CHAP. I.
Things charged upon the Primitive Christians, respecting their Religion.

NO sooner did the Son of God appear in the world, to establish the most excellent Religion that ever was communicated to Mankind, but he met with the most fierce and vigorous opposition: persecuted and devoted to death assoon as he was born, followed all his life with fresh assaults of malice and cruelty, his credit traduced and slander­ed, his Doctrine despised and slighted, and himself at last put to death with the most exquisite arts of torture & disgrace. [Page 3] And if they thus served the Master of the house, how much more them of the hous­hold; the disciple not being above his Ma­ster, nor the servant above his Lord. Therefore when he gave commission to his Apostles, to publish this Religion to the world, he told them beforehand, what hard and unkind reception they must look to meet with, that he sent them forth as Sheep in the midst of Wolves, that they should be delivered up to the Councils, and scourged in the Synagogues, and be brought before Kings and Gover­nours, and be hated of all men for his names sake; nay so high should the quarrel arise upon the account of Religi­on, that men should violate some of the nearest Laws of Nature, betray their friends and kinsfolk; the Brother delive­ring up the Brother to death, and the Fa­ther the Child, the Children rising up a­gainst their Parents, and causing them to be put to death. This he well foresaw (and the event truly answered it) would be the fate of its first appearing in the world: and indeed, considering the pre­sent state and circumstances of the world at that time, it could not reaso­nably be expected, that the Christian Religion should meet with a better en­tertainment; [Page 4] for the genius and nature of its Doctrine was such, as was almost impossible to escape the frowns and dis­pleasure of men: a Doctrine it was, that call'd men off from lusts and pleasures, and offered violence to their native incli­nations, that required the greatest strict­ness and severity of life, obliged men to deny themselves, to take up their Cross, and to follow the steps of a poor crucified Saviour, and that upon little other en­couragement at present, than the invisi­ble rewards of another world. It intro­duced new Rites and Ceremonies, un­known to those of former Ages, and such as did undermine the received and esta­blished principles of that Religion, that for so many Generations had governed the world; it revealed and brought to light such truths, as were not only con­trary to the principles of mens education, but many of them above the reach of na­tural comprehension, too deep for the line of humane reason to fathom or find out.

Upon these, and such like accounts, Christianity was sure to encounter with mighty prejudices and potent opposition; and to it did; for no sooner did it peep abroad in the world, but it was every [Page 5] where spoken against: Princes and Po­tentates, and the greatest powers and policies of the world, did for some Ages confederate and combine together, to extirpate and banish it out of the world: and certainly, if Arms and Armies, if strength and subtilty, if malice and cruelty could have stifled it, it had been smothered in its infancy and first deli­very into the world. But notwithstand­ing all these oppositions, it still lifted up his head in triumph, and outbrav'd the fiercest storms of persecution; and as Tertullian told their Enemies, by every exquisite act of cruelty, Apol. c. ult. p. 40. they did but tempt others to come over to the party, the oft­ner they were mowed down, the faster they sprang up again, the blood of Christians making the Churches soil more fat and fertile. Hereupon the great enemy of mankind, betook himself to other coun­sels, and sought to undermine, what he saw he could not carry by open assault and battery; he studied to leaven the minds of men with false and unjust pre­judices against Christianity, and to bur­den it with whole loads of reproaches and defamations, knowing no speedier way to hinder its reception, than to blast its reputation. For this purpose all [Page 6] the arts of spite and malice were mustred up, and Christians confidently charged with all those crimes that could render them and their Religion vile and infa­mous: Now the things that were charg­ed upon the Christians, were either such as respected their Religion, or such as concern'd their outward state and condi­tion, or such as related to their moral carriage and behaviour, with some things relating to the matter or manner of their Worship; we shall consider them in order, and how the Christians of those times vindicated themselves from these impu­tations.

The Christian Religion at its first coming abroad into the world, was mainly charged with these two things, Impiety and Novelty: For the first, 'twas commonly cryed out against, as a grand piece of Atheism and Impiety, as an affront to their Religion, and an un­dermining the very being and existence of their gods; this is the sum of the charge, J. Martyr. Ap. 1. p. 47. as we find it in the ancient Apo­logists; Athenag. Legat. p 4 more particularly Caecilius the Heathen, in Minucius Felix accuses the Christians for a desperate undone and unlawful faction, Arnob l. 1. p. 7. Min. Fael. p. 7. who by way of con­tempt did snuff and spit at the mention [Page 7] of their gods, deride their worship, sooff at their Priests, and despise their Tem­ples, as no better than Charnel-houses, and heaps of bones and ashes of the dead; for these, and such like reasons, the Chri­stians were every where accounted a pack of Atheists, and their Religion the Athe­ism; and seldom it is that Julian the Emperor calls Christianity by any other name. Pseudo­mant. pa. 888. tom. 2. Thus Lucian bringing in Alexan­der the Impostor setting up for an Oracle­monger, ranks the Christians with Athe­ists and Epicureans, as those that were especially to be banished from his myste­rious Rites. In answer to this charge, the Christians pleaded especially these three things.

First, that the Gentiles were for the most part incompetent Judges of such cases as these, as being almost wholly ignorant of the true state of the Christi­an Doctrine, and therefore unfit to pro­nounce sentence against it. Thus when Crescens the Philosopher had traduced the Christians, as atheistical and irreligious, Justin Martyr answers, Just. Mar­tyr. loc. laud. that he talked about things which he did not under­stand, feigning things of his own head, only to comply with the humour of his seduc'd disciples and followers; that in re­proach­ing [Page 8] the Doctrine of Christ, when he did not understand it, he discover­ed a most wicked and malignant tem­per, and shewed himself far worse than the most simple and unlearned, who are not wont rashly to bear witness and determine in things not sufficiently known to them. Or if he did under­stand its greatness and excellency, then he shewed himself much more base and dis-ingenuous, in charging upon it what he knew to be false, and concealing his inward sentiments and convictions, for fear, lest he should be suspected to be a Christian. But Justin well knew, that he was miserably unskilful in matters of Christianity, having formerly had con­ferences and disputations with him a­bout these things; and therefore offer'd the Senate of Rome (to whom he then presented his Apology) if they had not heard the sum of it, to hold another conference with him, even before the Senate it self: which he thought would be a work worthy of so wise and grave a Council: or if they had heard it, then he did not doubt, but they clearly ap­prehended how little he understood these things; or, that if he did understand them, he knowingly dissembled it to [Page 9] his Auditors, not daring to own the truth, as Socrates did in the face of danger: an evident argument that he was [...], not a Philoso­pher, but a slave to popular applause and glory.

Secondly, They did in some sort con­fess the charge, that according to the vulgar notion which the Heathens had of their Deities, J. Mart. Ap. 2. (sen verius 1.) p. 56. & p. 55. they were Atheists, i.e. strangers and enemies to them; that the gods of the Gentiles were at best but Daemons, impure and unclean spirits, who had long imposed upon mankind, and by their villanies, sophistries, and arts of terrour, had so affrighted the com­mon people, who knew not really what they were, and who judge of things more by appearance than by reason, that they call'd them gods, and gave to every one of them that name, which the Dae­mon was willing to take to himself, and that they really were nothing but De­vils, fallen and apostate spirits, the Chri­stians evidently manifested at every turn, forcing them to the confessing it, while by Prayer and invocating the name of the true God, they drove them out of possessed persons, and therefore they trembled to encounter with a Christian, [Page 10] as Octavius triumphingly tells Caecilius; that they entertained the most absurd and fabulous notions of their gods, Pag. 23. and usually ascrib'd such things to them, as would be accounted an horrible shame and dishonour to any wise and good man, the Worship and mysterious Rites of many of them being so brutish and filthy, that the honester and severer Romans were asham'd on't, and therefore over­turn'd their Altars, and banished them out of the roll of their Deities, though their degenerate posterity took them in again, Apol. c. 7. p. 7. as Tertullian observes; their gods themselves so impure and beastly, their Worship so obscene and detestable, that Julius Firmicus advises them to turn their Temples into Theatres, de err. prof. Relig. p. 9. where the secrets of their Religion may be deli­vered in Scenes, and to make their Play­ers Priests, and that the common rout might sing the amours, the sports and pastimes, the wantonnesses and im­pieties of their gods, no places be­ing so fit for such a Religion as they. Besides the attributing to them hu­mane bodies, with many blemishes and imperfections, and subjection to the mi­series of humane life, and to the laws of mortality, they could not deny them [Page 11] to have been guilty of the most horrid and prodigious villanies and enormities, revenge and murther, incest and luxu­ry, drunkenness and intemperance, theft and unnatural rebellion against their Parents, and such like, of which their own Writings were full almost in every page, which served only to corrupt and debauch the minds and manners of youth, Min. Fael. p. 19. vid. Arnob. adv. gent. l. 1. p. 7. as Octavius tells his adversary, where he pursues this argument at large, with great eloquence and reason. Nay, those among them that were most in­quisitive and serious, and that entertain­ed more abstract and refin'd appre­hensions of things than the common people, yet could not agree in any fit and rational notion of a Deity, Vid. Min. Fael. p. 15▪ 16. some ridiculously affirming one thing and some another, till they were divided into a hundred different opinions, and all of them farther distant from the truth, than they were from one another; the vul­gar in the mean while making gods of the most brutish objects, such as Dogs, Cats, Wolves, Goats, Hawks, Dragons, Beetles, Crocodiles, &c. this Origen a­gainst Celsus particularly charges upon the Egyptians, Adv. Cels. l. 3 p. 121. When you approach (says he) their sacred places, they have glorious [Page 12] Groves and Chappels, Temples with goodly Gates, and stately Portico's, and many mysterious and religious Ceremonies; but when once you are entred, and got within their Temples, you shall see nothing but a Cat or an Ape, or a Crocodile, or a Goat, or a Dog worshipp'd with the most solemn veneration. Vid. Atha­nas. orat. contr. gent. Nay they deified senseless and inanimate things, that had no life or power to help themselves, much less their Worshippers, Herbs, Roots, and Plants; nay unmanly and degenerate passions, fear, paleness, &c. fell down before stumps and statues, which owed all their Divi­nity to the cost and folly of their Vota­ries; despised and trampled on by the sorriest Creatures, Mice, Swallows, &c. who were wont to build nests in the ve­ry mouth of their gods, and Spiders to pe­riwig their heads with Cobwebs: being forc'd first to make them, and then make them clean, and to defend and protect them, that they might fear and worship them, Min. Fael. p. 20. as he in Minutius wittily derides them; in whose Worship there are (says he) many things that justly deserve to be laught at, and others that call for pity and compassion. And what wonder now, if the Christians were not in the least asham­ed to be called Atheists, with respect to [Page 13] such Deities, and such a Religion as this was?

Thirdly, In the strict and proper no­tion of Atheism, they no less truly than confidently denied the charge, and ap­pealed to their severest adversaries, whe­ther those who owned such principles as they did, could reasonably be stiled Athe­ists; none ever pleaded better and more irrefragable arguments for the existence of a supream infinite Being, who made and governs all things by infinite wis­dom and almighty power, none ever more ready to produce a most clear and candid confession of their faith, as to this grand article of Religion, than they: Although we profess our selves Atheists, with respect to those whom you esteem and repute to be gods (so their Apologist tells the Senate) yet not in respect of the true God, J. Martyr. Ap. 1. p. 56. the parent and fountain of wisdom and righteousness, and all other excellencies and perfections, who is in­finitely free from the least contagion or spot of evil: Him, and his only begotten Son (who instructed us and the whole Society of good Angels in these divine mysteries) and the Spirit of Prophecie, we worship and adore, honouring them in truth, and with the highest reason, and [Page 14] ready to communicate these things to any one that's willing to learn them, as we our selves have received them. Can we then be Atheists, Ib. p. 60. who worship the great Creator of this world, not with blood, incense, and offerings (which we are sufficiently taught he stands no need of) but exalt him according to our power with prayers and praises, in all the addresses we make to him: believ­ing this to be the only honour that's worthy of him, not to consume the Crea­tures which he has given us for our use, and the comfort of those that want, in the fire by Sacrifice; but to approve our selves thankful to him, and to sing and celebrate rational hymns and sacrifices, pouring out our prayers to him as a grateful return for those many good things which we have received, and do yet expect from him, according to the faith and trust that we have in him. To the same purpose Athenagoras, Athen. leg. pro Chri­stian. p. 5. in his re­turn to this charge; Diagoras indeed was guilty of the deepest atheism and impiety; but we who separate God from all material being, and affirm him to be eternal and unbegotten, but all matter to be made and corruptible, how un­justly are we branded with impiety? [Page 15] It's true, did we side with Diagoras in denying a Divinity, when there are so many and such powerful arguments from the creation and government of the world, to convince us of the existence of God and Religion, then both the guilt and punishment of Atheism might deservedly be put upon us. But when our Religion acknowledges one God, the maker of the Universe, who being uncreate him­self, created all things by his word, we are manifestly wrong'd both in word and deed; both in being charged with it, and in being punished for it. We are accused (says Arnobius) for introducing prophane Rites and an impious Religi­on; Lib. 1. p. 7. but tell me, O ye men of reason, how dare you make so rash a charge? To adore the mighty God, the Sove­raign of the whole Creation, the Go­vernour of the highest powers, to pray to him with the most obsequious reve­rence; under an afflicted state to lay hold of him with all our powers, to love him, and look up to him, is this a dis­mal and detestable Religion, a Religion full of sacriledge and impiety, destroy­ing and defiling all ancient Rites? is this that bold and prodigious crime, for which your Gods are so angry with us? [Page 16] and for which you your selves do so rage against us, confiscating our Estates, banish­ing our persons, burning, tearing, and racking us to death with such exquisite tortures? We Christians are nothing else but the worshippers of the supream King and Governour of the world, according as we are taught by Christ our Master: search, and you'll find nothing else in our Religion: this is the sum of the whole affair; this the end and design of our di­vine Offices; before him it is that we are wont to prostrate and bow our selves, him we worship with common and conjoin'd devotions, from him we beg those things which are just and honest, and such as are not unworthy of him to hear and grant. So little reason had the Enemies of Chri­stianity, to brand it with the note of Atheism and Irreligion.

CHAP. II.
Of the Novelty that was charged upon Christianity.

THis Artifice proving weak and in­effectual, the next charge was its lateness and novelty, that it was an up­start Sect, and but of yesterdays stand­ing, not known in the world many years before, whereas the Religion of the Gentiles had uncontroulably and almost universally obtained from Ages and Ge­nerations; a Doctrine newly sprung up, and come as 'twere from a far Country, [...], as 'tis in Theophilus Antiochenus: Lib. 3. p. 119▪ B. a divorce, or rending themselves from the institutions of their Ancestors, Ad Nation. lib. 1. c. 10. p. 46. as Tertullian has it. This charge begun betimes, when S. Paul preached at Athens, Act. 17. 18. we find this the first thing charged upon him, that he was a setter forth of strange gods, because he preached to them Jesus and the resur­rection; and it was followed with a loud cry in succeeding times: you are wont to object to us (says Arnobius) that our Religion is novel, Lib. 2. p. 40 start up not many days ago, and that you ought not to desert your ancient way, and the Religion of your Country, Praepar. E­vang. lib. 1. c. 2. p. 5. to espouse barbarous and foreign Rites. And Eusebius tells us, the Heathens were wont to reason thus: what strange profession of Religion is [Page 19] this? what new way of life? wherein we can neither discern the Rites amongst us us'd in Greece, nor amongst any Sect of the Barbarians; who can deny them to be impious, who have forsaken the Customs of their Fathers, observed be­fore in all Cities and Countries, revolt­ing from a way of Worship, which had been universally received from all Ages both by Greeks and Barbarians, enter­tained both in Cities and Villages, coun­tenanced and approved by the common vote and consent of all Kings, Law­makers, Philosophers, and the greatest persons whatsoever. Nay we may ob­serve, that after Christianity had been setled for some hundreds of years in the world, and was become the prevailing Religion, and had in a manner banish­ed all others out of doors, and driven them into corners, yet this charge still continued; Ep. 51. oper. Jul. part. 2. p. 208. thus Julian the Emperour writing to the people of Alexandria, concerning the Galilaeans (so he was wont in scorn to call the Christians) that he wondered that any of them durst dwell amongst them, or that they would suf­fer these despisers of the Religion of their Country to be in any place amongst them, calls Christianity the new Doctrine [Page 20] that had been preached to the world: the very same title which Lucian had al­so long since bestowed upon it, De mort. Peregrin. tom▪ 2. p. 762. where speaking of our Saviour, he calls him the great man that was crucified in Palestine, who introduced that new Religion into the world. Symmach. Ep. lib. 10. So Symmachus some years af­ter Julian (a man no less eminent for his parts and eloquence, Ep. 54. ad Valent. than for his power and authority, Theod Ar­cad. A. A. A. p. 537. being Chief Priest and Prefect of Rome) confidently owns to the Emperours themselves (though they were Christians) that he did endeavour to defend the institutions of their An­cestors, the setled Rights and Laws of the Country (he means them of Reli­gion) that he design'd to settle that state of Religion, which for so many Ages had been profitable to the Common­wealth; Pag. 538. and therefore begs of them, that what they had received when they were Children, Pag. 539. now they were old they might leave to their Posterity; that they were to be true to the trust that had from so many Ages been devolved upon them, and were to follow their Parents, as they had happily done their Ancestors that had gone before them. So he; pleading the cause of Paganism from its antiquity [...] and prescription, obliquely re­flecting [Page 21] upon the novellism of Christia­nity, for more he durst not speak, the Emperours (to whom he made his ad­dress) being themselves Christians. This indeed must needs be a mighty prejudice against the Christian Religion, at its first coming into the world, for all men as they have a natural reverence for Religion, so they have a great ve­neration for Antiquity, the Customs and Traditions of their Fathers, which they entertain as a most inestimable de­positum, and for which they look upon themselves as obliged to contend, as for that which is most solemn and sa­cred. What more excellent and vene­rable (says the Heathen in Minucius Fae­lix) than to entertain the discipline of our Forefathers, Min. Fael. [...] p. 5. to solemnize that Re­ligion that has been delivered to us, to worship those Gods, the knowledge of whom has been infus'd into us by our Parents, not boldly to determine con­cerning the Deities, but to believe those who have been before us. To the same purpose Lactantius speaking of the Heathens, Lactan [...]. l. 2▪ c. 6. p. 171. they go on (says he) most pertinaciously, to maintain and defend the Religion derived down to them from their Ancestors, not so much con­sidering [Page 22] what they are, as concluding them to be right and good, because the Ancients conveyed them to them; nay, so great the power and authority of an­tiquity, that it's accounted a kind of impiety to question it, or enquire into it. Upon these accounts the Gentiles bore so hard upon Christianity, beholding it as a Mushroom-Sect, sprung up of a sud­den, and as an incroaching Inmate, un­dermining the established Religions of the world.

Now we find two pleas especially, which the Christians made to this In­dictment.

First, That the charge was not whol­ly and universally true, for besides that many principles of Christianity were the same with those of the Law of Nature, the Christian Religion was for substance the same with that of the ancient Jewes; whose Religion claim'd the precedenncy of all others in the word. That the Re­ligion was in substance and effect the same, is expresly asserted and proved by Eusebius; Prapar. E­vang. l▪ [...]. c. 5. p. 9. &c. the ancient Patriarchs were the Christians of the old world, who had the same Faith, Religion, and Wor­ship common with us, nay the same name too, as he endeavours to prove, [Page 23] from that, touch not mine anointed, [...], my Christs or Christians: and how far superiour in age they were to any thing that's recorded of the most ancient Gentiles, to their oldest Writers, Vid. Athen. leg. pro▪ Christianis. p. 16. Clem. Alex strom. lib. Orpheus, Homer, Hesiord, nay to their very gods themselves, is sufficiently made good by many of the ancient Fa­thers; there being at the easiest compu­tation between Moses and Homer, above 600 years; nay Cadmus the first inven­ter of Letters among the Graecians was some Ages junior unto Moses. There­fore Origen tells Celsus, Adv. Cels. l. 6. p. 279. that Moses and the Prophets were not only more anci­ent than Plato, but than Homer himself, yea than the very invention of Letters amongst the Graecians who yet were as proud of their antiquity, as any other Nation in the World. Nay whatever useful and excellent notions the great Masters of Religion amongst the Hea­thens had amongst them, Praepara [...]. Evang. lib. 10. tot. Clem. Alex. strom. l. 1. p. 320. 'tis plain they borrowed, or more truly stole them from the Writings of the Ancients, Tert. Ap. c. 47. vid. Jews, as is abundantly demonstrated by Euse­bius at large; Theod. de curand. as before him it had been done by Clemens of Alexandria, Grec As­sect. Serm. 2. de Prin­cip. and by Tertullian before them both, who shews that all their Poets and Philosophers had [Page 24] drunk deep of the Fountain of the Pro­phets, and had forced their best Do­ctrines and Opinions from thence, though subtilly altering and disguising them, to make them look more like their own: so that upon this consideration, the ac­cusation was unjust and false, and Chri­stianity appears the oldest Religion in the world.

Secondly, Admit the Christian Reli­gion, in a more limited and restrained sense, to be of a far later standing than the Religion of the Gentiles, yet they pleaded, that 'twas infinitely reasonable, that they should change for the better, whenever it offered it self to them; that novel truth was better than ancient er­rour, and that they ought not to be eternally bound up in old inveterate Cu­stoms and Principles, when those which were abundantly more reasonable and satisfactory were presented to them. You tell us (says Clemens Alex.) Admonit. ad gent. p. 57. that you may not subvert the Customs received from your Ancestors: but if so, why then are we not content without any other food than our Mothers milk, to which we were accustomed, when we first came into the world: why do we encrease or impair our estates, and not [Page 25] rather keep them at the same pitch, just as we received them from our Fathers: why have we left off those toys and sports, to which we were wonted while Infants and Children, but only because years and discretion (although we had no other Tutor) would make us quit those childish and trifling vanities. That old age (says S. Ambrose) has true cause to blush, Ambros. Ep. 2 contr. that is asham'd to reform; Symmach. inter Ep. 'tis not multitude of years, but the goodness of manners that makes gray hairs wor­thy of praise and honour; Symmach. p. 562. no age is too late to learn, nor is it shame to grow better. Lactant. loco supra laudato. What wilt thou do (says Lactan­tius to the Heathen) wilt thou follow Reason or thy Ancestors? If Reason, then thou must needs relinquish the authority and institutions of thy Forefathers, be­cause that way only can be right, that is warranted and prescribed by Reason: but if piety towards thine Ancestors sway with thee to follow them, thou must con­fess, both that they were Fools in devo­ting themselves to a Religion contrary to Reason, and that thou thy self art unwise and simple, in worshipping what thou art convinced to be false: besides, that they had little reason to boast of those goodly Ancestors, to whom they [Page 26] adhered so close, and upon whose au­thority they did so much depend, as he goes on to demonstrate in the remain­ing part of that Chapter. That you ob­ject to us the novelty of our Religion (so Arnobius) may we not charge some such fault upon the first and most anci­ent Ages of the world, Adv. gent. l. 2. p. 40, 41. who at first liv'd in a very poor and mean state; but by little and little chang'd it into a more li­beral and splendid course of life? was it any crime that they changed their beasts skins into more comely and [...] conveni­ent Garments, or that they were no long­er fond of their thatcht Cottages, or chose to dwell like wild beasts in Rocks and Caverns, when they had learnt to build better habitations? 'tis natural to all mankind to prefer better before what is worse, profitable before what is use­less, and to seek after what we are as­sur'd is more grateful and excellent: therefore when you charge us with Apo­stasie from the Religion of the Ancients, you should rather consider the cause than the action, and not so much upbraid us with what we have left, as examine what it is we have entertain'd. For if meer­ly to change our opinion, and to pass from ancient Institutions to what's more [Page 27] late and new, be a fault and crime; then none so guilty of the charge as your selves, who have so oft changed your manners and course of life, and by embracing new Rites and Customs, have condemned those that went before: which he there makes good by particu­lar instances: and the same answer St. Ambrose gives to Symmachus, if nothing but ancient Rites will please you, how comes it to pass, that there has been a succession of new and foreign Rites e­ven in Rome it self; of which he gives him many particular examples: In short, Arnobius wittily argues thus, Ib. p. 42. Our way of Religion (you say) is new, and yours ancient: and what does this either hurt our cause, or help yours? If ours be new, 'twill in time become old; is yours old, there was a time when it was new: the good­ness and authority of Religion is not to be valued by length of time, but by the ex­cellency of its worship, nor does it become us to consider so much when it begun, as what it is we Worship.

It may not be impertinent in this place to take notice of what the Heathens objected as a branch of this charge: Id. ib. p. 43. vid. Greg. that if God's sending Christ into the world, Nyss▪ Orat. was so great a blessing, Catechet. c▪ 29. tom. 2. p. 521. why did this Sa­viour [Page 28] of mankind come no sooner, to re­veal this Religion, to lead men into the truth, to tell the world who this true God was, and to reduce us to the ado­ration of him; if so, why did God suf­fer him to stay so long, and to be born (as 'twere) but a few hours before, in comparison of the preceding Ages of the world? To this Arnobius answers, with a great deal of modesty and reason, that he could not tell; that 'twere easie to retort the same captious question upon them; if 'twere so much to the benefit of the world, that Hercules, Aesculapius, Mercury, &c. should be gods, why were they born and deified no sooner, that not only posterity but antiquity might have reap'd advantage by them? If there was reason in one case, then there was also in the other; but to assign proper and particular reasons was not possible; it not being within the power of such a short-sighted Creature as man is, to fathom the depth of the Divine Councils, or to dis­cover by what ways or methods he di­sposes his affairs; these things being known only to him who is the grand Pa­rent, the Soveraign Lord and Gover­nour of all things: that although we are not able to assign the cause why a [Page 29] thing comes to pass in this or that parti­cular manner, yet this concludes never a whit the more, that the thing is not so, or that it is less credible, when it has otherwise the most clear and unquestio­nable evidence and demonstration. More particularly he answers, that our Savi­our cannot be said to have been lately sent in respect of God, because in re­spect of eternity there is nothing late; where there is neither beginning nor end, there can be nothing too soon, no­thing too late: Time indeed is transact­ed by parts and terms, but these have no place in a perpetual and uninterrupt­ed series of eternal Ages: what if that state of things, to which he came to bring relief, required that season of time to come in? what if the condition of anci­ent and modern times were in this case not alike? or call'd for somewhat diffe­rent methods of cure? it may be the great God then chose to send Christ, when the state of mankind was more broken and shatter'd, and humane nature be­come more weak and unable to help it self: this we are sure of, that if what so lately came to pass had been necessa­ry to have been done some thousands of years ago, the supream Creator would [Page 30] have done it, or had it been necessary to have been done thousands of years hence, nothing could have forc'd God to have anticipated the setled periods of time one moment; for all his actions are managed by fix'd and eternal reasons, and what he has once determined, can­not be frustrated by any change or alte­ration. And thus we see how easily, and yet how satisfactorily, the primitive Christians wip'd off that double imputa­tion of impiety and novelty, which the Gentiles had so undeservedly cast upon their Religion.

CHAP. III.
Things charged upon the Christi­ans, respecting their outward condition.

[Page 33] THE second sort of arts which the Enemies of Christianity made use of, to render Christians vile and despi­cable, related to the circumstances of their external state and condition in the world, where two things were laid to their charge, that they generally were a very mean and inconsiderable sort of men, and that they were an useless and unser­viceable people, nay pernicious and mis­chievous to the world. They were look­ed upon as the lowest and meanest rank of men, persons neither considerable for their parts and learning, nor for their estates and quality. Inconsiderable they were accounted in respect of parts and learning; Adv. gent. l. 3 p. 49. you scorn and spit us out as rude and simple, and think that the treasury of all divine and excellent knowledge is open only to your selves, as Arnobius tells them. Thus Celsus objected, Orig. contr. Cels. l. 3. p. 137. that amongst the Christians no wise and learned men were admitted to the mysteries of their Reli­gion; let no man come that is learned, wise, and prudent (for these things, says he, they account evil and unlawful) but if any be unlearned, an infant or an ideot, let him come and welcome; open­ly declaring, that none but Fools, and [Page 34] such as are devoid of sense and reason, Slaves, silly Women, and little Chil­dren are fit Disciples for the God they worship. We may observe (says he) these trifling and Mountebank Impostors, Ib. p. 141. bragging great things to the vulgar, not in the presence and company of wise men (for that they dare not) but where­ever they espye a flock of Boys, Slaves, and weak simple people, there they presently crowd in, and boast them­selves; Pag. 144. you shall see (as he goes on in this charge) Weavers, Taylors, Fullers, and the most rustick and illiterate Fel­lowes, at home when before their elders and betters as mute as Fishes; but when they can get a few Children and silly Women by themselves, then who so wise and learned, who so full of talk, and so able to teach and instruct as they? Much to the same purpose Cecilius di­scourses in Minucius Faelix, Min. Fael. p. 7. that the Chri­stians were men of a desperate and un­lawful faction, who gathering a compa­ny out of the very dregs and refuse of the people, of silly, easie, credulous Women, who by reason of the weak­ness of their Sex are easily imposed and wrought upon, combine them into a wicked confederation, a people mute in [Page 35] publick, but in corners talkative and full of prattle. Now to this part of the ac­cusation Origen answers, that 'tis for the main false, Pag. 137. & seq. and proceeds from the spirit of malice and reproach: the sum of his answer as he delivers it to the several parts of the Charge, take thus: That the Christian Doctrine invites and calls men to wisdom, as appears both from the Writings of the Jews of old, and the Scriptures of the New Testament, where­in we find many singularly eminent for wisdom and learning, Moses, Solomon, Daniel, and such like of old, and the blessed Jesus made choice of such Dis­ciples as whom he judged fittest to com­municate the secrets of his Religion to, and privately opened and explain­ed to them, what he only delivered in parables and similitudes unto others; that he promised to send forth Prophets, Matth. 23. 34. wise men, and Scribes, for the divulging and propagating of his Doctrine; that S. Paul reckons wisdom and knowledge in the first rank of the gifts of God, 1 Cor. 12. 8. and that if he any where seem to reflect se­verely upon wisdom or humane learn­ing (which probably may be the first rise of this Charge) he only censures the abuse, never intending to blame the [Page 36] thing it self; that when he prescribes the properties of a true Bishop, or Governour of the Church, he re­quires this as one necessary qualificati­on, that he be apt to teach, and able by sound Doctrine both to exhort and to con­vince the gainsayers: Tit. 1. 9. that we are so far from prohibiting any, that come who will, wise, learned, and prudent, pro­vided the rude, simple, and unlearned be not excluded, for to them also the Gospel does promise and provide a re­medy, making them meet for God; that, no man but must confess that 'tis an excellent thing to study the best arts and discipline, and that learning, the study of Arts, and prudence are so far from being an [...] hinderance to the know­ledge of God, that they mightily help it and advance it: that, it's a great ca­lumny to compare us to wandring im­postors, who by our reading and ex­pounding the Divine Oracles, do only exhort the people to piety toward the great God, and to the rest of those virtues which are its individual compa­nions; endeavouring to rescue men from a contempt of the Deity, and all bru­tish▪ and irregular passions; a thing which the very best Philosophers of [Page 37] them all could wish for: that Christians are so far from admitting any, hand over head, that they first pre-examine the minds of those that desire to become their auditors; and having privately had tryal of them, before they receive them into the Congregation, when they per­ceive them fully resolved to lead a pious and religious life, then they admit them in their distinct orders, some that are newly admitted, but not yet baptized, others that have given some evidence and de­monstration of their purpose to live as becomes Christians; amongst whom there are Governours appointed to in­spect and enquire into the life and man­ners of those who have been admitted, that they may expel and turn off those candidates of Religion who answer not their profession; and heartily entertain those that do, and by dayly converses build them up and make them better: that, it's false to say that we apply our selves only to Women and Children, and that in corners, when we endeavour what we can by all means to fill our Societies with wise and prudent persons, and to such we open the more sublime and recondite principles of Religion, o­therwise accommodating our discourses [Page 38] to the capacities of meaner persons, who stand more in need of milk than strong meat: that, we desire that all men may be trained up in the Word of God, and that Servants and Children may have such instructions given them, as are sutable and convenient no them, the Mi­nisters of our Religion professing them­selves to be debtors both to the Greeks and Barbarians, both to the wise and to the unwise, that as much as may be they may outgrow their ignorance, and at­tain to the best kind of wisdom: and whereas we are accused to seduce and circumvent silly Women and little Chil­dren, and to draw them away from more weighty and serious counsels; let him produce any such, and enquire of them whether ever they heard better Masters than ours, or if they did, why they would leave so grave a discipline, and suffer themselves to be seduced in­to a worse▪ but he'll find no such thing to fasten upon us; but that on the con­trary we reclaim Women from immode­sty, from falling out with their Hus­bands, and parting from them, from the wild extravagancies of the sports and Theaters, and from all superstition what­soever: the youth who are prone to [Page 39] vice and luxury, we restrain, by telling them not only how base and degenerous a thing it is to indulge their lust, but into how much danger they precipitate their souls, and what punishments the divine vengeance lays up for such profli­gate offenders: we openly, not in cor­ners, promise eternal happiness to those who live according to the rules of the divine Law, who set God always before their eyes, and whatever they do, en­deavour to approve themselves to him: and is this the discipline, these the do­ctrines of Weavers, Taylors, Fullers, and the most rustick and illiterate per­sons? surely no: if at any time, we re­fuse to produce our instructions and counsels before Masters of Families, or the Doctors of Philosophy: know, that if they be studious of virtue, enemies to vice, and such as breath after the best things, before such we are most willing and ready to instruct our youth, being well assur'd we shall find them favoura­ble Judges: but if they be enemies to goodness and virtue, and opposers of sound wholsom Doctrine, then if we hold our peace, no fault can justly be laid upon us: for in such circumstances the Philosophers themselves would not dis­cover [Page 40] the dictates and mysteries of their Philosophy. This is the substance of the several answers, which Origen pursues more at large through several pages: which though very rational and satisfa­ctory, yet we find something pleaded more direct and positive to the charge; viz. that although amongst the Christi­ans (as 'tis in any Society of men) the vulgar and more common sort, might not be men of the sharpest understand­ing, or vers'd in the more polite arts of learning, yet wanted they not (and those no small number) great Scholars, men of acute parts and raised abilities, such as had run through the whole cir­cle of the Sciences, who daily came over to them: So Arnobius, urging the tri­umphant power and efficacy which the Christian Faith had over the minds of men, Adv. gent. l. 2. p. 21. who (says he) would not believe it, when he sees in how short a time it has conquered so great a part of the world; when men of so great wit and parts, Orators, Grammarians, Rhetorici­ans, Lawyers, Physicians, and Philoso­phers, have thrown up those former sen­timets; of which but a little before they were so tenacious, and have em­braced the Doctrines of the Gospel. So [Page 41] fast did the Christian Church fill with the most eminent professors of all parts of Learning, that were then known to the world.

Nor were the Christians of those times more despised upon the account of their weakness and ignorance, than they were for their meanness and poverty; they were looked upon as de ultima faece, as the scum and refuse of the people, scarce a considerable man to be found amongst them. Pag. 9. See (says the Heathen in Minu­cius Faelix) the most and best of all your party are a poor, beggerly, hungerstarv'd generation, that have neither riches, nor reputation to bear them out. This Charge (however impertinent, seeing the goodness of any Religion depends not upon the greatness of its professors) was yet as untrue as 'twas unreasonable, the Christians having amongst them per­sons of the chiefest place and quality, and after some years the Princes and Potentates of the world, and even the Emperors themselves struck sail to the Scepter of Christ. When Scapula the President of Carthage threatned the Chri­stians with severe and cruel usage, Ter­tullian bids him bethink himself; Ad Scap. c. 4. p. 71. what wilt thou do (says he) with so many [Page 42] thousands of men and women of every sex, age, and dignity, as will freely of­fer themselves? What fires, what Swords wilt thou stand in need of? What is Car­thage it self like to suffer, if decimated by thee; when every one shall find there his near Kindred and Neighbours, and shall see there Matrons, and men perhaps of thy own rank and order, and the most principal persons, and either the Kindred or Friends of those who are thy own nearest friends. Spare them therefore for your own sake, if not for ours. And if there were persons of such quality in Afric (so remote, and in a manner so barbarous a Province) what may we suppose there were in Rome it self, and other parts of the Roman Em­pire. Cap. 37. p. 30. And in his Apologie, speaking of the vast spreading of the party, though (says he) we be men of quite another way, yet have we fill'd all places among you, your Cities, Islands, Castles, Corpo­rations, Councils, nay your Armies them­selves, your Tribes, Companies, yea the Palace, the Senate, and the Courts of Justice; only your Temples we have left you free. Sure I am Pliny in his Letter to the Emperor, Lib. 10. tells him, Epist. 97. that Christia­nity had not only over-run City and [Page 43] Country, but that it had infected many of every sex, age, and order of men.

And indeed it were no hard matter out of the ancient Histories and Martyro­logies of the Church, nay from the Hea­then Writers themselves, to prove that persons of the highest rank and qua­lity, even in those times, embraced Christianity, and seal'd it with their blood. Of which it may suffice to give an account only of some few. Not to insist upon the Saints which S. Paul tells us were in Nero's Palace, we find many considerable persons, and some of them near a kin to the Emperour under the reign of Domitian (that cruel Prince and persecutor of Christians) entertain­ing the profession of the Gospel. And first let us hear the account which Dion Cassius the famous Historian gives us. He tells us that about the latter end of Do­mitian's Reign he condemned many (some whereof were slain, Lib. 67. in Domit▪ p. 766. others stript of their estates) and amongst the rest Flavius Clemens the Consul, his own Cou­sin-german, and his Wife Flavia Domi­tilla, near akin also to the Emperour, upon pretence of Atheism ( [...]) and for that they had em­brac'd the Rites and Religion of the [Page 44] Jews. His Nephew Clemens he put to death, his Wife Domitilla he banished into the Island Pandateria. Upon the same account also he put to death Aci­lius Glabrio, who, together with Trajan had been Consul the year before. That the persons here describ'd were Christi­ans, is plain, partly from the Charge of Atheism here fastned upon them (the common and familiar accusation, and the title given to Christianity by the Heathens, as we observ'd before) and partly because they are said to have passed over to the Rites and Customs of the Jews; nothing being more ordina­ry in the Historians of those times, than to mistake Christians for Jews, and to call them so, because both proceeding out of the same Country, Christ himself and his Apostles being Jews born, and his Religion first published and planted there. And that which may give some more countenance to this, is, that Sueto­nius speaking of Domitian's condemn­ing this Fl. Clemens, I [...] Domi­tian. c. 15. p. 803. represents him as a man contemtissimae inertiae, as a most contemptibly dull and sluggish person, which we know was generally charged upon the Christians, that they were an useless and unactive people, as we shall [Page 45] have occasion by and by more particu­larly to remark. Besides this Fl. Domi­tilla, the Wife of Clemens, there was a­nother of the same name, his Neece by the Sister's side (unless Dion Cassius mi­stook, and put down Wife for Neece, which there's no reason to suppose, see­ing both may very well consist toge­ther) who (as Eusebius informs us) was with many more banished by Domitian in the fifteenth year of his Reign, Hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 18. p. 89. into the Island Pontia, and there put to death for the profession of Christianity; whose persecutions and martyrdoms (says he) are recorded by Heathen-writers them­selves. Amongst whom, I suppose, he principally intends Brettius or Brutius the Historian, Can. Chron. ad An. Chr. 97. p. 208. & Chron. p. 80. Edit. Graec. whom he cites elsewhere, and out of whom he there quotes this very passage, That under Domitian ma­ny of the Christians suffered martyrdom, amongst whom was Fl. Domitilla, Neece by the Sister's side to Fl. Clemens the Con­sul, who for being a Christian was banish­ed into the Island Pontia. She is said after a great deal of hard and tedious usage to have been burnt, together with the house wherein she was; her memory celebrated in the Roman Kalendar upon the seventh of May. Martyr. Rom. ad 7. Maii.

[Page 46] Besides these, we find that Christia­nity getting ground under the quiet Reign of the Emperour Commodus, ma­ny of the greatest birth and fortunes in Rome, Euseb. l. 5. c. 21. p. 189▪ together with their whole Fami­lies flock'd over to the Christian Faith. Amongst whom was Apollonius, a man famous for Philosophy, and all polite humane literature, who so gallant­ly pleaded his cause before the Senate, and was himself a Senatour, De Script. as S. Hierom informs us. Eccles. in Apoll. I shall but mention one in­stance more, and that is of Philip the Emperour; Li. 6▪ c. 34. p. 232. whom Eusebius expresly af­firms to have been a Christian, and the first of the Emperours that was so; fol­lowed herein by a whole troop both of ancient and modern Writers. Nay we are told by some a formal story, that this Philip and his Son were converted by the preaching of Pontius the Martyr, Act. Pont. apud. Sur. ad 14. and baptized by Fabiam Bishop of Rome. Maii. tom. 3. But notwithstanding the smoothness of the story, and the number of authori­ties, I must confess it seems to me scarce­ly probable, that a person of so bad a life, guilty of such enormous villanies, as that Emperour was, should either be, or be thought a Christian; or if he was, that the whole world should not presently ring [Page 47] of it. Certain I am, that all Histori­ans of that time are wholly silent in the case, nor is there the least intimation of any such thing in any Writer, either Heathen or Christian before Eusebius. Nay Origen who wrote his Book in defence of Christianity under the Reign of this very Emperour, and about this very time (nay and two Epistles, one to Philip, the other to his Wife Severa, if we may believe Eusebius) yet not only makes no mention of it, when it would have made greatly for his purpose, but tacitely im­plies there was no such thing. For Cel­sus reproving the boldness and petulancy of the Christians, as if they should give out, that if they could but bring over the present Emperours to their Religion, all other men would quickly be brought over: Origen point blanck denies the Charge, and tells him there's no need of any answer, Adv. Cels. l. 8. p. 42 [...] ▪ for that none of the Christians ever said so. An answer which surely he would not have given, had the Emperour at that time been a Chri­stian; not to insist upon many other in­timations which might be produc'd out of that Book against it. Hist. Ro [...] l. 9. non longe ab init. Besides, Eutro­pius reports, that Philip and his Son be­ing slain by the Souldiers, were yet [Page 48] inter Divos relati, deified, or advanced into the number of their Gods. An ho­nour which 'tis certain the Senate would not have done them, had they either been, or but suspected to have been Christians. To all which I may add, that Eusebius himself (in whom the first foot­steps of this story appear) builds it up­on no better a foundation, ib. 6. c. 34▪ than a [...], a bare tradition and report. That which seems to have given both birth and colour to the story is this. One Philippus an illustrious person under the Emperour Severus, Martyr. was a long time Go­vernour of Egypt; Eugen. a­pud Sur. ad 25. De­cemb. tom. 6. he by the means of his Daughter Eugenia was converted to Christianity, under whose shelter the Christians there enjoyed great peace and favour (nay the story adds, though cer­tainly without any ground, that he was created Bishop of Alexandria) till the Emperour being acquainted with his being a Christian, presently remov'd him, and by the help of his Successor Terentius caus'd him to be secretly mur­dered and made away. This (if any thing) was the rise of the story; and that which makes it more probable, is, the honour and excellency of that em­ployment, the greatest of all the Offices [Page 49] in the Roman Empire, the command and state little less than regal; and therefore the Emperours in their Letter to this Philip (wherein they reproach him for ingratitude and apostasie) tell him that in a manner he was made a King, when he was chosen President of Egypt. Accord­ingly the title of the Governour of E­gypt (as appears from the Historians, but especially the Notitia Imperii) was Prae­fectus Augustalis; and how easie was it to mistake Philippus Augustus for Philippus Augustalis? But enough of this, as also the falseness of that charge, that the Christi­ans were such a sorry inconsiderable people.

But however, let us suppose them to have been as mean and poor, as the ma­lice and cruelty of their adversaries did endeavour to make them, yet this was no real prejudice to their cause, nor any great hurt to them. That the most part of us are accused to be poor (says Octavius in answer to Caecilius his charge) 'tis not our dishonour, but our glory; the mind as 'tis dissolv'd by plenty and luxury, so 'tis strengthened and girt close by indigence and frugality; and yet how can that man be poor, who wants not, who is not greedy of what's another mans, who is rich in and towards [Page 50] God? that man is rather poor, who when he has a great deal desires more: the truth is, no man can be so poor, as he was when he was born; the Birds live without any patrimony entail'd upon them, and the Beasts find pastures eve­ry day; and yet these are born for our use, all which we fully enjoy, when we do not covet them: much lighter and happier does he go to Heaven, who is not burdened by the way with an unneces­sary load of riches: and yet did we think estates so useful to us, we could beg them of God, who being Lord of all, might well afford a little to us; but we had rather despise them than enjoy them, and rather chuse innocency and patience, desiring more to be good than to be great and prodigal. If we endure outward sufferings and tortures, 'tis not so much pain as 'tis a warfare; our cou­rage is encreased by infirmities, and calamity is very oft the discipline of vir­tue; the nerves both of body and mind without exercise would grow loose and faint; and therefore God is neither un­able to help us, not yet negligent of us, as being the Governour of the world, and the Father of his Children; but trys and examines every ones temper in an [Page 51] adverse state, as Gold is tryed in the fire. Besides it must needs be a sight ve­ry pleasing to God, to behold a Christi­an conflicting with grief and misery, pre­paring himself to encounter threatenings and torments, pressing in upon the very noise of death, and the horrour of the Ex­ecutioner, maintaining his liberty against Kings and Princes, and only yielding to God, whose he wholly is, coming off from all the attempts of adversity with victory and triumph. So argues that excellent person (and who ever reads him in his native language must confess it) with equal strength of eloquence and reason, where he also briefly touches that objection so common amongst the Heathens, that if Christians were so dear to God, why then did he suffer them to be oppressed with so many miseries▪ and troubles, Arnob adv. gent. l. 2. prop. fin. and not come in to vindicate and relieve them: an argument fully cleared by Arnobius, Lactant. l▪ 5. de ju­stit. c. 2 [...]. Lactantius, and other ancient Apologists for the Christi­an Faith.

But this was not all, they were charg­ed as a very useless and unserviceable people, that contributed nothing to the happiness of the Common-wealth; nay as destructive and pernicious to humane [Page 52] society, and as the procuring cause of all those mischiefs and calamities that befel the world. In answer to the first, their being useless as to the common good, Ap. c. 42. p. 33. hear what Tertullian says in the case; How can this be (says he) when we live amongst you, have the same diet, habit, manner, and way of life? we are no Brachmans or Indian Gymnoso­phists, who live in Woods, and banish themselves from all civil life: we are not unmindful of what we owe to our great Creator, and therefore despise none of his Creatures, though careful to use them with temperance and sobrie­ty; wherefore we live not in the world without the use of your Markets, Sham­bles, Bathes, Taverns, Shops, Stables, your Marts, and other ways of humane com­merce: we go to Sea with you, bear Arms, till and improve the ground, use merchandize, we undergo Trades amongst you, and expose our works to your use; and how then we can seem unservicea­ble to your affairs, with which and by which we live, Ib c. 43. I see not. Certainly (says he) if any have cause truly to com­plain of our being unprofitable, they are Bawds, Panders, Pimps, Hectors and Ruffians, sellers of poyson, Magicians, [Page 53] Southsayers, Wizards, and Astrologers: and to be unserviceable to these, is the greatest serviceableness. But besides this, they pleaded for themselves, that their Religion was highly beneficial to the world, and in its own nature con­tributed to the peace and happiness of mankind; it cannot be denied but that some of the Primitive Christians were shie of engaging in Wars, and not very forward to undergo publick places of authority and power; but (besides that this was only the opinion of some pri­vate persons, and not the common and current practice or determination of the Church) it arose partly from some mis­taken passages in the Gospel, turning Evangelical Counsels into positive precepts; but principally because such Offices and Employments were usally clogg'd with such circumstances and conditions, as obliged them to some things repugnant to the Christian Law: otherwise where they could do it without offering vio­lence to their Religion and their Con­science, they shunn'd it not, but fre­quently bore Arms, and discharged such Publick Offices as were committed to them, as cannot be unknown to any that are never so little vers'd in the Hi­story [Page 54] of the first Ages of the Church: ne­ver were there better, more faithful and resolute Souldiers, more obedient to the Orders of their Commanders, more rea­dy to attempt the most hazardous enter­prises, never boggling at any thing which they could do without sin: of which, amongst many others I shall instance only in that of the Thebaean Legion, who being commanded upon a bloody and unlaw­ful butchery, Martyrol. Adonis ad X. Kalend. Octob. to destroy and cut off the Christians their brethren, meekly return­ed this answer to the Heathen Emperour Maximianus, under whom they served; we offer our hands against any Enemy, but count it unlawful to embrue them in the blood of the innocent: our Swords know how to strike a Rebel or an Enemy, but not to wound those who are Citi­zens and guiltless; we remember that we took up Arms for, not against friends and fellow Citizens: we have always fought for justice and piety, and for the safety of the innocent; these have been hitherto the price of those dangers that we have run upon; we have fought for fidelity, which how shall we be able to keep to you, if we do not first keep it to our God. So far were the Christians of those times from refusing to engage in [Page 55] the service of their Prince. Nay those of them who were so bound up by their private sentiments, as not to think it lawful, yet reckoned they otherways made equivalent compensation: thus when Celsus press'd the Christians to un­dergo publick Offices, and to help the Emperours in their Wars; Adv. Cels. l. 8. p. 426, 427. Origen an­swers, that they did so, though by a di­vine not humane help, by praying for their persons, and their prosperity and success; above all men (says he) we fight for the Emperour, while we train our selves in exercises of piety, and contend by prayers for him. But besides these there were several other instances which the Christians pleaded to vindicate them­selves, from being unserviceable to the good of mankind, amongst which I shall at present take notice only of these two.

