9. If we deny the authority of the divine scriptures, we are fallen from truth: if we reject the Old Testament, we are no longer of the catholic church. 10. Let these people, says he, produce any passage of the Old or the New Testament favouring their sentiments. 11. He complains, that some men neglecting the truth of the prophets, evangelists, and apostles, have introduced false and fabulous notions. 12. He professeth to have delivered the true faith, taken from the law, and the prophets, and the gospels, and the apostles. 13. This they must allow, unless they admit fables, contrary to the doctrine of the prophets and the law, and the apostles, and evangelists. VI. I shall now put down a few remarkable observations in this writer. 1. He says, that when Christ was baptized, he was of the age of twenty-nine years and ten months. This he supposeth to be the meaning of St. Luke's words, iii. 23. « And Jesus him. self began to be about thirty years of age:" that is, thirty years not complete. 2. He thinks, our Lord was exactly thirty years of age, when he wrought the miracle at Cana in Galilee, recorded John ii. 1-11. 3. He says, there " are two passovers in our Lord's ministry, according to St. John's gospel ; and that he suffered at the third passover in the thirty-third year of his life on earth, Therefore he did not think the "feast of the Jews," mentioned John v. 1. to be passover. 4. In another place he says, there were three passovers in our Lord's ministry: but he is to be understood in the same manner as above represented... 5. He thought that the two disciples, whom Jesus met in the way to Emmaus, as related Luke xxiv. were Nathanael and Cleophas. 6. Epiphanius says, that " the apostles did not preach themselves, but Jesus Christ, Lord. Therefore there was no sect, or church, called after the apostles; for we never heard of Petrians or Paulians, or Bartholomeans, or Thaddeans, but of Christians only, as they were called at Antioch. We saw a like observation some while ago in" Athanasius. 7. He says, all things in the divine scripture are easy to those who inquire with a pious mind. VII. The sum of his testimony will lie in a little room. His canon of the Old Testament was much the same with that of the Jews: for he acknowledges, that the book of Baruch was not received by them. The book of Wisdom, and the book of Ecclesiasticus, he considers as useful only, and not of authority, and therefore not admitted into the ark. Nor have the books of Maccabees, or Tobit, or Judith, any place in those catalogues. The books of the New Testa ment received by him, are the same as those which are now generally received by us. He quotes no others, as of authority, unless he has so quoted the Constitutions; which will be considered presently. For the sacred books of the Old and New Testament he has the highest regard. I scarce need to say, that he makes no use of Christian apocryphal books, written in the name of apostles, and falsely ascribed to them. Epiphanius's aversion for such books must be well known to the readers of this work: it is a charge frequently brought by him against heretics, that they made use of apocryphal books: and he reckons it no small fault in them. ' Εαν γαρ αρνησωμεθα τας θείας γραφάς, αλήθεις ουκ εσμεν, ούτω Όμως δυο πασχα μεν κατά την • Ει έχουσι μαρτυριαν εν παλαια και εν καινη διαθηκη, Ancor. n. 1. p. 54. B. • Την γαρ θείων γραφων ακολυθίαν, και ευθυληία, και ακακίας ὁμολογίαν, προφητικην τε, και ευα/γελικήν, και αποστολικὴν τας ιν παρενίες, σοφισικήν ήμιν λέξιν, και μυθωδη παρειση[αίον. Η 77. n. 1. p. 996. B. 4 Καρούτω γεγραφα—βεβαιον ὁμολοΓίαν την από του νόμε, και