A33359:283
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.
3. The other proof that Ibas was a Diocesan, viz. because he had excommunicating Archdeacons, our Author would make good by telling us, that one of his Archdeacons excommunicated Maras. Now this though it prove not what it is alleged for, may prove more than he likes. An Archdeacon in the ancient Church (though he be another thing now) was not so much as a Presbyter, he was but in the lower Order of Deacons, though chief amongst them, and chosen by them, as Jerome signifiesu, Diaconi eligunt de se quem industrium noverint, & Archidiaconum vocant, the Deacons choose from amongst themselves one whom they know to be industrious, and call him Archdeacon. Now if a Deacon had the power to excommunicate, there can be no doubt but the Presbyters had it, being of a Superior Order and Power. And excommunication being counted the highest act of Jurisdiction, it cannot be questioned but the other acts thereof belonged to them; and so the Presbyters having all the Jurisdiction of Bishops (all the power of Government) what did they want of being Bishops but the honour of presiding in their Assemblies? ⟨p. 93⟩And if they were no farther from being Bishops, they will go near to be as much Diocesan, and so this Gentleman may choose, whether he will have all of both sorts to be Diocesans, or none of either.
3. The other proof that Ibas was a Diocesan, viz. because he had excommunicating Archdeacons, our Author would make good by telling us, that one of his Archdeacons excommunicated Maras. Now this though it prove not what it is alledged for, may prove more than he likes. An Archdeacon in the antient Church (though he be another thing now) was not so much as a Presbyter, he was but in the lower Order of Deacons, though chief amongst them, and chosen by them, as Jerome signifiesu, Diaconi eligunt de se quem industrium noverint, & Archidiaconum vocant, the Deacons chuse from amongst themselves one whom they know to be industrious, and call him Archdeacon. Now if a Deacon had the power to excommunicate, there can be no doubt but the Presbyters had it, being of a Superiour Order and Power. And excommunication being counted the highest act of Jurisdiction, it cannot be questioned but the other acts thereof belonged to them; and so the Presbyters having all the Jurisdiction of Bishops (all the power of Government) what did they want of being Bishops but the honour of presiding in their Assemblies?