, praying to God with his hands expanded
in the form of a cross. And Prudentius, relating
the passion of Fructuosus, a Spanish bishop and
martyr in the time of Gallienus, says, The bands
which tied his arms were first burnt off without
touching his skin ; for they durst not restrain those
arms which were to be lift up to the Father76 in the
manner of a cross. And this probably is St. Chry
sostom's meaning, when he says, The sign of the
cross was used even by the emperors upon all occa
sions, on their purple, on their diadems, in their77
prayers, on their arms, and at the holy table. And
in reference to this gesture it is that Eusebius tells
us, that Constantine ordered his own image to be
stamped on his golden medals, representing him78
in the posture of a supplicant, looking up to heaven,
with his arms stretched forth to God. Origen
says,79 this was to represent the lifting up of their
hearts to God in the heavens. And Chrysostom80
more largely sets forth the use of it in explaining
those words of the psalmist, " Let the lifting up of
my hands be an evening sacrifice." What means,
says he, the stretching forth our hands in prayer ?
Because they are instrumental in many sorts of
wickedness, as fighting, murder, robbery, and rapa
cious avarice, therefore we are commanded to lift
them up, that the ministry of prayer may tie them
up from vice, and deliver them from wickedness :
that when you are inclined to rob, or plunder, or
smite your neighbour, you should then remember,
that these hands are the advocates, as it were, which
you are to send forth to God, and by which you are
to offer the spiritual sacrifice of prayer to him ; and
therefore you ought not to dishonour them, and de
stroy their confidence, by letting them minister to
wicked actions ; but rather cleanse them by alms-
deeds, and humanity, and assistance of those that
are in want, and so lift them up to God in prayer.
For if you cannot endure to lift up unwashen hands,

,s Miuuc. Dial. p. 90. Crucis signum est, cum homo
porrectis manibus Deum pura mente veneratur.
71 Aster, ap. Phot. Cod. 271. 'EKTETapivas irpofiaXXd-
pevos Tas xE~ipas, tS tov GTavpov irdBos iv Tip axiipaTi
e\-eikovI\ei. 75 Paulin. Vit. Ambros. p. 12. Ab hora undecima diei
usque ad illam horam qua emisit Spiritum, expansis mani
bus in modum crucis orabat.
78 Prudent. Peri Stephan. Hymn. 6. in Fructuos. Non
ausa est cohibere pcena palmas, in morem crucis ad Patrem
levandas. 77 Chrysost. Demonstrat. quod Christus sit Deus, cap. 8.

how much less should you think it meet to defile
them with sin! By all this it appears, that these
ceremonies, both of washing hands, and lifting them
up in prayer, were of spiritual use, and designed for
pious ends, to put men in mind of internal purity
by external symbols ; and that this significancy was
the chief thing that could justify and account for
the use of them, as ceremonies in Divine service.
But as they aUowed of such decent
. . ... Sect. 11.
and significant ceremonies as those Bu' i"1 w.ere. „
great enemies to all
that have been mentioned, so they tl"!at™alses'"«»-
were great enemies to all light and theatrical ges
tures. They required a modest, and grave, and well-
composed behaviour in all external deportment, as
thinking no other becoming the majesty of God, or
the character of those that were to address him.
Upon this account, Tertullian61 requires a modesty
and humihty in his votaries, even in lifting up their
hands in prayer, that they should not toss them up
indecently on high, nor appear with a countenance
expressing elation and boldness : because the pub
lican's humility and dejection was more commend
able than the audaciousness of the Pharisee. He
requires also a gentle and submissive voice, since
God did not hear men for the sound of their words,
or the strength of their lungs or arteries, but the
fervency of their hearts. And they that were loud
in prayer, he tells them, did nothing else but hinder
their neighbour's devotion. St. Cyprian 82 expresses
himself much after the same way in his directions
about the manner of praying : Let them that pray,
says he, do it with an orderly voice, expressing
quietness and modesty. Let us consider ourselves
as standing in the sight of God, and that we are to
please the Divine eyes both with the habit or ges
ture of our body, and with the manner of our voice.
For as it is a sign of an impudent man to make a
clamorous noise, so it becomes a modest man to
use modesty in his prayers. Therefore when we
meet together with our brethren, and celebrate the
Divine sacrifices with the priest of God, we ought
to be mindful of reverence and discipline ; not
tossing out our prayers with a rude and disorderly
voice, nor with a tumultuous loquacity pouring forth
those petitions, which ought to be recommended
modestly to God. For God is not the hearer of the
voice, but the heart: neither needs he to be re-

t. 5. p. 838. 'E-7ri evx^v tiTavpos, iirl SirXuiv UTavpos, Sic.
73 Euseb. Vit. Constant, lib. 4. cap. 15. 'Qs dvoi pxiiretv
SokeXv ivaTETapivos irpos Qeov, Tpoirov Evxopivov.
79 Orig. iTEpl EVXrr1' n- 20.
39 Chrys. in Psal. cxl. p. 550. Vid. Clem. Alex. Strom.
7. p. 854.
91 Tertul. de Orat. cap. 13. Cum modestia et humilitate
adorantes, magis commendamus Deo preces nostras, ne
ipsis quidem manibus sublimius elatis, sed temperate ac
probe elatis. Ne vultu quidem in audaciam erecto, &c.
82 Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p. 140.

652

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

minded by noise and clamour, who sees the thoughts
of men. It appears from these cautions, that men
were apt to run into disorders and excesses in the
manner of expressing the external part of their de
votions, which needed such rules and admonitions
to direct them in the purest ages. And it appears
yet more from St. Chrysostom, who has several
sharp and severe invectives against some, who ac
customing themselves to see the Roman games and
plays, brought the manners of the stage into the
church, and corrupted their devotions with theatri
cal gestures. It will be sufficient to relate a few
words out of a single passage88 in one of his homi
lies to this purpose. 0 unhappy wretch, says he,
thou oughtest with reverence and fear to send up
the angelical hymn, and with trembling make con
fession to God, and thereby ask pardon of thy of
fences. Instead of this, thou bringest into the
church the manners of mimics and dancers, by a
disorderly tossing up thy hands, and beating with
thy feet, and agitation of thy whole body. Dost
thou not consider, that the Lord himself is present,
who measures every man's motions, and examines
their consciences ? Dost thou not consider, that
the angels stand by this tremendous table, and sur
round it with fear ? But thou considerest none of
these things, because .thy mind is blinded with
what, thou hast heard and seen in the theatres ; and
the things which are done there thou bringest into
the rites and ceremonies of the church, and with
insignificant clamours bewrayest the disorder of thy
soul. How canst thou expect to incline God to
mercy, who offerest thy prayer with such contempt ?
Thou sayest, Lord, have mercy on me, whilst thy
behaviour proclaims itself a stranger to mercy.
Thou criest out, Lord, save me, whilst the whole
deportment of thy body is in opposition to salva
tion. For what can those hands, which are al
ways tossed up on high, and disorderly rolled
about, contribute toward prayer ? What use can
there be in vehement clamour, and violent impulse
of spirit, that has nothing in it but sound and noise
without signification ? These are more the prac
tices of strumpets on the high-way, or actors on the
theatre. And how darest thou to -mingle the sports
of devils with that doxology, whereby angels glo
rify God ? Thus far St. Chrysostom in his warmth
and zeal against the corruptions that were creeping
in upon devotion by absurd and ridiculous gestures.
And this shows us abundantly, that as the an
cients were no way averse . to any rites and cere
monies, habits or gestures, that were decent and
significant in their own nature, and had any real
tendency toward piety ; so they were utter enemies

to such as were insignificant and trivial, light and
theatrical, and discountenanced them as the effects
of superstition or vanity, arising from misappre
hensions of religion or evil customs of the world,
which they laboured to extirpate, but could not al
ways conquer ; men's corrupt inclinations disposing
them to commute the great things of religion for
those that were small in comparison, and sometimes
for those which were a real detriment and disad
vantage to it, as in the cases now before us.
But to pass by irregularities, and Sect
proceed with the observations of the at°hTree™ mce"S
church. This were a proper place to to the clmrch-
take notice of several other usages, whereby they
expressed their reverence to God at their first en
trance into the church. But because some of these
have been already considered in a former Book,84
where we speak of the respect and reverence which
the primitive Christians paid to their churches, I
shall but just name them in this place. Such was
the ceremony of respect used by kings and em
perors, who laid aside their crowns and arms and
guards, when they entered into the house of the
King of kings. Of which I have only this further
to observe here, that probably it was done in imita
tion of the old Roman magistrates, who, as some
authors tell us,85 were wont to lay aside their fasces
and other ensigns of honour, whenever they went
into the schools of philosophy at Athens. Such
was that other custom of respect observed by the
monks of Egypt, who put off their shoes when they
went into the house of God : but this, I showed,
was only a topical custom peculiar to that nation,
and not a general one reaching the whole church.
I observed also, that there are some reasons to be
lieve the ancients used the ceremony of bowing to
wards the altar at their first entrance into the
church, though the arguments amount only to a
probability, not a demonstration.
It is more certain, that the bishop Secl 13
saluted the people in the usual form, a ™'f <ie S?
Pax vobis, Peace be with you, at his SeniSceTnto'the
first entrance into the church. For
this is often mentioned by St. Chrysostom,86 who
derives it from apostolical practice.
St. Chrysostom also mentions an
other very laudable custom, and he And the people
gave alms to the
uses aU his rhetoric to promote and poor, who stood be-
* forc the gates of the
encourage the practice of it; which church for this pur-
was, the people's giving alms to the
poor, at their first entrance into the church. For
this reason, says he, our forefathers appointed the
poor to stand before the doors of our churches, that
the sight of them might provoke the most backward

83 Chrys. Horn. 1. de Verbis Esai. t. 3. p. 836. Vid. Horn.
19. in Mat. p. 195.
84 Book VIII. chap. 10.

85 Vid. Pool, Synops. Criticor. in 2 Reg. v. 9.
83 Chrys. Horn. 36. in 1 Cor. p. 652. Horn. 3. in Colos.
p. 1338.

Chap. VIII.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

65»

and inhuman soul to compassion.87 And as by law
and custom we have fountains before our oratories,
that they who go in to worship God, may first wash
their hands, and so lift them up in prayer ; so our
ancestors, instead- of fountains and cisterns, placed
the poor before the doors of the church ; that as we
wash our hands in water, so we should cleanse our
souls by beneficence and charity first, and then go
and offer up our prayers. For water is not more
adapted by nature to wash away the spots of the
body, than the power of alms-deeds is to cleanse the
filth of the soul. As, therefore, you dare not go in
to pray with unwashen hands, though this be but a
small offence ; so neither should you without alms
ever enter the church for prayer. You, many times,
when your hands are clean, will not lift them up to
God, before you have washed them in water; so
prevalent is the force of custom with us : let us
therefore do the same with respect to alms-deeds :
and though we are not conscious to ourselves of any
great and heinous crimes, yet let us by charity clear
our consciences of lesser spots and blemishes, which
we contract in our daily business and conversation.
So again in another place,68 expounding those words,
" Thou shalt not appear before the Lord empty :"
These things, says he, were spoken to the Jews; and
how much more to us ! Therefore the poor stand be
fore the doors of the church, that no one should go in
empty, but enter securely with charity for his com
panion. You go into the church to obtain mercy :
first, show mercy : make God your debtor, and then
you may ask of him, and receive with usury. We
are not heard barely for the lifting up our hands.
Stretch forth your hands, not only to heaven, but
to the hands of the poor : if you stretch out your
hands to the poor, you touch the very height of
heaven. For He that sits there, receives your alms :
but if you lift up barren hands, it profits nothing.
He repeats the same89 in other places, which shows,
that it was an exceUent custom prevailing among
them, and carefully recommended as a just prepar
ation for prayer, among many other moral qualifica
tions for this duty, which being vulgar and commonly
known, I need not insist upon them in this place.
sect 15 There was one observation more,
.hip^'d toward"the which must not be omitted, because it
reasonrfor thfs was a ceremony almost of general use
and practice : and that was, the cus

tom of turning their faces to the east in their solemn
adorations. The original of this custom seems to
be derived from the ceremonies of baptism, in
which, as has been showed before,80 it was usual to
renounce the devil with their faces to the west, and-
then turn about to the east, and make their cove
nant with Christ ; from whence, I conceive, it be
came their common custom to worship God after
the same way that they had first entered into cove
nant with him. The ancients give several reasons
for this custom, but they all seem to glance at this-
one. Some say, the east was the symbol of Christ,
who was called the Orient, and Light, and Sun of
righteousness, in Scripture : and therefore, since
they must worship toward some quarter of the
world, they chose that which led them to Christ by
symbolical representation. As Tertullian tells us
in one place,91 that in fact they worshipped toward
the east, which made the heathen suspect that they
worshipped the rising sun; so in another place92
he says, The east was the figure of Christ, and there
fore both their churches and their prayers were di
rected that way. Clemens Alexandrinus93 says,
They worshipped toward the east, because the east
is the image of our spiritual nativity, and from
thence the hght first arises and shines out of dark
ness, and the day of true knowledge, after the man
ner of the sun, arises upon those who lie buried in
ignorance. And St. Austin,04 When we stand at
our prayers, we turn to the east, whence the hea
vens, or the light of heaven arises : not as if God
was only there, and had forsaken all other parts of
the world, but to put ourselves in mind of turning
to a more excellent nature, that is, to the Lord.
This reason exactly falls in with that which is given
for turning to the east, when they covenanted with
Christ in the solemnities of baptism.
2. Another reason given for it by some, is, that
the east was the place of paradise, our ancient habit
ation and country, which we lost in the first Adam
by the fall, and whither we hope to be restored again,
as to our native abode and rest, in the Second Adam,'
Christ our Saviour. This reason is given by Gre
gory Nyssen95 and St. Basil,96 and by the author of
the Constitutions,97 and the author of the Questions
and Answers to Antiochus among the works of
Athanasius,99 together with Chrysostom, (as he is
cited by Cotelerius99 and Gregentius,109) and many

87 Chrys. Horn. 25. de Verbis Apost. t. 5. p. 369.
88 Chrys. Horn. 1. in 2 Tim. p. 1631.
89 Chrys. Horn. 9. de Pcenitent. t. 1. p. 704.
¦° Book XI. chap. vii. sect. 4.
91 Tertul. Apol. cap. 16. Inde suspicio, quod innotuerit
nos ad orientis regionem precari.
92 Id. cont. Valentin, cap. 3. Nostras columbae domus
simplex, etiam in editis semper et apertis et ad lucem : ainat
figuram Spiritus Sancti, orientem Christi figuram.
03 Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 856.
" Aug. de Serm. Dom. in Monte, lib. 2. cap. 5. Cum ad

orationes stamus, ad orientem convertimur, unde ccfilum
surgit, &c. ut admoneatur animus ad naturain excellenti-
orem se convertere, id est, ad Dominum.
05 Nyss. Horn. 5. de Orat. Dom. t. 1. p. 755.
96 Basil, de Spir. Sanct. cap. 27.
97 Constit. lib. 2. cap. 57.
98 Athan. Quaest. ad Antioch. qu. 37.
99 Coteler. Not. in Constitut. lib. 2. cap. 57. Ex Chrys.
in Dan. vi. 10.
i" Gregent. Disput. cum Herbano Judaeo. Bibl. Patr t.
1. p. 217. Gr. Lat.

654

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

others. Now, this is the very reason assigned by
St. Cyril for turning to the east, when they cove
nanted with Christ, and celebrated the mysteries of
baptism. So that hitherto we find a clear relation
of these ceremonies one to the' other, and a perfect
agreement between them.
3. Another reason assigned for this custom, was,
that the east was the most honourable part of the
creation, as being the seat of light and brightness.
The author of the Questions and Answers to the
Orthodox101 gives this reason for it: We set apart,
says he, the most honourable things to the honour
of God : and the east, in the opinion of men, is the
most honourable part of the creation : we therefore
in time of prayer turn our faces to the east ; as we
sign those in the name of Christ, that need con
signation, with the right hand, because it is deemed
more honourable than the left, though it differ only
in position, not in nature. And Lactantius, without
taking any particular notice of this custom, makes
this general observation, That the east was102 more
peculiarly ascribed to God, because he was the
fountain of light, and illuminator of all things, and
because he makes us rise to eternal life. But the
west was ascribed to that wicked and depraved spirit
the devil, because he hides the light, and induces
darkness always upon men, and makes them fall and
perish in their sins. Now, this is a reason that
equally holds for turning to the east in baptism, as
well as their daily devotion.
4. There is one reason more assigned for it, which
is, that Christ made his appearance on earth in the
East, and there ascended into heaven, and there will
appear again at the last day. This is one of the
three answers, which the author of the Questions
to Antiochus, under the name of Athanasius,103 orders
to be given to this question : If a Christian ask the
question, he is to be told, They looked toward para
dise, beseeching God to restore them to their ancient
country and region, from whence they were expel
led. If a heathen put the question, the answer
should be, Because God is the true Light, for which
reason, when they looked upon the created light,
they did not worship it, but the Creator of it. If the
question was proposed by a Jew, he should be told,
They did it because the Holy Ghost had said by
David, " We will worship toward the place where
thy feet stood, O Lord," Psal. cxxxii. 7, meaning the
place where Christ was born, and lived, and was
crucified, and rose again, and ascended into heaven.
Which seems also to be intimated by St. Hilary on

those words of the 67th Psalm, according to the
translation of the Septuagint, " Sing unto God, who
ascended above the heaven of heavens" in the east.
The honour of God, says he,16* who ascended above
the heaven of heavens in the east, is- now reason
ably required : and for that reason toward the east,
because he, according to the prophet, is the East or
Morning from on high ; that he, returning to the
place whence he descended, might be known to be
the Orient Light, who shall hereafter be the Author
of men's rising to the same ascent of a celestial ha
bitation. These several reasons have all a peculiar refer
ence to Christ: and therefore, as Christians first used
the ceremony of turning to the east, when they en
tered into covenant with Christ in baptism; so it is
probable, that from thence they derived this custom
of turning to the east in all their solemn adorations.
But whether this were so or not, we are sure there
was such a general custom among them, and that
it was founded upon some or all the reasons that
have been mentioned ; which is as much as is neces
sary to be said here for the illustration of it.