των προφητών, και ευαγγελιων, και αποσόλων. Ancor. n. 83. p. 88. e - εκ προβήλων τε, και νόμε, και αποςόλων, και ευαίγελίζων παραδόσεως. Η. 70. n. 2. p. 813. C. f Hy γαρ τῳ μεν οντι εικοσιεννέα είων, και μηνων δεκα, ὅτε επι το βάπτισμα ήκε, τριακονία μεν είων, αλλ' ου πληρης. Η. 51. n. 16. p. 439. A. Conf. n. 28. p. 450. A. 8 Όπερ πρωΐον σημείον και πλήρωμα τριακονία ετων από γενέσεως της ενσαρκες αυτου παρεσίας. κ. λ. Η. 51. n. 16, p. 439. C. αρχήν τε κηρυξμαίος Η. 51. n. 30. p. 452. * Ευρισκεται γαρ εν τῷ τριακόσω τρίτῳ ελει της αυτ8 ενσαρ κωσεως παρεσίας πασχων ὁ μονοίενης. Η. 51. n. 23. p. 440. Β. εν τῳ τριακοσῳ τρίτω της αυτ8. ενσαρκα οικονομίας. Ib. n. 25. p. 448. A. See also H. 78, p. 1041. C. * Και εκ οίδασιν οἱ ιδιωται, ὅτι 8 μόνον δυο πασχα ομολογεί τα ευα/γέλια, αλλα δυο μεν πρώία λέξει, και αυτό δε εν ᾧ πεπονθεν ὁ σωτηρ, τρια πασχα των εν τω κηρυ μαλι πεπρα μαλευμένων. Ib. n. 22. p. 444. B. 1 H. 23. n. 6. m Δυο εκ εν αίρεσις, ουδε εκκλησία, εις όνομα αποσόλων ανηγορευμενη ουδέποτε γαρ ηκέσαμεν η Πείριος, η Παυλίες, η Βαρθολομαίος, η Θαδδαίες. κ. λ. Η. 42. p. 366. D. ή Ρ. 399. • Πανία γαρ σαφη εν τη θεία γραφη τοις βελομένοις ευσέβει λογισμῳ προσερχεσθαι τῷ θείῳ λοίῳ. Η. 76. n. 7. p. 920. Α. • This he imputes to Bardesanes. See Vol. ii. ch. 28. n. 12, and to several others, as may be seen, Vol. i. ch. 41. 588, 589. Not to refer to other places. Ρ CHA P. LXXXV. THE APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS AND CANONS. se reveal! F I. Epiphanius's quotations of a work called Apostolical Constitutions, with remarks upon them. II. The opinions of learned moderns concerning the Apostolical Constitutions now in being. III. An argument upon them proposed. IV. They are written i them proposed. IV. They are written in the name of the apostles of Christ: V. But are destitute of the external evidence necessary to support that claim: not being quoted by the Christian writers of the first three centuries. VI. They are also destitute of internal evidence : 1. The quotations of the books of the New Testament not suiting the apostles. 2. Having in them many things later than the times of the apostles: 3. Some things unworthy of the apostles. 4. Inconsistencies, and false history. 5. Expressions, betraying a later time than is pretended. VII. Consequently they are an imposture. VIII. The author's testimony to the books of the New Testament. IX. The Apostolical Canons. At every I. As a work called Apostolical Constitutions is cited by Epiphanius, and he is the first Christian writer who has quoted any book with that title, I shall here put down his several citations, and sometimes with the connection. 2 1. In his forty-fifth heresy, that of the Severians, who were Encratites, and condemned the use of wine, he observes: The Lord says, "I am the true Vine." [John xv. 1.] If the vine ' had been evil, he would not have used that expression. Moreover the apostles, in the work 'called the Constitution, say, that the catholic church is the plantation and vineyard of the 'Lord. Yea, and the Lord himself has again in the gospel a parable of a vineyard, See Luke XX. and Matt. xx.- 1 เก 1 C ། 2. In his seventieth heresy, that of the Audians, who were for keeping Easter at the same,, time with the Jews, he says: For this purpose they allege the Constitution of the 'Apostles: which book, though it be with many of doubtful authority, is not to be rejected, for it contains the whole order of church government, and has nothing in it contrary to the eccle 'siastical discipline, or the canon, or the faith. But they misunderstand the direction concern'ing Easter, which they allege for the support of their practice. For the apostles in the Consti'tution appoint to this purpose: Do not you make computation of the time, say they, but keep 'it together with your brethren who are of the circumcision, at the same time that they do:And though they should be mistaken, let not that give you any concern.' I put in the margin a part of Grabe's note upon this passage. 