Keimåelia 'ekklåesiastika, The historical and miscellaneous tracts of the Reverend and learned Peter Heylyn, D.D. now collected into one volume ... : and an account of the life of the author, never before published : with an exact table to the whole.

CHAP. VI. Of the Estate of holy Church, particularly of the Asian Churches, to∣ward the latter days of S. John the Apoistle.

• 1. The time of S. John's coming into Asia.
• 2. All the Seven Churches, except Ephesus, of his Plantation.
• 3. That the Angels of those Churches were the Bishops of them, in the opinion of the Fathers.
• 4. And of some Protestant Divines of name and eminence.
• 5. Conclusive reasons for the same.
• 6. Who most like to be the Angel of the Church of Ephesus.
• 7. That Polycarpus was the Angel of the Church of Smyrna.
• 8. Touching the Angel of the Church of Per∣gamus, and of Thyatira.
• 9. As also of the Churches of Sardis, Phila∣delphia, and Laodicea.
• 10. What Successors these several Angels had in the several Churches.
• 11. Of other Churches founded in Episcopacy, by S. John the Apostle.
• 12. S. John deceasing, left the government of the Church to Bishops, as to the Successors of the Apostles.
• 13. The ordinary Pastors of the Church.
• 14. And the Vicars of Christ.
• 15. A brief view of the estate of holy Church in this first Century.

WE now proceed unto Saint John, and to the Churches of his time, those most especially which he did either plant or water: who living till the end of this present Century, and being the last Surviver of that Glorious company of the Apostles, could not but see the Church of Christ in her fullest growth, in her perfection, both for strength and beauty. Of this Apostle we find not any thing in Scripture, from his descent unto Samaria, when he accompanied Saint Peter thither, by the ap∣pointment of the residue of that goodly fellowship, until the writing of the Revela∣tion. The intervening passages of his life and preaching, we must make up out of such fragments of Antiquity, and records of Story, as are come safe unto our hands. Where first I must needs disallow the conceit of those, who carry him I know not how to Ephesus, making him an inhabitant there, and taking with him to that place, the Mother of our Lord and Saviour: which must needs be, if ever it had been at all, about the 44. year after Christs Nativity, that being the time wherein the Apostles and Disciples were dispersed abroad, upon the persecution raised by Herod. But that it was not then, nor a long time after, will appear by this, that when Paul came to preach and reside at Ephesus, which was in Anno 55. above ten years after, there was so little knowledg of the faith of Christ, that they had not so much as heard there was any Holy Ghost; being baptized only, as themselves confessed, unto John's baptism. A thing which could not possibly be supposed, without a great deal of reproach and ignominy to this blessed Apostle, had he been here a resiant, as by some reported. And after this, though we are well assured of his being here, yet then he could not have in houshold with him the blessed Mother of our Lord; who died, in their account that put it off until the latest, Anno 48. seven years before the coming of Saint Paul to Ephesus. And therefore I agree rather unto Epiphanius, as to the main and matter of his Negative, though not as to the reason of it. For where he tells us, that when JOHN went down to Asia, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he took not the blessed Virgin with him; I hold it to be absolutely true, past contradi∣ction. But where he buildeth his negation upon an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the silence of the Scripture in it; I hold that reason to be insufficient: there being many things of un∣doubted verity, whereof there is no mention in the Holy Scripture. And I agree too unto Epiphanius, where he tells us this, that Saint John's coming into Asia was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 when he began to be in years; the Holy Ghost then calling of him thither, as well to propagate the Gospel where it was not preached; as to con∣firm it where it had been shaken by the force of Heresie. Into what parts the Spirit did before command him, it is hard to say. Some likelyhood there is. that he did preach the Gospel amongst the Parthians, (some of which Nation had been present at Hierusalem at the first giving of the Holy Ghost) his first Epistle being inscribed, ad Parthos, as some Antients say.

But that he came at last to Asia, and there preached the Gospel, is a thing past que∣stion. [unspec II] Eusebius, out of Origen, doth expresly say it. And though that piece of Origen be lost out of which Eusebius took the same; yet we may take it on his word without more authority. Nor did he only preach the Gospel in those parts of Asia, strictly and properly so called; but he also planted many Churches, and founded in them many Bishopricks. All the seven Churches, except that of Ephesus, to which he writ his Revelation, were partly, if not totally his foundation: and in all them he constituted Bishops, as we shall manifest and declare anon. And as for Ephesus, although he came too late to plant it, yet he came time enough to water it; to settle and confirm the same: being much weakned and endangered by the sorceries and devices of Apollo∣nius Tyanaeus, who for some time did therein dwell; as also by the Heresies of Ebion and Cerinthus, who at that time lived, and therefore rightly doth Ignatius, who then lived also, joyn him with Paul and Timothy, as a Co-founder of that Church. But being in the middle of his course, he was sent prisoner unto Rome, Anno 92. thence confined to Patmos, where he continued till the death of the Emperour Domitian, which was in Anno 99. during which time he writ the Revelation. And of those Churches I conceive it was that Tertullian speaketh, where pleading in defence of the Catholick Faith, delivered by the Apostles, to the Churches by them severally plant∣ed, and by the Bishops of those Churches taught, and in their successions: he thus brings them in, "Habemus & Johannis alumnas Ecclesias, &c. We have, saith he, the Churches founded by Saint John. For howsoever Marcion doth reject his Revelation, Or∣do tamen Episcoporum, yet the succession of their Bishops reckoned up unto their original, will stand for John to be their founder. And probable at their request it was, that

he writ his Gospel. For that he writ it at the intreaty of the Asian Bishops, Roga∣tus ab Asiae Episcopis, is positively affirmed by Hierom: though like enough it is, that other Bishops besides those of his own foundation, might contribute their requests, and importunities to so good a purpose, being all equally afflicted with the pest of Heresies.