First, That they really sought to re­claim men from vice and sin, to a good and a virtuous life; by which means (besides that they provided for mens highest and nearest interest, the interest of their souls, and their eternal happi­ness in another life) they greatly con­sulted the peace and welfare of the pla­ces where they lived; for vicious and [Page 56] wicked men are the pests and plagues of humane society, that taint and infect others by their bad examples or perswa­sions, and entail vengeance upon the places of their residence; whilst good men engage the favour and blessing of heaven, and both by their counsels and examples bring over others to sobriety and virtue, whereby they establish and strengthen the foundations of Govern­ment, and the happiness of civil life, and none so eminent for this as the Chri­stians of old; this is the great trium­phant argument wherewith Origen at e­very turn exalts the honour of Christia­nity; Adv. Cels. lib. 1. p. 9. this (says he) we find in the mul­titudes of those that believe, who are delivered from that sink of vices, where­in before they were wont to wallow: enquire into the lives of some of us, Ib. p. 21. compare our former and our present course, and you'll find in what filthiness and impieties they tumbled, before they entertained the Christian Doctrine; but since the time that they entred into it, how gentle and moderate, how grave and constant are they become, Ib. p. 53. and some so inflam'd with the love of purity, that they forbear even what lawfully they might enjoy; how largely are the [Page 57] Churches of God, founded by Christ, spread over all Nations, consisting of such as are converted from innumerable evil ways to a better mind: And else­where vindicating the Doctrine of Christ, from the mischievous cavils of his ad­versary, Lib. 2. p. 78 he tells us how 'twas impossible that could be pestilent and hurtful, which had converted so many from their vices and debaucheries, to a course most a­greeable to Nature and Reason, and to a life of temperance and all other vir­tues: and the same he urges frequent­ly in other places, and what greater kindness and benefit could be done to men? Lib. 8. p. 427. Does Celsus call upon us (says he) to bear Offices for the good of our Country; let him know that the Coun­try is much more beholden to Christi­ans than to the rest of men, while they teach men piety towards God, the tu­telar Guardian of the Country, and shew them the way to that heavenly Ci­ty that is above, which they that live well may attain to, though here they dwell in the smallest City in the world. Nor do the Christians thus employ them­selves, Ib. p. 428. because they shun the publick Of­fices of the civil life; but only reserve themselves for the more divine and n­cessary [Page 58] services of the Church, in order to the good and happiness of men; for this they think very just and reasona­ble, that they should take care of all men, of them of their own party, that they may every day make them better; of others, that they may draw them to the belief and practice of piety and Re­ligion; that so worshipping God in truth, and doing what they can to instruct o­thers, they may be united to the great God, and to his blessed Son, who is the wisdom, truth, and righteousness, and by whom it is that every one is conver­ted to a pious and religious life.

Theodoret discoursing against the Gen­tiles, De curand. Graec. affe­ctib. Serm. 9. de Leg. p. 128. of the excellency of the Laws of Christ, above any that were given by the best Philosophers or wisest men amongst the Heathens, gives them instances of whole Nations whom Christianity had brought off from the most brutish and sa­vage manners, he tells them of the Per­sians who by the Laws given them by Za­rada lived in incestuous mixtures with their own Mothers, Sisters, and Daugh­ters, looking upon it as a lawful and warrantable practice; till entertaining Christianity, they threw off those abo­minable Laws, and submitted to that [Page 59] temperance and chastity which the Go­spel requires of us. And whereas before they were wont to cast out the bodies of their dead, to be devoured by Beasts and Birds of prey, since they embraced the Christian Religion, they abstained from that piece of inhumanity, and de­cently committed them to the earth; from which they could not be restrain­ed, either by the Laws of their Country, or the bitterness of those torments which they underwent. The Massagetes who thought it the most miserable thing in the world to dye any other than a vio­lent death, and therefore made a Law that all persons arrived to old age should be offered in Sacrifice and eaten, no sooner submitted to Christianity, but ab­horred those barbarous and abominable Customs. The Tibarens, who used to throw aged persons down the steepest Rocks, left it off upon their embracing of the Gospel. Upon the same account the Hyrcani and the Caspians reformed their manners, who were formerly wont to keep Dogs on purpose to devour the bodies of the dead. Nor did the Scy­thians any longer together with their dead bury those alive who had been their nearest friends and kindred. So [Page 60] great a change (says my Author) did the Laws of Christ make in the manners of men, and so easily were the most barba­rous Nations perswaded to entertain them, a thing which Plato, though the best of all Philosophers, could never ef­fect amongst the Athenians, his own Fel­low Citizens, who could never induce them to govern the Common-wealth, ac­cording to those Laws and Institutions which he had prescribed them.

Nay where the Gospel did not pro­duce this effect to reclaim men from their vices and vanities, and to bring them over to the Religion of the crucified Sa­viour; yet had it this excellent influence upon the world, that it generally taught them better lessons, refin'd their under­standings, and filled their minds with more useful and practical notions about Religion than they had before. To which purpose it's mainly observable, that those Philosophers who lived in the time of Christianity, after the Gospel publickly appeared in the world, wrote in a much more divine strain, entertained more honourable and worthy sentiments about God and Religion, and the du­ties of men in their several capacities, than those of their Sect that went before [Page 61] them. Of which I conceive no account can be given so satisfactory as this, that the genius and spirit of the Gospel be­gan then to fly abroad, and to breathe in a freer air, and so could not but leave some tincture and savour upon the spi­rits of men, though its most inveterate Enemies. [...]. Theod. de Cur. Graec. Ass. Serm. 2. de prin­cip. p. 33. Besides that many of them did more nearly converse with the Wri­tings of Christianity, which they read either out of curiosity, or with a design to confute and answer them. This doubt­less sharpned the edge of their under­standings, and furnished them with bet­ter notions, more useful precepts and rules of life, than are to be met with in any of the old Philosophers: witness those excellent and uncommon strains of piety that run through the Writings of Se­neca, Epictetus, Antoninus, Arrian, Plu­tarch, Hierocles, Plotinus, and the rest that lived in those first Ages of the Gos­pel: of which I could give considerable instances, were it necessary to my purpose. I shall only as a specimen, set down that Prayer wherewith Simplicius (Enemy e­nough to Christianity) concludes his Comment upon Epictetus: and thus he makes his address to God.

[Page 62] [...]. Pag. 331.

I Beseech thee, O Lord, thou that art the Father and guide of our rational powers, grant that we may be mindful of those noble and gene­rous natures with which thou hast in­vested us; and assist us, that as persons en­dued with self-mov­ing principles, we may cleanse our selves from all bodi­ly and brutish passi­ons, that we may subdue and govern them, and in a due and decent manner use them only as Or­gans and instru­ments. Help us through the light of the truth, accurately to correct our reason, and to unite it to those things that have a real existence. And in the third place, I beseech my Saviour, that he would perfect­ly dispel the mist that is before the eyes of [Page 63] our minds, that according to that of the Poet, we may rightly understand what be­longs either to God or man.

Besides the matter of this Prayer, which is very sublime and spiritual, the manner of its composure is considerable, consisting of three parts, and those ad­dressed as it were to three persons, an­swerable to those in the blessed Trinity, the Lord (or Father) the Saviour (or Christ) and the light of truth (which even in Scripture is a common Periphrasis of the Holy Spirit:) whether he intended this, I will not say, sure I am it looks very like it. But enough of this.

Secondly, That they ordinarily wrought such miracles as were incom­parably beneficial to the world, in cu­ring diseases, raising the dead, and re­scuing possessed persons from the merci­less rage and cruelty of the Devil: we may observe, that in those primitive times there were innumerable multitudes of possessed persons, beyond what were in the Ages either before or since; the Divine Providence doubtless permitting it to be so, that by this means there might be a fairer occasion of commend­ing Christianity to the world; and there [Page 64] is nothing which we more commonly meet with in the Writings of the anci­ent Fathers, than testimonies concern­ing their triumphant power over evil spirits: Justin Martyr discoursing of the end of Christ's coming into the world, Apol. 1. p. 45. for the salvation of men, and the sub­version of Devils, tells the Senate, that these things are so, you may know by what is done before your eyes; for ma­ny that were possessed by Devils, throughout the whole world, and even in this City of yours, whom all your In­chanters, Sorcerers, and Conjurers were not able to cure, many of us Christians adjuring them by the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, have perfectly cured, and do still cure, disarming and driving out of men those Daemons that had seized upon them; and the same he affirms more than once and again in his discourse with Trypho the Jew. Adv haeres. lib. 2. c. 57. p. 218. Ironaeus arguing against the Hereticks, tells us, that the true Dis­ciples of Christ did in his name many strange things for the good of others, according as every one had received his gift, some so signally expelling Devils, that those out of whom they were cast came over to the Faith; others fore­telling [Page 65] future events: others curing men of the most grievous distempers, by put­ting their hands upon them, and resto­ring them to their former health: ma­ny that have been raised from the dead, and afterwards lived many years amongst us: and indeed innumerable (says he) are the gifts which God has every where bestowed upon his Church, whereby in the name of the crucified Jesus, many and great miracles are daily done to the great advantage of the world. Ad Scap. c. 2 p 69. Tertullian ap­peals to the Heathens, as a thing com­monly known amongst them, that they daily restrained the power of Devils, and cast them out of men; Ib. c. 4. p. 71. and he tells Sca­pula the President, that he might be satis­fied of this from his own Records, and those very advocates who had them­selves reaped this benefit from Christi­ans; as for instance, a certain Notary, and the Kinsman and Child of another; besides divers other persons of note and quality (not to speak of the meaner sort) who had been recovered either from Devils or from desperate Diseases: nay Severus the Father of Antoninus having been cured by being anointed with Oyl by Proculus a Christian, he kept him in his Palace till his death; whom Anto­ninus [Page 66] knew well, having been himself nursed by a Christian: and in his Apolo­gie he challenges the Heathens to pro­duce any possessed person before the publick Tribunals, and the evil spirit being commanded by any Christian shall then as truly confess himself to be a De­vil, as at other times he falsely boasts himself to be a god. And elsewhere put­ting the case that the Christians should agree to retire out of the Roman Em­pire, Apol. c. 37. p 30. he asks them what protection they would then have left against the secret and invisible attempts of Devils, O [...]ig contr. C. lib. 1. p. 5 7. 53. l. 3 p. 124. l. 7. p. 334. 376. who made such havock both of their souls and bodies, whom the Christians so free­ly expelled and drove out; Cypr. Ep. ad Donat. p. 3. ad Deme­trian. p. 201. 206. Min Fael. p. 23 that it would be a sufficient piece of revenge, that hereby they should leave them open to the uncontrouled possession of those e­vil spirits. 'Twere endless to produce all the testimonies of this nature, that might be fetch'd from Origen, Minucius Faelix, Arnob. adv. gent. l. 1. p. 13. Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius, Eusebius, Lactant. de Or. error. l. 2. c. 15. p. 220. and all the old Apologists for the Christian Religion, (some whereof I have briefly noted in the Margin) who constantly pleaded this as a mighty and uncontroulable argument of the truth and divinity of their Religion, Euseb. de­monstrat. Evang. l. 3. p. 132. and of [Page 67] their great usefulness to mankind; nay this miraculous power continued in the Church some considerable time after Constantine and the world was become Christian, Naz. Or. 1. Apol. p. 35. Aug. de C. D. l. 22. c. 8. p. 1339. as appears from S. Basil, Na­zianzen, and others; and though I do not give heed to all the miracles which are reported by S. Hierom, Greg. Nyss. Or. in suam ordinat. tom. 1. p 876. in the lives of Hilarion, Paulus, and some others; or by Palladius in his Historia Lausiaca; yet doubtless many of them were very true and real; Athanas. de incarn. verb. p. 35. edit. Lat. God withdrawing this extra­ordinary power, as Christianity gained faster footing in the world, and leaving the Church to those standing methods by which it was to be managed and govern­ed to the end of the world.

And yet notwithstanding the case was thus plain and evident, how much the world was beholden to Christians, yet were they looked upon as the pests of humane society, counted and called the common enemies of mankind, Ap. c. 37. p. 30. as Tertulli­an complains; that, they were the causes of all publick calamities, and that for their sakes it was, that vengeance did so often remarkably haunt the Roman Empire. This was the common out-cry; if the City be besieged (says Tertullian) if any thing happen ill in the Fields, Ib. c. 1. p. 2. in the Garrisons, [Page 68] in the Islands, presently they cry out, ' tis because of the Christians: Ibid. c. 40. p. 32. they con­spire the ruine of good men, and thirst after the blood of the innocent, patro­nizing their hatred with this vain pre­tence, that the Christians are the cause of all publick misfortunes and calami­ties; if Tiber overflow the walls, if the Nile do not (as 'tis wont) overflow the fields, if the Heaven do not keep its accustomed course, if an Earthquake happen, if a Famine, or a Plague, pre­sently the cry is, away with the Christi­ans to the Lions. Thus Demetrian the Proconsul of Afric objected to S. Cyprian, Cypr. ad Demetr. p. 197. that they might thank the Christians, that wars did oftener arise, that Plagues and Famines did rage so much, and that immoderate and excessive rains hindred the kindly seasons of the year. The same, Arnob. adv. gent. lib. 1. p. 1. Arnobius tells us, the Heathens were wont to object at every turn, and to conclude it as sure as if it had been dictated by an Oracle, that since the Chri­stians appeared in the world, the world had been well-nigh undone, mankind has been over-run with infinite kinds of evil; and the very gods themselves had withdrawn that solemn care and provi­dence, wherewith they were wont to [Page 69] superintend humane affairs. Nay so hot and common was this Charge amongst the Pagans, that when the Goths and Van­dals broke in upon the Roman Empire, S. Augustine was forced to write those excellent Books De Civit. Dei, Aid. Re­tractat. l. 2. c. 43. tom. 1. p. 52. purpose­ly to stop the mouth of this objection, as upon the same account and at his re­quest Orosius wrote his seven Books of History against the Pagans. P. Oros. praef ad lib. Hist. ad D. Aug. Omitting some of the answers given by the Fa­thers (as being probably less solid, and not so proper in this case; such as, that 'twas no wonder if miseries happened, and things grew worse in this old age of time, the world daily growing more feeble and decrepit; and that these things had been foretold by God, Ad Dem [...] ­trian. p. 198, 199. and therefore must necessarily come to pass; two arguments largely and strongly pleaded by S. Cyprian: that those evils were properly resolvable into natural causes; and that every thing is not pre­sently evil, because it crosses our ease and interest as Arnobius answers: pas­sing by these) I shall take notice only of two things which the Christians pleaded in this case. Arnob. ut supra p. 4.

First, That the Gentiles should do ve­ry well to seek the true causes of these [Page 70] things nearer home, and to enquire whether 'twas not for their own sakes, that the Divine Providence was thus of­fended with them; there being very just reasons to think so. Tertullian points them to such causes as these. Ap. c. 40. p. 33. First, their horrible affronting their natural notions of God, that when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their ima­ginations, Rom. 1. 21, 22, 23. and their foolish heart was darkned, and they changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an Image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things, as S. Paul had told them long before: and that therefore 'twas reasonable to sup­pose, Ap. c. 41. vid. Arnob. l. 1. p. 6, 7. that God was more angry with them, who instead of him worshipped pieces of wood and Statues, or at best Genii and Devils, than with those who sincerely paid their adorations to him a­lone. Secondly, Passing by God the great Master of all goodness and inno­cence, and the severe revenger of all im­piety, they tumbled themselves in all manner of vice and wickedness; and what wonder if the Divine Justice fol­lowed close at their heels. Ʋt supra. p. 199. 200 You are angry (says Cyprian) that God is angry, [Page 71] as if in living ill you deserved well, and as if all that has happened to you were not less and lighter than your sins: and thou, Demetrian, who art a Judge of o­thers, but in this a Judge of thy self, in­spect the retirements of thy conscience, and behold thy self now, who shalt one day be seen naked by all; and thou wilt find thy self enslav'd and led captive by some sins or other; and why then shouldst thou wonder that the flames of the divine anger should rise higher, when the sins of men do daily admini­ster more fuel to it: an answer which he there prosecutes to very excellent purpose. Thirdly, Their prodigious unthankfulness to God for all the former blessings they had received from him: so far as they were ingrateful, they were highly guilty, and God could not but punish them; had they sought him, whom in part they could not but know, and been observant of him, they would in this case have found him a much more propitious, than an angry Deity, as Tertullian tells them. Upon these and such like accounts, they might well con­clude it was, that the vengeance of God did press so hard upon them, and that therefore they had no true reason to [Page 72] lay the fault at any other door but their own.

Secondly, As to the thing it self, as 'twas charged upon them, they point blank denied it to be true, and that for two reasons especially.

First, Because the world had been sadly and frequently pestered with such evils and miseries long before the Chri­stian Religion appeared in it: I pray (says Tertullian) what miseries did over­whelm all the world, Ap. c. 40. p. 32. and even Rome it self, before the times of Tiberius, i. e. before the coming of Christ; have we not read of Hierapolis, and the Islands of Delos, and Rhodes, and Cos destroyed with many thousands of men? does not Plato speak of the greatest part of Asia and Afric swallowed up by the Atlantic Sea? an Earthquake drank up the Co­rinthan Sea, and the force of the Ocean rent off Sicilia from Italy: not to ask where were the Christians, the great contemners of your gods? but where were your gods themselves, when the Flood over-ran the world? Palestine had not yet received the Jewish Nation out of Egypt, much less had the Christi­ans sat down there, when Sodom and Gomorrah and the adjacent parts were [Page 73] burnt up by a shower of fire and Brim­stone; of which the Country smells to this day. Nor could Tuscia and Campa­nia complain of the Christians, when a fire from Heaven destroyed the Vulsinii and the Pompeii. None as yet worship­ped the true God at Rome, when Han­nibal at Cannae made such a slaughter of the Romans, that the very Rings that he took (which were the honourable Badges of none but Roman Knights) were mea­sured by the Bushel: they were all your gods that then had the general worship, when the Gauls took the Capitol it self. So smartly does that grave man retort their own arguments upon themselves. Arnobius fully and elegantly pursues this, Lib. 1. p. 2, 3. that in this respect the former times were no better than these, which they so much complained of, and bids them run over the Annals and Records that were written in all languages, and they would find that all Nations had frequently had their common miseries and devastati­ons: the clearing of which was likewise the great design Orosius proposed to him­self, Praefat. ut supra. p. 2. in drawing down the History of the world through all the Ages and Generati­ons of it.

Secondly, Because since the coming of [Page 74] Christianity, the world had been in a better and more prosperous state than it was before, especially when ever the Christian Religion met with any favour and encouragement; the reason of it Tertullian gives: Apol. c. 40. p. 33. although we should compare present with former miseries, yet they are much lighter now, since God sent Christians into the world; for since then, innocency has ballanced the iniquities of the Age, and there have been many who have interceded with Heaven. Quest. 126 p. 476. The Author of the Questions and Answers in Justin Martyr (for that it was not Justin himself, I think no man can doubt, that reads him, the man betray­ing himself openly enough to have liv'd in the times of prevailing Christianity) putting this question, whether paganism was not the better Religion, forasmuch as under it there was great prosperity and abundance, whereas 'twas quite o­therwise since Christianity came in fa­shion; he answers, among other things, that (besides that plenty was no argu­ment of the goodness of any Religion, Christians being to be judged of rather by the holiness than the prosperity of their Religion) there was so much the more abundance in these times of Christianity, [Page 75] by how much there were fewer Wars, than was while Paganism governed the world. Never were wars more succes­fully managed, never was prosperity more triumphant, than when Christians met with kind entertainment. Melito▪ Bishop of Sardis, in an Oration which he presented to the Emperour M. Anto­ninus in behalf of the Christians (part whereof is yet extant in Eusebius) tells him that Christianity commencing under the Reign of Augustus was a good [...] of the prosperity of the Empire, Euseb. Ec­cles. Hist. lib. 4. c. 26. p. 148. and that ever since, the majesty of the Roman Empire had encreased: of whom he be­ing the Heir and Successor, he could not better assure it to himself and his Son, than by protecting that Religion that had been born and bred up toge­ther with the Empire, and for which his Ancestors amongst other Religions had had an esteem and honour: that there could be no better argument, that this Religion contributed to the happi­ness of the Empire (with which it be­gan and had grown up) than that since the Reign of Augustus no misfortune, but on the contrary, according to all mens wishes every thing had hapned to be magnificent and prosperous. Hence [Page 76] Eusebius notes once and again, that the affairs of the Empire commonly flou­rished, Vid. ib. l. 7. c. 1. l. 8. c. 13. while Christianity was protect­ed, but when that was persecuted, things began to go to rack, De Martyr. Palest. c. 3. p. 322. and their ancient peace and prosperity could not be re­trieved, till peace and tranquillity was restored to the Christians: therefore Cyprian tells the Proconsul, Ad Demet. p. 200. that their cruelty to the Christians was one of those crying sins that had provoked God to inflict so many heavy miseries upon them, not only refusing to worship God them­selves, but unjustly persecuting those in­nocent persons that did, with all the me­thods of rage and fierceness. So little hand had the Christians in entailing ven­geance upon the world, that their Ene­mies rather wilfully pull'd it down upon their own heads.

CHAP. IV.
The Charges brought against them, respecting their life and manners.

ALL the attempts that had been hi­therto made against the honour and reputation of Christians, seemed but like the first skirmishings of an Ar­my, in respect of the main Battalia that was yet behind, the Charge that was made against their moral carriage and behaviour; and here they were accused at every turn of no less than Sacriledge, Sedition, and High-Treason, of incest and promiscuous mixtures, of murder, and eating the flesh of Infants at their sacra­mental Feasts: These were sad and hor­rid crimes, and had they been true, would justly have made Christianity stink in the nostrils of all sober and con­sidering men: but they were as false as [Page 79] they were black and hellish: the parti­cular Answers to these Charges (toge­ther with some things relating to mat­ters of Worship) shall be considered hereafter, according as they fall in in their more proper places; I shall only at pre­sent take notice of the general vindicati­on which the Christians made of them­selves, from these Indictments that were brought in against them; and the sum of what they pleaded lyes especially in these three things.

First, They did openly assert and maintain their innocency, and shew by their lives as well as their Apologies, that they were men of quite another make and temper, than their Enemies did ge­nerally represent them: their Religion and way of life was admired by all: who (says S. Clement to the Corinthians) did ever dwell amongst you, Clem. Ep. ad Corinth. p. 2. 4. that did not approve of your excellent and un­shaken Faith; that did not wonder at your sober and moderate piety in Christ? you were forward to every good work, adorned with a most virtuous and vene­rable conversation, doing all things in the fear of God, and having his Laws and Commands written upon the tables of your hearts. They placed Religion [Page 80] then not in talking finely, but in living well. Leg. pro Christ. p. 12. Amongst us (says Athenagoras) the meanest and most mechanick persons, and old women, although not able to discourse and dispute for the usefulness of their profession, do yet demonstrate it in their lives and actions; they don't in­deed critically weigh their words, and recite elegant Orations, but they mani­fest honest and virtuous actions; while being buffeted they strike not again, nor sue them at Law that spoil and plun­der them; Liberally give to them that ask, and love their neighbours as themselves. And this we do, because we are assu­red that there is a God that superintends humane affairs, who made both us and the whole world, and because we must give to him an account of all the trans­actions of our lives, therefore we chuse the most moderate, humane, and benign, and, to many, the most contemptible course of life, for we reckon that no evil in this life can be so great, though we should be called to lay down our lives, which ought not to be esteemed little and of no value, in comparison of that happiness which we hereafter look for from the great Judge of the world, promised to those who are of [Page 81] an humble, benign, and moderate con­versation. Adm [...]nit. ad gent. p. 76. Clemens of Alexandria gives us this short account of them; as the fairest possession we give up our selves to God, entirely loving him, and rec­koning this the great business of our lives: no man is with us a Christian, or accounted truly rich, temperate, and generous, but he that is pious and reli­gious, nor does any farther bear the image of God, than he speaks and be­lieves what is just and holy: so that this in short is the state of us who follow God; such as are our desires, such are our dis­courses; such as are our discourses, such are our actions; such as are our actions, such is our life; so universally good is the whole life of Christians. Certainly none were ever greater Enemies to a naked profession, and the covering a bad life under the title of Christianity. Do any live otherwise than Christ hath commanded, 'tis a most certain argu­ment they are no Christians, though with their tongues they never so smoothly profess the Christian Doctrine; for 'tis not meer Professors, but those who live according to their profession, that shall be saved, Ap. 2. p. 63. as Justin Martyr declares be­fore the Emperours. Let no man ( says [Page 82] Basil) impose upon himself with incon­siderate words, Comment. in cap. 1. saying, though I be a sinner, Esai. tom. 2. p. 28. yet I am a Christian, and I hope that title will be my shelter; but hearken sinner, all wicked men shall be bundled up together, and in the great day of the di­vine vengeance shall be indifferently thrown into those merciless and devour­ing Flames.

Nay so careful were they to avoid all sin, that they stood at a wide distance from any thing, that though lawful in it self, Lib. 7. p. 375. yet seemed to carry an ill colour with it; this Origen tells Celsus was the reason why they refused to do any ho­nour to an Image, lest thereby they should give occasion to others to think that they ascribed divinity to them: for this reason they shunn'd all communi­ty with the Rites and Customs of the Heathens, abstaining from things stran­gled, or that had been offered to Idols, from frequenting the publick Bathes, or going to the Sights and Shows, because they seemed to owe their original to idolatry, and were the occasion of many gross enormities; they refused to wear Crowns of Laurel, lest they should seem to patronize the Custom of the Gentiles, who were wont to do so in their sacred [Page 83] and solemn Rites, as appeared eminent­ly in the Solemnities of the Emperours Severus and Caracalla, when the Tribune delivering the donative to the Souldiers, and all came to receive it with Crowns upon their heads, one of them brought his in his hand, and being demanded the reason, answered that he was a Chri­stian, and could not do it; which was the occasion of Tertullian's Book de Co­rona Militis, wherein he sets himself to defend it.

Secondly, They were willing to put themselves upon the strictest trial, and to undergo the severest penalties, if found guilty of those Crimes that were charged upon them: So their Apologist bespeaks the Emperours; Just. Mar­tyr. Ap. 2. p. 54. we beseech you ( says he) that those things that are charged upon the Christians may be en­quired into, and if they be found to be so, let them have their deserved punish­ment, nay let them be more severely punished than other men: but if not guilty, then 'tis not reasonable, that in­nocent persons should suffer meerly up­on report and clamour. And speaking of those that only took sanctuary at the name of Christians, he adds, that those who lived not according to the Laws [Page 84] of Christ, and were only called by his name, they begg'd of them that such might be punished. To the same pur­pose Athenagoras in his Embassy, Leg pro Christian p. 3. taking notice how their Enemies laid wait for their lives and fortunes, loaded them with heaps of reproaches, charging them with things that never so much as entred into their minds, and of which their accusers themselves were most guilty, he makes this offer; let but any of us be convict of any crime either small or great, and we refuse not to be punish­ed, nay are ready to undergo the most cruel and heavy penalty: but if we be only accused for our name (and to this day all our accusations are but the sig­ments of obscure and uncertain fame, no Christian having ever been convict of any fault) then we hope it will be­come such wise, gracious, and mighty Princes as you are, to make such Laws as may secure us from those wrongs and injuries. But alas, so clear was their innocency, that their bitterest adversa­ries durst not suffer them to come to a fair open tryal; if you be so certain that we are guilty (says Tertullian to the Heathens) why then are we not treat­ed in the same nature with all male­factors; Ap [...] c. 2. p. 2. [Page 85] who have leave both by them­selves and their advocates to defend their innocency, to answer and put in pleas, it being unlawful to condemn any be­fore they be heard, and have liberty to defend themselves; whereas Christians only are not permitted to speak any thing that might clear their cause, main­tain the truth, and make the Judge able to pronounce righteous sentence: 'tis enough to justifie the publick odium, if we do but confess our selves Christians, without ever examining of the crime; contrary to the manner of procedure a­gainst all other Delinquents, whom 'tis not enough barely to charge to be murderers, sacrilegious, or incestuous, or enemies to the Publick (the titles you are pleased to bestow upon us) unless they also take the quality of the fact, the place, manner, time, partners and acces­sories under examination. But no such favour is shewn to us, but we are con­demned without any inquisition passed upon us. And good reason there was, that they should take this course, seeing they could really find nothing to con­demn them for, but for being Christians. This one would think strange, especi­ally amongst a people so renowned for [Page 86] justice and equity as the Romans were, and yet in these times nothing more or­dinary; therefore when Ʋrbicius the Pre­fect of Rome had condemned Ptolomeus meerly upon his confessing himself a Christian, Just. Mart. one Lucius that stood by cry­ed out, Ap. 1. p. 43. What strange course is this, what infamous misdemeanour is this man guilty of; that when he's no adulterer, fornica­tor, no murtherer, no thief, or robber, thou shouldst punish him only because he calls himself a Christian? certainly, Urbicius, such justice as this does not become the pie­ty of the Emperour, or the Philosophy of Caesar his Son, or the sacred and venera­ble Senate. Ap. c. 3. p. 4. And Tertullian tells us, 'twas the common accusation they had in their mouths, such or such a one is a goodman, only he is a Christian; or, I wonder at such a one, a wise man, but lately turned Christian. Ad Deme­trian. pag. 200. So Cyprian, I remember, re­duces his adversary to this unavoidable dilemma; chuse one of these two things, to be a Christian, either is a fault, or 'tis not; Vid. Tertul. if it be a fault, why dost thou not kill every one that confesses it? Ap. c. 1, 2, 3. if it be not, J. Mart. why dost thou persecute them that are innocent? Ap. 2▪ p 54. 68, 69. Hence we find nothing more common in the old Apologists, Athenag. leg pro Christian. p. 3, 4. than complaints concerning the unreasona­bleness [Page 87] of being accused, condemned, and punished, meerly for their name, this being the first and great cause of all that hatred and cruelty that was exer­cised towards them, 'twas the innocent name that was hated in them, all the quarrel was about this title, and when a Christian was guilty of nothing else, 'twas this made him guilty, as Tertullian complains at every turn. The truth is, they mightily gloried in this title, and were ambitious to own it in the face of the greatest danger; Euseb. Hist. therefore when At­talus the famous French Martyr was led about the Amphitheatre, Eccles. l. 5. c. 1. p. 162. that he might be exposed to the hatred and derision of the people, he triumphed in this, that a tablet was carried before him with this Inscription, THIS IS ATTALUS THE CHRISTIAN. Ib. p. 158. And Sanctus another of them being oft asked by the President, what his name was, what his City and Country, and whether he was a Free-man or a Servant, answered nothing more to any of them, than that he was a Christian, professing this name to be Country, Kindred, and all things to him. Nay so great was the honour and value which they had for this name, that Ju­lian the Emperour (whom we com­monly [Page 88] call the Apostate) endeavoured by all ways to suppress it, that when he could not drive the thing, he might at least banish the name out of the world; and therefore did not only himself con­stantly call Christians Galilaeans, Naz in­vect. in Ju­lian. 1. p. 81. but made a Law, that they should be called only by that name. But to return, the sum is this, the Christians were so buoy'd up with the conscience of their inno­cency, that they cared not who saw them, were willing and desirous to be scann'd and searched to the bottom, and to lye open to the view of all; and therefore desired no other favour, than that that Apologie which Justin Martyr presented to them, Ap. 1. p. 51. might be set out with the Decree of the Senate, that so peo­ple might come to the true knowledge of their case, and they be delivered from false suspicions, and these accusa­tions, for which they had been unde­servedly exposed to so many punish­ments.

Thirdly, They appealed for their vin­dication to the judgment and conscien­ces of their more sober and impartial Enemies, and were accordingly acquit­ted by them, as guiltless of any hainous crimes. Pliny the younger being com­manded [Page 89] by the Emperour Trajan, to give him an account of the Christians, Epist. l. 10. tells him, Ep. 97. that after the best estimate that he could take, and the strictest inqui­sition that he could make by tortures, he found no worse of them than this, that they were wont to meet early for the performance of their solemn devotions, and to bind themselves under the most sacred obligations; to commit no vice or wickedness, and that their Religion was nothing else but an untoward and immoderate superstition. This is the te­stimony which that great man, (who be­ing Proconsul of Bithynia was capable to satisfy himself, and who was no less diligent to search into the matter) gives concerning them. Euseb. Hist. Next after him Se­r [...]us Granianus the Proconsul of Asia, Eccles. l. 4. c. 8. 9. p. 122. writes to the Emperour Adrian (Trajans successor) to represent to him how un­just it was to put Christians to death, when no crime was duly laid to their charge, meerly to gratifie the tumultu­ous clamours of the people, to whom the Emperour answers, that they should not be unjustly troubled, that if any thing was truly prov'd against them, he should punish them according to the na­ture of the fault; but if done out of [Page 90] malice or spite, he should then accord­ingly punish the accuser as a calumnia­tor. J. Martyr. Next to Adrian, Antoninus Pius (if he be not mistaken for his successor Marcus) in his Epistle to the Commons of Asia, Ap. 2. p. 100. tells them, that they had tra­duced the Christians, and had objected those crimes to them, which they could not prove; that they were more firm and undaunted in their profession than themselves, and had a greater freedom with and confidence towards God; [...]. and that therefore he resolved to ratifie and follow the determination of his Father. After him comes M. Antoninus, Ib. p. 101, 102. who having obtained that famous and signal Victory against the Quades in Germany, confesses in his Letter to the Senate (which Letter, though I know 'tis que­stioned by some learned men, as now extant, whether true and genuine, yet that there was such a Letter is evident enough from Tertullian, Ap. c. 5. p. 6. & ad Scap. c. p. 4. 71. who himself lived within a few years of that time, and appeals to it) that it was clearly gotten by the prayers of the Christian Legion which he had in his Army, and therefore commands that none be mo­lested for being Christians, and that if any accuse a Christian for being such, [Page 91] without a sufficient crime proved against him, he shall be burnt alive for his ac­cusation, that a Christian confessing himself to be one shall be safe and se­cure, and that the Governour of the Pro­vince shall not drive him to renounce his profession, and this he commands to be confirmed by the Decree of the Senate. So clear did the Christians appear to their greatest Enemies, especially in their more calm and sober intervals. Nay Trypho the Jew (and that very notion speaks him enemy enough, J. Mart. dial cum Tryph. p. 227. yet) confes­ses them clear of those foul aspersions; for when the Martyr had asked him, whether he disliked the Christians man­ners and way of life, and whether he really believed that they ate mens flesh, and putting out the Candles ran toge­ther in promiscuous mixtures? the Jew answered, that those things whereof they were accused by many were un­worthy of belief, as being so extream­ly abhorrent to humane nature; and that the precepts which are commanded in their Gospel (which his curiosity had prompted him to read) were so great and admirable, that he supposed no man could be able to keep and obey them. And to instance in no more, the Hea­then [Page 92] Oracle it self pronounced in favour of the Christians; for Apollo giving forth his Oracles, Euseb. de vit. Con­stant. l. 2. c. 50. 51. p. 467. not as he was wont by humane voice, but out of a dark and dis­mal cavern, confessed it was because of just men that lived upon the earth; and when Dioclesian enquired who those just men were, one of the Heathen Priests that stood by answered, that they were the Christians. This Constantine the Great tells he himself heard, being then a young man, and in company at that time with the Emperour Dioclesian, and he there solemnly calls God to witness for the truth of the story.

From all which it appears how inno­cent the Christians were of those things which the Gentiles charged upon them, how infinitely strict and unblameable in their lives, and therefore triumphed o­ver the Heathens in the purity and in­nocency of their conversations. Lib. 3. p. 128, 129. Origen tells Celsus, that the Churches of God which had taken upon them the disci­pline of Christ, if compared to the com­mon Societies of men, were amongst them like lights in the world. For who (says he) is there, but he must needs confess that the worser part of our Church is much better than the popular [Page 93] assemblies; as for instance, the Church of God at Athens is meek and quiet, as endeavouring to approve it self to the great God; whereas now the popular as­sembly of Athens is seditious and tumul­tuous, and no ways to be compared with the Church of God in that City; and the same may be said of the Churches of God, and the vulgar assemblies which are at Corinth, Pag. 29. or Alexandria. So Mi­nucius Foelix, should we Christians be compared with you, although our Dis­cipline may seem somewhat inferiour, yet we should be found infinitely to transcend you: you forbid adultely, and then practise it; we keep entirery to our own Wives; you punish wickedness when committed, with us even a wick­ed thought is sin; you stand in awe of those who are conscious of your crimes, we of nothing but our consciences, with­out which we cannot be; and last of all 'tis with your party that the Prison is filled and crowded, no Christian is there, unless such a one as is either a shame to his Religion, or an Apostate from it: and a little after he tells his adversary, Pag. 31. how much they exceeded the best Phi­losophers, who were filthy and tyran­nical, and only eloquent to declaime [Page 94] against those vices of which themselves were most guilty: that we Christians do not measure wisdom by mens habits, but by their minds and tempers, and do not speak great things, but live them, having this to boast of, that we really attain to those things which they ear­nestly sought, but could not find. Thus Lactantius having excellently discoursed of the prodigious debaucheries and wickednesses of the Heathens; De justit. l. 5▪ c. 9. p. 485. but which of these things (says he) can be objected to our people, whose whole Religion is to live without spot or ble­mish? from whence they might easily gather, had they any understanding, that piety is on our side, and that they themselves are vile and impious. And Eusebius tells us, Hist. Ec­cles. l. 4. c. 7. p. 121. vid. Con­stant. Or. ad caetum. S. S. c. 23. p. 599. that in his time the Christian Faith had by gravity, sinceri­ty, modesty, and holiness of life, so conquered all opposition, that none durst bespatter it, or charge it with any of those calumnies, which the ancient Enemies of our Religion used to fasten upon it. What Religion (says Arno­bius) can be truer, more useful, power­ful, just than this? which (as he else­where notes) renders men meek, Adv. Gent. lib. [...] 4. 67. speak­ers of truth, modest, chaste, charitable, [Page 95] kind and helpful to all, as if most nearly related to us; and indeed this is the ge­nuine and natural tendency of the Chri­stian Doctrine, and which it cannot but effect, where-ever 'tis kindly embraced and entertained. So true is that which Athenagoras told the Emperours, Leg. pro Christian. p. 4. that no Christian could be a bad man, unless he were an hypocrite; and Tertullian open­ly declares, Apol. c. 46. p. 36. that when men depart from the discipline of the Gospel, they so far cease amongst us to be accounted Chri­stians: Ad Nation. l. 1. c. 5. p. 43. and therefore when the Hea­thens objected, that some that went un­der that name were guilty of great e­normities, and enquired how comes such a one to be a cheat, if the Christians be so righteous; how so cruel, if they be merciful? he answers, that by this very thing they bore witness, that they who were real Christians were not such; that there's a vast difference be­tween the crime and the name, the opi­nion and the truth; that they are not presently Christians that are called so, but cheat others by the pretence of a name; that they shunn'd the company of such, and did not meet or partake with them in the offices of Religion; that they did not admit those whom [Page 96] meer force and cruelty had driven to deny Christianity, much less such as vo­luntarily transgressed the Christian Dis­cipline; and that therefore the Heathens did very ill to call them Christians, whom the Christians themselves did disown, who yet were not wont to deny their own party.

CHAP. V.
Of the positive parts of their Re­ligion: and first of their piety towards God.

[Page 98] HAving thus seen with how much clearness the ancient Christians vindicated themselves from those unjust aspersions, which their spightful and ma­licious adversaries had cast upon them; we come now to take a more direct and positive view of their Religion; which according to S. Pauls division, we shall consider as to their piety towards God; Tit. 2. 12. those virtues which more immediately concern'd themselves, and those which respected their behaviour and carriage towards others. Their piety towards God appeared in those two main in­stances of it, a serious and hearty dete­station of Idolatry, and a religious care about the concerns of Divine Wor­ship.

Idolatry in those times was the pre­vailing sin of the world; De idolo­lat c. 1. p. 85. the principal crime of mankind, the great guilt of the Age, and the almost sole cause of mens being brought into judgment, as what in a manner contains all sins under it, as Tertullian begins his Book upon that subject; a crime of the first rank, and one of the highest sorts of wickedness, as 'tis called by the most ancient Council in Spain. Conc. Illi­berit. Can. 1. They looked upon it as a sin [Page 99] that undermined the very being of the Deity, and ravished the honour of his Crown. Before we proceed any further, we shall first enquire what was the no­tion they generally had of Idolatry; and they then accounted that a man was guilty of Idolatry, when he gave divine adoration to any thing that was not God, not only when he worshipped a material Idol, but when he vested any creature with that religious respect and venera­tion that was only due to God: Idola­try (says Tertullian) robs God, Ʋt supra c. 11. denying him those honours that are due to him, and conferring them upon others, so that at the same time it does both defraud him and reproach him: Ib. c. 15. p. 95. and a little after he expresly affirms, that whatever is ex­alted above the Standard of civil Wor­ship, in imitation of the divine excel­lency, is directly made an Idol: thus S. Gregory, for his solid and excellent learning call'd the Divine (a title ne­ver given to any besides him but to St. John the Apostle) defines Idolatry (which, Greg. Naz: Orat. Pa­neg. in Na­tivit. Ch [...]i­sti Or. 38. p. 620. says he, is the greatest evil in the world) to be the translation of that worship that is due to the Creator upon the Creature. Accordingly we find them infinitely zealous to assert divine adoration, as [Page 100] the proper and incommunicable prero­gative of God alone, and absolutely re­fusing to impart religious Worship to any though the best of Creatures; sure­ly if any, one would think Angels, the first rank of created beings, creatures of such sublime excellencies and perfe­ctions, might have challenged it at their hands; but hear what Origen says to this; Contr. Cels. l. 8. p. 415. 416. we adore (says he) our Lord God, and serve him alone, following the example of Christ, who when tempt­ed by the Devil to fall down and wor­ship him, answered, thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve; which is the reason why we re­fuse to give honours to those spirits that preside over humane affairs, because we cannot serve two Masters, to wit, God and Mammon: as for these Daemons, we know that they have no administration of the conveniencies of mans life: yea, though we know that they are not Dae­mons, but Angels, that have the Govern­ment of fruits and seasons, and the pro­ductions of Animals committed to them; we indeed speak well of them, and think them happy, that they are intrusted by God to manage the conveniencies of mans life; but yet do not give them that [Page 101] honour that is only due to God; for this neither does God allow of, neither do they desire it; but equally love and regard us when we do not, as if we did sacrifice to them. And when Celsus a little before had smartly pressed him to do honour to Daemons, he rejects the motion with great contempt, Pag. 395. away (says he) with this counsel of Celsus, who in this is not in the least to be hearkned to; for the great God only is to be a­dored, and prayers to be delivered up to none but his only begotten Son, the first born of every creature, that as our High-Priest he may carry them to his Father and to our Father, to his God and to our God. 'Tis true that the Worship of Angels did (and that very early, as appears from the Apostles caveat against it in his Epistle to the Colossians) creep into some parts of the Christian Church, but was always disowned and cryed out against, and at last publickly and solemn­ly condemned by the whole Laodicean Council: it is not lawful (says the thirty fifth Canon of that Council) for Christi­ans to leave the Church of God, and to go and invocate Angels, and to make prohibited assemblies: if therefore any one shall be found devoting himself to [Page 102] this private Idolatry, let him be accursed; forasmuch as he has forsaken the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and has de­livered up himself to Idolatry. From which nothing can be more clear, than that it was the sense of these Fathers, that the wor­shipping of Angels was not only down-right Idolatry, but a plain apostasie from the Christian Faith.

Nor were they more peremptory in denying divine honour to Angels, than they were to Martyrs and departed Saints: for though they had a mighty honour and respect for Martyrs (as we shall take notice afterwards) as those that had maintained the truth of their Religion, and seal'd it with their blood, and therefore did what they could to do praise and honour to their memories, yet were they far from placing any thing of Religion or divine adoration in it; whereof 'twill be enough to quote one famous instance. The Church of Smyr­na writing to the Churches of Pontus, Euseb Hist. to give them an account of the martyrdom of Polycarpus their Bishop, Eccles. l 4. c. 15. p. 134▪ tells them, that after he was dead, many of the Christians were desirous to have gotten the remains of his body (possibly to have given them decent and honourable bu­rial) [Page 103] but were prevented in it by some Jews, who importun'd the Proconsul to the contrary, suggesting that the Chri­stians leaving their crucified Master, might henceforth worship Polycarpus, whereupon they add, that this suggesti­on must needs proceed from ignorance of the true state of Christians; this they did (say they) not considering how im­possible 'tis that ever we should either for­sake Christ, who died for the salvation of mankind, or that we should worship any other. We adore him as the Son of God; but the Martyrs, as the Disciples and Followes of our Lord, we deserv­edly love for their eminent kindness to their own Prince and Master; whose Companions and Fellow-Disciples we also by all means desire to be. This in­stance is so much the more valuable in this case, not only because so plain and pertinent but because so ancient, and from persons of so great authority in the Church: For this is not the testimony of any one private person, but of the whole Church of Smyrna, according as it had been trained up under the Doctrine and Discipline of Polycarpus, the imme­diate Disciple of S. John. This was the Doctrine and practice of Christians [Page 104] then, and it held so for some Ages af­ter, even down to the times of S. Augu­stine, when yet in many other things the simplicity of the Christian Religion began to decline apace: we set apart (says he) no Temples, Aug. de Civ. Dei. l. 8. c. 27. p. 492. vid. l. 22. c▪ 10. col. 1355. nor Priests, nor divine services, nor sacrifices to Martyrs; because they are not God, but the same who is theirs, is our God: indeed we honour their memories, as of holy men, who have stood for the truth, even unto death, that so the true Religion might appear, and those which are false be con­vinc'd to be so: but who ever heard a Priest standing at the Altar, built for the honour and worship of God over the body of the holy Martyr, to say in his Prayers, I offer sacrifice to thee Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian; for in such commemo­rations we offer to that God, who made them both men and Martyrs, and has made them partners with holy Angels in the heavenly glory; and by these so­lemnities we both give thanks to the true God for the victories which they have gain'd, and also stir up our selves by begging his assistance, to contend for such crowns and rewards as they are possessed of; so that whatever offices religious men perform in the places of [Page 105] the Martyrs, they are only ornaments to their memories, not sacrifices or divine services done to the departed, as if they were Deities. More to the same purpose we may find in that place, as also in infi­nite other places of his Works, where (were it worth the while) I could easily shew that he does no less frequently than expresly assert, that though the honour of love, respect, and imitation, yet no religi­ous adoration is due either to Angels, Mar­tyrs, or departed Saints.

