Secondly, then, he tells you that tlic question about Mosaical rites and neces- sity of their ohsci'vation icas referred to Jerusalem hi/ the sinrjJe church of Ati- tioch. But how does the doctor make good this first stop'/ which yet if he could, would do him no good at all. It is true that Paul was now come to Antioch, chap. xiv. 20; also, that he was brought on his way by the church, chap. XV. 3 ; but yet that the bretln-en who were taught the doctrine con-
A PREFACE TO THE READER. 53
tested about, verses 1, 2, were only of the church of Antioch (when it is most certain, from the epistles of Paul to the Galatians, Colosslans, Romans, and others, that great disturbance was raised far and wide, in all the churches of the Gentiles, about this controversy), nothing is offered. It seems, in- deed, that their disputes grew to the great-est height at Antioch, whither brethren from other parts and churches did also come whilst Barnabas and Paul abode there ; but that that single church referred the determining of that controversy to them at Jerusalem, exclusively to others, the doctor proves not. And it is most evident, from the return of the answer sent by the apostles from Jerusalem, verse 23, that the reference was from all the churches of the Gentiles, yea, and all the scattered brethren, perhaps as yet not brought into church order, not only at Antioch, but also through- out Syria and Cilicia. It is then granted, what he next observes, namely, that in the answer returned from Jerusalem, with them at Antioch those in Syria and Cilicia are joined; the reason of it being manifest, namely, their trouble about the same controversy being no less than theirs at Antioch. It is also granted, that, as Paul passed through the cities, he delivered them the decrees to keep that were ordained bj'^ the apostles and elders, chap. xvi. 4; and that not only to the churches of Syria and Cilicia, which he left, chap. xv. 41, but also to those throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, chap. xvi. 6. What now follows out of all this ? What but that Antioch, by apostolical institution, was the metropolitan see of all the churches of Syria and Cilicia! Good doctor, do not be angry, but tell us how this may be proved. Why, doubtless it was so, as Antioch belonged to the metropolitan church at Jerusalem, as he told us out of Philo ! (who was excellently acquainted with apostolical institutions.) What Jerusalem was to the whole church and nation of the Jews, whilst the name of God was fixed there, we know ; but what was the primitive estate of the churches of Jesus Christ, made up of Jews and Gentiles, tied neither to city nor moun- tain, I must be pardoned if I cannot find the doctor making any tender of manifesting or declaring. The reason of referring this controversy unto a determination at Jerusalem the Holy Ghost acquaints us with, chap. XV. 2; so that we have no need of this metropolitical figment to inform us in it. And now if we will not only not submit to diocesan bishops, but also not reverence the grave metropolitans, standing upon such clear apostolical institution, it is fit that all the world should count us the arrantest schis- matics that ever lived since Pope Boniface's time. The sum, then, of this doughty argument for the apostolical institution of metropolitans (that none might ever more dare to call diocesans into question hereafter) is this: Paul, who was converted about the third or fourth year of Caligula, five or six years after the ascension of Christ, having with great success for three years preached the gospel, went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas, upon the persecution raised against him at Damascus, chap. ix. 22-27; whence, returning to his work, he went first to Tarsus, verse 30 ; thence to Antioch, where he abode one whole year, chap. xi. 25, 26 ; and was then sent to Jeru- salem with the collection for the saints, about the fourth year of Claudius, verses 29, 30 ; thence returning again to Antioch, he was sent out by the com- mand of the Holy Ghost, more eminently and peculiarly than formerly, for the conversion of the Gentiles, chap. xiii. 1-3. In this undertaking, in the space of a year or two, he preached and gathered churches (whereof express mention is made) at Salamis, chap. xiii. 5; at Paphos, verse 6; at Perga in Pamphylia, verse 13; at Antioch in Pisidia, verse 14; at Iconium, chap. xiv. 1 ; at Lystra aiid Derbe, verse 6 ; and at Perga, verse 25 : in all these places gathering some believers to Christ ; whom, before they returned
64 A PREFACE TO THE READER.
to Antioch, he visited all over the second time, and settled elders in the several congregations, chap. xiv. 21-23. In this journey and travel for the propagation of the gospel, he seems in all places to have been followed, almost at the heels, by the professing Pharisees, who imposed the necessity of the observation of the Mosaical ceremonies upon his new converts; for instantly upon his return to Antioch, where, during his absence, probably they had much prevailed, he falls into dispute with them, chap. xv. 1, 2; — and that he was not concerned in this controversy only upon the account of the church of Antioch, himself informs us. Gal. ii. 4, affirming that the false brethren which caused those disputes and dissensions crept in to spy out his liberty in his preaching the gospel among the Gentiles, verse 2, — that is, in the places before mentioned, throughout a great part of Asia. For the appeasing of this difference, and the establishing of the souls of the disciples, which were grievously perplexed with the imposition of the Mosaical yoke, it is determined that the case should be resolved by the apostles. Acts xv. 2; partly because of their authority in all the churches, wherein those who contended with Paul would be compelled to acquiesce, and partly because those Judaizing teachers pretended the commission of the apostles for the doctrine they preached, as is evident from the dis- claimure made by them of any such commission or command, verse 24. Upon Paul's return from the assembly at Jerusalem, wherein the great controversy about Jewish ceremonies was stated and determined, after he had in the first place delivered the decrees and apostolical salutation by epistle to the church at Antioch, he goes with them also to the churches in Syria and Cilicia, expressed in the letter by name, as also to those in Pamphylia, Pisidia, Dcrbe, Lystra, Iconium, etc., chap. xvi. 1-4, and all the churches which he had gathered and planted in his travels through Asia, whereunto he was commanded by the Holy Ghost, chap. xiii. 1, 2. Things being thus stated, it necessarily follows that the apostles had in- stituted diocesan and metropolitan bishops; for though the churches were so small, and thin, and few in number, that, seven years after this, may we believe our doctor, the apostles had not instituted or appointed any elders or presbyters in them, — namely, when Paul wrote his epistle to the Phi- lippians, which was when he was prisoner in Rome, as appears, chap. i. 7, 13, 14, iv. 22, about the third year of Nero, — yet that he had fully built and settled the hierarchical fabric contended for, who once dares question !