has built upon this supposition, in order to subject the Britons to the Pope, at once falls to the ground. I will not now stand disputing with him, whether the word diocese was never about this time taken in any author for one of the great dioceses of the Roman empire. He says Constantine so uses it in one place 65, speaking of the Asiatic and Pontic dioceses: and if that will do him any service, I can help him to another; for Constantine also speaks of a civil officer, called καθολικὸς διοικήσεως, or rationalis of the diocese 66, where, I agree with Valesius, we are to understand one of the great dioceses of the Roman empire. Nay, I have said before that I think there were patriarchs too in the Church at that time, and that they had the great dioceses of the Roman empire divided among them. But does it hence follow, that because the word diocese is sometimes so used, that therefore it must needs signify so in this place, when there is plain demonstration to the contrary? All the world knows that about the same time the name diocese was given to single episcopal churches also, and they too were called greater dioceses in opposition to the tituli, or parishes, which were quasi diœceses, the lesser dioceses, under them, as the Pontifical words it in the Life of Pope Marcellus 67, who was one of Sylvester's predecessors. So that Sylvester's holding greater dioceses, may mean no more than his being a metropolitan, or having several episcopal dioceses under his jurisdiction, to whom he was to signify according to custom the time of keeping Easter, and other things decreed in the Council. Or if we suppose him to have been a patriarch at that time, then his greater dioceses may signify those ten suburbicary provinces, which were the 65 Ep. ad Omnes Ecclesias, ap. Euseb. de Vit. Constant. l. 3. c. 19. (ν. I. p. 588. 35.) Τούτου ἕνεκεν ἐπὶ τοῦ παρόντος καλῶς ἔχειν ἅπαντες ἡγήσαντο, καὶ αὐτὸς δὲ τῇ ὑμετέρᾳ ἀγχινοίᾳ ἀρέσειν ὑπεσχόμην· ἵν ̓ ὅπερ δ ̓ ἂν κατὰ τὴν τῶν Ῥωμαίων πόλιν τε καὶ ̓Αφρικὴν, Ιταλίαν τε ἅπασαν, Αἴγυπτον, Σπανίαν, Γαλλίας, Βρεττανίας, Λιβύας, ὅλην Ελλάδα, ̓Ασιανήν τε διοίκησιν καὶ Ποντικὴν, καὶ Κιλικίαν, μιᾷ καὶ συμφώνῳ φυλάττεται γνώμῃ, ἀσμένως τοῦτο καὶ ἡ ὑμετέρα προσδέξηται σύνεσις. 66 Ibid. 1. 4. c. 36. (p. 646. 20.) ̓Απεστάλη δὲ γράμματα παρὰ τῆς ἡμετέρας ἡμερότητος πρὸς τὸν τῆς διοικήσεως καθολικὸν, ὅπως ἅπαντα τὰ πρὸς ἐπισκευὴν αὐτῶν ἐπιτήδεια παρασχεῖν φροντίσειεν. 67 Pontifical. (CC. t. 1. p. 946 c.) Hic fecit cometerium Via Salaria, et viginti quinque titulos in Urbe Roma constituit, quasi diæceses, propter baptismum et penitentiam multorum, qui convertebantur ex paganis, et propter sepulturas martyrum. ancient bounds of his patriarchal jurisdiction. But whatever meaning they have, it is certain they cannot be understood in our author's sense, of the great dioceses of the Roman empire: because it were absurd to think that Africa should acknowledge itself to be one of the Pope's dioceses, which never was reckoned among the suburbicary provinces, and, what is more, always resolutely opposed the Pope's pretences to the least shadow of power over it, claiming an absolute and independent power within itself in all matters of ecclesiastical cognizance and jurisdiction. And the case of the Britannic Church being the same with that of Afric, it follows that it was as independent of Rome as the other was, notwithstanding any pretended confession of subjection made by its bishops in the Council of Arles; upon which our author lays the main strength of his cause, though there is nothing in it when fairly canvassed and examined, as I doubt not I have made it appear to every unprejudiced reader. I was the more willing to consider here some of the chief exceptions of this celebrated writer against the liberties of the Britannic Church, because I know not whether any one else has made a reply to them; and these strictures will serve to suggest at once to the reader the true grounds upon which our ancient liberties were founded, and the contrary pretences, which would subject us to the power of the bishop of Rome, as