But the great instance, wherein the primitive Christians manifested their de­testation of Idolatry was in respect of the idolatrous Worship of the Heathen world, the denying and abhorring any thing of divine honour that was done to their gods. They looked upon the very making of Idols (though with no intention to worship them) as an un­lawful trade, and as inconsistent with Christianity: how have we renounced the Devil and his Angels (says Tertulli­an, De Idolo­lat. c. 6. p. 88. meaning their solemn renunciation in baptism) if we make Idols, nor is it e­nough to say, though I make them, I do not worship them; there being the same cause not to make them, that there is not to worship them; viz. the offence [Page 106] that in both is done to God: yet thou dost so far worship them, as thou makest them that others may worship them: and therefore he roundly pronounces, that no Art, Cap. 11. p. 92. vid. c. 9. 10. no Profession, no service whatsoe­ver that is employed either in making or ministring to Idols, can come short of I­dolatry. They startled at any thing that had but the least shadow of symbolizing with them in their Idolatry; therefore the Ancyran Council condemned them to a two years supension from the Sacra­ment, Can. 7. who sat down with their Heathen friends upon their solemn Festivals in their Idol-Temples, although they brought their own Provisions along with them, and touched not one bit of what had been offered to the Idol. Their first care in instructing new Converts, was to lea­ven them with the hatred of Idolatry: those that are to be initiated into our Religion (says Origen) we do before all things instil into them a dislike and con­tempt of all Idols and Images, Adv. Cels. l. 3. p. 120. and lift up their minds from worshipping Crea­tures instead of God, to him who is the great Creator of the world. If any through weakness chanced at any time to lapse into this sin, how pathetically did they bewail it? So Celerinus in his [Page 107] Epistle to Lucian, giving him an account of a woman that to avoid persecution had done sacrifice, Inter Epist. and thereby fallen from Christ, Cypr. Ep. 20. p. 32. he bewails her as dead, tells him that it stuck so close to him, that though in the time of Easter, a time of festivity and rejoicing, yet he wept night and day, and kept company with sack­cloth and ashes, and resolved to do so, till by the help of Christ and the prayers of good men, she shouled by repentance be raised up again. The better to pre­vent this sin (wherein weaker Christi­ans were sometimes ensnared in those times of cruelty and persecution) the discipline of the ancient Church was ve­ry severe against it, of which we can have no better evidence, than to take a little view of the determinations relating to this case of that ancient Council of Il­liberis, Concil Illi­ber. Can. 2. vid. not. held some years before the time of Constantine; Albaspin. p. 5. & de rit. Eccles. Obs. 22. there we find, that if any Christian after Baptism took upon him the Flamin-ship or Priesthood of the Gentiles (an Office ordinarily devolved upon the better sort, and which Chri­stians sometimes either made suit for, to gain more favour with the people, or had it forc'd upon them by the Laws of the Country, so that they must either [Page 108] undergo it, or flye and forfeit their E­states) such a one no not at the hour of death was to be received into the Com­munion of the Church. The reason of which severity was, because who ever underwent that Office must do sacrifice to the gods, and entertain the people with several kinds of Sights, Plays, and Sports, which could not be managed without murders, and the exercise of all lust and filthiness, whereby they did double and treble their sin, Vid. Can. 3. p. 8. as that Coun­cil speaks. If a Christian in that Office did but allow the charges to maintain those Sports and Sights (although he did not actually sacrifice, which he might a­void, by substituting a Gentile Priest in his room) he was indeed to be taken in­to communion at last, but was to under­go a very severe penance for it all his life. Nay although he did neither of the former, yet if he did but wear a Crown (a thing usually done by the Hea­then Priests) he was to be excluded from communion for two years together. Can. 55. p. 69. If a Christian went up to the Capitol (probab­ly out of curiosity) only to see the sa­crifices of the Gentiles, Can. 59. p. 71. and did not see them, yet he should be as guilty as if he had seen them, his intention and will [Page 109] being the same, as the learned Albaspine (and I think truly) understands the Ca­non; Can. 41. p. 57. and in such a case, if the person was one of the faithful, he was not to be received till after ten years repen­tance. Every Master of a Family was commanded to suffer no little Idols or Images to be kept in his house, to be worshipped by his Children or Servants; but if this could not be done without danger of being betrayed and accused by his Servants (a thing not unusual in those times) that then at least he himself should abstain from them; otherwise to be thrown out of the Church. Being im­bued with such principles, and train'd up under such a discipline as this, 'tis no wonder if they would do or suffer any thing rather than comply with the least symptom of Idolatry; they willingly underwent banishment and confiscation, amongst several of which sort Caldonius tells Cyprian of one Bona, Ep. 18. p. 30 who being violently drawn by her Husband to sa­crifice, they by force guiding her hand to do it, cryed out and protested against it, that 'twas not she but they that did it, and was thereupon sent into banishment. They freely laid down their greatest ho­nours and dignities, rather than by any [Page 110] idolatrous act to offer violence to their consciences. Whereof Constantius, the Father of Constantine, Euseb. de vit. Con­stant. l. 1. c. 19. p. 417. made this wise experiment, he gave out that all the Of­ficers and great men of the Court should either do sacrifice to the gods, or im­mediately quit his service, and the Offi­ces and preferments which they held under him; whereupon many turned a­bout, while others remained firm and unshaken; upon this the prudent and excellent Prince discovered his Plot, embraced, commended, and advanced to greater honours those who were faithful to their Religion and their con­science; reproaching and turning off those who were so ready to quit and forfeit them. Socr. Hist. Thus Jovianus a man of considerable note and quality, Eccles. l. 3. c. 22. p. 195 and an Officer of great place in Julian's Army, when the Emperour sent out his Edict, that all the Souldiers should either sa­crifice, or lay down their Arms, pre­sently threw away his belt, rather than obey that impious command; though the Emperour at that time, for reasons of State would not suffer him to depart. And after the death of Julian, when by the unanimous vote of the whole Army he was chosen Emperour, he utterly re­fused [Page 111] it, 'till the Army had renounced their Pagan idolatry and superstition. And though 'tis true, that life is dear­est to men of all things in this world; yet how chearfully did they chuse ra­ther to shed their blood, than to defile their consciences with Idolatry; of which Eusebius gives us many instances, and indeed this was the common test in those times, either sacrifice or die. Phi­leas Bishop of Thmuis in a Letter to his people, Euseb. Hist. giving them an account of the martyrdoms that hapned at Alex­andria, Eccles. l. 8. c. 10. p. 304 tells them, that many after hav­ing endured strange and unheard of tor­ments, were put to their choice, whe­ther they would sacrifice and be set at liberty, or refuse and lose their heads; whereupon all of them without any he­sitation readily went to embrace death; knowing well how the Scripture is, that whoever sacrifices to strange gods shall be cut off; and again, thou shalt have no other gods but me. And in the next Chapter Eusebius tells us of a whole Ci­ty of Christians in Phrygia, which to­gether with all the men, women and children was burnt to ashes, for no o­ther reason, but because they univer­sally confessed themselves to be Christi­ans, [Page 112] and refused to obey those that com­manded them to worship Idols: instan­ces of which kind there are enough to be met with in the Histories of the Church.

And so fix'd and unmoveable were they in this, that no promises or hopes of reward, no fears or threatnings could either tempt or startle them; memora­ble a passage or two that we meet with­al to this purpose: it was a custom a­mongst the Romans to show some respect and honour not only to the Emperours themselves, but even to their Statues and Images, by bowing the body, or some o­ther act of external veneration. Naz Orat. invect. 1. in Julian. Or. 13. p. 83. vid. So­zom. Hist. Now Julian the Emperour (whose great de­sign was to reduce all men, but especi­ally his Army back to Paganism and Idolatry) made use of this crafty pro­ject; Eccles. l. 5. c. 17. he placed the Pictures of Jupiter, and other Heathen gods, so close to his own Statues, that they could not bow to the one, but they must also to the other; politickly reducing them to this strait, that either they must refuse to pay ci­vil honour to their Prince (which had been a sufficient crime against them) or seem at least to do honour to the gods; with this device the less wary and cau­telous [Page 113] were entrapped; but others that were more pious and purdent chose ra­ther to deny the Prince that civil ho­mage, Naz. ib. p. 84. and fall into the arms of martyr­dom, than by such an ambiguous ado­ration to seem to patronize Idolatry. At another time he fell upon this stratagem: upon a solemn day, when the Emperours were wont to bestow Largesses upon the Souldiers, he caused the Army to be called before him, sitting then in great pomp and splendour, and a large dona­tive of Gold to be laid on the one side, and a heap of Frankincense with fire by it on the other, proclamation being made, that they that would sacrifice the one, should have the other. By this means many of the Christian Souldiers were ensnared, performed the Sacrifice, re­ceived the Donative, and went home jolly and secure. But being at Dinner with their Companions, and drinking to each other (as the custom was) with their eyes lift up, and calling upon Christ, and making the Sign of the Cross, as oft as they took the Cup into their hands; one at the Table told them, he wondred how they could call upon Christ, whom they had so lately ab­jur'd. Amazed at this, and asking how [Page 114] they had abjured him, they were told, that they had sacrificed, which was all one as to deny Christ. Whereupon start­ing up from the Table, they ran up and down the Market-place in a furious and frantick manner, crying out, we are Chri­stians, we are Christians in heart and truth; and let all the world take notice, that there is but one God, to whom we live, and for whom we'll dye; we have not broken the faith which we swore to thee, O blessed Saviour, nor renounced our profession; if our hands be guilty, our hearts are innocent, 'tis not the Gold that has corrupted us, but the Empe­rours craftiness that deceived us: and with that running to the Emperour, they threw down their Gold before him, with this address, we have not, Sir, received a donative, but are condemned to dye; instead of being honoured we are vilified and disgraced; take this Largess and give it to your Souldiers; as for us, kill us and sacrifice us to Christ, whom alone we owne as our highest Prince; re­turn us fire for fire, and for the ashes of the sacrifice, reduce us to ashes. Cut off those hands, which we so wickedly stretched out; those feet that carried us to so great a mischief; give others the [Page 115] Gold, who may have no cause to repent on't; for our part Christ is enough for us, whom we value instead of all things. With this noble and generous resoluti­on though the Emperour was highly en­raged, yet because he envied them the honour of martyrdom, he would not put them to death, but banished them, and inflicted other penalties which might sufficiently evidence his rage against them.

Nay with so warm a zeal were they acted against Idolatry, that many of them could not contain themselves from falling foul upon it, where-ever they met it, though with the immediate ha­zard of their lives. Euseb. de mart. Pal. c. 2. p. 320. So Romanus Dea­con and Exorcist of the Church of Caesa­ria seeing great multitudes of people at Antioch flocking to the Temples, and doing sacrifice to the gods, came to them, and began very severely to re­prove and reproach them; for which being apprehended, after many strange and cruel usages he was put to death, with all imaginable pain and torture. Thus Apphianus a young man, when the Cryers by proclamation summoned all the Inhabitants of Caesaria to sacrifice to the gods, the Tribunes particularly [Page 116] reciting every mans name out of a Book, to the great terrour of all that were Christians, privately and unknown to us (says Eusebius, Ib. c. 4. p. 324. who lived at that time in the same house with him) stole out, and getting near Ʋrbanus the President (who was then compassed about with a Guard of Souldiers) just as he was about to offer Sacrifice, caught hold of his right hand, which he grasped so fast, that he forced him to let fall the Sacri­fice, gravely admonishing him to desist from such errours and vanities: Clearly shewing (says the Historian) that true Christians are so far from being drawn from the Worship of the true God, that by threatnings and torments they are rather heightened into a greater and more ingenuous freedom and boldness in the profession of the Truth. For this fact the young man was almost torn in pie­ces by the Souldiers, whose rage and fierceness could scarce suffer him to be repriev'd for acuter tortures, which were exerised towards him with all pos­sible cruelty; and when all could do no good upon him, he was thrown half dead into the Sea. Socrat. H. The like we read of three famous Christians at Merum a City in Phrygia, Eccles. l. 3. c. 15. p. 186. where when the Go­vernour [Page 117] of the Province under Julian the Apostate had commanded the Heathen Temple to be opened, they got by night into the Temple, and broke to pieces all the Statues and Images of the gods. Whereupon when a general persecution was like to arise against all the Christians of the City, that the ignorant and inno­cent might not suffer, the Authors of the fact came of their own accord to the Judge, and confessed it; who offered them pardon if they would sacrifice, which they rejected with disdain, [...] and told him they were much readier to en­dure any torments and death it self, than to be defiled with sacrificing: and ac­cordingly were first treated with all sorts of torments, and then burnt upon an Iron Grate; retaining their courage to the last, and took their leave of the Governour with this sarcasm, If thou hast a mind, Amachius, to eat rost meat, turn us on the other side, lest we be but half rosted, and so prove ungrateful to thy taste. So mightily did a restless passion for the divine honour possess the minds of those primitive Christians. And though 'tis true such transports of zeal are not ordinarily warrantable (for which rea­son the Council of Illiberis justly pro­hibited Can. 60. p. 72. [Page 118] those who were killed in the de­facing and demolishing Idols, to be rec­koned in the number of Martyrs) yet do they sufficiently shew what a spirit of eagerness and activity ruled in those times against the false Religions of the world.

By all this we may see how unjustly the Christians were traduced and accused for Idolaters; three things were commonly charged upon them, that they worshipped the Sun, the Cross, and an Asses head. For the first, their worshipping the Sun, Ter­tullian answers, Apol. c. 16. p. 16. that the mistake arose from a double cause, partly that the Chri­stians of those times did generally pray towards the East and the Sun-rising, which the Heathens themselves also did, though upon different grounds: and partly because they performed the So­lemnities of their Religion upon the day that was dedicated to the Sun, which made the Gentiles suspect that they wor­shipped the Sun it self. They were next charged with worshipping Crosses; a charge directly false; as for Crosses (says Octavius) we neither desire, Minu. Fael. p. 24. nor worship them, 'tis you who consecrate wooden gods, that perhaps adore wooden Cros­ses as parts of them; for what else are [Page 119] your Ensigns, Banners, and Colours, with which you go out to war, but golden and painted Crosses; the very Trophies of your Victory do not only resemble the fashion of a simple Cross, but of a man that's fastned to it; Loc. supra citat. the very same answer which Tertullian also returns to this Charge. The occasion of it no doubt was, the Christians talking of, and magnifying so much their crucified Ma­ster, and their almost constant use of the sign of the Cross, which (as we shall see afterwards) they made use of even in the most common actions of their lives; but for paying any adoration to a material Cross, was a thing to which those times were the greatest strangers; otherwise understanding the Cross for him that hung upon it, they were not ashamed with the great Apostle, to glory in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to count it the matter of their highest joy and triumph. But the absurdest part of the Charge was, that they worship­ped the head of an Ass. I hear (says the Heathen in Minucius Faelix) that be­ing seduced by I know not what fond perswasion they worship the consecrated head of an Ass, Pag. 8. one of the filthiest Crea­tures; a Religion fitly calculated for [Page 120] persons of such a dull and stupid dispo­sition. Hence Tertullian tells us, Ibid. that Christians were called▪ Vid. ad Na­tion l. 1. c. 14. p. 50. Asinarii, Ass­worshippers, and that Christ was paint­ed, and publickly exposed by the bold wicked hand of an apostate Jew, with Asses ears, one of his feet hoof'd, hold­ing a Book in his hand, and having a Gown over him, with this Inscription ‘DEVS CHRISTIANORVM ONONYCHITES’ Onony­chites.] The Asse-hoof'd God of the Christians. De variis hujus vocis lectionib. vid. Ri­galt. in loc. & Voss. de idol. l. 3. c. 75. p. 565. Pag. 23. A most ridiculous representation, and the issue of the most foolish spite and ma­lice: when I saw it (says he) I laughed both at the title and the fashion. This Octavius tells his Adversary was the re­sult and spawn of lying same, begot and nourished by the Father of lyes: for who (says he) can be so silly as to wor­ship this? or who can be so much more silly as to believe that it should be wor­shipped? unless it be that you your selves do consecrate whole Asses in the Stable with your Goddess Epona, and religiously adorn them in the Solemni­ties of Isis, and both sacrifice and adore the heads of Rams and Oxen: you make gods of a mixture of a Goat and a Man, and dedicate them with the faces of [Page 121] Dogs and Lions. More he has there to the same purpose, as Tertullian also had answered the same thing before him. The true ground of this ridiculous Charge, as Tertullian observes, was a fabulous report that had been a long time common amongst the Heathens, vid. etiam ad Nation. l. 1. c. 11. p. 49. that the Jews when wandring in the wil­derness, and almost ready to die of thirst, were conducted by wild Asses to a Fountain of water, for which great kindness they formed the shape of an Ass, and ever after worshipped it with divine honours. This is confidently re­ported both by Tacitus and Plutarch, Tacit. Hist. l. 5. c. 4. Plut. sym­pos. lib. 4. Quest. 5. p. 670. as it had been many years before by Appio the Alexandrian in his Books against the Jews, and by this means the Heathens, who did frequently confound the Jews and Christians, came to form and fasten this Charge upon them; when it was e­qually false in respect of both: for as Tertullian observes, Apol. c. 16. the same Tacitus who reports this, tells us in another place, that when Pompey at the taking of Jeru­salem presumptuously broke into the Ho­ly of Holies, whither none but the High-Priest might enter, out of a curiosity to pry into the most hidden secrets and arcana's of their Religion, he found no [Page 122] Image at all there; whereas (says Ter­tullian) had they worshipped any such thing, there had been no likelier place to have met with it, and therefore brands him with the charge of the most lying Historian in the world. And thus we see how the ancient Christians manifest­ed and maintained their love and piety towards God, by a most vigorous and hearty opposition of that Idolatry that reigned so uncontroulably in the Heathen world.

CHAP. VI.
Of Churches, and places of Pub­lick Worship in the primitive times.

THE Primitive Christians were not more heartily zealous against the idolatrous Worship of the Heathen-gods, than they were religiously obser­vant of whatever concerned the honour and Worship of the true, as to all the material parts and circumstances of it; as will easily appear, if we consider what care they had about the place, time, [Page 125] persons, and both the matter and manner of that Worship that they performed to God, under each of which we shall take notice of what is most considerable, and does most properly relate to it, so far as the Records of those times give us an ac­count of it.

Place is an inseparable circumstance of Religious Worship; for every body by the natural necessity of its being re­quires some determinate place either for rest or motion: now the Worship of God being in a great part an external action, especially when performed by the joint concurrence of several persons, does not only necessarily require a place, but a place conveniently capacious of all that join together in the same publick actions of Religion. This reason put all Nations even by the light of Nature up­on erecting publick places for the honour of their gods, and for their own conve­niency in meeting together to pay their religious services and devotions. But my present enquiry reaches no farther than the Primitive Christians, not whe­ther they met together for the discharge of their common duties; (which I sup­pose none can doubt of) but whether they had Churches, fixed and appropri­ate [Page 126] places for the joint performance of their publick offices. And that they had even in those early times, will I think be beyond all dispute, if we take but a short survey of those first Ages of Chri­stianity: in the sacred Story we find some more than probable footsteps of some determinate places for their solemn conventions, and peculiar only to that use. Of this nature was that [...] ▪ or Ʋpper Room into which the Apostles and Disciples, Act. 1. 13. after their return from the as­cension of our Saviour, went up, as in­to a place commonly known and sepa­rate to that use, there by fasting and prayer to make choice of a new Apo­stle; and this supposed by a very anci­ent tradition to have been the same room wherein our Saviour the night before his death celebrated the Passover with his Disciples, and instituted the Lords Sup­per. Such a one, if not (which I rather think) the same, Act. 2. 1. was that one place, wherein they were all assembled with one accord upon the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Ghost visibly came down upon them; and this the rather because the multitude (and they too strangers of every Nation under heaven) came so rea­dily to the place upon the first rumour [Page 127] of so strange an accident, which could hardly have been, had it not been com­monly known to be the place where the Christians used to meet together: and this very learned men take to be the meaning of that Act. 2. 46. they continu­ed daily with one accord in the Temple, and breaking bread [...], not as we render it, from house to house, but at home, as 'tis in the margin, or in the house, they ate their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, i.e. when they had performed their daily devotions at the Temple at the accustomed hours of prayer, they used to return home to this Ʋpper Room, there to celebrate the ho­ly Eucharist, and then go to their ordi­nary meals: this seems to be a clear and unforc'd interpretation; and to me the more probable, because it immediately follows upon their assembling together in that one place at the day of Pentecost, which Room is also called by the same name of house, at the second Verse of that Chapter; and 'tis no ways unlikely (as M. Mede conjectures) but that when the first Believers sold their Houses and Lands, and laid the money at the Apostles feet to supply the necessities of the Church, some of them might give their houses (at least [Page 128] some eminent Room in them) for the Church to meet, and perform their sa­cred duties: which also may be the rea­son why the Apostles writing to particu­lar Christians, speaks so often of the Church that was in their house; which seems clearly to intimate not so much the particular persons of any private Family living together under the same band of Christian discipline, as that in such or such a house (and more especially in this or that room of it) there was the constant and solemn convention of the Christians of that place, for their joynt celebra­tion of divine Worship. And this will be farther cleared by that famous passage of S. Paul, where taxing the Corinthi­ans, for their irreverence and abuse of the Lords Supper, one greedily eating before another, and some of them to great excess, 1 Cor. 11. 22. What (says he) have you not houses to eat and to drink in, or despise ye the Church of God. Where that by Church is not meant the Assembly meeting, but the place in which they used to assemble, is evident partly from what went before, for their coming together in the Church, verse 18. is expounded by their coming together into one place, verse 20. plainly arguing that the Apostle meant not the [Page 129] persons but the place; partly from the opposition which he makes between the Church and their own private houses; if they must have such irregular Ban­quets, they had houses of their own, where 'twas much fitter to do it, and to have their ordinary repast, than in that place which was set apart for the com­mon exercises of Religion, and there­fore ought not to be dishonoured by such extravagant and intemperate feast­ings; for which cause he enjoins them in the close of that Chapter, that if any man hunger he should eat at home. And that this place was always thus understood by the Fathers of old, were no hard matter to make out, as also by most learned men of later times, of which it shall suffice to intimate two of our own, Nic. Full. miscell. S. l. 2. c. 9. men of great name and learning, who have done it to great satisfaction. Mr. M [...]de p▪ 405.

Thus stood the case during the Apo­stles times; for the Ages after them we find that the Christians had their fixed and definite places of Worship; especi­ally in the second Century, as had we no other evidence, might be made good from the testimony of the Authour of that Dialogue in Lucian (if not Lucian himself, Philopatr. tom. 2. p. 1007. of which I see no great cause [Page 130] to doubt) who lived under the Reign of Trajan, and who expresly mentions that House or Room wherein the Chri­stians were wont to assemble together. And Clemens in his famous Epistle to the Corinthians assures us, Pag. 52. that Christ did not only appoint the times when, the persons by whom, but the places where he would be solemnly served and wor­shipped: Ap. 2. p. 98. And Justin Martyr expresly af­firms, that upon Sunday all Christians whether in Town or Country, used to assemble together in one place, which could hardly be done, had not that place been fixed and setled: De idolola. c. 7. p. 88. the same we find afterwards in several places of Tertullian, who speaks of their coming into the Church and the House of God, Adv. Va­lentin. c. 3. p. 2. 51. which he elsewhere calls the House of our Dove, i.e. our innocent and Dove-like Reli­gion, and there describes the very form and fashion of it; and in another place speaking of their going into the water to be baptized, De Coron. Mil. c. 3. p. 101. he tells us they were wont first to go into the Church to make their solemn renunciation before the Bi­shop. About this time in the Reign of Alexander Severus the Emperour (who began his Reign about the year 222.) the Heathen Historian tells us, that [Page 131] when there was a contest between the Christians and the Vintners about a cer­tain publick place, Lamprid. in vit. A­lex. Sever▪ c. 49. p. 575. which the Christians had seiz'd and challenged for theirs, the Emperour gave the cause for the Chri­stians against the Vintners, saying ' twas much better that God should be wor­shipped there any ways, than that the Vintners should possess it. If it shall be said that the Heathens of those times generally accused the Christians for ha­ving no Temples, and charged it upon them as a piece of atheism and impiety, Min. Fael. p. 8.—26. and that the Christian Apologists did not deny it, as will appear to any that will take the pains to examine the places al­ledged in the margin; Arnob. adv. gent. l. 6. p. 83. to this the an­swer in short depends upon the notion which they had of a Temple, Lact. de O [...]ig. error. l. 2. c. 2. p. 141. by which the Gentiles understood the places de­voted to their gods, and wherein their Deities were inclosed and shut up, pla­ces adorned with Statues and Images, with fine Altars and ornaments; and for such Temples as these they freely confessed they had none, no nor ought to have, for that the true God did not (as the Heathens supposed theirs) dwell in Temples made with hands, nor either needed nor could possibly be honoured [Page 132] by them: and therefore they purposely abstained from the word Temple, and I do not remember that 'tis used by any Christian Writer for the place of the Christian Assemblies, for the best part of the first three hundred years: and yet those very Writers who deny Chri­stians to have had any Temples, do at the same time acknowledge, that they had their meeting places for divine Worship, Lib. 4. p. 67. their conventicula as Arnobius calls them, and complains they were furiously demolished by their Enemies. If any desire to know more concerning this, as also that Christians had appro­priate places of Worship for the great­est part of the three first Centuries, let him read a Discourse purposely written upon this subject, by a most learned man of our own Nation, Mr. Jos. Mede dis­course con­cerning Churches oper. part. 1. lib. 2. nor indeed should I have said so much as I have about it, but that I had noted most of these things, before I read his Discourse up­on that subject.

Afterwards their Churches began to rise apace, according as they met with more quiet and favourable times; espe­cially under Valerian, Gallienus, Claudi­us, Hist. Eccl. l. 8. c. 1. p. 292. Aurelian, and some other Emperours: of which times Eusebius tells us, that [Page 133] the Bishops met with the highest respect and kindness both from people and Go­vernours; and adds, but who shall be able to reckon up the innumerable mul­titudes that daily flocked to the Faith of Christ, the number of Congregations in every City, those famous meetings of theirs in their Oratories or sacred places, so great, that not being content with those old Buildings which they had before, they erected from the very foundations more fair and spacious Churches in every Ci­ty. This was several years before the times of Constantine, and yet even then they had their Churches of ancient date. This indeed was a very serene and Sun­shiny season, but alas it begun to dark­en again, and the clouds returned after rain; for in the very next Chapter he tells us that in the Reign of Dioclesian, there came out Imperial Edicts, com­manding all Christians to be persecuted, the Bishops to be imprisoned, the holy Bible to be burnt, and their Churches to be demolished and laid level with the ground: De Schis­mat. Donat. l. 2. p. 40. which how many they were, may be guessed at by this, that (as Op­tatus tells us) there were about this time above forty Basilicae or Churches in Rome only. Upon Constantines coming [Page 134] into a partnership of the Empire, the Clouds began to dispense and scatter, Euseb. l. 9. c. 10. p. 364. and Maximi [...]us (who then govern'd the Eastern parts of the Empire) a bitter Enemy to Christians, was yet forced by a publick Edict to give Christians the free liberty of their Religion, and leave to repair and rebuild [...], Id. lib. 10. c. 2. p. 370. their Churches; which shortly after they every where set upon, raising their Churches from the ground to a vast height, and to a far greater splendour and glory than those which they had be­fore, the Emperours giving all possible encouragement to it by frequent Laws and Constitutions: the Christians also themselves contributing towards it with the greatest chearfulness and liberality, even to a magnificence, comparable to that of the Jewish Princes towards the building of Solomons Temple, Ib▪ c▪ 4. p. 377. as Euse­bius tells them in his Oration at the de­dication of the famous Church at Tyre. And no sooner was the whole Empire devolved upon Constantine, Devit Con­stant. l. 2. c. 45, 46. p. 464. but he pub­lished two Laws, one to prohibite Pa­gan Worship, the other commanding Churches to be built of a nobler size and capacity than before; to which purpose he directed his Letters to Eusebius and [Page 135] the rest of the Bishops to see it done within their several jurisdictions, charg­ing also the Governours of Provinces to be assisting to them, and to furnish them with whatever was necessary and convenient: Orat. de laud. Const. c. 7. p. 660. insomuch that in a short time the world was beautified with Churches and sacred Oratories, both in Cities and Villages, and in the most bar­barous and desart places, called [...], says the Historian (from whence our Kirk and Church) the Lords Houses, be­cause erected not to men, but to the ho­nour of our Lord and Saviour. 'Twere needless to insist any longer upon the piety of Christians in building Churches in and after the times of Constantine, the instances being so vastly numerous; on­ly I cannot omit what Nazianzen reports of his own Father, Or. funebr. in laud Patr. Or. 19. p. 313. who though Bishop of a very small▪ and inconsiderable Dio­cess, yet built a famous Church almost wholly at his own charge.

Thus we have seen that from the ve­ry infancy of the Gospel, the Christians always had their setled and determi­nate places of divine Worship; for the form and fashion of their Churches it was for the most part oblong, Constit. A­post. l. 2. c. 57 p. 875. to keep (say some) the better correspondence [Page 136] with the fashion of a Ship, the common notion and metaphor by which the Church was wont to be represented, and to put us in mind that we are tos­sed up and down in the world, as upon a stormy and tempestuous Sea, and that out of the Church there's no safe pas­sage to Heaven, the Country we all hope to arrive at. They were generally built towards the East (towards which also they performed the more solemn parts of their Worship, the reasons whereof we shall see afterwards in its due place) following herein the Custom of the Gen­tiles, though upon far other grounds than they did, and this seems to have obtained from the first Ages of Christia­nity; Adv. Va­lentin. p. 251. sure I am 'twas so in Tertullian's time, who opposing the plain and sim­ple way of the Orthodox Assemblies to the skulking and clancular Conventicles of the Hereticks, who Serpent-like crept about in holes and corners; says he, the house of our Dove-like Religion is simple, built on high and in open view, and re­spects the light as the figure of the Holy Spirit, and the East as the representation of Christ. It cannot be thought that in the first Ages, while the flames of perse­cution raged about their ears, the Chri­stian [Page 137] Churches should be very stately and magnificent, but such as the condi­tion of those times would bear, their splendour encreasing according to the entertainment that Christianity met with­al in the world, till the Empire becom­ing Christian, their Temples rose up in­to grandeur and gallantry, as amongst others may appear by the particular de­scription which Eusebius makes of the Church at Tyre, mentioned before, and that which Constantine built at Constan­tinople in honour of the Apostles, De vit. Const. l. 4. c. 58, 59. p. 555. both which were incomparably sumptuous and magnificent.

I shall not undertake to describe at large the exact form, and the several parts and dimensions of their Churches (which va­ried somewhat according to different times and Ages) but briefly reflect upon such as were most common and remark­able: at the entrance of their Churches (especially after they began to arrive at more perfection) was the Vestibulum (called also Atrium and [...]) the Porch, in greater Churches of somewhat larger capacity, adorned many times with goodly Cloysters, marble Columns, Fountains, and Cisterns of water, and covered over for the conveniency of [Page 138] those that stood or walked there. Here stood the lowest order of Penitents, beg­ing the prayers of the faithful as they went in. For the Church it self, it usu­ally consisted of three parts; the first was the Narthex (which we have no pro­per word to render by) it was that part of the Church that lay next to the great door by which they entred in: in the first part of it stood the Catechumens, or first learners of Christianity, in the mid­dle the Euergumeni, or those who were possessed by Satan, and in this part also stood the Font, or place of baptismal ini­tiation; and towards the upper end was the place of the Hearers, who were one of the ranks of Penitents. The second part contained the middle, or main bo­dy of the Church (called by the Greeks [...], by the Latins Navis, from whence our term the Nave of the Church comes) where the faithful assembled for the ce­lebration of Divine Service, where the men and the women had their distinct apartments, Const. A­post l 2. c. 57. p. 875. lest at such times unchast and irregular appetites should be kindled by a promiscuous interfering with one ano­ther; Roma sub­terran l. 2. c. 10. Num. 23. p. 204. of which pious and excellent con­trivance mention is made in an ancient Funeral Inscription found in the Vatican [Page 139] Coemetery at Rome; such a one buried, SINISTRA PARTE VIRORUM, on that side of the Church where the men sat. In this part of the Church next to the entring into it stood the Class of the Penitents, who were called [...], because at their going out they fell down upon their knees before the Bi­shop, who laid his hands upon them. Next to them was the Ambo, the Pulpit or rather reading-desk, whence the Scrip­tures were read and preached to the peo­ple. Above that were the Faithful, the highest rank and order of the people, and who alone communicated at the Lords Table. The third part was the [...], or [...], separated from the rest of the Church by neat Rails, called Can­celli, whence our English word Chancel, to denote the part of the Church to this day: into this part none might come but such as were in holy orders, unless it were the Greek Emperours, who were allowed to come up to the Table to make their Offerings, and so back again; with­in this division the most considerable thing was the [...], the Altar (as they metaphorically called it, because there they offered the commemorative Sacrifice of Christs Body and Blood) [Page 140] o [...] the Communion-Table ( [...] as 'tis frequently styled by the Greek Fa­thers) behind which at the very upper end of the Chancel was the Chair or Throne of the Bishop (for so was it al­most constantly called) on both sides whereof were the [...], the Seats of the Presbyters (for the Deacons might not here sit down:) the Bishops Throne was raised up somewhat higher from the ground, and from hence I suppose it was that he usually delivered his Ser­mons to the people: Hist. Eccl. l. 6. c. 5. p. 304. therefore Socrates seems to note it as a new thing in Chry­sostoms, that when he preached, he went to sit [...] upon the Pulpit (he means that in the body of the Church, for so Sozomon tells us that he sat in the Reading Desk in the middle of the Church) that by reason of his low voice he might be better heard of the people. Lib. 8. c. 5. p. 764. Adjoining to the Chancel on the North-side, probably, was the Diaco­nicon, Can. 21. De Templ. Graec. Num. 14. p. 25. mentioned both in the Laodicean Council (though I know both Zonaras and Balsamon, and after them the learn­ed Leo Allatius will have another thing to be meant in that place) as also in a Law of Arcadius and Honorius against Hereticks; C. Th. Lib. 16. Tit. 5. l. 29. ubi vid. Jac. Gothofr. Com. and probably so called either [Page 141] because peculiarly committed to the Deacon of the place, or as the great Commentator upon that Law will have it, because set apart [...]; to some sacred services. It was in the na­ture of our modern Vestries, the Sacristy, wherein the Plate, Vessels, and Vest­ments belonging to the Church, and o­ther things dedicated to holy uses, were laid up, and where in after times Re­liques and such like Fopperies were trea­sured up with great care and diligence. On the other side of the Chancel was the Prothesis; or place where things were prepared in order to the Sacrament, where the Offerings were laid, and what remained of the Sacramental Ele­ments, till they were decently disposed of. And this may serve for a short view of the Churches of those first times, af­ter they began to grow up into some beauty and perfection.

But though the Christians of those times spared no convenient cost in founding and adorning publick places for the Worship of God, yet were they careful to keep a decent mean between a sordid slovenliness, and a too curious and over nice superstition. In the more early times, even while the fury and [Page 142] fierceness of their Enemies kept them low and mean, yet they beautified their Oratories and places of Worship; espe­cially if we may believe the Authour of the Dialogue in Lucian (whom we men­tioned before, and who lived within the first Age) who bringing in one Critias that was perswaded by the Christians, to go to the place of their Assembly (which by his description seems to have been an [...], or Ʋpper-Room) tells us that after they had gone up several stairs, they came at last into an House or Room that was overlaid with Gold, where he beheld nothing but a compa­ny of persons with their bodies bow'd down, and pale faces. I know the de­sign of that Dialogue in part is to abuse and deride the Christians, but there's no reason to suppose he feigned those cir­cumstances which made nothing to his purpose. As the times grew better, they added more and greater ornaments to them; concerning two whereof there has been some contest in the Christian world, Altars and Images. As for Al­tars, the first Christians had no other in their Churches than decent Tables of wood, upon which they celebrated the holy Eucharist; these 'tis true in allusion [Page 143] to those in the Jewish Temple, the Fa­thers generally called Altars, and truly enough might do so, by reason of those Sacrifices they offered upon them, viz. the commemoration of Christs Sacrifice in the blessed Sacrament, the Sacrifice of prayer and thanksgiving, and the obla­tion of Alms and Charity for the poor (usually laid upon those Tables) which the Apostle expresly styles a Sacrifice. These were the only Sacrifices (for no o­ther had the Christian world for many hundreds of years) which they then of­fered upon their Altars, which were much of the same kind with our Com­munion-Tables at this day▪ For that they had not any such fixed and gaudy Altars (as the Heathens then had in their Temples, and Papists still have in their Churches) is most evident, Vid. Clem. Alex. stro­mat. l. 7. p. 117. because the Heathens at every turn did charge and reproach them for having none, Orig. adv. Cels. lib. 4. p. lib. 8. p. 383. and the Fathers in their answers did freely and openly acknowledge and avow it; asserting and pleading that the only true sacred Altar was a pure and a holy mind, M. Faell [...]. p. 8—26. and that the best and most acceptable Sa­crifice to God was a pious heart, Arnob. adv. gent. l. 6. p. 83. and an innocent and religious life. Lactant. l. 2. c. 2. Haec nostra sa­crificia, haec Dei sacra sunt, these (say [Page 144] they) are our oblations, these the sacri­fices we give to God. This was the state of Altars in the Christian Churches for near upon the first three hundred years; till Constantine coming in, and with him peace and plenty, the Churches began to excel in costliness and bravery every day, and then their wooden and move­able Altars began to be turned into fix­ed Altars of Stone or Marble, though used to no other purpose than before, and yet this too did not so universally obtain (though severely urged by Sylvester Bi­shop of Rome) but that in very many places Tables or moveable Altars of wood continued in use a long time af­ter, as might easily be made appear from several passages in Athanasius and others, Athanas. ad Ortho­dox. p. 729. yea even to S. Augustine's time, and pro­bably much later, Tom. 1. were it proper to my business to search after it. Et Ep. ad Solit. vit. agent. No sooner were Altars made fixed and immovea­ble, Aug. Quest. V. & N. T. Ques. 101. & alibi saepe. but they were compassed in with Rails to fence off rudeness and irreve­rence, and persons began to regard them with mighty observance and respect; which soon grew so high, that they be­came Asylums and refuges to protect in­nocent persons and unwitting offenders from immediate violence and oppression; [Page 145] an instance whereof Nazianzen gives us in a Christian Widow a woman of great place and quality, Orat. 20. in laud. Basil. 353. who flying from the importunities of the President, who would have forced her to marry him, had no other way but to take sanctuary at the holy Table in S. Basils Church at Caesarea; she was demanded with many fierce and terrible threatnings, but the holy man stoutly refused, although the President was his mortal Enemy, and sought only a pretence to ruine him. Ma­ny such cases may be met with in the Hi­story of the Church: nor was this a pri­viledge meerly founded upon custom, but setled and ratified by the Laws of Christian Emperours, concerning the par­ticular cases whereof, together with the extent and limitation of these immuni­ties, there are no less than six several Laws of the Emperours Theodosius, Lib. 9. Tit. 45. de hi [...] qui ad Ec­clesias con­fugi [...]nt. Ar­cadius, and Theodosius junior, yet ex­tant in the Theodosian Code. But how far those Asyla's and Sanctuaries were good and useful, and to what evil and pernicious purposes they were improv'd in after-times, is without the limits of my present task to enquire.

But if in those times there was so lit­tle ground for Altars (as us'd in the [Page 146] present sense of the Church of Rome) there was yet far less for Images; and cer­tainly might things be carried by a fair and impartial tryal of Antiquity, the dispute would soon be at an end; there not being any one just and good autho­rity to prove that Images were either worshipped, or us'd in Churches, for near upon four hundred years after Christ; and I doubt not but it might be carried much farther, but that my busi­ness lyes mainly within those first Ages of Christianity. Nothing can be more clear than that the Christians were fre­quently challenged by the Heathens, as for having no Altars and Temples, so that they had no Images or Statues in them, and that the Christian Apologists never denied it, but industriously de­fended themselves against the charge, and rejected the very thoughts of any such thing with contempt and scorn, as might be abundantly made good from Tertullian, Clem. Alexandrinus, Origen, Minucius Faelix, Arnobius and Lactan­tius, many of whose testimonies have been formerly pointed to. Amongst o­ther things Origen plainly tells his Adver­sary (who had objected this to the Chri­stians) that the Images that were to be [Page 147] dedicated to God were not to be care­ed by the hand of Artists; Lib. 8. p. 389. but to be formed and fashioned in us by the Word of God, viz. the virtues of justice and temperance, of wisdom and piety, &c. that conform us to the Image of his on­ly Son: These (says he) are the only Statues formed in our minds, and by which alone we are perswaded 'tis fit to do honour to him who is the Image of the invisible God, the prototype and architypal pattern of all such Images. Had Christi­ans then given adoration to them, or but set them up in their places of Wor­ship, with what face can we suppose they should have told the world, that they so much slighted and abhorred them; and indeed what a hearty dete­station they universally shew'd to any thing that had but the least shadow of Idolatry, Can. 3 [...]. p. 50. has been before prov'd at large. The Council of Illiberis that was held in Spain some time before Constan­tine expresly provided against it, de­creeing that no Pictures ought to be in the Church, nor that any thing that is worship­ped and adored should be painted upon the walls: words so clear and positive, as not to be evaded by all the little shifts and glosses which the Expositors [Page 148] of that Canon would put upon it. The first use of Statues and Pictures in pub­lick Churches was meerly historical, or to add some beauty and ornament to the place, which after Ages improved into Superstition and Idolatry. The first that we meet with upon good authori­ty (for all the instances brought for the first Ages are either false and spurious, or impertinent and to no purpose) is no elder than the times of Epiphanius, and then too met with no very welcome en­tertainment, as may appear from Epi­phanius his own Epistle translated by S. Hierom; where the story in short is this. Inter opera Hieron. tom. 2. p. 161. Coming (says he) to Anablatha a Village in Palestine, and going into a Church to pray, I espied a Curtain hanging over the door, whereon was painted the Image of Christ or of some Saint; which when I looked upon, and saw the Image of a man hanging up in the Church, con­trary to the authority of the Holy Scrip­tures, I presently rent it, and advis'd the Guardians of the Church rather to make usd of it as a Winding-sheet for some poor mans burying: whereat when they were a little troubled, and said 'twas but just, that since I had rent that Cur­tain, I should change it, and give them [Page 149] another; I promis'd them I would, and have now sent the best I could get, and pray' entreat them to accept it, and give command that for the time to come no such Curtains, being contrary to our Religion, may be hung up in the Church of Christ; it more becoming your place solicitously to remove whatever is offen­sive to, and unworthy of the Church of Christ, and the people committed to your Charge. This was written to John Bi­shop of Jerusalem, in whose Diocess the thing had been done; and the case is so much the more pressing and weigh­ty, by how the greater esteem and va­lue Epiphanius (then Bishop of Salamine in Cyprus) for his great age and excel­lent learning, had in the Church of God. This instance is so home and preg­nant, that the Patrons of Image-Worship are at a mighty loss what to say to it, and after all are forced to cry out against it as supposititious. De Eccles. Triumph. l. 2. c. 9. col. 776. Bellarmine brings no less than nine arguments (if such they may be called) to make it seem probable: but had he been ingenuous, he might have given one reason more true and satisfactory than all the rest, why that part of the Epistle should be thought forged and spurious, viz. be­cause [Page 150] it makes so much against them. More might be produced to this pur­pose, but by this I hope 'tis clear e­nough, that the honest Christians of those times, as they thought it sufficient to pray to God without making their ad­dresses to Saints and Angels, so they ac­counted their Churches fine enough without Pictures and Images to adorn them.

Their Churches being built and beau­tified (so far as consisted with the abili­ty and simplicity of those days) they sought to derive a greater value and e­steem upon them by some peculiar con­secration; for the wisdom and piety of those times thought it not enough bare­ly to devote them to the publick ser­vices of Religion, unless they also set them apart with solemn Rites of a for­mal dedication. This had been an anci­ent Custom both amongst Jews and Gen­tiles, as old as Solomons Temple, nay as Moses and the Tabernacle. When 'twas first taken up by Christians is not easie to determine; only I do not remember to have met with the footsteps of any such thing in any approved Writer (for the Decretal Epistles every one knows what their faith is) till the Reign of Con­stantine: [Page 151] in his time Christianity being become more prosperous and successful, Churches were every where erected and repaired, Hist. Eccl. l. 10. c▪ 3. p. 370. and no sooner were so, but (as Eusebius tells us) they were solemnly consecrated, and the dedications cele­brated with great festivity and rejoy­cing; an instance whereof he there gives of the famous Church of Tyre, at the de­dication whereof he himself made that excellent Oration inserted into the body of his History. About the thirtieth year of his Reign he built a stately Church at Jerusalem over the Sepulchre of our Saviour, Devit Con­stant. l. 4. c. 42, 43. which was dedicated with sin­gular magnificence and veneration, and for the greater honour, by his imperial Letters he summoned the Bishops, who from all parts of the East were then met in Council at Tyre, to be present and as­sisting at the Solemnity. The Rites and Ceremonies used at these dedications, as we find in Eusebius, were a great conflu­ence of Bishops and Strangers from all parts, the performance of divine offices, singing of hymns and Psalms, reading and expounding of the Scriptures, Ser­mons and Orations, receiving the holy Sacrament, prayers, and thanksgivings, [...]iberal Alms bestowed on the poor, and [Page 152] great gifts given to the Church, and in short, mighty expressions of mutual love and kindness, and universal rejoycing with one another. What other particu­lar Ceremonies were introduced after­wards, concerns not me to enquire, on­ly let me note, that under some of the Christian Emperours, when Paganism lay gasping for life, and their Temples were purged and converted into Chri­stian Churches, Cod. Theod. lib. 16. Tit. 10▪ de pag. sacrific. & templis. leg. 25. ubi [...]vid. Com. G [...]thofr. they were usually con­secrated only by placing a Cross in them, as the venerable Ensign of the Christian Religion, as appears by the Law of Theo­dosius the younger to that purpose. The memory of the dedication of that Church at Jerusalem was constantly continued and kept alive in that Church, Niceph. Call. Hist. Eccl. l. 8. c. [...]0. p. 653. and once a year, to wit, on the 14. of September, on which day it had been dedicated, was solemnized with great pomp and much confluence of people from all parts, the Solemnity usually lasting eight days to­gether, which doubtless gave birth to that custom of keeping anniversary days of commemoration of the dedication of Churches, which from this time for­wards we frequently meet with in the Hi­stories of the Church, and much prevail­ed in after Ages, some shadow whereof [Page 153] still remains amongst us at this day, in the Wakes observed in several Counties, which in correspondence with the En­coenia of the ancient Church, are annual Festivals kept in Country Villages, in memory of the dedication of their par­ticular Churches.