3. Epiphanius afterwards mentions several things, as sayings, or ordinances of the apostles, and some of them as contrary to the above-mentioned direction, and from the same work, as is reckoned. 4. In the seventy-fifth heresy, which is that of the Aërians, who were against set times of All the passages of Epiphanius, with remarks, may be seen in Grabe's Spicil. T. i. p. 46-55. as well as elsewhere. Αλλα καὶ οἱ αποσόλοι φασιν εν τη Διατάξει τη καλο μένη. Οτι φυλειά θες και αμπέλων ή καθολική εκκλησια. Αλλά και αυτος ὁ κύριος παλιν εν τῷ ευα/γελιῳ ποιόμενος την τε αμ πελωνος παραβολην. κ. λ. Epiph. H. 45. p. 390. A. B. Vid. Const. Ap. l. i. in. • Εις τελο δὲ οἱ αυτοι Ανδιανοι παραφέρεσι την των αποσόλων Διαταξιν, ουσαν μεν τοις πολλοις εν αμφίλεκίῳ, αλλ' εκ αδόκι μον· πασα γας εν αυτη κανονικη ταξις εμφερείαι, και εδεν πα ρακεχαραίμενον της πίσεως, εδε της εκκλησιασικής διοικήσεως, και κανόνος, και πιςεως. - Ορίζεσι γας εν τη αυτη Διατάξει οἱ απόςολοι, ὅτι ὑμεῖς μη ψηφιζεις, αλλά ποιείτε, όταν οι αδελφοι ύμων οἱ εκ περιτομης, μετ' αυτων αμα ποιειτελείονίες ότι καν τε πλανηθωσι, μηδε ύμιν μελείω. Η. 70. n. 10. p. 822. Α. Β. 823. A. d Contrarium plane præcipitur in istis, quibus modo utimur Constitutionibus Clementis. I. v. c. 17. —Unde Cotelerius ad hunc locum: Recte, inquit, observârunt docti homines, Constitutionem hujus capitis diversam esse a Constitutione, de quâ Epiphanius in hæresi Audianorum. Immo non solum diversa est, sed e diametro contradicit. Grab. Sp. T. i. p. 46. * Εξ αυίων δε των εκείσε ειρημένων ῥηλων ή ανιθησις οφθήσεται. Φασκέσι γαρ την αγρυπνιαν φέρειν μεσαζονίων των αζύμων. Ib. n. 10. p. 823. A. ΛεΓεσι γαρ οι αυτοι αποςολοι, ότι όταν εκείνοι ευωχωνται, ύμεις. της ευονίες υπερ αυίων πενθείλε, ότι εν τη ημερα κορίης τον Χρίσιν εξαύρωσαν. κ. λ. Ib. n. 11. p. 823. C. Vid. Const. l. v. c. 15. Αύθις αυίων ἀκεῖνες εν τη Διατάξει, ὅτι ὁ κακων ἑαυτό την a fasting and feasting under the gospel-dispensation, Epiphanius having quoted to them 1 Cor. v. 7. and Acts xx. 16, goes on: and if the authority is to be fetched from the Constitution of the apostles, it may be easily shewn, how they have there appointed a fast on the fourth, and on the sixth day of the week for ever [or always], except in Pentecost: and that in the six days of Easter no food ought to be taken, beside bread, and salt, and water.' 5. In the eightieth heresy, which is that of the Messalians and others: And concerning the beard the divine word and doctrine in the Constitutions of the Apostles says, that it should not be corrupted, that is, that the hair of the beard should not be cut, and that men should not ' wear a meretricious dress, nor yet make a shew of religion.' c d 6. There seems also to be a reference to this book in his Exposition of the Catholic Faith. I put a part of the passage at the bottom of the page; as also a remark of Grabe upon it. Upon these quotations we may now observe as follows. 