CHAP. I.

§. I THIS is not in the People, and Belie­vers in Common are not the Subject of Power Ecclesiastical. The Power of the Keys is not seated in, nor can it flow from, or be devolved, by them, either as a Body in general, or any one single Congre­gation in particular. Their stretching, or holding up the Hand, their joynt-suffrages in the choosing, numbring by the tale, as by Stones, Notes or Election, deputing and as­signation (or whatever else, in their own be­half, they can make appear to be implied in the words [...] and [...], which they lay great stress upon, and wrest to their purpose) are of no strength and vali­dity at all, of no more force to depute for the ministry, to constitute in a new Order and Station, to confer the Power of the Keys, and place in that sacred Function, then the common cry and rout of the Jews, design­ing [Page 11] it, devolved guilt on the head of our Sa­viour, deposed him from his holy Offices, took from him his Kingly Power, when cry­ing out with full throats, We'll have no King but Caesar, we will not have this man to reign over us; or their hands stretch'd forth in Prayer, Isai. 1. did bring a Blessing upon themselves, when full of Blood; but on the contrary, hateful and abomination.

SUCH as pretend to this, plead this Power §. II for Deputation, and that such only are the Separate for the Ministry, who are set apart by themselves, and in Substitution, and can produce their Seals and Credentials, must first shew and give proof of their own Power derivative, and that such was first given them of God, deposited in their hands, as the com­mon Magazine, or Store-house, to be dispensed at their wills and discretion, as the Harvest requires, and the Labourers are sent forth in­to it; and that for whom soever they shall lift up their hands, or stretch them out, to choose and make Election of, shall receive the Holy Ghost, the Powers of Sacred Orders, or of the Keys in the same act be conferr'd upon them, and which can never be prov'd, that it was given to the People or Believers in common; the gratia gratis data, and the gratia gratum faciens, the gifts of Sanctifica­tion and Edification, as they speak, as in their own Nature and Extent, do not reach to and imply one another, always place them­selves together in one and the same Subject, by any one Necessity whatsoever; every man is not wise in the same degree that he is good, nor Holy according to his Knowledge; [Page 12] Power and Godliness do not still go together, no more then do all those other Gifts and Charity mentioned and dislodged by Saint Paul, 1 Cor. 12.13. the honest report of those seven Men full of the Holy Ghost and Wisdom, did not create them thereby, and in the immediate Power and Virtue of it, Church-Officers or Deacons, till set before the Apostles, and they pray'd, and laid their hands on them, Acts 6. and so in the Con­secration of all other Orders. So neither do we find under any one Dispensation since the World was, that by any one positive super­induced Order and Constitution, these Land­marks were removed, that the separate Power of the Priesthood was ever laid common, pro­miscuously and indefinitely placed in all Sub­jects, in every one in particular, all those that either owned its Use and Power, that either pleaded or reaped any benefit by it. Before the Law God placed it in, and limited it to the Primogeniture, the first-born and chief of the Family. At the first giving, and under the Law he brought it into lesser com­pass, and subjected it in Aaron and his Fa­mily in Succession. And our Saviour Jesus Christ ascending upon high, and giving his Gifts unto Men, when to plant and propa­gate his Church throughout the whole World; he had rent, indeed, the Veyl of the Temple in sunder at his Death, taken down the Partition-Wall betwixt Jew and Gentile, the inclosure was laid open, and the Aaronical Priesthood had an end; but there was still to be Separates for the guiding and conducting Men to Heaven, and officiating [Page 13] to that end before God, a Priesthood was still to be continued, though settled by a new Commission and of another Nature; a Power devolved and limited to select special Per­sons also, and not Universal, as was to be the Believers, And he gave some Apostles: and some, Prophets: and some, Evangelists: and some, Pastors and Teachers; for the per­fecting of the Saints, for the work of the mini­stry, for the edifying of the Body of Christ; till we all come in the unity of the Faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect Man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ; that we henceforth be no more chil­dren tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of Doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness whereby they lye in wait to deceive: But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body fitly joyned together and compacted, by that which every joynt supplyeth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body, unto the edifying of it self in love, Ephes. 4.8.—11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. Are all Apostles? are all Prophets? are all Teachers? are all workers of miracles? have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? 1 Cor. 12.29, 30. or could we admit of that absurder, preca­rious state of Nature contended for by some, supposing once an equality in all men, and that to all things, every one as coming into the world, had a right and title to every thing, a share and interest in each Benefit, Of­fice and Duty, and suitably as their Maker [Page 14] was to be publickly served and worshipped, so could each one officiate in and discharge the Performance, or devolve and transfer his right on whom he please, or as occasion; a Mistake of the Learned Hugo Grotius himself, in his Posthumous work, De Imperio summa­rum potestatum in Sacris, cap. 2. sect. 4. though the fruit of his earlier and indigested Brain; nor is Spalatensis to be acquitted in the point, De Repub. Christ. lib. 1. cap. 12. yet all this is superseded by an after-positive Institution, and which is acknowledged by Grotius in the fore-quoted place; and 'tis the appointments of our Saviour that is to be our guide and rule, especially since himself has put a per­petual Sanction in this our very case, and to endure all along with his Kingdom, as above, Ephes. 4. or if the obstinacy of some, and such there are, will still persist, and tell it out, That this inclosure was notwithstanding this, yet made common, and the Power re­solved again into the Multitude, they are to give Evidence both of the first Translation, and after Matter of Fact, how it so descended. Church-Power, nor indeed any other, is not a private Presumption, secretly infused, whether on a Multitude or particular Per­sons: ‘'tis what was once deposited in cer­tain hands, the effect whereof is visible, in the Succession of Persons, deriving the Au­tority which they claim, from the visible act of those Persons, that are intrusted with it.’ There must be some known Aera, or publick visible date of its issuing out, some distinctive mark of its coming, some out­ward badge of its cognizance; that the Con­scientious [Page 15] Enquirer may receive Satisfaction when demanding in Sincerity, what Zedekiah the Son of Chenaanah did of Micaiah in con­tempt, and with reproach, Which way went the spirit of the Lord to speak unto thee? 1 Kings 22.24. thus to ask a sign, had been no more to tempt the Lord, then it had been in King Ahaz, had he done it, Isai. 7. but on the contrary a Duty; and St. Jerome gives the reason in his Commentaries on that place, Tamen jussus ut peteret, obedientia debet explere praeceptum; therefore because God had com­manded, and expects it. And St. Jerome there goes on, and therefore compares Ahab to the Idol-Worshippers, who are led by their own fancies, that places his Altar in the corners of the Streets, in each Mountain and Grove, Et pro Levitis habebat Fanaticos, non vult sig­num petere quod praeceptum est; for Levites take Fanatiques to officiate in God's Worship, such as were not sent, nor called, as was Aa­ron; a word as old as St. Jerome's days, in the true sense of Fanaticism, when the visible beaten way, set out by God himself (as was the Order of the Levites) is slighted and de­serted, and they take to them Levites of their own, Temulentos & fanaticos, nescire quid di­cerent, as St. Jerome farther in his Comments on Osea, Men drunk, but not with Wine, not able to give a reason of their Profession to him that asks it.

NOR is there that in the Greek word §. III [...] which is contended for, and on which indeed their whole Fabrick is erected, and designs advanced. I know not how to give the due sense of this word, thereby [Page 16] to undeceive such as generally lye under the prejudice of its perverted Signification, than in the words of our learned Doctor Hammond in his Query of Imposition of hands for Ordina­tion; [ [...], ‘A word that literally sig­nifies to stretch out, or hold up the hand; but being used among the Heathens for choosing, or any sort of Suffrage, or gi­ving of Sentence; which among them in popular Judicatures or Choyces was wont to be done by that ceremony of stretching out or lifting up hands: it is in vulgar use among Heathens, and Jewish, but especial­ly among Christian Writers, brought to signifie, without any respect to giving of Suffrages (indifferently whether by one or by more) constituting or ordaining,] and of which whoso wants farther satisfaction,’ may go on in that Excellent discourse, and have it, and also in his Annotations on Acts 14.23. I'le only add here, as the word is used but three times in the New Testament, in none is it appliable to what they design from it. The one place is Acts 10.41. where a multitude in voting to be sure is excluded, for 'tis said only of Gods Election and Or­dination of the Apostles. The other is Acts 14.22. [...]. 'Tis rendred, when they had Ordained them Elders in every City. Where nothing to do sure with the Multitude, the People or Laity. The last is 2 Cor. 8.19. and will amount to no more than the for­mer; and whosoever was the particular per­son there said to be chosen of the Churches, the meaning can only be, That the Apostles had assigned and appointed him to go along in that particular affair.