The quality and condition of these Asian Churches, [unspec III] Saint John doth punctually describe in his Revelation, written in Anno 97. when as he had been four or five years confined to Patmos. It seemeth those Churches, most of them at the least, on the calami∣ty which befel the Apostle in his deportation, being deprived of the benefit of so Divine and excellent a Spirit, and pressed by the importunity of these active Hereticks, willing to make the best advantage of the present time, began to stagger in the faith, wax cold in their affection to the Gospel, and to give way to such false Teachers as were crept in amongst them, to rectify what was amiss amongst them, and to inform them of their er∣rours did he direct unto them his Apocalypse, To the seven Churches in Asia; so it doth begin. But when he comes unto particulars, to give them every one their particular charge, from him who walked in the midst of the Golden Candlesticks; then he addresseth his discourse to the Angels only, the Angels of those several Churches. Unto the Angel of the Church of Ephesus; and to the Angel of the Church of Smyrna; and to the Angel of the Church of Pergamus; & sic de caeteris. Now ask the Fathers what those Angels were, and they will tell you that they were the Bishops of those several Churches. Saint Austin writing on these words, Ʋnto the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, &c. makes this observation, Divina voce sub Angeli nomine laudatur praepositus Ecclesiae, that the Bishop or Governour of the Church, (remember what was said before of the word Praepositus) is praised by the voice of Christ, under the name of an Angel: But first he gives a reason of his resolution, shewing that this Expostulation could not be applyed to those Ministring spirits in the Heavens, because they still retained their first Love to God; and therefore must be understood, de praepositis Ecclesiae, of the Rulers or Governours of the Church, who had given way to false Apostles. The like occurreth in his Comment on the Revelation, wherein he maketh the Angels of these Churches, to be Episcopi aut praepositi Ecclesiarum, the Bishops or Rulers of the same. The Commentaries under the name of Ambrose, pointing unto this place of the Apocalypse, give us this short note, Angelos Episcopos dicit, that by Angels there he meaneth Bishops. And these ascribed to Hierom, writing on those words, Because of the Angels, 1 Cor. 11. observes the same, Angelos ecclesiis presidentes dicit, that there by Angels Saint Paul intends the Presidents or Rulers of the Churches. Final∣ly, Oecumenius saith the same, who speaking of the seven Churches in Asia, to whom Saint John addresseth his Discourses, observe, that John ascribes to them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, an equal or proportionable number of governing Angels. And on those words, the seven stars are the Angels of the seven Churches, makes this gloss or Comment, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that he cal∣leth these Angels, governours of Churches by the name of stars, because they borrow all their light from the Sun of Righteousness.

For Protestant Writers which affirm the same, [unspec IV] I begin with those which speak most generally and indefinitely: where first we have Sebastian Meyer; Ecclesiarum Prae∣fecti, & stellae & Angeli, in sacris literis dicuntur; the Governours of Churches are called, saith he, in holy Scripture, by the name of Stars, and Angels. Bullenger to the same effect, Angeli sunt legati Dei, Pastores Ecclesiarum, the Angels are the Messengers of God, the Pastors of the Churches; in which, lest possibly we might mistake his meaning, in the word Pastor, he tells us not long after, that he means the Bishop, for speaking of the Angel, or the Pastor of the Church of Smyrna, he tells us that he was that Polycarpus, as it was indeed, Ordinatus ab Apostolis, ab ipso inquam Johanne Epi∣scopus, who was ordained Bishop of that Church by the Apostles, nay by John him∣self. Paraeus is as general as the other two, but far more express. Episcopos vocat stel∣las, &c. The Bishops are called Stars, saith he, because they ought to out-shine others, aswell in purity of Doctrine, as sincerity of Conversation in the Church of God: eosdem Angelos vocat, quia sunt Legati Dei ad Ecclesiam, and they are also called Angels, because they are the Legats or Embassadours of God to his holy Church. And lest we should mistake our selves, and him, in the word Episcopus, he laboureth to find out the Bishop of each several Church, as we shall see hereafter in that inquisition: for those who speak to the particular, we begin with Beza, who on those words, un∣to the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, gives this Annotation. Angelo, i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

quem nimirum oportuit imprimis de his rebus admoneri, &c. To the Angel, that is, saith he, to the chief President, whom it behoved to have the notice of the charge there given, and by him to the rest of his Colleagues, and the whole Congregation: but fearing lest this Exposition might give some advantage, for the upholding of the Hierarchie, which he so laboured to pull down, he adds, de proprio, that notwithstanding this acknowledgment, Episcopal authority, being a thing of mans invention, hinc statui, nec potest, nec debet, nor may, nor ought to have any ground from hence. Finally, Marlorat himself on those very words, shews that however there were many things in the Church of Ephesus, which required Reformation, both in the Clergy and the people; Non tamen populum aggreditur, sed Clerum, yet the Apostle doth not apply himself un∣to the people, but the Clergy. Nor doth he fashion his discourse to the Clergy gene∣rally, Sed ad Principem Cleri, Episcopum utique, but to the chief or principal of the Clergy, which was the Bishop.

Nay, Marlorat goes further yet, and he as he layeth down his interpretation, [unspec V] so he doth also give a reason of it; and such a one as may well satisfie any man of reason. His reason is, Nam Pastor non modo pro propriis, &c. Because the Pastor is not only to ren∣der an account to the supream Judg, for his own sins alone, but for the sins of all his flock, if any of them by his sloth or negligence do chance to perish. And certainly this reason is of special use and efficacy to the point in hand. For if the Lord do look for an ac∣count at the Pastors hand, for every sheep that shall be lost by his sloth or negligence: it must needs follow thereupon, that those of whom so strict a reckoning is expected must not have power only to persuade and counsel, but also to correct and censure, and by their own proper and innate authority, to rectifie such things as are amiss in their several charges. The Son of God is neither so unjust, as that the Pastor should be charged with those enormities, which he hath no authority to amend or rectifie: nor so forgetful as to threaten and rebuke the Pastor, not only for the peoples faults, but the Errata of the Presbyters, in case he were not trusted with a greater power than any of the rest, for that end and purpose. Which being so, and that our Saviour by Saint John doth send out his summons neither unto the Church in general, nor to the Presbyters in common, but to the Angel of each Church in the singular number: it is most plain and evident, as I conceive, that in the time of writing the Apocalypse, as long time before it, the Church of Christ had certain Pastors, of more eminent note, when they (as we) intituled Bishops, which governed as well the Presbyters, as the rest of the Flock; and those the Son of God acknowledgeth for stars and Angels. And howsoever the inferiour Pastors both are, and may be cal∣led Angels, in a general sense, as Messengers and Ministers of God Almighty: yet if it be the Angel in the singular number, the Angel in the way of eminence and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it is peculiar only to the Bishop.