patriarch of the Western empire, though the Britannic diocese had as just a title to be independent at that time as Rome itself, or Afric, or any other diocese in the empire. I make no further inquiry here into the bounds of other patriarchs or metropolitans, or their dioceses, because no such momentous disputes have been raised about them, and they may be easily learned from the Notitia of the Church here subjoined in the latter part of this Book. Therefore I proceed in the next place to examine the ordinary extent of the ancient episcopal dioceses, or, as we now call them, diocesan churches. CHAP. II. A more particular account of the number, nature, and extent of dioceses, or episcopal churches, in Africa, Egypt, and other Eastern provinces. parœchiæ. 1. It is evident from what has been discoursed in the last Dioceses anciently chapter that the most ancient and apostolical division of the called Church was into dioceses, or episcopal churches; that is, such apoikiai, precincts or districts as single bishops governed, with the assistance of their presbyters. But yet we are to make a little further inquiry into the nature and extent of these, because great errors have been committed by some late writers about them. There are who pretend that a diocese, for the three first ages, was never more than such a number of people as could meet, and ordinarily did meet, in a single congregation. Others extend the limits of ancient dioceses further than this at first, to include a city and the whole region about it: but then they reckon that upon the general conversion of heathens to Christianity, such dioceses ought to have been divided into single congregations, and a new bishop and clergy set over every one. There is no difference betwixt these two opinions, save only this, that the one wholly mistakes the Church's first and primitive model, and the other quarrels with her practice. But the truth of the matter was, that the Church, in settling the bounds of dioceses, went by another rule, not that of single assemblies or congregations, but the rule of government in every city, including not only the city itself, but the suburbs, or region lying round about it within the verge of its jurisdiction. Which seems to be the plain reason of that great and visible difference which we find in the extent of dioceses; some being very large, others very small, according as the civil government of each city happened to have a larger or lesser jurisdiction. There are two things indeed that commonly impose upon unwary readers in this matter. One is, that the ancient name of an episcopal diocese for three hundred years is commonly Taρoikia, which they mistake for a parish-church, or single congregation whereas, as learned men 68 have rightly observed, it signified then not the places or habitations near a church, but the towns or villages near a city, which, together with the city, was the bishop's Tаρоiкía, or, as we now call it, his diocese, the bounds of his ordinary care and jurisdiction. That thus it was, appears evidently from this, that the largest dioceses, such as those of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, which had many particular churches in them, were called by the same name, as the reader may find an hundred passages in Eusebius 69, where he uses the word "apoiкía, when he speaks of those large and populous cities which had many particular churches in them. The city of Alexandria, in the time of Alexander and Athanasius, was divided into several districts called lauræ, in every one of which there was a church, with a presbyter fixed upon it; and yet all these were but one πаρoiкíα, as Alexander calls it in his Circular Epistle 70 against Arius. The reader may see the word so used by Epiphanius 71, St. Jerom 72, the Councils of Antioch 73, Ancyra 74, and many others 75 68 Patriarchal Government, quest. 1. (Brief Treatises, p. 102.) ... For which cause, the jurisdiction of a bishop was anciently known by no other name but apoikia, signifying not, as many ignorant novelists think, a parish, as now the word is taken, that is the places or habitations near a church, but the towns and villages near a city, all which together, with the city, the bishop had in charge. 