[Page 17]AND 'tis farther observable, that where­ever any Election by Suffrage or Vote, is §. IV either pretended to be made by the Multi­tude, or really is so in the New Testament, and some there were; 'tis not the naked Voting or giving up the Assent in their be­half, gives what is to be, or what can be supposed to be conferr'd, that constitutes and sixes in any one designed Order, but something farther is super-added, and super­venes, collates and instals, makes the sepa­ration and inclosure; it is pleaded at the Ordination of Matthias, Acts 1. [...], Communibus calculis annumerabatur, by com­mon Consent, Votes and Suffrage, he was ad­ded to that Number, to the Eleven Apostles, i. e. the whole Multitude, the Hundred and twenty Disciples, or Believers, all concurr'd in the choice and assignation; and which if granted, though it needs not be, yet no­thing is gain'd on their side, for that which constituted and gave Matthias his Portion in the Ministry, and which Barsabas had not, though he had his first Appointment by the whole Society as well as he, was the lot fal­ling upon him, by which God, not they are said to choose him, i. e. to delegate unto, and invest him with the Order and Power of an Apostle, by the sensible Medium or Determi­nation by lots; and this the Prayer makes plain. And they pray'd and said, Lord, thou which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whe­ther of these two thou hast chosen, that he may take part of this Ministry and Apostleship, from which Judas, by transgression fell, that he might go unto his own place; and they gave forth their [Page 18] lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbred among the eleven Apostles. They all with one accord acknowledged him a Man separate for the Ministry. Another Ordina­tion we find Acts 6. though to a much lower Office and Order in the Church, when the Seven Deacons receiv'd their first Constitu­tion; where 'tis plain, the Apostles call'd the Multitude together, told them the occa­sion of the designed Order, such the People were to look out the Men, and see and en­quire that they be sit for the present Office, and so they did, they chose Stephen and Phi­lip, &c. but it follows, when they had done so, they set them before the Apostles, who were to give them the Power designed, to accept and invest them; And when the Apo­stles had prayed, they laid their hands on them: where the Multitude are allow'd to choose, and here they might have an especial reason for it; for their Estates in part, so much as was assign'd for the Poor, was to be entrusted in their hands, and good reason that they approv'd of their personal Integrity; yet had they not Power to constitute in the lowest degree of the Priesthood; 'tis the Apostles alone who had receiv'd the Power from on high, and on whose Persons it was enstated, could, and did, do it. And whatever Beza supposes at the Ordination made by Barnabas and Paul, that they had the joynt-suffrages of the People in order to it, Acts 14.23. and which he doth in the same precarious way, in all the Ordinations we meet with in Scrip­ture, though the Apostles and Presbyters are still alone mentioned, as here, yet 'tis evi­dent [Page 19] that they were the hands of Paul and Barnabas that were laid on them, as of the Presbytery in other places, and by which, not the Votes and Elections of the People, at least not without them, were the Ordinations performed; 'tis not to be sure in the Believers in common to do it.

THAT not only Election, but Vocation, §. V differ from Ordination; and 'tis one thing to look out, cull, choose and design for the Office of the Ministry, and another actually to give the Power of the Keys, to enstate and six in it; nothing more clear than this from the Practice of our Saviour himself, who first called Andrew and Peter, &c. then elected and chose them into the number of the Twelve; yet all this while, whatever of Power was given in the mean time, the full to be sure and complete Power of an Apostle was not given to any one of them, that was not devolved and transmitted, till after his Ascension, and then only they re­ceived that Power by the Holy Ghosts coming upon them at the Feast of Pentecost, Acts 2. and the same has been the Sense and Practice of the succeeding Church in all Ages, that the People had Votes in the choice of Bishops, all must grant, and it can be only Ignorance and Folly that pleads the contrary; but this ne­ver was thought to create the Bishop, and he must be as ignorant and stupid on the other side that believes it, and run as cross to the practice of all Antiquity, that was still the Clergies Province alone, the Work of Or­dination; nor are the People pleaded or ever mentioned to have a share in it: and [Page 20] though [...] be sometimes used for Ele­ction and Choice. So Balsamon upon the first Canon of the Apostles, and 'tis used at the entrance of Deaconesses by Justinian, Novel 3. 6. cap. 6. and Hugo Grotius gives us many more instances of the like Natures, De Imperio sum. Potest. in Sacris, cap. 10. sect. 6. yet when strictly speaking, it is defined by Zonaras upon that first Canon, [...], and 'tis appro­priated to the Bishop, when stretching forth his Hand in the Office of Consecration; or when Praying over the Person to be Ordain­ed, and invoking the Holy Ghost, as by [...] is farther declared, ibid. and so strict is Zonaras in this his limitation of the Word, and its use to Ordination, that when speaking of the assignation of under Church-Officers, as Readers, Singers, &c. he changes it into [...], using the former in the Ordina­tion only of those of the Priestly Catalogue, Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons, and which he only Copies out of the Church-Canons; as Can. 2. Concil. 4. Gen. Chalced. Can. 6. & 14. Concil. 6. in Trullo, and the first Council of Nicea has still held to the distinction be­twixt Election and Ordination, and expresses them by several words; the former by [...], the latter by [...], in the fourth Ca­non. And so again in the sixth Canon, the care is the same of confounding these two, so far as the use of different words will do it, [...] is the word used for the Power and Acts of the People; and [...] of the Bishop; and which Zonaras there Para­phrases by [...], [Page 21] none of which was ever assumed by the Peo­ple or Laity, and the same distinction is re­tained betwixt [...] and [...] by Aristenus in Can. 10. Sancti Basilii ad Amphi­lochium apud Pandect. Can. Beverig. Socrates in his Church History, lib. 1. cap. 9. uses dif­ferent words but with the same design, and is clearer yet, if possible, in the distinction; the Power of the People he speaks of and ex­presses by [...], a word very fit and apt to prove the Primitive Custom of Ele­ction preceding, the Act and Office of the Bishop, by [...], laying on his hands up­on the Consecrated; and so it generally goes on betwixt the Clergy and the People, in the Offices of Ordination, the People choo­sing, the Bishop consecrating, the Emperor assenting, and so also is the business of laying on of hands still appropriated to the Bishop, not only as excluding the Presbyter, who has not the Power, but also the People, as 'tis over and over again in the Church Story, and which to transcribe were needless; the People give nothing of that Power, about which we are discoursing, and is supposed in those in Holy Orders.