And because it was a custom in some Ages of the Church, that no Church should be consecrated till it was endowed, it may give us occasion to enquire what Revenues Churches had in those first Ages of Christianity. 'Tis more than proba­ble that for a great while they had no o­ther publick incomes, than either what arose out of those common contributions which they made at their usual Assem­blies, every one giving or offering ac­cording to his ability or devotion, which was put into a common stock or treasury, or what proceeded from the offerings which they made out of the improve­ment of their Lands, Can. 3, 4. the Apostolick Canons providing that their First-fruits should be partly offered at the Church, partly sent home to the Bishops and Pres­byters: the care of all which was com­mitted to the President or Bishop of the Church, (for who says the Authour of the fore-cited Canons, Can. 41. is fitter to be trust­ed [Page 154] with the riches and revenues of the Church, than he who is intrusted with the precious souls of men) and by him disposed of for the maintenance of the Clergie, the relief of the poor, or what­ever necessities of the Church. As Chri­stianity encreased, and times grew bet­ter, they obtained more proper and fix­ed revenues, houses and lands being set­led upon them; for such 'tis certain they had even during the times of persecution; for so we find in a Law of Constantine and Licinius, Euseb. l. 10. c. 5. p. 389. where giving liberty of Reli­gion to Christians, and restoring them freely to the Churches which had been taken from them, and disposed of by former Emperours; they further add; and because (say they) the same Christi­ans had not only places wherein they were wont to assemble, but are also known to have had other possessions, which were not the propriety of any sin­gle person, but belonged to the whole body and community; all these by this Law we command to be immediately re­stored to those Christians, to every So­ciety and Community of them what be­longed to them. And in a rescript to Anulinus the Proconsul about the same matter, Ib. p. 390. they particularly specifie, whe­ther [Page 155] they be Gardens or Houses, or what­ever else belonged to the right and pro­priety of those Churches, that with all speed they be universally restored to them; Lib. 9. c. p. 364. the same which Maximinus also (though no good friend to Christians, yet either out of fear of Constantine, or from the conviction of his conscience awakened by a terrible sickness) had or­dained for his parts of the Empire. Af­terwards Constantine set himself by all ways to advance the honour and inte­rests of the Church; Sozom. out of the Tri­butes of every City which were yearly paid into his Exchequer, Hist. Eccl▪ lib. 1. c. 8. p. 411. he assigned a portion to the Church and Clergy of that place, and setled it by a Law, which (excepting the short Reign of Julian who revoked it) was as the Historian assures us, Ib. lib. 5. c. 5. p. 600▪ in force in his time. Where any of the Martyrs or Confessors had di­ed without kindred, Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 2. c. 36. &▪ seq. or been banished their native Country, and left no heirs behind them, he ordained that their E­states and Inheritance should be given to the Church of that place, and that who­ever had seized upon them, or had bought them of the Exchequer should restore them, and refer themselves to him for what recompence should be made [Page 156] them. He took away the restraint which former Emperours had laid upon the bounty of pious and charitable men, Cod. l. 1. and gave every man liberty to leave what he would to the Church: Tit. 2. de S. S. Eccl. leg. 1. he gave sala­ries out of the publick Corn, which though taken away by Julian, was re­stored by his Successor Jovianus, Ibid. leg. 12. and ra­tified as a perpetual donation by the Law of Valentinian and Marcianus. After his time the Revenues of Churches encrea­sed every day, pious and devout persons thinking they could never enough testi­fie their piety to God, by expressing their bounty and liberality to the Church.

I shall conclude this discourse, by ob­serving what respect and reverence they were wont in those days to shew in the Church, as the solemn place of Wor­ship, and where God did more peculiar­ly manifest his presence: and this cer­tainly was very great. Ep. ad He­br. in c. 9. hom. 15. tom. 10. p. 1862. They came into the Church, as into the Palace of the great King (as Chrysostom calls it) with fear and trembling, upon which account he there presses the highest modesty and gravity upon them: before their going into the Church they used to wash at least their hands, Tert. de O­rat. c. 11. p. 133. as Tertullian probably [Page 157] intimates, and Chrysostom expresly tells us; Chrysost. hom▪ 52. in Math. p. 463. hom. in Joan. 72▪ p. 371. carrying themselves while there with the most profound silence and de­votion; nay so great was the reve­rence which they bore to the Church, that the Emperours themselves who o­therwise never went without their Guard about them, yet when they came to go into the Church used to lay down their Arms, to leave their Guard behind them, and to put off their Crowns, reckoning that the less ostentation they made of power and greatness there, the more firmly the im­perial Majesty would be entailed upon them, Lib. 9. Tit. 45. leg. 4. vid. Chry­sost. Orat­post redit. ab exil. as we find it in the Law of Theo­dosius and Valentinian, inserted at large into the last edition of the Theodosian Code. But of this we may probably speak more, Tom. 4. p. 850. when we come to treat of the manner of their publick adoration.

CHAP. VII.
Of the Lords-Day and the Fasts and Festivals of the ancient Church.

TIme is a circumstance no less inse­parable from religious actions than Place, for man consisting of a soul and body cannot always be actually [Page 161] engaged in the service of God, that's the priviledge of Angels, and souls freed from the fetters of mortality; so long as we are here, we must worship God with respect to our present state, and conse­quently of necessity have some definite and particular time to do it in. Now that man might not be left to a floating uncertainty in a matter of so great im­portance, in all Ages and Nations men have been guided by the very dictates of Nature to pitch upon some certain seasons, wherein to assemble and meet together to perform the publick offices of Religion. What and how many were the publick Festivals instituted and ob­served either amongst Jews or Gentiles, I am not concerned to take notice of. For the ancient Christians, they ever had their peculiar seasons, their solemn and stated times of meeting together to perform the common duties of Divine Worship; of which because the Lords-Day challenges the precedency of all the rest, we shall begin first with that. And being unconcern'd in all the con­troversies which in the late times were raised about it; I shall only note some instances of the piety of Christians in re­ference to this day, which I have ob­served [Page 162] in passing through the Writers of those times. For the name of this day of Publick Worship, it is sometimes, e­specially by Justin Martyr and Tertullian, called Sunday, because it hapned upon that day of the week, which by the Hea­thens was dedicated to the Sun, and therefore as being best known to them, the Fathers commonly made use of it in their Apologies to the Heathen Go­vernours. This title continued after the world became Christian, and sel­dom it is that it passes under any other name in the Imperial Edicts of the first Christian Emperours. But the more pro­per and prevailing name was [...], or Dies Dominica, the Lords-day, as 'tis called by S. John himself, Rev. 1. 10. as being that day of the Week whereon our Lord made his triumphant return from the dead; Ap. 2. p. 99. this Justin Martyr assures us was the true original of the title; upon Sun­day. (says he) we all assemble and meet together, as being the first day where­in God, parting the darkness from the rude chaos, created the world, and the same day whereon Jesus Christ our Sa­viour rose again from the dead; for he was crucified the day before Satur­day, and the day after (which is Sunday) [Page 163] he appeared to his Apostles and Disci­ples: by this means observing a kind of analogy and proportion with the Jew­ish Sabbath which had been instituted by God himself. For as that day was kept as a commemoration of Gods Sab­bath, or resting from the work of Crea­tion, so was this set apart to religious uses, as the solemn memorial of Christs resting from the work of our redempti­on in this world, compleated upon the day of his resurrection. Which brings into my mind that custom of theirs so universally common in those days, that whereas at other times they kneeled at prayers, on the Lords day they always prayed standing, as is expresly affirmed both by Justin Martyr and Tertullian; Ap. 2. p. 98. the reason of which we find in the Au­thour of the Questions and Answers in J. Martyr: De Coron. c. 3. p. 102. it is (says he) that by this means we may be put in mind both of our fall by sin, Resp. ad Quest. 115. p. 468. & our resurrection or resti­tution by the grace of Christ; that for six days we pray upon our knees, is in token of our fall by sin; but that on the Lords day we do not bow the knee, does symboli­cally represent our resurrection, by which through the grace of Christ we are de­livered from our sins, and the powers of death: this he there tells us was a custom [Page 164] deriv'd from the very times of the Apo­stles, for which he cites Irenaeus in his Book concerning Easter. And this custom was maintained with so much vigour, that when some began to neglect it, the great Council of Nice took notice of it, Can▪ 20. and or­dained that there should be a constant uniformity in this case, and that on the Lords day (and at such other times as were usual) men should stand, when they made their prayers to God. So fit and rea­sonable did they think it to do all possi­ble honour to that day, on which Christ rose from the dead. Therefore we may observe all along in the sacred story, that after Christs resurrection the Apostles and primitive Christians did especially assemble upon the first day of the week: and whatever they might do at other times, yet there are many passages that intimate, that the first day of the week was their more solemn time of meet­ing; on this day it was that they were met together, when our Saviour first appeared to them, and so again the next week after: on this day they were assembled when the Holy Ghost so vi­sibly came down upon them, when Pe­ter preached that excellent Sermon, con­verted and baptized three thousand [Page 165] souls. Thus when S. Paul was taking his leave at Troas, upon the first day of the week, when the Disciples came toge­ther to break Bread, i.e. as almost all a­gree, to celebrate the holy Sacrament, he preached to them, 1 Cor. 16. 1, 2. sufficiently inti­mating that upon that day 'twas their usual custom to meet in that manner; and elsewhere giving directions to the Church of Corinth (as he had done in the like case to other Churches) concern­ing their contributions to the poor suf­fering Brethren, he bids them lay it a­side upon the first day of the week, which seems plainly to respect their religious assemblies upon that day, for then it was that every one according to his abi­lity deposited something for the relief of the poor, and the uses of the Church.

After the Apostles, the Christians con­stantly observed this day, meeting toge­ther for prayer, expounding and hear­ing of the Scriptures, celebration of the Sacraments, and other publick duties of Religion. Ʋpon the day called Sunday (says J. Martyr) all of us that live ei­ther in City or Country meet together in one place; Ap. 2. p. 98▪ and what they then did, Lib. 10. he there describes, Ep. 97. of which afterwards. This doubtless Pliny meant, when giving Trajan an account of the Christians, he [Page 166] tells him that they were wont to meet together to worship Christ stato die, upon a set certain day, by which he can be reasonably understood to design no other but the Lords day; for though they probably met at other times, yet he takes notice of this only, either be­cause the Christians, whom he had exa­min'd, had not told him of their meet­ing at other times, or because this was their most publick and solemn conven­tion, and which in a manner swallowed up the rest. By the violent persecuti­ons of those times the Christians were forced to meet together before day, so Pliny in the same place tells the Empe­rour, Ad Ʋxor. l. 2. c. 4. p. 168. that they assembled before day-light, to sing their morning hymns to Christ. Whence it is that Tertullian so often mentions their nocturnal convocations; for putting the case that his Wife after his decease should marry with a Gentile-Husband, amongst other inconvenien­cies he asks her, whether she thought he would be willing to let her rise from his Bed to go to their night-meetings; De sug. in persecut. c. 14. p. 543. and in the case of persecution he tells Fabius, that if they could not celebrate Dominica solennia, their Lords-Day So­lemnities in the day time, they had the night sufficiently clear with the light of [Page 167] Christ. This gave occasion to their spightful Adversaries to calumniate and asperse them: M. Fael. p. 7. the Heathen in Minucius charges them with their night-Congre­gations, upon which account they are there scornfully called latebrosa & luci­fugax natio an obscure and skulking Ge­neration; Orig. adv. Cel. 1. p. 4.—7. and the very first thing that Celsus objects is, that the Christians had private and clancular Assemblies, or Combinations; to which Origen answers, that if it were so, they might thank them for it who would not suffer them to exercise it more openly; that the Chri­stian Doctrine was sufficiently evident and obvious, and better known through the world, than the opinion and senti­ments of their best Philosophers; and that if there were some mysteries in the Christian Religion which were not com­municated to every one, 'twas no other thing than what was common in the se­veral Sects of their own Philosophy. But to return.

They looked upon the Lords-Day as a time to be celebrated with great expres­sions of joy, as being the happy memo­ry of Christs resurrection, and accord­ingly restrained whatever might savour of sorrow and sadness; fasting on that day they prohibited with the greatest [Page 168] severity, accounting it utterly unlawful, as Tertullian informs us. De Cor. mil. c. 3. p. 102. It was a very bitter censure that of Ignatius (or whose­ever that Epistle was, for certainly it was not his) that who ever fasts on a Lords-Day is a murderer of Christ; Ep. ad Phi­lip. p. 112. how­ever 'tis certain, that they never fasted on those days, no not in the time of Lent it self; nay the Montanists, though otherwise great pretenders to fasting and mortification, did yet abstain from it on the Lords-day. And as they accounted it a joyful and good day, so they did what ever they thought might contri­bute to the honour of it. No sooner was Constantine come over to the Church, Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 4. c. 18, 19, 20. p. 534. but his principal care was a­bout the Lords-day, he commanded it to be solemnly observed, and that by all persons whatsoever, he made it to all a day of rest; that men might have nothing to do but to worship God, and be better instructed in the Christian Faith, and spend their whole time with­out any thing to hinder them in prayer and devotion, according to the custom and discipline of the Church: and for those in his Army who yet remained in their Paganism and infidelity, he com­manded them upon Lords-days to go out [Page 169] into the Fields, and there pour out their souls in hearty prayers to God; and that none might pretend their own ina­bility to the duty, he himself composed and gave them a short form of prayer, which he enjoin'd them to make use of every Lords-Day: so careful was he that this day should not be dishonoured or mis-imployed, even by those who were yet strangers and enemies to Christiani­ty. Cod. Just. l. 3. Tit. 12. de feriis l. 3. He moreover ordained, that there should be no Courts of Judicature open upon this day, no Suits or Tryals at Law, but that for any works of mercy, such as the emancipating and setting free of Slaves or Servants, this might be done. That there should be no Suits nor de­manding debts upon this day, Cod. Theod. lib. 2. Tit. 8. de feriis l. 1. lib. 8. was con­firmed by several Laws of succeeding Emperours, and that no Arbitrators who had the Umpirage of any business lying before them, Tit. 8. l. 3. should at that time have power to determine or take up litigious causes, penalties being entail'd upon a­ny that transgressed herein. Ib. lib. 15. Theodosius the Great, Tit. 5. de spectac. l. 2. anno 386. by a second Law ra­tified one which he had passed long be­fore, wherein he expresly prohibited all publick Shews upon the Lords-Day, that the worship of God might not be con­founded [Page 170] with those prophane Solemni­ties. This Law the younger Theodosius some few years after confirmed and en­larged, Ib. Leg. 5. Dominico. enacting, that on the Lords day (and some other Festivals there menti­oned) not only Christians, but even Jews and Heathens should be restrained from the pleasure of all Sights and Spe­ctacles, and the Theatres be shut up in every place; and whereas it might so happen that the Birth-day or inaugura­tion of the Emperour might fall upon that day, therefore to let the people know how infinitely he preferred the honour of God, before the concerns of his own majesty and greatness, he com­manded that if it should so happen, that then the imperial Solemnity should be put off, and deferred till another day.

I shall take notice but of one instance more of their great observance of this day, and that was their constant atten­dance upon the Solemnities of publick Worship; they did not think it enough to read and pray, and praise God at home, but made conscience of appear­ing in the publick Assemblies, from which nothing but sickness and absolute neces­sity did detain them: and if sick, or in prison, or under banishment, nothing [Page 171] troubled them more, than that they could not come to Church, and join their devotions to the common Services. If persecution at any time forced them to keep a little close, yet no sooner was there the least mitigation, but they pre­sently returned to their open duty, and publickly met all together. No trivial pretences, no light excuses were then admitted for any ones absence from the Congregation, but according to the merit of the cause severe censures were passed upon them. The Synod of Illibe­ris provided, Can. 21. p. 28. that if any man dwelling in a City (where usually Churches were nearest hand) should for three Lords Days absent himself from the Church, he should for some time be suspended the Communion, that he might appear to be corrected for his fault. They allow­ed no separate Assemblies, no Congre­gations but what met in the publick Church; if any man took upon him to make a breach, and to draw people in­to corners, he was presently condemn­ed, and a sutable penalty put upon him. When Eustathius Bishop of Sebastia (a man petending to great strictness and austerity of life) began to cast off the Discipline of the Church, and to intro­duce [Page 172] many odd observations of his own, amongst others, to contemn Priests that were married, to fast on the Lords day, and to keep meetings in private houses, drawing away many, but especially wo­men, Sozom. l 3. c. 14 p. 521. (as the Historian observes) who leaving their Husbands were led away with errour, and from that into great filthiness and impurity. No sooner did the Bishops of those parts discover it, but meeting in Council at Gangra the Metropolis of Paphlagonia about the year 340. they condemned and cast them out of the Church, Conc. Gar­gr. Can. 4, 5. passing these two Canons among the rest: If any one shall teach that the House of God is to be de­spised, and the assemblies that are held in it, let him be accursed: If any shall take upon him out of the Church, privately to preach at home, and making light of the Church shall do those things that belong on­ly to the Church, without the presence of the Priest, and the leave and allowance of the Bishop, let him be accursed. Corre­spondent to which, Can. 31. the Canons called Apostolical, Conc. An­tioch. Can. 5. and the Council of Antioch, ordain, that if any Presbyter setting light by his own Bishop, shall withdraw and set up separate meetings, and erect ano­ther Altar (i. e. says Zonaras, keep un­lawful [Page 173] Conventicles, preach privately, and administer the Sacrament) that in such a case he shall be deposed, as ambi­tious and tyrannical, and the people communicating with him be excommuni­cate, as being factious and schismatical; only this not to be done, till after the third admonition. After all that has been said, I might further show what e­steem and value the first Christians had of the Lords day, by those great and honourable things they have spoken concerning it; of which I'll produce but two passages; the one is that in the E­pistle ad Magnesios, which if not Igna­tius, must yet be acknowledged an an­cient Authour: Pag. 149. Let every one (says he) that loves Christ keep the Lords day Fe­stival, the resurrection day, the Queen and Empress of all days, in which our life was raised again, and death conquered by our Lord and Saviour. The other that of Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria, Edict. The­oph. apud Balsam. in Synod. Tom. 2. part 1. p. 170. who speaks thus, that both custom and reason challenge from us, that we should honour the Lords day, and keep it Festival, see­ing on that day it was that our Lord Jesus Christ compleated his resurrection from the dead.

Next to the Lords day, the Sabbath, [Page 174] or Saturday (for so the word Sabbatum is constantly used in the Writings of the Fathers, when speaking of it as it re­lates to Christians) was held by them in great veneration, and especially in the Eastern parts honoured with all the pub­lick Solemnities of Religion. For which we are to know, that the Gospel in those parts mainly prevailing amongst the Jews, they being generally the first Con­verts to the Christian Faith, they still retained a mighty reverence for the Mo­saick Institutions, and especially for the Sabbath, as that which had been ap­pointed by God himself (as the memo­rial of his rest from the work of Crea­tion) setled by their great Master Moses, and celebrated by their Ancestors for so many Ages, as the solemn day of their publick Worship, and were there­fore very loth that it should be whol­ly antiquated and laid aside. For this reason it seemed good to the prudence of those times (as in others of the Jew­ish Rites, so in this) to indulge the hu­mour of that people, and to keep the Sabbath as a day for religious offices. Hence they usually had most parts of Divine Service performed upon that day, they met together for publick [Page 175] Prayers, for reading the Scriptures, ce­lebration of the Sacraments, and such like duties. This is plain not only from some passages in Ignatius and Clemens his Constitutions, but from Writers of more unquestionable credit and autho­rity. Homil. de Sement. in init. Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria tells us, that they assembled on Saturdays, not that they were infected with Juda­ism, but only to worship Jesus Christ the Lord of the Sabbath: Hist. Eccl. l. 6. c. 8. p. 312. and Socrates speaking of the usual times of their pub­lick meeting, calls the Sabbath and the Lords day the weekly Festivals, on which the Congregation was wont to meet in the Church, for the perfor­mance of Divine Services. Therefore the Council of Laodicea amongst other things decreed, Can. 16. 49. 51. that upon Saturdays the Gospels and other Scriptures should be read, that in Lent the Eucharist should not be celebrated but upon Saturday and the Lords day, and upon those days on­ly in the time of Lent it should be law­ful to commemorate and rehearse the names of Martyrs. Upon this day also aswel as upon Sunday all Fasts were se­verely prohibited (an infallible argu­ment they counted it a Festival day) one Saturday in the year only excepted, viz. [Page 176] that before Easter-day, which was al­ways observed as a solemn Fast. Things so commonly known as to need no proof. But though the Church thought fit thus far to correspond with Jewish Converts, as solemnly to observe the Sabbath; yet to take away all offence, and to vindi­cate themselves from compliance with Judaism, they openly declared that they did it only in a Christian way, and kept it not as a Jewish Sabbath, as is expresly affirmed by Athanasius, Athanas. Homil. de Sement. Nazianzen, and others; and the forementioned Laodice­an Synod has a Canon to this purpose, Tom. 1. p. 835. that Christians should not judaize, Can. 29. and rest from all labour on the Sabbath, but follow their ordinary works (i. e. so far as consisted with their attendance upon the publick Assemblies) and should not entertain such thoughts of it, but that still they should prefer the Lords day before it; and on that day rest as Chri­stians; but if any were found to judaize they should be accursed.

Thus stood the case in the Eastern Church; in those of the West we find it somewhat different, amongst them it was not observed as a religious Festival, but kept as a constant Fast, the reason whereof (as 'tis given by Pope Inno­nocent, [Page 177] in an Epistle to the Bishop of Eu­gubium, where he treats of this very case) seems most probable; if Innocent. Ep. ad de­cium Eugu­bin. c. 4. Sabbato vero. (says he) we commemorate Christs resurrection not only at Easter, but every Lords day, and fast upon Friday because 'twas the day of his passion, we ought not to pass by Saturday, which is the middle-time be­tween the days of grief and joy; the Apostles themselves spending those two days (viz. Friday and the Sabbath) in great sorrow and heaviness: and he thinks no doubt ought to be made but that the Apostles fasted upon those two days, whence the Church had a Tradi­tion, that the Sacraments were not to be administred on those days, and there­fore concludes, that every Saturday or Sabbath ought to be kept a Fast. To the same purpose the Council of Illiberis or­dained, Can. 36. p. 35. that a Saturday Festival was an errour that ought to be reformed, and that men ought to fast upon every Sab­bath. But though this seems to have been the general practice, yet it did not obtain in all places of the West alike. In Italy it self, 'twas otherwise at Milain; where Saturday was a Festival; Paulin in vit. Ambr. operibus Ambros. praefix [...] and 'tis said in the life of S. Ambrose, who was Bishop of that See, that he constantly [Page 178] dined as well upon Saturday as the Lords day, (it being his custom to dine upon no other days but those, and the memorials of the Martyrs) and used also upon that day to preach to the peo­ple; though so great was the prudence and moderation of that good man, that he bound not up himself in these indiffe­rent things, but when he was at Millain he dined upon Saturdays, and when he was at Rome, he fasted as they did upon those days: Ad Janu­ar. Epist. 118. col. 557 tom. 2. This S. Augustine assures us he had from his own mouth; for when his Mother Monica came after him to Millain (where he then resided) she was greatly troubled to find the Saturday Fast not kept there, as she had found it in other places; for her satisfaction he immediately went to consult S. Ambrose, then Bishop of that place, who told him he could give him no better advice in the cause, that to do as he did: When I come to Rome (said he) I fast on the Sa­turday as they do at Rome, when I am here I do not fast. So likewise you, to whatsoever Church you come, observe the custom of that place, if you mean not ei­ther to give or take offence. With this an­swer he satisfied his Mother, and ever after when he thought of it, looked up­on [Page 179] it as an Oracle sent from Heaven. So that even in Italy the Saturday Fast was not universally observed. Nay a very learned man (and a Bishop of the Roman Church) thinks it highly probable, Albasp. de vet. Eccl­rit. obs. 13. p. 90. that for the first Ages especially, Saturday was no more kept as a Fast at Rome, than in the Churches of the East: though the great argument whereby he would establish it (viz. because some Latine Churches, who must needs follow the pattern of the Church of Rome, did not keep it so) is very infirm and weak; and needs no more than that very in­stance of the Church of Millain to re­fute it, which though under the Popes nose, did not yet keep that day as a Fast, although this was many years af­ter it had been so established and ob­served at Rome.

And now that I am got into this busi­ness, I shall once for all dispatch the matter about their Fasts, before I pro­ceed to their other Festivals. 'Tis cer­tain the ancient Christians had two sorts of solemn Fasts, weekly and annual. Their weekly Fasts (called Jejunia quartae & sextae seriae) were kept upon Wednesdays and Fridays, appointed so, as we are told, for this reason, because on Wed­nesday [Page 180] our Lord was betrayed by Judas, on Friday he was crucified by the Jews. Vid. Con­ [...]it. App. l. 5. c. 14. p. 929. l. 7. c. 24. p. 978. This custom Epiphanius (how truly I know not) refers to the Apostles, and elsewhere tells us that those days were observed as Fasts through the whole world. Serm. Com­pen. p. 466. These Fasts they called their Stations (not because they stood all the while, Haeres. 85. p. 387. but by an allusion to the military Stations and keeping their Guards, as Tertullian observes, De Orat. c. 14. p. 136. they kept close at it) and they usually lasted [...], as Epiphanius informs us, Serm. Com­pend. de fid. p 466. till the ninth hour, i. e. till three of the Clock in the Afternoon, at which time having ended their Fast devotions, they received the Eucharist, and then broke up the Stati­on, and went home; whence it is that Tertullian calls them stationum semijeju­nia, De jejun. c. 13. p. 551. the half Fasts of Stations: and he seems to censure the practice of some who having privately resolved upon an entire Fast of the whole day, De Orat. c. 14. p 135. refused to receive the Eucharist at the publick sta­tionary Fasts, because they thought that by eating and drinking the sacramental Elements, they put a period to their fasting: Vid. de je­jun p. 545. A. p. 544. B. for it was usual in those times with many, after the stationary Fasts were ended, to continue and hold on [Page 181] the Fast until the evening. The Histo­rian tells us that it had been a very an­cient custom in the Church of Alexan­dria, Socrat. l. [...] c. 22. p. 28. upon these days to have the Scrip­tures read and expounded, and all o­ther parts of Divine Service, except the celebration of the Sacrament, and that it was chiefly in those days that Ori­gen was wont to teach the people: whe­ther the omitting of the Sacrament then might be a peculiar custom to that Church, I know not, certain I am 'twas upon those days administred in other places. Tom. 3. E­pist. 289. p. 279. So S. Basil enumerating the times how oft they received it every week, expresly puts Wednesday and Friday in­to the number. The remains of these pri­mitive Stations are yet observed in our Church at this day, which by her 15. Canon has ordained, That though Wed­nesdays and Fridays be not holy days, yet that weekly upon those times Minister and People shall resort to Church at the accu­stomed hours of prayer.

Their Annual Fast was that of Lent, by way of preparation to the Feast of our Saviours Resurrection, this (though not in the modern use of it) was very ancient, B. Tayl. Duct: Dub. lib. 3. c. 4. p. 629. though far from being an [...] Apo­stolical Canon, as a learned Prelate of our [Page 182] Church has fully proved. From the very first Age of the Christian Church 'twas customary to fast before Easter; but for how long, it was variously observ­ed according to different times and pla­ces; some fasting so many days, others so many weeks, and some so many days on each week; Id. ib. vid. Thorndike. rel. assembl. c. 8. p. 276. and 'tis most probably thought, that it was at first stiled [...] or Quadragesima, not because 'twas a Fast of forty days, but of forty hours, begun about twelve on Friday (the time of our Saviours falling under the power of death) and continued till Sunday morning, the time of his rising from the dead. Afterwards it was en­larged to a longer time, drawn out in­to more days, and then weeks, till it came to three, and at last to six or se­ven weeks. But concerning the diffe­rent observations of it in several places, let them who desire to know more con­sult Socrates and Sozomen, Socrat. l. 5. c. 22. who both speak enough about it. Sozom. l. 7. c. 19. This Quadra­gesimal Fast was kept in those times with great piety and Religion, people gene­rally applying themselves with all seri­ousness to acts of penance and mortifi­cation, Hom. 1. in Gen. tom. 2. p. 1. whence Chrysostom calls Lent the remedy and Physick of our souls; and to [Page 183] the end that the observation of it might be more grave and solemn, Theodosins M. and his Colleague Emperours passed two Laws, [...]od The­od. lib. 9. that during the time of Lent all Process and enquiry into criminal acti­ons should be suspended, Tit. 35. de Question. ll 4. & 5. and no corpo­ral punishments inflicted upon any; it being unfit (as the second of those Laws expresses it) that in the holy time of Lent the body should suffer punishment, while the soul is expecting absolution. But with what care soever they kept the preceeding parts, 'tis certain they kept the close of it with a mighty strict­ness and austerity, I mean the last week of it, Constit. A­postol. l. 5. c. 17, 18. p. 932. that which immediately prece­ded the Feast of Easter; this they con­secrated to more peculiar acts of prayer, abstinence, Epiphan. [...] p. 466. and devotion; and whereas in the other parts of Lent they ended their fast in the evening, in this they ex­tended it to the Cock-crowing, or first glimpse of the morning; to be sure they ended it not before midnight, for to break up the Fast before that time was accounted a piece of great prophane­ness and intemperance, as Apud. Zo­nar. in Sy­nod. Tom 2. part. 1. p. 1. Dionysius Bi­shop of Alexandria determines in a Let­ter to Basilides, wherein he largely and learnedly states the case. This was the [Page 184] Hebdomada Magna, the great (or holy) week; Hom. 30. in Gen. p. 328. so called (says Chrysostom) not that it has either more hours or days in it than other weeks, but because this is the week in which truly great and inef­fable good things were purchased for us; within this time death was conquered, the curse destroyed, the Devils tyran­ny dissolved, his instruments broken, Heaven opened, Angels rejoyced, the partition-wall broken down, and God and man reconciled. For this cause we call it the great week, for this cause men fast, and watch, and do Alms, to do the greater honour to it: the Empe­rours themselves, to shew what venera­tion they have for this time, commanding all Suits and Processes at Law to cease, Tribunal-doors to be shut up, and Pri­soners to be set free, imitating herein their great Lord and Master, who by his death at this time delivered us from the prison and the chains of sin; mean­ing herein those Laws of Theodosius, Gratian, and Valentinian, which we lately mentioned.

We proceed now to enquire what o­ther Festivals there were in those first Ages of the Church, which I find to be chiefly these; Easter, Whitsuntide, and [Page 185] Epiphany, which comprehended two, Christmass and Epiphany properly so called. I reckon them not in their pro­per order, but as I suppose them to have taken place in the Church. Of these Easter challenges the precedence both for its antiquity, and the great stir a­bout it; that in and from the very times of the Apostles (besides the weekly re­turns of the Lords day) there has been always observed an Anniversary Festival in memory of Christs Resurrection, no man can doubt, that has any insight in­to the affairs of the ancient Church; all the dispute was about the particular time when it was to be kept, which be­came a matter of as famous a Contro­versie as any that in those Ages exer­cised the Christian world. The state of the case was briefly this; the Churches of Asia the less kept their Easter upon the same day, whereon the Jews cele­brated their Passover, viz. upon the 14. day of the first Month (which always began with the appearance of the Moon) mostly answering to our March, and this they did, upon what day of the week soever it fell, and hence were stiled Quartodecimans, because keeping Easter quarta decima Luna, upon the [Page 186] 14. day after the [...] or appearance of the Moon. The other Churches, and especially those of the West did not fol­low this custom, but kept Easter upon the Lords day following the day of the Jewish Passover, partly the more to ho­nour the day, and partly to distinguish between Jews and Christians: the Asia­ticks pleaded for themselves the practice of the Apostles; Polycarpus Bishop of Smyr­na, who had lived and conversed with them, having kept it upon that day, to­gether with S. John and the rest of the Apostles, Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 24. p. 193. as Irenaeus (who himself knew Polycarpus, and doubtless had it from his own mouth) speaks in a Letter about this very thing though himself was of the other side. Ibid. p. 191. And Polycrates in a Let­ter to the same purpose, instances not only in S. John, but S. Philip the Apo­stle▪ who himself and his whole Family used so to keep it, from whom it had been conveyed down in a constant and uninterrupted observance through all the Bishops of those places, some where­of he there enumerates, and tells us that seven Bishops of that place in a constant succession had been his Kinsmen, and himself the eighth, and that it had never been kept by them upon any other day; [Page 187] this we are not so to understand, as if S. John and the Apostles had instituted this Festival, and commanded it to be observed upon that day, but rather that they did it by way of condescension, ac­commodating their practice in a matter indifferent to the humour of the Jewish Converts (whose number in those parts was very great) as they had done before in several other cases, and particularly in observing the Sabbath or Saturday. The other Churches also (says Eusebius) had for their patronage an Apostolical Tradition, Ib. c. 23. p. 190. or at least pretended it: and were the much more numerous party. This difference was the spring of great bustles in the Church; for the Bishops of Rome stickled hard to impose their custom upon the Eastern Churches, whereupon Polycarpus comes over to Rome to confer with Anicetus who was then Bishop about it; Id. l. 4. c. 14. p. 127. and though they could not agree the matter, yet they parted fairly. After this Pope Victor re­newed the quarrel, and was so fierce and peremptory in the case, that he either actually did, H. Vales. Annot. in. Euseb. l. 5. c. 24. p. 105. col. 1. or (as a learned man in­clines rather to think, probably to molli­fie the odium of the Fact) severely threat­ned to excommunicate those Eastern [Page 188] Churches for standing out against it: this rash and bold attempt was ill resent­ed by the sober and moderate men of his own party, who writ to him about it; and particularly Irenaeus (a man, as Eu­sebius notes, truly answering his name, both in his temper and his life, quiet and peaceable) who gravely reproved him for renting the peace of the Church, and troubling so many famous Churches for observing the customs derived to them from their Ancestors, with much more to the same purpose. But the Asian Bi­shops little regarded what was either said or done at Rome, and still went on in their old course, though by the diligent pra­ctices of the other party they lost ground, but yet still made shift to keep the cause on foot till the time of Con­stantine, Euseb. de vit. Con­stant. l. 3. c. 14.—17. who finding this controversie amongst others much to disquiet the peace of the Church, did for this and some other reasons summon the great Council of Nice, by whom this question was solemnly determined, Easter ordain­ed to be kept upon one and the same day throughout the world, not accord­ing to the custom of the Jews, but upon the Lords day, and this Decree ratified and published by the imperial Letters to all the Churches.

[Page 189] The Eve of Vigils or this Festival were wont to be celebrated with more than ordinary pomp, with solemn watch­ings, Naz. Or. 2. in Pasch. with multitudes of lighted Torches both in the Churches and their own pri­vate houses, Orat. 42. p. 676. so as to turn the night it self into day, and with the general re­sort and confluence of all ranks of men, both Magistrates and people. This cu­stom of lights at that time was, Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 4. c. 22. p. 536. if not be­gun, at least much augmented by Con­stantine, who set up Lamps and Torches in all places as well within the Churches as without; that through the whole Ci­ty the night seemed to outvye the Sun at Noonday. And this they did (as Na­zianzen intimates) as a Prodromus or forerunner of that great light, Ibid. p. 677. even the Sun of righteousness, which the next day arose upon the world. Ibid. & O­rat. 19. p. 304. For the Feast it self, the same Father calls it the holy and famous Passover, a day which is the Queen of days, the Festival of Festivals, and which as far excels all other, even of those which are instituted to the honour of Christ, as the Sun goes beyond the other Stars. A time it was famous for works of mercy and charity, every one both of Clergy and Laity striving to con­tribute liberally to the poor: a duty [Page 190] (as one of the Ancients observes) very congruous and sutable to that happy sea­son, Commod. instruction. c. 75. p. 57. for what more fit, than that such as beg relief should be enabled to rejoice at that time, when we remember the common fountain of our mercies? There­fore no sooner did the morning of this day appear, Euseb. ut. supra. but Constantine used to arise, and in imitation of the love and kind­ness of our blessed Saviour, to bestow the richest and most noble gifts, and to diffuse the influences of his bounty over all parts of his Empire. And his exam­ple herein it seems was followed by most of his Successors, who used upon this Solemnity by their imperial Orders to release all Prisoners, unless such as were in for more heavy and notorious crimes, high Treason, Murders, Rapes, Incest, and the like. And Chrysostom tells us of a Letter of Theodosius the Great sent at this time throughout the Empire, Hom. 20. ad pop. An­tioch. p. 230. tom. 1. wherein he did not only command, that all Prisoners should be released and par­doned, but wished he was able to recal those that were already executed, and to restore them to life again. And be­cause by the negligence and remissness of messengers, or any accident those Impe­rial Letters might sometimes happen to [Page 191] come too late, therefore Valentinian the younger provided by a standing Law, Lib. 9. C. Theod. Tit. 38. de in­dulg. l. 8. that whether order came or not, the Judges should dispence the accustomed indulgence, and upon Easter day in the morning cause all Prisons to be open, the Chains to be knock'd off, and the persons set at liberty.

The next Feast considerable in those primitive times, was that of Whitsun­day or Pentecost, a Feast of great emi­nency amongst the Jews, in memory of the Law delivered at Mount Sinai at that time, and for the gathering and bringing in of their Harvest; and of no less note amongst Christians for the Holy Ghosts descending upon the Apostles and other Christians, in the visible appearance of fiery cloven tongues, which hapned upon that day, and those miraculous powers then conferred upon them. It was observed with the same respect to Easter, that the Jews did with respect to their Passover, viz. (as the word imports) just fifty days after it, reckoning from the second day of that Festival: it seems to some to have commenced from the first rise of Christianity, not only because the Apostles and the Church were as­sembled upon that day, but because [Page 192] S. Paul made so much haste to be at Je­rusalem the day of Pentecost, which they understand of his great desire to keep it there as a Christian Feast. Act. 20. 16. But the argu­ment seems to me no way conclusive, for the Apostle might desire to be there at that time, both because he was sure to meet with a great number of the Bre­thren, and because he should have a fit­ter opportunity to preach the Gospel to the Jews, who from all parts flock'd thi­ther to the Feast, as our Saviour himself for the same reason used to go up to Jeru­salem at all their great and solemn Feasts. But however this was, 'tis certain the ob­servation of it is ancient, 'twas mentioned by Irenaeus in a Book which he wrote concerning Easter, as the Author of the Questions and Responses in J. Martyr tells us; Quest. 115. by Tertullian, and after him by Ori­gen more than once. Tert. de Idol. c. 14. p 94. This Feast is by us stiled Whitsunday, Adv. Cels. [...]. 8 p. 392. partly because of those vast diffusions of light and know­ledge which upon this day were shed up­on the Apostles, in order to the enlight­ning of the world; but principally be­cause this (as also Easter) being the stated time for Baptism in the ancient Church, those who were baptized put on white Garments, in token of that [Page 193] pure and innocent course of life they had now engaged in (of which more in its proper place:) this white Garment they wore till the next Sunday after, and then laid it aside; whence the Octave or Sunday after Easter came to be stiled Do­minica in Albis, the Sunday in white, it being then that the new-baptized put off their white Garments. We may ob­serve that in the Writers of those times the whole space of fifty days between Easter and Whitsunday goes often under the name of Pentecost, and was in a man­ner accounted Festival, Tert de Idol. c 14. de Bapt. c. 19. de Cor. mil. c. 3. vid Max. as Tertullian in­forms us, and the forty third Canon of the Illiberitan Council seems to intimate. During this whole time Baptism was conferred, T [...]rin Ho­mil. 3 de S. Pentecost▪ p. 223. all Fasts were suspended and counted unlawful, they prayed standing as they did every Lords day; and at this time read over the Acts of the Apo­stles, wherein their sufferings and mira­cles are recorded, as we learn from a Law of the younger Theodosius, C. Th. lib. 15. Tit. 5. l▪ 5▪ wherein this custom is mentioned, and more plainly from S. Chrysostom, Serm 73. who treats of it in an Homily on purpose, Cur. Act. where he gives this reason why that Book which contained those actions of the A­postles which were done after Pentecost; App legan­tur in Pen­tec. Tom. 5. [Page 194] should yet be read before it, when as at all other times those parts of the Gospel were read, which were proper to the season, because the Apostles miracles be­ing the grand confirmation of the truth of Christs Resurrection, and those mira­cles recorded in that Book, it was there­fore most proper to be read next to the Feast of the Resurrection.

Epiphany succeeds; this word was of old promiscuously used either for the Feast of Christs Nativity, or for that which we now properly call by that name: afterwards the Titles became di­stinct; that of Christs Birth (or as we now term it Christmas-day) was called [...] the Nativity, [...], and [...] the ap­pearance of God in the flesh; Orat. 38. p 613. two names importing the same thing as Nazianzen notes. For the antiquity of it, the first footsteps I find of it are in the second Century, though I doubt not but it might be celebrated before, mentioned by Theo­philus Bishop of Caesaria, about the time of the Emperour Commodus: but if any credit might be given to the Decretal E­pistles, Decret. Te­lesph. sect. nocte vero. it was somewhat elder than that, Pope Telesphorus, who lived under Anto­ninus Pius, ordaining Divine Service to be celebrated, and an angelical Hymn [Page 195] to be sung the night before the Nativity of our Saviour. However that it was kept before the times of Constantine, we have this sad instance. Niceph. H. Eccles. l. 7. c. 6. p. 446. forsan ex Sim. Meta­phrast. qui eadem ha­bet in Mar­tyr Ind. & Domn. a­pud Sur. ad 26. De­cemb. tom. 6. That when the persecution raged under Dioclesian, who then kept his Court at Nicomedia, a­mongst other acts of barbarous cruelty done there, finding multitudes of Chri­stians young and old met together in the Temple, upon the day of Christs Nati­vity, to celebrate that Festival, he com­manded the Church doors to be shut up, and fire to be put to it, which in a short time reduced them and the Church to ashes. I shall not dispute, whether it was always observed upon the same day that we keep it now, the twenty fifth of Decem­ber; it seems probable, that for a long time in the East it was kept in January, under the name, and at the general time of the Epiphania, till receiving more light in the case from the Churches of the West, they changed it to this day; sure I am S. Chrysostom in an Homily on purpose about this very thing affirms, Serm. 31. that it was not above ten years since in that Church (i. e. Antioch) it began first to be observed upon that day, Tom. 5. p. 417. and there offers several reasons to prove that to be the true day of Christs Nativity.

[Page 196] The Feast of Epiphany, properly so called, was kept on the sixth of January, and had that name from a threefold appa­rition or manifestation commemorated upon that day, which all hapned, though not in the same year, yet upon the same day of the year. The first was the appea­rance of the Star, which guided the wise men to Christ. The second was the fa­mous appearance at the baptism of Christ, when all the persons in the holy Trinity did sensibly manifest themselves, the Fa­ther in the voice from Heaven, the Son in the River Jordan, and the Holy Ghost in the visible shape of a Dove. This was ever accounted a famous Festival, and as S. Chrysostom tells us, Hom. 23. de Baptis­mo Christi. tom 1. p. 278. was properly called Epiphany, because he came in a manner into the world incognito; but at his baptism openly appeared to be the Son of God, and was so declared before the world. At this time it was that by his going into the River Jordan he did sanctifie water to the mystical washing a­way of sin (as our Church expresses it) in memory whereof, Ibid. Chrysostom tells us, they used in this Solemnity at midnight to draw water, which they looked up­on as consecrated this day, and carrying it home to lay it up, where it would [Page 197] remain pure and uncorrupt for a whole year, sometimes two or three years to­gether, the truth whereof must rest up­on the credit of that good man. The third manifestation commemorated at this time, was that of Christs divinity, which appeared in the first miracle that he wrought in turning water into Wine; therefore 'twas called Bethphania, be­cause it was done in the house at that fa­mous Marriage in Cana of Galilee, which our Saviour honoured with his own pre­sence. All these three appearances con­tributed to the Solemnity of this Festi­val.

But beside these, there was another sort of Festivals in the primitive Church, kept in commemoration of Martyrs: for the understanding of which we are to know, that in those sad and bloody times when the Christian Religion tri­umphed over persecution, and gained upon the world by nothing more than the constant and resolute sufferings of its professors, whom no threatnings or torments could baffle out of it; the peo­ple generally had a vast reverence for those who suffered thus deep in the cause of Christianity, and laid down their lives for the confirmation of it. They [Page 198] looked upon Confessors and Martyrs as the great Champions of their Religion, who resisted unto blood, and dyed upon the spot to make good its ground, and to maintain its honour and reputation; and therefore thought it very reasona­ble to do all possible honour to their me­mories, partly that others might be en­couraged to the like patience and for­titude, and partly that virtue even in this world might not lose its reward. Hence they were wont once a year to meet at the Graves of Martyrs, there solemnly to recite their sufferings and their triumphs, to praise their virtues, and to bless God for their pious exam­ples, for their holy lives and their hap­py deaths, for their Palms and Crowns. These anniversary Solemnities were call­ed memoriae martyrum, the memories of the Martyrs, a title mentioned by Cy­prian, but certainly much older than his time; Epist. 37. p. 51. and indeed when they were first taken up in the Church is I think not so exactly known: the first that I remember to have met with, is that of Polycarp (whose martyrdom is placed by Euse­bius anno 168. Euseb. Chron. ad An. 168. under the third Persecu­tion) concerning whose death and suf­ferings the Church of Smyrna (of which [Page 199] he was Bishop) giving an account to the Church of Philomelium, Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 4. c. 15. p. 135. and especially of the place where they had honoura­bly entomb'd his bones, they do profess that (so far as the malice of their Enemies would permit them, and they prayed God nothing might hinder it) they would assemble in that place, and cele­brate the Birth-day of his Martyrdom with joy and gladness: where we may especially observe, that this Solemnity is stiled his Birth-day, and indeed so the primitive Christians used to call the days of their death and passion (quite con­trary to the manner of the Gentiles, who kept the Natalitials of their famous men) looking upon these as the true days of their nativity, wherein they were freed from this Valley of tears, these regions of death, and born again unto the joys and happiness of an endless life. The same account Origen gives (if that Book be his, a very ancient Authour however) we keep (says he) the memories of the Saints, Expose. in Job. l. 3. fol. 39. tom. 2. of our Ancestors, and friends that dye in the faith, both rejoycing in that rest which they have obtained, and begging for our selves a pious consum­mation in the faith: and we celebrate not the day of their nativity, as being [Page 200] the inlet to sorrow and temptation, but of their death, as the period of their mi­series, and that which sets them beyond the reach of temptations. And this we do, both Clergie and People meeting to­gether, inviting the poor and needy, and refreshing the Widows and the Orphans; that so our Festival may be both in re­spect of them, whom we commemorate, the memorial of that happy rest which their departed souls do enjoy; and in respect of us the odour of a sweet smell in the sight of God. Under Constantine these days were commanded to be ob­served with great care and strictness, De vit. Const. l. 4. c. 23 p 536. en­joining all his Lieutenants and Gover­nours of Provinces to see the memorials of the Martyrs duly honoured; and so sacred were they accounted in those days, that it was thought a piece of prophaneness to be absent from them; therefore S. Basil thought he could not use a more solemn argument, Epist 336. tom. 3. p. 328. to per­swade a certain Bishop to come over to him upon this occasion, than to adjure him by the respect he bore to the me­mories of the Martyrs, that if he would not do it for his, yet he should for their sakes, towards whom it was unfit he should shew the least disregard. Hence [Page 201] it is that Libanius sometimes takes no­tice of the Christians under no other cha­racter than this, Apologet. pro doctr. sua p. 592. Enemies to the gods, [...], that haunt and frequent Tombs and Sepulchers. For the time of these assemblies it was commonly once a year, viz. upon the day of their martyr­dom, for which end they took particu­lar care to keep Registers of the days of the Martyrs passions. So Cyprian ex­presly charges his Clergie to note down the days of their decease, Loco supra annot. that there might be a commemoration of them a­mongst the memories of the Martyrs. Theodoret tells us, that in his time they did not thus assemble once or twice, De Cur. Graec. as­sect. Serm. 8. de mar­tyrib. p. 121. or five times in a year, but kept frequent memorials, oftentimes every day cele­brating the memorials of Martyrs, with hymns and praises unto God. But I suppose he means it of days appointed to the memory of particular Martyrs, which being then very numerous, their memorials were distinctly fixed upon their proper days, the Festival of S. Pe­ter, or S. Paul, Thomas, Sergius, Marcel­lus, &c. as he there enumerates them. For the places, these Solemnities were kept at first at the Tombs where the Mar­tyrs had been buried, which usually [Page 202] were in the Coemeteria or Church-yard, di­stinct in those times from their places of Publick Worship, and at a great distance from them, as being commonly without the Cities. Here their burying places where in large Cryptae or Grots under ground, where they celebrated these memorials, and whither they used to retire for their common devotions in times of great persecution, when their Churches were destroyed or taken from them. And therefore when Aemilian the Governour of Egypt under the Reign of Valerian would screw up the persecuti­on against Christians, Euseb. Hist. lib. 7. c. 11. p. 258. l. 9. c. 2. p. 349. he forbad their meetings, and that they should not so much as assemble in the places which they called their Church-yards; the same priviledge which Maximinus also had ta­ken from them. By reason of the dark­ness of these places, and their frequent assembling there in the night, to avoid the fury of their Enemies, they were forced to use Lights and Lamps in their publick meetings, but they who make this an argument to patronize their burn­ing of Lamps and Wax-Candles in their Churches at Noon-day (as 'tis in all the great Churches of the Roman Commu­nion) talk at a strange rate of wild in­consequence. [Page 203] I am sure S. Hierom when charged with it, Adv. vigi­lant. tom. 2. p. 123. denied that they used any in the day time, and never but at night when they rose up to their night-devotions. He confesses indeed 'twas o­therwise in the Eastern Churches, where when the Gospel was to be read, they set up Lights, as a token of their rejoycing for those happy and glad tidings that were contained in it, light having been ever used as a symbol and representation of joy and gladness: A custom probably not much elder than his time. After­wards when Christianity prevailed in the world, the devotion of Christians erected Churches in those places; the Temples of the Martyrs (says Theodo­ret) being spacious and beautiful, Ibid. richly and curiously adorned, and shining with great lustre and brightness. These So­lemnities, as the same Author informs us, were kept not like the Heathen Fe­stivals with luxury and obsceneness, but with devotion and sobriety, Vid. Con­stit. App. l. 8. c. 45. p. 1040. with divine Hymns and religious Sermons, with fer­vent prayers to God, Vid. Epi­phan. [...]. p. 466. mixed many times with sighs and tears. Here they heard Sermons and Orations, joined in publick prayers and praises, received the holy Sacrament, offered gifts and charities [Page 204] for the poor, recited the names of the Martyrs then commemorated with their due elogies and commendations, and their virtues propounded to the imita­tion of the hearers. For which purpose they had their set Notaries who took the acts, sayings, and sufferings of Martyrs, which were after compiled into particu­lar Treatises, and were recited in these annual meetings, and this was the first original of Martyrologies in the Christi­an Church. From this custom of offering up prayers, praises, and alms at those times, it is that the Fathers speak so of­ten of oblations and sacrifices at the Mar­tyrs Festivals. De Cor. mil. c. 3. p. 102. Tertullian often, upon an anniversary day (says he) we make obla­tions for them that are departed, De exhort. Castil. p. 523. in me­mory of their Natalitia or Birth days, and to the same purpose elsewhere. De monog. p. 531. As oft (says Cyprian) as by an anniversary com­memoration we celebrate the passion days of the Martyrs, Epist. 34. p. 48. & Ep. 37. we always offer sacrifices for them; and the same phrases oft oc­cur in many others of the Fathers. By which 'tis evident, they meant no more than their publick prayers, and offering up praises to God for the piety and con­stancy, and the excellent examples of their Martyrs, their celebrating the Eu­charist [Page 205] at these times, as the commemo­ration of Christs Sacrifice, their oblati­on of alms and charity for the poor, every one of which truly may, and of­ten is stiled a sacrifice or oblation; and are so understood by some of the more moderate, Rigalt. obs. ad Cypr. H. Vales. annot. ad Euseb. Hist. annot. p. 262. Pi­charell. de missa. p. 103.-107. even of the Romish Church: and with good reason, for that they did not make any real and formal sacrifices and oblations to Martyrs, but only honour them as holy men, and friends to God, who for his and our Saviours honour, and the truth of Religion, Loco supra cit. p. 116. chose to lay down their lives, I find expresly affirm­ed by Theodoret.