CHAPTER IX.

OF THE TIMES OF THEIR EELIGIOUS ASSEMBLIES,
AND THE SEVERAL PARTS OF DIVINE SERVICE
PERFORMED IN THEM.
There remains one circumstance
more of "Divine worship, which I have - no certain mie
. , for meeting in pub-
purposely reserved for this place, be- ^, e«;p» upon the
x s7 * * Lord s day, in times
cause the consideration of it wUl °f persecution, for
the two first ages.
lead us to the several parts of the
worship itself; that is, the circumstance of time:
concerning which it may be inquired, how often
they met in a week, and how often they met in
a day, for Divine worship ? Now, no general an
swer can be given to these questions, because
the times of their assembhes varied according to
the different state and ages of the church. At
first, learned men think, they held assembhes every
day in the apostles' time, and whilst the Jewish
temple stood; for we read of the apostles going
up to the temple at the ninth hour, being the hour
of prayer, Acts iii. 1. And of their "continuing
daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking
bread from house to house,'' or in their house, mean-

101 Justin. Quaest. ad Orthodox, qu. 118.
102 Lact. lib. 2. cap. 10. Oriens Deo accensetur, quia
ipse luminis fons, et illustrator est rerum, et quod oriri nos
faciat ad vitam aeternam. Occidens autem conturbatae illi
pravaeque menti ascribitur, quod lumen abscondat, quod
tenebras semper inducat, et quod homines faciat occidere ac
interire peccatis.

103 Athan. Quaest. ad Antioch. qu. 37.
104 Hilar, in Psal. lxvii. p. 242. Competenter nunc ascen-
dentis super ccelum cceli ad orientem Dei honor poscitur.
 Ad orientem vero idcirco, quia ipse secundum pro-
phetam oriens ex alto sit : ut regressus eo unde descenderat,
oriens nosceretur, ipseque sit hominibus in hunc cceleslis
sedis ascensum rursus autor oriundi.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

655

ing the church, or house of prayer, as others render
it, Acts ii. 46. Though their most solemn meetings
were on " the first day of the week,'' or the Lord's
day, Acts xx. 7 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 2. In after ages, when
the persecutions ' grew warm, they are thought to
have confined themselves to the Lord's day. For
the confession which Pliny ' took from the mouths
of some apostatizing Christians, mentions no other :
they confessed to him, that the sum of their crime
or error was, that they were used to meet on a cer
tain stated day, before it was light, and sing a hymn
to Christ, as to their God ; and to bind themselves
by a covenant or sacrament, not unto any wicked
ness, but that they would not commit any theft, or
robbery, or adultery, or break their faith, or deny
what was committed to their trust ; after which
they were used to break up their assembly, and
return again to a common feast. Which is a plain
description of their worship, and communion and
love-feast, called agape, on the Lord's day, but no
other. And so Justin Martyr,2 describing the Chris
tian worship, says, That on the day caUed Sunday,
there was a general meeting of all that lived both
in city and country, when they had the Scriptures
read, and a sermon preached, and prayers, and the
communion ; but he mentions no assembly for pub
lic worship on any other day : whence learned men'
have concluded, that in his time the church ob
served no other days of solemn assemblies, but only
the Lord's day. His silence as to all others, is a
negative argument against them, unless perhaps
some distinction may be made between the general
assembly of both city and country on the Lord's
day, and the particular assemblies of the city Chris
tians (who had better opportunities to meet) on
other days : which distinction we often meet with
in the following ages, when Christianity was come
to its maturity and perfection.
Secl 2 However, it was not long after Jus-
Aanfr,'..^ tin Martyr's time before, we are sure,
Sie*'or„hWeoinS: the church observed the custom of
days and Fridays, ,. , , e -p.. . , •
and what Divine meeting solemnly for Divine worship
service was per- TTT . -n • n l ¦ l
formed on those on W ednesdays and r ndays, which
days are commonly called stationary
days, because they continued their assemblies on
these days to a great length, till three o'clock in
the afternoon ; for which reason they had also the
name of semi-jejunia, or half-fasts, in opposition to
the Lent fast, which always held till evening ; and

1 Plin. lib. 10. Ep. 97. Affirmabant, autem, hanc fuisse
summam vel culpae suae, vel erroris, quod essent soliti stato
die ante lucem convenire : carmenque Christo, quasi Deo,
dicere secum invicem; seque sacramento non in scelus
aliquod obstringere, sed ne furta^ne latrocinia, ne adulteria
coramitterent : quibus peractis, morem sibi discedendi fu
isse, rursusque coeundi ad capiendum cibum, Sec.
2 Justin. Apol. 2. p. 98. Ty tov wXiov XeyopEvri bpipa
iravTtav Kari irdXeis r) dypovs pevovtiov iirl to avTO trvvi-
Xevhis ylvETai, Sec.

jejunia quartos and sextcsf erics, the fasts of the fourth
and sixth days of the week, that is, Wednesdays and
Fridays. These are first mentioned by Tertullian,
and Clemens Alexandrinus, and Origen, and after
them, by most other •'writers, as fast-days generally
observed by the church. But I consider them not
here as fasts, (which will be more properly done
under another head, when we come to speak of the
fasts and festivals of the church,) but here only look
upon them as days of religious assembly, to discover
what public Divine worship was performed on them.
And for this we are chiefly beholden to Tertullian,
who assures us, That on these days they always
celebrated the communion ; from whence we may
infer, that the same service was performed on these
days as on the Lord's day, unless perhaps the ser
mon was wanting. Some there were, he says, who
objected against receiving the communion on these
days, because they were scrupulously afraid they
should break their fast by eating and drinking the
bread and wine in the eucharist ; and therefore they
chose4 rather to absent themselves from the obla
tion prayers, than break their fast, as they imagined,
by receiving the eucharist. Whom he undeceives
by telling them, that to receive the eucharist on
such days would be no infringement of their fast,
but bind them closer to God; their station would
be so much the more solemn for their standing at
the altar of God ; they might receive the body of
the Lord, and preserve their fast too ; and so both
would be safe, whilst they both participated of the
sacrifice and discharged their other obligation.
Since, therefore, they received the eucharist on these
days, we may conclude they had all the prayers of
the communion office, and what other offices were
wont to go before them, as the psalmody, and read
ing of the Scriptures, and prayers for the catechu
mens and penitents,"which, together with the ser
mons, were the whole service for the Lord's day.
But, because even all this could not take up near
so much time, as must needs be spent in these sta
tions, it seems most probable, that in two particulars
they much enlarged their service on these days, that
is, in their psalmody, and private prayers and con
fession of their sins. The psalms, as we shall see
hereafter, were sometimes lengthened to an in
definite number, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, or more,
as the occasion of a vigil or a fast required, and be
tween every psalm they had liberty to meditate and

3 Coteler. in Constitut. Apost. lib. 2. cap. 59.
« Tertul. de Oratione, cap. 14. Similiter de stationum
diebus non putant plerique sacrinciorum orationibus inter-
veniendum, quod statio solvenda sit accepto corpore Do
mini Ergo devotum Deo obsequium eucharistia resolvit,
an magis Deo obligat? Nonne solennior erit statio tua, si
et ad aram Dei steteris? Accepto corpore Domini et re
servata, utrumque salvum est, et participatio sacrificii et
executio officii. Some editions read it, reservato, instead
of re servata.

656

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

fall to their private prayers : and by these two exer
cises, so lengthened and repeated, it is easy to con
ceive how the longest station might be employed.
Socrates6 says, At Alexandria on these days they
had sermons and all other service used at other
times, except the communion. But admitting they
had the whole service entire, as on the Lord's day,
yet it was not commensurate to the time of their
stations, unless we suppose their psalmody and pri
vate devotions in the church to be enlarged on those
days to a greater length, than was usual in ordinary
service. St. Basil" agrees with Tertullian in making these
days not only fasts, but communion days ; for, reck
oning up how many days in the week they received
the communion, he makes Wednesday and Friday
to be two of the number. Yet stiU it is hard to
conceive what business they could have to detain
them so long in the church ; since their collects and
public prayers were but few in comparison; and
therefore it seems most probable, that a competent
share of this time was spent in psalmody, and, as I
find a learned person' inclined to think, in private
devotions, which always had a share in their service,
and was generally intermixed with their singing of
psalms, as shall be showed in their proper places.
See Book XIV. chap. 1. Book XV. chap. 1. sect. 1.
_ . , We also find in ancient writers fre-
Sect. 3.
fl'tnSy.anS'nuj <luent mention made of religious as-
Boierr,nfty,"ashaBday semblies on the Saturday, or seventh
of public devotion. -, n ,, . l • r .it • l
day of the week, which was the Jewish
sabbath. It is not easy to tell either the original
of this practice, or the reasons of it, because the
writers of the first ages are altogether silent about
it. In the Latin churches (excepting Milan) it was
kept as a fast ; but in all the Greek churches as a
festival : I consider it here only as a day of public
Divine service, on which, as the authors who men
tion it assure us, all the same offices were performed
as were used to be on the Lord's day. For Atha
nasius,8 who is one of the first that mentions it,
says, They met on the sabbath, not that they were
infected with Judaism, but to worship Jesus, the
Lord of the sabbath. And Timotheus, one of his
successors in the see of Alexandria, says, The com
munion9 was administered on this day, as on the

Lord's day. Which were the only days in the week
that the communion was received by the Christians
of his time at Alexandria. Socrates 10 is a little more
particular about the service : for he says, In their
assemblies on this day they celebrated the commu
nion ; only the churches of Egypt and Thebais dif
fered in this from the rest of the world, and even
from their neighbours at Alexandria, that they had
the communion at evening service. In another
place, speaking of the churches of Constantinople
in the time of Chrysostom, he reckons Saturday11
and Lord's day the two great weekly festivals, on
which they always held church assemblies. And
Cassian12 takes notice of the Egyptian churches,
that among them the service of the Lord's day and
the sabbath was always the same ; for they had the
lessons then read out of the New Testament only,
one out of the Gospels, and the other out of the
Epistles or the Acts of the Apostles ; whereas, on
other days they had them partly out of the Old
Testament and partly out of the New. In another
place he observes,18 That in the monasteries of Egypt
and Thebais, they had no public assemblies on other
days, besides morning and evening, except upon
Saturday and the Lord's day, when they met at
three o'clock, that is, nine in the morning, to cele
brate the communion. In the council of Laodicea
there are three canons to the same purpose. One '*
appoints the Gospels, with the &. ner Scriptures, to
be read upon this day. Another,1" That the oblation
of the bread in the eucharist shall- not be made all
the time of Lent, except on the sabbath and the
Lord's day. Which implies that those were com
munion days, and kept as festivals, even in Lent
itself. And for the same reason a third canon18 or
ders, That no festivals of martyrs should be kept
in Lent, but only commemorations of the martyrs
be made on the sabbath and the Lord's day. The
only difference that was then made between the sab
bath and the Lord's day, was, that Christians were
not obliged to rest from bodily17 labour on the sab
bath, but might work on that day, (so far as Divine
service would permit,) giving preference in this re
spect to the Lord's day, whereon they were to rest
as Christians. And if any transgressed these rules
about working on the sabbath, they were to be

5 Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 22. 6 Basil. Ep. 289. t. 3. p. 278.
7 Stillingfleet, Orig. Britan. p. 224.
8 Homil. de Semente, t. 1. p. 1060.
9 Timoth. Ep. Canon, can. 13. ap. Bevereg. Pandect, t. 2.
19 Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 22. >' Ibid. lib. 6. cap. 8.
12 Cassian. Institut. lib. 2. cap. 6. In die vero sabbati vel
Dominico utrasque lectiones de Novo recitant Testamento,
id est, unam de Apostolo vel Actibus Apostolorum, et aliam
de Evangeliis.
18 Cassian. lib. 3. cap. 2. Exceptis vespertinis horis ac
nocturnis congregationibus, nulla apud eos per diem solen-
nitas, absque die sabbati vel Dominica, in quibus hora tertia
sacrae communionis obtentu conveniunt.

14 Cone. Laodic. can. 16. TlEpl tov iv truPJldTtp eiiay-
yiXta pETa iTEptnv ypaepiov dv.ayivtoerKEaBal.
15 Ibid. can. 49. "Oti ov SeX tij TEtrerapaKotrTy aprov
irpoatpipEtv, eI pi] iv trafifidTtp Kal KVptaKtj pdvov.
16 Can. 51. "Oti oil SeX iv TEtraapaKoaTij papTvptov yEVE-
BXtov IititeXeXv, dXXa tiov dyltov papTvptov' pvEtav irotEtv
ev ToXs trafifiaTots Kal KvpiaKais.
17 Can. 29. "Oti oi'i SEX.XptaTtavovs lovSai%Etv, Kal iv
Tip aafUfUdTtp o-xoXa£eif, dXXd ipyd^EtrBai avTobs iv Ty
avnj hpipa.' ti]v Si KvptaKijv irpoTipiovTas, trxoXa'Etv tos
XptaTtavoi' at Si evpeBeXev 'lovSaiaTal, EUTtoaav avaVEpa
irapd XpiaTtp.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

deemed Judaizers, and are ordered to be anathe
matized by another canon of the same council. By
which it appears that Saturday was kept weekly as
a day of public worship, but not as a Jewish sab
bath. Epiphanius18 mentions it likewise as a day
of public assembhes in some places, but not in all.
St. Basil19 says it was one of the four days in the
week, on which in his time they received the com
munion. By all which we may perceive that the
author of the Constitutions had a plain regard to
the practice of the Eastern church, when he pre
scribed, that on every sabbath save one, (that is, the
Saturday before Easter day,) and on eveiy Lord's
day,20 they should hold religious assemblies, and
keep them as the weekly festivals ; that is, not only
with psalmody, and reading the Scriptures, and
common prayers, which was the ordinary service
of the morning and evening of every day ; but with
sermons also, or preaching the gospel, and the of
fering of the oblation, and reception of the holy
food ; as he describes the service of the sabbath
and Lord's day in another place.21
Now, as these were the two great
How they ohserv- festivals of every week, so thev were
ed the vigils ofthe J
sabbath and Lurd-s commonly ushered in by the attend-
day, and other in- * J
ctf«r,tai festivals of ance of preceding pernoctations or
vigils, which, as harbingers, went be
fore to make preparation for the solemnities of the
following days. These vigils were much of the
same nature as the common nocturnal, or daily ¦
morning prayer, which was early, before it was
light; and they only differed from the usual ante-
lucan service in this, that whereas the usual morn
ing service never began till after midnight, towards
cock-crowing in the morning, these vigils were a
longer service, that kept the congregation at church
the greatest part of the night. These the Greeks
called iravvvxibig ; and the Latins, pemoctationes
and pervigilia, watchings all the night. St. Chrysos
tom often speaks of these : Go into the church, says
he, and there see the poor continuing from mid
night to break of day ; go, and see the holy pernoc-
tations22 joining day and night together : behold the
people of Christ, fearing neither by night, nor by
day, the tyranny of sleep or the necessities of po
verty. In another place23 he calls them wdwvxoi
Kal SirivtKEtg TaVetc, the continued and perfect night
stations, in opposition to the stations by day, which

t 18 Epiphan. Epitom. 1. 1. p. 1107. "En tioi Si tottois Kal
ev toXs o-dppatri o-vvd^Eis ettiteXovo-iv.
19 Basil. Ep. 289. ad Ciesaream Patriciam. So Austin,
EP- 118. Alibi nullus dies omittitur, quo non offeratur,
alibi sabbato tantum et Dominico.
20 Constit. lib. 5. cap. 20. It. lib. 8. cap. 23.
21 Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 59. p. 268.
22 Chrys. Horn. 4. de Verbis Esaiae, t. 3. p. 865. MXiirE
iravvvxiSus Upas ripspa Kal vvktI avvatpBEiaas.
28 Id. Horn. 1. de Verb. Esai. p. 834.
24 (--lirys. Horn. 20. de Statuis, t. ]. p. 252. et Horn. 40. in
2 U

