Unity of the Church) is but one; a Part whereof each [Bishop] holds, fo as to be interested for the Whole. The Church is alfo one, which by its fruitful Increafe improves into a Multitude, as the Beams of the Sun are many, as Branches from Trees, and Streams from a Fountain; whofe Number, tho' it feems difperfed by the abundant Plenty of them, yet their Unity is preferv'd by the common Original of them all. Apply this plain Rule to all Sorts of Unities mention'd here; and fee first, if the Primitive Expreffions of one Church, one Altar, and one Bishop, do not evidently confift with as many Churches, Altars, and Bishops, as can be proved to be undeniably derived from one and the fame original Inftitutor: The Unity of whose Divine Power and Spirit, diffused at first amongst the chofen Twelve, ftamps a Character of Unity upon all who regularly defcend from them, and upon every Individual, who only claims under, and owns his Authority from, and his Dependence upon fuch as them: Nay, the Unity of fundry Prayers too, (as I have fhewn before) by the fame Analogy of Reafon, may be own'd to be fuch, if they all center (as to the Subftance of them) in that original Model which the Divine Author of Chriftian Prayer firft deliver'd in to us; thofe common Articles of Faith and Doctrine which he oblig'd us all to; provided they be offer'd up by a Perfon duly authoriz'd for fuch Minifterial Offices in the Church. Nor will the Miniftration of the bleffed Eucharift by divers Hands, or at fundry Tables, tho' within the fame particular Diocefe ftill, differ any thing from the reft, if duly warranted by, and kept accountable to,

the

the first and principal Minifter of that holy Ordinance, who is the rightful Bishop of the whole Flock. The Plurality of Eucharifts is thus made one throughout all the United Provinces and Dioceses of the Catholick Church; because in the gradual Progrefs of the Church, from the Beginning, both Bishops and Presbyters do all claim a Power of Commiffion to confecrate from one another, till they rife up to the bleffed Apoftles themselves, and they from Christ alone.

And thus S. Ignatius's Catholick Phrase, of one Altar, one Bishop, and the like, does no more prove the Neceffity of but one Communion-Table in a Primitive Bishop's Diocese, than it would do in the most extenfive one of this or any former Ages, or in the largest Patriarchal Province that was ever fettled in the Church, provided every one who minister'd at each of them had a juft Commission from their Orthodox Superiors for doing fo: Bat what is otherwife than fo, is Altar against Altar indeed, and no less than formal Schifm. Let us take care then, not to draw up Forces (as *S. Ignatius's Words import) against the Bishop, if we mean not to withdraw our Subjection from God.

By this Account the Reader will fee what the Ancients truly meant, when they call'd a Schif matical ufurpation of the Episcopal Power, by the Name of a Profane Altar; which yet our learned Enquirer urges again and again, as a fair

* Σποδάσωμ μὴ ἀνάπεθαι τῳ Ἐπισκόπῳ, ἵνα Suw De SaoTaoor. Ad Ephef. p. 20.

fair Argument to prove, that there could be no more than one fingle Congregation in a whole Diocese, tho' the Minifters of a fecond, or third, or more, fhould never fo much agree with the Bishop himself in all his Principles and Miniftrations, and be even authoriz'd and approv'd of by him; as † S. Ignatius exprefly tells us, a Bishop might fo authorize and approve him; in which Cafe they were fo far from being thought a Profane Altar, that they were truly own'd to be but one and the fame.

Next to the one only Communion-Table, our Author proceeds to prove the second Part of his main Propofition, That all the People of the Diocese receiv'd together at once. His Authorities for that are only two: First, from S. Cyprian, whofe Words he quotes and represents in the Form of a direct and pofitive Propofition, thus: We celebrate the Sacrament, the whole Brotherhood being prefent. This is pretty near the Author's Words, I confefs; but his Application of them to the whole Flock of a Diocese, either of S. Cyprian himself, or of any other Bishop, is very hard to be gather'd from them in the Place where I find them lie. The Cafe was this: S. Cyprian was complaining to Cacilius of fome Perfons in fome Places, who ei

ther

+ Ω ἂν αὐτὸς ἐπιτρέψη. Ad Smyrn. p. 6.

αν

* Ut facramenti veritatem fraternitate omni præfente celebremus. Cyp. Ep. 63. Edit. Oxon. 1691. Amftel. Quoniam quidam vel ignoranter, vel fimpliciter in calice dominico fan&tificando & plebi miniftrando, non hoc faciunt, quod Jefus Chriftus facrificii hujus auctor fecit, &c. Cypr. ib. fub init.

ther out of Ignorance, or Simplicity of Heart, celebrated the holy Eucharift with Water only in the Chalice, without Wine; the Zealous Bishop is full of Argument and Resentment against them: What! (fays he) are they afraid the Heathen fhou'd discover them in their Morning Sacrifices by the Smell of Wine? What will they do in Time of Perfecution, if they are fo afham'd of the Blood of Chrift in the very Offerings themselves? Or do many of them excufe themselves thus, that tho' Water only was offer'd in the Morning, yet when they come to Supper, they offer a mix'd Cup then? [I shan't amufe my Reader with what the Learned may fay about their taking the Eucharist thus in the Morning, and completing it in the Evening, or about any other Senfe that may be given of it; 'tis foreign to our Cafe] but the Words are plain: To which S. Cyprian replies, But when we fup, (fays he) we can't call the People to our Feast, that we might celebrate the Truth of the Sacrament, (namely in a mix'd Cup, as it ought to be) with all the Brotherhood about us. This is the Occafion then of the Words. In which 'tis easy to observe,

*

ift, That they refer not at all to S. Cyprian in Perfon, or poffibly to any in his Diocese, tho' in the Name of Chriftians in general, he fays, that we might celebrate the Sacrament aright, c. or if they did refer to him, they wou'd demonstrate that he had more Congregations than one in his Church; for in his own Cathedral, to

be

* See the fame, 63. Ep. §. 7.

be fure, he did not minifter fo, or else he reafon'd very strangely indeed.

2dly, 'Tis plain that all the Brotherhood here is put in Oppofition to the Chriftians in their private Families, which I think with fufficient Propriety of Speech might be faid, if he meant only all the Chriftian Brethren that us'd to meet in their own Particular Oratory together for publick Worship, tho' there were twenty other fuch-like Oratories as thofe, United together with them under one common Bishop, to make up a Diocesan Church; for certainly, what any private Men fhou'd do in their own Houses nowa-days, which ought to be done in their ParishChurch, might very properly be reprov'd, by faying, they ought to have done it when all the Brotherhood came together.

3dly, I might observe what an useful Turn our ingenious Author gave to this Quotation, by Tranflating it with that infenfible Variation, We do celebrate, instead of, That we might celebrate; which made it directly S. Cyprian's Act and Deed in his own Diocese, and gave no Occafion to imagine, that there cou'd be any other poffible Meaning in it, than very plainly fo.

Lay these few Things together, and judge what an irrefragable Argument this must be, to prove that no Primitive Bishop whatsoever, and particularly S. Cyprian himself, did ever minifter the bleffed Sacrament; but that every Soul under his refpective Epifcopal Cure (who Communicated at all) were always Prefent with him, which was the Thing 'twas brought to prove; nor has our learned Author any one Authority more here, to prove this grand Point

of