1. We hence perceive, that in the time of Epiphanius there was a work called Apostolical Constitutions: and the things therein contained seem to have been written, as in those we now have, in the name of the apostles. There were likewise in that work directions concerning Easter, and Pentecost, and other set days of fasting, or feasting, as in ours. e 2. Nevertheless there is reason to think, that the Constitutions mentioned by Epiphanius, are not the same with those which we now have. The order concerning keeping Easter is quite different in ours from that quoted by the Audians: nor does Epiphanius say, that their quotation was false; though indeed he alleges some things, which seem contrary to the rule by which they governed themselves. 3. Epiphanius bears witness, that the Constitutions, which were in being in his time, were 'doubted of by many,' and were not generally received. 4. That expression, doubted of by many,' or of doubtful authority with many,' seems to be ambiguous. It may denote, that it was doubted, whether the book should be esteemed canonical; or else, whether it was an ecclesiastical book, and not apocryphal and heretical, and utterly to be rejected. And it may be thought, that this last is the true meaning of the expres sion, for these two reasons: first, when Epiphanius gives an account of the canonical books of scripture, he takes no notice of this. Secondly, when he says: it is not to be rejected, for it has nothing in it contrary to the discipline of the church, or the canon, or the faith;' he seems only to assert, that it was a good, ecclesiastical or catholic writing. When therefore he says, that this book was doubted of by many,' he intimates, that some suspected it to be the work of some heretics: in opposition to which he says, it ought not to be rejected. For it appeared from ψύκην εν κυριακή, επικαταρατος εσι τῷ θεῷ. Ib. p. 223. D. Const. 1. v. cap. 20. - čopiny wasxa, Telesi rny Eldonada y uploμer, και απ' αυτών των αποσόλων εν τη Διατάξει. Ib. n. 12. p. 824. C. 2 Ει δε και χρη το της Διατάξεως των αποςόλων λεξειν, πως εκει ώριζον ο τείραδα και προσαββαίον νηςεύειν δια πανος, χωρίς πεντηκοσής· και περί των ἐξ ἡμερων το πασχα, πως παραγελλεσιν, μηδεν όλως λαμβανειν, η αρίς, και άλος, και ύδαλος· ποιαν τε ήμεραν αίειν, πως τε απολύειν εις επιφώσκεσαν κυριακήν, φανερόν εσι. κ. λ. H. 75. n. 6. p. 910. B. C. D. Cont. Const. 1. v. cap. 15. 20. 1. vii. c. 23. 1. v. c. 13. 15. 18, 19. - Και περι μεν εν τω γενεις εν ταις Διατάξεσι των αποσόλων βάσκει ὁ θείος λόγος και ἡ διδασκαλία, μη φθείρειν, τέλεσι μη TELLVELY TRIXAS yɛvele. x. λ. H. 80. n. 7. p. 1073. C. Vid. Const. 1. i. cap. 3. - Συνάξεις δε επιτελεμεναι ταχθείσαι εισιν από των αποσόλων τεῖράδι και προσαββαΐ, και κυριακής τείραδι δε και εν προσαβ καίῳ ἐν νησεία εώς ώρας εννάτης. κ. λ. Exp. Fid. n. 22. p. 1104. in octo libros distinctæ, quæ a prioribus illis, ac nihilominus dubiis, quarum meminit Epiphanius, diversæ videntur. Etenim quinque ex illis sententiæ hoc & sequenti numero citantur, quæ in vulgatis nusquam reperiuntur: imo vero contraria quædain, in iis leguntur. Nam lib. v. cap. 16. de Paschatis celebritate catholicorum dogma propalam edicitur, uti post æquinoctium instauretur. Tum ne cum Judais agatur, & alia quædam; quæ si in antiquis illis Constitutionibus legebantur, mirum est hoc tam præsenti ac diserto testimonio usum non esse contra Audianos Epiphanium, qui Judæorum more celebrandum Pascha iisdem ex Constitutionibus affirmabant. Apparet igitur, aliud fuisse Constitutionum genus, quam quibus hodie Clementis nomen inscribitur. Animadv. in H. 1xx. p. 290, 291. Grabe was of opinion, that the Constitutions quoted by Epiphanius were not only different from ours, but that they were the Doctrine, or Doctrines of the Apostles, mentioned by Eusebius and Athanasius, and shorter than ours. Equidem id lubens concedo, Doctrinam Apostolorum, ab Eusebio & Athanasio memoratam eamdem fuisse cum Aialaa sive Constitutione Apostolicâ ab Epiphanio aliquoties laudata.