657
were but partial and imperfect. By these, he adds, .
you imitate the station of the angelical choir, whilst
you offer up itKaTdiravrov bpvoXoyiav, psalmody and
hymnody without ceasing to your Creator. Oh the
wonderful gifts of Christ! The armies of angels
sing glory to God above : and on earth men, keep-
ing their choral stations in the church, sing the
same doxology after their example. The cherubims
above cry aloud, « Holy, holy, holy," in the Trisa
gion hymn ; and the congregation of men on earth
below send up the same : and so a common general
assembly is made of the inhabiters of heaven and
earth together. Their thanksgiving is one and the
same, their exultation the same, their joyful choral
station the very same. In which words he plainly
gives us to understand, that the angelical hymn,
" Glory be to God on high," and the cherubical
hymn, or the Trisagion, as it was called from the
cherubims thrice repeating the first words, " Holy,
holy, holy," were part of their sacred service in these
night stations : which, as I observed before, were
but an earlier oblation of the ordinary morning ser
vice, wherein we shall find the angelical hymn
amongst other parts of Divine worship always ap
pointed to be used.
It were easy to make a long discourse here of the
several sorts of these night stations, or completer
vigils holding all the night through ; for they were
sometimes held upon extraordinary occasions of
prayer, upon great emergencies and necessities of
the church ; instances of which the curious reader
may find several in Chrysostom,24 and St. Austin,25
and Ruffin,28 and Socrates,27 and Sozomen,28 and
Theodoret.29 Sometimes, again, they were kept as
anniversary vigils to usher in the greater festivals
of the Nativity, Epiphany, Resurrection, and As
cension of Christ, and the descent of the Holy
Ghost at Pentecost ; of which sort there is mention
made in TertuUian,30 Lactantius,31 Chrysostom,32
Socrates,33 and many others. But the vigils we are
here concerned to speak of, are only such as have
some relation to the weekly service, of which num
ber we may reckon those vigils of the sabbath and
Lord's day the chief, because they returned con
stantly in the weekly revolution. Concerning
which we have not only the forementioned au
thority of Chrysostom, but several others. For
Socrates, giving an account of Athanasius's escape

Juventinum, t. 1. 550.
25 Aug. Confess, lib. 9. cap. 7. Ep. 119. ad Januarium.
23 Ruffin. lib. 1. cap. 12. lib. 2. cap. 16.
2' Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 37. lib. 5. cap. 11.
23 Sozom. lib. 2. cap. 29. lib. 3. cap. 6.
29 Theod. lib. 1. cap. 14.
30 Tertul. ad Uxor. lib. 2. cap. 4.
31 Lactant. lib. 7. cap. 19.
32 Chrys. Horn. 30. in Genes, p. 424.
33 Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 5. Vid. Euseb. de Vit. Constant.
lib. 4. cap. 57. Hieronym. Com. in Mat. xxv.

658

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

out of the church of Alexandria in the night,84 when
the church was beset with soldiers to take him,
says, It was evening, and the people were keeping
their nocturnal vigils, because the next day was to
be a synaxis, or church, assembly. Therefore Atha
nasius, fearing lest the people should suffer upon
his account, bid the deacon give the signal or call >
to prayer, and he commanded a psalm to be sung,
and whilst they were singing their psalmody, the
soldiers were quiet, and they all meanwhile went
out at one. door of the church, and Athanasius in
the midst of the singers escaped untouched and fled
to Rome. Athanasius himself35 has the same story
in his Apology for his Flight, where he says, some
of the people were keeping their night vigil, ex
pecting an assembly the next day. And Socrates
in another place, speaking of these nocturnal vigils
kept both by the Arians and catholics, says, they
held them against the weekly festivals, the sabbath
and the Lord's day,36 on which days there were used
to be general assemblies of the church. And be
cause the Arians were allowed no churches within
the walls, they sung their hymns in the streets and
porticos of the city till the morning light, and then
went out to their meeting-places without the gates.
And the historian observes, That Chrysostom, fear
ing the Arians might gain ground upon the church
by this practice, and draw away some of the more
simple people, appointed some of his own people,
who were used to nocturnal hymnody, to meet in
the streets after the same manner ; and to make
the solemnity more splendid, the empress gave
them silver crosses to set their lamps in, appoint
ing one of her own eunuchs, called Brison, to be
their protector : which so provoked the Arians,
that they fell to blows upon it, and Brison and
some others were slain in the engagement ; which
occasioned the emperor wholly to put down those
Arian meetings, and leave the catholics quietly to
go on with their vigils in the churches, as they had
done before. From these accounts we may easily
collect, both that there were such weekly vigils fre
quented by the more zealous and religious sort of
people in all parts of the East, and also that psalms
and hymns and prayers were the exercises, where
with they entertained themselves to the morning
light. I might add many other testimonies out of

Nazianzen87 and other Greek writers, but these are
abundantly sufficient to show us the practice of the
Oriental church.
For the Latin church we have the authority of
St. Jerom, who, interpreting the word " watcher,"
in Daniel, says, it signifies the angels, who always
watch, and are ready to obey the commands of
God : and he adds,38 We also, by our frequent per-
noctations or night-watches, imitate the office of
angels. And it appears from him further, that
women and virgins frequented this service, as well
as men ; for he advises Leeta39 to inure her daugh
ter to these solemn pernoctations ; only cautioning
her to keep a guard upon her, and not let her wan
der from her side ; for the same reason, I presume,
for which the council of Eliberis 40 thought fit wholly
to forbid women the observation of these vigils, be
cause many, under pretence of prayer, were found
to commit wickedness. There are many other pas
sages in St. Austin, and St. Hilary, and other Latin
writers, which speak of vigils ; but because they
may be understood either of private watchings in
prayers at home, or of the common vigils of the or
dinary morning prayer before day, I omit them in
this place ; only alleging that of St. Ambrose,*1
where he seems to found this practice upon the
imitation of Christ's example : The Lord Jesus, says
he, continued all night in prayer, not that he want
ed the help of prayer, but to set thee an example
to copy after : he continued all night praying for
thee, that thou mightest learn after what manner
to pray for thyself.
But besides these stated vigils of the two weekly
festivals, there was another sort of incidental ones,
which came almost every week throughout the
year, or at least were very frequent in some parts
of it: those were the vigils of the festivals or an
niversaries of the martyrs. Those anniversaries,
as we shall see by and by, were always in great re
pute, and observed with the same solemnities of Di
vine worship, as the sabbath or the Lord's day ; and
therefore their vigils were also celebrated with the
same ceremony, as the vigils or night stations of
the two great weekly festivals. St. Chrysostom42
is an undoubted witness of this ; for in a homily
made upon one of these festivals, he takes notice of
the preceding vigil, that had continued all the

91 Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 11.
35 Athan. Apol. de Fuga, t. 1. p. 716. Tou Xaov tives
iiravvdxt^ov, irpotjSoKtopivi)S txvvd^Etos, Sec.
30 Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 8.
37 Naz. Carm. Iambic. 18. t. 2. p. 218. Orat. 11. de
Gorgouia, t. 1. p. 183.
33 Hieron. Com. in Dan. iv. 13. Significat autem angelos,
quod semper vigilent, et ad Dei imperium sint parati.
Unde et nos crebris pernoctationibus imitamur angelorum
officia. 39 Id. Ep. 7. ad Laetam. Vigiliarum dies et solennes per-
noctationcs sic virguncula nostra celebret, ut ne transverso

quidem ungue a matre discedat.
40 Couc. Eliber. can. 35. Placuit prohiberi, ne fosmina?
in ccemiterio pervigilent ; eo quod saepe sub obtentu ora
tionis latenter scelera cominittant.
41 Ambr. Serm. 19. in Psal. cxviii. ver, 147. p. 740. Per-
noctabat in oratione Dominus Jesus, non indigens precatio-
nis auxilio, sed statuens tibi imitationis exemplura. Ihe
pro te rogans pernoctabat, ut tu disceres quomodo pro te
rogares. 42 Chrys. Horn. 59. in Martyres, t. 5. p. 779. 'E-Troiiio-oTE
Ti]v vvKTa iipipav Std tiov iravvvxtStov twit lEptov' pu
iroiritraTE iraXtv ti)v vpipav vvKTa Sid TT)S ui8r)S, Sec.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

659

night : Ye have turned, says he, the night into day
by keeping your holy stations all the night : do not
now turn the day into night again by surfeiting, and
drunkenness, and lascivious songs. And Sidonius
Apollinaris48 will testify the same, at least for some
part of the western church ; for, writing about the
festival of Justus, bishop of Lyons, he thus describes
both the observation of the day, and the preceding
vigil : We met, says he, at the grave of St. Justus ;
it was a morning procession before day ; it was an
anniversary solemnity ; the confluence of people of
both sexes was so great, that the church, though
very capacious and surrounded with cloisters, would
not contain them. When the service of the vigil
was ended, which the monks and clerical singers
performed with alternate melody, we separated for
some time, but went not very far away, as being to
meet again at three o'clock, that is, nine in the morn
ing, when the priests were to perform Divine service,
that is, the service of the communion, as on a festival.
„ . And now that we have mentioned
Sect. 5.
rn»,ftyr?.fTSUori-f the festivals of martyrs, as days of
iService'was'p^ public religious worship, we must take
formed on them. ,. t. . -i • • ¦ -, . - -,
notice of their original, to find out
how early they became days of solemn addresses to
God, and in what offices of Divine service their ob
servation consisted. These festivals were grown so
numerous in the time of Chrysostom and Theodoret,
that they teU us, it was not once, or twice, or five
times in a year that they celebrated their memorials,
but they had oftentimes one or two in the same
week,44 which occasioned frequent solemnities. The
original of them is at least to be carried as high as
the time of Polycarp, who suffered about the year
l*3S\VFor the church of Smyrna, (whereof he was
bishop,) in their epistle to the church of Philome-
lium, recorded by Eusebius,45 teU them, That they
intended, if God would permit, to meet at his tomb,
and celebrate his birth-day, that is, the day of his
martyrdom, with joy and gladness, as well for the
memory of the sufferer, as for example to posterity.
Tertullian speaks of these anniversary festivals, as
observed in his time. We offer, says he, oblations
for those that are dead, for their48 nativities on their
anniversary day. And Cyprian47 orders his clergy

to note down the days of their decease, that a com
memoration of them might be celebrated amongst
the memories of the martyrs. And in another place48
he says, They offered sacrifices for them, as often as
they celebrated their passions, or days of martyrdom,
by an anniversary commemoration. These sacrifices
were the sacrifices of prayer, and thanksgiving to
God for the examples of the martyrs, and the cele
bration of the eucharist on these days, and the offer
ings of alms and oblations for the poor, which, to
gether with a panegyrical oration or sermon, and
reading the acts or passion of the martyr, if they
had any such recorded, were the exercises and spe
cial acts of devotion, in which they spent these days.
For these were always esteemed high festivals, and
therefore the same service that was performed on
the sabbath and Lord's day was always performed
on them. They never passed without a full assem
bly, nor without a sermon or a communion, as ap
pears from some of Chi-ysostom's homilies upon
such occasions. To dissuade the people from in
temperance, he bids them consider how absurd it
was,49 after such a meeting, after a whole night's
vigil, after hearing the Holy Scriptures, after par
ticipating ofthe Divine mysteries, after such a spirit
ual repast, for a man or a woman to be found spend
ing whole days in a tavern. The foundation of his
argument is built upon this supposition, that they
had received the eucharist in the church before, in
celebrating the memorial of a martyr. And so Si
donius Apollinaris represents the matter in the pas
sage just now cited from him,50 That after they had
kept the vigil of St. Justus the night preceding, they
assembled again by day at nine in the morning,
when the priests did rem divinam facere, offer the
oblation, or consecrate the eucharist, as Savaro51
rightly interprets it.
But besides the usual solemnities of other festi
vals, there was one thing peculiar to these festivals
of the martyrs : which was, that the history of their
passions, as they were taken by the notaries ap
pointed by the church for this purpose, were com
monly read in the assembly upon such occasions.
It was at least the common practice of the African
churches. For St. Austin52 speaks of it as a usual

48 Sidon. lib. 5. Epist. 17. Conveneramus ad Sancti Justi
Bepulehrum. — Processio fuerat antelucana, solennitas anni-
versaria, populus ingens sexu ex utroque, quem capacissima
basilica non caperet, et quamlibet cineta diffusis cryptopor-
ticibus. Cultu peracto vigiliarum, quas alteniante mulce-
uine monachi clericique psalmicines concelebraverant,
quisque in diversa secessimus, non procul tamen, utpote
ad tertiam praesto futuri, cum sacerdotibus res Divina fa-
cienda. 44 Vid. Chrys. Horn. 40. in Juventinum, t. 1. p. 546.
Iheod. Serm. 8. de Martyribus, t. 4. p. 605. Chrys. Horn.
65. de Martyr, t. 4. p. 971.
45 Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 15.
48 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3. Oblationes pro defunctis
2 u 2

pro natalitiis, annua die facimus.
47 Cypr. Ep. 12. al. 37. Denique et dies eorum quibus
excedunt annotate, ut commemorationes eorum inter me
morias martyrum celebrare possimus.
43 Id. Ep. 39. al. 34. p. 77. Sacriflcia pro eis semper, ut
meministis, offerimus, quoties martyrum passiones et dies
anniversaria eommemoratione celebramus.
19 Chrys. Horn. 59. de Martyribus, t. 5. p. 779.
» Sidon. Apoll. lib. 5. Ep. 17.
51 Savaro, Comment, in Sidon.
52 Aug. Horn. 26. ex 50. t. 10. p. 174. Quando aut pas
siones prolixae, aut certe aliquae lectiones longiores, qui stare
non possunt, humiliter et cum silentio sedentes, attentis au
ribus audiant quae leguntur.

660

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

thing, indulging his people liberty to sit, whilst they
heard them read, because they were sometimes of a
considerable length. And the third council of Car
thage53 made a canon to encourage the reading of
them. Mabillon54 gives several other instances out
of Alcimus Avitus, Caesarius Arelatensis, and Fer-
reolus, to show that they were read also in the
French churches. Only they were forbidden in the
Roman church by the decree of Pope Gelasius,55 in
his synod of seventy bishops, under pretence that
they were written by anonymous authors, and some
times by ignorant heathens, and sometimes by he
retical authors, as the Passions of Cyricus, Julitta,
and St. George. For which reason they had, by
ancient custom, prohibited the reading of them in
the Roman church. But this rule, it seems, did not
then prescribe to other churches.
It may be further observed, that
Sect. 6. J
fo?°'™ach1ne™ba1iid during the whole forty days of Lent,
worihfPc'heidbeve"r, they had continual assemblies not only
wSiefortf dhaeys of for prayers, but preaching also: as is
Lent, and the fifty . -. - .-,-, . ,
days between Easter evident from (Jhrysostom s sermons,
and Whitsuntide. , . .. , . .
many of which were preached by him
successively one day after another throughout the
greatest part of that season ; as his homilies upon
Genesis, and those famous discourses, called his
'AvSpiavreg, preached at Antioch, in Lent, upon the
occasion of a tumult, wherein the emperor's statues
were demolished. And many other instances may
be given of the same practice, of which more here
after, under the head of preaching, in the next
Book.56 It is true, indeed, they did not always con
secrate the eucharist in Lent, but only upon the
sabbath and Lord's day, as we learn from the coun
cil of Laodicea,57 which expressly forbids the obla
tion of the bread in Lent upon any other day besides
the sabbath and the Lord's day. The reason of
which was, that these two days were observed as
festivals even in Lent itself ; and they did not ordi
narily consecrate the eucharist upon the solemn
fasts in the time of this couneil : but instead of the
consecration service, they had probably that which
in the following ages is called irporiytatTpkvuiv Xeirovp-
ytd, missa prcssanct'ificatorum, the office of the pre
sanctified elements, which was a shorter service for

communicating on fast days in the elements that
were consecrated before on the Lord's day festival,
about which there is a particular direction in the
council of Trullo, can. 52. So that one way or
other they seem to have had both a communion and
a sermon every day in Lent.
Then, again, the fifty days between Easter and
Whitsuntide were a sort of perpetual festival, and
observed with great solemnity, as days of joy, from
the time of Tertulhan, who mentions it, and triumphs
over the heathen upon it, That besides the Sunday,
which returned once in eight days, this one con
tinued festival58 of Pentecost was more than all the
festivals the heathen could pretend to reckon up in
a whole year. He does not tell us here, indeed, with
what solemnity they observed this time, but in an
other place he assures us59 they had solemn worship
every day, and paid the same respect to it as they
did to the Lord's day, in that they neither fasted nor
prayed kneeling on any day during this whole in
terval, which was the commemoration of our Sa
viour's resurrection and ascension. Whence it is
no improbable conjecture, that during this season
they might have the same complete worship every
day, that they had upon the Lord's day.
And this consideration will lead us
to fix the date of the setting up morn- Public prayer
° morning and even
ing and evening prayer daily in the J„f,|™7luar'"'he
church. Por if the persecutions would
give leave in Tertullian's time to keep fifty days
together as solemn festivals ; there is no reason to
imagine that they could not as well meet every day
for their ordinary devotions. And if Wednesdays
and Fridays were then observed as stationary days,
with more than ordinary attendance, as we have
heard him declare before-; there is little reason to
question, but that every day might have an ordinary
vigil or morning assembly. It was not long after
Tertullian's time, that Cyprian60 assures us, They
received* the eucharist every day; and he thinks,
that petition in the Lord's prayer may bear this
sense, when we say, " Give us this day our daily
bread:" which was also Tertullian's sense of it before
him.61 Now this is demonstration, then, that they
had assemblies for public worship every day, since