Now that each Church of those remembred in that Book, had his proper Angel, [unspec VI] and that they were not governed by a Corporation or Colledg of Presbyters, to whom those several Epistles might be sent, by the name of Angels, the word Angel being to be taken collectively, and not individually, as some men suppose, is in the next place to be shewed. And first for proof, there is a pregnant evidence in a Discourse or Treatise touching the Martyrdom of Timothy: the Author of the which relates, that after Saint John the Apostle was revoked from his exile, by the sentence of Nerva, he be∣took himself to the Metropolis of Ephesus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and being assisted with the presence of the seven Bishops, he took upon himself the government of the Metropolis of the Ephesians, and there continued preaching the Do∣ctrine of salvation till the time of Trajan. Which as it is an evident and convincing proof, that the seven Churches had their several Bishops, to each Church one Bishop: so is it no such difficult matter, to find out most of them by name, and what Church each of them did govern. And first for Ephesus, some have conceived that Timothy was still alive, and Bishop at that time when the Apocalypse was written: which hot∣ly is defended by Alcasar, against Ribera, Lyra, and Pererius, who opine the contrary. But surely Timothy it could not be, as doth appear in part by that which was alledged out of the Treatise of his Martyrdom, which if it were not written by Polycrates, is yet very antient, and authentick: wherein he is conceived to be dead before: but principally by the quality and condition of that blessed Evangelist, so plentifully en∣dued with the Holy Ghost, so eminent in piety, and all heavenly graces, that no man can conceive him lyable to the accusation, with which the Angel of that Church is charged. And therefore it must either be that John, when (on the death of Timo∣thy,

as I conceive) Saint John ordained Bishop of this Church, as is reported in the Constitutions, ascribed to Clemens: or else Onesimus, another of the Successors of Timothy in the See of Ephesus, who is intituled Bishop of it in the Epistle of Igna∣tius, written to that Church; within twelve years after the writing of the Revelation. In which Epistle Ignatius blessing God for so good a Bishop, admonisheth the people of their duty, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in submitting themselves unto his judg∣ment, or concurring with it, as their whole Presbytery did: which harmony of the Bishop and his Presbyters, he doth compare 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 unto the concord of the Strings and Harp. In which he speaks if you observe, as of a Bishop that had been long confirmed, and setled in his place of Government; and knew the temper of his people: one that was vested with a constant, and fixt preheminence above his Pres∣byters, not with a temporary Presidency, and no more than so.

But whatsoever doubt or scruple may be made, [unspec VII] about Onesimus, his being Bishop, or Angel at this time, of the Church of Ephesus; certain I am, there can be none pre∣tended against Polycarpus, as if he were not then the Angel of the Church of Smyrna: he being made Bishop of that See 13 years before, as Bullinger computes the time, and holding it a long while after, no less than 74 years, as the Annals reckon it, with∣out vicissitude or alteration. Now that this Polycarpus was Bishop of this Church of Smyrna, appears by such a cloud of Witnesses, as he that questioneth it, may with equal reason, make doubt of yesterday. And first we have Ignatius Bishop of An∣tioch, one of his Co-temporaries, who taking him in transitu, as he was led from Syria towards Rome to suffer Martyrdom, did after write to him an Epistle, in which he stileth him, in the superscription, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Bishop of the Church of Smyrna. Irenaeus, one of his Disciples, and who had often heard the good man discourse of his conversation with Saint John, reporteth that he was not only taught by the Apostles, and had conversed with many of those who had seen Christ in the flesh, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; but also was by them appointed Bishop of the Church in Smyrna. Next comes in the whole Church of Smyrna, in their Encyclical Epistle of his death, and Martyr∣dom, where he is called an Apostolical and Prophetical Doctor, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and Bishop of the Catholick Church of Smyrna. After them speaks Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, one of the Successours of Onesimus, and so by consequence his Neighbour, who being 38 years of age at the time of the death of Polycarpus, attesteth to him, saying amongst other things, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that he had been both Bishop and Martyr in Smyrna. Tertul∣lian who lived about the same time with Polycrates, though in another Clime or Re∣gion, is more particular in the point: not only making him Bishop of Smyrna, as the others do; but à Johanne collocatum refert, making him to be placed or establish∣ed there by Saint John the Apostle. From these hands, and no doubt from many others, it came at last to Eusebius, Bish. of Caesarea, by whom it is affirmed that he was made Bishop of the Church of Smyrna, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by those which had beheld the Lord, and were his Ministers. Saint Hierom finally doth inform us, that he was a Disciple of Saint Johns, & ab eo Smyrnae Episcopus or∣dinatus, and by him ordained Bishop of Smyrna. By which it is most clear and evi∣dent that he was the Angel or Bishop of this Church, and thereto constituted by Saint John, other of the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord and Saviour, concurring in the Ordination, No titular or nominal Bishop only, but such a one as had a body of Presbyters assistant and subservient to him, as doth most evidently appear out of Ig∣natius his Epistle unto those of Smyrna; wherein he telleth them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. that they ought not to do any thing, no not so much as to administer the Sacrament, without the consent and approbation of their Bishop.