AND to this all agree, that admit of the §. VI laying on of the hands of the Presbytery in Ordinations, and that there is something pe­culiar in the Clergy, and which the People have not, and consequently cannot give; but another Dispute here commences, what Ob­ligation this Practice of the Church for some Ages past, lays upon the Christian World now present? in what degree of usefulness or necessity they placed the Votes and Con­currency [Page 22] of the People in the constituting a Church-man? And this say some, in the same order of necessity as the Concurrency of the Clergy; that although the Suffrages of the People do not confer and collate Church-Power apart and solitary, and where the hands of the Presbytery is not; yet the Pres­bytery cannot do it without them, 'tis nei­ther legal, just, nor duly performed if so attempted, something is wanting, not only for outward Attestation, but for the real translation of Autority on the heads of the Ordained. Thus Theodore Beza is express, Ordinatio seu impositio manuum, certè nullos pro­prie creat ministros; sed legitime vocatos seu electos, adhibitis precibus, mittit in sui muneris possessionem. De ministerii grad. cont. Saraviam cap. 22. That Ordination or Imposition of Hands properly creates no Ministers, but by Prayers, gives such as are call'd or elected (he means by the People, as 'tis every where to be seen in his Writings) Possession of their Office, a kind, it seems, of Mandate for in­duction, to what they had a right before by another Hand collated. And David Blondel, the most Industrious of the Presbyterian Or­der, in his Apology Pro Hieronimo, spends many Pages in the latter end of that Treatise, in giving the Practice of the Church for Ten Centuries, admitting this Power of the Peo­ple in Ordinations, and that they have equal right thereto, and are alike constituted by Christ, his Vicars in the case, with the Clergy, Laicos fratres, equo cum clero jure, Christi hac in parte vicarios constitutos, pag. 471. and upon which he fixes a Divine right immuta­ble, [Page 23] and indispensable; and what Ordina­tions were made during these Centuries, without the Peoples Choice, Suffrages and Approbations preceding, aberrationes fuisse statuamus, pag. 542. ibid. were Anomala's, and Aberrations from the Rule, for Corre­ction, not Imitation. My design is not to examine all the little Arguments Blondel there produces, or the numerous Quotations he brings, it were tedious and to no purpose, because most of them are so, his Zeal and Industry outrunning his Judgment, as through­out the whole Apology. What is Truth and to be adhered unto, I shall as briefly and plainly as I am able, lay down in the follow­ing Conclusions taking the liberty of Refle­xion, as occasion.

THAT there is no Practice, much less §. VII Command of our Saviour for any such thing, but the quite contrary, he consulted nobody that we read of, not only in the first Voca­tion and Election of his Disciples (for who should they be? or where should he find them?) nor in their after-assignation to ei­ther Apostleship, or to what other degree of the Power of the Ministry was on the Seven­ty devolved. And this Blondel in part grants, but first insinuates, that it might be other­wise, though secret and not declared, and then positively affirms that it was so, upon a bottom equally precarious; because the A­postles practised and delivered to us what they copied from Christ, who still call'd in the whole Fraternity and required their Votes in each Ordination, and thought them­selves in Duty so obliged, Pag. 475. and [Page 24] which how far true, and to what purpose, that it is no ways to the advantage of Blon­del's design, is already considered.

§. VIII NOR do the after-Ordinations in Scrip­ture prove any thing like it, but rather give Evidence to the contrary; I'le make my in­stances in the Epistles to Timothy and Ti­tus, on purpose wrote by St. Paul to instruct them in these like Affairs of the Church, as to the Polity of it, that they might know how to behave themselves in the Church of God, as he tells Timothy in particular, 1.3.15. where 'tis notoriously evident, that the Peo­ples Votes are no more required to the con­stituting a Bishop or Deacon, then that their Hands are there actually laid upon them. That the Hands of the Presbytery did conse­crate, we read expresly, and we read of none else; and such the Presbytery, Timothy and Titus, have the alone Charge and Power de­legated, to Inspect and Animadvert upon their Lifes and Manners, to receive or reject as their Prudence directs; the Clergy are sole Judges, 'tis not required, that the People, so much as present; every particular Man's inward desire, and private Motions (suppo­sing other due qualifications concurring) made known to such whose is the Power for or­daining, seems sufficient, if any man desire the Office of a Bishop, 1 Tim. 3.1. and that these Epistles are to be follow'd, as the pat­tern in the Mount, the Platform and Model of Church-Government, these Men strenu­ously plead at other times; and those other instances of Ordinations in Scripture brought by Blondel, conclude nothing more. In that [Page 25] of Matthias, there is no such thing express at all; the Believers being few—were all toge­ther in one place, and they were necessitated so to be; but that they otherwise concurr'd then by their presence; or that St. Peter's Speech was directed to them and not to the Apostles only, is not thence to be inferr'd; that in Acts 6. was chiefly, he says only; to provide Deacons to look after their Poor; and good reason was there, the People should approve of such in whose hands their Moneys was to be deposited; nor can any inference be hence made on his side, unless the conse­quence be good, that such as are fit and able to choose and depute in whose hands their Money shall be entrusted, are for the same reason, instructed to Skill and choose their Teachers; or that we set a lower price on mens Souls, than we do on their Money; be­cause we can allow the Laity to provide for the latter; but we think there ought to be better provision made, and more care taken for the former. What is argued farther from the parity of the Call and Consecration of Aaron, Heb. 5. is full levell'd against him­self; where to be sure all concurrency of the People was excluded, in every respect what­ever.

WE'll go on from Scripture-instances to §. IX those immediately after the Apostles, and see if here his Success be more; we'll accept what he says of his Twelve Centuries in im­mediate Succession; because they are not worth the particular canvass in this Deter­mination. The point does not lye here, Whether the Laity did sometimes, or often­times [Page 26] concur in Ordinations? but did they always concur? He dares not say this, but he believes not above Ten Ordinations to be made otherways, Pag. 541. which he suppo­ses to be failures, and to be occasioned by the inseparable accidents of the Church Mili­tant; but no rules for Succession. Though, by the way, 'tis the chief design of the Apo­logy it self, by fewer Examples, indeed not one, but what is by him industriously forced and perverted, to cut off the Chain, and overthrow the concurrent Testimony of all Ages in the point of Episcopacy; such is his slavery to his present Cause. But such as con­sult Antiquity, and the Ordinals of Churches impartially, and which we have reason to be­lieve he never did, will find more, and no one of them censur'd as failures; that Ele­ctions and Nominations were made other­wise, and that oftner, than in his form. At least many times, sometimes by the Emperors without the People, sometimes by the Empe­rors and People, sometimes by the Emperor, Clergy, and People, sometimes by the Cler­gy without either; and this in very good times of the Church, as instances are every where in Church-Story; and particularly, that it is not inseparable from the People, and but by Permission, and upon occasion, other­wise their Votes are to be over-ruled, ap­pears from the many Laws made by the Em­perors, limiting what Persons are to be Or­dained, and what not, 16. Cod. Theodos. Tit. 2. Lex. 3. l. 19.32, &c. Sozomen. Eccl. Hist. l. 5. c. 13. And if it be admitted, what Me­litius and his followers objected against Pau­linus, [Page 27] That his Ordination was not as it ought to be, because without the consent of all the People; as in Sozomen, Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 13. yet the Ordination was not hereby voided, and we have a certain Autority on the other side, and much about the same time too; 'tis the 13th Canon of the Council of Laodicca, which expresly forbids, that the Election of such as are to be Ordained be at all in the People, a certain Argument that the Church placed it at the most under the head of in­differences, what occasion and circumstan­ces might enjoyn or null, receive or reject; otherwise it could not thus become limitable by Custom, or the Subject of different Laws Ecclesiastical; and at last the numerous and turbulent Meetings on the occasion of Ordi­nations and Factions in giving their Votes, even to Riots and Tumults, to Blood-shedding and Murder, forced that the People were ex­cluded quite, and general Laws to that pur­pose were made, prohibiting their appearance at such times, Quamdiu in Ecclesia Plebs par­tem habuit in Episcopis & Presbyteris legendis, nunquam discordiis & factionibus civitates ca­ruere, donec res ipsa & pax Ecclesiarum docuit, Plebi hoc jus ademptum, Magistratibus & Cle­ricis relinqui primò debere, quod posteà soli sibi Clerici vindicabant. So Blondel's own Friend Salmasius gives account, and an end of the Elections by the People, Defensio. Regia, cap. 7. And it may be farther observ'd, that amongst the many Cautions and Restrictions concern­ing Ordinations, the several Rules and In­stances given, by and for which, they are rendred void, and null'd if against or want­ing [Page 28] in either, abundance of which are to be found; as, That every Bishop is to be Conse­crated by three other Bishops, Can. 1. Apostol. That the Metropolitan be always one, or with his leave, Can. 4. Conc. 1. Nic. Can. 19. Conc. Antioch. Can. 12. & Can. 6. une quarte Gen. Conc. Chalcedon. That no foreign Ordi­nations are valid, Can. 2. Conc. Constantinop. unless in those Churches in Heathen Coun­tries, and no Bishop is setled, or in case of Persecution. Sozom. Eccl. Hist. cap. 9. If a Bishop deserts his Diocess, Can. 3. Concil. Ephes. Gen. All Ordinations procured by Mo­ney, Can. 29. Apost. & Can. 2. Concil. 4. Gen. Chalcedon. That it be not by Secular Powers, Can. 30. Apost. If made only by Presbyters, as in the Case of Colluthus, Athanas. Apol. pag. 784. 792. In case of some known and no­torious Scandal which the Bishop that or­dain'd then lay under, Athanas. Ep. ad Soli­tar. vitam agentes. In some Cases of Heresie in the Ordainer, 16. Cod. Theodos. Tit. 5. Lex. 12.14.57. Yet amidst these and such like [...], illegal Ordi­nations and defective, complain'd of by Eu­sebius, which were during the Persecution of Dioclesian in his twelfth Chapter, De Marty­ribus Palestinae, and against which the Church still provided for the future; there is no one Caution concerning Ordinations by the Peo­ple, such a thing being never presumed and attempted, nor is there any one instance of but voiding any one Ordination that was made without their but Votes, and Hands lift up, and concurring in order to it, and which certainly there would have been, had [Page 29] the Church adjudg'd their pre-elections or concurrency so necessary, especially upon so many failures; as David Blondel acknowledges there were, one of which was enough to have awakened the Church-Governors to a­like care they used on such Occasions, or had she but placed their concurrency with those but Circumstantials, of Orders, many of which are just now mentioned, and the Church there made particular provision relating to them.

