Church-history of the government of bishops and their councils abbreviated including the chief part…

§. 3. But I must not conceal from the Reader that Baronius and Dion. Petavius say, that Epiphanius is deceived in all this History, and maketh the case of the Meletians better than it was; and that some Meletian knave beguiled him: But, 1. They give us no proof of any such knaves beguiling him at all: 2. And he that was so apt to over-do in suspecting and aggravating Heresies, (as in Origen's and Chrysostom's Case,) was not likely to make the Case here so much better than it was: 3. And how much nearer was Epiphanius in time and place, than Baronius and Petavius? and how easy was it then for him to have true notice of such public things? 4. And if they make Epiphanius so fallacious in such a story as this, so near him, what a shake doth it give to the Credit of his copious History of the many other Heresies, which he had less opportunity to know: and consequently to the Credit of much of Church-History? Yet I confess, that the man seemeth not to be very accurate in his Disputes, nor all his Narratives; But rather by far to be suspected of making things worse than they were, than better. And I believe that some passages in this History are mistaken by him (as that the Meletians joined with the Arians before the death of Alexander:) but that maketh their Case the better. Petavius saith also, p. 286. Animad. in Epiph. Multum in Historiâ Meletii lapsum esse suprà vidimus; Largiùs in Arianae Haeresis description peccavit vir alioqui diligentissimus. And in his instance of the time of Arius death it's undeniable. But if in such famous Histories, we must read him with such suspicion and allowance, how much more in the many little ones that were more obscure?

§. 3. But I must not conceal from the Reader that Baronius and Dion. Petavius say, that Epiphanius is deceived in all this History, and maketh the case of the Meletians better than it was; and that some Meletian knave beguiled him: But, 1. They give us no proof of any such knaves beguiling him at all: 2. And he that was so apt to over-do in suspecting and aggravating Heresies, (as in Origen's and Chrysostome's Case,) was not likely to make the Case here so much better than it was: 3. And how much nearer was Epiphanius in time and place, than Baronius and Petavius? and how easie was it then for him to have true notice of such publick things? 4. And if they make Epiphanius so fallacious in such a story as this, so near him, what a shake doth it give to the Credit of his copious History of the many other Heresies, which he had less opportunity to know: and consequently to the Credit of much of Church-History? Yet I confess, that the man seemeth not to be very accurate in his Disputes, nor all his Narratives; But rather by far to be suspected of making things worse than they were, than better. And I believe that some passages in this History are mistaken by him (as that the Meletians joyned with the Arians before the death of Alexander:) but that maketh their Case the better. Petavius saith also, p. 286. Animad. in Epiph. Multum in Historiâ Meletii lapsum esse suprà vidimus; Largiùs in Arianae Haeresis descriptione peccavit vir alioqui diligentissimus. And in his instance of the time of Arius death it's undeniable. But if in such famous Histories, we must read him with such suspicion and allowance, how much more in the many little ones that were more obscure?