69 Vid. l. I. c. I. (v. I. p. 1. 3.)... Οσα τε καὶ πηλίκα πραγματευθῆναι κατὰ τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικὴν ἱστορίαν λέγεται, καὶ ὅσοι ταύτης διαπρεπῶς ἐν ταῖς μάλιστα ἐπισημοτάταις παροικίαις ἡγήσαντό τε καὶ προέστησαν, κ. τ. λ.-L. 2. c. 24. (ibid. p. 82. 1.) Νέρωνος δὲ ὄγδοον ἄγοντος τῆς βασιλείας ἔτος, πρῶτος μετὰ Μάρκον τὸν ἀπόστολον καὶ εὐαγγελιστὴν, τῆς ἐν ̓Αλεξανδρείᾳ παροικίας ̓Αννιανὸς τὴν λειτουργίαν διαδέχεται. 70 Ap. Socrat. 1. 1. c. 6. (v. 2. p. 10. 30.) 'Ev Tη μeтépa тоívvv пapoKía éîλov vvv avdρes napávoμoi kai Χριστομάχοι, κ. τ. λ. 71 Ep. ad Joan. Hierosol. (t. 2. P. 313 c.) Ad meæ parochia vide bantur ecclesiam pertinere, &c. 72 Ep. 53. [al. 109.] ad Ripar. (t. 1. p. 720 d.) Miror sanctum episcopum, in cujus parochia esse presbyter dicitur [Vigilantius,] acquiescere furori ejus, &c. 73 C. 9. (t. 2. p. 565 b.) "EkaσTov γὰρ ἐπίσκοπον ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν τῆς ἑαυτοῦ παροικίας, διοικεῖν τε κατὰ τὴν ἑκάστῳ ἐπιβάλλουσαν εὐλάβειαν, καὶ πρόνοιαν ποιεῖσθαι πάσης τῆς χώρας τῆς ὑπὸ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ πόλιν. 74 C. 18. (t. I. p. 1461 e.) Eï TivES ἐπίσκοποι κατασταθέντες, καὶ μὴ δεχθέντες ὑπὸ τῆς παροικίας ἐκείνης, εἰς ἣν ὠνομάσθησαν, ἑτέραις βούλοιντο παροικίας ἐπιέναι, καὶ βιάζεσθαι τοὺς καθεστῶτας, καὶ στάσεις κινεῖν κατ ̓ αὐτῶν, τούτους ἀφορίζεσθαι. 75 August. Ep. 261. [al. 209.] (t. 2. p. 777 c.) Fussala dicitur Hipponensi territorio confine castellum: antea ibi nunquam episcopus fuit: sed simul cum contigua sibi regione ad parœciam Hipponensis ecclesiæ pertinebat.-Basil. Ep. 264. [al. 95.] ad Euseb. Samosat. (t. 3. part. 2. P. 528 b.) Περιοδευόντων ἡμῶν τὴν Tароikiay, K. T. λ. in after-ages, when it is certain episcopal dioceses were something larger than parish churches, as those are taken to signify single congregations. So that nothing can be plainer than the use of the word mapoukía for a diocese to the fourth century. 6 name dio used. 2. And now about this time the name diocese began to be When the used likewise. For the Council of Arles, which was held in cese began the beginning of the fourth century, writing to the bishop of first to be Rome, says 76, that he did majores dioceses tenere, possess greater dioceses;' which though Schelstrate and other Romish writers interpret patriarchal dioceses, to aggrandize the Pope's jurisdiction; yet it is more probable, as Dr. Cave observes77, that it means only single bishoprics; though I grant Constantine might have made the division of the empire into civil dioceses, from whence patriarchal dioceses took their name in the following ages. The word is used frequently for a single diocese in the African Councils, as where it is said 78, 'a bishop shall not leave his principal seat, and betake himself to any other church in the diocese:' so likewise often in the African Code, and the Collation of Carthage. From which it appears that the words parochia and diœcesis were of the same import 76 C. Arelat. 1. Epist. Synod. See ch. 1. s. 12. n. 63, preceding. 77 Ancient Church-Government, ch. 3. pp. 129, 130. (s. 6. p. 402.) When the Synod at Arles, in their Letter to Pope Sylvester, say, that he did majores dioceses tenere, (a passage frequently quoted by the writers of the Roman Church), possess greater dioceses: besides, that the place, as Salmasius observes, is very corrupt, and affords no current sense, it is plain that the word diocese there cannot be understood of patriarchal dioceses, (Constantine not having yet made the division of the empire, nor dioceses come up in a civil, much less in an ecclesiastical sense,) and must therefore be meant of single bishoprics, in the modern use of the word, and which was not unusual in those days, as is evident from the Code of the African Church, and the Conference between the Catholics and Donatists at Car thage, where nothing is more com- 78 C. Carth. 5. c. 5. (t. 2. p.1216 b.) |