-Sed istas, quibus modo utimur, Constitutiones Apostolicas Clementi adscriptas, nego easdem esse cum Διδαχαις seu Διδασκ naλiais Apostolorum, licet in quibusdam capitibus conveniant. Spic. p. 41.- -contra quam hypothesin supra p. 41, & seqq. evici, Adaxas, sive Constitutiones Epiphanii, diversas a nostris, nec adeo prolixas, vel in plures libros divisas fuisse. Ib. p. 284. the contents of it to be the work of some honest, orthodox, or catholic Christian. Daillé has argued in a like manner. 5. It is not easy to say what respect Epiphanius himself had for this work. He quotes things from it, as ordinances of the apostles, and as the divine word and doctrine: but it is not mentioned in any of the passages, where he gives the catalogues of the books of scripture, exhibited in the preceding chapter. Moreover, the expressions of his just taken notice of, seem to imply no more, than that the book was an ecclesiastical or orthodox writing: farther, either his Constitutions were not the same as ours, or he had not much regard for them. For in our Constitutions divers early heretics are named, and they are condemned and confuted: of which passages nevertheless Epiphanius has made no use in his history of those heretics, or 'in his arguments ́against them: which every one must be apt to think he would have done, if the Constitutions which we have, had been then in being, and had been esteemed by him as of authority. 6. Whatever was the opinion of Epiphanius about the work quoted in the passages of his just recited, or referred to, there can be no good reason for us to suppose it was a book of sacred scripture; forasmuch as no such book is quoted as scripture by Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Cyprian, Eusebius, or any other Christian writer of the first three centuries. If any should say that Epiphanius's Constitutions are the same with the Doctrine of the Apostles, mentioned by Eusebius and Athanasius, [which has been the opinion of Grabe and some others,] I would answer: That is not certain. Supposing them to be the same, it is manifest that the book called the Doctrine of the Apostles, was no book of sacred scripture. It is never quoted by Eusebius, or Athanasius, in any of their writings: they have only once mentioned it, each of them, as a spurious, or useful book, when they give a catalogue of the books of the New Testament: and all other Christian writers before them are quite silent about it. In the Synopsis, ascribed to Athanasius, it is mentioned; but it is ranked with contradicted,' or apocryphal books. II. Having seen the passages of Epiphanius concerning the Apostolical Constitutions of his time, and made remarks on them, I proceed to consider a work which we now have in eight books, with a like title: and I begin with alleging the judgments of divers learned moderns upon them. 1. Cotelerius says: It is certain, that the work of the Apostolical Constitutions in eight books is apocryphal and pseudepigraphal, not composed by the apostles, nor by the apostolical • Clement. Although Epiphanius and Cedrenus have quoted the Constitutions as the divine <word; nevertheless it is manifest, that a book cannot be esteemed the work of the apostles, which the earliest times of the church were unacquainted with, which was unknown to the fathers, or neglected by them, which has many marks of forgery and falsehood; which the catholic church excludes from the canon of divine scripture: which, finally, has in it very many things contrary to truth and probability, plainly of a later date than the times of the apostles, and quite different from their true characters.' 