The Angel of the Church of Pergamus is next in order; [unspec VIII] but who this was, is not so easie to determine. That there had been a Bishop of this Church before, is proved by Paraeus out of Aretas Caesariensis, who makes Antipas (whom we find mentioned Apo∣cal. 2.13.) to be the Pastor of this Church under the Empire of Domitian, who being cruelly put to death by the Pergamenians, successor ejus haud dubiè fuit iste, ad quem scribit, his successour, as there Paraeus doth observe, must out of question be the man, to whom as to the Angel of that Church, these things are written. And he informs us this withal, that similis supplicii metu, for fear of the like punishment which Antipas suffered, though he continued constant in the faith of Christ, he might grow more remiss and negligent in looking to his Pastoral Office. So then the Angel of this

Church was Pergamensis Episcopus, the Bishop of Pergamus, as he plainly calls him; and possibly may be that Gaius whom Clemens makes to be ordained Bishop of this Church by the hands of some of the Apostles. Or if not he, yet questionless some one particular person, as Paraeus saith: this we may rely upon, though his name we know not. Next is the Angel of the Church of Thyatira, Antistes Thyatirensis, that is, the Bishop of Thyatira, saith Paraeus. That Thyatira had a Bishop, as other the seven Churches had, was affirmed before. And probably the Bishop of it at this time, might be that Carpus, who by the name of Carpus Bishop of Thyatira did suffer Martyrdom, during the persecution raised by Antoninus; whereof consult the Martyrologies, com∣pared with Eusebius, lib. 4. However we may take what Paraeus gives us, that the Angel of this Church was the Bishop of it, one singular and individual Person, to whom our Saviour doth direct his charge; though there be somewhat in the Text which is alledged to the contrary. For whereas in the two former Epistles, and the be∣ginning of the present, the stile is singular, I know thy works, and I have somewhat against thee, here on a suddain, as it were, the stile is altered, and it is Vobis autem dico, but I say to you, and unto the rest in Thyatira. Hence some infer, that by the word Angel in that place, is meant not any one singular person, but the whole company of Presbyters; and by the rest, the residue of that People there: the people governed, and the gover∣nours in the plural number. But this as I conceive, will avail but little; these altera∣tions or enallages of number being no rare matters in the Scripture, as doth appear by that so memorable place in the first of Timothy, Salvabitur autem si permanserint, where the Apostle doth begin in she, and end in they. Besides it is observed, that the anti∣enter and better Copies read it without the copulative, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I say to you the rest in Thyatira; the spirit there addressing his discourse to those godly men that had not known the depths of Satan. And so, besides the antient Copy sent hither by the Patriarch of Constantinople, and cited by my L. B. of Exeter, doth Primasius read it. Vobis autem dico, reliqui qui estis Thyatirae. Paraeus also doth observe, Veterem sine copula, that the old Latine hath not the conjunction; and that Andreas and Montanus do adhere to that. So that for all this observation, the Angel of this Church was a singular person. And this doth further yet appear (since we are fallen upon these Criti∣cisms) by some antient readings of the 20. verse. For whereas now we read in our usual Copies, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the woman Jesebel, the old Greek Copy from Constantinople, writ above 1300 years ago, doth read it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, thy Wife Jesebel, and so doth that also of Aretas Caesariensis. And this doth seem to be the ancienter and the truer reading, as being followed by S. Cyprian and Primasius also; (the first of which lived 1400 years agone) in whom we read uxorem tuam. And though I grant that the Original standing thus may be translated thy woman Jesebel, or that woman of thine Jesebel, as I perceive some men would have it; yet then it must be granted therewithal, that the Angel of this Church was one singular individual person, not a body collective. It could not otherwise be thine, but yours.

The fifth in order of these Angels, is he of Sardis, Ecclesiae Antistes, [unspec IX] the Bishop of that Church, as Paraeus noteth; and he observes withal, veteres quosdam, that some ancient writers conceive that Melito, of whom Eusebius speaketh, lib. 4. cap. 26. was then the Bishop of this Church, and probably it might be so. For howsoever he ex∣cepteth against this opinion, because that Melito was Bishop of this place under Anto∣ninus, tamdiu vero Melitonem Sardibus praefuisse non est verisimile, and therefore that it is not likely that he should so long hold this Bishoprick; yet granting it in Polycarpus, tam∣diu Smyrnensibus praefuisse, that he was Bishop of Smyrna for as long a time: I see no reason why the like may not be granted of the other also: As for his other reason, that Melito is commended for his sanctimony, and the Angel here accused for his Hypocrisie; it may well be, that though this Angel were accused of Hypocrisie, at the present time, yet having many good things in him, he might be brought unto a sense thereof, upon this admonition from our Lord and Saviour, and so become a careful and a painful Pastor. So that the ancient Writers, as Paraeus saith, reporting that this Angel was that Melito, may be believed, for ought I see unto the contrary, in that affirmation, and this I am the rather inclined to think, because I find a tract of Melito's inscribed Onesimo Fratri, unto Onesimus his Brother, who was the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, as be∣fore was said, which shews they lived together in one age or time. The Angel of the Church of Philadelphia, must be looked on next, whom some conceive to be Quadra∣tus, a Scholar or Disciple of the Apostles, of whom Eusebius speaks, lib. 3. cap. 37. But surely if Eusebius speaks of him at all, it is as Bishop of Athens, not of Philadelphia,

