A33359:189
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.
Next he would disprove M. B's representation of the Church of Alexandria in Constantius's time, by giving a view of that Churches greatness from the first Foundation of itu; which because it may concern the Letter duly understood, I shall take some notice of it very briefly. But there is something interposed, between this and the Letter, which requires some observance; there we may have an instance of this Gentleman's severity upon M. B. and how reasonable it is; His remark, says he, upon two Bishops living quietly in Alexandria is so ⟨p. 51⟩disingenuous a suggestion, that he hath reason to be ashamed of it.
Next he would disprove M. B's representation of the Church of Alexandria in Constantius's time, by giving a view of that Churches greatness from the first Foundation of itu; which because it may concern the Letter duly understood, I shall take some notice of it very briefly. But there is something interposed, between this and the Letter, which requires some observance; there we may have an instance of this Gentleman's severity upon M. B. and how reasonable it is; His remark, sayes he, upon two Bishops living quietly in Alexandria is so ⟨p. 51⟩disingenuous a suggestion, that he hath reason to be asham'd of it.
- uPag. 61.
But what is there in this so disingenuous and shameful? Does not Epiphanius say this, and our Examiner acknowledge itb? Ay, but M. B. means that there were not only two Bishops, but their distinct Churches in this City. Well, and does not Epiphanius give him suffici-ground for it? Does he not tell us that Meletius made Bishops, who had their [Greek or Hebrew] in every place where he came? Does he not signify that the Meletians in Alexandria had their distinct Churches or Meetings both in the time of Alexander and Athanasius? says he not particularly of Meletius that being familiar with Alexander he stayed long in that City, having [Greek or Hebrew] a distinct Meeting with those of his own Party? Were there not innumerable Cities in that Age which had two Bishops and their Churches, some three or four at once (those of the Arians, the Donatists, the Novatians, the Meletians, &c. besides those who were styled Catholics) Would this Gentleman take it well if M. B. should tell him, that he who denies this is disingenuous if he know it, and hath some reason to be ashamed if he know it not? Ay, but Epiphanius was deceived in this account of the Meletians, and mis-represents them. Indeed our Examiner makes as bold with Epiphanius (a Bishop of great Zeal and Holiness, a Metropolitan, a famous Writer (as he does with M. B. charging him with much weakness (as one easily imposed upon) many oversights, gross mistakes, diverse absurd things, and such stories, that he will scarce wish worse to his Adversary, than to believe him