There is a great Disagreement among the Antients about the first Bishops of _Rome_: _Tertullian_ makes _Clement_, whom he supposes to have been ordained by St. _Peter_, the immediate _Successor of that Apostle_[67]. He was followed therein by _Ruffinus_[68], and _Ruffinus_ by the _Latins_ in general; among whom that Opinion universally prevailed towards the End of the Fourth Century. But _Jerom_, rejecting the Opinion of the _Latins_, places _Linus_ immediately after the Apostles, _Anacletus_ next to him, and _Clement_ in the third Place[69]. His Opinion is supported by the Authority of _Irenæus_[70], _Eusebius_[71], _Theodoret_[72], and likewise of _Epiphanius_[73], _Optatus Milevitanus_[74], and St. _Augustin_[75], with this Difference, that _Epiphanius_ gives the Name of _Cletus_ to the Successor of _Linus_, and both _Optatus_ and St. _Augustin_ place him after _Clement_; but in this they all agree, that _Linus_ was the first, after the Apostles, who governed the Church of _Rome_. To the Authority of these Writers I may add that of the Apostolic Constitutions, telling us, in express Terms, that _Linus_ was ordained Bishop of _Rome_ by St. _Paul_[76]. [Sidenote: _Whether_ Clement _appointed by St._ Peter _to succeed him_.] As to what we read in _Tertullian_ and _Ruffinus_, _viz._ that _Clement_ was ordained by St. _Peter_, and named to succeed him; Dr. _Hammond_ answers, That _Clement_ governed with Episcopal Power and Jurisdiction the converted _Jews_, while _Linus_ and _Anacletus_ governed, with the same Power, the converted Gentiles. He adds, That, upon the Death of _Anacletus_, both Churches were united under him[77]. Thus he strives to reconcile the Opinion of the _Latins_, placing _Clement_ immediately after the Apostles, with that of the _Greeks_, allowing him only the third Place: for, granting what he advances to be true, and Reasons are not wanting to support it, _Clement_ was, agreeably to the Opinion of the _Latins_, the immediate Successor of the Apostles, with respect to the _Jews_; but, with respect to the Gentiles, he succeeded _Anacletus_, agreeably to the Opinion of the _Greeks_[78]. This Answer _Cotelerius_ applauds as an ingenious, learned, and probable Solution; but, at the same time, rejects it as contradicting, in his Opinion, the Apostolic Constitutions, and not supported by the Authority of any antient Writer[79]. The learned Dr. _Pearson_ will admit no Opinion that supposes Two Bishops to have presided together in one City[80], that being an Irregularity, according to St. _Cyprian_[81], _contrary to the Ecclesiastic Disposition, contrary to the Evangelic Law, contrary to the Rules of the Catholic Institution_, and condemned as such by the Council of _Nice_[82]. It is very much to be doubted, as I have shewn above, whether St. _Peter_ ever was at _Rome_, and consequently whether _Clement_ was ordained, by him, Bishop of that City. His not succeeding