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

unless perhaps we may conceive that being first Bishop of Philadelphia, he was translated afterwards to Athens, (Publius the Bishop being dead, whom he there succeeded) which I somewhat doubt. But whatsoever was his name, or whether he were that Demetrius, who as Clemens saith, was by S. Paul made Bishop of this place; I take him for the very man whom Ignatius speaks of in his Epistle to this People: where speaking of their Bishop, he tells them this, that at the very first sight of him he did plainly see, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that neither of his own desire, nor by choice of man was he preferred unto that place, but by the love of Jesus Christ, and God the Father; commending him for modesty, and for a careful walking in Gods Command∣ments, being like Zachary, without reproof; and finally, not only free from passion, but perfectly adorned with all kind of vertue. A commendation very well agreeing with that bestowed upon this Angel by the Holy Ghost; as did the Character of the Angel of the Church of Smyrna, agree unto the quality of Polycarpus, the then Bishop of it; it being generally observed, as it is most true, that only these two Angels are presented to us without fault or blemish. Last of all, for the Angel of the Church of Laodicea, Paraeus, as before conceiveth, that he was the Bishop; quis vero fuerit, nos latet; but who this Bishop was, that he cannot tell. Only he notes him for a man, qui Episcopi titulum perfunctoriè sustineret, that only had the name of Bishop, but not one lively spark of Piety, being wholly taken up with luxury and the love of money. But whether he were Lucius mentioned by S. Paul, Rom. 16. whom Dorotheus makes to be Bishop here; or one Archippus, said by Clemens to be the Bishop of this Church; or Sagaris, who by Polycrates is affirmed to be the Bishop of this place, I am not able to say positively: Though I incline rather unto Sagaris, whose Martyrdom being touched upon by Melito, in his books de Paschate, is a strong argument that he departed some good time before him, and so most like to be the man. Nor is it any obstacle unto this conjecture, that Christ did threaten to spew this Angel out of his mouth, being he called him to repentance, and promised him a throne, if he overcame.

To bring this business to an end, [unspec X] these Angels as they had a singularity, in refe∣rence unto that personal Authority which each of them enjoyed in his several Church: so had they all and every one of them a singularity in the succession thereunto. For sure it were no difficult matter to a diligent eye, to find out many of their Successors in those several Sees, since that of Laodicea, which was in most apparent danger to lose its Candlestick, retained a continual and constant successions of Bishops there, from the death of Sagaris to the Nicene Council, and a long time after. Where, by the way, I must needs rectifie Paraeus in this one particular, who shewing that this Church of Laodicea, did afterwards recover and get strength again, instanceth in Anatotius and Stephanus, both eminent and learned men, and both Bishops there; whereas indeed they were not Bishops of this Laodicea, but of Laodicea in Syria, (called antiently Seleucia Tetrapolis) as he might easily have seen by a more careful looking on those places of Eusebius, which himself hath cited. Now in the Nicene Council, if we like of that, we find the Successors of those several Angels, subscribing severally to the Acts thereof, amongst other Prelates of that time; as viz. Menophanes of Ephesus, Euty∣chius, B. of Smyrna, for the province of Asia; Artemidorus B. of Sardis, Soron or Serras B. of Thyatira, Ethymasius B. of Philadelphia, for the Province of Lydia; and finally Nunechlus B. of this Laodicea, for the Province of Phrygia, for Theodotus, who by Bilson is affirmed to have subscribed as Bishop of this Laodicea, was Bishop of Laodicea in the Province of Syria, amongst the Bishops of which Province his subscription is; which I marvel that most learned and industrious Prelate did not see. And though we find not him of Pergamus amongst them there, yet after in the Council of Chalcedon, doth his name occur. In fine, by the person that speaketh to the Pastors, and those seven Churches, and the name he gives them, it is plain and evident that their vocation was not only confirmed by the Lord himself, but their Commission expressed. He speak∣eth that hath best right to appoint what Pastors he would have to guide his Flock, till himself come to judgment: The name he giveth them, sheweth their power and charge to be delivered them from God; and consequently, each of them in his several charge and City, must have Commission to reform the errors and abuses in their se∣veral Churches, at whose hands it shall be required, by him that shall sit judge to take account of their doings. And so much for the Angels of the seven Churches in Asia, remembred in the book of the Revelation.

But to go forwards to S. John, [unspec XI] the Author of it, immediately on his return from Patmos, he sets himself unto the reformation of these Churches, calling together the

Bishops of the same, as before we shewed; and governing both those and the adjoyn∣ing Churches of Asia minor, by his Apostolical Authority and preheminence. Which having done on the intreaty and request of some godly men, he went unto the neigh∣bour Nations, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in some places instituting or ordaining Bishops, in others rectifying and reforming the whole Churches; and in a word, by the direction of the spirit, founding a Clergy in the same. It seems the journey was not far, the places which he visited being said to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the neighbouring Nations; and indeed the Apostle was now grown too old to endure much travel, being near an hundred at this time. And therefore I conceive that the Episcopal Sees of Traellis and Magnesia, were of his foundation: being Cities not far off, and after reckoned as the Suffragans of the Archb. or Metropolitan of Ephesus. Certain I am, that they were both of them Sees of Bishops, as doth appear by the Epistles of Ignatius; in which he nameth Polybius Bishop of Trallis, and Damas Bishop of Magnesia; and those not titular Bishops only, but such as were to be obeyed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, without gain-saying; and without whose allowance there was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 layed upon the Presbyters, who were not to do any thing in their mi∣nistrations, but by his authority. One other Bishop there is said to be of S. John's or∣daining, viz. the young man which Clemens speaks of, whose aspect being liked by the Apostle, he left him to the care and tutorage of an ancient Bishop of those parts. And when the Young man afterwards for want of careful looking to, became debauched, and made himself the Captain of a crew of Out-laws, the blessed Saint with much ado reclaimed him from that wretched course, and afterwards having new moulded him, and prepared him for it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, made him a Bishop in the Church. But whether that the word will bear that sense, as to the making him a Bishop, or that it only doth imply that S. John placed him in some function of the holy Ministery, Ec∣clesiae ministeri•• praefecit, as Christophorson reads it, I will not contend. Only I cannot but observe, that where the Bishop to whose care he was committed, is in the prosecution of the story, called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; some have collected from the same, that Bishops in those times were no more than Presbyters. But this will prove, if better looked on, but a plain mistake: the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in that place, noting the Bishops age, and not his office, as doth appear by that which followeth in the story, where he is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which certainly doth signifie an ancient man, but not a Presbyter.

