A33359:75
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.
The next instance is of Theotecnus and Anatolius who were Bishops of Caesarea together. Against this he hath little to say, I suppose because nothing can be said against it in reason. Only he seems willing that Anatolius should pass but as Episcopus designatus, whereby if he mean one, who is not yet actually a Bishop, but designed to be one hereafter, as Eradius was by Augustine, it is inconsistent with what Eusebius says and himself quotes, but one line before, viz. that Theotecnus ordained him Bishop in his life-time; for if he was not actually Bishop after he was thus ordained, he was never Bishop at allm.
The next instance is of Theotecnus and Anatolius who were Bishops of Caesarea together. Against this he hath little to say, I suppose because nothing can be said against it in reason. Only he seems willing that Anatolius should pass but as Episcopus designatus, whereby if he mean one, who is not yet actually a Bishop, but designed to be one hereafter, as Eradius was by Augustine, it is inconsistent with what Eusebius sayes and himself quotes, but one line before, viz. that Theotecnus ordained him Bishop in his life-time; for if he was not actually Bishop after he was thus ordained, he was never Bishop at allm.
- mEuseb. l. 7. c. 32.
Another instance was of Macarius and Maximus both Bishops at once of Jerusalem.
He would not have Maximus to be Bishop while Macarius lived, because it is said he was to rule the Church after his Death.