53 Con. Carlh. 3. can. 47. Liceat etiam legi passiones
martyrum, cum anniversarii dies eorum celebrantur.
54 Mabillon, de Cursu Gallicano, p. 403, &c.
55 Gelas. Decret. ap. Crab. 1. 1. p. -992. Singulari cautela,
secundum antiquam consuetudinem, in sancta Romana ec
clesia non legunlur, quia et eorum qui conscripsere nomina
penitus ignoi-antur; et ab infidelibus idiotis superflua, aut
minus apta, quam rei ordo fuerit, scripla esse putantur, sicut
cujusdam Cyrici et Julitae, sicut Georgii aliorumque hujus-
niudi passiones, qua; ab haereticis perhibentur compositae.
56 Book XIV. chap. 4.
57 Cone. Laodic. can. 49. "Oti op SeX tt, TEa-crapaKoaTrj
dpTov iriiotrtpipEiv, ei pit iv trafifidTtp Kal KvpiaKi] pdvov.
59 Tertul. de idololat. cap. 14. Ethnicis semel annuus dies

quisque festus est : tibi octavo quoque die. Excerpe sin-
gulas solennitates nationum, et in ordinem texe, Pentecos
ten implere non poterunt.
59 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3. Die Dominico jejunium
nefas ducimus, vel de geniculis adorare. Eadem immuni-
tate a die Paschae in Pentecosten usque gaudemus.
60 Cypr. de Orat. Domin. p. 147. Hunc panem dari nobis
quotidie postulamus, ne qui in Christo sumus, et quotidie
eucharistiam ad cibum salutis accipimus, intercedente aliquo
graviore delicto  a Christi corpore separemur.
61 Tertul. de Orat. cap. 6. Corpus ejus in pane censetur :
Hne est corpus meum: itaque petendo panem quotidianum,
perpetuitatem postulamus in Christo, et individuitatem a
corpore ejus.

Chap. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

661

they received the eucharist every day, which they
did not use to consecrate but in pubhc assemblies
of the church. From this time therefore there is
no dispute about the church's daily sacrifice of
prayer in her morning assemblies ; which, in after
a°-es, are commonly caUed ccetus antelucani, and vigi-
lice, and hores nocturnes, because they were a sort of
ordinary vigils, or night assemblies, held before it
was light, though not so early as those other sort of
vigils, or night stations, before the sabbath and
Lord's day, which were of longer duration, as has
been noted already of them in its proper place.
As to evening prayer, pubhc in the church, Mr.
Mede62 thinks there is no mention made of it in
Cyprian or Tertullian, nor in any writers before
the author of the Constitutions and the council
of Laodicea : he thinks the ninth hour of prayer,
mentioned by Cyprian,68 relates only to private
prayer; which is very probable: and that Ter
tullian's nocturnes convocationes mean not evening,
but morning prayers early before day ; which is
undoubtedly true : but then he seems not to have
considered, that in Cyprian's time there was a cus
tom among some of communicating after supper ;
for he plainly mentions it,64 though he did not hke
the custom : and this custom continued among the
Egyptians till the time of Socrates,65 who speaks of
it then as something peculiar to those churches.
Now, if there was a custom in Cyprian's time of
communicating after supper, there is no doubt to
be made of evening prayer at the same time. Ri-
galtius,66 and after him Bishop Fell67 and Dr. Cave,68
carry this custom of communicating after supper as
high as Tertullian ; but I think they mistake his
words ; for he does not say, that they communicated
after supper,69 but that Christ, at supper time, gave
the command for the sacrament of the eucharist to
all, though then they communicated in their morn
ing assemblies, and received it from the hands of
none but their governors. I lay no stress therefore
upon this proof, but think the proof of evening
prayer may be rationally deduced from that of
Cyprian. After whom the author of the Constitu
tions not only speaks of it,76 but gives us the order
both of their morning and evening service, with
which I shall present the reader in the following
chapters. The council of Laodicea speaks of the
evening service,71 together with that of the nones, or

62 Mede, Epist. 66. p. 840.
63 Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p. 154.
61 Cypr. Ep. 63. Ad Caecilium, p. 156. An ilia sibi ali-
quis contemplatione blanditur, quod etsi mane aqua sola
offerri videtur, tamen cum ad ccenandum venimus, mixtum
calicem offerimus ?
65 Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 22. 66 Rigalt. in Cypr. Ep. 63.
87 Fell, in dictum Cypriani locum.
68 Cave, Prim. Christ, par. 1. cap. 11. p. 338.
69 Tertul. de Cor. Mil. cap. 3. Eucharistiae sacramentum
et in tempore victus, et omnibus mandatum a Domino,

three in the afternoon, and orders the same service
to be used in both. The Greeks commonly call it
Xvxvaipia, and the Latins, lucernarium, because it
commonly began at the time when the day went
off, and when they lighted candles for the night. It
is likewise frequently styled sacrificium vespertinum,
the evening sacrifice, and missa vespertina, as those
names are used to signify, in general, the service or
prayers of the church. And these two, evening
and morning, are the most celebrated times of the
ancient daily service, which are to be found almost
in every ecclesiastical writer ; so that it is alto
gether needless here to insist any further upon them.
There remains one question more „ . „
^ Sect. 8.
concerning those times of prayer, theclno°Snoui»
which are commonly called the ca- °tlJSZml%'il
nonical hours, that is, besides the !¦£. '^Sl'm Tile
,. -, . -. • three first ages.
forementioned evening and morning
prayer, those that are called the first, the third, the
sixth, and the ninth hours, with the completorium,
or bed-time. They who have made the most exact
inquiries into the original of these as fixed hours of
public prayer, can find no footsteps of them in the
three first ages, but conclude they came first into
the church with the monastic life. So Mr. Mede,72
and Bishop Pearson,78 who observes that Tertullian
mentigns the third, sixth, and ninth hours of prayer ;
but then he is disputing, as a Montanist,74 against
the catholics, and urging the necessity of observing
the rules of the Montanists in all the heights of
their austerities, and pretences of mortification and
devotion above the church. And he does not inti
mate, that either the Montanists or the catholics
observed these hours for public assemblies. Cyprian
indeed recommends75 these hours of prayer from
the example of Daniel, and other arguments, to
Christians, in their private devotions : but he does
not so much as once suggest, that the church had
then by any rule made these the stated hours of
public devotion. That which evidently confirms
this opinion, is an observation to be made out of
Cassian, who particularly describes the devotions of
these canonical hours, and the gradual rise of them.
For they had not all their original at the same time.
The first monks of Egypt, who were the founders
of the monastic life, he assures us, never observed
any other canonical hours for public devotion, but
only evening and morning early76 before day: all

etiam antelucanis coetibus, nee de aliorum manu quam prae-
sidentium sumimus.
70 Constit. lib. 8. u. 35.
71 Cone. Laodic. can. 18. Uepl tov, t!)v avTt)v Xeitovo.
y'tav tiov evxuiv irdvTOTE Kal iv Tais IvvaTais Kal iv TaXs
etrltEpats oepEtXEtv yivEoBat.
72 Mede, Epist. 66.
78 Pearson, Praalect. 2. in Act. Apost. num. 3, 4.
74 Tertul. de Jejun. cap. 10.
75 Cypr. de Orat. Domin. p. 154.
76 Cassian. Institut. lib. 3. cap 2.

662

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

the rest of their time they spent at work privately,
ioining private meditation of the Scriptures, singing
of psalms, and prayers, continually with their labour.
Not long after, the monasteries of Mesopotamia and
Palestine set up the practice of meeting publicly at
the third, sixth, and ninth hours for performing
their psalmody77 and devotions. But as yet there
was no new morning service distinct from that of
the old morning service before day. This was first
begun in the monastery of Bethleem,78 and thence
propagated into others, but not received in all. And
the completorium, or bed-time service, was utterly
unknown to the ancients, as distinct from the lu
cernaris, or evening service, as Bona79 himself proves
against Bellarmine. So that these canonical hours
came gradually into the church, and are all of them
owing to the rules of the Eastern monasteries for
their original. Therefore what a learned man68
among ourselves says, must be taken with a little
qualification, else it will not be true : " That the
universal church anciently observed certain set
hours of prayer, that all Christians throughout the
world might at the same time join together to glo
rify God : and some of them81 were of opinion, that
the angelical host, being acquainted with those
hours, took that time to join their prayers and praises
with those of the church." If this be understood
of any rule or custom of the universal church for
hours of public prayer, besides those of morning and
evening, in the three first ages, it will not be true :
but if it only mean, that there were directions given
for the encouragement of private prayer at those set
times, and that Christians generally observed them
in private, it may be allowed ; since not only Origen,
but Cyprian, as we have heard before, writes in fa
vour of them, and Clemens Alexandrinus82 says*
some allotted set hours for prayer, the third, sixth,
and ninth. So necessary is it to distinguish between
pubhc and private devotions, and between the first
and the following ages, when we speak of canonical
hours of prayer as appointed by the church univer
sal. For even after they were set up in the monas
teries, they were not immediately observed in all
the churches. For Epiphanius,93 speaking of the
customs of the catholic church, mentions the morn
ing hymns and prayers, and the evening psalms and
prayers, but no other. So Chrysostom often men
tions the daily service in the church 81 morning and

evening; and at the most never speaks of above
three times86 a day for public assemblies. For thus
he brings in a secular man complaining, and saying,
How is it possible for me, who am a secular man,
and pinned down to the courts of law, to run to
church, and pray at the three hours ofthe day? In
answer to which Chrysostom does not say, that the
church had these three hours of prayer for laymen,
and more for others ; but he tells the man of busi
ness, that if he could not come to church, because
he was so fettered to the court, yet he might pray
even as he stood there ; since it was the mind and the
voice, and the elevation of the soul, rather than the
lifting up of the hands, that was to be regarded in
prayer. For Hannah's prayer was not heard for her
loud voice, but because she cried aloud inwardly in
her soul. This seems to intimate, that the church
then only observed three hours of prayer, that is, the
evening and morning, and, as I conceive, the nones,
or three in the afternoon. For by this time, in some
places, the church had received that hour as a
stated hour of prayer, of which more by and by.
Yet it was some time after this before these hours
were admitted in the Gallican and Spanish churches.
For Mabillon shows86 out of Gregory Turonensis,
that the sixth and ninth hours of prayer were not
introduced into the church of Tours till the time of
Bishop Injuriosus, which was not till the year 530.
And it appears from one of the canons of Martin
Bracarensis, that they were not in his time admitted
into the Spanish churches. For he calls only87 the
morning and evening service the daily sacrifice of
psalmody, at which all clerks were obliged to be
present, under pain of deposition without amend
ment. This argues, that as yet the other hours
were not established in the churches (but only in
the monasteries) as canonical parts of the daily
service. And it is observable further, that most of
the writers of the fourth age, who speak of six or
seven hours of prayer, speak of the observations of
the monks only, and not of the whole body of the
church. As St. Jerom,88 where he describes the in
stitutions of the monasteries erected by the famous
Lady Paula, says, They sung the psalter in order, in
the morning, at the third, and sixth, and ninth hours,
and at evening, and at midnighh And giving di
rections in another place to Lceta, how to educate
her daughter in the monastic life, he prescribes the

" Cass. lib. 3. cap. 3. ™ Ibid. cap. 4.
79 Bona de Psalmod. cap. 11. sect. 1. u. 2.
80 Patrick of Prayer, part 2. chap. 11. p. 109.
61 Origen. irEpl Evxiis. n. 33, 35.
82 Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 854. Ed. Oxon.
»3 Epiphan. Expos. Fid. n. 23. t. 1. p. 1106. 'EtoOtvoi te
vpvoi iv aiiTy T77 dy'ta iKKXt]tria SiijvekeXs yivoVTat, Kal
irpotTEvxal itoBtval, XvxvtKoi TE bipa x^aXpol Kal irpotrEV-
X«i. " Chrys. Horn. 18. in Act. p. 174, 176. Horn. 6. in 1 Tim..
p. 1550.

85 Ibid. Horn. 4. de Anna, t. 2. p. 995. ITtos SvvaTov, dv-
Bpwirov fitcoTiKov, StKaaT-rtpitp irpoarr]XujpEvov, KaTi TpEts
tiipas EvxEerBaiTrjs bpipas, Kal e'is iKKXriaiav iKTpixEiv,Sec.
86 Mabil. de Cursu Gallicano, p. 409.
87 Martin. Bracar. Capilul. Synod, cap. 64. Si quis cleri
cus intra civitatem fuerit, aut in quolibet loco, in quo eccle
sia est, et ad quotidianum psallendi sacrificium non con-
venerit ; deponatur a clero, &c.
98 Hieron. Epitaph. Paulae, Epist. 27. cap. 10. Mane,
hora tertia, sexta, nona, vespere, noctis medio, per ordi-
I nem psalterium cantabant.

ClIAP. IX.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

663

same hours to be observed in devotion.89 And the
like may be seen in St. Basil, Gregory Nyssen, Cas
sian, Cassiodore, and most other writers, nay, even
St. Chrysostom himself, who speaks but of three
solemn hours of prayer in the church, yet when he
has occasion to speak of the monks and their insti
tutions, he gives in much the same number of ca
nonical hours as others do. He tells us,90 they had
their midnight hymns, their morning prayers, their
third, and sixth, and ninth hours, and last of all their
evening prayers. But I will not deny that by this
time these hours of prayers might in some places of
the East be admitted into the churches. For the
author of the Constitutions has different directions
upon this point : in some places 81 he speaks only of
morning and evening prayer in the church ; but in
another he prescribes this rule to be observed by the
bishops in the church : Ye shall make prayers x in
the morning, and at the third hour, and the sixth,
and the ninth, and at evening, and at cock-crowing.
In the morning giving thanks to the Lord for that
he hath enlightened you, removing the night, and
bringing in the day : at the third hour, because at
that time the Lord received sentence of condemna
tion from Pilate : at the sixth hour, because at that
time, after the Lord was crucified, all things were
shaken and moved with horror and astonishment at
the audacious fact of the impious Jews, detesting
the affront that was put upon their Lord : at even
ing giving thanks to God, who hath given the night
to be a rest from our daily labours : at cock-crowing,
because that hour brings the welcome news of the
day, to work the works of hght. If you cannot go to
church because of the infidels, you shall assemble
in a house : or if you can neither assemble in a
house, nor in the church, then let every one sing,
read, and pray by himself; or two or three together:
" For where two or three are gathered together in
my name, there am I in the midst of them." One
may conjecture from this passage, that this author,
living in the time when these canonical hours began
to be in request, in the beginning of the fourth cen
tury, found them to be admitted into the usage of
some churches, and therefore drew his scheme of
directions in conformity to their practice.