SO that David Blondel's design of a Divine §. X and Immutable Right, in the defence of which he has took so great pains, is only writing in the Dust; nor is any one inference due that he has made in order to it: 'Tis true, his Argument is well laid, had the Per­formance been accordingly, and the concur­rency of ten Centuries immediately upon the Apostles and Scriptures attesting any one Truth or Practice, is as authentique, and ought to be so received, as any Grounds and Motives of Faith can make it to be, nor can any thing be required more, which can be thought to concur to the making a full per­swasion of the Truth under Debate. But alas! the chief Ingredient, for a thorow Tra­dition is absent, Universality, it was so nei­ther in all places, not at all times, nor in any one time or Century of the best and first Ages of the Church, in every instance of it; but still changed upon accidents often, and more upon Industry and Choice; and last of all wholly abolished and in good times of the Church, without any care or design for a re­stitution, taken even out of the hands of the [Page 30] Magistrate, and limited to the Bishops, Can. 3. Concil. Sept. Gen. Niceae. and it may be much questioned, whether his Brethren and Friends both in France, and Holland, and England; espe­cially such of them as have took up the Cudgels after him, have more reason to be ashamed of his ill Success, then to be down-right an­gry with him for the Way and Method and Grounds he laid for proving the Divine and immutable right of it. Surely if this be ad­mitted, the disadvantage will be their own, in a point of a higher concern, if Apostoli­cal Ecclesiastical practice still amount to a Divine immutable Law. And indeed it would be of real ill consequence, in many conside­rable cases that would arise in the true Church of Christ; for although the matter of Fact be evident, it has been receiv'd and practised in the Churches first and best Ages; yet it may be a doubt what the Obligation was to them who then receiv'd it, and whose practice it was? whether as absolute and im­mutable, and consequently, how it now rea­ches us? every Truth and Matter of Fact, has not the same degree of Necessity in its Na­ture and Use, nor do his Brethren more go against him here, than he against himself; I might refer to his own Text, but the Ireni­cum has done it before me, ( p. 401.) joyning him with Bochart, and Amiraldus in the cause, of which his Triumvirate, as he calls them, Blondel is there placed in the head, and all to make good that one great Truth, by their Autority, which is vast and unque­stionable, (and to defend which is the great business of that Treatise of Church-Govern­ment; [Page 31] nor has that Author as yet declared his Judgment to be otherwise, or rather cor­rected that his first and early Mistake there obtruded on the World) to pass a perpetual Sanction upon it. That no form of Govern­ment or Polity in the Church is immutable, though by the Apostles themselves recom­mended; and yet Apostolical practice is here binding and eternal ( pag. 473. Apol.) and the Power of the People is thus transmitted from Heaven, as the alone House and Pede­gree of its descent, and so immutably is it stablish'd, that no accident or ill circumstance whatever, or with what ill consequences soe­ver foreseen and foreknown, no considera­tion of the Peoples ignorance, even duncery it self ( at eos omnes, non modo imperitos sed & imperitissimos demus, pag. 501.) no miscarria­ges or other seeming inconsistencies, are to be considered, or can they weigh down against the Eternal antecedent Command, either abolish the Power, or cease; but alter, in but one instance, the custom and practice of their Votes and Elections to the Office of the Mini­stry, nothing can remain but for common Prudence, for all was known at first to our Saviour, whence the Apostles received it, to the succeeding Church, who left no such re­serve, allow'd not to us (nor have we reason to take it ill, for they did not to themselves) any such Considerations ( pag. 51, 52.) and what Exceptions there have been to this first and great Rule, as he tells us there was some few, arose from the Pride and Usurpations of the Bishops, who so soon as they had taken to themselves Titles and Power above the [Page 32] Presbyters, they engrossed the Right of Or­daining them, and never required the con­currency of the Clergy, and the People, spurr'd on by Fame, and Vain-glory, and Secular Interest; and that is the reason why there is no Canons express, and very few ex­amples of the Peoples choosing Presbyters and Deacons. Nor does it in the original right diminish their Power, because wrested from them, ( pag. 469, 470.) and all which is one, among the many Fictions and Ro­mances, the whole Apology is stuffed withal, and every ways like himself, who, according to his usual good Nature, and Malice to the Order it self, still lays what dirt he can at the doors of the most eminent Chri­stians, the Bishops and Prelates of the Church of Christ, not considering, or, rather not ca­ring, what injury the common Christianity thereby receives, through the sides of these its known Martyrs and Confessors, so be he can but fill up his private Congregation; a guilt not easily to be removed from too many of the French Reformation, especially from Dailee in his Book of the Use of the Fathers; and the abundance of Irreligion in general, in these parts of the World ows it self in a great measure to it. And to see the unlucki­ness of it, and how his ill Nature returns un­avoidably upon himself, what he attributes to the Bishops Pride and Arrogancy, and Self­interest, in assuming and engrossing to them­selves a Power which was not theirs, that they ordained Presbyters and Deacons with­out the People and Clergy, that the depen­dency of both might be the surer upon them, [Page 33] and certainly be their Slaves and Vassals, and which is the invidious design of his whole Book, how easily is it all return'd on his own pate? and to what else can any one impute this his clawing with and condescending to the People to be, but his own, and the other of his Brethrens dependance upon them, as it is at this day in France? and 'tis wholly in the Power of the Congregation, both to Vote in, and Eject their Minister at pleasure, to bestow what Maintenance upon them their Wisdom directs; nor is it at all in the Power of the Clergy, as things are now with them, streightned by the Civil Sword, to avoid or amend it; to them indeed, in their circum­stances, the good-liking and choice of the People are necessary, otherwise they must change the Climate, their Churches and Mi­nistry must cease and fall together. And this I say, not to insult over and upbraid them, for their case in general is really to be pitied; but thus do outward accidents imbody them­selves, and become as of the real Substance; and too many Models and Systems, and Pro­fessions have some regard, too much yielding and complyance with them; this one thing does it generally need a Pardon, and to them in particular it cannot easily be granted, it may with great justice be called their Pride and Usurpation, that what is their own un­avoidable Necessity; what the frowns and injuries of their Native Countrey they live in, the want of Countenance and Protection from the Prince, and of a due Provision by Laws, and which in reason ought to be other­ways, lays upon them, this they'l obtrude [Page 34] upon us, upon all Churches, as the Pattern upon the Mount, the Platform, not to be de­viated from, every ways to be copied out, upon no less a peril than the breach of an antecedent immutable Law, an Institution from Heaven. What ought to be their care to represent as fairly as they can, they ma­gisterially command; other Churches are condemned for not obeying, a fault the Churches of the French Reformation are no ways to be acquitted of. That there is a Sub­ordination among Clergy-men, and a depen­dence as on one Head and Superior in the several degrees of the Priesthood, this is most certain, 'tis bottomed on as good and known Autority as our Religion it self, and which will be made to appear by and by in this Treatise, though not as the business of it. The Deacon is a Minister or Servant to the Bishop, and both Presbyter and Deacon re­ceive their Power and Deputation from him; but in any other sense we own no Head or Master, Servants, Ministers we are but of God and Christ, of the Gospel which we mi­nister unto them, of which we are Stewards for their advantage and relief, dispensing to every man his Portion, ministring in our courses, as the Angels in theirs, for the good of all, a faithful Minister of Christ for you; so the Apostle, Colos. 1.23. and in this alone consists our [...] or [...], the work of our Ministry, and attendance at the Altar. Thus we are to the People, as Governors, Rulers, Instructers, Teachers, and which last Office, allowed us by all; so immediate­ly implies Superiority and Prelation, that it [Page 35] alone will not let us be their Servants, as Au­torized and Commissioned, impower'd by and in Deputation from them.