These Festivals being times of mirth and gladness were celebrated with great expressions of love and charity to the poor, and mutual rejoycings with one another. Here they had their [...], or Feasts, every one bringing something to the common Banquet, out of which the poor also had their share. These Feasts at first were very sober and temperate, and such as became the modesty and simplicity of Christians, Cap. 12. p. 585. as we heard before out of Theodoret, and is affirmed before him by Constantine in his Oration to the Saints. But degene­rating afterwards into excess and intem­perance, [Page 206] they were every where de­claimed against by the Fathers, till they were wholly laid aside. Upon the ac­count of these Feasts, and for the bet­ter making provisions for them, we may conceive it was that Markets came to be kept at these times and places, for of such S. Basil speaks [...], Reg. fus. disput. in­terrogat. 40. tom. 2. 2. p. 589. Markets held at the memorials and Tombs of Martyrs; these he con­demns as highly unsuitable to those So­lemnities, which were only instituted for prayer, and a commemoration of the virtues of good men, for our incourage­ment and imitation, and that they ought to remember the severity of our other­wise meek and humble Saviour, who whipt the Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple, when by their marketings they had turned the house of prayer into a den of thieves. And the truth is these anniversary commemorations, though in their primitive institution they are high­ly reasonable and commendable, yet through the folly and dotage of men they were after made to minister to great superstition and idolatry; so plain is it that the best and usefullest things may be corrupted to bad purposes. For hence sprung the doctrine and practice [Page 207] of prayer and invocation of Saints, and their intercession with God, the wor­shipping of Reliques, Pilgrimages, and visiting Churches, and offering at the Shrines of such and such Saints, and such like superstitious practices, which in af­ter Ages over-run so great a part of the Christian Church; things utterly un­known to the simplicity of those purer and better times.

CHAP. VIII.
Of the persons constituting the body of the Church, both peo­ple and Ministers.

FRom the consideration of time and place, we proceed to consider the Persons that constituted and made up their Religious Assemblies; and they were either the body of the people, or those who were peculiarly consecrated and set apart for the publick ministrati­ons of Religion. For the Body of the [Page 210] people, we may observe that as Christi­anity at first generally gain'd admission in great Towns and Cities, so all the Believers of that place usually assembled and met together: the Christians also of the Neighbour-Villages resorting thither at times of publick Worship. But Religion encreasing apace, the publick Assembly especially in the greater Ci­ties quickly began to be too vast and numerous, to be managed with any or­der and conveniency, and therefore they were forced to divide the body into par­ticular Congregations, who had their Pa­stors and spiritual Guides set over them, but still were under the superintenden­cy and care of him that was the Presi­dent or Bishop of the place. And accord­ing as the Church could form and esta­blish its discipline, the people either ac­cording to their seniority and improve­ment, or according to the quality of the present condition they were under, be­gan to be distinguished into several ranks and Classes, which had their di­stinct places in the Church, and their gradual admission to the several parts of the publick Worship. Balsam. The first were the Catechumens, Zo [...]ar. and of these there were two sorts, Aristen. in [...]an. 5. the [...], Conc. Neo-Caesar. or more perfect, [Page 211] such as had been Catechumens of some considerable standing, and were even ripe for Baptism; these might stay not only the reading of the Scriptures, but to the very last part of the first Service. The others were the [...], the more rude and imperfect, who stood only a­mongst the Hearers, and were to depart the Congregation, as soon as the Lessons were read: these were as yet account­ed Heathens, who applied themselves to the Christian Faith, and were catechized and instructed in the more plain grounds and rudiments of Religion. These prin­ciples were gradually delivered to them, according as they became capable to re­ceive them; first the more plain, and then the more difficult. Indeed they were very shye of imparting the knowledge of the more recondite Doctrines of Christi­anity to any till after Baptism. Praef. ad Catech. Il­lum. p. 13. So S. Cyril expresly assures us, where speaking to the illuminate or Baptized: if during the chatechetical exercise, says he, a Catechumen shall ask thee, what that means which the Preachers say, tell him not, for he is yet without; and these mysteries are delivered to thee only. The weak understanding of a Catechu­men being no more able to bear such [Page 212] sublime mysteries, than a sick mans head can large and immoderate draughts of Wine. And at the end of his Preface he has this note, Ibid. p. 21. These Catechetical dis­courses may be read by those that are to be baptized, or the faithful already bap­tized: but to Catechumens or such as are no Christians thou mayst not impart them; for if thou dost, expect to give an account to God.

S. Basil discoursing of the Rites and Institutions of Christianity, De Spirit. S. c. 27. p. 352. tom. 2. divides them into two parts, the [...], and the [...]. The [...] were those parts of Religion which might [...], be familiarly preached and expounded to the people: The [...] were the more sublime and hidden Doctrines and parts of the Christian Faith; and these were [...], things not rashly and com­monly to be divulged, but to be lock'd up in silence. Of this nature were the Doctrines of the Trinity and Hypostatick Vnion, Vid. Dionys. Areop. de Eccl. Hie­r [...]rch. c. 1. p. 230. and such like, especially of the two Sacraments, Baptism and the Lords Supper. For though they acquainted their young hearers with so much of them as was necessary to stir up their desires, yet as to the main of the things themselves, the sacramental Symbols, the [Page 213] manner of their celebration, the modus of the divine presence at the holy Eu­charist, the meaning of all those mysti­cal Rites and Ceremonies that were used about them, these were carefully con­cealed both from Strangers and Catechu­mens, and communicated only to those who were solemnly initiated and bap­tized. Hence that ancient form so com­mon in the Sermons and Writings of the Fathers, whereby when accidentally discoursing before the people of any of these mysterious parts of Religion, they used to fetch themselves off with an [...] Those that are initiated know what is said. Chrys. This was so usual, Hom. 67. in Genes. p. 719. Tom. 1. & alibi saepiss Isid. that this phrase oc­curs at least fifty times in the Writings of S. Chrysostom only, Pelus. l. 4. as Casaubon hath observed: Epist. 162. p. 82. alii­que. who has likewise noted three reasons out of the Fathers, why they so studiously concealed these parts of their Religion. Exercit. 16. ad An­nal. Bar. S. 43. p. 556. First, the nature of the things themselves, so sublime and remote from vulgar apprehensions, that they would signifie little to Pagans or Catechumens not yet fully instructed and confirmed in the faith, and would either be lost upon them, or in danger to be derided by them. Secondly, that hereby the [Page 214] Catechumens and younger Christians might be inflamed with a greater eager­ness of desire to partake of the myste­ries and priviledges of the Faithful; hu­mane nature being desirous of nothing more, than the knowledge of what is kept and conceal'd from us. To help them forwards in this, Ad V [...]l. S. Augustine tells us, Epist. 107. col. 493. that in their publick prayers they were wont to beg of God to inspire the Catechumens with a desire of baptismal regeneration. The same account Chry­sostom gives us, Hom. 2. in cap. 1. 1 ad Cor p. 740. this being part of the form used in their publick Service, Let us pray that the most gracious and merci­ful God would hear the prayers of the Ca­techumens; and what it was they pray­ed for, he presently add, viz. that they might no longer remain in that state. Up­on these accounts initiation by Baptism, but especially admission to the Lords Supper, is amongst other titles in the Writers of those times called Desiderata, because so earnestly desired and sought for by those that were not yet taken in. The truth is, Vid. Chrys. ibid. till persons arrived at this state, they were not accounted Christi­ans (or but in a large sense as Candidates that stood in order to it) and there­fore could not satisfie themselves either [Page 215] to live or dye in that condition, where­in they wanted the great seals and pledges of their Christianity. Thirdly, to beget in mens minds the higher esteem and veneration for these religious myste­ries, nothing producing a greater contempt even in sacred things, than too much openness and familiarity. So that a lit­tle obscurity and concealment might seem necessary to vindicate them from con­tempt, and secure the majesty and re­verence that was due to them. This made the Fathers & Seniors of the Church (says S. Basil) in prescribing Rites and Laws, Loc. supr. laud. leave many things in the dark, behind the vail and curtain, that they might [...], pre­serve the sacredness and dignity that was due to the mysteries of Religion. For a thing (says he) cannot properly be said to be a mystery, when 'tis once expos'd to every vulgar and common ear. But of this enough, if not too much.

And as they were careful to keep the higher parts of Christianity within the cognizance of the faithful, so they were not less careful to teach and instruct the Catechumens in all those principles they were capable of being taught. This at their first coming over was done pri­vately [Page 216] and at home, by persons deputed on purpose to that office by the Bishop, (as Balsamon clearly intimates) till they were sufficiently instructed in the first and more intelligible principles of the faith. In Can. 26. Then they were admitted into the Congregation, Conc. Lao­die. and suffered to be present at some parts of the Divine Service, e­specially the Sermons, which were made for the building them up unto higher measures of knowledge; which being ended, they were commanded to depart the Church, not being suffered to be present at the more solemn Rites, espe­cially the celebration of the Lords Sup­per: and in this manner they were train­ed up, till they were initiated by bap­tism, and taken into the highest form of Christians. How long persons remain­ed in the state of the Catechumens is dif­ficult to determine, it not being always nor in all places alike, but longer in some and shorter in others, and pro­bably according to the capacity of the persons. Lib 8. c. 32. p. 1032. The Apostolick Constitutions ap­point three years for the Catechumen to be instructed; but provide withal that if any one be diligent and virtuous, and have a ripeness of understanding for the thing, he may be admitted to Baptism [Page 217] sooner: for (say they) not the space of time, but the fitness and manners of men, are to be regarded in this matter.

The next sort were the Penitents, such as for some misdemeanours were under the censures and severity of the Church, and were gradually to obtain absolution from it. Of these there were several degrees, five especially mentioned by S. Gregory of Neo-Caesarea, Epist. Ca­non. [...]. who liv'd about the year 250. The first were the [...], Can. 11. p. 121. such as wept▪ and lamented, and were rather Candidates to be re­ceived into the order of Penitents, than Penitents properly so called. These usu­ally stood in a squalid and mournful ha­bit at the Church-Porch, with tears and great importunity begging of the Faith­ful as they went in, to pray for them. The second were the [...], the Hear­ers, who were admitted to hear the ho­ly Scriptures read and expounded to the people. Their station was at the upper end of the Narthex, or first part of the Church, and were to depart the Con­gregation at the same time with the Ca­techumens. The third Class of Penitents was that of the [...], the Prostrate, because service being ended, Sozom. H. they fell down before the Bishop, Eccl. lib. 7. c. 16. p. 727. who together [Page 218] with the Congregation falling down and making confession in their behalf, after rais'd them up, and laid his hands upon them. These stood within the body of the Church next the Pulpit or Reading-Pew, and were to depart together with the Catechumens. The fourth were the [...], the Consistentes, such as stayed with the rest of the Congregation, and did not depart with the Catechumens, but after they and the other Penitents were gone out, stayed and joined in prayer and singing (but not in receiving the Sacrament) with the faithful. These after some time were advanced into the fifth and last order of the Communicantes ( [...] S. Gregory calls it) and were admitted to the participation of the holy Sacrament. This was the state of the Penitents in the primitive Church. Persons having fully passed through the state of the Catechumenate, became then immediate Candidates of Baptism, presented their names to the Bishop, and humbly prostrating them­selves begged that they might be entred into the Church. These were called Competentes, because they did Competere gratiam Christi, sue for the grace of Christ conferred in Baptism. The last [Page 219] rank was that of the [...] or the Faith­ful, who having been baptized and confirmed, and having approved them­selves by the long train and course of a strict pious life, were then admitted to the participation of the Lords Supper; which being the highest and most vene­rable mystery of the Christian Religion, was not then rashly given to any, but to such only as had run through all o­ther degrees, and by a course of piety evidenced themselves to be such real and faithful Christians, as that the high­est mysteries and most solemn parts of Religion might be committed to them. This was the highest order, and look­ed upon with great regard, and for any of this rank to lapse and be overtaken with a fault, cost them severer penances, than were imposed upon the inferiour forms of Christians.

This in short was the state of the peo­ple. But because 'tis not possible any bo­dy or community of men should be re­gularly managed without some particu­lar persons to superintend, direct, and govern the affairs of the whole Society, therefore we are next to enquire what persons there were in the primitive Church, that were peculiarly set apart [Page 220] to steer its affairs, and to attend upon the publick Offices and Ministrations of it. That God always had a peculiar peo­ple, whom he selected for himself out of the rest of mankind, is too evident to need any proof. Such were the Pa­triarchs, and the holy seed of old: such the Jews, chosen by him above all other Nations in the world. This was his [...], his particular lot and portion, comprehending the body of the people in general. But afterwards this title was confin'd to narrower bounds, and be­came appropriate to that Tribe, which God had made choice of to stand before him, to wait at his Altar, and to mini­ster in the services of his Worship. And after the expiration of their Oeconomy, was accordingly used to denote the mi­nistry of the Gospel, the persons peculi­arly consecrated and devoted to the ser­vice of God in the Christian Church: the Clergie being those, qui divino cul­tui ministeria religionis impendunt (as they are defin'd in a Law of the Empe­rour Constantine) who are set apart for the ministeries of Religion, C. Th. lib. 16. Tit. 3. de Episc. Eccl. & Cler. l. 2. in matters re­lating to the Divine Worship. Now the whole [...] (as 'tis often call­ed in the Apostles Canons) the roll of [Page 221] the Clergie▪ of the ancient Church (taking it within the compass of its first four hun­dred years) consisted of two sorts of per­sons; the [...], who were peculiarly consecrated to the more proper and im­mediate acts of the Worship of God: and the [...], such as were set apart only for the more mean and common services of the Church. Of the first sort were these three, Bishops, Presbyters, and Dea­cons.

The first and principal Officer of the Church was the President or Bishop, usually chosen out of the Presbyters. I shall not here concern my self in the di­sputes, whether Episcopacy as a superior order to Presbytery, was of divine insti­tution (a controversie sufficiently venti­lated in the late times) it being enough to my purpose, what is acknowledged both by Blondel and Salmasius, the most learned defenders of Presbytery, that Bishops were distinct from, and superi­or to Presbyters in the second Century, or the next Age to the Apostles. The main work and office of a Bishop was to teach and instruct the people, to ad­minister the Sacraments, to absolve Pe­nitents, to eject and excommunicate ob­stinate and incorrigible offenders, to [Page 222] preside in the Assemblies of the Clergy, to ordain inferiour Officers in the Church, to call them to account and to suspend or deal with them according to the nature of the offence, to urge the observance of Ecclesiastical Laws, and to appoint and institute such indifferent Rites, as were for the decent and or­derly administration of his Church. In short, according to the notation of his name he was [...], a Watchman and Sentinal, and therefore oblig'd [...], diligently and carefully to inspect and observe, to superintend and provide for those that were under his charge. This Zonaras tells us was implied in the Bi­shops Throne, In Can. A­post. Can. 58. being placed on high in the most eminent part of the Church, to de­note how much 'twas his duty from thence to overlook, and very diligent­ly to observe the people that were un­der him. These and many more were the unquestionable rights and duties of the Episcopal Office; which because it was very difficult and troublesom for one man to discharge, especially where the [...] or Diocess (as we now call it) was any thing large, therefore upon the multiplying of Country Churches, it was thought fit to take in a subordinate [Page 322] sort of Bishops called Chorepiscopi, Coun­try or (as amongst us they have been called) suffragan Bishops, whose busi­ness it was to superintend and inspect the Churches in the Country, that lay more remote from the City, where the Episcopal See was, and which the Bishop could not always inspect and oversee in his own person. These were the Vicarii Episcoporum (as they are called in Isi­dores Version of the thirteenth Canon, both of the Ancyran and Neocaesarean Council) the Bishops Deputies, chosen out of the fittest and gravest persons. In the Canon of the last mentioned Council they are said to be chosen in imitation of the seventy, not the seventy Elders which Moses took in to bear part of the Government, (as some have glossed the words of that Canon) but of the seventy Disciples whom our Lord made choice of, to send up and down the Countries to preach the Gospel, as both Zonaras and Balsamon understand it: and there­upon by reason of their great care and pains are commanded to be esteemed very honourable. Their authority was much greater than that of Presbyters, and yet much inferior to the Bishop. Conc. Anti­och. Can. 10. Bi­shops really they were, though their [Page 224] power confin'd within narrow limits; they were not allowed to ordain either Presbyters or Deacons, (unless peculiarly licens'd to it by the Bishop of the Dio­cess) though they might ordain sub-Deacons, Readers and any inferiour Of­ficers under them. They were to be as­sistant to the Bishop, might be present at Synods and Councils (to many whereof we find their subscriptions) and had power to give Letters of peace, i. e. such Letters, Ibid. Can. 8. whereby the Bishop of one Dio­cess was wont to recommend any of his Clergy to the Bishop of another, that so a fair understanding and correspon­dence might be maintained between them; a priviledge expresly denied to any Presbyter whatsoever. But lest this wandring employment of the Chorepi­scopi should reflect any dishonour upon the Episcopal Office, there were certain Presbyters appointed in their room (call­ed [...], Conc. Laod. Can. 57. or Visiters, often mention­ed in the ancient Canons and Acts of Councils) who being tied to no certain place were to go up and down the Country, to observe and correct what was amiss. And these doubtless were those [...] (spoken of in the thirteenth Canon of the Neocaesarean [Page 225] Council) those rural Presbyters, who are there forbid to consecrate the Eucharist in the City Church, in the presence of the Bishop or the Presbyters of the City.

As Christianity encreased and over­spread all parts, and especially the Ci­ties of the Empire, it was found neces­sary yet farther to enlarge the Episcopal Office, and as there was commonly a Bishop in every great City, so in the Me­tropolis (as the Romans called it) the Mo­ther City of every Province (wherein they had Courts of Civil Judicature) there was an Archbishop or a Metropolitan, who had Ecclesiastical jurisdiction over all the Churches within that Province. He was superior to all the Bishops with­in those limits; to him it belonged ei­ther to ordain, or to ratifie the elections and ordinations of all the Bishops with­in his Province, insomuch that without his confirmation they were looked upon as null and void. Once at least every year he was to summon the Bishops under him to a Synod, to enquire into and di­rect the Ecclesiastical affairs within that Province; to inspect the lives and man­ners, the opinions and principles of his Bishops, to admonish, reprove, and su­spend them that were disorderly and [Page 226] irregular; if any controversies or con­tentions happened between any of them, he was to have the hearing and determi­nation of them; and indeed no matter of moment was done within the whole Province without first consulting him in the case. Besides this Metropolitan there was many times another in the same Pro­vince, who enjoyed nothing but that name and title, his Episcopal See being by the Emperours Pragmatic erected into the dignity of a Metropolis. He was on­ly an Honorary Metropolitan, without a­ny real power and jurisdiction, and had no other priviledge, but that he took place above other ordinary Bi­shops, in all things else equally subject with them to the Metropolitan of the Province, Can. 12. as the Council of Chalcedon determines in this case. When this Of­fice of Metropolitan first began, I find not, only this we are sure of, that the Council of Nice setling the just rights and priviledges of Metropolitan Bishops speaks of them as a thing of ancient date, ushering in the Canon with an [...], Can. 6. let ancient customs still take place. The original of the institu­tion seems to have been partly to com­ply with peoples occasions, who oft [Page 227] resorted to the Metropolis for dispatch of their affairs, and so might fitly discharge their Civil and Ecclesiastical concerns both at once; and partly because of the great confluence of people to that City, Vid. Conc. Antioch. that the Bishop of it might have prehe­minence above the rest, Can. 9. and the honour of the Church bear some proportion to that of the State.

After this sprang up another branch of the Episcopal Office, as much supe­riour to that of Metropolitans, as theirs was to ordinary Bishops, these were called Primates and Patriarchs, and had jurisdiction over many Provinces. For the understanding of this it's neces­sary to know, that when Christianity came to be fully setled in the world, they contrived to model the external Government of the Church, as near as might be to the Civil Government of the Roman Empire; the parallel most exactly drawn by an ingenious person of our own Nation: Edward Breerwood Patriarch. Governm. of the ancient Church. Quest. 1. the sum of it is this. The whole Empire of Rome was divi­ded into Thirteen Dioceces (so they called those divisions) these contained about one hundred and twenty Provinses, and e­very Province several Cities. Now as in every City there was a temporal Magi­strate [Page 228] for the executing of justice, and keeping peace both for that City, and the Towns round about it, so was there also a Bishop for spiritual order and Go­vernment, whose jurisdiction was of like extent and latitude. In every Pro­vince there was a Proconsul or President, whose seat was usually at the Metropolis or chief City of the Province; and hi­ther all inferiour Cities came for judg­ment in matters of importance. And in proportion to this there was in the same City an Archbishop or Metropolitan for matters of Ecclesiastical concernment. Lastly, in every Diocess the Emperours had their Vicarii or Lieutenants, who dwelt in the principal City of the Dio­cess, where all imperial Edicts were pub­lished, and from whence they were sent abroad into the several Provinces, and where was the chief Tribunal, where all Causes not determinable elsewhere were decided. And to answer this, there was in the same City a Primate, to whom the last determination of all appeals from all the Provinces in differences of the Cler­gie, and the Soveraign care of all the Diocess for sundry points of spiritual Government did belong. This in short is the sum of the account which that [Page 229] learned man gives of this matter. So that the Patriarch as superiour to Metropoli­tans, was to have under his jurisdiction not any one single Province, but a whole Diocess (in the old Roman notion of that word) consisting of many Provinces. To him belonged the ordination of all the Metropolitans that were under him, as also the summoning them to Councils, the correcting and reforming the misde­meanours they were guilty of, and from his judgment and sentence in things pro­perly within his cognizance there lay no appeal. To this I shall only add what Salmasius has noted, De Primat. c. 19. p. 331. that as the Diocess that was governed by the Vicarius had many Provinces under it, so the Praefectus Praetorio had several Diocesses under him: and in proportion to this probably it was, that Patriarchs were first brought in, who if not superiour to Primates in jurisdiction and power, were yet in ho­nour, by reason of the dignity of those Cities where their Sees were fixed, as at Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, An­tioch, and Jerusalem, a title and dignity which they retain to this day.

The next Office to Bishops was that of Presbyters, to whom it belonged to preach to the people, to administer [Page 230] Baptism, consecrate the Eucharist, and to be assistent to the Bishop both in publick ministrations, and in dispatching the af­fairs of the Church. The truth is, the Presbyters of every great City were a kind of Ecclesiastical Senate, under the care and presidency of the Bishop, whose counsel and assistance he made use of in ruling those Societies of Christians that were under his charge and government, and were accordingly reckoned next in place and power to him: thus described by S. Gregory in his Iambics. [...]. Corm. 23. p. 244. Tom. 2.

The venerable Senate of Presbyters, that preside over the people, and possess the se­cond Throne, i. e. the place next to the Bi­shop: C. Theod. Leg. 11. they are called Clerici superioris loci, and otherwhiles (unless we understand it of the Chorepiscopi) Antistites in secun­do ordine; Tit. 39. de fid. and accordingly in Churches had seats of eminency placed for them next to the Bishops Throne. Test. lib. 10. Sidon. A­poll. lib. 4. Epist. 11. p. 96. Whereby was implied (says Zonaras) that they ought to use a proportionable care and In Can. 58. Apost. [Page 231] providence towards the people, to in­form and teach them, to direct and guide them, being appointed as Fellow-labour­ers with, and Assistants to the Bishop. But though Presbyters by their ordina­tion had a power conferred upon them to administer holy things, yet after that the Church was setled upon foun­dations of order and regularity, they did not usually exercise this power with­in any Diocess, without leave and au­thority from the Bishop, much less take upon them to preach in his presence. This custom (however it might be other­wise in the Eastern Church) we are sure was constantly observed in the Churches of Afric till the time of Valerius, Possid in vit. Aug. c. 5. col 862 S. Au­gustine's Predecessor in the See of Hippo. Who being a Greek, Tom. 1. and by reason of his little skill in the Latine tongue, una­ble to preach to the edification of the people, admitted S. Augustine (whom he had lately ordained Presbyter) to preach before him. Which though at first 'twas ill resented by some Bishops in those parts, yet quickly became a president for other Churches to follow after.

After these came Deacons: What the duty of their place was appears from their primitive election, Act. 6. the Apostles [Page 232] setting them apart to serve or minister to the Tables, i.e. to attend upon and take charge of those daily provisions that were made for poor indigent Christians; but certainly it implies also their being de­stinated to a peculiar attendance at the service of the Lords Table. And both these may be very well meant in that place, it being the custom of Christians then to meet every day at the Lords Table, where they made their offerings for the poor, and when poor and rich had their meales together. And hence it was ever accounted part of the Dea­cons Office, as to take care of the poor, and to distribute the monies given for their relief and maintenance, so to wait upon the celebration of the Eucharist, which being consecrated by the Bishop or Presbyter, the Deacon delivered the Sacramental elements to the people. Be­sides this they were wont also to preach and to baptize, and were employed in many parts of the publick Service, espe­cially in guiding and directing of the people. The number of them in any one place was usually restrained to seven, this being the number originally insti­tuted by the Apostles, and which might not be altered, although the City was [Page 233] never so great and numerous, as 'tis in the last Canon of the Neocaesarean Coun­cil. As the Presbyters were to the Bishop, so the Deacons were to the Presbyters, to be assistent to them, and to give them all due respect and reverence. And therefore when some of them began to take too much upon them to distribute the Sacrament before the Bishop or Pres­byter, and to take place amongst the Presbyters, the Council of Nice took notice of it as a piece of bold and saucy usurpation, Can. 18. severely commanded them to know their place, and to contain them­selves within their own bounds and mea­sures, and neither to meddle with the Sacrament but in their order, nor to sit down before the Presbyters, unless it be by their leave and command, as 'tis ex­pressed by the Laodicean Synod. Can. 20. Ac­cordingly the first Council of Arles for­bids the Deacons to do any thing of themselves, Can. 18. but to reserve the honour to the Presbyters. Out of the body of these Deacons there was usually one cho­sen to overlook the rest, the Arch-Dea­con; an Office supposed to have been of good antiquity in the Church, and of great authority, especially in after times, being generally styled the Eye of the [Page 234] Bishop, to inspect all parts and places of his Diocess. This was he that in the Church of Rome was called the Cardinal Deacon, De Episc. who (as Onuphrius tell us) was at first but one, Tit & Dia­con. Car­din. p. 24. though the number en­creased afterwards. While Churches were little, and the services not many, the Deacons themselves were able to discharge them, but as these encreased so did their labours, and therefore 'twas thought fit to take in some inferiour Of­ficers under them. This gave being to

Subdeacons, who were to be assistent to the Deacon, as the Deacon to the Pres­byter, Conc. Lao­dic. Can. 43 ubi vid. and he to the Bishop. One great part of his work was to wait at the Church-doors in the time of publick Wor­ship, Zon & Bal­sam. to usher in, and to bring out the several Orders of the Catechumens and Penitents, that none might mistake their proper stations, and that no confusion or disorder might arise to the distur­bance of the Congregation. When he was first taken in, I cannot find, but he is mentioned in an Epistle of the Roman Clergie to them of Carthage about S. Cy­prians retirement, Inter Epist. and elsewhere very often in Cyprian's Epistles. Cypr. Epist. 2. p. 8. Where he also speaks of the Acolythus; Epist. 28. p. 41. what his proper business was, is not so certain; [Page 235] by some his Office is said to have been this, to Follow (as the world implies) or to go along with the Bishop in the qua­lity of an honourable attendant, to be ready at hand to minister to him, and to be a companion and witness of his ho­nest and unblameable conversation, in case any evil fame should arise, that might endeavour to blast his reputation. But by others he is said to have been a Taper-bearer to carry the Lights, which were set up at the reading of the Gospel. And this seems to be clear from the fourth Council of Carthage, Can. 6. where at his ordination he is appointed to receive at the Archdeacons hand a Candlestick with a Taper, that he may know 'tis the duty of his place, to light up the Lights in the Church. This might very well be in those times, but 'tis certain the Office of Aco­lythus was in use long before that custom of setting up Lights at the reading of the Gospel was brought into the Church. By Cyprian also is mentioned the Office of the Exorcist, Epist. 16. p. 29. & 146. whose business was to attend the Catechumens and the Energu­meni, or such as were possessed of the Devil. For after the miraculous power of casting out Devils began to cease, or at least not to be so common as it was, [Page 236] these possessed persons used to come to the out-parts of the Church, where a per­son was appointed to exorcise them, i.e. to pray over them in such prayers as were peculiarly composed for those oc­casions, and this he did in the publick name of the whole Church, the people also at the same time praying within; by which means the possessed person was delivered from the tyranny of the evil spirit; without any such charms and conjurations, and other unchristian forms and rites, which by degrees crept into this Office, and are at this day in use in the Church of Rome. Besides, to the Ex­orcists Office it belonged to instruct the Catechumens, and to train them up in the first principles of the Christian Faith: in which sense the Exorcist is by Harme­nopulus explained by Catechist, Epist. Can. ss. 1. Tit. 9. and to exorcise (says Balsamon) is [...], Jur. Graec. to instruct unbelievers. Rom. p. 16.

Next to the Exorcist was the Lector or Reader (mentioned frequently by S. Cyprian) whose business was to stand near the Ambo or Pulpit, In Can. 26. and to read those portions of holy Scripture which were appointed to be read as principal parts of the Divine Service. Conc. Laod. This Office Julian (who was afterwards Emperour) [Page 237] when a young Student at Nicomedia took upon him, and became a Reader in that Church, Socrat. H. which he did only to blind his Cousin Constantius, Eccl. lib. 3. c. 1. p. 166. who began to suspect him as inclining to Paganism, to which he openly revolted afterwards, and became a bitter and virulent enemy to Christians, making an ill use of those Scriptures, which he had once privately studied and publickly read to the people. I know not whether it may be worth the while to take notice of the Ostiarii or Door-keepers, answerable to the Nethi­nims in the Jewish Church, who were to attend the Church Doors at times of publick meetings, to keep out notori­ous Hereticks, Jewes, and Gentiles from entring into the Christian Assemblies: it doubtless took its rise in the times of persecutions, Christians then being forc'd to keep their meetings as private and clancular as they could, and to guard their Assemblies with all possible dili­gence, lest some Jew or Infidel stealing in, should have gone and accused them before the Magistrate. What other Offi­cers there were (or whether any at all) in those times in and about the Church, will not be worth our labour to en­quire.

[Page 238] To these Offices they were set apart by solemn rites of prayer and imposition of hands; a ceremony (so far as [...] is strictly taken for lifting up the hand in suffrage) commonly used at Athens, and some of the States of Greece in the designing and electing persons to be publick Magistrates. But more particu­larly in use amongst the Jews, and from them doubtless (as many other of the Sy­nagogue-rites) transferred into the Chri­stian Church, and there constantly used both as to the lifting up and laying on the hands, as the rite of conferring ordina­tion upon the Ministers of Christ. Only it is here to be remembred, that there was a double imposition of hands, in set­ting apart Ecclesiastical Officers: the one was [...], or by way of conse­cration, and this was the proper way of or­daining the first rank of Officers, Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons: the other [...], by way of blessing, hands being laid up­on them only as in the absolution of Pe­nitents by way of solemn benediction, and thus the inferiour Officers, Subdea­cons, Readers, &c. and Deaconesses were set apart: All orders under Bishops were ordained by the Bishop, the Bishop him­self by all the Bishops of that Province, [Page 239] who used to meet together for that pur­pose, if nearness of place and other con­veniencies would allow; Conc. Ni­cen. Can. 4. otherwise three (and in cases of necessity two) might do it; the rest testifying their consent in writing, and the person thus ordained was to be confirmed by the Metropoli­tan of that Province. And whereas the Council of Antioch provides, Can. 19. that no Bi­shop shall be ordained without the Me­tropolitan being present, it is to be un­derstood (as Balsamon tells us) of his leave and permission, or his appointing it to be so. For the ordination of the rest of the Clergy, Priests, Deacons, &c. the act and presence of one Bishop might suffice: and as no more than one was required, so one at least was necessary, the power of conferring order, being e­ven by those who otherwise have had no mighty kindness for Episcopacy, ac­knowledged an unquestionable right of the Episcopal Office. Insomuch that in the case of Athanasius it was a just ex­ception against Ischyras, Athan. that he had been ordained by Colythus, Apol. 2. de fug. sua. p. 570. who was no higher than a Presbyter, and consequent­ly his ordination by the Council was ad­judged null and void. Tom. 1.

At all ordinations, especially of supe­riour [Page 240] Officers, the people of the place were always present, and ratified the action with their approbation and consent. And indeed it cannot be denied but that the people in some places especially, were very much considered in this affair, Vid. Con­stit. App. lib 8. c. 4. p. 1004. it being seldom or never done without their presence and suffrage. To this end the Bishop was wont before every ordi­nation to propound and publish the names of those who were to have holy Orders conferred upon them, Cypr. Epist. 68 p. 113. 114. that so the people who best knew their lives and conver­sations, might interpose, if they had a­ny thing material to object against it. By which means the unworthy were disco­vered and rejected, the deserving ho­noured and admitted, the ordination became legitimate and satisfactory, hav­ing past the common vote and suffrage, without any exception made against it, as Cyprian speaks. Hence the Clergie of what order soever were said Praedicari, to be propounded or published: And this way seemed so fit and reasonable, that Severus the Emperour (a wise and pru­dent Prince) in imitation of the Chri­stians established it in the disposal of Ci­vil Offices. Lamprid. in vit. A­lex. Sev. c. 45. p. 570. For when he had a mind to send out any Governours of Provinces, [Page 241] or to appoint Receivers of his Revenues, he propounded the names of those he intended, desiring the people to except against the persons, if they knew them guilty of any crimes which they were able to make good against them: affirm­ing it to be unfit (says his own Historian) that when the Christians and Jews did it in publishing those who were to be ordain­ed their Priests and Ministers, the same should not be observed in the election of Governours of Provinces, who had the lives and fortunes of men committed to them. When the case so hapned that the ordination was more remote or private, they were then required to bring suffi­cient testimonials; Epist. 24. p. 35. thus Cyprian when ordaining Saturus and Optatus to be Rea­ders, we examined, says he, whether the Testimonials agreed to them, which they ought to have, who are admitted into the Clergy.

And indeed they proceeded in this affair with all imaginable care and pru­dence; Basil. Epist. 181 p 194 Tm. 3. they examined mens fitness for the place to which they were set apart, enquired severely what had been the course and manner of their life, how they had carried themselves in their youth, and whether they had governed [Page 242] it by the strict rules of piety. This an­cient custom (as S. Basil calls it) was ra­tified by the Nicene Council, Can. 9. declaring that none should be ordained Presbyter without previous examination, especially a strict enquiry into his life and manners. For the Apostolick Church (says Joseph the Egyptian in his Arabick Paraphrase of that Canon) admits none in this case, but him that is of great innocency and an unspotted life, free from those crimes and enormities, which he there particu­larly reckons up. They suffered not men in those days to leap into Ecclesia­stical Orders, but by the usual steps, and staying the appointed times. Ad Antoni­an. Epist. 52. p. 67. Cyprian commends Cornelius Bishop of Rome, that he did not skip into the Chair, but passed through all the Ecclesiastical Of­fices, ascending through all the degrees of Religion, till he came ad sacerdotii sublime fastigium, to the top of the high­est order. A thing expresly provided for by the Synod of Sardis, Ca [...] 10. that no man though never so rich, though furnished with never so good a knack of speech and oratory, should yet be made Bishop before he had passed through the pre­ceding Orders of Reader, Subdeacon, Deacon, and Presbyter, that having been [Page 243] found fit in each of these, he might step by step ascend up to the Episcopal Chair: and that he should spend some considerable time in each of these de­grees, that so his faith, and the inno­cency and excellency of his life, his con­stancy and moderation might be made known to all, and his fitness for that sa­cred function being made apparent might procure him the greater honour and reverence from others. Men were then forced to stay their full time before they could be promoted to any higher Order; they did not commence Divines and Bishops in a day ( [...] as Nazianzen elegantly calls them) like some he complains of in his time, Orat. 1. de Theol. p. 535 & in laud. Bas. Or. 20. p. 335. who were not polished by time and stu­dy, but fitted and made Bishops all at once; whom therefore he wittily com­pares to the Dragons teeth, which the Fable tells us Cadmus sowed at Thebes, which immediately sprung up Giants out of the earth, arm'd Cap-a-pe, perfect men and perfect Warriours in one day: and just such, says he, were some Prelates, consecrated, made wise and learned in one day, who yet understood nothing before, nor brought any thing to the Order, but only a good will to be there. [Page 244] For the Age of the persons that were to be ordained, they usually observed the Apostolick Canon, not to chuse a Novice, but of an age competent to that Office, that he was chosen to; though it varied ac­cording to times and persons, and the occasions of the Church. For that of Bishops, I find not any certain age posi­tively set down. Photius in his Nomo-Canon speaks of an Imperial constitution that requires a Bishop not to be under thirty five: [...]. p. 20. but the Apostolical Constitu­tions allow not a man to be made a Bishop under fifty years of age, Lib. 2. c. 1. p. 824. as having then passed all juvenile petulancies and disor­ders. 'Tis certain they were not gene­rally (some extraordinary instances al­ter not the case) promoted to that Of­fice, till they were of a considerable age, and thence frequently stiled majores natu in the Writings of the Church. Pres­byters were commonly made at thirty; yea the Council of Neocaesarea decreed, Can. 11. that no man though otherwise of never so unquestionable a conversation, should be ordained Presbyter before that age; the reason whereof they give, because Christ himself was not baptized, nor be­gan to preach till the thirtieth year of his age. Conc. Aga. Can. 17. The Council of Agde requires [Page 245] the same age, but assigns another reason, not before thirty years of age, because then, say they, he comes to the age of a perfect man. Deacons were made at twenty five, and the like distance and proportion observed for the inferiour Of­ficers under them. I take no notice in this place of Monks, Hermits, &c. part­ly because, although they were under a kind of Ecclesiastical relation, by reason of their more than ordinarily strict and severe profession of Religion, yet were they not usually in holy Orders; and partly because Monachism was of no ve­ry early standing in the Church, begin­ing probably about the times of the la­ter persecutions; and even then too Monks were quite another thing, both in profession, habit, and way of life, from what they are at this day, as will abun­dantly appear to him that will take the pains to compare the account which S. Hierom, Augustine, Palladius, Cassian, and others give of those primitive Monks, with the several Orders in the Church of Rome at this day.

I shall only add, that out of the Monks persons were usually made choice of to be advanced into the Clergie, as is evi­dent not only from multitudes of in­stances [Page 246] in the Writers of the fourth, and following Centuries, but from an ex­press Law of the Emperour Arcadius to that purpose: Cod. Theod. lib. 16. Tit. 2. de Epis. copis, &c. [...] 2. the strictness of their lives, and the purity of their manners more immediately qualifying them for those holy Offices; insomuch that many times they were advanced unto the Episcopal Chair, without going through the usu­al intermediate Orders of the Church: several instances whereof (Serapion, A­pollonius, Agatho, Aristo, and some others) Athanasius reckons up in his Epistle to Dracontius, Tom. 1. p. 738. who being a Monk refused a Bishoprick to which he was chosen. But because we meet in the ancient Wri­tings of the Church with very frequent mention of persons of another Sex, Dea­conesses, who were employed in many Offices of Religion, it may not be amiss in this place to give some short account of them. Their original was very early, and of equal standing with the infancy of the Church; such was Phebe in the Church of Cenchris, mentioned by S. Paul; such were those two Servant-maids spoken of by Pliny in his Letter to the Emperour, whom he examined upon the Rack; such was the famous Olympias in the Church of Constantinople, not to [Page 247] mention any more particular instances. They were either Widows, and then not to be taken into the service of the Church under threescore years of age, according to S. Paul's direction; or else Virgins, who having been educated in order to it, and given testimony of a chast and sober conversation, were set apart at forty: what the proper place and ministry of these Deaconesses was in the ancient Church, Syntagm. c. 11. lit. T. p. 71. though Matthew Bla­stares seems to render a little doubtful, yet certainly it principally consisted in such offices as these; Epiph Hae­res. 79. p. 447. to attend upon the Women at times of Publick▪ Worship, especially in the administration of Bap­tism, that when they were to be divest­ed in order to their immersion, they might overshadow them, so as nothing of indecency and uncomeliness might ap­pear; sometimes they were employed in instructing the more rude and igno­rant sort of women, Cl. Alex. strom. lib 3. p. 448. Con­cil 4. Car­thag. Can. 12. in the plain and ea­sie principles of Christianity, and in pre­paring them for Baptism; otherwhiles in visiting and attending upon Women that were sick, in conveying messages, coun­sels, consolations, relief (especially in times of persecution, when it was dan­gerous for the Officers of the Church) to [Page 248] the Martyrs and them that were in Pri­son; and of these women no doubt it was that Libanius speaks of amongst the Christians, Orat. de vinctis. p. 56. who were so very ready to be employed in these offices of humani­ty. But to return.

Persons being thus set apart for holy Offices, the Christians of those days dis­covered no less piety in that mighty re­spect and reverence which they paid to them; that the Ministers of Religion should be peculiarly honoured and re­garded, seems to have been accounted a piece of natural justice by the common sentiments of mankind; the most barba­rous and unpolished Nations that ever had a value for any thing of Religion, have always had a proportionable re­gard to them, to whom the care and administration of it did belong. Julian the Emperour expresly pleads for it as the most reasonable thing in the world, Julian. fragm. Oper. p. 1. p. 542. that Priests should be honoured, yea in some respects above civil Magistrates, as being the immediate attendants and do­mestick servants of God, our interces­sors with Heaven, and the means of de­riving down great blessings from God upon us. But never was this clearlier demonstrated than in the practice of the [Page 249] primitive Christians, who carried them­selves towards their Bishops and Mini­sters, with all that kindness and venera­tion which they were capable to express towards them. S. Paul bears record to the Galatians, Gal. 4. 15. that he was accounted so dear to them, that if the plucking out their eyes would have done him any good, they were ready to have done it for his sake; and S. Clement testifies of the Corinthians, Pag. 2. that they walked in the Laws of God, being subject to them that had the rule over them; yielding also due honour to the seniors or elder persons that were amongst them. That by [...] in this place he should mean Civil Magistrates (as some have told us) I can hardly be perswaded, both because 'tis the same word that's used by the Author to the Hebrews obey [...] them that have the rule over you, Heb. 13. 17 H. Eccl. lib. 3. c. 38. p. 110. de Script. Ec­cl. in Clem. and submit your selves (and indeed both Eu­sebius and S. Hierom of old observed such a mighty affinity in the phrase between this and the Epistle to the Hebrews, as certainly to conclude S. Clemens to have been, if not the Author, at least the Tran­slator of that Epistle) and also because the sole occasion of S. Clements writing this Epistle was a mutiny which they [Page 250] had made against their spiritual Guides and Governours, and therefore accord­ing to the right art of Orators, he first commends them for their eminent sub­jection to them, that he might with the more advantage reprove and censure them for their schism afterwards, which he does severely in the latter part of the Epistle, and towards the end of it exhorts those who had laid the founda­tion of the Sedition, to become subject to their Presbyters; and being instruct­ed to repentance, to bow the knees of their hearts, to lay aside the arrogant and insolent boldness of their tongues, and to learn to subject and submit them­selves. Vid. Con­stit. Apost. lib. 2. c. 33. p. 859. The truth is Bishops and Mini­sters were then looked upon as the com­mon Parents of Christians, whom as such they honoured and obeyed, and to whom they repaired for counsel and di­rection in all important cases. De mono­gam. c. 11. p. 531. 'Tis plain from several passages in Tertullian, that none could lawfully marry till they had first advised with the Bishop and Clergy of the Church, Ad Vxor. l. 2. c. 2. 9. and had asked and ob­tained their leave; which probably they did to secure the person from marrying with a Gentile, Vid. de Co­ron. mil. c. 13. p. [...]39. or any of them that were without, and from the inconveniencies [Page 251] that might ensue upon such a match. No respect, no submission was thought great enough, whereby they might do ho­nour to them, Vid. Chry­sost. de S. Melet. An­tioch. Hom. 45. tom. 1. p. 526. & Annot. p. 91 they were wont to kiss their hands, to embrace their feet, and at their going from, or returning home, or indeed their coming unto any place, to wait upon them, and either to re­ceive or dismiss them with the univer­sal confluence of the people. Happy they thought themselves if they could but entertain them in their houses, and bless their roofs with such welcome guests. Amongst the various ways of kindness which Constantine the Great shewed to the Clergie, De vit. Constant. lib. 1. c. 42. p. 429. the Writer of his life tells us, that he used to treat them at his own Table, though in the meanest and most despicable habit, and never went a jour­ney, but he took some of them along with him, reckoning that thereby he made himself surer of the propitious and favourable influence of the divine pre­sence. What honours he did them at the Council of Nice, Lib. 3. where he refused to sit down, till they had given him in­timation, with what magnificent gifts and entertainments he treated them af­terwards, the same Author relates at large. The truth is, the piety of that [Page 252] devout and excellent Prince thought nothing too good for those who were the messengers of God, and ministers of holy things, Theodor. and so infinitely tender was he of their honour, Hist. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 11. as to profess, that if at any time he should spye a Bi­shop overtaken in an immodest and un­comely action, he would cover him with his own imperial Robe, rather than others should take notice of it, to the scandal of his place and person. And because their spiritual authority and relation might not be sufficient to secure them from the contempt of rude and pro­phane persons, therefore the first Chri­stian Emperours invested them with power even in Civil cases, as the way to beget them respect and authority amongst the people. H. Eccles. lib. 1. c. 9. p. 413. Thus Constantine, (as Sozo­mon tells us, and he sets it down as a great argument of that Princes reve­rence for Religion) ordained, that per­sons contending in Law, might if they pleased remove their cause out of the Civil Courts, and appeal to the judg­ment of the Bishops, whose sentence should be firm, and take place before that of any other Judges, as if it had been immediately passed by the Empe­rour himself; and cases thus judged by [Page 253] Bishops, all Governours of Provinces and their Officers were presently to put into execution; C. Tit. 4. de Episc. Au­dient. [...]. 7. 8. which was afterwards ratified by two Laws, one of Arcadius, another of Honorius to that purpose. This power the Bishops sometimes dele­gated to their inferior Clergy, making them Judges in these cases, as appears from what Socrates reports of Silvanus Bishop of Troas, H. Eccles. lib. 7. c. 37. p. 383. that finding a male-admi­nistration of this power, he took it out of the hands of his Clergie, and devol­ved the hearing and determining causes over to the Laity. And to name no more, S. Augustine more than once and again tells us, Epist. 147. col. 685. vid. Epist. how much he was crowded and even oppressed in deciding the contests and causes of secular persons. Nebrid. ad Aug. Ep. 114. & a­libi passim. It seems they thought themselves happy in those days, if they could have their causes heard and determined by Bishops.

