The life of the Most Reverend Father in God, James Usher, late Lord Arch-Bishop of Armagh, primate and metropolitan of all Ireland with a Collection of three hundred letters between the said Lord Primate and most of the eminentest persons for piety and learning in his time ... / collected and published from original copies under their own hands, by Richard Parr ...

LETTER CCXXII. A Letter from the Reverend Dr. Barlow (now Bishop of Lin∣coln) to the most Reverend James Usher Arch-bishop of Ar∣magh.

My Lord,

I Did receive (by the hands of Mr. Tozer) your Grace's Tract de Sym∣bolis; for which great Honour done unto me, this piece of Paper comes to return my most humble and hearty Thanks. I confess I have ever been inquisitive after your Grace's Writings, and thought my self happy when I had found them; for I was never deceived in my Expectation, but ever found old Orthodox Truth maintained upon just and carrying Grounds, which elsewhere I have often sought, but seldom found. I wish Vossius in putting out and composing his Tract de tribus Symbolis, had used the same Judgment and Diligence your Grace hath done in this: For tho your Grace be pleased to give that Tract of his a civil Commendation, yet 'tis undenia∣bly the most indigested thing that ever Vossius put out. And here (well knowing your Lordship's unparallell'd Skill in Antiquity, and your Can∣dor and Willingness to communicate your Knowledg to the Benfit of others) I shall take the boldness humbly to desire your Grace's Opinion concerning the 13 Can. of the Council of Ancyra, the words are these—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. I find no various reading in any Greek Copies, Balsamon, Zonaras, Tilius, Justellus, &c. all agreeing; only Salmasius, (Apparatu ad lib. de Primatu, pag. 78.) for [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] will have it [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] And (it seems) Dionysius Exiguus reads it so too. The Latin Translations make it quite another thing than the Greek imports, as your

Lordship may see by those two Translations in Grabb (followed by the rest) and that of Justellus, in his Codex Can. Ecclesiae Universae, pag. 2. which runs thus—Chorepiscopis non licere Presbyteros, vel Diaconos ordinare: Sed nec Presbyteris Civitatis, sine literis Episcopi, in alienâ Parochià aliquid agere: Where Justellus adds these two last words [Aliquid agere] as if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or some such thing were in the Greek, which I find not. I confess Fulg. Ferrandus in Breviat. Cano. Can. 92. reads it as Justellus—Ut Presbyteri Givitatis sine jussu Episcopi nihil jubeant, nec in unaqua{que} Parochiâ aliquid agant; tho the Greek is otherwise, and the old Latin Translation (vid. Cod. Can. veterem Ecclesiae Romanae Mogunt. 1525. & postea Par. 1609.) agrees exactly with the Greek. So then the sense of the Can. seems to be this—That the Chorepiscopi, and Presbyteri civitatis, may not ordain Priests or Deacons without Commission from the Bishop, but with it they may. Here first, I shall make no question but the Chorepiscopi might ordain with Licence first had from the Bishop; for tho it hath been the general opinion of the World that the Chorepiscopi were only Simplices Presbyteri (as the counterfeit Damasus 1 tells us, Epist. 5. and the rest have followed him, as 2 Gratian, 3 Ant. Augustinus, 4 Salmasius, 5 Blondellus, 6 Donfield, 7 Spalaten∣sis, 8 Forbes, the Capit. of 9 Charles the Great, &c.) Yet I conceive that 'tis demonstrable undeniably from the carrying Principles in Antiquity that they were Bi∣shops. And therefore my Question is, how the Presby∣teri Civitatis might ordain (if that be the meaning of the Canon) with Licence from the Bishop, it never appearing in Antiquity that any Presbyters Ordination of a Presbyter was Canonical, either by himself; for we find Ischyras censured, and deposed, because or∣dained by Coluthus, who was but a Presbyter. Second∣ly, Nor do we find that ever any Bishop gave Com∣mission to a Presbyter to ordain; it being expresly against the Canons of the Apostles, Can. 2. I know that Claud. Salmasius (Wal. Messalin. cap. 5. pag. 315. & fusè à pag. 308, ad pag. 317. & in Apparat. ad lib. de Pri∣mat. pag. 78. & lib. de Primat. cap. 1. pag. 10, 11.) and Dav. Blondellus (Apolog. pro sententiâ Hieron. Sect. 3. pag. 93. & sequentibus) from this Canon infers that Ordination anciently was not peculiar to the Bishop, but any Presbyter had commune jus, and might (as well as the Bishop) ordain. If your Grace would be pleased to honour me so far, and help me in this doubt, you should do a great favour to Truth, and to

My Lord,

Your Grace's most humble, and very much obliged Servant. Thomas Barlow.

Q. Coll. Oxon. Sept. CIC. ICC. XLVII.

Notes

• 1

  Apud Blondel Pseudo-Isido∣ri, pag. 530, &c.
• 2

  Distinct. 68. Can. 4, 5.
• 3

  In Epit. Jur. Pon∣tificii, lib. 6. Tit. 2. cap. 1, 2, 3.
• 4

  Wal. Messal. cap. 5. pag. 315.
• 5

  Apologiae, Sect. 3. p. 93, &c.
• 6

  Of the Church, l. 5. c. 29.
• 7

  De Republ. Eccl. part. 1. l. 2. c. 9. §. 17, 18, 19.
• 8

  Irenico. l. 2. cap. 11. Prop. 14. p. 249, &c.
• 9

  Apud Fred. Lindenbrog. l. 7. c. 318, 328, 329. lib. 5. c. 168. l. 6. cap. 19, 284. lib. 1. cap. 9. lib. 7. cap. 310.