The Asian Churches being thus setled and confirmed in the faith of Christ, [unspec XII] partly by the pains and travel of this blessed man, but principally by the Gospel, and other pieces of Divine holy Scripture, by him written and published about this time, he went unto the Lord his God in a good old age, being then 98 years old, as Beda reckoneth in the beginning of the second century, Anno 101. according to the computation of Baronius: The Church at his departure he left firmly grounded in all the points of faith and do∣ctrine, taught by Christ our Saviour, as well setled in the outward government, the polity and administration of the same, which had been framed by the Apostles, accor∣ding to the pattern and example of their Lord and Master. For being that the Church was born of Seed immortal, and they themselves though excellent and divine, yet still mortal men; it did concern the Church in an high degree to be provided of a perpe∣tuity, or if you will, an immortality of Overseers, both for the sowing of this Seed, and for the ordering of the Church, or the field it self. This since they could not do in person, they were to do it by their Successors, who by their Office were to be the or∣dinary Pastors of the Church, and the Vicars of Christ. Now if you ask the Fathers who they were that were accounted in their times and ages, the Successors of the Apo∣stles; they will with one accord make answer that the Bishops were. To take them as they lived in order, it is affirmed expresly by Irenaeus, one who conversed familiatly with Polycarpus, S. John's Disciple. He speaking of those Bishops which were ordained by the Apostles, and shewing what perfections were in them required, then adds, Quos & Successores relinquebant sunm ipsorum locum magisterii tradentes, whom they did leave to be their Successors, delivering unto them their own place of government. S. Cyprian next writing to Cornelius, then Bishop of Rome, exhorts him to endeavour to preserve that unity, Per Apostolos nobis Successoribus traditam, which was commended by the Apostles unto them their Successors. So in another place, speaking of the commission which our Saviour gave to his Apostles, he adds that it was also given to those Praepositi, rulers and governours of the Church, Qui Apostolis Vicaria ordinatione succedunt, which by their ordination have been substituted as Successors to them. And lest we should mistake his meaning in the word Prupositi, Firmilianut, anothe ••i shop of those times,

in an Epistle unto Cyprian, useth instead thereof the word Episcopi, not varying in the rest from those very words which Cyprian had used before. Hierom, although conceived by some to be an adversary of the Bishops, doth affirm as much. Where speaking of Montanus and his faction, he shews this difference betwixt them and the Church of God, viz. that they had cast the Bishop downwards, made him to be the third in order, Apud nos Apostolorum locum Episcopi tenent, but in the Catholick-Church of Christ, the Bishops held the place or room of the Apostles. The like he saith in his Epistle to Euagrius, where speaking of the parity of Bishops amongst themselves, that the emi∣nency of their Churches did make no difference in their authority; he gives this reason of the same, Omnes Apostolorum successores sunt, because they were all Successors to the Apostles. So also in his Comments on the Book of Psalms, writing upon those words, Instead of thy Fathers thou shalt have Children, he tells us that at first, the Apo∣stles were the Fathers of the Church; but they being gon, Habes pro his Episcopos filios, the Church had Bishops in their stead: which though they were her Children, as be∣gotten by her, Sunt tamen & patres tui, yet they were also Fathers to her, in that she was directed and guided by them. S. Austin on the same words hath the like conceit, the Fathers of the Church, saith he, were the Lords Apostles, Pro Apostolis filii nati sunt tibi, constituti sunt Episcopi, instead of those Fathers, the Church hath Children, Bi∣shops that be ordained in her, such whom she calleth Fathers, though her self begat them, & constituit in Sedibus patrum, and placed them in the seats or thrones of those holy Fathers. The like the same Saint Austin in another place, to the same effect. The root, saith he, of Christian Religion, is by the seats of the A∣postles, & Successiones Episcoporum, and the succession of the Bishops, dispersed and propagated over all the world. And so S. Gregory discoursing of the power of binding and loosing, committed by the Lord unto his Apostles, applies it thus: Horum nunc in Ecclesiâ locum Episcopi tenent, that now the Bishops hold their places in the Church of Christ. Not that the Bishops do succeed them in their personal graces, their mighty power of working Miracles, speaking with tongues, giving the Holy Ghost, and others, such as these, which were meerly temporary; but in their Pastoral charge and go∣vernment, as the chief Rulers of the Church, the ordinary Pastors of the Flock of Christ.

Now that the Bishops are the ordinary Pastors of the Church, [unspec XIII] and so conceived to be by the ancient Fathers, will be made evident by as good authority as the point be∣fore. Ignatius, who conversed with most of the Apostles, writing unto the Antiochians, requireth them to call to mind Euodius (who was his Predecessor in the See of Antioch) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, their most blessed Pastor. Tertullian discoursing on those words of Christ, The hireling seeth the Woolf coming and fleeth; but that the good Shepherd layeth down his life for the Sheep, Joh. 10. inferreth thereupon, Praepositos Ec∣clesiae in persecutione fugere non oportere, that the Prelates or Governours of the Church are not to fly in persecution. By which it is most clear, (not to dispute the truth of his assertion) that Pastor & Praepositus Ecclesiae do come both to one. S. Cyprian in his tract de Aleatore, is more plain and positive, Nam ut constaret nos, i. e. Episcopos, Pa∣stores esse ovium Spiritualium, &c. that it might evidently appear, saith he, that we the Bishops are the Pastors of the Flock of Christ: He said to Peter, feed my Sheep. And in another place, (for fear the former Book may prove none of his) expostulating with Pupianus, who charged him, as it seemeth, for some defect in his administration, he thus drives the point. Behold, saith he, for these six years, Nec fraternitas babu∣erit Episcopum, neither the Brother-hood hath had a Bishop, nor the People a Praepositus, or Ruler, nor the Flock a Pastor, nor the Church a Governour, nor Christ a Prelate, nor God a Priest. Where plainly, Pastor and Episcopus, and so all the rest are made to be the same one function. More clearly in another place of the same Epistle, where he defineth a Church to be Plebs sacerdoti adunata, & Pastori suo grex adhaerens; that is to say, a People joyned or united rather to their Priest, a Flock adhering to their Pa∣stor. Where by Sacerdos, as before, (and in other Authors of the first times) he meaneth no other than a Bishop, as doth appear by that which followeth. Ʋnde scire debes Episcopum in Ecclesia, &c. From whom thou oughtest to understand, saith he, the Bishop to be in the Church, and the Church to be also in the Bishop; and that whoever is not with the Bishop, is not in the Church. Optatus saith the same in brief, by whom Pastor sine grege, & Episcopus sine populo, a Bishop without a Church or People, and a Pastor without a Flock are joyned together as Synonyma. S. Austin speaking of two sorts of Over-seers in the fold of Christ, some of them being Children,