A pious Bishop, and a faithful Minister was in those days dearer to them than the most valuable blessings upon earth, and they could want any thing rather than be without them; Chrysost. when Chrysostom was driven by the Empress into banish­ment, Ep. 125. tom. 4. p. 763. the people as he went along burst into tears, and cryed out, ' twas better the Sun should not shine, than that John Chry­sostom [Page 254] should not preach; and when through the importunity of the people he was recalled from his former banish­ment and diverted into the Suburbs till he might have an opportunity to make a publick vindication of his innocency, Socrat. the people not enduring such delays, Hist. Eccl. lib. 6. c. 16. p. 324. the Emperour was forced to send for him into the City; the people universally meeting him, and conducting him to his Church, with all expressions of reve­rence and veneration. Meta­phrast. in vit. Chryso­stomi apud Surium ad diem 27. Nay while he was yet Presbyter of the Church of Anti­och, so highly was he loved and honour­ed by the people of that place, that though he was chosen to the See of Con­stantinople, Jan tom. 1. and sent for by the Empe­rours Letters, though their Bishop made an Oration on purpose to perswade them to it, yet would they by no means be brought to part with him; and when the Messengers by force attempted to bring him away, he was forced to pre­vent a tumult, to withdraw and hide himself; the people keeping a Guard about him, lest he should be taken from them: nor could the Emperour or his Agents with all their arts effect it, till he used this wile, he secretly wrote to the Governour of Antioch, who pre­tending [Page 255] to Chrysostom, that he had con­cerns of moment to impart to him, in­vited him to a private place without the City, where seizing upon him, by Mules which he had in readiness, he conveyed him to Constantinople; where that his welcome might be the more magnifi­cent, the Emperour commanded that all persons of eminency, both Ecclesia­stical and Civil, should with all possible pomp and state go six miles to meet him. Of Nazianzen (who sat in the same Chair of Constantinople before him) I find, Greg. Presb. de vit. Gre­gor. Nazi­an. praefix. oper. Naz. that when he would have left that Bishoprick by reason of the stirs that were about it, and delivered up himself to solitude and a private life, as a thing much more suitable to his humour and genius, ma­ny of the people came about him, with tears beseeching him not to forsake his Flock, which he had hitherto fed with so much sweat and labour. They could not then lose their spiritual Guides, but they looked upon themselves as Widows and Orphans, resenting their death with a general sorrow and lamentation, as if they had lost a common Father. Nazi­anzen reports, In laud. patr. Or. 19 p. 304. that when his Father (who was Bishop of but a little Diocess) lay very sick, and all other remedies proved [Page 256] unsuccessful, the people generally flock­ed to Church (and though it was then the joyful time of Easter) broke out into mournful and passionate complaints, and with the most earnest prayers and tears besought God for his life. In laud. And of Basil Bishop of Caesarea he tell us, Basil. Or. 20. p. 371. that when he lay a dying, the whole▪ City came a­bout him, not able to bear his depar­ture from them, praying as if they would have laid hands upon his soul, and by force detained it in his body; they were (says he) even distracted with the thoughts of so great a loss, nor was there any who would not have been willing to have been deprived of part of his own life, might it have added unto his. His Funeral was solemnized with all pos­sible testimonies of love and honourable attendance, and with the abundant tears not only of Christians, but of Jews and Heathens; the confluence so vast, that many were pressed to death in the crowd, and sent to bear him company to his long home. And that we may see that their respect did not lye meerly in a few kind words, or external protesta­tions, they made it good in more real and evident demonstrations, by provi­ding liberal maintenance for them, part­ing [Page 257] at first with their own estates to sup­ply the uses of the Church, and after that making no less large than frequent contributions, which could not but a­mount to very considerable sums, the piety of Christians daily adding to their liberality; of which we may make some estimate, Amm. Mar­cellin. lib. 27. p. 1739. by what the Heathen Historian with a little kind of envy relates only of the Church of Rome (and doubtless it was so in some proportion in other places) that the profits of the Clergie arising from oblations chiefly was so great, as to enable them to live in a Prince-like state and plenty. And not long after it became the object not only of admiration but envy, [...], &c. Tom. 6. p. 896 edit. Savil. insomuch that Chrysostom was forced to make one whole Sermon a­gainst those that envied the wealth of the Clergie. It was also the great care of those times, to free them from what might be either scandalous or burthensom to their calling. Euseb. Hist. Constantine decreed, that the Orthodox Clergy should be ex­empt from all Civil Offices, Eccl. lib. 10. c. 7. p 394. & Cod. or what­ever might hinder their attendance up­on the services of the Church: Theod lib. 16. Tit. 2. leg. 1. 2. his Son Constantius, Ib. L 12. that Bishops in many cases should not be chargeable in the secular Courts, Ib L. 21. but be tryed in an Assembly of [Page 258] Bishops, which privilege was extended by Honorius to all the Clergie, that they should be tryed before their Bishops; Ib Tit. 11. l. 1. before whom also he ordained, that all causes properly belonging to Religion should be brought, and be determined by them; and by another constitution, that for the veneration that is due to the Church, Ib. lib. 2. Tit. 4 l. 7. all Ecclesiastical causes should be decided with all possible speed. And to name no more, that the persons of Ministers might be secured from foreign attempts, Lib. 16. Tit. 2. l. 31. he and his Colleague Arcadi­us made a Law, that whosoever did of­fer any violence to them, should upon conviction or confession of the fact be punished with death; and that the mi­nisters of Civil justice should not stay till the Bishop complained of the injury that was done (it being probable that he would rather incline to mercy and for­giveness) but that every one in this case should be admitted and encouraged to prefer and prosecute the charge: and in case the rude multitude should by arms or otherwise obstruct execution, and that the powers of that place could not see it done, that then they should call in the assistance of the Governour of the Province, to see Justice put into execu­tion. [Page 259] And because next to his person no­thing is so dear to a Clergie-man as his credit and reputation, Ibid. L. 41. therefore the Em­perour Honorius took care by a Law, that whosoever (be he a person of the highest rank) should charge any Clergie-man with Crimes which he was not able to make good, he himself should be pub­lickly accounted vile and infamous, it being but just and equal (says the Law) that as guilt should be punished, and offenders reckoned as spots and ble­mishes to the Church, so that injured innocency should be righted and main­tained. How infinitely tender the first general Council of Constantinople was in this case, to secure the honour and good name of Bishops and Clergie-men, against the malicious insinuations and charges of false accusers, may appear by the large provision which they make about it in the sixth Canon of that Council; and because it sometimes so happens, that a mans enemies are those of his own house, therefore the Apostolical Canons ordain, Can. 55, 56. that if any Clergy-man reproach and de­fame a Bishop, he shall be deposed from his Ministry, for thou mayest not (says the Canon) speak evil of the Ruler of thy people; but if it be a Presbyter or Deacon, [Page 260] whom he thus reproaches, he shall be suspended from the execution of his Of­fice. So sacred and venerable did they then account the persons and concern­ments of those who ministred in the af­fairs of Divine Worship.

CHAP. IX.
Of their usual Worship, both pri­vate and publick.

THus far we have discovered the piety of those ancient times, as to those necessary circumstances that re­late to the Worship of God, we are next to see wherein their Worship it self did consist, which we shall consider both as private and publick, that which they performed at home, and that which was done in their solemn and Church-Assemblies, only let it be remembred, that under the notion of Worship I here comprehend all those duties of piety that refer to God: the duties of their pri­vate worship were of two sorts, either such as were more solemn and stated, and concerned the whole Family, or such as persons discharged alone, or at least did not tye up themselves to usu­al times: For the first, which are pro­perly Family duties, they were usually performed in this order; at their first rising in the morning, they were wont to meet together, and to betake themselves to prayer (as is plainly implied in Chry­sostoms exhortation) to praise God for the protection and refreshment of the night, Hom. 1. de precat tom. 1. p. 750. vid. Basil. and to beg his grace and blessing for the following day: Ep. ad Greg. de vit solit. tom. [...]. p. 43. A. this was done by the Master of the house, unless some [Page 263] Minister of Religion were present: 'tis probable that at this time they recited the Creed, or some confession of their Faith, by which they professed them­selves Christians, and as 'twere armed themselves against the assaults of dangers and temptations; however I question not, but that now they read some parts of Scripture, which they were most rea­dy to do at all times, and therefore cer­tainly would not omit it now. That they had their set hours for prayer, the third, De Orat. dom. p. 196 strom. lib. 7. p. 722. sixth and ninth hour, is plain both from Cyprian, Clem. Alexandrinus, and others: this they borrowed from the Jews, who divided the day into four greater hours, the first, third, sixth, and ninth hour, three last whereof were stated hours of prayer; the first hour began at six in the morning, and held till nine; the third from nine till twelve; and at this hour it was that the Apostles and Christians were met together, when the Holy Ghost descended upon them; the sixth hour was from twelve till three in the afternoon, and at this time Peter went up to the house top to pray; the ninth was from three till six at night, and now it was that Peter and John went up to the Temple, it being the ninth hour of [Page 264] prayer; this division was observed by the Christians of succeeding times, though whether punctually kept to in their Family devotions I am not able to affirm. Clem. Alex. strom. lib. 7. p. 728. About noon before their going to dinner some portions of Scripture were read, Tert. Apol. c. 39. p. 32. and the meat being set upon the Table, a blessing was solemnly begged of God, Sozom. praefat. ad. Hist. Eccl. p. 395. as the fountain of all blessings (and so religious herein was the good Empe­rour Theodosius junior, that he would never taste any meat, no not so much as a Fig, or any other Fruit, before he had first given thanks to the great So­veraign Creator) and both meat and drink set apart with the sign of the Cross (a custom they used in the most common actions of life) as is expresly affirmed both by Tertullian and Origen, De Cor. mil. c. 3. p. 102 lib. 2. in Job fol. 36. col. 2. tom. 2. where he also gives a form of such prayers as they were wont to use before meals, viz. that lifting up their eyes to Heaven, they prayed thus, Thou that givest food to all flesh, grant that we may receive this food with thy blessing; thou Lord hast said, that if we drink any thing that is deadly, if we call upon thy name it shall not hurt us, thou therefore who art Lord of all power and glory, turn away all evil and malignant quality from our food, and [Page 265] what ever pernicious influence it may have upon us; when they were at dinner, they sung Hymns and Psalms; a practice which Clem. Alexandrinus commends as very suitable to Christians, Paedag. lib. 2. c. 4. p. 165. as a modest and decent way of praising God, while we are partaking of his Creatures. In Psalm. 41. tom. 3. p. 147. Chryso­stom greatly pleads for it, that men should be careful to teach them their Wives and Children, and which they should use even at their ordinary works, but especially at meals, such divine Songs being an excellent antidote against temp­tations; for (says he) as the Devil is never more ready to ensnare us than at meals, either by intemperance, ease, or immoderate mirth, therefore both be­fore and at meals we should fortifie our selves with Psalms, nay and when we rise from the Table with our Wives and Children, we should again sing Hymns to God. Cypr. Epist. 1. p. 7. They used also to have the Scriptures read, Clem. Alex. ut supra. and as I have elsewhere noted out of Nazianzen, every time they took the Cup to drink, made the sign of the Cross and called upon Christ. Dinner being ended, Basil. Ep. ad Greg. tom 3. p. 46 they concluded with prayer, giving thanks to God for their present refreshment, and begging his continued provision of those good things which he [Page 266] had promised to them. So great a place had Religion in those days even in mens common and natural actions, and so care­ful were they not to starve the soul, while they were feeding of the body: Much after the same rate they spent the rest of the day, till the night approach­ed, when before their going to rest, the Family was again called to prayer, after which they went to bed; about mid­night they were generally wont to rise to pray and to sing hymns to God; Clem Alex. paedag. lib. 2. c. 9. p. 185. this custom was very ancient, and doubtless took its original from the first times of persecution, when not daring to meet together in the day, they were forced to keep their religious Assemblies in the night; and though this was afterwards antiquated, as being found inconveni­ent for the generality of Christians, yet did it still continue in the nocturnal hours of Monasteries and religious Orders.

But besides these stated and ordinary devotions, performed by a joint con­currence of the Family, the Christians of those days were careful to spend all the time they could even when alone in actions of peity and religion: Hist. Eccl. lib 2. c 23. p 63. ex Hegesippo. they were most frequent in prayer; Eusebius reports of S. James the just, that he was wont [Page 267] every day to go alone into the Church, and there kneeling upon the pavement so long to pour out his prayers to God, till his knees became as hard and brawny as a Camels; the same which Nazianzen also tells us of his good Sister Gorgonia, In laud. that by often praying her knees were be­come hard, Gorgon. Or. 10. p. 183. and did as 'twere stick to the ground. De vit. Constantine the Great though burdened with the cares of so vast an Empire, Const. lib. 4. c. 22. did yet every day at his wont­ed hours withdraw from all the company of the Court, retire into his Closet, and upon his knees offer up his prayers to God; Ibid. c. 15▪ p. 533. and to let the world know how much he was devoted to this duty, he caused his Image in all his Gold Coins, in his Pictures and Statues to be repre­sented in the posture of a person praying, with his hands spread abroad, and his eyes lift up to Heaven. Their next care was diligently and seriously to read the Scripture, to be mighty in the Divine Oracles, as indeed they had an invalua­ble esteem of and reverence for the Word of God, Epist. 43. p. 804. as the Book which they infinitely prized beyond all others; up­on which account Nazianzen very se­verely chides his dear friend Gregory Nyssen, that having laid aside the holy [Page 268] Scriptures (the most excellent Writings in the world) which he was wont to read both privately to himself, and pub­lickly to the people, he had given up himself to the study of foreign and pro­phane Authors, desirous rather to be ac­counted an Orator than a Christian. S. Austine tells us, Vid. Con­fess▪ lib 3. c. 5. & l. 7. c. 20, 21. that after his conver­sion (how meanly soever he had before thought of them) the Scriptures were become the matter of his most pure and chaste delight, in respect whereof all o­ther Books (even those of Cicero him­self, which once he had so much doted on) became dry and unsavoury to him. In the study of this Book it was that Christians then mainly exercised them­selves, as thinking they could never ful­ly enough understand it, or deeply e­nough imprint it upon their hearts and memories. Socrat. H. Eccles. lib. 7. c. 22. p. 361. Of the younger Theodosius they tell us, that rising early every morning, he together with his Sisters in­terchangeably sung Psalms of praise to God; the holy Scriptures he could ex­actly repeat in any part of them, and was wont to discourse out of them with the Bishops that were at Court, as readily as if he had been an old Bishop himself. Euseb. Hist. We read of Origen, Eccl. l. 6. c. 2. p. 202. though then but a child, [Page 269] that when his Father commanded him to commit some places of Scripture to memory, he most willingly set himself to it, and not content with the bare reading, he began to enquire into the more profound and recondite meaning of it, often asking his Father (to his no less joy than admiration) what the sense of this or that place of Scripture was; and this thirst after divine knowledge still continued and encreased in him all his life, Ep. ad Marcell. tom. 1. p. 129. S. Hierom reporting it out of a Letter of one that was his great compa­nion and benefactor, that he never went to meals without some part of Scripture read, never to sleep, till some about him had read them to him, and that both by night and day no sooner had he done praying but he betook himself to read­ing, and after reading returned again to prayer. Euseb. de Martyr. Valens Deacon of the Church of Jerusalem, Palest. c. 11. p. 336. a venerable old man, had so entirely given up himself to the study of the Scriptures, that it was all one to him to read, or to repeat whole pages toge­ther. Ib c. ult. p. 334. The like we find of John an Egyp­tian Confessor (whom Eusebius saw and heard) that though both his eyes were put out, and his body mangled with unheard of cruelty, yet he was able at [Page 270] any time to repeat any places or passa­ges either out of the old or new Testa­ment; which when I first heard him do in the publick Congregation, I supposed him (say he) to have been reading in a Book, till coming near, and finding how it was, I was struck with great ad­miration at it. Certainly Christians then had no mean esteem of, took no small de­light in these sacred Volumes: for the sake of this Book (which he had chosen to be the companion and counsellor of his life) Nazianzen professes he had willing­ly undervalued and relinquished all o­ther things; De pace. Or. 12. p. 193. this was the mine where they enriched themselves with divine treasures, a Book where they furnished themselves with a true stock of know­ledge; Epitaph. as S. Hierom speaks of Nepotian, Nepot. nom. 1. p. 25. that by daily reading and meditation he had made his soul a Library of Christ; Ep. ad Paul. p. 157. and he tells us of Blesilla a de­vout Widow, that though she was so far over-run with weakness and sickness, that her foot would scarce bear her bo­dy, or her neck sustain the burden of her head, yet she was never found without a Bible in her hand.

Nor did they covetously hoard up, and reserve this excellent knowledge [Page 271] to themselves, but freely communicated it to others, especially were careful to catechise and instruct their Children and Servants in the principles of Religion. Pag 3. S. Clemens praises the Corinthians that they took care to admonish their young men to follow those things that were modest and comely, Ib. p. 31. and accordingly ex­horts them to instruct the younger in the knowledge of the fear of God, to make their children partakers of the discipline of Christ, to teach them how much hu­mility and a chast love do prevail with God, that the fear of him is good and useful, and preserves all those who with pure thoughts lead a holy life accord­ing to his will. De vit. The Historian observes of Constantine, Const. lib. 4. c. 51. that his first and greatest care towards his Sons, was to secure the happiness of their souls, by sowing the seeds of piety in their minds, which he did partly himself, instructing them in the knowledge of divine things, and partly by appointing such Tutors as were most approved for Religion: Ib. c. 52. p. 552. and when he had taken them into a partnership of the Government, and either by private admonitions, or by Letters gave them counsels for the steering themselves, this was always the first and chief, that they [Page 272] should prefer the knowledge and wor­ship of God, the great King of the world, before all other advantages, yea before the Empire it self. In land. Caesarii Or. 10. p. 161. For this Nazianzen peculiarly commends his Mother, that not only she her self was consecrated to God, and brought up under a pious edu­cation, but that she conveyed it down as a necessary inheritance to her Chil­dren; Id. Or. 11. p. 180. and it seems her Daughter Gor­gonia was so well seasoned with these ho­ly principles, that she religiously walk­ed in the steps of so good a pattern, and did not only reclaim her Husband, but educated her Children and Nephews in the ways of Religion, giving them an excellent example while she lived, and leaving this as her last charge and request when she died. This was the discipline under which Christians were brought up in those times, Religion was instilled into them betimes, which grew up and mixed it self with their ordina­ry labours and recreations, insomuch that the most rude and illiterate persons instead of prophane wanton Songs, which vitiate and corrupt the minds of men [...] as Chrysostom calls them, In Psalm. 117: tom. 3. p. 358. (Songs of the Devils composure) used no­thing but spiritual and divine Hymns, so [Page 273] that (as Hierom relates of the place where he lived) you could not go into the field, Ep. ad Marcell. tom. 1. p. 127. but you might hear the Plowman at his Hallelujahs, the Mower at his Hymns, and the Vine-Dresser singing Da­vids Psalms.

Thus they carried themselves at home, what they did in publick in their Church-Assemblies, on the Lords-day especially, is next to be considered; the manner whereof I shall briefly represent, as it generally and for the most part obtain­ed in those Ages, for it could not but vary something according to time and place. And here I should save my self the trouble of any further search, by setting down the account which Justin Martyr and Tertullian give of their pub­lick Worship in their Apologies for the Christians, but that I am satisfied they did not design to give a perfect and pun­ctual account of what was done at their religious Assemblies, as might suffici­ently appear from this one thing, that the first of them in those places speaks not any thing of their Hymns and Psalms, which yet that they were (even in the times wherein they lived) a constant part of the Divine Service, no man that is not wholly a stranger in Church-An­tiquity [Page 274] can be ignorant of. I shall there­fore out of them and others pick up and put together what seems to have con­stituted the main body of their publick duties, and represent them in that or­der wherein they were performed, which usually was in this manner. At their first coming together into the Congrega­tion, they began with Prayer, as Tertul­lian at least probably intimates (for I do not find it in any besides him) we come together (says he) unto God, Apol. c. 39. p. 31. that being banded as 'twere into an Ar­my we may besiege him with our prayers and petitions; a violence which is very pleasing and grateful to him; I do not from hence positively conclude that prayer was the first duty they began with, though it seems fairly to look that way, especially if Tertullian meant to represent the order as well as the sub­stance of their devotions. After this fol­lowed the reading of the Scriptures both of the old and new Testament, both the Commentaries of the Apostles and the Writings of the Prophets, Apol. 2. p. 98. as J. Martyr informs us. How much of each was read at one meeting, in the first time, is not known, it being then unfixed and arbi­trary; because their meetings, by the [Page 275] sudden interruption of the Heathens, were oft disturbed and broken up, and therefore both Justin and Tertullian con­fess that they only read as much as occa­sion served, and the condition of the pre­sent times did require: but afterwards there were set portions assigned, both out of the Old and New Testament, Lib. 2 c. 57▪ p. 875. two Lessons out of each, as we find it in the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions. Nay not only the Canonical Scriptures, but many of the Writings of Apostolical men (such as were eminent for place and piety) were in those days publickly read in the Church, Euseb. Hist. such was the famous E­pistle of S. Clemens to the Corinthians; Eccl. lib. 4. c. 23 p. 149▪ of which and of the custom in like ca­ses Dionysius Bishop of Corinth, who lived about the year 172. gives Soter Bishop of Rome this account: to day (says he) we kept holy the Lords-day, wherein we read your Epistle, which we shall constantly read for our instru­ction, as we also do the first Epistle which Clemens wrote to us. H. Eccles. lib. 3. c. 3. p. 72. The like Eu­sebius reports of Hermas his Pastor (a Book so called) and S. Hierom of the Writings of S. Ephrem the famous Dea­con of Edessa, De Script. Ecclesiast. in voc. E­phrem. p. 300. that in some Churches they were publickly read, after the read­ing [Page 276] of the holy Scriptures. About this part of the service it was that they sung Hymns and Psalms, a considerable part of the Divine Worship (as it had ever been accounted both amongst Jews and Gentiles) and more immediately ser­viceable for celebrating the honour of God, and lifting up the minds of men to divine and heavenly raptures. 'Twas in use in the very infancy of the Chri­stian Church, spoken of largely by S. Paul, and continued in all Ages after, insomuch that Pliny reports it as the main part of the Christians Worship, Lib. 10. that they met together before day to join in singing Hymns to Christ as God: Ep. 97. these Hymns were either extemporary rap­tures, so long as immediate inspira­tion lasted, or set compositions, ei­ther taken out of the holy Scriptures, or of their own composing, Ap. c. 39. p. 32. as Tertullian tells us: Euseb. l. 5. c. 28. p. 196 for it was usual then for any persons to compose divine Songs to the honour of Christ, and to sing them in the Publick Assemblies, till the Coun­cil of Laodicea ordered, Can. 59. that no Psalms composed by private persons should be recited in the Church; where though by the [...] the two Greek Scho­liasts will have certain Psalms ascribed [Page 277] to Solomon and others to be understood, yet it's much more reasonable to under­stand it of private constitutions, usual a long time in the Church, and here for good reason prohibited. By this Coun­cil it was likewise appointed, Can. 17. that the Psalms should not be one entire conti­nued service, but that a Lesson should be interposed in the midst after every Psalm; which was done (as Balsamon and Alexius Aristenus tell us) to take off the weariness of the people, whose minds might be apt to tire in passing through those prolix offices all together, especi­ally the Lessons being so large and ma­ny. In this duty the whole Congrega­tion bore a part, joining all together in a common celebration of the praises of God; afterwards the custom was to sing alternatim course by course, answering one another, Theod. Hist. Eccl. lib. 2. c. 24. p. 78. first brought in (as we are told) by Flavianus and Diodorus in the Church of Antioch in the Reign of Con­stantine; Hist. Eccl. lib. 6. c. 8. p. 313. but if we may believe Socra­tes, some hundreds of years before that, by Ignatius who was Bishop of that Church, who having in a vision heard the Angels praising the holy Trinity with alternate Hymns, thereupon introduced the use of it in that Church, which from [Page 278] thence spread it self into all other Churches; and whether Pliny (who lived about that time) might not mean some such thing by his secum invicem ca­nere, that the Christians sung Hymns one with another, or in their courses, may be considered by those who think it worth their labour to enquire. In the mean time we proceed; the Reader having done (they are the words of Ju­stin the martyr) the President of the As­sembly makes a Sermon by way of instru­ction and exhortation, Loc. supr. [...]. to the imitation and practice of those excellent things that they had heard. And indeed Sermons in those times were nothing else but the expositions of some part of the Scriptures which had been read before, and ex­hortations to the people to obey the do­ctrines contained in them, and com­monly were upon the Lesson which was last read, because that being freshest in the peoples memory, was most proper to be treated of, Serm. 237. de temp. tom. 10. col. 1116. as S. Augustine both avers the custom, and gives the reason. Hence, in the Writers of the Church, Preachers came to be called Tractatores, and their Sermons Tractatus, because they handled or treated of such places of Scripture as had been a little before [Page 279] read unto the people. According as oc­casion was these Sermons were more or fewer, sometimes two or three at the same Assembly, the Presbyters first and then the Bishop, as is expresly affirmed in the Apostolical Constitutions, Ʋt supra. p. 876. then (i.e. after the reading of the Gospel) let the Presbyters exhort the people one by one, not all at once, and after all the Bishop, as it is fitting for the Master to do. And thus Gregory Nyssen excuses himself for not in­troducing his Sermons with a tedious Preface, [...]. tom. 1. p. 872. because he would not be bur­densom to the people, who had alrea­dy taken pains to hear those admirable discourses that had been made before him.

This course they held not in the morning only, but likewise in the after­noon (at some times at least) when they had their publick Prayers and Sermons to the people. [...]. Hom. 10. ad Pop. An­tioch. p. 116. Tom. 1. This Chrysostom assures us of in an Homily upon this very sub­ject, in commendation of those who came to Church after Dinner, and that as he tells them, in greater numbers than before; who instead of sleeping after Dinner, came to hear the divine Laws expounded to them; instead of walk­ing upon the Exchange, and entertain­ing [Page 280] themselves with idle and unprofita­ble chat, came and stood amongst their brethren, to converse with the discour­ses of the Prophets. And this he tells them he put them in mind of, not that it was a reproach to eat and to drink, but that having done so, it was a shame to stay at home, and deprive themse [...]ves of those religious Solemnities. The same 'twere easie to make good from se­veral passages in S. Basil, S. Augustine, and others, who frequently refer to those Sermons which they had preached in the morning.

But how many soever the discourses were, the people were ready enough to entertain them, flocking to them as to their spiritual meals and banquets. Apol. c. 39. We meet together (says Tertullian) to hear the holy Scriptures rehearsed to us, that so according to the quality of the times we may be either forewarned or corrected by them: for certainly with these holy words we nourish our Faith, erect our hope, seal our confidence, and by these inculcations are the better established in obedience to the divine commands. Orat. 32. p. [...]17. Nazianzen tells us what vast numbers used to meet in his Church at Constantinople, of all Sexes, of all sorts [Page 281] and ranks of persons, rich and poor, honourable and ignoble, learned and sim­ple, Governours and People, Souldiers and Tradesmen, all here unanimously con­spiring together, and greedily desirous to learn the knowledge of divine things. The like Chrysostom reports of the Church at Antioch, that they would set aside all affairs at home, Hom. 56. tom. 1. p. 623. to come and hear Sermons at Church; he tells them 'twas the great honour of the City, not so much that it had large Suburbs and vast numbers of people, or brave houses with gilded Dining-Rooms, Hom. 4. in verb. Esaiae vid. Dom. &c. tom. 3. p. 750. as that it had a diligent and attentive people. And elsewhere, that 'twas the great encou­ragement of his ministry, to see such a famous and chearful concourse, a peo­ple so well ordered and desirous to hear; that 'twas this advanced their Ci­ty above the honour of a Senate, or the Office of Consul, or the variety of Sta­tues or ornaments, or the plenty of its Merchandise, or the commodiousness of its scituation; in that its people were so earnest to hear and learn, its Churches so thronged and crowded, and all per­sons inflamed with such an insatiable de­sire of the word that was preached to them; yea that this it was that adorned [Page 282] the City even above Rome it self. And indeed the commendation is the grea­ter, in that commonness did not breed contempt, it being usual in that Church (as Chrysostom often intimates) for a good part of the year to have Sermons every day.

Well, Sermon being ended, prayers were made with and for the Catechu­mens, Constit. A­post. l. 8. c. 6. p. 1006. Penitents, Possessed, and the like, according to their respective capacities and qualifications, the persons that were in every rank departing as soon as the prayer that particularly concerned them was done: first the Catechumens, and then the Penitents, as is prescribed in the nineteenth Canon of the Laodicean Coun­cil: for no sooner was the service thus far performed, but all that were under baptism, or under the discipline of pe­nance, i. e. all that might not communi­cate at the Lords Table, were command­ed to depart, the Deacon crying aloud, [...], Those that are Catechumens go out; in the Latine Church the form was ITE, MISSA EST, depart, there is a dismission of you, missa being the same with missio, as re­missa oft used in some Writers for re­missio (and so the word missa is used [Page 283] by Cassian even in his time, De insti­tut. monach lib. 3. c. 7. p. 26. for the dis­mission of the Congregation.) Hence it was that the whole Service from the be­ginning of it till the time that the Hear­ers were dismissed came to be called Missa Catechumenorum, the Mass or Ser­vice of the Catechumens, as that which was performed afterwards at the ce­lebration of the Eucharist was called Missa Fidelium, the Mass or Service of the Faithful, because none but they were present at it; and in these notions and no other the word is often to be met with in Tertullian, and other ancient Writers of the Church; 'tis true, that in process of time, as the discipline of the Catechumens wore out, so that title which belonged to the first part of the Service was forgotten, and the name missa was appropriated to the Service of the Lords Supper, and accordingly was made use of by the Church of Rome, to denote that which they peculiarly call the Mass or the propitiatory Sacrifice of the Altar at this day: and the more plausibly to impose this delusion upon the people, they do with a great deal of confidence muster up all those places of the Fathers where the word missa is to be found, and apply it to their Mass; [Page 284] though it would puzle them to produce but one place, where the word is used in the same sense as they use it now, out of any genuine and approved Writer of the Church for at least the first four hundred years. But to return, the Cate­chumens, &c. being departed, and the Church doors shut, they proceeded to the Lords Supper, at which the Faithful only might be present, wherein they prayed for all states and ranks of men, gave the the Kiss of charity, prayed for consecration of the Eucharist, then re­ceived the sacramental Elements, made their Offerings, and such like; of which I do not now speak particularly, because I intend to treat distinctly of the Sacra­ments afterwards: for the same reason I say nothing concerning their admoni­tions, Church-censures, absolutions, &c. be­cause these will come under considerati­on in another place, as also because though managed at their publick Assemblies, were yet only accidental to them, and no setled parts of the Divine Service. This in short was the general form of publick Worship in those ancient times, which although it might vary somewhat according to times and places, did yet for the main and the substance of it hold in all.

[Page 285] That which remains, is a little to re­marque how the Christians carried them­selves in the discharge of these solemn duties, which certainly was with singu­lar reverence and devotion, such gestures and actions as they conceived might ex­press the greatest piety and humility. Paedag. l. 3. c. 11. p. 255 Let both men and women (says Clemens of Alexandria) come to Church in comely apparel, with a grave pace, with a mo­dest silence, with a love unfeigned, chast both in body and mind, and so as they may be fit to put up prayers to God. De Orat. Let our speech in prayer (says Cyprian) be under discipline, Dom. p. 188. observing a deco­rous calmness and modesty; we are to remember that we are under the eye of God, whom we are not to offend either in the habit of our body, or the manner of our speech; for as 'tis the fashion of those that are impudent to clamour and make a noise, so on the contrary it be­comes a sober man to pray with a modest voice: when therefore we come toge­ther with our brethren into the Assem­bly, to celebrate the divine Sacrifices with the Minister of God, we ought to be mindful of order and a reverent re­gard, and not to throw about our prayers with a wild and confused voice, [Page 286] or with a disorderly prattling to cast forth those petitions, which ought with the greatest modesty to be put up to God. The men prayed with their heads bare, as not ashamed to look up to hea­ven for what they begged of God; the women covered, as a sign of the modesty of that Sex, and therefore Tertullian se­verely checks the practice of some wo­men in his time, who in time of wor­ship had no covering on their heads, or what was as good as none; what re­proof (says he) do they deserve, De Virg. Veland p. 504. that continue unvailed in singing Psalms, or in any mention of God; or do they think it's enough to lay some thin and slight thing over their heads in prayer, and then think themselves covered. Where he manifestly refers to those rules which the Apostle prescribes in this case, and concludes at last, that they should at all times and in all places be mindful of the rule, being ready and provided against all mention of the name of God, who if he be in womens hearts, will be known on their heads, viz. by a modest carriage and covering of them in their addresses to him. Their hands they did not only lift up to heaven (a po­sture in prayer common both among [Page 287] Jews and Gentiles) but they did expan and spread them abroad, that so by this means they might shadow out an image of the Cross, or rather a resemblance of him that hung upon it, De Orat. c. 11. Apol. c. 39. as Tertullian more than once and again informs us: Prayer (says another) is a conversing with God, Asterius A­masen. and the way to heaven, and to stretch out our hands is to form the resemblance of Christ crucified; Hom. de precat. a­pud Phot. which whoever prays should do, not only as to the form and figure, Cod. 271. col. 1496. but in reality and affection; for as he that is fastned to the Cross surely dyes, so he that prays should crucifie the desires of the flesh, and every inordinate lust and passion. In the performing of this duty, they either kneeled, which was most usual, or stood, which they always did upon the Lords day, for a reason which we have spoken of before; fitting was ever held a po­sture of great rudeness and irreverence; nay Tertullian falls heavy upon some that used presently to clap themselves down upon their seats, De Orat. c. 12. p. 134. as soon as ever prayer was done, and down-right charges it as against Scripture; if it be an irreverent thing (as he argues) to sit down before, or over against a person for whom thou hast a mighty reverence and veneration; [Page 288] how much more does it savour of irre­ligion to do so in the presence of the living God, while the Angel is yet stand­ing by thee to carry up the prayer to heaven, unless we have a mind to re­proach God to his face, and tell him that we are weary of the duty.

Another custom which they had in prayer was, that they constantly prayed towards the East; this was so universal­ly common, that there's scarce any an­cient Ecclesiastical Writer but speaks of it; though not many of them agree in assigning the reason of it; the custom doubtless begun very early, and is ge­nerally ascribed to the Apostles; so the Author of the Questions and Answers as­sures us, Quest. 118. p. 471. and tells us it was because the East was accounted the most excellent part of the Creation, and seeing in prayer we must turn our faces towards some quarter, De Spirit. 'twas fittest it should be to­wards the East: S. c. 27 p. 352. tom. 2 just (says he) as in ma­king the sign of the Cross in the name of Christ, Athanas. ad Antioch. we use the right hand, because 'tis better than the left, Quest. 37. p. 285. tom. 2. not in its own nature, but only in its positure and fitness for our use. Const App. lib. 2. c. 57. p. 876. S. Basil likewise reckons it amongst the traditions that had been derived from the Apostles, but tells us [Page 289] the Mystery of it was, that hereby they respected Paradise, which God planted in the East, begging of him that they might be restored to that ancient Coun­try from whence they had been cast out. This might probably be with those who dwelt in the Western parts of the world, but how it could be done by those who lived East of the Garden of Eden (sup­pose in any parts of India) I am not a­ble to imagine. Strom. lib. 7 p. 72 [...]. Clemens Alex. tells us that herein they had respect to Christ, for as the East is the birth and womb of the natural day, from whence the Sun (the Fountain of all sensible light) does arise and spring; so Christ the true Sun of righteousness, who arose upon the world with the light of truth, when it sat in the darkness of errour and igno­rance, is in Scripture stiled the East, and therefore our prayers are directed thi­ther. Contr. Va­lent c. 3 p [...] 251. For which reason Tertullian calls the East, the figure or the type of Christ: but whatever the true reason was, I'm sure 'tis a sober account which Athana­sius gives of it; Ʋbi supr [...] p. 2 [...]4. we do not (says he) worship towards the East, as if we thought God any ways shut up in those parts of the world, but because God is in himself, and is so stiled in Scripture, [Page 290] the true light; in turning therefore to­wards that created light, we do not wor­ship it, but the great. Creator of it; tak­ing occasion from that most excellent e­lement, to adore that God who was be­fore all elements and ages of the world. This was their carriage for prayer; nor were they less humble and reverent in other parts of Worship, they heard the Scriptures read and preached with all possible gravity and attention, which that they might the better do, they were wont to stand all the while the Sermon continued, none sitting then but the Bishop and Presbyters that were a­bout him; De Schism. so Optatus expresly tells us, Donatist. l. 4. p. 115. that the people had no priviledge to sit down in the Church: though whether the custom was universally so in all pla­ces, De Cate­chis. rudib. c. 13. tom. 4. col. 907. I much doubt; nay S. Augustine tells us, that in some transmarine (I suppose he means the Western) Churches it was otherwise, the people having seats placed for them as well as the Ministers. But generally the people stood, partly to express the reverence, partly to keep their attentions awake and lively. De incom­parab. Dei natur. Hom. 4▪ p. 353. tom. 1. Hence it was part of the Deacons Office (as Chry­sostom tells us, and the same we find in the ancient Greek Liturgies) to call upon [Page 291] the people with an [...], Let us duly stand upright, respecting the decent posture of their bodies, though withal principally intending the eleva­tion of their minds, the lifting up their thoughts from low sordid objects to those spiritual and divine things, they were then conversant about. But what ever they did in other parts of the pub­lick Service, they constantly stood up at the reading of the Gospel; a custom generally embraced in all parts of the Christian world. H. Eccl. lib. 7. c. 19. p. 734. Therefore Sozomen discoursing of the various rights obser­ved in several Churches, notes it as an unusual thing in the Bishop of Alexan­dria, that he did not rise up when the Gospels were read; a thing (says he) which I never saw nor heard of in any other place: H. Eccl. l. 3 [...] num. 5 p. 29. and Philostorgius tells us of Theophilus the Indian Bishop, that a­mongst several irregularities which he corrected in those Churches, he parti­cularly reformed this, that the people were wont to sit while the Lessons out of the Gospel were read to them. Nor did the greatest personages think them­selves too high to express this piece of reverence in their attendance upon the King of Kings. 'Tis very memorable [Page 292] what we read concerning the great Con­stantine, that when upon occasion Euse­bius was to make a Panegyrick concern­ing the Sepulchre of our Saviour, De vit. though it was not in the Church, Constant. lib▪ 4. c. 33. p. 542. but in the Pa­lace, yet he refused to sit all the time, and when Eusebius beseeched him to sit down in his Throne, that was hard by him, he would not, but attentively heard, judged, and approved those things that were spoken: and when af­ter a good while, the Sermon having been prolix, Eusebius out of compliance would have broken off and done, he called to him to go on till he came to the full end of his discourse; whereup­on he was again sollicited to sit down, but refused, affirming it to be unfit to at­tend upon any discourse concerning God, and much more at this time, with ease and softness; and that it was very conso­nant to piety and religion that discourses about divine things should be heard stand­ing. So great a reverence had that ex­cellent Prince for the solemnities of di­vine Worship. In the discharge of these holy Exercises as they carried them­selves with all seriousness and gravity, so they continued in them till they were compleatly finished; there was then no [Page 293] such airiness and levity as now possesses the minds of men, no snatching at some pieces of the Worship, tanquam Canis ad Nilum, and gone again, no rude disor­derly departing the Congregation, till the whole Worship and Service of God was over. And therefore when this warmth and vigour of the first Ages was a little abated, the Council of Orleans thought good to re-establish the primi­tive devotion by this Canon, Can. 22. That when the people came together for the celebration of divine Service, they should not depart till the whole Solemnity was over, and the Bishop or Presbyter had given the blessing.

CHAP. X.
Of Baptism, and the admini­stration of it in the Pri­mitive Church.

OUR Lord having instituted Bap­tism and the Lords Supper as the two great Sacraments of the Chri­stian Law, they have accordingly been ever accounted principal parts of pub­lick Worship in the Christian Church; we shall treat first of Baptism, as being the door by which persons enter in, the great and solemn rite of our initiation into the faith of Christ; concerning which, four circumstances are chiefly to be enquired into; the persons by and upon whom; the time when, the place where, the manner how this Sacrament was administred in the ancient Church.

For the persons by whom this Sacra­ment was administred, they were the Ministers of the Gospel, the Stewards of the mysteries of Christ, baptizing and preaching the Gospel being joined to­gether by our Saviour in the same Com­mission; usually 'twas done by the Bi­shop, the [...] in J. Martyr, the Anti­stes in Tertullian, the President or chief Minister of the Congregation, the sum­mus sacerdos, qui est Episcopus, as he calls [Page 297] him, without whose leave and authori­ty neither Presbyters nor Deacons might take upon them to baptize, Epist. ad Smyrnaeos. p. 6. as not only Ignatius but Tertullian expresly tells us, and if they did, De Bap­tism. c. 17. p. 230. it was only in case of necessity, as is affirmed by an ancient Author who lived in or near the time of Cyprian: De non re­baptiz. a­pud Cypr. p. 138. the same S. Hierom assures us was the custom in his time, though otherwhiles we find the Bishop to begin the action, Dial. adv. Lucifer. p. 139. and the Presbyters to carry it on and finish it. Ambr. de Sacram. l. 3. c. 1. But as Christianity encreased, this became a more familiar part of the Presbyters and the Deacons office, and doubtless had been more or less executed by them from the begin­ning, though out of reverence to the Bishop, and to preserve the honour of the Church (as Tertullian gives the rea­son) they did it not without his leave and deputation, and 'tis certain that Philip baptized the Eunuch, who yet was of no higher order than that of Deacon. Nor was it accounted enough by some in those times, that Baptism was conferred by a person called to the Mi­nistry, unless he was also orthodox in the Faith. This became matter of great bustle in the Church; hence sprang that famous controversie between Cyprian [Page 298] and Stephen Bishop of Rome, concerning the re-baptizing those that had been bap­tized by Hereticks (of which there is so much in Cyprians Writings) Cyprian as­serting that they ought to be re-bapti­zed, the other as stifly maintaining it to be both against the doctrine and practice of the Church. This begot great heats and feuds between those good men, and engaged a great part of the whole Chri­stian Church in the quarrel, Cyprian en­deavouring to strengthen his cause not only by arguments from Scripture, but by calling a Council at Carthage of eigh­ty seven African Bishops, who all con­cluded for his opinion. How truly Cy­prian maintained this, I am not concern­ed to enquire; only I take notice of two things which he and his Followers pleaded by way of abatement to the ri­gour of their opinion. Cypr. Ep. ad Quint. de Haeret. bap. Ep. 71. p. 119. & Concil. First that here­by they did not assert re-baptization to be lawful, this they expresly deny to receive any patronage from their pra­ctice, Carth. a­pud Cypr. senten. 35. p. 286. for they looked upon that bap­tism that had been conferred by Here­ticks as null and invalid (seeing Here­ticks being out of the Church could not give what they had not) and therefore when any returned to the union of the [Page 299] Church they could not properly be said to be re-baptized, seeing they did but receive what (lawfully) they had not be­fore. Cypr. ibid. & Conc. Carthag. sentent. 8. & Cyrill. praef. Ca­tech. ad il­lumin. p. 9. Secondly, that they did not pro­miscuously baptize all that came over from heretical Churches, for where any had been lawfully baptized by Orthodox Ministers before their going over to them, these they received at their re­turn without any other Ceremony than imposition of hands; baptizing those on­ly who never had any other baptism than that which Hereticks had conferred up­on them. Cyprian being thus severe a­gainst baptism dispensed by heretical Mi­nisters, we may wonder what he thought of that which was administred by meer lay-unordained persons, which yet was not uncommon in those times: for that Lay-men (provided they were Christi­ans and baptized themselves) might and did baptize others in cases of necessity, is so positively asserted by Tertullian, Locis antea citat. Hierom, and others, that no man can doubt of it. A custom ratified by the Fathers of the Illiberine Council, Can. 38. with this proviso, that if the persons so bap­tized lived, they should receive confir­mation from the Bishop. This without question arose from an opinion they had [Page 300] of the absolute and indispensable neces­sity of Baptism, without which they scarce thought a mans future condition could be safe, and that therefore 'twas better it should be had from any, than to de­part this life without it; for excepting the case of Martyrs (whom they thought sufficiently qualified for heaven by being baptized in their own blood, Cyrill. ad Illuminat. Catech. 3. p. 61. insisting up­on a twofold Baptism, one of water in time of peace, another of blood in the time of persecution, answerable to the water and blood that flowed out of our Saviours side: excepting these) they reckoned no man could be saved with­out being baptized, and cared not much in cases of necessity, so they had it, how they came by it. As for that act of A­thanasius (mentioned by the Author of his life in Photius, Cod. 258. col. 1429. and more largely re­lated by Sozomen) when a Boy play­ing with the rest of his Companions, Hist. Eccl. lib. 2. c. 17. p. 467. they formed themselves into a kind of Church-society; Athanasius was chosen Bishop, and others personated the Cate­chumens ready to be baptized, and were accordingly with all the usual formali­ties baptized by Athanasius. This juve­nile Ceremony being ended, they were brought before Alexander the then Bi­shop [Page 301] of Alexandria (who had himself be­held the whole scene) who enquiring into the reasons and circumstances of the action, and having consulted with his Clergy that were about him, concluded that those Children ought not to be re­baptized, and therefore only added his confirmation to them. But this being only a particular case, and the like not mentioned that I remember by any Wri­ter of those times, I only relate it as I find it. But though this power in cases of necessity was allowed to men (who were capable of having the ministerial office conferred upon them) yet was it ever denied to women, whom the Apo­stle has so expresly forbidden to exer­cise any ministry in the Church of God, and accordingly censured in the Aposto­lical Constitutions, Tert. de. Bap. c. 17. de vel. virg. c. 9. de prae­script. adv. Haeret. c. 41. to be not only dange­rous, but unlawful and impious. Indeed in the Churches of the Hereticks women even in those times took upon them to baptize, Epiph. hae­res. 49. & haeres. 79. but it was universally con­demned and cried out against by the Orthodox, Ritual. and constantly affixed as a note of dishonour and reproach upon the heretical parties of those times, Rom. de Sacram. as abundantly appears from Tertullian, Bapt. Ru­bric. de ministr. bapt. p. 9. Epi­phanius, and others, who records the [Page 302] heretical doctrines and practices of those first Ages of the Church; however af­terwards it crept in in some places, and is allowed and practised in the Church of Rome at this day: where in cases of necessity they give leave that it may be administred by any, and in any lan­guage, whether the person administring be a Clergie or a Lay-man (yea though under excommunication) whether he be a Believer or an Infidel, a Catholick or an Heretick, a man or a woman; only taking care, that if it may be, a Priest be preferred before a Deacon, a Deacon before a Subdeacon, a Clergie man before a Laic, and a man before a woman; to­gether with some other cases which are there wisely provided for.