NOR is this David Blondel's disingenuity, §. XI or undue dealings alone, or in this case only, of the Peoples Power over their Pastors, there is one case more at least, and which has more than one Abettor, and 'tis that of Episcopa­cy; as the People are above the Clergy, so must not one Clergy-man be above another; the Order, Solitary Power, Superiority and Prelation of the Bishop must cease, was never any, then as by Usurpation, there must be a level between a Presbyter and him; because there are no Bishops in the French Churches, an equality is now fixed and setled among them; and in order to the surer, certain, compassing it in our Church of England, they took the opportunity of a present Schism and Defection from our present Bishops, abetted and heightned by a prosperous Rebellion; they even insult over us as men that were down, and to rise up no more; they pursue us as a vanquish'd Enemy, look upon the iron as red hot and to be stricken, and their Pres­byterian Model to be erected in our King­dom, as that Image once fallen from Heaven. To this purpose comes upon the Stage their Triumviri, Blondel, Salmasius, and Dailce, Men throughly instructed by a vast and unwearied Industry and Reading, and which they per­verted to render Episcopacy less acceptable, not to say odious in the World, as the effect of Innovation and Ambition, contrary to the designs of Christ, and the Practice of the Church in the best Ages of it; and [Page 36] herein their proficiency and advancement was not inconsiderable, considering the bad­ness and difficulty of their cause, what St. Je­rome has observed of Hereticks in and before his time, in his Comments on the First Chap­ter of Amos; Omnes enim Haeretici labore ni­mio ac dolore quaerendi, ordinem aliquem & con­sequentiam heraeseos suae reperire conati sunt, is evident in them, through abundance of toil and sore labour, making pretence of Order, shews of Antiquity and Consequences, to ad­vance and effect it. And Blondel goes in the Front, or at least, has merited to be placed there, with his renowned and much gloried in Apology Pro Hieronymo, which he says he kept by him Three years, ready for the Press; but did not Print it by reason of the Wars in England, or rather till the King and Church were both ruined, easily then pre­suming of a fairer reception, and which Book 'tis more than probable, he then Digested and Composed, when his offer'd Service to write quite the other way, and in the De­fence of our Episcopacy establish'd in this Church, was tender'd to that great Prelate and Martyr of Blessed Memory Arch-Bishop Land, but rejected: what were the Reasons moving the Wisdom of that excellent Pre­late to refuse him, I cannot tell; he might suspect his Integrity, or judge it less for the Honor of our Church, on purpose to imply a Foreigner in the managery and defence of what is so neer, and of so great a concern to us; and he might not think the concurrency of one or two Doctors of the French Refor­mation, so considerable, or perhaps of any [Page 37] weight, to turn the Scale for or against the famous Church of England, as it now appears they are reputed, he could not suspect his thorow Instructions and Ability for it; and that the former mostly sweigh'd the wonted Sagacity of that excellent Person, giving him no small Grounds for it, will appear, if we go on, and find him dedicating That his Book Ʋniversis Dei optimi Maximi servis, occidente toto, maxime vero per Britannias, ad Christia­ni populi Ecclesiasticum & Politicum regimen vocatis; To the Houses of Parliament and Assembly at Westminster, both Usurpers; the one of the Regal, the other of the Episcopal Power, whom they had Assaulted both with Sword and Pen, to their then present Aboli­tion, and whom he slatters with the specious Titles of Supporters both of Church and State, Vobis viri maximi in quos Ecclesia & Respublica inclinatè recumbum, Britannorum [...], the Choice Men and Supreme in our Land, Quibus inco [...]um est generoso pectus honesto; and for Episcopacy it self, (besides the whole Design of the Book which is laid against it) he places it for time and quality with those first Heresies which infested the Church, those Antichrists which were then in the World, both in St. Paul's Epistles, and in St. John's, and in the Revelations, with those Hereticks that deny the Monarchy of God, and the Incarnation of Christ Jesus, and that it was by Diotrephes devolv'd to after-ages, by degenerate Men, who regar­ded not the institution from God, Per dege­neres plurimos, divinae (que) originis immemores pro­pagatum, by such only as consult Ambition, [Page 38] to whom the Apostolical Humility enjoyn'd by our Saviour, was tedious and nauseous; men affecting Tyranny and Usurpation a­gainst St. Peter's monition, 1 Pet. 5.2, 3. Obtaedium Apostolicae humilitatis quam praecepit affe­ctantes Tyrannidem, &c. He approves the Sco­tish Covenant, and their bringing it into England, fortissimum Communis concordiae pa­cis (que) vestrae vinculum, as the most effectual way for Peace and Concord; of which Co­venant one part of its second Article is this, To endeavour the Extirpation of Prelacy, i. e. Church-Government, by Arch-Bishops, Bi­shops, &c. and Exhorts them by their Loy­alty and Obedience to their Prince, to quit and vindicate themselves of that Aspersion of Rebels they lye under, and through them may be cast upon all Protestants, Christianâ modestiâ pacificis (que) consiliis, perpetuis (que) fidelis vestrae in regiam Majestatem observantiae exem­plis, asperas voces refellite; that the World convinc'd by Experience may confess, that it is neither true now, nor ever shall be ne­cessary, No Bishop, no King; and that the one may be admitted and supported without the other, Fateatur (que) continuis experimentis evictus orbis, nec verum nunc nec necessarium esse, vel fuisse unquam, qui aegrè Episcopos fe­runt, aegriùs reges serre, qui nullos admittunt, nec regiam potestatem ex animo admittere, and assures them of the concurrency of the Pro­testant Churches on their side the Sea, who have often wish'd to see their own Simplicity in Government, to be restored and setled among them, quam Disciplinam à cismarinis Protestantibus praeoptatam, &c. and all which [Page 39] is to be seen, and more, by whoso pleases to read over but his Preface to the Apology. Claudius Salmasius goes the same way, or worse, if worse can be; he argues indeed for the Episcopacy in England, because con­tinued with the Reformation, and what pre­vented many Pestiferous Sects, which after the Seclusion of Bishops arose, Quod quamdiu fuerat Episcopatus, mille pestiferae Sectae & Hae­reses in Anglia pullularunt. Praefat. ad Defens. Regiam; and aggravates it against the Inde­pendents, whom he supposes to have Mur­dered the King, and removed the Bishops without his Assent, Defens. pag. 358. it seems it was concluded in France what Party brought the King to Death; nor did they then believe the Bishops to be the Authors of all the Heresies in the Christian World. Though Mr. Baxter tells us, It is not agreed here in London, and that all Heresies sprang thence, in that his black Book, call'd Church History abbreviated; then which, a Lucian has not been more rude, in his language and scurrilous Imputations to our common Christianity; and all Parties of but common apprehension, that read that his Book or hear of it, must agree that he is in­deed a Hater, as he in the Title-Page terms himself; but not of false History, but of the truth of Christian Religion; to the baffling of which, representing it effectually to the Age, inclined enough to believe it, as a Cheat and Imposture, what more could have been done, then by exposing, in that odious way, so ma­ny Successions of the Bishops and acknow­ledged Governors in the Church, the most eminent Professors there, and the great part [Page 40] of them, to the Stake, and with their Blood? by such Follies and Impertinencies many times, but oftner, by heavier guilts, reported of them, the Author's Impudency, and his Falsities as to Matter of Fact, has already been given to the World by an Ingenious Hand; and nothing but a decay of Discipline and Government in the Church, can hinder that a farther censure does not follow, his Person be not equally pursued, and he publick­ly Excommunicated the Body of Christians. Perhaps James Naylor did not more deserve to have his Tongue bored through. But to re­turn to our Friend Walo, who in Comparison to Mr. Baxter is so indeed; but his Spleen was now but low, it swells and grows bigger at other times, and our Bishops are then its object, he speaks out in other places, he says, so long as Episcopacy remains, which is the foundation and root of Papacy, little or no­thing is done; to cut off the Head is not enough, Quamdiu remanebat Episcopatus, qui tanquam basis est ac radix Papatûs, nihil am parum proficeret, qui solum caput resecaret. App [...]rat. ad lib. de Primatu, pag. 169, 70. And he goes to the same purpose, Pag. 197. that those Common-wealths or Kingdoms, which have receiv'd the Reformation, Sworn against the Roman, both Court and Church, and where there is now no Papacy; for what reason they can desire to retain Episcopacy, he does not see, the Reformation seems not whole and full, which is in that part defe­ctive; and that Episcopacy is become a de­gree above a Presbyter, he imputes to the corrupt Manners, to Ambition and desire of [Page 41] Honor, and to other evil Arts, and depraved Minds of Men, Walo. Messal. de Episcop. & Presbyt. cont. Petavium, Dissert. cap. 6. and suitably did he lay his design, and he did not think he could write to the purpose against the Primacy of the Pope, without that his tedious and nauseous Apparatus or Preface, levelled against the Government of the Church by Bishops, and indeed against Church-Government in general, (so unhappy were still those Men in their Plots against Rome) as there will be occasion further to consider in this Discourse, and which make up that bulky Volume the World is enrich'd withall, and to all which Andrew Rivet has subscrib'd, applauding Salmasius in this particular and according with him, and thinks it Crime enough in Grotius, that he differs from him, Grotianae Discuss. [...], Sect. 1. 16. John Dailee his rage is nothing less, but rather more this way; and so is his industry too, that eminent Martyr Ignatius is discarded and turn'd out of the Catalogue of Church-Wri­ters for Asserting in so plain and positive words the Divine perpetual Right of Epis­copacy, and indispensable Subjection and Obe­dience of all Christians to their Power and Jurisdiction, that all his profuser Criticisms and conjectural Triflings cannot make a Pre­tence against, any ways bafflle or evade him; and therefore his Epistles are rejected as spu­rious and counterfeit, are Condemned to the Fire, as the Holy Martyr himself was to the Beasts; and which he endeavours more than to Martyr, to annihilate, passes his Sentence of perpetual oblivion and forgetfulness against [Page 42] them. So Hereticks of old dealt with the Scriptures themselves. Marcion blotted out with his Pen and wholly crased what he could not evade or deny, what he could not by his Style and Expositions overthrow, Macherâ non stylo usus est; as Tertullian tells us in his Book of Prescriptions against Hereticks, cap. 19. whereas Valentinus, another Heretick, there spoke of; Non ad materiam Scripturas, sed materiam ad Scripturas excogitavit, blotted not out, but brought the Scriptures to him­self, Proprietates verborum auferens, wresting and perverting of them; and which of the two, took from, and really did more vio­lence to the Scriptures, there is no occasion at present to enquire; though Tertullian gives it to the latter; for the Person we at present have to deal with, is guilty of both. Those two notorious Hereticks seem to survive in him at once, nor has he with less tricks of words, evaded the sence of him and others, then with a resolved Contumacy, at last quite blotted out the Writing of that most Holy and Apostolical Person; nor will it abate much of his guilt, or can I be much accused in making the Parallel betwixt him and two such notorious Hereticks, and whose Objects were the Scriptures themselves; for the Me­thod is as natural, and the same Hand and Pen is equally ready for the one as the other, and the Canonical Epistles themselves have had the same usage, as had by him these of Igna­tius, when standing in the way, and this by some of his own design and complexion. And how he hath dealt with our own Church in particular, and much after the same Nature, [Page 43] in many things not distinguishing her Practi­ces, from the depraved usages of Rome, and particularly in Point of Government, by Arch-Bishops, Metropolitans and Bishops, is to be seen in his Book De Cultu Romanorum; and has been lately observed and reported to the World by a most Faithful and Learned Hand in another Language. I cannot say, but sometimes, even these very Men appear more civil towards us, and pass upon us high and mighty Complements, and their Practice is not so rude as their Determinations are ri­gorus upon us; nor do they approve our un­ruly Dissenters and Peace-breakers in point of Government, though their Documents and Principles such our home-Schismaticks, re­ceive and Copy out from them, and whose Autority we are still urged withal; though what they would do, were they as secure, as Blondel thought himself in 1646. when he de­dicated his Apology to the then Rebellious Parliament, and Assembly-men, is another question; what manner of Spirit his was then, has been already declared; and what personal Aspersions, and loads of Calumnies he laid, as upon the Cause it self, so upon the present Bishops, will appear from that often-forced Apology of our learned Doctor Hammond, for their Innocency and Integrity, in his Answer to him, Dissert. 1 ^a contra Blondel, cap. 12. sect. 22. In haec unica Hierarchicorum doctrina adeò totum Antichristum ebibisse censeatur, ut in hoc unum erroris Pelagus alia omnia Acherontis ostia se effudisse, aut quidquid in illius Seculi Ec­clesia peccatum ab Haereticis fuit, illud statim in Episcopis hujus aevi puniendum videatur; or whe­ther [Page 44] it may return again, God knows: All the Progress we have made yet, seems to be but this; we have and still do pity and be­moan that state of theirs, as sad and to be la­mented, which they have, and do still ac­count their Gospel-Simplicity, and Perfection, Plead that Necessity for them, which they deny and wilfully persist in, which provokes back again, only their Pity for us, not to say their Scorn and Contempt; for so it has by some of them been return'd upon us, and by the most favourable we are beheld as well-meaning, but ignorant men; so Gersom Bucer plainly tells Bishop Dounham, in his Answer to the Sermon, Pag. 594. our own Pleas and Arguments, by Complyance and Condescen­sions to and for them is managed and retort­ed upon our selves; and not by them only, but, and which is the greater disadvantage has come to us by it, by our own Members, and within the Pale of our Communion, and the great popular prevailing Argument, that Episcopacy is not Essential to Church-Go­vernment, is this, because our Charity, hopes and concludes the best of them; that God's Mercy through their sincerity and upright meaning, may supply the defect they are un­der, and endeavouring all we can to justifie them, we have been disabled to justifie our selves: This hath been the plain case all along with us; the words of our Learned Bi­shop Taylor are apt to this in his Treatise called Episcopacy Asserted, Sect. 32. and may not unduly be here inserted, ‘For we were glad at first of Abettors against the Errors of the Roman Church; we found these Men [Page 45] Zealous in it, we thanked God for it (as we had cause) and we were willing to make them recompence, by endeavouring to justi­fie their Ordinations, not thinking what would follow upon our selves; but now it is come to that issue, that our Episcopacy is thought not necessary, because we did not condemn the Ordinations of their Pres­bytery.’ And even at this day, after so thorow a debate by Monsieur Dail [...]e and Bi­shop Pearson, they may have abated some­what of that rigorous Practice in France, that just now named learned Bishop in that his Treatise, tells us was once in use amongst them, That if any one returns to them, they will re-ordain him by their Presbytery, though he had before Episcopal Ordination; and for which he refers us to Danaeus, Part 2. Isagog. lib. 2. cap. 22. Perron. Repl. fol. 92. Impress. 1605. but the result on their side is only this, and 'tis no further than Beza and Gersom Bucer had gone before, insalubrior est, as Bucer speaks, in his Answer to Bishop Downham's Sermon, Pag. 18. 255. 6. and tells us, That the same is the opinion of Beza, it is less advantageous, that our Government, though but a meer Humane Invention, is what may be born with; its yoke may be en­dured, by those that are under it, Et quamvis Episcoporum eminentiam supra Presbyteros Insti­tutionis esse merè humanae firmissi [...] redam, prae­stat tamen meo judicio regimen illud Episcopale patienter ferre, &c. So the late Replyer to Bishop Pearson, and Doctor Beveridge, Dailee the Son, as 'tis thought, Observat. in Igna­tianas Pearsonis Vindicias, in [...]; and [Page 46] after all their gilded Phrases, Pompous words, and higher Eulogies, I never could find that any one of them ever has given us any more; the late two Printed Epistles from Paris, I am sure, do not. But I cease here, and re­turn to my first Subject.

