A33359:90
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.
If what the African Bishops did allege, were restrained to that particular case he contends for; yet this is enough to make good all I intend, viz. that usually in the ancient Church, there were two Bishops together in one place. For when one is ordained Bishop in the same place, when another is still living; with whatever design, upon what occasion soever this is done, yet there are two Bishops at once in the same place.
If what the African Bishops did alledge, were restrained to that particular case he contends for; yet this is enough to make good all I intend, viz. that usually in the antient Church, there were two Bishops together in one place. For when one is ordained Bishop in the same place, when another is still living; with whatever design, upon what occasion soever this is done, yet there are two Bishops at once in the same place.
I see no reason why this should be restrained to that particular case, the occasion of what the Bishops affirm may clear it, and that was Austin's scruple, not to succeed Valerius, but to be made Bishop of Hippo, while his Bishop there was living, Episcopatum suscipere, suo vivente Episcopo, recusabat, for so there would be two together, which he took to be against the Custom of the Church, contra morem Ecclesiae; but they all persuade him that this was usually done, id fieri solere, and prove it by examples in all partsq. And Valerius his desire and proposal was, that Austin might be ordained Bishop of Hippo, Qui suae Cathedrae non tam succederet sed Consacerdos accederet, not as one that was to succeed him only, but to be Bishop together with him.
I see no reason why this should be restrained to that particular case, the occasion of what the Bishops affirm may clear it, and that was Austin's scruple, not to succeed Valerius, but to be made Bishop of Hippo, while his Bishop there was living, Episcopatum suscipere, suo vivente Episcopo, recusabat, for so there would be two together, which he took to be against the Custom of the Church, contra morem Ecclesiae; but they all perswade him that this was usually done, id fieri solere, and prove it by examples in all parts