EQUALITY OF BISHOPS IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 197 peared to have possessed it, and would have sometimes, I might say frequently, yea continually, have exercised it in the first ages; which that he did not at all we shall make, I hope, very manifest, by re- flecting on the chief passages occurring then, whereof, indeed, there is scarce any one which, duly weighed, does not serve to overthrow the Roman pretence. But that matter I reserve to another place, and shall propound other considerations, declaring the sense of the fathers; only I shall add, that indeed, - 2. The state of the most primitive church did not well admit such an universal sovereignty; for that consisted of small bodies inco- herently situated, and scattered about in very distant places, and consequently unfit to be modelled into one political society, or to be governed by one head, especially considering their condition, under persecution and poverty. What convenient resort for direction or justice could a few distressed Christians in Egypt, Ethiopia, Parthia, India, Mesopotamia, Syria, Armenia, Cappadocia, and other parts have to Rome? What trouble, what burden had it been, to seek instruction, succour, decision of cases thence! Had they been obliged or required to do so, what offences, what clamours would it have raised, seeing that afterward, when Christendomwas connected and compacted together, when the state of Christians was flourishing and prosperous, when passages were open, and the best of oppor- tunities of correspondence were afforded, yet the setting out of these pretences caused great oppositions and stirs; seeing the exercise of this authority, when it had obtained most vigour, produced so many grievances, so many complaints, so many courses to check and curb it, in countries feeling the inconveniences and mischiefs springing from it! The want of the like in the first ages is a good argument that the cause of them had not yet sprung up. Christendom could not have been so still [quiet] if there had been then so meddlesome a body in it as the pope now is. The Roman clergy, in their epistle to St Cyprian, told him that, " because of the difficulty of things and times, they could not consti- tute a bishop who might moderate things"' immediately belonging to them, in their own precincts. How much more, in that state of things, would a bishop there be fit [unfit] to moderate things over all the world, when, as Rigaltius truly notes, " the church being then oppressed with various vexations, the communication of provinces between themselves was difficult and infrequent!"2 1 Nobis, post exeessum nobilissimae memorise viri Fabiani, nondum est episcopus propter rerum et temporum difficultatem constitutis, qui omnia ista moderatur, &c. CI. Rom. ad Cypr., Ep. xxxi. 2 Varus tune ecclesiavexationibus oppressa, difficiïis et infrequenserat provinciarum inter sese communicatio. Rigalt. in Cypr.. Ep. lxvii.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=