From the persons ministring we pro­ceed to the persons upon whom it was conferred, and they were of two sorts, Infants and adult persons: how far the baptizing of Infants is included in our Saviours institution is not my work to dispute; but certainly if in controvert­ed cases the constant practice of the Church, and those who immediately succeeded the Apostles be (as no man can deny it is) the best interpreter of the Laws of Christ, the dispute one [Page 303] would think should be at an end: for that it always was the custom to receive the Children of Christian Parents into the Church by Baptism, we have suffi­cient evidence from the greatest part of the most early Writers, J. G. Voss. de bapt. di­sput. 14. p. 178. & seq. Irenaeus, Tertul­lian, Origen, Cyprian, &c. whose testi­monies I do not produce, because I find them collected by others, Forbes. in­struct. Hist. Theol. lib. 10. c. 5. sect. 14. & seq. and the argu­ment thence so forcible and conclusive, that the most zealous opposers of Infant Baptism know not how to evade it; the testimonies being so clear, Dr. Ham. Defen. of Infant Bap­tism. c. 4. sect. 2. and not the least shadow that I know of in those times of any thing to make against it. There was indeed in Cyprians time a controversie about the baptizing of In­fants, not whether they ought to be bap­tized (for of that there was no doubt) but concerning the time when it was to be administred, whether on the second or third, or whether as Circumcision of old to be deferred till the eighth day: for the determining of which, Cyprian sitting in Council with sixty six Bishops, writes a Synodical Epistle to Fidus, Epist. 60. p. 97. to let him know, that it was not necessa­ry to be deferred so long, and that it was their universal judgment and reso­lution that the mercy and grace of God [Page 304] was not to be denied to any, though as soon as he was born: concluding, that it was the sentence of the Council, that none ought to be forbidden baptism and the grace of God; which as it was to be observed and reteined towards all men, so much more towards Infants and new­born Children; Epist. 28. ad Hiero­nym: tom. 2. col. 108. and that this sentence of theirs was no novel doctrine S. Augu­stine assures us, where speaking con­cerning this Synodical determination, he tells us, that in this Cyprian did not make any new decree, but kept the Faith of the Church most firm and sure. I shall only taken notice of one place more out of Cyprian, De lapsis p. 171. which methinks evidently makes for this purpose, where describ­ing the great wickedness and miserable condition of the lapsed, such as to avoid persecution had done sacrifice to the Idols, he urges this as one of the last and highest aggravations, that by their apostasie their Infants and Children were exposed to ruine, and had lost that which they had obtained at their first coming into the world (which whether he means it of their right to Baptism, or their having been actually baptized, and losing the fruit and benefit of their Bap­tism, is all one to my purpose) and [Page 305] therefore he brings them in thus elegant­ly pleading against their Parents at the great day. ' Twas no fault of ours, we did not of our selves forsake the Sacraments of our Lord, and run over to join with prophane impieties; the unfaithfulness of others has undone us, we have found our Parents to be murderers; they denied us God for our Father, and the Church for our Mother; for while we alas were little, unable to take any care of our selves, and ignorant of so great a wickedness, we were ensnared by the treachery of others, and by them betrayed into a partnership of their impieties.

This was the case of Infants, but those who made up the main body of the bap­tized in those days, were adult persons, who flocking over daily in great num­bers to the faith of Christ, were receiv­ed in at this door: usually they were for some considerable time catechized, and trained up in the principles of the Christian Faith, till having given testi­mony of their proficiency in knowledge (to the Bishop or Presbyter, Conc. Lao­dic. Can▪ 46. who were appointed to take their examination, and to whom they were to give an ac­count once a week of what they had learnt) and of a sober and regular con­versation, [Page 306] they then became Candidates for Baptism, and were accordingly ta­ken in, which brings me to the next cir­cumstance considerable concerning

The Time when Baptism was wont to be administred: at first all times were alike, and persons were baptized as op­portunity and occasion served; but the discipline of the Church being a little setled, it began to be restrained to two solemn and stated times of the year, viz. Easter and Whitsontide. Tert. de Baptism. [...] 19 p. 232 At Easter in me­mory of Christs death and resurrection, correspondent unto which are the two parts of the Christian life represented and shadowed out in Baptism, dying un­to sin, and rising again unto newness of life, Cyrill. prae­fa [...] Ca­ [...]h. ad il­l [...]minat. p. 6. in order to which the parties to be baptized were to prepare themselves by a strict observation of Lent, disposing and fitring themselves for Baptism by fasting and prayer. In some places, par­ticularly the Churches of Thessaly, [...]. Eccles. lib. [...]. c. 22. p 287. Easter was the only time for Baptism (as Socra­tes tells us) which was the reason why many amongst them died unbaptized: but this was an usage peculiar to them alone. The ancient custom of the Church (as Zonaras tells us) was for persons to be baptized especially upon the Saturday [Page 307] before Easter-day, [...]. Can 45. Conc. Laod. the reason whereof was, that this being the great or holy Sab­bath, and the mid-time between the day whereon Christ was buried, and that whereon he rose again, did fitliest correspond with the mystery of Bap­tism, as it is the type and representation both of our Lords burial and resurre­ction. At Whitsontide; in memory of the Holy Ghosts being shed upon the Apostles, the same being in some measure repre­sented and conveyed in Baptism. When I say that these were the two fixed times of Baptism, I do not strictly mean it of the precise days of Easter and Whitson­tide, but also of the whole intermedi­ate space of fifty days that is between them, which was in a manner account­ed Festival, and Baptism administred during the whole time, as I have for­merly noted. [...]. O­rat. 40. p. 654. Besides these, Nazianzen reckons the Feasts of Epiphany as an an­nual time of Baptism, probably in me­mory either of the Birth or Baptism of our Saviour, both which anciently went under that title: this might be the cu­stom in some places, but I question whe­ther it was universal, besides that after­wards it was prohibited and laid aside. But though persons in health, and the [Page 308] space that was requisite for the instru­ction of the Catechumens might well enough comport with these annual re­turns, yet if there was a necessity (as in case of sickness and danger of death) they might be baptized at any other time: for finding themselves at any time surprized with a dangerous or a mortal sickness, and not daring to pass into a­nother world without this Badge of their initiation into Christ, they presently signified their earnest desire to be bap­tized, which was accordingly done as well as the circumstances of a sick Bed would permit. These were called Cli­nici (of whom there is frequent men­tion in the ancient Writers of the Church) because [...], baptized as they lay along in their beds. This was accounted a less solemn and perfect kind of Baptism, partly because 'twas done not by immersion, but by sprinkling; partly because persons were supposed at such a time to desire it, chiefly out of a fear of death, and ma­ny times when not throughly Masters of their understandings. For which reason persons so baptized (if they recovered) are by the Fathers of the Neocaesarean Council rendred ordinarily incapable of [Page 309] being admitted to the degree of Pres­byters in the Church. Can. 12. Indeed 'twas ve­ry usual in those times (notwithstanding that the Fathers did solemnly and smart­ly declaim against it) for persons to de­fer their being baptized till they were near their death, out of a kind of No­vation principle, that if they fell into sin after Baptism, there would be no place for repentance, mistaking that place of the Apostle, where 'tis said that if they who have been once enlightened ( [...], which the Ancients ge­nerally understand of Baptism) fall away, 'tis impossible to renew them again unto repentance. Euseb. de vit. Const. lib. 4. c. 61, 62. p. 557. For some such reason we may suppose it was that Constantine the Great deferred his Baptism till he lay a dying; Hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 47. p. 161. the same which Socrates relates of his Son Constantius, baptized a little before his death: and the like he reports of the Emperour Theodosius, Lib. 5. c. 6. p. 262. who appre­hending himself to be arrested with a mortal sickness, presently caused himself to be baptized, though he recovered afterwards. To this custom of Clinic Baptism some not improbably think the Apostle has reference in that famous place, Vid. Voss. Thes de Baptism. p. 161. & de Resur. Thes▪ 18. where he speaks of those that are baptized for the dead, [...], which [Page 310] they expound with reference to the state of the dead, and that 'tis meant of such who in danger of death would be baptized, Haeres. 28. p. 54. vid. Matth. that it might fare well with them after death. This Epiphanius thinks the truest interpretation, Blast. Syn­tag. c. 1. lit. B. p. 41. that it's meant of Catechumens; who being suddenly surprised with death, would be baptized that so their sins being remitted in Bap­tism, they might go hence under the hope of that eternal life which awaits good men after death, and testifie their belief and expectation of their future hap­py resurrection. Others think it may re­fer to the place of Baptism, those who are baptized [...], over the Graves or Sepulchres of the dead, it being an ancient and general custom to have their religious meetings, and to perform their publick exercises at the Tombs of Mar­tyrs; Vid. Pru­dent. Pe­risteph. there being numerous instances in the acts of the Martyrs, of such as were baptized in the Coemeteria, Hymn. 8. p. 110. over the Mo­numents of the dead. Which soever of these is most sutable, yet certainly either of them is far more probable than that which many talk so much of, Vid. Epi­phan. Hae­res. 28. con­tra Cerinth p. 54. as if the A­postle meant it of a custom common in those primitive times amongst the Ce­rinthians, and other Hereticks, where [Page 311] when any died without Baptism, they used to place another under his Bed, who was baptized for him in his stead, whence Tertullian calls it a vicarious Baptism; De Resur. Carn. c. 48. it being highly improbable, that the great Apostle would fetch an argument to confirm so solemn and fundamental a principle of the Christian Faith as the doctrine of the Resurrection is, from such an absurd and ridiculous rite used only by the worst of Hereticks. But this only by the way.

For the Place where this solemn action was performed it was at first unlimited, any place where there was water, as Justin Martyr tells us, in Ponds, or Lakes, at Springs, Apol. 2. p. 93. or Rivers, as Tertul­lian speaks; De Bap­tism. c. 4. but always as near as might be to the place of their publick Assem­blies, for it was seldom done without the presence of the Congregation, and that for very good reason, both as 'tis a principal act of religious Worship, and as 'tis the initiating of persons into the Church, which therefore ought to be as publick as it could, that so the whole Congregation might be spectators and witnesses of that profession and engage­ment which the person baptized then took upon him; and this they so zea­lously [Page 312] kept to, that the Trullan Council allows not Baptism to be administred in a private Chappel, Can. 59. but only in the pub­lick Churches, punishing the persons of­fending, if Clergy with deposition, if Laity with excommunication; which yet (as both Zonaras and Balsamon expound the Canon) is to be understood, unless it be done with the leave and appro­bation of the Bishop of the Diocess; for this reason they had afterwards their Baptisteria, or as we call them Fonts, built at first near the Church, then in the Church-Porch, to represent Bap­tisms being the entrance into the my­stical Church; afterwards they were placed in the Church it self: they were usually very large and capacious, not only that they might comport with the general custom of those times of persons baptized, being immersed or put under water, but because the stated times of Baptism returning so seldom, great mul­titudes were usually baptized at the same time. In the middle of the Font there was a partition, the one part for men, the other for women, that to avoid of­fence and scandal they might be bapti­zed asunder. Here it was that this great rite was commonly performed, though [Page 313] in cases of necessity they dispensed with private Baptism, as in the case of those that were sick, or shut up in prison, of which there were frequent instances in times of persecution. Many there were in those days (such especially as lived in the parts near to it) whom nothing would serve, unless they might be bap­tized in Jordan, out of a reverence to that place where our Saviour himself had been baptized; De vit. this Constantine tells us he had a long time resolved upon, Const. l. 4. c. 62. to be baptized in Jordan, though God cut him short of his desire: Euseb. de loc. Hebr. in voce [...]. p. 59. and Eusebius elsewhere relates, that at Bethabara be­yond Jordan where John baptized, there was a place whither very many even in his time used to resort, earnestly desi­ring to obtain their Baptism in that place. This doubtless proceeded from a very devout and pious mind, though otherwise one place can contribute no­thing more than another, nothing be­ing truer than what Tertullian has ob­served in this case, De Bap­tism. c. 4. p. 225. that it's no matter whether we be haptized amongst those whom John baptized in Jordan, or whom Peter baptized in Tyber.

The last circumstance I propounded concerns the manner of the celebration [Page 314] of this Sacrament, and for this we may observe, that in the Apostles Age Bap­tism was administred with great naked­ness and simplicity, probably without any more formality than a short prayer, and repeating the words of institution, and indeed it could not well be other­wise, considering the vast numbers that many times were then baptized at once. But after-ages added many rites, differ­ing very often according to time and place; I shall not undertake to give an account of all, but only of the most re­markable, and such as did generally ob­tain in those times, keeping as near as I can to the order which they observed in the administration, which usually was thus. Persons having past through the state of the Catech [...]mens, and being now ripe for Baptism, made it their request to the Bishop that they might be bap­tized, whereupon at the solemn times they were brought to the entrance of the Baptistery or Font, Cyrill. Hie­ros. Catech. myst. 1. p. 506 & seq. vid. Dion. and standing with their faces towards the West (which be­ing directly opposite to the East, the place of light, Areop. de Eccl. Hie­rarch. c. 2. p. 253. did symbolically repre­sent the Prince of darkness whom they were to renounce and defie) were com­manded to stretch out their hand, as it [Page 315] were in defiance of him: in this posture they were interrogated by the Bishop, concerning their breaking of all their former leagues and commerce with sin, and the powers of Hell, Ambros. de Sacram. lib. 1. c. 2. tom. 4. p. 429. the Bishop ask­ing, dost thou renounce the Devil and all his works, powers, and service? to which the party answered, I do renounce them: dost thou renounce the world and all its pomps and pleasures? Answer, I do re­nounce them. This renunciation was made twice, once before the Congregation (pro­bably at their obtaining leave to be bap­tized) and presently after at the Font or place of Baptism, De Coron. mil. c. 3. p. 102. de Spect. c. 13. p. 79. as Tertullian wit­nesses. Next they made an open confes­sion of their Faith, the Bishop asking Dost thou believe in God the Father al­mighty, Vid. Con­stit. Apost. lib. 7. c. 42. p. 993. &c. in Jesus Christ his only Son, who, &c. dost thou believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Catholick Church, and in one Baptism of repentance for the re­mission of sins, and life everlasting? to all which the person answered, I do believe. This form of interrogation seems to have been very ancient in the Church, and the Apostle is justly thought to refer to it, when he stiles Baptism the answer of a good conscience towards God, which can reasonably re­fer [Page 316] to nothing so well as that common custom of answering in Baptism. These answers and actions in the adult were done by the persons themselves, in chil­dren by their sponsores, De Bap­tism. c. 18. p. 231. as Tertullian calls them, their Sureties and undertakers; for that both Infants and adult persons had those that undertook for them at their Baptism, is so notoriously known, that it were impertinent to insist upon it. After this there was a kind of Exor­cism, and an insufflation or breathing in the face of the person baptized (which S. Austine calls a most ancient tradition of the Church) by which they signified the expelling of the evil spirit, De nupt. & concup. lib. 2. c. 29. tom. 7. col. 856. and the breathing in the good Spirit of God: not that they thought that every one before Baptism was possessed by the Devil, but only that we are by na­ture children of wrath, enemies to God, and slaves to Satan. Nor did they lay any stress upon the bare usage of those Symbolick Rites, but wholly upon the Churches Prayers, which at the same time were made, that God would deliver those persons from the power of Satan, and by his Spirit unite them to the Church. This being done, they were brought to the Font, and were [Page 317] first stript of their garments (intimating thereby their putting off the old man which is corrupt with his deceitful lusts) and that all occasions of scandal and immodesty might be prevented in so sacred an acti­on, the men and women (as I observed before) were baptized in their distinct apartments, Constit. A­post. lib. 3. c. 15 p. 899 the women having Deaco­nesses to attend them, Epiphan. to undress and dress them, Haeres. 79▪ p. 447. ib. l. 7. c. 23. p. 379. to stand about and over­shadow them, that nothing of indecency might appear; then followed the Vncti­on, Catech. 2. p. 518. a Ceremony of early date, by which (says S. Cyril) they signified that they were now cut off from the wild Olive, and were ingraffed into Christ, the true Olive-tree, Ambros. de Sacram. l. 1. c. 2. tom. 4. p. 429. vid. Dion. and made partakers of his fruits and benefits, or else to shew that now they were become Champions for Christ, and had entred upon a state of conflict, Areop. de Eccles. Hi­erach. c. 2. p. 279. wherein they must strive and contend with all the snares and allure­ments of the world, as the Athletae of old were anointed against their solemn Games, that they might be more expedite, and that their Antagonists might take less hold upon them: or rather, probably, to denote their being admitted to the great Priviledges of Christianity, a chosen ge­neration, royal Priesthood, an noly nation [Page 318] (as the Apostle stiles Christians) Offices of which anointing was an ancient Sym­bol, both of being designed to them, and invested in them; and this account Tertullian favours, De Baptis. c. 7. p. 226. where speaking of this Unction in Baptism, he tells us 'tis deri­ved from the ancient, i. e. Jewish Disci­pline, where the Priests were wont to be anointed for the Priesthood: for some such purpose they thought it fit that a Christian (who carries unction in his ve­ry name) should be anointed as a spiri­tual King and Priest, and that no time was more proper for it, than at his Ba­ptism, when the name of Christian was conferred upon him. De Spirit. Together with this we may suppose it was, Sanct. c. 27 tom. 2. p. 351. that the sign of the Cross was made upon the forehead of the party baptized; Vid. Tert. adv. Mar­cion. l. 3. p. 226. when this Cere­mony first began to be used in Baptism, I find not; S. Basil reckons it (and he puts it too in the first place) amongst those ancient Customs of the Church that had been derived from the times of the Apostles: Cyprian. de laps. p. 169. frons cum signo, &c. de unit. ec­les. p. 185. ea parte corporis, &c. adv. that it was generally in use in the times of Tertullian and Cyprian, Demet. p. 202▪ rena­ti, & signo Christi sig­nati, &c. we have sufficient evidence from their Writings, and indeed cannot reasonably suppose they should omit it in this solemn acti­on (where it is so proper) when they [Page 319] used it in the commonest actions of their lives, Tertullian expresly assuring us, De Coron. that upon every motion, Milit. c. 3. p. 102. vid. at their going out and coming in, Cyr [...]l. ad illum. Ca­tech. 4. p. 81. at their going to bath, or to bed, or to meals, or whatever their em­ployment or occasions called them to, they were wont frontem signaculo terere, to make the sign of the Cross upon their fore­head; and this they did (as he there tells us) not that it was imposed upon them by any Law of Christ, but brought in by a pious custom, as that which did very much tend to strengthen and increase their faith. By this they shewed, that they were not ashamed of the Cross of Christ, nor unwilling to ingage in the service of a crucified Master, which yet was so great a scandal to the Heathen-World, and therefore so often triumph­ed in this Symbol and Representation of it. Praefat. in Joh. tom. 3. p. 24. Thus S. Hierom, though he lived in a time when Christianity had almost quite prevailed over all other Religions in the World, yet counted this the great matter of his glory, that I am (says he) a Christian, that I was born of Christian Parents, and do carry in my forehead the Banner of the Cross. And indeed so great a respect did they bear to this Repre­sentation of our Saviours death, that [Page 320] (though they did not worship the Cross, yet) they took care that it should not be put to any mean and trivial uses, be painted or made upon the ground, or en­graven upon Marble Pavements, or any thing where it might be trampled upon, as is expresly provided by a Law of The­odosius and Valentinian. Lib. 1. C. Justin. Tit. 8. L. unic.

The action having proceeded thus far, the party to be baptized was wholly immerged or put under water, which was the almost constant and universal custom of those times, whereby they did more notably and significantly express the three great ends and effects of Baptism; for as in immersion there are in a man­ner three several acts, the putting the per­son into water, his abiding there for a little time, and his rising up again; so by these were represented Christs death, burial, and resurrection, and in confor­mity thereunto our dying unto sin, the destruction of its power, and our resurre­ction to a new course of life; by the per­sons being put into water was lively re­presented the putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, and being washed from the filth and pollution of them: by his abode under it, which was a kind of burial in the water, his entring into a [Page 321] state of death or mortification, like as Christ remained for some time under the state or power of death, therefore as many as are baptized into Christ, are said to be baptized into his death, and to be buried with him by Baptism into death, that the old man being crucified with him, the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth he might not serve sin, for that he that is dead is freed from sin, as the Apostle clearly explains the meaning of this rite: and then by his emersion, or rising up out of the water, was signified his entring upon a new course of life, differing from that which he lived be­fore, that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. But though by reason of the more eminent significancy of these things, im­mersion was the common practice in those days, and therefore they earnestly urg­ed it and pleaded for it, yet did they not hold sprinkling to be unlawful, espe­cially in cases of necessity, as of weak­ness, danger of death, or where conve­niency of immerging could not be had, in these and such like cases Cyprian does not only allow, Ep. 76. ad Magn. p. 153. but plead for it, and that in a discourse on purpose, when [Page 322] the question concerning it was put to him. Upon this account it is that immer­sion is now generally disused in these parts of the world, and sprinkling suc­ceeded in its room, because the tender bodies of most Infants (the only persons now baptized) could not be put under water in these cold Northern Climates without apparent prejudice to their health, if not their lives; and therefore in this as in other cases, God requires mercy rather than sacrifice, especially considering that the main ends of Bap­tism are attained this way, and the my­stical effects of it as truly, though not so plainly and significantly represented, by sprinkling, as by putting the body un­der water.

This immersion was performed thrice, the person baptized being three several times put under water, Ʋbi supra. Hist. Eccl. lib. 6. c. 26. p. 673. a custom which Basil and Sozomon will have derived from the Apostles; Adv. Prax. c. 26. p. 443 de Cor. mil. c. 3 p 460. 'tis certain that it was ve­ry early in the Church, being twice mentioned by Tertullian as the common practice. Dion. Are­op. Eccles. By this trine immersion they signified (say some) their distinct ado­ring the three persons in the blessed Tri­nity, Hierarch. c. 2. p. 254. and therefore the custom was, Ibid. de Sacram. lib. 2. c. 7. p. 424. in repeating the words of institution, at [Page 323] the naming of every person, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, to plunge the party under water, Athanns. in dict. & in­terp. sap. as Tertullian tells us, Quest. 93. and S. Ambrose more expresly. 'Twas done (say others) to represent the death, Cyrill. Ca­tech Myst. 2. p. 518. burial, and resurrection of our Saviour, Greg. Nyss. Orat. Ca­tech. c. 35. tom. 2. p. 530. together with his three days continuance in the Grave; S. Augustine joins both these together as the double mystery of this ancient rite, as he is ci­ted by Gratian to this purpose. De conse­crat. Di­stinct. 4. c. 78. It can­not be denied but that the Ceremony is very significant and expressive, and ac­cordingly the Ancients laid great weight upon it, Can 50. insomuch that the Canons that go under the name of Apostolical com­mand him, whether Bishop or Presby­ter, that baptizes any without the trine immersion, to be deposed from his Mini­stry. But though this custom was in a manner universal, yet in some places (in after times especially) it was otherwise, particularly in Spain, where they used it but once, lest they should gratifie the Arrians, who made use of the trine im­mersion to denote the persons in the Tri­nity to be three distinct substances, and gloried that the Catholicks did, and held the same with them. Upon this account they were content to immerge but once; [Page 324] and when differences and controversies did still remain about it, the fourth Council of Toledo out of a Letter of Gre­gory the great thus determined the case, Can. 5. that they should still use their single im­mersion, and that this would sufficient­ly express the mysteries of Baptism, the diving under water would denote Christs death and descending into Hell, the com­ing out his resurrection: the single im­mersion would express the unity of the Godhead; while the Trinity of persons would be sufficiently denoted by the persons being baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The person baptized being come out of the water was anointed a second time, as S. Cyril tells us; and indeed whatever becomes of the unction that was before, De Bap­tism. c. 7. p. 2 [...]6. 'tis certain that that which Tertullian speaks of as a part of the ancient disci­pline, Cyrill. Ca­tech. 4 p. [...]33. was after the person was baptized; which being done, Jobius a­pud Phot. he had a white Gar­ment put upon him, to denote his hav­ing put off the lusts of the flesh, Cod. 222. c. 18. col. 597. his be­ing washed from the filth and defilement of his former sins, Ambros. de iis qui my­ster. initi­ant. c. 7. tom. 4. p. 425. and his resolution to maintain a life of unspotted innocence and purity, according to that solemn and strict engagement which in Baptism he [Page 325] had taken upon him. In this they allud­ed to that of the Apostle, that as many as are baptized into Christ, have put on Christ, i. e. have engaged in that strict and holy course of life, which he both by his doctrine and example has left to the world: accordingly persons baptized are both by the Apostle, and by the Greek Fathers frequently called [...], or the enlightned, because they now professed that they were become the children of the light and of the day, and would not return to works of darkness any more; and this as they expected mercy from Christ at the great day; therefore the white Garment was wont to be delivered to them with such a charge as this, Gregor. Sa­cramentar. inter Li­turgic. La­tinor. tom. 2 p. 269. vid. Eucholog. Graec. in Offic. S. Baptism. p. 357. Receive the white and im­maculate garment, and bring it forth with­out spot before the tribunal of our Lord Jesus Christ, that thou mayst have eternal life. Amen. From the wearing of these white Vestments (as we have observed before) Pentecost (which was one of the two annual times for Baptism) came to be called Whitesunday, as also the Sun­day after Easter (which was the other time) Dominica in Albis, because then they laid this white Robe aside; for it was the custom for persons baptized to wear [Page 326] this Garment for a whole week after they were baptized, and then to put it off, and lay it up in the Church, that it might be kept as an evidence against them, if they violated or denied that Faith which they had owned in Bap­tism; whereof we have a memorable in­stance under the Arrian persecution in Africk. Victor. Elpidophorus a Citizen of Car­thage had lived a long time in the com­munion of the Church, Ʋtic. de persecut. but apostatizing afterwards to the Arrians, Vand. lib. 3. fol. 43. became a most bitter and implacable persecutor of the Orthodox party: amongst others whom he summoned to be put to the Rack, was one Miritas a venerable old Deacon (who had been the Ʋndertaker for him at his Baptism) who being rea­dy to be put upon the Rack, plucked out the white Vestment wherewith Elpi­dophorus had been clothed at his Bap­tism, and with tears in his eyes thus o­penly bespake him before all the people: These, Elpidophorus, thou minister of error, these are the Garments that shall accuse thee, when thou shalt appear before the ma­jesty of the great Judge; these I will dili­gently keep as a testimony of that ruine, that shall depress thee down into the lake the burns with fire and brimstone; these [Page 327] are they that were girt upon thee, when thou camest pure out of the holy Font; and these are they that shall bitterly pursue thee when thou shalt be cast into the place of flames; because thou hast clothed thy self with cursing, as with a Garment, and hast cast off the sacred obligation of thy Baptism, and the true faith which thou didst then profess and take upon thee. Thesese were the main and most conside­rable circumstances wherewith Baptism was administred in the primitive Church; some whereof were by degrees anti­quated and disused, other rites there were that belonged only to particular Churches, and which, as they were sud­denly taken up, so were as quickly laid aside; others were added in after-times, till they encreased so fast, that the usage and the number of them became absurd and burdensom, as may appear by the office for Baptism in the Romish Ritual at this day.

As a conclusion to this Chapter, I had once thought to have treated concern­ing Confirmation, B. Tayler. which ever was a constant appendage to Baptism, Dr. Ham­mond. and had noted some things to that purpose; Mr. Baxter but shall supersede that labour, Mr. Han­mer. finding it so often, Mr. Daille. and so fully done by others in just [Page 328] discourses, that nothing considerable can be added to them; only I shall give this brief and general account of it: all per­sons baptized in the ancient Church (ac­cording to their age and capacity, per­sons adult, some little time after Baptism, Children, when arrived to years of com­petent ripeness and maturity) were brought to the Bishop, there further to confirm and ratifie that compact which they had made with God in Baptism, and by some solemn acts of his ministry to be themselves confirmed and strength­ned, by having the grace and blessing of God conferred upon them, to enable them to discharge that great promise and engagement which they had made to God. This was usually performed with the Ceremony of Ʋnction, the person confirmed being anointed by the Bi­shop, or in his absence by an inferiour Minister; and indeed Unction was an ancient rite used in the Jewish Church to denote the conferring of gifts or graces upon persons, and thence pro­bably amongst other reasons (as many other usages were) might be derived into the Christian Church; Hen. Vales. Annot. ad Euseb. Hist. Eccles. p. 135. col. 1. though a learned man is of opinion, that unction was never used in confirmation, but [Page 329] where the person being in case of neces­sity baptized by some of the inferior Clergy had not been before anointed; otherwise those who had received com­pleat Baptism, were not afterwards a­nointed at their confirmation, for which the Council of Orange is most express and clear. Can. 1. And indeed that Confirma­tion was often administred without this unction, no man can doubt that knows the state of those times, being done on­ly by solemn imposition of the Bishops hands, and by devout and pious prayers, that the persons confirmed might grow in grace and the knowledge of Christ, and be enabled to perform those vows and pur­poses, and that profession of Faith which they had before embraced in Baptism, and then again owned before the whole Congregation. Till this was done, they were not accounted compleat Christians, nor admitted to the holy Communion, nor could challenge any actual right to those great priviledges of Christianity, whence it is that the Ancients so often speak of Confirmation as that which did perfect and consummate Christians, as being a means to confer greater mea­sures of that grace that was but begun in Baptism; upon all which accounts, [Page 330] and almost exactly according to the pri­mitive usage, it is still retained and pra­ctised in our own Church at this day: and happy were it for us, were it kept up in its due power and vigour; sure I am, 'tis too plain that many of our unhappy breaches and controversies in Religion do (if not wholly, in a great measure) owe their birth and rise to the neglect and contempt of this excellent usage of the Church.

CHAP. XI.
Of the Lords Supper, and the administration of it in the ancient Church.

THE holy Eucharist or Supper of our Lord being a rite so solemnly instituted, and of such great importance in the Christian Religion had place ac­cordingly amongst the Ancients in their publick offices and devotions. In speak­ing to which I shall much what observe the same method I did in treating con­cerning Baptism, considering the persons, the time, the place, and the manner of its celebration. The persons administring were the ordinary Pastors and Gover­nours of the Church, those who were set apart for the ministration of holy of­fices; the institution was begun by our Lord himself, and the administration of it by him committed to his Apostles and to their ordinary successors, to the end of the world. De Cor. mil c. 3. p. 102. We find in Tertullian, that they never received it from any but the hand of the President; which must either be meant of the particular custom of that Church where he lived, or of conse­cration only; for otherwise the custom was when the Bishop or President had by solemn Prayers and blessings consecrated [Page 333] the sacramental elements, for the Dea­cons to distribute them to the people, as well to those that were absent as to them that were present, Apol. 2. p. 97. as Justin Mar­tyr expresly affirms, and as the custom generally was afterwards. For the per­sons communicating at this Sacrament, at first the whole Church, or body of Chri­stians, within such a space, that had em­braced the doctrine of the Gospel, and been baptized into the faith of Christ, used constantly to meet together at the Lords Table. As Christians multiplied, and a more exact discipline became ne­cessary, none were admitted to this or­dinance till they had arrived at the de­gree of the Faithful, for who ever were in the state of the Catechumens, i. e. under instruction in order to their Baptism, or by reason of any hainous crime under the cen­sures and suspension of the Church, and not yet passed through the several stages of the Penitents, might not communicate, and were therefore commanded to de­part the Church, when the rest went to the celebration of the Sacrament: for looking upon the Lords Supper as the highest and most solemn act of Religi­on, they thought they could never take care enough in the dispensing of it; ac­cordingly [Page 334] who ever was found guilty of any scandalous fault, was according to the nature of the offence debarred the Communion a shorter or a longer time, and sometimes all their life, not to be reconciled and taken into the commu­nion of the Church, till they had con­tinued their repentance to their death-bed. As for those persons that could not be present, either through distance of place, sickness, or any other just cause, the Eucharist was wont to be sent home to them, some little pieces of the conse­crated bread dipt in the sacramental Cup, which were usually carried by the Dea­con or some inferior Officer of the Church, or in cases of necessity by any other person; as in the case of Serapion, of whom Dionysius of Alexandria relates, Apud Eu­seb. Hist. Eccles. l. 6. c. 44. p. 246. that having been all his life a good man, at last lapsed in a time of persecution, and though he oft desired reconciliati­on, yet none would communicate with him; not long after he was seized upon by a mortal sickness, depriv'd of the use of his speech and senses, but com­ing to himself after four days, he sends his Nephew a little Boy late at night for one of the Presbyters to come to him; the Minister was at that time sick, but [Page 335] considering the exigence of the case, gives the Boy a little piece of the Eu­charist, bids him to moisten it with a lit­tle water, and so give it him in his mouth, which he did, and immediately the old man chearfully departed this life. For the better understanding of which, we are to observe, that those who had lapsed into Idolatry, were to undergo a very long time of penance, and were not many times admitted to the Communion, till they were near their death; and because it sometimes hapned that they were overtaken with sudden death, before the Sacrament could be administred to them, thence a custom sprung up to give it them after they were dead, which they did doubt­less upon this ground, that they might give some kind of evidence, that those persons died in the peace and communion of the Church, Vid. Conc. 3. [...]arth. Can. 6▪ though this usage was afterwards by many Councils abrogated and laid aside. Conc. 6. in Trull. Can. 83. I take no notice in this place of their giving the Eucharist to new-baptized Infants, the case being so commonly known and obvious. In those early times nothing was more common than for Christians either to carry, or to have sent to them some parts of the Eu­charist, [Page 336] which they kept in some decent place in their houses against all emer­gent occasions, especially to fortifie and strengthen their faith in times of perse­cution, and to encrease kindness and amity with one another; Joa. Front. Epist. de [...] Veter. p. 6. whence one that was well versed in Church-Antiqui­ties, conjectures that when ever they entertained Friends or Strangers, they used before every meal first to give them some parts of the holy Eucharist, as being the greatest badge, the strongest band of true love and friendship in the world. Besides these parcels of the sa­cramental Elements, there were wont at the celebration of the Communion to be pieces of bread (which remained of the Offerings of the people) which be­ing solemnly blessed by the Bishop, might be given to those who had no right to be at the Lords Table, as to the Catechu­mens, and such like, and were to them instead of the Sacrament: These pieces were properly called Eulogiae, because set apart by solemn benediction, and were sent up and down the Towns and Villages round about, to testifie and re­present their mutual union and fellow­ship with one another; nay and some­times from Churches in one Country to [Page 337] those that were in another; which was also done by the Eucharist it self: for so Irenaeus in a Letter to Pope Victor tells us, Euseb. [...]. Eccl [...]s li [...]. 5. c. 23. p. 193. that the Ministers of Churches, though differing in some little circumstances, did yet use to send the Eucharist to one another. Which custom is also taken notice of by Zonaras; but because the carrying the Sacramental Elements up and down the World, was thought not so well to consist with the reverence and veneration that is due to this solemn Or­dinance, therefore it was abolished by the Laodicean Synod, Can. [...]. and these Eulogiae or pieces of bread appointed at Easter to be sent up and down in their room.

For the Time, the next circumstance, when they met together for this solemn Action, it was in general at their pub­lick Assemblies, on the Lords day always or the first day of the week, as we find it in the History of the Apostles Acts, be­sides other days, and especially Satur­day, on which day all the Churches in the World (those of Rome only and Ale­xandria excepted) used to celebrate this Sacrament, Socrat. lib. 5 c. 22. p. 286. as the Historian informs us. What time of the day they took to do it, is not altogether so certain; our bles­sed Saviour and his Apostles celebrated it at night at the time of the Jewish Pass­over; [Page 338] but whether the Apostles and their immediate Successors punctually obser­ved this circumstance may be doubted; 'tis probable that the holy Eucharist which S. Paul speaks of in the Church of Co­rinth was solemnized in the morning, In Loc. the Apostles calling it a Supper (as Chryso­stom thinks) not because 'twas done in the evening, but the more effectually to put them in mind of the time when our Lord did institute those holy Mysteries. De Cor. mil c. 3. p. 102. Tertullian assures us in his time 'twas done in tempore victus, about Supper­time (as all understand him) and very often in the morning before day, when they held their religious Assemblies, of which Pliny also takes notice in his Let­ter to the Emperour: Lib 10. for in those times of Persecution, Ep. 97. when they were hunted out by the inquisitive malice of their enemies, they were glad of the remotest corners, the most unseasonable hours when they could meet to perform the joynt offices of Religion. But this com­municating at evening or at night either lasted only during the extreme heats of Persecution, or at least wore off apace; for Cyprian expresly pleads against it, Ad Caecil. affirming that it ought to be in the mor­ning, Epist 63. p. 104. and so indeed in a short time it prevailed over most parts of the World, [Page 339] except in some places of Egypt, near Alexandria, Ʋt supr. p. 287. of which Socrates tells us, that after they had sufficiently feasted themselves in the evening, they were wont to receive the Sacrament. Under this circumstance of time we may take occasion to consider, how oft in those days they usually met at this table. And at first (while the Spirit of Christianity was yet warm and vigorous, and the hearts of men passionately inflamed with the love of Christ) 'tis more than proba­ble they communicated every day; or as oft as they came together for publick Worship, insomuch that the Canons Apo­stolical and the Synod of Antioch threa­ten every one of the Faithful with Ex­communication, Can. 9. Con­cil. Anti­och. Can. 2. who came to Church to hear the holy Scriptures, but stay not to participate of the Lords Supper: the eye of their minds was then almost whol­ly fixed upon the memory of their cru­cified Saviour, Vid Ep. Cypr. ad Thab [...] it. and the oftner they fed at his table, the stronger and healthier they found themselves, Ep. 56 cir­ca init. p. 87. and the more a­ble to encounter with those fierce oppo­sitions that were made against them. This custom of receiving the Sacrament every day continued some considerable time in the Church, though in some pla­ces longer than in others, especially in [Page 340] the Western Churches; from Cyprian we are fully assured 'twas so in his time, De Orat. We receive the Eucharist every day (says he) as the food that nourishes us to Salvation. Domin. p. 192. The like S. Ambrose seems to intimate of Mi­lan, De Sacram. lib. 5. c. 4 p. 449. tom. 4. whereof he was Bishop, Ad Jovi­nian. p. 108 tom. 2. nay and after him S. Hierom tells us, 'twas the custom of the Church of Rome, and S. Augustine seems pretty clearly to intimate, De Serm. that it was not unusual in his time. Dom. in mont. lib 2. tom 4. col. 1147. & Ep 118. ad Januar. c. 3. col. 557. In the Churches of the East this custom wore off sooner, though more or less according as the primitive zeal did abate and decay; S. Basil telling us that in his time they com­municated four times a week, on the Lords-day, Bas. Ep. 289 ad Caesariam. Wednesday, Friday, and Sa­turday, Patrit. tom. 3. p. 279. yea and upon other days too, if the memory or festival of any Martyr fell upon them. Afterwards as the power of Religion began more sensibly to de­cline, and the commonness of the thing begat some contempt (Manna it self was slighted, after once it was rained down every day) this Sacrament was more rarely frequented, and from once a day it came to once or twice a week, and then fell to once a month, and after for the most part to thrice a year at the three great Solemnities, of Christmas, Easter, and Whitsontide; to so great a coldness and indifferency did the piety and [Page 341] devotion of Christians grow, after once the true primitive temper and spirit of the Gospel had left the World.

Concerning the third circumstance, the Place where this holy Supper was kept, much need not be said, it being a main part of their publick Worship al­ways performed in the place of their re­ligious Assemblies. 'Twas instituted by our Saviour in a private house, because of its Analogie to the Jewish Passover, and because the necessity of that time would not otherwise admit; by the Apostles and Christians with them 'twas celebra­ted in the houses of Believers, generally in an upper room, set apart by the bounty of some Christian for the uses of the Church, and which (as I have formerly proved) was the constant separate place of religious Worship for all the Christi­ans that dwelt thereabouts. Under the severities of great persecutions they were forced to fly to the mountains, or to their Cryptae or Vaults under ground, and to celebrate this Sacrament at the Tombs of Martyrs, and over the Ashes of the dead. Churches growing up into some beauty and regularity, several parts of the divine offices began to have seve­ral places assigned to them, the Commu­nion-service being removed to the up­per [Page 342] or East end of the Church, and there performed upon a table of wood, which afterwards was changed into one of stone, and both of them not uncommonly, though metaphorically, by the Fathers styled Altars, and the Eucharist it self, in later times especially, the Sacrament of the Altar. This place was called [...], and was fenced in with Rails, within which the Clergie received the Sacra­ment, as the Laity did without. Here it was that they all used to meet at this heavenly Banquet, for out of this place they allowed not the celebration of the Sacrament (a thing expresly forbidden by the Laodicean Council) unless in cases of great necessity; Can. 58. and therefore 'twas one of the principal Articles for which the Synod of Gangra deposed Eustathius from his Bishoprick, Socrat. lib. 2. c. 43 p. [...]56. & Concil. that he kept private Meet­ings, perswading some that were averse to the publick Assemblies of the Church, Gargr. that they might communicate and receive the Sacrament at home. Can. 5. 6.

We come last of all to consider the Man­ner how the Eucharist was celebrated in the ancient Church; but before we de­scribe that, we are to take notice, that after the Service of the Catechumens, and be­fore the beginning of that of the Faithful, at which the Eucharist was administred, [Page 343] the custom was to present their offerings, every one according to his ability bring­ing some gift as the first-fruits of his in­crease, Irenaeus adv Haer. lib. 4. c. 34. p 362. which was by the Minister laid upon the Altar or Communion-table, J. Martyr. Ap. 2. p 98. none of them then thinking it fit to ap­pear before the Lord empty, and therefore S. Cyprian severely chides a rich Widow of his time, De oper & eleem [...]syn. p. 218. who came without giving any thing to the poor mans Box, and did partake of their offerings, without bring­ing any offering of her own. These Ob­leations were designed to the uses of the Church, for the maintenance of the Mi­nistry, and the relief of the Poor, espe­cially out of them were taken the Bread and the Wine for the Sacramental Ele­ments, the bread being no other than common bread, such as served for their ordinary uses, there being then no no­tice taken of what has for so many hun­dred years, and still is to this day fierce­ly disputed between the Greek and the Latine Church, whether it ought to be leavened or unleavened bread. Out of these oblations also 'tis probable they took (at least sent provisions extraordi­nary) to furnish the common Feast, which in those days they constantly had at the celebration of the Sacrament, where the rich and the poor feasted together at the [Page 344] same Table. These were called Agapae or Love-feasts (mentioned by S. Jude, and plainly enough intimated by S. Paul) be­cause hereat they testified and confirm­ed their mutual love and kindness, a thing never more proper than at the ce­lebration of the Lords Supper; which is not only a Seal of our peace with God, but a sign and a pledge of our Commu­nion and fellowship with one another. Whether this Banquet was before or af­ter the celebration of the Eucharist, is not easie to determine; 'tis probable, that in the Apostles time, and the Age af­ter them, it was before it, in imitation of our Saviours institution, who celebrated the Sacrament after supper, and S. Paul taxing the abuses of the Church of Co­rinth reproves them, [...] Cor. 11. That when they came together for the Lords Supper, they did not one tarry for another, but every one took his own supper, i. e. that provision which he had brought from home for the common feast▪ which was devoured with great ir­regularity and excess, some eating and drinking all they brought, others (the poor especially that came late) ha­ving nothing left, one being hungry and another drunken; all this, 'tis plain, was done before the celebration of the Eu­charist, which was never administred till [Page 345] the wole Church met together. That therefore which the Apostle reproves and corrects, is their indecency and intem­perance, commanding both rich and poor to wait for one another, and to eat this common meal together, that they might the more orderly and unanimously pass to the celebration of the Lords Supper. In after Ages this Feast was not till the Communion was over, when the Con­gregation feasted together, and so de­parted, Homil. 27. in 1. ad Corinth. p. 559. and so Chrysostom expresly tells us 'twas in his days; besides, nothing is more obvious, than that it was customary in those times for persons to fast, till they had received the Communion. I know a very learned man is of opinion, Albas. de rit. Eccles. obs. 18. p. 135. that these Love-feasts were not kept at the same time with the celebration of the Eu­charist; but besides that his Arguments are not conclusive, the whole stream of learned Writers runs full against him. These Feasts continued for some Ages, till great inconveniences being found in them they were prohibited to be kept in Churches by the Laodicean Synod, Can. 28. and af­ter that by the Council of Carthage; which though but Provincial or National Coun­cils, yet the Decrees were afterwards ra­tified by the sixth Trullan Council, Can. 74. and the custom in a short time dwindled into no­thing.

[Page 346] These things being premised, the sa­cramental elements prepared, and all things ready, they proceeded to the acti­on it self, Catech. myst. 5. which (following for the main the account that is given us by S. Cyril of Jerusalem, Cyrill. ib. p. 534. and taking in what we find in others) was usually managed after this manner: First the Deacon brought water to the Bishop and the Presbyters that stood round about the Table to wash their hands, Constit. A­post. lib. 8. c. 11. p. 1013. signifying the purity that ought to be in those that draw nigh to God, ac­cording to that of the Psalmist, I will wash my hands in innocency, and so will I compass thine Altar, O Lord; then the Dea­con cryed out aloud, mutually embrace and kiss one another; Just. Mart. Apol. 2. p. 97. this holy kiss was very ancient, commonly used in the Apo­stles times, and in the succeeding Ages of the Church, but especially at the Sacra­ment, as a sign of the unfeigned reconci­liation of their minds, and that all inju­ries and offences were blotted out, ac­cording to our Lords command, When thou bringest thy gift to the Altar, and re­membrest that thy Brother hath ought a­gainst thee, leave thy gift before the Altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy Bro­ther, and then come and offer thy gift; this being done, they fell to prayer, the whole Congregation praying together with the [Page 347] Minister (which therefore Justin Martyr calls the Common Prayer, Ibid. the form where­of in the Apostolical Constitutions is de­scribed at large) for the universal peace and welfare of the Church, Lib. 8. c. 10. p. 1011. for the tran­quillity and quietness of the world, Tert. Apol. c. 39. for the prosperity of the age, August. E­pist. 118. for wholesom wea­ther and fruitful seasons, Constit. A­postol. lib. 2. c. 57. p. 881. for all sorts of persons, for Kings and Emperours, and all in authority, for Souldiers and Armies, for believers and unbelievers, for friends and companions, for the sick and distressed, and in short for all that stood in need of help. This general prayer is frequently mentioned by the ancient Fathers; as that which was at the beginning of the Communion Service, Ib. p. 538. though S. Cyrill place it a little later, Cyrill. p. 537. as doubtless it was in his time. Chrysost in c. 9. 1. ad Cor. Hom. 36. p. 652. 2. ad Cor. c. 8. Hom. 18▪ p 873. After this followed the mu­tual salutation of the minister and peo­ple, the Minister saying the Lord be with you, to whom the People answered, and with thy spirit; the Minister cryed, lift up your hearts (nothing being more suta­ble says S. Cyrill at this time, Cyprian. de Orat. Dom. p. 195. than that we should shake off all worldly cares, and exalt our hearts to God in heaven) the people truly assenting and yielding to it, answered, we lift them up unto the Lord; the Minister proceeded, let us give thanks unto the Lord (for what more fit than [Page 348] thankfulness to God, and a high resent­ment of such favours and blessings) to this the people returned, it is meet and just so to do: Whereupon the Minister pro­ceeded to the prayer of Consecration (the form whereof we have in the Apostolical Constitutions) wherein he express'd huge thankfulness to God for the death, Lib. 7. c. 26 p. 979. resur­rection, and ascension of his Son, for the shedding of his blood for us, and the ce­lebration of it in this Sacrament; for condescending to admit them to such mighty benefits, J. Mart. ib. p. 98. and praying for a closer unity to one another in the same mysti­cal body, Cyrill. p. 541. concluding usually with the Lords Prayer, and the hearty and univer­sal acclamation of Amen, Constit. A­post. lib. 8. c. 13. p. 1022. by all that were present: this done, the Minister cryed out [...] holy things be­long to holy persons; the people answer­ing, there is one holy, one Lord Jesus Christ; then he exhorted them to a due participa­tion of the holy mysteries, which Cyrill tells us was done by way of a divine Hymn, singing, Ib. p. 545. come taste and see that the Lord is good.