2. Tillemont's judgment is not very different from that of Cotelerius: I therefore take it next. If the Doctrine of the Apostles, mentioned by Eusebius and Athanasius, and the • Constitutions, are different works, as Du Pin thinks, Epiphanius is the first who has mentioned the Constitutions.-And though the last canon of the apostles ranks them with the canonical • scriptures; and though the Ethiopians respect them as sacred and divine scripture; we are ⚫ nevertheless constrained to own, that there are in them many things contrary to truth and pro'bability, and far different from the time of the apostolical writings." At non ideo fit, ut libros a Clemente vere scriptos, vereque ab Apostolis instituta dictataque, quæcumque in illis narrantur, fuisse crediderit. Multis enim libris nihil inest vel a fide, vel a disciplinâ alienum, quos non idcirco dixeris vel Clementinos, vel Apostolicos. Omnino videtur Epiphanius sensisse, illas Apostolorum nomine tam vulgatas Diataxes boni & catholici viri opus esse non inutile, iisque sincere explicatam esse ecclesiæ fidem ac disciplinam: ut a Clemente scriptas, & ab ipsis Apostolis dictatas crediderit, nihil sane cogit. De Psendep. Apostol. 1. i. cap. 2. p. 37. Itaque verum est, Constitutionum Apostolicarum o×7abıbλor opus esse apocryphum, & pseudepigraphum, ab apostolis non profectum, nec ab apostolico Clemente. Quamvis S. Epiphanius H. 80. 7. & Cedrenus.Selov λofov Diataxibus tribuant; attamen liquido constat, ad apostolus & Clementem non pertinere σuvlafua, quod prima ecclesiæ tempora latuit, quod a tot sanctis patribus ignoratum fuit, aut neglectum; quod pluribus suspicionem movit suppositionis, plurimis certitudinem dedit falsitatis; quod catholica ecclesia a canone scripturarum divinarum excludit; quod denique sexcenta complectitur cum veritate, cum similitudine pugnantia, recentiora temporibus apostolicis, & apostolico charactere remotissima. Cotel. Jud. de Const. Ap. ap. Patr. Ap. T. i. < Saint Clement, de Rome, Art. vii. Mem. T. ii, b ว 3. For Du Pin's opinion, I refer at present to his Preliminary Dissertation upon the Bible, and to what he writes in his account of the Canons and Constitutions ascribed to the apostles, and then of Clement of Rome. c d Daillé's opinion was, that the Constitutions were composed after the council of Nice, and before the end of the fifth century. 5. Mr. Robert Turner thought, the Constitutions made use of by Epiphanius to be different from the present Constitutions; and concludes his work, saying: That the eight books of • Constitutions seem to have been made out of several doctrines, constitutions, canons, travels, and traditions, ascribed to the apostles, and out of some of the ancient Liturgies, and the discipline and practice of the Greek church, oddly blended together, adulterated and changed by some ignorant Arian in the fifth century.' 6. Pearson was of opinion, that the Apostolical Constitutions were formed out of several lesser works, called Doctrines or Constitutions, said to be written by Clement, Ignatius, Hippolytus, and others, but altered and interpolated by the author of this collection: and that the eight books of the Constitutions, as we now have them, were not composed and finished till after the time of Epiphanius. I have now placed Pearson's words somewhat at large at the bottom of the page; and I formerly spoke of this opinion of his. h i 7. Grabe's opinion was exactly the same as Pearson's. I now also put his words below. 