And it being allowed, that about
, . . , , -,,1 Sert- 9-
this time thev began gradually to what service was
Job J allotted to these ca-
take place in the church, it will not nonieai hours by the
r ' church,
be amiss to take a short view of them
in particular, and examine what parts of Divine
service were performed in each of them. Cassian,
speaking of the first institution of them in the
monasteries of Mesopotamia and Palestine, where
they had their first birth, says93 they were appoint
ed to be celebrated with the singing of three psalms
at every meeting. And these, intermixed with some
prayers, were the whole service. So that these were
but short offices in comparison of the ancient morn
ing and evening service. And there is reason to
believe, that the church did not precisely follow
these monastic rules, but made proper offices for
herself to be used upon these occasions, partly be
cause the monastic offices were very different from
one another, and not always chosen with the great
est discretion. Of which I need but give one proof
here out of the council of Braga, which made a
canon to this purpose,91 That by common consent
one and the same order of singing should be ob
served in the morning and evening offices, and that
the private and different customs of the monasteries
should not be mingled with the rules ofthe church.
The Gallican church, in the time of the second
council of Tours, it is certain, had a very different
rule from that of the Eastern monasteries about the
number of psalms, hymns, and antiphonas to be
said at the several hours and times of prayer. For
in one of the canons of that council,95 about the
year 567, a very peculiar order was made, that the
method of psalmody and number of hymns should
be in proportion to the number of the hours or
months in which they were used : the new morning
service was to be performed with six antiphonas
and two psalms in the height of summer ; in Sep
tember, there were to be seven antiphonas and two
psalms ; in October, eight antiphonas and three
psalms ; in November, nine and three psalms ; in
December, ten and three psalms ; and the same in
January and February, until Easter. So again at
the sixth hour there were to be six psalms and the
hallelujah, and at the twelfth hour twelve psalms

89 Hieron. Ep. 7. ad Lactam. Assuescat exemplo ad ora
tiones et psalmos nocte consurgere, mane hymnos canere,
tertia, sexta, nona hora stare in acie, quasi bellatricem Chris
ti ; accensaque lucerna reddere sacrificiuin vespertinum.
M Chrys. Horn. 14. in 1 Tim. p. 1599.
91 Constit. lib. 2. cap. 59. lib. 8. cap. 35.
92 Ibid. cap. 34.
"Cassian. Institut. lib. 3. cap. 3. Itaque in Palaestinao
vel Mesopotamiae monasteriis, ac totius Orientis, snpradic-
tarum horarum solennitates trim's psalmis quotidie fini-
untur. 81 Cnnc. Bracarens. 1. can. 19. Placuit omnibus com
muni consensu, ut unus atque idem psallendi ordo in matu-
tinis vel vespertinis officiis teneatur, et non diversae ac

privata? monasteriorum consuetudines contra ecclesiasticas
regulas sint permixtae, vel cum ecclesiasticis regulis sint
permixtae. 95 Cone. Turon. 2. can. 19. Iste ordo psallendi servetur,
ut in diebus aestivis ad matutinum sex antiphonas binis
psalmis explicentur. Toto augusto manicationes fiant,
quia festivitates sunt etmissae. Septembri septem autiphonae
explicentur binis psalmis; Octobri octo ternis psalmis;
Novembri novem ternis psalmis: Decembri decern ternis
psalmis : J anuario et Februario, itidem usque ad Pascha. 
Superest, ut vel duodecim psalmi expediantur ad matuti
num, quia patrum statuta praeceperunt ut ad sextam sex
psalmi dicantur cum alleluia ; et ad duodecimam duodecim,
itemque cum alloluia, &c.

664

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

and the hallelujah. And in the whole month of
August, there should be manications, that is, as
MabiUon96 explains it out of Aimoinus,97 early ma
tins, or morning service, without any psalms, be
cause it was harvest time, and men were in haste
to be gone to their labour, when they had perform
ed the solemnity of the festivals, which in that
month were frequent above others. This shows,
that no certain rule was at first observed about these
canonical hours, but that they varied both as to
their number and service in their first original.
The first of these offices was the
or the mat'utina, matutina, or prima, the new morning
or prima, called the . . -. . .
new morning ser- service, so called in contradistinction
vice. to the old morning service, which was
always early before day ; whereas this was after the
day was begun. Cassian33 tells us, this was first
set up in the monastery of Bethleem, for till that
time the morning service used to end with the old
nocturnal psalms atid prayers and the daily vigils,
after which they used to betake themselves to rest
till the third hour, which was the first hour of di
urnal prayer, till this new office of morning prayer
was set up within Cassian's memory, to prevent
some inconveniences, which he there mentions.
He often gives it the name therefore of novella so-
lennitas, the new solemnity, as being so lately in
vented. And this is the true reason why, in most
of the writers before Cassian, such as St. Jerom,
the author of the Constitutions, St. Basil, and others
who speak particularly of the canonical hours, there
is no mention of this first hour, but they always
reckon them up after this manner, the morning,
meaning the morning vigil before day, the third, the
sixth, the ninth, without mentioning the first, be
cause it was not in their time as yet become an ac
customed hour of prayer. But when it was once
made a canonical hour, to complete the number of
seven times a day, then there were psalms particu
larly appointed for this service, which Cassian99
says were these three, the fiftieth, sixty-second, and
eighty-ninth; which, according to our computation,
are the fifty-first, sixty-third, and ninetieth. The
first of which, is that which the ancients called
properly the psalm of confession, or penitential
psalm, which begins, " Have mercy upon me, O God,
after thy great goodness : according to the multi
tude of thy mercies, do away mine offences.'' This,
Cassian says in the same place, was used by all the

churches of Italy in his time as the close of this
morning service. The second of these psalms is
that which the ancients called by a peculiar name,
the morning psalm, as we shall see hereafter, be
cause it begins with those words, " 0 God, my God,
early will I awake unto thee," or, " early will I seek
thee ;" and was always used in the old antelucan
service before this new service was set up. The
third of these psalms, which is the ninetieth, seems
to be taken into this service upon the account of
those words in it suiting the state of human life,
" In the morning it is green, and groweth up, but
in the evening it is cut down, dried up, and wither
ed :" and, " So teach us to number our days, that
we may apply our hearts unto wisdom."
Next after this, in all such churches Sect. 11.
as admitted the first, was the tertia, or or the tertia, or
third hour of prayer.
third hour, that is, nine in the morn
ing : this is mentioned by all the writers that say
any thing of hours of prayer ; some saying it was
to be observed in regard100 to our Saviour's being
condemned by Pilate at that time ; and others, in
memory of the Holy Ghost's coming upon the apos
tles101 at that hour : that men might with one mind
worship the Holy Spirit, and beg of him the same
sanctification, direction, and protection, imitating
David's prayer, in saying, " Create in me a clean
heart, 0 God, and renew a right spirit within me,"
Psal. li. : in another place, " Let thy loving Spirit
lead me forth into the land of righteousness," Psal.
cxliii. This is the reason assigned by Cassian and
St. Basil for this solemnity. But whether any par
ticular psalms were appropriated to this service, we
are not told, but only in general Cassian says, three
psalms, together with prayers, were appointed for
every hour. But on all festivals this service was
omitted, because on Sundays the communion ser
vice was used, which always began at this hour.
The next hour was the sixth, or
r • , - n Sect. 12.
noon-day service. At which time, fet. • or the sixth hour,
or noon-day service.
Basil says,102 they used the 90th or
91st Psalm, praying for protection against' the in
cursions of the noon-day devU, Satpov'm ptoripfiptvov,
for so the Septuagint. and other translations render
the words of that Psalm, " Thou shalt not be afraid
for any terror by night, nor for the arrow that flieth
by day ; nor for the pestilence that 'walketh in
darkness, nor for the sickness, nor the devil de
stroying at noon-day. What other psalms they

" Mabil. de Cursu Gallicano, n. 54. p. 422.
97 Aimoin. Hist. Francor. lib. 3. cap. 81. Porro toto
Augusto, propter crebras festivitates, manicationes fiebant.
Manicare autem mane surgere dicitur.
98 Cassian. Institut. lib. 3. cap. 4. Sciendum tamen hanc
matutinam, quae nunc observatur in Occiduis vel maxime
regionibus, canonicam functionem, nostro tempore, in nos-
tro quoque monasterio primitus institutam, ubi Dominus
noster Jesus Christus natus ex virgine.— Usque ad illud
enim tempus, hac solennitate matutina, quae expletis noc-

turnis psalmis et orationibus post modicum temporis inter-
vallum solet in Galliae monasteriis celebrari, cum quotidi-
anis vigiliis pariter consummata, reliquas horas reflectioni
corporum deputatas, a majoribus nostris invenimus.
99 Cassian. lib. 3. cap. 6. Quinquagesimum vero psal-
mum, et sexagesimum secundum, et octogesimum nonum
huic novellae solennitati novimus fuisse deputatos.
100 See the author of the Constitutions, lib. 8. c. 34.
101 Basil. Regul. Major, qu. 37. Cassian. Institut. lib.
3. c. 3. ">2 Basil, ibid.

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OP THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

used he tells us not, but probably they might be
some that had relation to the death of Christ, be
cause it is agreed by all, that this service was ap
pointed in commemoration of our Saviour's im
maculate sacrifice to the Father at this hour.
sect. 13. ^be last hour of prayer in the day-
orSlSruia'fS time, was the ninth hour, that is,
noo°- three in the afternoon, at which time
our Saviour expired upon the cross, and by his
death triumphed over death and hell. At this hour
Cornelius was praying, when he was visited by an
angel : as Peter was at the sixth hour, when he
had the vision of the sheet let down from heaven.
This was the hour when Peter and John went up
into the temple, " at the ninth hour, being the hour
of prayer," and the usual time of the Jewish evening
sacrifice. In regard to all which the church seems
to have taken this hour for a solemn time of public
prayer before the two last mentioned. For the
council of Laodicea 103 expressly mentions the ninth
hour of prayer, and orders that the same service
should be used in that as was appointed for even
ing prayer. And St. Chrysostom, speaking of three
hours104 of public prayer in the day, may most rea
sonably be understood to intend this ninth hour as
the third of them ; because in another place he
seems 105 to recommend it as such : for, speaking of
the apostles going into the temple at the ninth hour,
being the horn- of prayer, he says, They observed
this hour not without very good reason : for I have
often told you concerning this hour, that it was the
time when paradise was opened, and the thief en
tered into it; this the time when the curse was
taken away, when the sacrifice of the world was offer
ed, when the darkness was dissolved, and the light,
as well sensible as spiritual, shone forth. It was at
the ninth hour, when others, after dinner and drunk
enness, sleep a deep sleep, that they then, being
sober and vigilant, and fervent in love, made haste
to prayer. And if they needed to be so exact and
assiduous in prayer, who had such boldness, and
were conscious of no evil ; what shall we do, who
are overrun with wounds and sores, and neglect to
use the medicine of prayer ? This character here
given of the ninth hour, makes it probable to me,
that this was one of those three famous hours of
prayer, which in the former place he exhorts all
men to frequent in public. We have no particular
account in any writer, of the psalms or prayers to
be used at this hour, but only what we have heard
before out of the council of Laodicea, that it was
to be the same with the evening service ; and there
fore we must draw our accounts of it from thence.
Now, because we have a more ample and distinct
account of the morning and evening daily service,

605
than of any other stated hours of prayer in the an-
ciei t church, (as being both more ancient and more
celebrated than the rest,) I shall give a more par-
ticu ar and exact description of the several parts,
and method of performing those offices, from such
records as may be depended on for their truth and
fidelity ; and have therefore reserved the consider
ation of these for the two following chapters.

CHAPTER X.

THE ORDER OF THEIR DAILY MORNING SERVICE.
The most noted and usual times of
meeting, besides those of the Lord's /rheorierof'mom-
-i ., -, . „ ing service, as de-
uay, were the morning and evening of scribed m u,e con-
... ° stitutions. This be-
every dav, which m times of peace ?,,n ,,ilh th« slsiy-
J 1 third Psalm.
were constantly and regularly ob
served. I will describe the order of these services,
as they are- laid down in the Constitutions, and
compare the several parts of them with the memo
rials and accounts that are left us by other ancient
writers. The order for the morning service begins
with the appointment of the \j/a\pbg bpOptvbg, the
morning psalm, as the author of the Constitutions
terms it.1 He names not what psalm it was in this
place, but in another place he calls it the sixty-
second; that is, in our division, the sixty-third.
Which (to* show how proper it was to begin their
morning service with, both in relation to the night
past and the day approaching) I think it not im
proper to recite in this place, according to our old
version, which comes nearest to the translation of
the Septuagint used in the ancient church.
PSALM LXIII.
1 O God, thou art my God: early will I seek thee.
2 My soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh also long-
eth after thee, in a barren and dry land, where no
water is.
3 Thus have I looked for thee in holiness ; that
I might behold thy power and glory.
4 For thy lovingkindness is better than the life
itself : my lips shall praise thee.
5 As long as I live will I magnify thee on this
manner, and lift up my hands in thy name.
.6 My soul shall be satisfied even as it were wilh
marrow and fatness,. when my mouth praiseth thee
with joyful lips.
7 Have I not remembered thee in my bed, and
thought upon thee when I was waking ?
8 Because thou hast been my helper, therefore
under the shadow of thy wings will I rejoice.

1 Cone. Laodic. can. 18.
4 Chrys. Horn. 14. in 1 Tim. p. 1599.

« Ibid Horn. 12. De Inscriptione Act. Apost. t. 5. p. 176.
Constit. lib. 8. cap. 37. Confer, lib. 2. c. 59.

666

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

9 My soul hangeth upon thee : thy right hand
hath upholden me.
10 These also that seek the hurt of my soul, they
shall go under the earth.
11 Let them fall (Septuagint, They shall fall)
upon the edge of the sword, that they may be a
portion for foxes.
12 But the king shall rejoice in God; all they
also that swear by him shall be commended : but the
mouth of them that speak lies shall be stopped.
St. Chrysostom shows that the au-
whateCnotie we thor of the Constitutions does not im-
have of this morn- ... . ,
ing psaim in other pose upon us in this morning psalm :
for he says,2 The fathers of the church
appointed it to be said every morning, as a spiritual
song and medicine to blot out our sins ; to kindle in
us a desire of God ; to raise our souls, and inflame
them with a mighty fire of devotion ; to make us
overflow with goodness and love, and send us with
such preparation to approach and appear before God.
He names not the psalm, but he repeats the first
words, " 0 God, my God, early will I awake unto
thee. My soul thirsteth for thee." And, " Thus
have I appeared before thee in holiness, that I might
behold thy power and glory." By which we may
know that it is the same psalm. He says, he had
before made an exposition upon this psalm ; and re
fers his reader thither for a larger account of it :
but that, by injury of time, is now lost, and we are
beholden to this passage by the by for alt the notice
we have of this morning psalm out of him, upon
the occasion of his commenting upon the evening
psalm ; of which more hereafter, in its proper place.
Besides Chrysostom, we have the testimony of Cas
sian for the use of this psalm; for, speaking of the
several hours of prayer, and assigning reasons out
of Scripture for them, he makes this to be one rea
son for morning prayer, that the psalm, which was
daily sung in that office,3 did properly instruct men
about their obligations to this duty, saying, " O God,
my God, early will I seek thee." And Athanasius
also once or twice recommends this psalm to virgins
and others, as proper to be said privately in their
morning devotions. Rising early in the morning,
says he to Marcellinus,4 sing the sixty-second Psalm.
And again,5 to the virgins, In the morning sing this
psalm, " 0 God, my God, early will I seek thee."
These were but private directions, indeed, but pro
bably might be suited to the orders and measures of
public worship ; it being evident, from the forecitcd

authors, that this psalm was the usual introduction
to their morning devotions.
Immediately after this morning
psalm, without mention of any other Next to tile ps.im
, , -, . . . followed the prayers
psalmody, or reading any lessons Out for the catechumens,
x energumens, coin-
of the Old or New Testament, follow pteitta, and peni-
tents.
the prayers for the several orders of
catechumens, energumens, candidates of baptism,
and penitents, as in the general service of the Lord's
day, which, because I shall recite them at large in
that service,6 I omit to mention any further in this
place. Only observing, that these prayers ¦ were
performed partly by the deacons irpooftbvriiTig, bidding
the people pray, and repeating the several petitions
they were to make for those several orders of men ;
and partly by the bishop's invocation or benediction
said over them, as they bowed down to receive the
blessing before their dismission.
When these several orders were sent _ . ,
Sect. I
away, there followed the prayers forTSfai.i,/iir.;E
which, on the Lord's day, began the K^V^S.
j i ¦ , of Christ's church.
communion service, and which upon
that account were usually styled euyai marav, the
prayers of the faithful, or communicants, because
none but they who had a right to communicate in
the eucharist might be present at them. These
were the prayers for the peace of the world, and all
orders of men in the church, which always went
before the consecration of the eucharist. And though
there were no consecration of the eucharist on these
ordinary days, yet these general prayers were al
ways used in the daily morning service. I omit the
reciting of them here for the same reason as I do
the former, because the reader may find them re
hearsed at large hereafter,7 in the entrance on the
communion service.
I only observe here, that there is Seot 5
mention made, in other writers as well
as the Constitutions, of these prayers
for the whole state of the world, and all orders of
men in the church. For Chrysostom, writing upon
those words of St. Paul, " I exhort, therefore, that
first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and
giving of thanks, be made for all men ; for kings,
and all that are in authority ;" says, This word, " first
of all," relates to the daily worship; wherein they
that were initiated knew what was done every day,
morning and evening;8 how we make supplication
to God for the whole world, for kings and all that
are in authority. This clearly shows, that such
prayers were not only made on communion days at

2 Chrys. Com. in Psal. cxl. t. 3. p. 545. Totovrds eo-ti
Kal b ieoBtvbs v/aXpos, Sec.
3 Cassian. Institut. lib. 3. cap. 3. De matutina vero so
lennitate etiam illud nos instruit, quod in ipsa quotidie de-
cantari solet, Deus meus ad te de luce vigilo.
4 Alhan. Ep. ad Marcellinum, t. 1. p. 975. 'OpBpiX,tov
lpdX\E TOV i^lJKOtTTOV SEVTEpOV.