§. XII ALL they can with any shew of Truth or Reason pretend for the People at Ordinations to have to do, is only this, to be Discoverers of the Evil, and Witnesses of the Good Lifes and Conversations of such as are to be recei­ved into the Ministry; this we find the use of them in Justinian the Emperor's days, Novel. 6. cap. 1. Ʋt dicat si noverit an Ordi­nandus conscius sit illicitorum, & de quibus in­quisitio Publicê est facienda; to declare what he knew of the Person to be Ordained, and as enquiry shall be made of him, Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be Partaker of other mens sins, 1 Tim. 5.22. The meaning is, that Timothy proceed not in the Execution of Church-Power, or of his Episcopal Office, but with deliberation, upon a just search and enquiry, a due information in all Circumstan­ces, that every thing be as it ought; other­wise he partakes of the Sins are occasioned thereby, and they are his own, and their guilt adheres unto him. Now though St. Paul's or St. Timothie's own knowledge of the Per­son to be Ordained, by their nearer Relation, stricter Converse, and Personal Inspection, might be satisfaction sufficient to themselves, and no man can be so mad as to think such an Ordination to be invalid; self-inspection and notoriety of the Fact has still been accounted Ground and Motive sufficient for Publick [Page 47] Proceedings; but then, this by how much it is more private, so much it is less satisfactory to others; and for the Evidence to come from abroad, a Testimony from without, is more agreeable and more clearing, and of whom so properly as from the People? the Neigh­bourhood, as eye-witnesses of his Conversa­tion? And it was upon the common course of Proceedings what Saint Peter proposed before the Consecration of Matthias (Petrus ad Ple­bem loquitur, Cypr. Ep. 68.) and which was to the People, to the Believers all in com­mon; that out of those Men that accompanied them, and was well known unto them, all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among them, of which they were eye-wit­nesses, whose Application of themselves to Holy Things, and constant Industry, made them sit for so high an Office, an Apostle should be chosen, Acts 1. That the Seven Dea­cons be Men of good Report, and this at­tested by them that knew them, e're the Apo­stles lay their hands upon them, Acts 6. that Timothy be well reported by the Brethren, Acts 16.2. And so again of the Bishop, that he have a good report of them that are without, i. e. Heathens, 1 Tim. 3.7. and all which must be done suitable to the Converse he uses, and as the Subject renders capable of it; but that therefore the chief Interest should be in the People, (I now use the words of Mr. Thorn­dicke, in his Book of the Laws of the Church, pag. 154.) is an Imagination too brutish; ‘Cannot the Apostles finding themselves to Ordain Persons so and so qualified; for such and such Offices in the Church, appeal [Page 48] to the People, whom they acknowledge so and so qualified? Cannot St. Paul after­wards provide that no man shall blame them in the dispensing the Power that they are entrusted with, 2 Cor. 8.20. but a consequence must thereupon be inferr'd against themselves, that they are comman­ded by God, to refer the things concerning the Salvation of God's People in general; as the Power of an Apostle, the Order of a Deacon, &c. to the temerity and giddi­ness of the People?’ Nor does all those bulky Collections made by Blondel for the Clergy and People being consulted, in rea­lity amount to any more, In ordinationibus mos erat Plebem & Clerum consulere, & mores & merita Singulorum Communi Consilio ponde­rare, Cypr. Ep. 33. Episcopum & Collegarum & Plebis testimonio Probatum, Ep. 41. only to give Testimony to their Manners and Me­rit, of which the Persons receiving it, and to Consecrate and assign to such a People, were always Judges; Ad eam Plebem cui Prae­positus Ordinatur; Nothing was left to the People in appointing their Pastor, he was only sent out in their Presence; and what he brings out of the 68 Epistle of St. Cyprian, is only more plain if possible, and a fuller Evidence against his conceit; the design of that whole Epistle being this, That vitious Men be not received into the Church, and admitted to attend at the Altar; and to that purpose, that no Ordination be made but in Publick, Ne indignus obreperet; that a full account may be taken of their Lifes and Con­versations, and that it be not Secundum huma­nam [Page 49] Praesumptionem, upon Presumptions only, but a full Evidence; and this is most likely to be had from the People, or those with whom they had lived, and their Power there asserted, Vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel in­dignos recusandi, cannot be allowed to amount to any more, if consistent with the design of the Epistle; nor can there be any thing in the People like the Power of a Judge, to re­fuse or reject; but as Informers and Petitio­ners, by way rather of Prayer and Postula­tion, upon the Plea of what Testimonies they could Produce, or what Accusations they had against them, and according to the De­terminations of the Bishops that nominated and proposed him, and who lay hands upon him, is the Person fixed in his Station, De Episcoporum qui in praesentia convenerant, quique de eo apud vos literas fecerant, judicio, Episco­patus ei deferretur, & manus e [...] in loco Basili­dis imponeretur, ibid. Ep. 68. Much more to this purpose is to be seen in Cyprian, and all which is apply'd by Grotius to this purpose, De Imper. Sum. Potest. in Sacris, cap. 10. sect. 9. or rather, and which Autority is much greater, this Church Rule, and pro­ceeding in Elections, and Ordinations of Bi­shops is to be seen in the Fourth Canon of the First Council of Nicea, and which is there appointed to be done by all the Bishops of the Province; or, because all may not be ca­pable of Convening, by Three at the least, the others sending their Suffrages, and then to be Confirmed by the Metropolitan. Where to be sure, whatever of the Peoples concur­rency, or rather, anteceding Testimonies, [Page 50] was required, the ultimate and alone Power is in the Clergy, and 'tis Balsamon's Opinion upon that Canon, That the Canon was made purely in relation to the People, to exclude them quite, upon the account of the incon­veniences they found by their Presence; and which adds to what I have already observed, That the Peoples concurrency in Ordinations is so far from being of their Essence, and al­together requisite, that it depended all along, upon the Canons and Laws of the Church, to approve or null them; or if the Votes of the People did at any time prevail and over-rule, it was upon special Accidents, to avoid Tumults and Disorders, to prevent a greater Mischief, or by too much Conde­scension of the Bishops, or by particular Grants and Priviledges to such places, which the same Power did and might take away a­gain, an antecedent perpetual Right, is no way to be inferr'd from either, and particu­larly by David Blondel, who over-rules in o­ther Cases, when against him, upon the same Considerations, Apolog. Pag. 541.

