A33359:301
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.
He adds, that which, if it were true, would go near to dethrone these Country Bishops; (for Basil speaks of them, as having their Thrones in Villages) and render them less than ancient Presbyters, for all their large Territory, and there being Diocesans.
He adds, that which, if it were true, wouldgo near to dethrone these Countrey Bishops; (for Basil speaks of them, as having their Thrones in Villages) and render them less than antient Presbyters, for all their large Territory, and there being Diocesans.
But yet these were but the Deputies or Surrogates of the City Bishops in point of jurisdiction, for they were to do nothing of moment without their Bishop.
If this be so, it would be less wonder that the Pope will have Bishops to be but his substitutes; and that some Bishops will have the Pastors of Parochial Churches to be but their Vicars or Curates. I hope our Author intends better, however it is well that such odd Hypotheses have no better support than that which is added, for says he, they were to do nothing of moment without their Bishop; this is his argument, and he is not alone in urging it. Let us see whether it will not do the Bishops (for whose advancement it is designed) as much disservice, as it can do the Chorepiscopi, or Presbyters; divesting them of that which is counted more necessary and advantageous to them, than a large Diocese. The Provincial Bishops were obliged to do nothing, [Greek or Hebrew], without the Bishop of the Metropolis, this the synod at Antioch decrees, according to an ancient Canon of the Fathers. gBy this argument we must conclude, that the Bishops in a Province were but the Deputies and Surrogates of the Metropolitan. And it may proceed proportionably against the Metropolitans with respect to the [Greek or Hebrew] or Primates; and also to their prejudice in reference to the Patriarchs. It will go near to destroy the Bishops likewise, if we follow it downwards. In the ancient Church the Bishops were to do nothing of moment, without the Presbyters, this the most judicious and Learned Asserters of Episcopacy acknowledge;