5 Id. de Virginit. t. 1. p. 1057. Tlpos opBpov Si tov ij/uX-
pOV TOUTOV XtyETE, 'O QeOS, QeOS pOV, ITpOS HE OpBpi^tO.
6 See Book XIV. chap. 5. 7 See Book XV. chap. 1.
B Chrys. Horn. 6. in 1 Tim. p. 1550. Tovto taaatv ol
pvTat, iritis KaS' EKaTTjy vpipav yivETOl Kal iv EOiripa
/cat irpco'ta, Trios virip iravTos tov Kocrpov, Kat f3atrtXitov,
Kat irdvTtov Ttov iv virepoxi] ovtojv irotovpEBa tijv oetj<rty

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

667

the celebration of the eucharist, but every day, both
morning and evening also, when it is certain there
could be no sacrifice but only that of their prayers ;
for the consecration of the eucharist in that age
was never made at evening prayer. In this sense
we may understand many of the ancient apologists,
when they speak of making prayers continually for
the Roman government. Thus Dionysius, bishop
of Alexandria, tells iEmylian the prefect, We wor
ship the one God, Maker of all things, who gave
the empire to Valerian and Gallienus our divine
governors : to Him we pray9 continually for their
kingdom, that it may be preserved free from dis
turbance and commotion. And so TertuUian16 ac
quaints Scapula : We offer sacrifice for the emperor's
safety, but to no other god but our God and his ;
and in that manner as God has appointed, that is
to say, by prayer alone without blood. In like
manner Cyprian tells Demetrian :'¦ We continually
pour forth supplications and prayers for driving
away your enemies, and procuring rain, and either
for removing or moderating your calamities ; and
we pray instantly and incessantly day and night
for your peace and safety, appeasing God and ren
dering him propititious unto you. Origen also,12
answering the objection of Celsus, that the Chris
tians were wanting in their duty to the emperor, in
that they gave him no aid in his wars, and refused
to fight for him, among other things tells him, That
they gave him the most seasonable assistance, pro
curing him the Divine aid, and defending him with
the whole armour of God. And this they did in
obedience to the apostle's admonition, " I exhort,
therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, in
tercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all
men, for kings, and all that are in authority." He
adds, That keeping their hands pure, they fought
in their prayers to God for their lawful sovereign
and those that fought lawfully under him, that all
opposition and enemies might fall before them,
whilst they were lawfully employed. They by their
prayers enervated the power of devils, the authors
of war, and confounders of leagues, and disturbers
of peace ; and in doing this they did the emperor
more effectual service, than they that bare arms
for him. Athenagoras tells the emperors them
selves, in his address to them,13 That the Christians
prayed for their government and the royal progeny,
that the son might succeed the father in his king
dom according to right, and that their empire might

he extended and enlarged, all things succeeding ac
cording to their desire : and this they did, both that
they might lead a quiet and peaceable life, and
cheerfully observe all that was commanded them.
Now, though in all these passages there is no ex
press mention made of morning and evening prayer
in the church ; yet their continual prayer, and their
praying day and night, may reasonably be pre
sumed to include . these, without any prejudice to
other times of public or private devotion. I now
go on again with the order of morning prayer in
the Constitutions.
After the prayer for the whole state
of the church was ended, and the „ Alter the general
' prayer for the whole
deacon had said, " Keep us, O God, ra„l°dLh40S
and preserve us by thy grace ; " which smKHn'Kn-
concludes the former prayer ; he ex- su'°g ^'
horted the people to pray for peace and pros
perity the day ensuing and all their lives, in this
manner :
" Let us beg of God his mercies and compassions,
that this morning and this day, and all the time of
our pilgrimage, may be passed by us in peace and
without sin : let us beg of God, that he would
send us the angel of peace, and give us a Christian
end, and be gracious and merciful unto us. Let us
commend ourselves and one another to the living
God by his only begotten Son."
What is here said concerning the angel of peace,
is a petition that came often in the devotions of the
ancient church, both when they prayed for them
selves and others. For we shall meet with it again
in the evening service, and in the prayer for the
catechumens14 mentioned by St. Chrysostom in se
veral places of his writings, where he often speaks
of the deacon's bidding men pray for the angel of
peace, and that all their purposes may be directed
to a peaceable end. Which agree very well with
this prayer of the deacon in the Constitutions.
Immediately after this common Seot ,
prayer of the deacon and people to- comme}Ei„i*'"'„r
gether, (the deacon having bid the tha,,kssivins-
people commend themselves to God,) the bishop
makes this commendatory prayer, which is there
called evxapiTia bpBptv^, the morning thanksgiving,'3
and is in the follow ing words :
" 0 God, the God of spirits and of all flesh, with
whom no one can compare, whom no one can ap
proach, that givest the sun to govern the day, and
the moon and the stars to govern the night ; look

9 Dionys. Epist. ap. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 11. Tovtio StrjvEKtos
virip ti)s fiaatXEias avTuiv, oireos dvuXEVTOs Siapivt], irpotr-
EvxdpEBa. 10 Tertull. ad Scapulam, cap. 2. Sacrificamus pro salute
imperatoris, sed Deo nostro et ipsius : sed quomodo prae-
cepit Deus, pura prece. Vid. Apol. cap. 30, 31, et 39.
11 Cypr. ad Demetrian. p. 193. Pro arcendis hostibus et
imbribus impetrandis, et vel auferendis vel temperandis ad-

versis, rogamus semper et preces fundimus : et pro pace ac
salute vestra propitiantes ac placantes Deum, diebus ac
noctibus jugiter atque instanter oramus.
12 Orig. cont. Cels. lib. 8. p. 426.
13 Athenag. Legatio pro Christianis, p. 39.
14 See these places of Chrysostom cited Book XIV. chap,
5. sect. 4.
15 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 37.

668

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

down now upon us with the eyes of thy favour,
and receive our morning thanksgivings, and have
mercy on us. For we have not spread forth our
hands to any strange god. For there is not any
new god among us, but thou, our eternal and im
mortal God, who hast given us our being through
Christ, and our well-being through him also. Vouch
safe by him to bring us to everlasting life; with
whom unto thee be glory, honour, and adoration, in
the Holy Ghost, world without end. Amen."
sect. 8. After this the deacon bids them
tio.nndofl"hJSr*or how their heads and receive the im
position of hands, or the bishop's
benediction, which follows under the title of %upo-
Btoia bpBpivr), the imposition of hands in morning
prayer, in the form of words here annexed.
" O God, faithful and true, that showest mercy to
thousands and ten thousands of them that love thee ;
who art the friend of the humble, and defender of
the poor, whose aid all things stand in need of, be
cause all things serve thee : look down upon this thy
people, who bow their heads unto thee, and bless
them with thy spiritual benediction ; keep them as
the apple of the eye ; preserve them in piety and
righteousness, and vouchsafe to bring them to eter
nal life, in Christ Jesus thy beloved Son, with whom
unto thee be glory, honour, and adoration, in the
Holy Ghost, now and for ever, world without end.
Amen." This said, the deacon dismisses the congregation
with the usual form, Upok\BiTt iv eipi)vy, " Depart in
peace." Which Chrysostom takes notice of as the
solemn word for dismissing every church assembly.
For, speaking of the frequent use of the salutation,
Pax vobis, " Peace be unto you," he observes, that
as it was used in the beginning of every sacred ac
tion, prayer, preaching, blessing, &c, and sometimes
in the middle of prayers too, so particularly at the
bishop's entrance into the church, and the deacon's
final dismission of the assembly : The deacon, says
he, when he sends you away 1B from this meeting,
does it with this prayer, UopEvtoBt iv lipnvy, " Go in
peace." But besides this order of morning
Sect. 9. i.-,-, .,., ,,J
-whether the mom- prayer laid down in this place by the '
ing hymn was part £ J
or the public service author of the Constitutions, there is,
every day, in another place, a prayer or hymn
appointed for the morning, but whether for public
or private use, is not said ; I suppose he intended
it only for private devotion, because it is placed
among many other private prayers. He gives it
the name of irpoowxi, iu>6ivr), the morning prayer.
Other writers caU it the hymn, and the angelical
hymn, and the great doxology, from the first words

of it, " Glory be to God on high," which was the
angels' hymn at our Saviour's birth. The form of
it in this author runs in these words : 17
" Glory be to God on high, in earth peace, good
wiU towards men. We praise thee, we laud thee,
we bless thee, we glorify thee, we worship thee by
the great High Priest, thee the true God, the only
unbegotten, whom no one can approach, for thy
great glory, O Lord, heavenly King, God the Father
almighty : Lord God, the Father of Christ, the im
maculate Lamb, who taketh away the sin of the
world, receive our prayer, thou that sittest upon the
cherubims. For thou only art holy, thou only
Lord Jesus, the Christ of God, the God of every
created being, and our King. By whom unto thee
be glory, honour, and adoration.
This same hymn is mentioned also by Athana
sius, in his book of Virginity, but he gives it only
as a direction to virgins in their private devotions :
Early in the morning, says he, sing this psalm, " 0
God, my God, early will I awake unto thee. My
soul thirsteth for thee." (That is the 63rd Psalm.)
When it is light, say, " Bless ye the Lord, all ye
works of the Lord." (That is the Song of the Three
Children.) And,18 " Glory be to God on high, on
earth peace, good will towards men. We laud
thee, we bless thee, we worship thee ;" and what
follows. It is great pity this author did not give us
the whole hymn, that we might have compared it
with that in the Constitutions. It was always used
in the communion service, though not exactly in
the same form, as we shall see hereafter. But St.
Chrysostom19 speaks of it as used also daily at
morning prayer. For, describing the devotions of
those who led an ascetic life, he says, As soon as
they rose out of bed, they met together and made a
quire, and as it were with one mouth sang hymns
to God, praising him, and giving him thanks for
all his blessings both general and particular ; and,
among other things, like angels on earth, singing,
" Glory be to God on high, and on earth peace,
good will towards men." And MabiUon26 observes
out of the Rules of Csesarius Arelatensis and Aure
lian in the beginning of the sixth century, that it is
there appointed to be sung at matins, or morning
prayer, every Lord's day, and on Easter day, and
such other noted festivals. Which shows, that, at
least in some churches, it was used in other offices
besides the communion service, and among the
monks as an ordinary hymn in their daily morn
ing service. And so it is now used among the
modern Greeks, as a learned searcher of their
rituals21 informs us in his account of the Greek
church.

10 Chrys. Horn. 52. in eos qui Pascha jcjunant, t. 5.
p. 713.
" Constit. lib. 7. cap. 47.
19 Athan. de Virgin, t. 1. p. 1057.

19 Chrys. Horn. 69. in Matt. p. GOO.
20 Mabil. de Cursu Gallicano, p. 407.
21 Smith ofthe Greek Church, p. 224

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

669

But it seems a little more difficult to
whetherthe psalms account for another thing, which is
and lessons were . .
read at the daily omitted in the Constitutions. For
morning service. there isno order there eitherfor psalms
or lessons to be read in the morning service, be
sides that one psalm, which was particularly styled
the morning psalm. Whereas other authors, and
particularly Cassian, speak of three psalms read at
eveiy assembly through all the canonical hours of
the day ;22 and he remarks precisely for the morning
service the very psalms23 that were used, namely, the
50th, that is, our 51st, which they commonly called
the penitential psalm : " Have mercy upon me, 0
God, after thy great goodness : according to the
multitude of thy mercies, -do away my offences : "
and together with that, the 62nd Psalm, that is, the
63rd in our division, which was commonly called
the morning psalm, as we have noted before : and
the 89th, that is, our 90th Psalm, which is appro
priated to the funeral office, but is as proper for the
service of every day, and fit to be used by all men
whenever they begin a new day, because of those
excellent petitions in it for God's protection and
favour, and for wisdom to consider our latter end ;
" So teach us to number our days, that we may ap
ply our hearts unto wisdom :" and for that it so
famUiarly puts us in mind of our mortality, compar
ing our hfe to a sleep, which fades away suddenly
like the grass ; " In the morning it is green and
groweth up, but in the evening it is cut down, dried
up, and withered." By which we may judge both
of the wisdom and piety of the ancients in appoint
ing this psalm to be used constantly in the daily
course of morning service. Cassian observes further
in the same place,24 that in his time, throughout all
the churches of Italy, their morning hymns were
concluded with the penitential psalm, that is, the
50th according to his account, but with us the 51st.
And St. Basil25 remarks the same thing for many of
the churches of the East, that their vigils, or noctur
nal psalmody, was concluded, when the morning
appeared, with the psalm of confession, by which
he means no other but this same 51st, or peniten
tial psalm, as I have evidently showed in another 26
place. What shall we say then to the author of the

Constitutions, who speaks but of one psalm in the
morning service? I answer, 1. No doubt there were
different customs in different churches, and in no
thing did the practice vary more than in the rules
and measures about psalmody, as we shall see more
clearly hereafter. So that both accounts may be
very true, only applying them to the state and prac
tice of different churches. 2. I have observed be
fore,27 That the primitive morning service, in times
of persecution especially, was no other but the con
clusion of the vigils, or anteluean or nocturnal ser
vice, which concluded towards break of day with
some proper morning psalm, such as the 51st, or
63rd, or 90th, and certain prayers or collects proper
to the occasion ; the preceding part of the morning
having been spent in psalms and hymns to a greater
measure and number, sometimes ten, twelve, eigh
teen, or twenty, and these intermingled with lessons
of Scripture, and public or private prayers between
them ; but when the morning service was made a
distinct office from the vigils, as it began to be in
the fourth or fifth century, then some other psalms
were added to the morning psalm, and three psalms
at least were read in this as well as in all other of
fices ; and that is the reason why we meet with but
one psalm in the order for morning service in the
Constitutions, and three in others, which were of
later appointment. Cassian himself, who gives the
best account of these things of any other writer,
plainly favours this observation : for he tells us in
one place,28 that the Egyptians never admitted of
any morning office distinct from their nocturnal
vigils, nor of any other times of public worship be
sides the evening hours and nocturnal assemblies,
except on the sabbath and the Lord's day, when
they met also at the third hour, that is, at nine in
the morning, to celebrate the communion on those
days, All other times they spent in labouring pri
vately in their cells, joining continual meditation of
the Psalms and other Scriptures with their labour,
and mingling short prayers and ejaculations with
them ; so making the whole day but one continued
office of devotion, which others performed by inter
vals of time, and distinction of stated hours of prayer.
In another place29 he tells us, That they who first

22 Cassian. Institut. lib. 3. cap. 3. In Palaistinae et Me
sopotamia! monastery's ac totius Orientis supradictarum ho-
rarum solennitates tribus psalmis quotidie finiuntur.
23 Id. lib. 3. cap. 6. Quinquagesimum vero psalmum et
sexagesimum secundum et octogesimumnonumhuic novelise
solennitati novimus fuisse deputatos.
24 Cassian. ibid. Denique per Ilaliam hodieque consum-
matis matutinalibus hymnis quinquagesimus psalmus in
universis ecclesiis canitur.
23 Basil. Ep. 63. ad Neocsesar. t. 3. p. 96. "Eplpas nSi)
viroXapirBtn}s  orai/xts tov T7J9 ifcopoXoywereuos tyaXpbv
dvatpipBtrt Tip Kvpitp.
26 See below, sect. 13. of this chapter.
27 Book XIII. chap. 9. sect. 4 and 10.
28 Cassian. Institut. lib. 3. cap. 2. Apud illos ha;c officia,

qu£e Domino solvere per distinctiones horarum et temporis
intei-valla cum admonitione compulsoris adigimur, per to
tum diei spacium jugiter cum operis adjectione spontanea
celebrantur.  Quamobrem exceptis vespertinis horis ac
nocturnis congregationibus, nulla apud eos per diem publica
solennitas absque die sabbati vel Dominica eelebratur, in
quibus hora tertia sacra communionis obtentu conveniunt.
23 Ciss. lib. 3. cap. 6. Illud quoque nosse debemus, nihil
a senioribus nostris, qui eaudem matutinam solennitatem
addi debere censuerunt, de antiqua psalmorum consuetudine
iinmutatum : sed eodem ordine missam, quo prius in noc
turnis conventibus celebratam. Etenim hymnos, quos in
hac regione ad matutinam excepere solennitatem, in fine
nocturnarum vigiliarum, quas post gallorum canlum ante
auroram finire solent, similiter hodieque decantant, id est