§. XIII AND that all this depends upon Divina Praecepta, Divina Praescriptio, Dominicis Prae­ceptis, Divina Magisteria, Traditione Divina, Apostolica Observatione, Deisicam Disciplinam; and that the contrary is, Secundum humanam Praesumptionem, as St. Cyprian all along Phra­ses it in that 68 Epistle, is what every one will grant; nor is there any such thing gain'd by it, on Blondel's side, as he thinks there is, he many times repeating and insisting on these like Expressions; for no man sure will question this to be the Command and Ap­pointment [Page 51] of God, that no one be receiv'd into the Publick Imployments of the Church, but such as are approved and attested to be Men sit for so great a Charge, and high Of­fice, and it amounts to no more than that Caution of St. Paul to Timothy, Lay hands suddenly on no man; nor is there any Nomi­nation of a Bishop to his See, which is not made Publick to the whole Kingdom, and his Election as much made known in his Diocess, by notices affixed on his Cathedral; that if any man have an Accusation against him, he come and object, and then the Clergy in the presence of the People go on to Election; and the same is observed at the Ordinations of Presbyters and Deacons, who are not, and ought not, to be received, but upon Publick Testimony, and which are Ordained, at the four Ember-Weeks; if Canonically, or pub­lick times of the year, where every Body has the liberty of access, and to speak at pleasure, and which is represented, as the very course prescribed by the Apostles in this 68 Epistle, and recommended as the Practice of many Churches, Propter quod diligenter de Tradi­tione Divinâ & Apostolicâ observatione obser­vandum est & tenendum, quod apud nos quoque & ferè per Provincias universas tenetur, ut ad Ordinationes ritè Celebranda, ad eam Plebem cui praepositus Ordinatur, Episcopi ejusdem Pro­vinciae proximi quique conveniant, & Episcopus delegatur Plebe praesente, quae Singulorum vitam plenissimè novit, & unusquisque actum de ejus Conversatione prospexit; That the Neighbou­ring Clergy Convene, and the Bishop be assigned in the presence of the People; and [Page 52] to which agrees St. Jerome's peculiar Notion of [...], and which to be sure is Argu­ment sufficient of the Church's Practice in the Case in his days. That the Hands of the Ordainer were extended, stretcht out, lay open and abroad, at Ordinations, Ne scilicet vocis imprecatio Clandestina, Clericos ordinet nescientes, non lene enim peccatum, Ordinatio­nem Clericatus nequaquam Sanctis, & in lege Dei doctissimis, sed asseclis suis tribuere, & vi­lium Officiorum Ministris, quamquam his dede­corosius est muliercularum praecibus. Comment. in Isai. 58. to make them publick, and divulge them; lest being secret, ignorant Clerks may be Ordained, it being a great Sin to lay hands on such as are not Holy and very Lear­ned, on their Pages and viler Officers; but most of all it is dishonorable and disgrace­ful, when Ordinations are procured by the requests and assignations of Women. And it were otherwise unpracticable, if all the Clergy of whole Provinces were, as by the indispensable Appointment of God, and un­der peril of voiding the whole Action, to meet in Person at each Consecration, and as unserviceable too, much more for the nume­rous, or rather, innumerable Multitudes; The Nature of things requires some parti­cular appearances, nor can the whole be sup­posed to be a competent witness of their Lifes and Conversations; it is sufficient that every one has time and opportunity to im­plead as occasion, or at least may have it, if he'll seek after it, and which he ought to do, if he knows a just exception, and indeed busi­ness cannot be done otherwise, Universals are [Page 53] nothing; they subsist only in Conceit, and a digestion of the Brain; 'tis the Individua­tion makes Action, and the People in gene­ral, if not reduced to some Orders and Sta­tion, will be only a confused heap, each Body be Cyclopian, each Assembly become a Riot, fill'd only with disorder and astonish­ment; and the popular Elections of Bishops came so near to it at last, that they could be no longer permitted.