and the others hirelings: then adds, Praepositi autem qui filii sunt, Pastores sunt, the Rulers which are Children (of the Church) they are the Pastors. And in another place not long since cited, speaking of Episcopale judicium, the condemnation that at∣tends the Bishops sentence; he presently subjoyns, Pastoralis tamen necessitas, that yet the necessity incumbent on the Pastoral Office, doth many times inflict such sen∣tences for the publick safety of the Flock. I might be infinite in this search, but that I have spoke somewhat to the point already: and am moreover saved all further labour in it, by our learned Andrews, affirming positively and expresly, Apud veteres Pastorum nomen vix adhiberi, nisi cum de Episcopis loquuntur, the name of Pastor is scarce used among the Ancients, but when they have occasion to speak of Bishops. And Binius in his Notes upon the Councils, excepts against a fragment of the Synod of Rhemes, said to be held Anno 630. as not of that antiquity which is there pretend∣ed: and that he doth upon this reason only, Eo quod titulum ••astoris tribuat Parocho, because the stile of Pastor is there given to the common Presbyter, contrary to the usage of those elder times.

And certainly it is no wonder that it should be so, [unspec XIV] that he who is Episcopus & Pastor animarum, the Bishop and Pastor of our Souls, as Saint Peter calls him, should confer on them both his Titles: since he hath substituted and appointed them to be his Vi∣cars here on Earth. The Pope may challenge, if he will, this Title to himself alone: but since antiquity hath given it to all Bishops equally, to every one as much as to him of Rome. Saint Ambrose hath resolved it generally, Episcopus personam habet Christi, the Bishop, saith he, susteineth the person of Christ, and therefore every Wo∣man ought to behave her self before the Bishop, as before her Judg: giving this rea∣son therewithal, Quia Vicarius domini est, because he is the Vicar of the Lord. The Commentaries on Saint Matthew, ascribed to Chrysostom, doth affirm the same: where shewing that such men as persecuted or molested those of the holy Sacerdotal Order, were either Gentiles, or at least sordid and sensless Christians: he gives his reason for the same: Quia nec intelligunt, nec considerant, sacerdotes Christi Vicarios esse, be∣cause they neither understand nor do consider, that the Bishops, (whom he there meaneth by Sacerdotes) are the Vicars of Christ. Saint Austin to the same effect, as before, Saint Ambrose. The Bishop is to be more pure and pious than another man, for he seemeth to sustein the person of God: Est enim Vicarius ejus, for he is his Vi∣car. The Fathers in the Council of Compeigne, Anno 833. thus, Scire omnes convenit, it behoveth all men to understand what is the nature of the Government or Ministry of Bishops, Quos constat esse Christi Vicarios, who, as it evidently appears, are the Vicars of Christ. Nay even Blesensis, though he lived and writ when the Papacy was at the height, makes this description of a Bishop. Ordinatur Christi Vicarius, Ecclesiae Praelatus, &c. He is ordained a Vicar of Christ, a Prelate of the Church, a Father of men, and a Pastor of Souls: So far the Ancients have attested to the present business, and yet there is one Testimony more, which as it is more ancient, so it is as pertinent as any hitherto produced, viz. The Declaration of the Fathers in the Council of Carthage, Anno 258. or rather the attestation of the Fathers to that which was affirmed by Clarus of Muscala, one of the Bishops there assembled, who being to give his Vote upon the business then in agitation, first thus laid his grounds. Manifesta est senten∣tia Domini nostri, &c. The judgment of our Lord and Saviour JESƲS Christ is plain and evident, bequeathing that authority unto his Apostles, which had been given him by his Father, to which Apostles we are now the successours, eadem pote∣state Ecclesiam Domini gubernantes, governing the Church by that authority, which they had before. In which we see a clear and manifest derivation of this power, this Vicarship, from God the Father unto Christ, from Christ to his Apostles, and by them also to the Bishops, and their successours in the Church for ever. Not that each Bishop in particular hath some particular Apostle whom he doth succeed; I con∣ceive not so: but that the Bishops generally do succeed the Apostles, and are in ge∣neral Vicars unto Christ our Saviour, as to the general Government of the Church of God. Apostolis datos esse Episcopos successores, non siagulis Apostolis, sed in solidum uni∣versis; as the unfortunate Arch-Bish. of Spalato hath right well observed, conform unto the Tenet of the Fathers, in this very point. The sum of these three Sections then, in brief is this. Christ by the mission which he had from his heavenly Father, devolves all power on his Apostles, for teaching, governing and directing his little flock: and they being sensible of their own mortality, ordain by like authority a line of Bishops to succeed them, ad consummationem seculi, by whom that care might be

perpetuated. In whom, as there is plenitudo potestatis, a fulness of authority for that end and purpose; the Bishop, as is said by Ambrose, being made up of all the Orders in the Church (nam in Episcopo omnes ordines sunt, as his words there are:) so he both doth and may assume such and so many associates, assistants, and subservient Mini∣sters in partem oneris, for the discharge of this great trusi; as were assumed by the Apostles, or ordained by them rather, for the publick service of the Church.

