A33359:170
Diocesan churches not yet discovered in the primitive times
Diocesan churches not yet discovered in the primitive times, or, A defence of the answer to Dr. Stillingfleets allegations out of antiquity for such churches against the exceptions offered in the preface to a late treatise called A vindication of the primitive church, where what is further produced out of Scripture and ancient authors for diocesan churches is also discussed.Diocesan churches not yet discovered in the primitive times, or, A defence of the answer to Dr. Stillingfleets allegations out of antiquity for such churches against the exceptions offered in the preface to a late treatise called A vindication of the primitive church, where what is further produced out of Scripture and antient authors for diocesan churches is also discussed.
London: printed for Thomas Parkhurst, 1682
Diocesan Churches not yet discovered in the Primitive times.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
But the mistake is his own, and such a one, as I wonder how he could fall into it. He takes it for granted, that the Argument is brought to prove what Christians Alexandria had in Strabo's time. Here is not the least occasion given for this, unless the citing of Strabo showing the dimensions of that City: but Primate Usher is quoted too, on the same account; and so as much reason to fancy the design was to show what Christians Alexandria had in the Primate's time. Jerome, Epiphanius, Theodoret, Socrates, Sozomen are also cited there; why could not these as well lead him to the right Age, which their words plainly point at, without the least glance at any Age before, as Strabo alone (cited without any respect to the time when he writ) so far mislead him? Nay, the 4th. age is expressly mentioned in the Letter; and the numerousness of the Novatians and Arians in Alexandria at the time intended, is insisted on; could he think any man so stupid, that had but the least acquaintance with those things, as to speak of Arians, and Novatians in Strabo's time? But it may be, though I would hope better, our Examiner was too inclinable to fix an absurd thing upon the Writer of the Letter; that he might be excused, from giving a better answer when it was not ready.
But the mistake is his own, and such a one, as I wonder how he could fall into it. He takes it for granted, that the Argument is brought to prove what Christians Alexandria had in Strabo's time. Here is not the least occasion given for this, unless the citing of Strabo shewing the dimensions of that City: but Primate Ʋsher is quoted too, on the same account; and so as much reason to fancy the design was to shew what Christians Alexandria had in the Primate's time. Jcrome, Epiphanius, Theodoret, Socrates, Sozomen are also cited there; why could not these as well lead him to the right Age, which their words plainly point at, without the least glance at any Age before, as Strabo alone (cited without any respect to the time when he writ) so far mislead him? Nay, the 4th. age is expresly mentioned in the Letter; and the numerousness of the Novatians and Arians in Alexandria at the time intended, is insisted on; could he think any man so stupid, that had but the least acquaintance with those things, as to speak of Arians, and Novatians in Strabo's time? But it may be, though I would hope better, our Examiner was too inclinable to fix an absurd thing upon the Writer of the Letter; that he might be excused, from giving a better answer when it was not ready.