670

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

brought in this new morning office, distinct from
the nocturnal, did not diminish aught of the ancient
psalmody from the nocturnal service ; for they con
tinued still to conclude their vigils before break of
day with the same psalms as they were used to do
before; that is, with 143th, 149th, 150th Psalms;
only they set apart the 51st, 63rd, and 90th Psalms
for this new office of morning service. From all
which it seems very probable, that, according to the
difference of times and places, the number of psalms
for the morning service might vary, since there were
such different methods in the observation of this
solemnity, and an old and a new office, that both
went by the name of morning service.
Having thus far described the order
The original of of the old morning service, as it lies
antelucan and night. . . . , - .
assembhes, in times m the Constitutions ; and hinted, that
of persecution. . .
the morning assembhes were origin
ally the very same with the nocturnal or antelucan
meetings for Divine service, which we so often read
of in ancient writers ; for the further illustration of
this part of the Christian worship, it will be proper
to inquire a httle more narrowly into the nature and
management of them from their first original; which
is known to have had its rise from the severity of
the heathen persecutions. For the Christians, being
afraid to meet publicly on the Lord's day for Di
vine worship, were forced to hold their assemblies
in the night, meeting early in the morning before
day, to avoid the observation of their enemies. This
appears from that early account of Pliny, which he
had from the mouths of some apostatizing Chris
tians, who confessed to him,30 that the sum of their
crime or error was, that they were used to meet to
gether on a certain day before it was light, and sing
a nymn to Christ, as to their God. Hence it is,
that the heathen in Minucius more than once31 ob
jects to them their night assemblies, and calls them
a sculking generation, that fled from the light, be
ing mute in public, but free in discourse with one
another, when they were got into their private
corners. Celsus82 seems to mean the same thing,
when he objects to them their holding of clancular
meetings, avvBi)Kag Kpv/iSijv. And Tertullian, to
show Christian women the inconvenience of marry
ing heathens, puts them in mind of these night

assemblies : What husband, says he,33 will be willing
to suffer his wife to rise from his side, and go to the
night assemblies. And Prudentius, describing the
martyrdom of St. Laurence, introduces the heathen
judge84 telling him, that he had heard how they sa
crificed in silver, and had their wax-lights set in gold » s
for the use of their night assemblies. And this was
the true original of lamps, and oil, and tapers for
the use of such meetings in time of persecution.
Now, though it was necessity which Secl 12
first gave rise to these assemblies; wSV'p"™"1!
yet the church in after ages thought ti°"s """ over-
fit to continue them, (transferring them from the
Lord's day to all other days,) partly to keep up the
spirit of devotion in the ascetics, or such as had be
taken themselves to a stricter life ; partly to give
leisure and opportunity to men of a secular life to
observe a seasonable time of devotion, which they
might do early in the morning without any distrac
tion ; and partly to guard her children against the
temptations and seduction of the Arian sect, who
with great zeal endeavoured to promote their heresy
by their psalmody in such meetings, as appears
from what Socrates35 and Sozomen36 say of them,
and what Sidonius Apollinaris particularly notes37
of Theodoric, king ofthe Goths, that he was so eager
a promoter of the Arian cause, that in his zeal for
them he frequented their morning assemblies before
day, with a small guard attending him. Now, the
catholics having so many reasons to keep up these
assemblies, not only continued them, but with great
zeal encouraged them in their discourses. St. Chry
sostom33 commends the widows and virgins for fre
quenting the church night and day, and singing
psalms in these assemblies. He says, Men ought38
to come to the sanctuary in the night, and pour out
their prayers there. In another place, speaking of
the excellency of the city of Antioch, he says, It
consisted not in its fine buildings or piUars, but in
the morals of the men. Go into the church,40 and
there see the excellency of the city. Go into the
church, and see the poor continuing there from mid
night to the morning light. And it is remarkable
what Socrates " says of him, when he was bishop
of Constantinople, That he made additional prayers
for the nocturnal hymns, on purpose to counter-

Psalmum 148, et reliquos qui sequuntur: quinquagesimum
vero psalmum, et sexagesimum secundum, et octogesimum
nonum huic novelise solennitati novimus fuisse deputatos.
30 Plin. lib. 10. Ep. 97. Affirmabant autem hanc fuisse
summam vel culpse subs, vel erroris, quod essent soliti stato
die ante lucem convenire : carmenque Christo, quasi Deo,
dicere secum invicem.
31 Minuc. de Idol. Vanit. p. 25. Nocturnis congregationi-
bus- — fcederantur. Latebrosa et lucifugax natio, in publi
cum muta, in angulis garrula. It. p. 27. Occultis ac noc
turnis sacris apposita suspicio.
32 Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 1. p. 4.
83 Tertul. ad Uxor. lib. 2. cap. 4. Quis nocturnis convo-

cationibus, si ita oportuerit, a latere suo eximi libenler
feret ? It. de Coron. Mil. cap. 3.
31 Prudent. Hymn. 2. de Laurentio. Argenteis scyphis
ferunt fumare sacrum sanguinem, auroque nocturnis sacris
adstare fixos cereos.
35 Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 8. 36 Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 8.
37 Sidon. lib. 1. Ep. 2. Antelucanos sacerdotum suorum
ccetus minimo comitatu expetit.
38 Chrys. Horn. 30. in 1 Cor. p. 591.
99 Chrys. Com. in Psal. cxxxiii. t. 3. p. 488.
" Chrys. Horn. 4. de Verbis Esaiee, t. 3. p. 865.
41 Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 7. HC£ijo-e irpioTos Kal tos icEpi
TOVS VVKTEptVOVS vpVOVS EUX«S-

Chap. X.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

671

tbem,
by St. Basil.

mine the practice of the Arians. But I must not
stand to repeat aU that is said of these famous
morning assemblies ; for there is scarce an ecclesi
astical writer42 that has not given some hint of
them, which I need not recite, but rather go on to
show what were the chief exercises of these meet
ings, which usually began soon after midnight, and
continued to the morning light.
sect 13 ^k Basil, in one of his epistles,
vinXr-te whSh gives us a pretty clear description of
^Tsoribed them, though but in general terms,
whilst he makes an apology for the
practices of his own church, against some who
charged them with innovation. His words are
these: The customs, says he, which now prevail
among 11s,43 are consonant and agreeable to all
the churches of God. For with us the people,
rising early, whilst it is night, come to the house of
prayer, and there, with much labour and affliction,
and contrition and tears, make confession of their
sins to God. When this is done, they rise from
prayers, and dispose themselves to psalmody : some
times dividing themselves into two parts, they
answer one another in singing, or sing alternately,
dvrti'/aXXoiio-tv dXXi)Xoig : after this again they per
mit one alone to begin the psalm, and the rest join
in the close of every verse, birnxovoi. And thus with
this variety of psalmody they carry on the night,
praying betwixt whiles, or intermingling prayers
with their psalms, pETah\b irpooEvxdpEvot. At last,
when the day begins to break forth, they all in com
mon, as with one mouth and one heart, offer up to
God the psalm of confession, tov rrjg 0;opoXoyi)trEoig
tydhpbv rtp Ktipi'tj) dvatfikpovm, every one making the
words of this psalm to be the expression of his own
repentance. Here we have the plain order of these
nocturnal or morning devotions. 1. Confession of
sins. 2. Psalms sung alternately. 3. Psalms sung
by one alone. 4. Prayers between the psalms.
5. Lastly, The common psalm of confession, or the
penitential psalm, in the close of all. Whether the
first confession of sins was a pubhc or private one,
is not very certain; some learned persons44 take it
for a public confession, like that in the beginning
of our liturgy ; but I rather think it was a private
confession, with which we are sure their offices
generally began, as appears from a canon of the
council of Laodicea,45 where it is called the silent
prayer, ivxi) Sid aaoirfig, of which I have given a
fuller account in the communion service.46 The

latter confession was plainly a public one, made by
a certain form, being no other but the 51st Psalm,
" Have mercy on me, O God, after thy great good
ness : according to the multitude of thy mercies, do
away mine offences." For this psalm was par
ticularly noted among the ancients by the name of
the psalm of confession. Athanasius gives it47 this
title, telling us that the 50th Psalm, which is the
51st in our division, is \paXpbg IkopoXoynattog, the
psalm of confession. And what further confirms
this interpretation is, that this very psalm by name
is appointed to be used in the close of the matins,
or morning service, which the Western churches
introduced as distinct from the nocturnal service,
as Cassian48 relates, who was an eye-witness of it.
See before, sect, 10.
What number of psalms or prayers
. . , . . . Sect. 14.
was used in this service, is not par- tim account of
, x them out of Cassian.
ticularly noted by St. Basil; nor per
haps was it stinted to any certain number, but ac
cording as the length of the psalms or time required.
But in the Egyptian churches they reduced it to
the precise number of twelve psalms, from whence
some other churches afterwards took their model,
as Cassian informs us,49 who says, That in other
regions there were different rules and appointments :
for some recited no less than twenty psalms, and
these by way of antiphonal or alternate melody ;
others exceeded this number ; others had eighteen ;
so that there were almost as many ways and rules
as there were monasteries and cells. Nay, in Egypt,
before the rule was settled, some were for having50
fifty, some sixty psalms ; but at last, upon mature
advice, they fixed upon51 the certain number of
twelve psalms both for their evening and morning
service, interposing a prayer between each psalm, and
adding two lessons, one out of the Old Testament,
and the other out of the New; which was their cus
tom on all days, except Saturdays and Sundays, when
they repeated them both out of the New Testament,
the one out of St. Paul's Epistles or the Acts ofthe
Apostles, and the other out of the Gospels, as they
did also for the whole term of fifty days between
Easter and Whitsuntide. He adds further, That
they did not use the alternate way of singing in
Egypt, but only one amongst them sung with a
plain and even voice, the rest sitting by, and attend
ing to what was said. Neither did they answer,
" Glory be to the52 Father, and to the Son, and to the
Holy Ghost," at the end of every psalm, but inter-

42 Vid. Epiphan. in fine Panarii. Hieronym. Ep. 7. ad
Laetam. Hilar, in Psal. lxiv. p. 231.
43 Basil. Ep. 63. ad Neocaesar. t. 3. p. 96.
44 Hamon. L'Estrange, Alliance of Divin. Offic. cap.
3. p. 75.
45 Cone. Laodicen. can. 19.
16 See Book XV. chap. 1. sect. I.
47 Athan. Ep. ad Marcellinum, de Interpr. Psalmor. t.
1. p. 975.

'" Cassian. Institut. lib. 3. cap. 6.
49 Cassian. lib. 2. cap, 2. Quidam vicenos psalmos, et hos
ipsos antiphonarum protelatos melodiis, et adjunctione qua-
rundam modulationum debere diei singulis noctibus cen-
suerunt, &c.
50 Cass. ibid. cap. 5. 51 Id. cap. 6.
52 Cassian. lib. 2. cap. 8. Illud etiam quod in hac pro-
vincia (Gallia) vidimus, ut uno cantante, in clausula psalmi
omnes astantes concinant cum clamore ; Gloria Patri, et

67:

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

posed a prayer (which was the custom of aU the
East); and then at the end of the last psalm, which
they called the hallelujah, they subjoined the glori
fication of the Trinity, which they never used but
at the end of that antiphona, as they called the
hallelujah in the Eastern church. When the psalms
were very long, they sometimes divided them into
two or three parts, and at the end of every part
made a stop to interpose a prayer,53 thinking it bet
ter to use frequent and short prayers to keep up
the fervour of devotion. It does not appear, that
these were public prayers, but rather private, at the
end of which the chief minister officiating is said
colligere precem, to make a collect or prayer, reca
pitulating the prayers that were made before by the
assembly in private ; of which I shall have occasion
to give a fuller account in another place. See Book
XV. chap.i. sect. 1. It is noted further by Cassian,54
concerning the last of their psalms, called the anti
phona, or hallelujah, that no psalm was ever used
in this place but only one of those which had the
inscription of hallelujah prefixed in the title of it,
such as the 145th, and those that follow, one of
which was commonly the concluding psalm, repeat
ed by way of antiphona or responses. It was
something particular in the manner of performing
this psalmody in those Egyptian monasteries, that
he that sung the psalms only stood up, but the rest
heard them sitting: which Cassian55 observes to be
matter of indulgence in regard to their continual
watchings and hard labour. And it was no less
peculiar, that never above four persons were allowed
to repeat the twelve psalms in one assembly, and
that by course, every one singing three in order after
one another. Or if there were but three, then each
sung four psalms ; and if but two, each of them
sung six. And thus far of the nocturnal psalm-
This morning ser- ody, which was the old morning
vice much frequent- .
ed by the laity of au service ol the church. 1 only add,
sorts. J
that though this service was very
early in the morning, yet it was frequented, not by
the clergy and monks only, but by the people also.
For, as we have seen before, St. Basil takes notice,
that the people came to church to celebrate these
morning devotions ; and Sidonius has told us also,
that Theodoric, king of the Goths, was a constant
observer of them. So here it is also remarked by

Cassian,56 that this part of the church's devotions
was with great exactness observed by many secular
men, who, rising early before day, would not engage
themselves in any of their most necessary and ordi
nary worldly business, before they had consecrated
the first-fruits of all their actions and labours to God,
by going to church, and presenting themselves in
the Divine presence. A worthy example, fit to be
recorded in letters of gold, to excite the emulation
of the present age, wherein the daily worship of
God at religious assemblies is so little frequented,
and by many so much despised ; though the same
service with that of the ancients for substance is
still retained, with some improvements, and none of
the corruptions which the superstition of darker
ages brought into the devotions of the church ; as
any one may satisfy himself, that will compare what
has been delivered in this chapter with the daily
service of our church.

CHAPTER XI.
THE ORDER OF THEIR DAILY EVENING SERVICE.
The evening service, which was call
ed the hora lucernaris, because it be- The evening ser
vice in most IniiiTS
gan at the time of lighting candles conformed to that
o o o of the morning,
towards the close of the day, was in
most parts the same with that of the morning, only
with such variation of psalms, and hymns, and
prayers, as were proper to the occasion. The pray
ers for the catechumens, energumens, candidates of
baptism, and penitents were all the same ; so were
the prayers for the faithful or communicants, called
the prayers for the peace of the world, and the
whole state of the catholic church, which are de
scribed at large in the following Books, to which
the reader may have recourse.
The first thing wherein they dif- sect. a.
t. -. ,, . .i. , , - But they differed,
tered was, the initial psalm : tor as first, in that a pm-
- per psalm was ap-
the morning service began with the pointed for theeven-
° ° ing, called the even-
63rd Psalm, so the evening service is i"Jf„0prsa0fVfcon-
appointed to begin with the 140th «"'»'i»°s-
Psalm, which we reckon the 141st. "Lord, I call
upon thee, haste thee unto me, and consider my

Filio, et Spiritui Sancto; nusquam per omnem Orientem
audivimus; sed cum omnium silentio, abeo qui cantat finito
psalmo, orationem succedere : hanc vero glorificationem
Trinitatis tantummodo solere antiphona terminari. (Leg.
antiphonam terminare. Vel, ut legit Mabillon, glorifica-
tione, &c. antiphona terminari.)
53 Cassian. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 11. Ne psalmos quidem ip
sos, quos in congregationibus decantant, continuata student
prouunciatione conludere : sed eos pro numero versuum
duabus vel tribus intercessionibus cum orationum interjec-
tione divisos distinctim particulatimque consummant.