Thus have we seen the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour, [unspec XV] dispersed in very little time, over all parts and quarters of the World: of so much of it at the least, whereof the Acts and Monuments have been recorded to posterity: and therewith a transmission also of that form of Government, which was begotten by it, and grew up with it. Nor is there any doubt at all, but that into what coasts soever the Lords Apostles preached the one, they also in the same did plant the other. The late discoveries of those parts and Countreys which were unknown unto our Predecessours, make this clear enough: there being no place nor Region how remote soever, where there was extant any thing of the Christian Faith, in which there were not found as ap∣parent footsteps of the Episcopal form of Government. A pregnant evidence, that as the Lords Apostles were by the Holy Ghost instructed in that Faith, which they were to preach; so by the same eternal Spirit they were directed to that form of Go∣vernment, which they were to plant. They could not else have fallen so unanimously on the self same project: nor had God blessed it with so flourishing and fair increase, a growth so suddain and miraculous; had it not been a graft of his own heavenly planting. Which graft, what root it took in this present Age, in little more than half an hundred years after Christs Ascension; we shall best see by looking on this brief Chronologie, which I have drawn to that intent.

Notes

• Acts 8.14.
• Acts 12.1, &c.
• Acts 19.2, 3.
• Epiphan. haeres. 78. n. 11.
• Epiph. ibid. n. 2.
• Acts 2.9. Possidius in Judic. operum August.
• August. qu. E∣vang. l. 2. chap. 39. Eccl. Histor. l. 3. cap. 1.
• Ignat. Epist. ad Ephes. p. 22••. Edit. Vedelian.
• Tertul. lib. 4. contra Marci. cap. 5.
• Hier. descrip Fcc. in Johan. & prooem. in E∣vang. 8. Matth.
• Apoc. 1.4.
• Apoc. 2.1. Cap. 8.12.
• August. Ep. 162. in fine.
• Vid. chap. 3. n. 5.
• Amb. in 1 Cor. cap. 11.
• Hier. ib.
• Oecumen. ca. 1. in Apoca.
• Id. cap. 2. in Apocal.
• Citat. apud Marlorat. in cap. ••. Apoca. v. 20. Bullin. con. 6. in Apocal. Id. in con. 9.
• Paraeus in Apo∣cal. cap. 1. v. 20.
• Beza Annot. Apoc. c. 2.1.
• Marlorat. Eccl. Exp••sit. in A∣pocal. c. 2. v. 1.
• Idem. Ibid.
• Smectymn. p. 52.
• Apud Phot. in Biblioth. n. 254.
• Paraeum in A∣pocal. cap. 2.
• Constitut. Apost. l. 7. c. 48.
• Igna. in Epist. ad Ephes.
• Pullenger in A∣pocal. Conc. 9.
• Ignat. Vpist. ad Polycarp.
• Irenaeus apud Euse. l. 4. c. 10. & con. haeres. l. 3. c. 3.
• Apud Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 4. c. 15.
• Ap. Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 24.
• Tertal. lib. de praescript.
• Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 30.
• De Scryptor. Eccl. in Poly∣car.
• Ignat. Epist. ad Smyrnen.
• Paraeus Com. in Apocal. c. 2.
• Id. in v. 14.
• Id. in v. 18.
• Apr. 13. Euseb. l. 4. c. 14.
• Apoc. 2.2, 4, 9, 13, 14, 19, 20.
• Apoc. 2.24. Smectym. p. 53.
• 1 Tim. 2.15.
• Apoc. 2.24.
• Def. of the humble Re∣monstr. p. 105. Primasius in Apoc. l. 1. c. 2.
• Cited in the Def. of the Remonstr. p. 105.
• In Can. Apoc. Epistola 52. In Can. Apoc. Vindication &c. p. 140. in marg.
• Paraeus in A∣pocal. c. 3. v. 1.
• Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 4. c. 25.
• Paraeus in A∣pocal. c. 3.
• Ignat. ad Phi∣ladelphens.
• Paraeus in A∣pocal. cap. 3.
• Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 23.
• Id. l. 4. c. 25.
• Apocal. 3.16.
• V. 19, 20, 21.
• Paraeus in A∣pocal. c. 3. v.
• Act. Conc. Nic. in subser.
• Perpet. gover. cap. 13. p. 269.
• Clemens Alex. ap. Euseb. hist. l. 2. c. 17.
• Concil. Chal. in subscript.
• Ignat. Epist. ad Magnesi.
• Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. hist. l. 2. c. 17.
• Unbishopping of Tim. & Tit. p. 126.
• Beda de sex aetatibus. In Annal. Ecc
• Iren. l. 3. c. 3.
• Cypr. Epist. 42. vel. l. 2. ep. 10.
• Id. Epist. 69. vel. l 4. ep. 10.
• Firmil. ep. Cy. Epist. 79.
• Hieron. ad Marcell. adv. Mont.
• Id. ad Euagr.
• Id. in Psal. 44.
• August. in Psal. 44.
• August. Epist. 42.
• Grego. Magn. hom. 26.
• Ignat. Epist. ad Antioch.
• Tertull. de fu∣ga in persecut.
• Cypr. de Alea∣tore.
• Id. Epist. 69.
• Opta. de schis∣mate. lib. 1.
• Aug••st. Tra••••. 46. in Job.
• Id de corr••pt & grat. c. 15.
• Resp. ad Epis. Petri Motinaei.
• Tom. 3. part. 2. p. 978.
• 1 Petri 2.2••.
• Ambros. in 1. ad cor. cap. 11.
• Opus imperfect. in Matth. hom. 17.
• Lib. qu. vet. & N. test. qu. 127.
• Concil. Com.
• Petr. Blesens. Serm. 47.
• Conc. Carth. sub. Cypr.
• De rep. Eccles. l. 2. c. 5. n. 3.
• Amb. in Ep 4.