After this the Bishop or Presbyter took the sacramental elements, sanctified then by a solemn benediction: De Sacra­ment. lib. 4▪ c. 5. p. 439. the form of con­secration we have in S. Ambrose; Lord, make this oblation now prepared for [Page 349] us, to become a reasonable and acceptable sacrifice; this, which is the figure of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ; who the day before he suffered took the bread in his sacred hands, looked up to heaven, giving thanks to thee, O holy Fa­ther, almighty and everlasting God; bles­sed it, and having broken it gave it to his Apostles and Disciples, saying, Take, eat all of it, for this is my body which is bro­ken for many: likewise also after Supper he took the Cup, that very day before he suffered, looked up to heaven, giving thanks to thee, holy Father, almighty and ever­lasting God; and having blessed it, gave it to his Apostles and Disciples, saying, Take and drink ye all of it, for this is my blood. J. Mart. ubi supr. After this he first brake the bread, and delivering it to the Deacon, he distributed it to the Communicants; and after that the Cup, which was like­wise delivered to them, for the custom of communicating under one kind only, as is used in the Church of Rome, was then unknown to the world, nay and for above a thousand years after Christ. In some cases 'tis true they dipt the Bread in the Wine, as in the case of baptized infants, to whom they admini­stred the Eucharist in those primitive times, and to very weak dying persons, [Page 350] who would not otherwise have swallow­ed the bread; and that by this means they might keep the Sacrament at home against all emergent occasions; and this probably might in time make the way easier for introducing the Sacrament under the kind of Bread only. Their sacramental Wine was generally diluted and mixed with water, as is evident from Justin Martyr, Ʋt supr. Irenaeus, Cyprian, and o­thers; Iren. lib. 4. c. 57. lib. 5. c. 2. Cyprian in a long Epistle expresly pleads for it, as the only true and war­rantable tradition, Ad Caecil. derived from Christ and his Apostles, Ep. 63. p. 100. and endeavours to find out many mystical significations intended by it, and seems to intimate as if he had been peculiarly warned of God to ob­serve it according to that manner; Ib p. 105. an argument which that good man often produces as his warrant to knock down a controversie, when other arguments were too weak to do it. But although it should be granted that our Saviour did so use it in the institution of the Sup­per (the Wines of those Eastern Coun­tries being very strong and generous, and that our Saviour, as all sober and tempe­rate persons, might probably abate its strength with water, of which never­theless the History of the Gospel is whol­ly silent) yet this being a thing in it self [Page 351] indifferent and accidental, and no way necessary to the Sacrament, could not be obligatory to the Church, but might ei­ther be done or let alone. The posture wherein they received it was not always the same; the Apostles at the institution of it by our Saviour received it (accord­ing to the custom of the Jews at meals at that time) lying along on their sides upon Beds round about the Table; how long this way of receiving lasted, I find not; in the time of Dionysius Alexan­drinus the custom was to stand at the Lords Table, Apud Eu­seb. H. Ec­cles. lib. 7. c. 9. p. 255. as he intimates in a Letter to Pope Xystus; other gestures being taken in as the prudence and piety of the Governours of the Church judged most decent and comely for such a so­lemn action; the Bread and Wine were delivered into the hands of those that communicated, and not as the supersti­tion of after-ages brought in, injected or thrown into their mouths. Pag. 545. Cyrill tells us that in his time they used to stretch out their right hand, putting their left hand under it, either to prevent any of the sacramental Bread from falling down, Vid. Conc. 6 in Trull. or as some would have it, hereby to shadow out a kind of figure of a Cross. Can. 101.

During the time of administration, which in populous Congregations was [Page 352] no little time, they sung Hymns and Psalms (the compiler of the Apostolical Constitutions particularly mentions the 33. Psalm) which being done, Lib. 8. c. 13. p. 1023. the whole action was solemnly concluded with prayer and thanksgiving, Videsis Di­on. Areop. de Eccl. (the form whereof is likewise set down by the Au­thor of the Apostolical Constitutions) that God had thought them worthy to participate of such sacred mysteries, Hierarch. c. 3. p. 284. Lib. 7. c. 27 p. 980. & lib. 8. c. 15. Cyr. p. 546. and the people being blessed by the Bishop or the Minister of the Assembly, and having again saluted each other with a Kiss of Peace, as a testimony of their hearty love and kindness (whence Tertullian calls this Kiss signaculum Orationis, De Orat. c. 14. the Seal of Prayer) the Assembly broke up, and they returned to their own houses. This for the main was the order where­in the first Christians celebrated this ho­ly Sacrament; for though I do not pre­tend to set down every thing in that precise and punctual order wherein they were always done (and how should I, when they often varied according to time and place?) yet I doubt not but who ever examines the usages of those times, will find that 'tis done as near as the nature of the thing would bear.

CHAP. I.
Of their Humility.

NExt to Piety towards God, suc­ceeds that part of Religion that immediately respects our selves, expressed by the Apostle under the general name of Sobriety, or the keeping our selves within those bounds [Page 3] and measures which God has set us, Vertues, for which the Primitive Chri­stians were no less renowned than for the other: Amongst them I shall take notice of their Humility, their contempt of the World, their temperance and so­briety, their courage and constancy, and their exemplary patience under suffer­ings. To begin with the first.

Humility is a vertue that seems more proper to the Gospel; for though Phi­losophers now and then spake a few good words concerning it; yet it found no real entertainment in their lives, be­ing generally animalia gloriae, creatures pufft up with wind and emptiness, and that sacrific'd only to their own praise and honour: whereas the doctrines of the Gospel immediately tend to level all proud and swelling apprehensions, to plant the world with mildness and mo­desty, and to cloath men with humility, and the ornament of a meek and a quiet spirit: By these we are taught to dwell at home, and to converse more famili­arly with our selves, to be acquainted with our own deficiencies and imper­fections, and rather to admire others than to advance our selves: for the pro­per notion of Humility lies in a low [Page 4] and mean estimation of our selves, and an answerable carriage towards others, not thinking of our selves more highly than we ought to think, nor being unwilling that other men should value us at the same rate. Now that this was the ex­cellent spirit of Primitive Christianity will appear, if we consider how ear­nestly they protested against all ambi­tious and vain-glorious designs, how chearfully they condescended to the meanest Offices and Imployments, how studiously they declin'd all advantages of applause and credit, how ready they were rather to give praise to others than to take it to themselves, in honour preferring one another. Epist. ad. Corinth. p. 3. S. Clemens high­ly commends his Corinthians, that all of them were of an humble temper, in nothing given to vain-glory, subject un­to others rather than subjecting others to themselves, ready to give rather than receive. Pag. 17. Accordingly, he exhorts them (especially after they were fallen into a little faction and disorder) still to be humble-minded, to lay aside all haugh­tiness and pride, foolishness and anger; and not to glory in wisdom, Pag. 20. strength or riches, but let him that glories, glory in the Lord; and to follow the example of [Page 5] our Lord the Scepter of the Majesty of God; who came not in the vain-boast­ing of arrogancy and pride, although able to do whatsoever he pleased, but in great meekness and humility of mind, appearing in the world without any form or comeliness, or any beauty that he should be desired, suffering himself to be despised and rejected of men, who esteemed him not, and hid as it were their faces from him; who counted himself a worm and no man, and was accordingly made a reproach of men, and the derision of the people; all they that saw him, laughing him to scorn, shooting out the lip and shaking the head at him. Now if our Lord himself was so humble-minded, what should we be, who are come under the yoke of his grace? This and much more to the same purpose, has that Ve­nerable and Apostolical man in that ad­mirable Epistle, wherein he does lively describe and recommend the meek and excellent spirit of the Gospel.

Justin the Martyr treads in the very same steps; Epist. ad Zen. & Se­ren p. 505. He tells us that we are to shun all sinister suspicions of others, and to be very careful what Opinion we en­tertain of them: that we are to be of a meek and unpassionate mind, not envy­ing [Page 6] the good esteem and respect which others have, nor ambitiously affecting, or putting our selves forwards upon any service or imployment: that we are humbly to submit our selves, not in words only, Ibid. p. 508, 509. but in all our actions, so as that we may appear to be not Impostors and Distemblers, but mild and unde­signing persons; for whoever would go­vern his life aright must be modest and unpragmatical, not angry and contenti­ous, but silently consider with himself what is best and fittest to be done: that we are to account others wise and pru­dent, and not to think our selves the only discreet and understanding per­sons: that we must not despise their admonitions, but hearken to their counsels, when ever they are just and true. When some in St. Cyprian's time had made a noble and resolute confes­sion of Christ in the face of the great­est danger, Epist. 5. lest they should be exalted above measure in their own thoughts, Presb. & Diacon. p. 13. he bids them remember, according to the discipline of the Gospel, to be humble, and modest and quiet, that they might preserve the honour of their name, and be as glorious in their actions as they had been in their words and confessions [Page 7] of Christ: that they should imitate their Lord, who was not more proud, but more humble at the time of his passion, washing his Apostles feet: and follow the counsel and pattern of St. Paul, who in his greatest sufferings continued meek and humble, and did not arrogate any thing to himself, no not after he had been honoured with a translation into Paradise and the third Heavens. And great reason he had to press this with all possible vehemency at that time, lest Christians by their turbulent and unquiet carriage should provoke the Heathen Magistrate to greater severity against them: and indeed who could better do it than he, who was himself so eminent for humility? For though some Schismatical persons (whose wild­ness and insolence he sought to restrain) endeavoured to insinuate that he was not so humble as became a man of his Rank and Order, and as were our Lord and his Apostles; yet observe how he vindicates himself in a Letter to Pupi­anus the Head of the Party; Epist. 69. p. 116. As for my humility (says he) 'tis sufficiently known not only to the Brethren, but the Gentiles themselves do see and re­spect it, and thou thy self didst know [Page 8] and honour it, whilst thou wast yet in the Church, and didst Communicate with me: but which of us I pray is far­thest from humility? I, who daily serve the Brethren, and receive those who come unto the Church with all joy and kindness; or Thou, who makest thy self a Bishop over thy Bishop; and pre­tendest to be a Judge appointed by God over him who is thy Judge? And indeed how far the good man was from any designs of greatness and dominati­on appear'd in this, [...]ontius Diac. in vit. Cypri­an. p. 12. that when the peo­ple had universally chosen him to be Bishop, he privately withdrew and re­tir'd himself, reckoning himself unwor­thy of so great and honourable an Of­fice, and giving way to others, whose age and experience rendred them (as he thought) much fitter for it: but the importunity of the people being heightned into a greater impatiency, and having found where he was, they beset the house, and blocked up all pas­sages of escape, till they had found him, and forc'd it upon him. And with no less humility did he behave himself in the discharge of it: When consulted by some of his Clergy what they should do in the case of the lapsed, Ep. 5. p. 13, 14. he answers, [Page 9] that being now alone he could say no­thing to it, for that he had determin'd from his first entring upon his Bishop­rick not to adjudge any thing by his own private order without the counsel of the Clergy, and the consent of the People. So meanly did that wise and excellent man think of himself, and so much did he attribute to the judge­ment and concurrence of those that were below him.

Nazianzen reports of his Father (a Bishop too) that amongst other Vertues he was peculiarly remarkable for Hu­mility; Orat. 19. in Laud. Patr. p. 300. which he did not express Philo­sopher-like in little arts of external modes and carriage, putting on a feign'd behaviour, like women who having no natural beauty of their own, fly to the additionals of dresses and paintings, [...], becoming more deformed by their ascititious beauty. His Humility consisted not in his dress, but in the constancy of his mind; not in the hanging down of his head, or the softness of his tone, or the demureness of his look, or the gravity of his beard, or the shaving of his head [the cropping of his hair] or the manner of his gate; but in the frame and temper of his soul, [Page 10] being as humble in his mind, as he was sublime and excellent in his life; and when no man could arrive at the per­fection of his Vertues, yet every one was admitted to a freedom of con­verse with him. Both in his garb and diet he equally avoided pomp and sor­ [...]dness; and though a great restrainer [...] [...]ppetite, would yet seem not to do it, [...]est he should be thought plain­ly to design glory to himself by being needlesly singular above other men. How industriously do we find them many times disowning that deserved praise and commendation that was due to them? How modestly does Justin Martyr decline his adversaries com­mendation of the acuteness and ele­gancy of his reasonings? Dialog. cum Tryph. p. 280. resolving all into the Grace of God, that enabled him to understand and expound the Scri­ptures, of which Grace he there per­swades all men freely and fully to be­come partakers with him. Of the Con­fessors in the time of the persecution under M. Aurelius, Eusebius out of the relation which the Churches of Vienna and Lyons in France sent to the Church­es in Asia, Hist. Eccl. lib. 5. [...]. 2. p. 166. tells us, that although they had often born witness to the Truth at [Page 11] the dearest rate of any thing on this side death, though they had been fre­quently thrown to wild Beasts, expos'd to the fire, and the remains of wounds and violence were visible in all parts of their bodies; yet in imitation of the great humility of the Son of God, they would not after all this (which yet was not uncommon in those times) either call themselves Martyrs, or suffer others to call them so: but if any of the bre­thren either by letter or discourse had saluted them by that title, they would severely reprove and check them for it; acknowledging themselves at best but vile and despicable Confessors, and with tears begging of the Brethren to be instant with God by Prayer, that they might perfect all by a reall Mar­tyrdom. Hence it was, that when Ju­lian the Apostate refus'd to proceed a­gainst the Christians by open persecu­tion, as his Predecessors had done, be­cause he envied them the honour of be­ing Martyrs; Orat. 3. in Julian. 1. p. 73. Nazianzen answers, that he was greatly mistaken if he suppos'd they suffered all this, rather out of a desire of Glory, than a love of Truth: such a foolish and vain-glorious humour might indeed be found amongst his [Page 12] Philosophers, and the best of his party, many of whom have put themselves upon strange attempts meerly to gain the honour of a name, and the reputa­tion of Divinity: But for Christians, they had rather dye in the Cause of Re­ligion, although no man should ever know of it, than to live and flourish amongst others with the greatest Ho­nour and Esteem; it being our great sol­licitude not to please Men, but only to obtain honour from God: Nay, some of us (says he) arrive to that horoick pitch, as to desire an intimate Ʋnion unto God, meerly for himself, and not for the honours and rewards that are laid up for us in the other world. Memorable the humility of the great Constantine, De Vit. Con­stant. lib. 4. cap. 48. p. 551. that when all mens mouths were filled with the honourable mention of his Vertues, and one took upon him to praise him to his face, telling him how happy he was whom God had thought worthy of so great an Empire in this world, and for whom he reserv'd a much better Kingdom in the next; he was highly offended with the address, and advis'd the man that he should not presume to talk so any more; but ra­ther turn his praises of him, into prayers [Page 13] to God for him, that both here and hereafter he might be thought worthy to be numbred amongst the servants of God.

I cannot but take notice of what St. Hierome reports of Nebridius, Ad Salvi­nam Ne­bridii vi­duam, de viduit. ser­vand. p. 75. tom. 1. a young Roman Gentleman, Cousin-german to the Empress, by whom he was brought up in the Palace, Play-fellow and Com­panion to the young Emperours (to whom he was very dear) train'd up with them in the same Studies, and Arts of Education; that notwithstanding all this, and that he was then in the prime and vigour of his Youth, yet he was neither debauched by intemperance a­midst the delicacies and pleasures of the Court, nor swell'd with pride, refle­cting upon others with a surly look; but rendred himself amiable unto all: the Princes he lov'd as brethren, and rever'd as Lords: their attendants and Mini­sters, and all the Orders of the Palace he had so endear'd by kindness and condescension, that they who were so much below him, did in a manner think themselves equal to him.

I shall give but one instance more of the Humility of those times, and that is their ready condescending to any Of­fice [Page 14] or Imployment, though never so mean, about the poorest Christian [...] they thought it not below them to cook and provide victuals for them, to visit the imprison'd, to kiss their chains, to dress their wounds, to wash their feet. And in this our Lord himself went before them, when a little be­fore his death he rose from table, girt himself, wash'd and wip'd his Disciples feet, and then told them what influ­ence this ought to have upon them, That if their Lord and Master had wash'd their feet, they ought also to wash one an­others feet, for that he had given them an example, that they should do as he had done to them; and good reason, the ser­vant not being greater than his Lord, neither he that is sent, greater than he that sent him. Accordingly we find this particular Act of Christian conde­scension frequently us'd in the Primi­tive Church. 1 Tim. 5. 10. St. Paul expresly re­quires it as a qualification in a widow that was to be taken in as a Deaconess into the Church, that she be one that has us'd to lodge strangers, Ad Ʋxor. l. 2. c. 4. p. 168. and to wash the Saints feet. Tertullian assures us 'twas usually done by Christians in his time, to go into the Prisons to kiss and [Page 15] embrace the Martyrs chains, to harbour and provide for indigent brethren, and to bring water to wash the Saints feet: No office so low, which they were not content to stoop to.

When Placilla the Empress was check'd by some of the Court for her mighty condescension in visiting the Hospitals, Theodoret H. Eccl. lib. 5. c. 18. p. 161. and curing the lame and the sick with her own hands, preparing and giving them their provisions, as a thing too much below her State and Grandeur: She answered, That to distribute gold became the Emperour; but for her part she thought her self oblig'd to do this for God, who had advanc'd her to that Honour and Dignity: Often instilling this pious Counsel into her Husband; It becomes you, Sir, always to remember, what you once were, and what you now are: by which means you will shew your self not to be ingrateful to your great Be­nefactor, and will govern the Empire committed to you Justly and Lawfully, and to the honour of him that gave it.

St. Hierom reckoning up the Vertues of Paula, Epitaph. Paulae ad Eustoch. filiam. a Lady of the greatest Descent and Nobility in Rome, but devoting her self afterwards to the solitudes of a Religious Life, Tom. 1. p. 175. tells us of her, that for [Page 16] humility (the prime and chief Vertue of Christians) she carried her self with so much lowliness, that whoever had seen and not known her, could not but have mistaken her for the meanest of the Maids that waited on her. When ever she appeared in the midst of those devout and pious Virgins that dwelt with her, she always seem'd both in cloaths, and voice, and garb, and gate the least and most contemptible of all the rest. So studious was the Piety of those dayes to keep the lustre of their own perfections from sparkling in their eyes, and not fondly to admire the glim­merings of their own light; being so far from falsly arrogating to themselves those excellencies which they had not, that they industriously conceal'd those excellent perfections which they had.

I cannot better conclude this Chap­ter, De Beati­tudinib. Orat. 1. Tom. 1. p. 768. than with the excellent reasonings of St. Gregory of Nyssa against priding a mans self in any external ornaments or advantages, where he thus entertains the proud man: He that looks to him­self, and not to the things that are about him, will see little reason to be proud: for what is Man? Say the best of him, and that which may add the greatest [Page 17] honour and veneration to him, that he's born of Nobles, and yet he that a­dorns his descent, and speaks highliest of the splendour and nobility of his house, does but derive his pedigree from the dirt: and to enquire more narrowly into the manner of his being born into the world, common with o­ther men, were to uncover what shame and modesty require should be con­ceal'd in the profoundest silence. And dost thou not blush, thou statue of earth, who art shortly to be crumbled into dust, who bubble-like containest within thee a short-liv'd humour; dost thou not blush to swell with pride and arro­gance, and to have thy mind stuffed with vain idle thoughts? Hast thou no regard to the double term of mans life, how it begun, and where it will end? Thou pridest thy self in thy juvenile age, and flatterest thy self in the flower, the beauty and sprightliness of thy youth, that thy hands are ready for action, and thy feet apt to dance nim­ble measures; that thy locks are wav'd by the wanton motions of the wind, and a soft down overgrows thy cheeks, that thy purple-robes put the very roses to the blush, and thy silken vestures [Page 18] are variegated with rich embroidery of of battels, huntings, or pieces of anci­ent history; or brought down to the feet, artificially set off with black, and curiously made fast with strings and buttons. These are the things thou look'st at, without any regard to thy self. But let me a little as in a glass shew thee thy own face, who and what thou art: Hast thou not seen in a publick Charnel-house the unvailed mysteries of humane nature; bones rudely thrown upon heaps; naked skulls with hollow eye-holes, yielding a dreadful and de­formed spectacle? Hast thou not be­held their grinning mouths, and gastly looks, and the rest of their members carelesly dispersed and scattered? If thou hast beheld such sights as these, in them thou hast seen thy self. Where then will be the signes of thy present beauty, that good complexion that a­dorns thy cheeks, and the colour of thy lips, that frightful Majesty, and supercilious loftiness that once resided in thine eyes, or thy nose that once beautifully grac'd thy cheeks? Where are thy locks that were wont to reach thy shoulders, the curles that used to adorn thy temples? What are become [Page 19] of those arms that used to draw the bow, those leggs that used to bestride thy horses? Where's the purple, the sil­ken garments, the long robe, the belt, the spurs, the horse, the race, the noise and pransings; and all the rest of those things that now add fuel to thy pride? Tell me, where then will those things be, upon the account whereof thou dost now so much boast and bear up thy self? Was there ever any dream so fond and inconstant, any thing more phan­tastick that ever appeared to a man asleep? What shadow was ever so thin, so incapable of being grasp'd within the hollow of the hand, as this dream of youth, which at once appears, and im­mediately vanishes away. Thus the Holy Man treats the young vapouring gallant, and levels his pride with the sober considerations of mortality: In his following discourse he deals with persons of riper years, and such as are in places of authority and power, and shews how absurd and uncomely pride is in them: which it might not be im­pertinent to represent, but fearing to be tedious, I forbear.

CHAP. II.
Of their Heavenly-mindedness, and contempt of the World.

THe Soul of man being Heaven-born cannot but partake of the nature and disposition of that Country, and have a Native inclina­tion to that place from whence it bor­rows its Original: And though 'tis true, in this corrupt and degenerate state it is deeply sunk into matter, clogg'd and overborn with the earthly and sensual propensions of the lower appetites, the desires and designs of men creeping up and down like shadows upon the sur­face of the earth; yet does it often, e­specially when assisted with the aids of Religion, attempt its own rescue and release. The mind of a good man is [Page 22] acted by manly and generous impulses, it dwells in the Contemplations of the upper Region, tramples upon those lit­tle projects of profit or pleasure which ensnare and enslave other men, and makes all its designs subservient to the interests of a better Country. A tem­per of mind never more triumphant in any than in the Christians of old, whose Conversations were in Heaven, and whose spirits breath'd in too free an air to be caught with the charms of the best enjoyments this world could af­ford: They looked upon the delights and advantages of this life as things not worthy to arrest their affections in their journey to a better. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 308. Justin Martyr dis­coursing with Trypho the Jew, tells him, that they were careful with all fear to converse with men according to the Scriptures, not greedily desiring to gain Riches, or Glory, or Pleasure to themselves, concerning any of which no man could lay any thing to their charge; and that they did not live like the great men of his people, of whom God himself has left this reproachful character, That their Princes were com­panions of thieves, every one loving gifts, and following after rewards.

[Page 23] Nay, Trypho himself bears them this testimony, Ibid. p. 226. though doubtless he intend­ed it as a reproach to them, that having from a vain report chosen Christ to be their Master, they did for his sake foolishly undervalue and throw away all the enjoyments and advantages of this world. Amongst us (says Tatian) there is no affectation of vain-glory, Orat. cont. Gra. p. 167. no diversity of sentiments and opinions, but separating our selves from all vul­gar and earthly thoughts and discour­ses, and having given up our selves to the commands of God to be govern'd by his Law, we abandon whatever seems but a-kin to humane glory. They never met with opportunities to have advantaged and enriched themselves, but they declined and turned them off with a noble scorn. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 15. p. 35. When Abgarus the Toparch of Edessa offered Thaddaeus (one of the Seventy Disciples) great summs of Gold and Silver for the pains he had taken, and the great things he had done amongst them, he refused them with this answer, To what purpose should we receive good things from others, who have freely forsaken and renounced our own? As indeed in those times friends and relations, houses and lands were [Page 24] chearfully parted with, when they stood in competition with Christ; they could content themselves with the most naked poverty, so it might but consist with the profession of the Go­spel.

When Quintianus the President un­der Decius the Emperour asked Aga­tha the Virgin-Martyr, Martyr. e­jus apud Sur. ad diem 5. Feb. tom. 1. ex 5. Metaph. why being de­scended of such Rich and Illustrious Parents, she would stoop to such low and mean Offices as she took upon her; She presently answered him, Our Glory and Nobility lies in this, that we are the Servants of Christ. To the same pur­pose was the answer of Quintinus the Martyr under the Dio [...]lesian Persecuti­on, when the President asked him how it came about, Apud Sur. ad 3. Octo. com. 5. that he being a Roman Citizen, and the Son of a Senator would truckle under such a Superstition, and worship him for a God, whom the Jews had Crucified; the Martyr told him, That it was the highest Honour and Nobility to know and serve God: that the Christian Religion, which he call'd Superstition, ought not to be traduc'd with so base a name, seeing it imme­diately guided its followers to the highest degrees of happiness; for here­in [Page 25] in it is that the Omnipotent God is re­vealed, the great Creator of Heaven and Earth, and his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, by whom all things were made, and who is in all things equal to his Father.

The simplicity of Christians then kept them from aspiring after honour and greatness, and if at any time ad­vanced to it, their great care was to keep themselves unspotted from the world; In Laud. as Nazianzen reports of his brother Caesarius, Caesar. frat. Orat 10. p. 166. chief Physician to the Emperour Constantius, that though he was very dear to him (as he was to the whole Court) and advanced by him every day to greater honours and dig­nities, yet this (says he) was the chief of all, that he suffered not the Nobility of his soul to be corrupted by that Glory, and those delights that were round a­bout him: but accounted this his chiefest honour that he was a Christian; in comparison of which all things else were to him but as a sport and Pagean­try; he looked upon other things but as Comick Scenes, soon up and as soon over; but upon Piety as the most safe and permanent good, and which we can properly call our own, regarding [Page 26] that Piety especially which is most in­ward and unseen to the world.

The like he relates of his Sister Gor­gonia, In laud. as the perfection of her excellent temper, Gorg [...]. O [...]a [...]. 11. p. 183. that she did not more seem to be good, than she did really strive to be so; peculiarly conversant in those secret acts of piety, which are visible only to him, who sees what is hidden and secret; to the Prince of this world she left nothing, transferring all into those safe and coelestial treasuries that are above; she left nothing to the earth but her body, changing all things for the hopes of a better life; be­queathing no other riches to her chil­dren but an excellent pattern, and a desire to follow her example. The truth is, as to estate, they were not concern'd for more than what would supply the necessities of nature, or the wants of others, not solicitous to get or possess such revenues as might make them the objects either of mens envy or their fear; as may appear amongst o­thers by this instance.

Domi [...]ian the Emperour being in­form'd that there were yet remaining some of Christs Kindred according to the flesh (the Nephews of Judas the [Page 27] Brother of our Lord, Euseb. lib. [...] 3, [...]. p. 89. of the Race and Posterity of David, which the Empe­rour sought utterly to extirpate) he sent for them, enquired of them whe­ther they were of the Line of David, they answered they were; he ask'd what possessions and estate they had, they told him they had between them thirty nine acres of land (to the value of about nine thousand pence) out of the fruits whereof they both paid him Tribute, and maintained themselves with their own hard labour, whereto the hardness and callousness of their hands (which they then shew'd him) bore witness: He then ask'd them con­cerning Christ and the state of his King­dome; to which they answered, that his Empire was not of this world, but Heavenly and Angelical, and which should finally take place in the end of the world, when he should come with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, and to reward men according to their works: which when he heard, despising the men upon the account of their meanness, he let them go without any severity against them. Id. lib. 6. c. 3. p. 205. Of Origen we read, that he was so great a despiser of the world, that when he might have [Page 28] liv'd upon the maintenance of others, he would not, but parted with his Li­brary of Books to one that was to allow him only four oboli a day; the day he spent in laborious tasks and exercises, and the greatest part of the night in study; he always remembred that precept of our Saviour, Not to have two coats, not to wear shooes, not anxiously to take care for to morrow, nor would he accept the kindness of others, when they would freely have given him some part of their estate to live on.

Not that the Christians of those times thought it unlawful to possess estates, or to use the blessings of Di­vine Providence; for though in those times of persecution they were often forc'd to quit their estates and habita­tions, yet did they preserve their Pro­prieties intire, and industriously mind the necessary conveniencies of this life, so far as was consistent with their care of a better. There were indeed a sort of Christians call'd Apostolici, who in a fond imitation of the Apostles left all they had, and gave up themselves to a voluntary poverty, holding it not law­ful to possess any thing: hence they were also call'd Apotactici, or renouncers, [Page 29] because they quitted and renounc'd whatsoever they had; but they were ever accounted infamous Hereticks: They were, Cnot. Apo­stolic. Hae­res. 61. pag. 220. as Epiphanius tells us, the descendants of Tatian, part of the old Cathari and Encratitae: together with whom they are put in a Law of the Emperour Theodosius, Cod. Theod. lib. 16. and reckon'd a­mongst the vilest of the Manichaean Hereticks: Tit. 5. de Haeretici [...] l. 7. mentioned also by Julian the Apostate as a branch of the Galilae­ans, De Cynic. Sect. Orat. 7. p. 417. as he calls the Christians, by him compar'd to the Cynic Philosophers a­mongst the Heathens, for the neglect­ing of their Countrey, the abandoning of their estates and goods, and their loose and rambling course of life; only herein different, that they did not as those Galilaean Apotactistae run up and down under a pretence of poverty to beg alms. The truth is, by the ac­count which both he and Epiphanius give of them, they seem to have been the very Patriarchs and primitive foun­ders of those Mendicant Orders, and professors of vowed poverty which swarm so much in the Church of Rome at this day. But to return; The Chri­stians of those dayes did not study those Arts of splendor and gallantry [Page 30] which have since over-run the world, stately Palaces, costly furniture, rich hangings, fine tables, curious beds, ves­sels of Gold and Silver, the very posses­sion of which (as Clemens Alexandri­nus speaks) creates envy; Paedag. lib. 2. c. 3. p. 160, 161. they are rare to get, hard to keep, and it may be not so accommodate to use. Will not a knife cut as well (says he) though it have not an Ivory-haft, or be not gar­nished with silver? or an earthen ba­son serve to wash the hands? will not the table hold our provisions, unless its feet be made of Ivory? or the Lamp give its light though made by a Potter, as well as if 'twere the work of the Goldsmith? may not a man sleep as well upon a mean couch, as upon a bed of Ivory? upon a Goats skin, as well as upon a purple or Phoenician carpet? Our Lord ate his meat out of a common dish, & made his followers sit upon the grass, and washed his Disciples feet, without ever fetching down a silver bowle from Heaven; he took the water which the Samaritaness had drawn in an earthen pitcher, not requiring one of gold, shew­ing how easie it was to quench his thirst; for he respected the use, not the vain and superfluous state of things. [Page 31] This and much more he there urges to this excellent purpose, to let us see how little a Christian need be behol­den to the world, if he be content with what's enough for the necessary uses of humane life.

To this let me annex some part of that discourse which Gregory Nyssen has upon this subject: De Orat. The fluid and tran­sitory condition of mans life (says he) calls for a daily reparation of the de­cays of nature: Domin. Orat 5. p. 745. tom. 1. he therefore that looks no further than to minister to the de­sires of nature, Vid. [...]ypri▪ de Orat. and troubles not him­self with vain anxious thoughts for more than's necessary, Dom. p. 192. lives little less than the life of Angels, whilst by a mind content with little he imitates their want of nothing. For this cause we are commanded to seek only what's enough to keep the body in its due state and temper, and thus to address our Prayers to God, give us our daily bread: Give us bread, not delicacies or riches, not splendid and purple ve­stures, or rich golden ornaments, not Pearls and Jewels, silver vessels, large fields and great possessions, not the go­vernment of Armies, the conduct of Wars, and disposal of Nations, not nu­merous [Page 32] flocks and herds of cattle, or multitudes of slaves and servants, not splendor and gallantry in publick, not marble pillars, or brazen statues, or silken Carpets, or quires of Musick, or any of those things by which the soul is diverted and drawn from more No­ble and Divine thoughts and cares: But only Bread, which indeed is the true and common staff of mans life.

Nor were they more studious of plea­sures and recreations abroad, Minut. F. p. 10. vid. Constit. than they were of fineness and bravery at home: Apostol. lib. 2. c. 62. p. 886. They went not to publick feasts, nor frequented the shews that were made for the disport and entertainment of the people: and this was so notorious, that the Heathens charg'd it upon them as part of their Crime. Observe how he in Minutius Foelix draws it up; The Romans (says he) govern and en­joy the world, while you in the mean time are careful and mopish, abstaining even from lawful pleasures; you visit not the shews, nor are present at the pomps, nor frequent the publick feasts; you abhor the holy games, the sacrifi­cial meats and drinks, crown not your heads with Garlands, nor perfume your bodies with sweet odours; a ghastly, [Page 33] fearful and miserable people! which by that time that Octavius the Christian comes to answer, Pag. 30. he grants it all to be true, and tells him there was very good reason why they should abstain from their shews, pomps and divertisements, at which they could not be present without great sin and shame, without affronting their modesty, and offering a distast and horrour to their minds; and indeed they reckon'd themselves particularly oblig'd to this by what they had vow'd and undertaken at their baptism, when they solemnly en­gaged to renounce the Devil and all his works, pomps and pleasures, i. e. (says St. Cyril) the sights and sports of the Thea­tre, Catech. Myst. 1. p. 510. and such like vanities. The truth is, they look'd upon the publick sports and pastimes of those dayes as the Scenes not only of folly and lewdness, but of great impiety and Idolatry; as places where the Devil eminently rul'd, and reckon'd all his Votaries that came thither. De Spect. c. 26. p. 83. Accordingly Tertullian tells us of a Christian woman who going to the Theatre, was there possessed by the Devil; and when the Evil Spirit at his casting out was ask'd, how he durst set upon a Christian; he presently answer­ed, [Page 34] I did but what was fit and just, for I found her upon my own ground.

Being thus affected towards the world, they could very willingly part with any thing that was dearest to them, Friends, Estate, Liberty, or Life it self. Athen. leg. pro Christ. p. 2. We are not mov'd (says one of their Apologists) with the loss of our Estates which our enemies wrest from us, nor with the violence that's offer'd to our credit and reputation, or if there be any thing of greater concernment than these; for although these things are mightily priz'd and valued amongst men, yet can we despise and sleight them: nay, we cannot only when beat­en, refrain from striking again, and make no resistance against those that in­vade and spoil us; but to them that smite one cheek, we can turn the other, and to them that take away the coat, we can let them take the cloak also. And I remember Nazianzen tells us, Orat. 1. p. 32. that of those excellencies and endowments which God had given him, health, wealth, esteem, and eloquence, he reaped this only benefit, that he had some­thing which he could contemn, and by which he could shew that he infinitely valued Christ before them. The greatest [Page 35] endearment of this life is Relations, and yet these too they could quietly resign when God called for them: Me­morable it is what St. Hierom reports of Melania (a Lady of great Piety in his time, Ad Paul. tom. 1. p. 160. in whose commendation Pau­linus Bishop of Nola spends a very large Epistle, especially commending her for her generous and heroick mind, tam vi­riliter Christiana, Epist lib. 2. that she was some­thing above a woman, Epist. 2. and had the Masculine spirit of a Christian: of this Lady St. Hierom tells us) that her Hus­band lying dead by her, she lost two of her sons at the same time; and when every one expected that she should break out into a violent passion, tear her hair, rent her garments, and burst into tears; she stood still, and at last falling down as 'twere at the feet of Christ, broke out into this pious and Christian resentment, Lord, I shall serve thee more nimbly and readily, by being eased of the weight thou hast taken from me. Nay, so little kindness had they for this world, that they cared not how little they stayed in it, and therefore readily offered themselves to Martyr­dom at every turn. Apol c. 41. p. 33. Tertullian tells his adversaries, that all those plagues [Page 36] which God sent upon the world, what damage soever they might do their enemies, could not hurt them, because they had no other concernment in this world, than as soon as they could to get out of it. De Spect. c. 1. p. 73. This he elsewhere tells us, the very Gentiles assign'd as one rea­son, why the Christians were train'd up in a defiance of all the sports and pleasures of this life, that they might be more willing to dye; and that the cords being cut by which they were tedder'd to this world, they might be more nimble and expedite for their passage hence. Their main designs were intent upon the happiness of another world, and therefore they regarded not what they went thorough to come sooner to it. Being inflamed (sayes Justin Martyr) with the desire of a pure and an eternal l [...]fe, Apol. 2. p. 57. we breath after an intimate converse with God the great Parent and Creator of the world, and make hast to seal our confession with our blood; being certainly perswaded that they shall attain to this state, who by their actions study to approve them­selves to God that they follow after him, and are heartily desirous of com­munion with him in that life, where [Page 37] no malice or wickedness shall take place. This was the mighty support they lean'd upon, the great cordial with which they kept up their spirits in those sad times of suffering and per­secution, the firm belief and expectati­on which they had of enjoying God in a better life. They knew, that the more hast their enemies made to break open the cage of their bodies, the sooner their souls would be at liberty to fly to the regions of blessedness and immor­tality. And indeed so much were their thoughts fixed upon this, so oft did they use to comfort one another by discour­sing of that Kingdom which they ex­pected hereafter, that some of their enemies over-hearing and mistaking them, accused them as treasonable affe­ctors of the Empire: when alas! (as Ju­stin Martyr assures the Emperours) they meant nothing less; Ibid. p. 58. which they might know by this, that being brought to tryal, they freely confessed themselves to be Christians, though they certain­ly knew they must dye for it: whereas (says he) did we expect an humane Kingdome, we would dissemble and deny it, to avoid death, and so expect a more convenient season to accomplish [Page 38] our designs; but since our hopes are not placed in any thing in this world, we regard not those that take away our lives, well knowing they take no­thing from us, but what we must needs lay down our selves. It was their care then continually to keep company with dying thoughts, and to dwell within the prospect of eternity; it being ge­nerally true of all what St. Hierom par­ticularly reports of Marcella, Epitaph. Marcell. ad Princip. p. 119. that she lived so, as alwayes believing that she should immediately dye, and never put on her garments, but it put her in mind of her grave, and of the sheet that should wrap her up in the house of si­lence.

But besides the influence which the expectation of their particular dissolu­tions had upon them, there was one thing which I doubt not did mightily contribute to their being wean'd from the world, and did strongly animate them to a quick and speedy diligence a­bout the affairs of the other life, and that was, the Opinion they generally had of the day of judgment being near at hand: An Opinion started early, as appears by that caution which St. Paul gives the Thessalonians about it; 2 Thes. 2, 3, 4. and it [Page 39] lasted for some Ages after, as is evident from several passages in Tertullian, Vid. de cult. foemin. lib. 2. c. 9. ad uxor. lib. 1. c. 5. who always improves it to this purpose, that men should not unnecessarily encounter themselves with the affairs of this life, but carry themselves as those that were immediately passing hence. I conclude with that of Justin Martyr; Christians (says he) dwell in their own coun­tries, Epist. ad Diognet. p. 497. but as inmates and forreigners; they have all things common with o­ther men as fellow-Citizens, and yet suffer all things as strangers and for­reigners: every forreign Region is their Country, and every Country is forreign to them: They marry like other men, and beget children, but do not expose or neglect their Off-spring; they feast in common, but do not exceed like o­ther men; they are in the flesh, but do not live after the flesh; dwell upon earth, but their conversation is in Hea­ven. Therefore he compares Chri­stians in this world to the soul in the body, as for other reasons, so especially for this, that as the soul lives in the body, but is not of the body, so Chri­stians dwell in the world, but are not of the world; an immortal spirit dwells in a mortal tabernacle, and Christians, [Page 40] while they sojourn in these corruptible mansions, expect and look for an incor­ruptible state in Heaven.

CHAP. III.
Of their sobriety, in respect of their Garb and Apparel.

[Page 42] THe Primitive Christians being thus eminent for their contempt of the world, 'tis easy to imagine that they were very temperate and abstemi­ous in the use of all the pleasures and conveniences of humane life, which we shall more particularly consider in these three instances, their Sobriety in respect of Garb and Apparel, their Temperance in regard of food and diet, and their Continence or chastity.

For the first, the care about our Garb and Dress, it is one of those instances of Sobriety which are to be conducted by the rules of Religion and Reason, and which very much discover a ver­tuous or a vicious temper: There are three things (as the Son of Syrach well ob­serves) that shew a man what he is, his Attire, excessive Laughter, and his Gate: There is not certainly a more open evi­dence of a vain mind, than a vain garb and habit. St. Basil discoursing what habit does best beseem a Christian, Reg. fus. disput. in­terrog. 22. p. 566. tom. [...]. tells us in general, that it ought to be such as most lively expresses the meekness and humility of the mind, that good men of old were so attired, and that we are commanded, having food and rai­ment [Page 43] to be therewith content; not stu­dying variety, and which most com­monly follows it, softness and elegancy, which are but instruments to minister to excess and luxury, introduced into humane life through the idle and un­necessary Arts of loosness and effemi­nacy. De cultu foemin. lib. 2. c. 13. p. 160. 'Tis not enough (says Tertul­lian) that a Christian be chast and mo­dest, but he must appear to be so; a ver­tue, of which he should have so great a store and treasure, that it should flow from his mind upon his habit, and break from the retirements of his conscience into the superficies of his life, as he there expresses it. More particularly St. Basil tells us, Ibid. p. 567. that the habit of a Christian ought to be suitable to the two great ends of cloathing instituted by God, viz. Honesty and Necessity; ho­nesty to hide the less comly parts of the body, and to cover that shame which sin has brought upon mankind: in Pa­radise Innocency was mans only robe, 'twas sin brought in the fig-leav'd coat, and what should more induce us to be modest in our apparel, than to remem­ber, that our clothes are Monitors of our apostasie, and that there's little reason we should pride our selves in [Page 44] that which is only a cover for our shame? Necessity, and so clothes were designed to keep the body in conve­nient warmth, and to defend it from those injuries and extremities of the air and wether, which would other­wise soon rot down this house of clay. Now to both these ends (he tells us) we ought to accommodate our gar­ments, Vid. Cyril. ad Illumi­nat. Catec. 4. p. 94. not striving for variety, having some for uses at home, others for often­tation when we go abroad, but that whatever attains these ends is enough. But besides these, there is a third Ʋse and end of clothes, noted by Clemens Alexandrinus, Paedag. lib. 3. c. 11. p. [...]45. and that is for distincti­on, not only of Sexes, but of different ranks and degrees of men, such as agree best to mens age, persons, shape, nature, or their several states and employments; in these respects men may use different and distinguishing habits: nay, he grants that in some cases men may re­cede from the strict rule and discipline of this affair, and that such women as cannot otherwise gain upon their hus­bands, may (if they require it) go a little more trim and neat, provided (as he there limits it) it be done only to please and gain upon their husbands, [Page 45] and that they do not practise any Arti­fices of unlawful beauty.

Now that the ancient Christians go­vern'd themselves by these rules in this affair is plain, in that they avoided both singularity on the one hand, and excess on the other, generally conform­ing themselves to the decent and order­ly customes and fashions of the times and places where they liv'd. Epist. ad Diogn. p. 496. Justin Martyr giving his friend an account of the Christians, tells him, that they differ'd not from other men either in their Country, or Speech, or the usages of the civil life; they dwell in their own Cities, use the same language with o­ther men, nor have they any singular and extraordinary way of life; they are not in any thing affected or phan­tastick; but inhabiting partly amongst Greeks, partly in barbarous Cities, as every ones lot is fallen, they follow the customes of their Countrey; and both in clothes and diet, and all other affairs of outward life, shew the ex­cellent and admirable constitution of their discipline and conversation. I am not ignorant of what some learned men would have us to believe, that in those times when any turn'd from Paganism [Page 46] to Christianity they were wont to change their habit, to leave off the Toga or Gown (the common habit almost in all parts of the Roman Empire) and to take up the Pallium or Cloak: and this they think sufficiently countenanc'd by the instance of Tertullian, who laying aside the Gown, and putting on the Cloak, was accused of lightness and inconstancy by the people of Carthage, and bitterly persecuted with the com­mon sarcasm, à Toga ad Pallium, as one that had want only skipp'd from the Gown to the Cloak, i. e. from one pro­fession to another; insomuch that he was forc'd to write an Apology for himself, which he did in his book de Pallio, where with a great deal of sa­tyrical and sarcastick wit he retorts up­on them, and vindicates himself from their charge and cavils. But that there was any such change of habit at persons first▪ coming over to Christianity I can see no reason to believe; and for the case of Tertullian it makes nothing to the purpose, unless it could be prov'd that he left off the gown at his first en­trance upon the Christian Religion, which will be hard to make out; for I am clearly of the mind of the learned [Page 47] Salmasius, that he altered his habit, and assumed the cloak not when he first be­came Christian, Praefat. in Comment. Tertul. de Pallio. but when he was made Presbyter of the Church of Carthage; Tertul. de Pall. c. 4. whence it is called by him according to his dialect Sacerdos habitus (for so it is in all ancient Manuscripts, Vid. Tertul. ex Edit. B. Rhenani, p. 620. vid. etiam Salm. in loc. and in the first Edition of B. Rhenanus, and not sa­cer habitus, as later Editions have it) the Priests habit; because the Christian Priests usually wore it after their en­trance upon Holy Orders. For the bet­ter understanding of which, we are to consider a little, that amongst the Greeks the Pallium or Cloak was not commonly worn, but was the proper habit of Philosophers, who profess'd a more severe and accurate course of life. Acordingly amongst the Christians those who professed themselves to be [...], the more strict and exact observ­ers of the Christian discipline, whether they were Laity or Clergy, assumed this habit to themselves; and because the Clergy in those times generally took upon them this austere and philoso­phick way of life, this garb was most peculiar to them; and this probably they did the rather, not only because this was the most plain and simple gar­ment [Page 48] in it self, but because they sup­posed the Apostles (whom they strove to imitate) wrote this habit, as is plain they did as from other passages in the New Testament so from St. Pauls send­ing for the Cloak which he left at Troas: therefore the Author of the Apostolical History, who shelters himself under the name of Abdios Babylonius, certainly forgot himself, when describing the ha­bit of St. Bartholomew the Apostle, he made it so trim and fine. Lib. 8. fol. 96. p. 2. Vestitus (says he) Colore (doubtless it should be Colo­bio) albo, &c. he was clothed in a white coat, beset with studs of purple, over which he had a white Cloak, having purple gems at each corner of it; a piece of gallantry unknown to the plainness of those times, and unsuitable to the profession of that Holy man. In­deed, as plenty and prosperity began to flow in upon the Church, this simple and modest garment was laid aside, and the Clergy took upon them a more rich and splendid garb; insomuch that when Eustathius Bishop of Sebastia took upon him to wear the Philosophick Cloak, Socrat. and perswaded his followers also to use it; Hist. Eccl. lib. 2. c 43. p. 156. vid. Concil. Gangr. Can. 12. he was for this very rea­son deposed by his own Father Eulalius [Page 49] Bishop of Caesarea, because wearing a habit unsuitable to the Ministerial Or­der, which sentence was not long after ratified by the Synod of Gangra, and a Canon made against it.