8. James Basnage thought, that Pearson had hit the time of this work very well. For on the one hand, these eight books of the Apostolical Constitutions were not known in the time of Epiphanius: it might be added, nor of Jerom. On the other hand, the author of the Imperfect Work upon St. Matthew, who wrote after the time of Theodosius, quotes the eighth book: therefore we must place the composing of this large collection at the middle of the fifth century. 9. The opinion of Samuel Basnage may be seen in his 1 Annals. 10. The late learned Dr. Waterland has these expressions: The Clementine Liturgy, though it is not thought to have been ever in public use, is commonly believed to be the oldest of any now extant: and, though as an entire collection, it cannot be justly set higher than the fifth century, yet it certainly contains many things derived from earlier times.' 11. Pagi thought it sufficient to say, for shewing the Constitutions not to be Clement's, that' they are not mentioned among his works either by Eusebius or Jerom. 12. Le Clerc wrote a Dissertation, which he placed at the end of the second volume of his last edition of the Apostolical Fathers. He takes notice of some things in the Constitutions exceedingly unsuitable to the character of the apostles of Christ. He says, they well represent the ecclesiastical discipline of the fourth century; but not that of earlier times. He thinks, they' a L. ii. c. 6. sect. 10. Biblioth. Ec. T. i. p. 14, &c. a Amsterdam. Si tamen, ut in re obscurâ, conjecturas & argumenta admittere libet; illud inprimis pro certo constitui posse mihi videtur, fuisse hoc opus ante finem quinti sæculi scriptum atque editum. De Pseudep. Ap. l. ii. c. 17. p. 393. Discourse of the pretended Apostolical Constitutions, p. 198. See the chapter of Hippolytus, Vol. i. p. 500. i Unde certissima mihi videtur sententia doctissimi Præsulis Pearsonii: qui in Vindiciis S. Ignatii asseruit, octo libros Constitutionum post ævum Epiphanii, sed ante Auctorem Operis Imperfecti in Matthæum compositos fuisse. Dictus enim auctor primus Constitutiones. Apostolicas, tamquam pluribus libris constantes, citavit -Hic itaque cum aliquamdiu post Theodosium imp. vixerit,octo libri Constitutionum exeunte sæculo iv. vel ineunte v. prodiisse videntur. -Cæterum jam supra p. 43. admodum probabilem dixi conjecturam laudati Pearsoniistam, qua modo utimur, Kaloλingy Aidaonaλia, in octo libros digestam, ex variis Adarnalais antiquioribus apostolorum, Clementis, Ignatii, conflatain, hasque maximâ ex parte in illa conservatas esse. Spic. p. 284, 285. Histoire de l'Eglise, p. 488. 1 Ann. 100. n. 8, 9. m Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, p. 341. ʼn Verum harum Constitutionum auctor non est Clemens Romanus, quia Eusebius, & Hieronymus libro de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, cum de scriptis S. Clementis agunt, unam duntaxat illius ad Corinthios epistolam recensent. Legatur Eusebius, 1. iii. c. 15. Pagi Ann. 100. n. 8. • Est in iis dogma quod maxime offendit viros doctos, & quidem merito, quo Episcopus ita extollitur, ut soli Deo subjiciatur, utque Dynasta & Deus terrenus adpelletur: quod veritati atque humilitati apostolorum prorsus adversatur. Exstat. 1. ii. c. 26. Rursus, cap. 34. sic loquuntur personati apostoli de episcopis:Hos Principes & Reges præesse existimate, tributaque iis offerte. &c. Diss. de Const. n. 6. p. 494. P Cæteroquin in Constitutionibus, quales habemus, optime describitur sæculi quarti disciplina ecclesiastica lb. n. 5. 1. Est hic quoque tota disciplina ecclesiastica iv sæculi, qualis ab initio non fuerat: ut jam observavit Jac. Usserius, Diss. cap. 14. 16. quem nemo confutavit, aut confutare queat. Ib. n. 10. Ego vero Constitutiones, quales nunc habemus, cum etiamnum arderent contentiones Arianorum, ab episcopo quo |