54 Cassian. ibid. Illud quoque apud eos omni observantia
custoditur, ut in responsione alleluias nullus dicatur psalinus,
nisi is, qui in titulo suo alleluias inscriptions prainotatur.
55 Id. lib. 2. cap. 11 et 12.
56 Cassian. Collation. 21. cap. 26. Quod devotionis genus
multi etiam ssecularium summa cautione custodiunt, qui
ante lucem vel diluculo consurgentes, nequaquam familiar-
ibus ac necessariis mundi hujus actibus implicantur, prius-
quam cunctorum actuum suorum operationumque primitias,
ad ecclesiam concurrentes, divino studeaut consecrare con-
spectui.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

673

voice when I cry unto thee. Let my prayer be set
forth in thy sight as the incense, and let the hfting
up of my hands be an evening sacrifice," &c. This
psalm the author of the Constitutions calls empha-
ticaUy rbv imXvxviov ipaXpbv,' the evening psalm, in
the place where he describes the order of this ser
vice. And though he does not in that place either
name the psalm, or mention any words in it ;.yet he
infallibly means the psalm now spoken of, because
in another place2 he expressly calls it the 140th
Psalm, requiring it to be used in public assemblies
at the daUy evening service.
Sect 3 And that which puts the matter be-
tioTnrfuS« theen" y°n(i aU dispute, is, that Chrysostom,
rci.rys°°°om SS in his Comment upon this psalm, takes
other writers. ^^ q{ ^ ^ Qf jj ^ ^ church
upon this particular occasion. Hearken dUigently,
says he,3 for it was not without reason that our fa
thers appointed this psalm to be said every evening;
not barely for the sake of that single expression,
" Let the lifting up of my hands be an evening
sacrifice ;" for other psalms have expressions of the
same nature, as that which says, " At evening, and
morning, and noon-day wiU I show forth thy praise :"
and again, " The day is thine, and the night is thine :"
and again, " Weeping may endure for a night, but
joy cometh in the morning :" and many other such
like psalms may one find, that are proper for the
evening season. Therefore our fathers did not or
der this psalm to be said upon the account of this
expression, but they appointed the reading of it, as
a sort of salutary medicine to cleanse us from sin ;
that whatever defilement we may have contracted
throughout the whole day, either abroad, in the
market, or at home, or in whatsoever place, when
the evening comes, we might put it aU off by this
spiritual charm, or song, which is a medicine to
purge away all such corruption.
sect. 4. After this psalm was ended, there
p™JSs"rcJ' erening followed the same prayers for the cate
chumens, energumens, penitents, and
common prayers for the world and the church, that
were used in the morning service ; but after them
the deacon bid the people pray in a certain form
proper for the evening, which the author of the
Constitutions4 styles irpoo-tjubvno-tg iiriXvxviog,the even
ing bidding prayer, and it runs in these words : " Let
us pray to the Lord for his mercies and compassions ;
and entreat him to send us the angel of peace, and
all good things convenient for us, and that he would
grant us to make a Christian end. Let us pray, that
this evening and night may pass in peace, and with
out sin, and all the time of our life unblamable
and without rebuke. Let us commend ourselves and
one another to the living God through his Christ."

1 Constit. lib. 8. cap. 35. 2 Id. Jib. 2. cap. 59.
3 Chrys. Horn, in Psal. cxl. t. 3. p. 544.
2 X

This said, the bishop, if present, made this com
mendatory coUect, which is there styled imXvxvioc
ivxapwria, the evening thanksgiving, and is con
ceived in the following words : " 0 God, who art
without beginning and without end, the Maker and
Governor of all things through Christ, the God and
Father of him before all things, the Lord of the
Spirit, and King of all things both intellectual and
sensible ; that hast made the day for works of light,
and the night to give rest to our weakness : for the
day is thine, and the night is thine ; thou hast pre
pared the light and the sun : do thou now, most
kind and gracious Lord, receive this our evening
thanksgiving. Thou that hast led us through the
length of the day, and brought us to the beginning
of the night, keep and preserve us by thy Christ ;
grant that we may pass this evening in peace, and
this night without sin ; and vouchsafe to bring us
to eternal' life through thy Christ ; by whom be
glory, honour, and adoration unto thee in the Holy
Spirit, world without end. Amen."
After this, the deacon bids the people KXivare rg
XeipoBeeria, bow down to receive the benediction with
imposition of hands, and then the bishop makes
this following prayer : " O God of our fathers, and
Lord of mercy, that hast created man by thy wis
dom a rational being, and of aU thy creatures upon
earth dearest unto thee, that hast given him do
minion over the earth, and hast made us by thy
pleasure to be kings and priests, the one to secure
our lives, and the other to preserve thy lawful wor
ship : be pleased now, O Lord Almighty, to bow
down and show the light of thy countenance upon
thy people, who bow the neck of their heart before
thee ; and bless them by Christ, by whom thou hast
enlightened us with the light of knowledge, and re
vealed thyself unto us : with whom is due unto thee
and the Holy Ghost the Comforter, all worthy ador
ation from every rational and holy nature, world
without end. Amen."
There are two expressions in these prayers, which
may seem a little unusual to a modern reader ; one,
where prayer is made for the angel of peace ; and
the other, which styles God the Father, Lord of the
Spirit : but both these occur in the morning prayers
for the catechumens, hereafter,6 where I show out
of Chrysostom, that prayer for the angel of peace
was a common petition in many of the known forms
of the church : and for that other expression, which
styles the Father, Lord of the Spirit, which is a
harsh way of speaking, and looks like Macedo-
nianism, as Cotelerius remarks upon it, I have
showed out of Bishop Bull, that it may fairly be
interpreted to a sound and catholic sense from
parallel expressions in Justin Martyr. So that we

' Constit. lib. 8. cap. 36.
6 Book XIV. chap. 5. sect. 3.

5 Ibid. cap. 37.

674

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

need not condemn this author as an Arian or Mace
donian heretic, only allowing him the favour of a
candid interpretation.
To return, therefore, to the prayers themselves :
the deacon, after these collects made by the bi
shop, dismisses the people with the usual form, as
in the morning service, UpoeXBsrE iv siprjvy, " Depart
in peace." And this is the conclusion of the evening
service, according to our author in this place.
But in another place7 he speaks
of the evening also of an evening hymn, which he
hymn. styles tvxy) ioirepivbg, an evenmg prayer
or thanksgiving, which is a sort of doxology to God,
like that used before in the morning prayer. The
form is in these words : " Praise the Lord, ye serv
ants, O praise the name of the Lord. We praise
thee, we laud thee, we bless thee, for thy great
glory, O Lord and King, the Father of Christ the
unspotted Lamb, that taketh away the sin of the
world. All praises, and hymns, and glory, are
justly rendered unto thee our God and Father, by
thy Son, in the most Holy Spirit, for all ages, world
without end. Amen. Lord, now lettest thou thy
servant depart in peace, according to thy word : for
mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast
prepared before the face of all people ; to be a light
to lighten the Gentiles, and to be the glory of thy
people Israel."
It is not here said, whether this hymn was for
public or private use. However, that there were
such sort of hymns in use among the ancients at the
first bringing in of candles in the evening, is evident
from St. Basil, who mentions one part of such a
hymn, which he styles imXvxvwg Evxapio-ria, the
thanksgiving at setting up lights. It seemed good,
says he, to our forefathers8 not to receive the gift
of the evening light altogether with silence, but to
give thanks immediately upon its appearance. We
cannot certainly tell who was the first author of
that thanksgiving at setting up lights ; but this we
are sure of, that the people have of old used this
form of words, (and no one ever charged them with
impiety for so doing,) Aivovpev \Tarkpa, ml 'Yidv, Kal
"Aytov Uvevpa Qeoij, We praise the Father, and the
Son, and the Holy Spirit of God.
Bishop Usher9 and Dr. Smith10 have given us
an ancient form of this kind more at large, out of
the Alexandrian Manuscript of the Septuagint,
and some other ancient copies of the Psalter in
Greek, which it may not be improper to insert in

7 Constit. lib. 7. cap. 48.
8 Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. 29.
8 Usserii Diatriba de Symbolis, p. 35.
10 Smith's Account of the Greek Church, p. 302.
11 $ujs IXapov dyias S6£t]S dOairaTou IlttTijds, oiipaviov
dyiov, pt'tKapos, 'li)aov Xpio-rt- iXBovTES iirl -roO bXiov
oiitrtv, ISovtes tpibs io-TTEpivov, bpvovpEV TittTEpa ital 'Ytov
Kal "Aytov TlvEupa QeoZ. (al. Qeov.) "A£ios eI iv iriai

this place. It goes in some books under the title
of vpvog eampivbg, the evening hymn ; and in others
it is called vpvog tov Xvxvikov, the hymn said at
setting up lights. We cannot certainly say this
is the same that St. Basil refers to, but all that St.
Basil mentions out of that ancient hymn, is now
found in this ; which makes it probable that they
are the very same. It is as follows :'' " 0 Jesus
Christ, thou joyful light of the sacred glory of the
immortal, heavenly, holy, blessed Father ! we now,
being come to the setting of the sun, and seeing the
evening light, do laud and praise the Father, and
Son, and Holy Spirit of God (or the Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost, that is God). Thou art worthy to
have hymns at all times sung unto thee with holy
voices, 0 Son of God that givest life. Therefore
the world glorifies thee." Bishop Usher, by mistake,
says this hymn was the same as the ipaXpbg iinXbxviog,
the evening psalm mentioned in the Constitutions,
lib. 8. cap. 35. Whereas indeed that evening psalm
was quite another thing from this evening hymn ;
that being one of David's Psalms, as I showed be
fore out of Chrysostom and the Constitutions them
selves ; and this a hymn of human composition.
Neither is it the same form with the evening hymn
related before out of the Constitutions, but seems
more likely to be that mentioned by St. Basil, which,
I conceive, was not a form for public, but only pri
vate devotion, to be used at home by aU Christians,
as a pious ejaculation or hymn to Christ, " the true
Light that enlightens every man that comes into the
world." But I only offer this as a conjecture, be
cause I find not this hymn mentioned, as inserted
into the public offices, either by the author of the
Constitutions, or St. Basil, or any other.
But then it may be asked, Were
there no hymns used in the evening whether there
n -itt .-i . -. were any hymns.nr
service r W ere there no lessons read, psaim., or lessons,
read in the eveninir
nor psalms, besides that called the «"»« bfsides *>*
* 141st Psalm.
evening psalm, sung in the church ?
I answer, No doubt there were in many churches ;
for the customs of churches varied in this matter ;
and though the author of the Constitutions men
tions them not in the rituals of the churches he
describes, yet other accounts do. For Cassian,12
describing the customary service of the Egyptian
monasteries, says, They sung twelve psalms every
morning and evening in their solemn meetings, and
had two lessons read, one out of the Old Testa
ment, and the other out of the New, and had pray-

KatpoXs vpvEXtrBal epaivaXs btrlais, 'Tie 6eoii, X,eoi)V b SiSobs'
Sid b Koerpos oe <5o£d£ei.
12 Cassian. Institut. lib. 2. cap. 6. Exin venerabilis Pa
trum senatus  decrevit hunc munerum (12 psalmorum)
tam in vespertinis, quam in nocturnis conventiculis custo-
dii-i, quibus lectiones geminas adjungentes, id est, unam
Veteris et aliam Novi Testamenti, &c. Vid. cap. 8.

Chap. XI.

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

675"

ers also between the psalms ; and sung the Gloria
Patri at the end of the last psalm. St. Jerom con
firms this account, and adds, that they had a ser
mon made by the abbot (who was always a presby
ter) every day after evening prayer. For thus he
describes their evening devotions : At nine o'clock
they meet together, then the psalms are sung, and
the Scriptures are read ; 13 and prayers being ended,
they all sit down, and one among them, whom they
call their father, begins to discourse to them, whom
they hear with the profoundest silence and venera
tion. But it may be said, this perhaps was only the
custom of the monasteries, and not of the churches.
In answer to which Epiphanius assures us,14 it was
the custom of the church to have psalms and
hymns continually both at morning and evening
prayer. St. Austin also mentions hymns 15 as well
as prayers at evening service ; which implies, that
they had more psalms than one sung upon that oc
casion. St. Hilary, upon those words of the psalm
ist, " The outgoings of the morning and evening
shaU praise thee ; " shows the same, when he says,
The progression of the church to her morning and
evening hymns with delight, is a great sign of God's
mercy. The day16 is begun with prayers, and the
day is closed with hymns to God. St. Hilary him
self is said to be the author of some of those hymns,
and St. Ambrose of others, which were of public
use in the church : and though some would have
rejected them, because they were only of human
composure, and not to be found in Scripture, yet
the fourth council of Toledo17 ordered them to be
retained in the public service of the church, toge
ther with the hymns, " Glory be to the Father," and
" Glory be to God on high,"'which were likewise of
human composition. For the Eastern churches,
the like is said by Chrysostom,18 that they had
hymns. at night in their evening prayer, as well as

morning. In the Gallican churches they had, be
sides their collects and prayers, both hymns and
antiphonas, or chapters, as they called them, col
lected out of the Psalms, to be said by way of
responses, as appears from the council of Agde.19
And the second council of Tours orders, That at
evening prayer, which they call the twelfth hour of
prayer, twelve psalms should be sung,20 answerable
to the order of morning service, which had twelve
psalms, as the sixth hour of prayer had six psalms,
with the additional psalm called the Hallelujah.
From all which it is apparent, that a considerable
number of psalms and hymns were used together
with the prayers, to make up the daily course
of evening as well as morning service in many
churches. And in some churches the Lord's
prayer was always made a part of the The LoYd-s'prayer
T ., , . , , . -, used in some
daily worship both morning and even- churches *s the con-
, , elusion of the dally,
ing. For the council of Girone21 made bolh. morning and
° evening service.
a general decree for the Spanish
churches, that the Lord's prayer should constantly
be used by every priest at the close of the matins
and vespers in the daily service. It had always
been used before on Sundays in the communion
office ; but it being, in the very title and tenor of it,
quotidiana oratio, a quotidian or daily prayer, they
thought it proper to make it a standing part of their
daily offices. And when some priests neglected to
obey this order, and still confined the use of it to
the Lord's day, the fourth council of Toledo22 made
a decree, That all such of the clergy as contuma
ciously refused to use it daily both in their public
and private offices, should be degraded.
In the French churches the practice was the
same. For by a canon of the third council of Or
leans,23 the people are obliged to stay at Divine
service till the Lord's prayer was said ; and if the

13 Hieron.- Ep. 22. ad Eustochium, cap. 15. Post horam
nonamiii commune concurritur, psalmi resonant, Scriptural
recitantur ex more. Et completis orationibus, cunctisque
residentibus, medius quem patrem vocant, incipit dispu-
tare, &c.
14 Epiphan. Exppsit. Fidei, n. 23. p. 1106. 'EooBivoi te
vpvoi iv avTij tij dyia EKKXrjaia SiijvekeXs yivovTat, Kal
irpootEVXal ito&tvul, Xvxvikoi te iipa \ffaXpol Kal irpotTEvxal.
15 Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 22. cap. 8. p. 1485. Ad ves-
pertinos illuc hymnos et orationes cum ancillis suis et qui-
busdam sanctimonialibus ex more Domiua possessionis in-
travit, atque hymnos cantare cceperunt.
16 Hilar, in Psalm, lxiv. p. 231. Progressus ecclesiae in
matutinum (leg. matutinorum) etvespertinorum hymnorum
delectatione maximum raisericordise Dei signum est. Dies
in orationibus Dei inchoatur, dies hymnis Dei clauditur.
17 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 12.
18 Chrys. Horn. 18. in Act. p. 174.
19 Cone. Agathen. can. 30. In conclusione matutinarum
vel vespertinarum missarum, post hymnos, capitella de
psalmis diei, et plebem, collecta oratione, ad vesperam ab

episcopo cum benedictione dimitti.
20 Cone. Turon. 2. can. 18. Patrum statuta prseceperunt,
ut ad sextam sex psalmi dicantur cum alleluia ; et ad duo-
decimam duodecim, itemque cum alleluia. It. can. 24. Et
licet Ambrosianos habeamus hymnos in canone, Sec.
21 Cone. Gerundense, can. 10. Item nobis semper pla
cuit observari, ut omnibus diebus post matutinas et vesperas
oratio Dominica a sacerdote proferatur.
22 Cone. Tolet. 4. can. 9. Nonnulli sacerdotum in Hispa-
niis reperiuntur, qui Dominicam. orationem, quam Salvatnr
noster docuit et prsecepit, non quotidie, sed tantum die Un-
minica dicant. — Quisquis ergo sacerdotum, vel subjacen-
tium clericorum, hanc orationem Dominicam quotidie aut
in publico aut in privato officio preeterierit, propter supcr-
biam judicatus, ordinis sui honore privetur.
23 Cone. Aurel. 3. can. 28. De missis nullus laicornm
ante discedat, quam Dominica dicatur oratio. Et si epis
copus praesens fuerit, ejus benedictio expectetur. Sacrificia
vero matutina (leg. matutinarum) missarum, vel vesper
tinarum, ne quis cum armis pertinentibus ad bellorum usum,
expetat.

676

ANTIQUITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

Book XIII.

bishop was present, to wait for him to pronounce
the benediction, which shows that it was the con
clusion of the prayers, since nothing came after
but the benediction. It is true, the word used for
Divine service in this canon, is missa ; which might
seem to mean the communion service, where the
Lord's prayer was always used : but it has- been
showed before, in the first chapter of this Book, that
missa is a general name for any part of Divine
service ; and in this canon is particularly taken for
the morning and evening sacrifice of prayers. For
it immediately follows, that no one should come to
the sacrifice of morning or evening mass, that is,
morning or evening prayers, with his arms or
weapons, which only appertained to the use of war.

Besides, that in the communion service, as we shall
see hereafter, the Lord's prayer came always in the
middle, and not, as here, in the conclusion of the
service. This is the substance of what I have observed
concerning the several parts and order of the daily
morning and evening service in the writings of the
fathers and the canons of the councils, which are at
present the chief rituals of the ancient church : ard
I have been the more careful to separate these
offices from the great service of the Lord's day, be
cause they are too often confounded in the accounts
of modern authors. I now proceed to the offices
and service of the Lord's day, which must be the
subject of the two following Books.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 02114 3400

- • " .-