NOR does D. Blondel acquit himself with §. XIV more Candor and Ingenuity, when contend­ing for the Right of the People, or believers as such, and in common, in electing and as­signing each Presbyter and Deacon to his par­ticular Title and Parish, of which such the Electors are Members, the division of Parishes being but of late, as he does acknowledge; and when it was otherwise, the Bishop had still the Power of sending out the Presbyters in the execution of their Ministerial Office, as was the Harvest, as Occasion and his Pru­dence saw fit; nor has he any Practice, either Apostolical or of 12 Centuries after, that the People still placed and fixed their own Mini­ster, to infer his Divine and Immutable Right from it. Sure I am, when Paul and Barna­bas, were to be separated to a peculiar Mi­nistry, and Service in the Church; 'Twas the Clergy, the Prophets and Teachers (that we know of) sent them away, to a People unknown, as to their faces, Acts 13. and which he thinks so great a Crime; nor is there any thing after produced against it. And himself does acknowledge, that the Pres­byters and Deacons were not substituted by [Page 54] the People; but the Bishops (whose indeed Curates they are) for this Thousand years downwards; and it will very hardly be found a sufficient proof for its Illegality, to say there was no Controversie moved about it before; and therefore it was otherwise, but not mentioned, or in his nauseous, impious, precarious, usual manner of speaking, when any thing of this nature pinches him, that it was from the Pride and Usurpation, fastus indomabilis (Pag. 64.) of the Bishops, and yet he exclaims as if all Religion lay at stake, a thorow Degeneracy and Dissolution, both in People and Clergy, they all become neg­ligent and contemned of one another; all the disorder, ill manners and failures in Du­ty is imputed to this one thing, whatever in­conveniencies in Church are observable (and always some there will be) all hence arise, that the People have not the choosing or re­fusal of him that is to officiate among them, have only the opportunity of bewailing with their Tears a vacancy upon Death, but not of repairing it; that Odor priscae Disciplinae, the Primitive Proceedings being gone, be­come even a stink to the Nostrils of a looser Age; the immutable fixed Rule of Christ laid aside and broken, or in plain terms, ac­cording to the Genius and Complexion of these Men observed already; because all the well-setled duly constituted Churches in Christendom do not dissolve and fall in pie­ces, are not framed anew into the acciden­tal necessitous Model, of a private French Congregation. And surely the contrary to all this is most true, there can be nothing [Page 55] more fatal to Christianity, than to have a Power of Substitution of the Clergy to their several Charges put into the hands of the People, that the Power of Mission and Appro­bation of such as are to serve at the Altar, be taken from the Clergy, nothing can re­flect more upon the Wisdom of our Saviour, as the Law-giver; and who has therefore gone quite another way, and the Bishops and Pastors are made Guides, Inspectors, Rulers, Teachers of, not in Substitution and Depu­tation from the People; nothing can go more cross and contradictory to the Nature of things, as that the Sheep should approve of and appoint their Shepheard, such as have wholly design'd themselves to the particular Study, should be the worst Judges in the Science, least know and be able to judge what Persons are sit to propagate and promote their own Profession; and all this put into the hands of Novices and Ignaro's, who are not, who cannot be supposed to have any Skill for inspection into it; no more and greater sign of his fastus indomabilis, the worst sort of Pride, and irrecoverable per­tinacy, than that such a sort should any ways desire, or pretend such a Power, or presume themselves sit for it; no greater disrepute to Religion, than that those which are real­ly least to be esteemed in the Church, should thus have Judgment, and alone Judgment, in the things of the highest concern, a Power to canvass against, and determine upon the eminentest Professors of it; nothing but a degeneracy in Knowledge and Manners, the profoundest Ignorance, and deepest Immo­rality [Page 56] can attempt it, the whole World must be stupid and sottish, lay aside all Sense of relations and dependency, be sunk down together below its Orb, Suae (que) in inte­grum restitutionis penitùs oblivisci (the words of Blondel are proper here) lose all Capaci­ties of but remembring what is fit and de­cent, be past all hopes of a restitution and amendment.

§. XV AND surely then, that Plea which is thus unreasonable, groundless, and every ways im­pertinent for the Power of the People in Ele­ [...] and Substituting the Bishop or Pres­byt [...] in their several Stations, for the dis­char [...]e of their Functions; will render more contemptible yet another Plea many assume and urge for the Power in the People, in the Decisions of Matters of Faith, and Determi­nations and fixing Indifferencies, in order to present Peace and Practice. And where we know the Laity have Convened with the Clergy, as in the first Council of Jerusalem and others since, they were still bound up and limited. Nor can they, but with much less reason, challenge any more here, than in being present at Elections and Ordina­tions; that upon the personal Hearing and View, (such as desire it) may be satisfied of the justness of all Proceedings, that no man should blame them in dispensing that Power they are intrusted with, and others to sub­mit unto, 2 Cor. 2.20. and most preca­rious is that of admitting Lay-Elders, and their Personal necessary concurrency in the Acts and Execution of Government in the Church, certain particular Lay-Persons, as [Page 57] sharers with the Pastors in the Jurisdiction, the gifts of Knowledge, Understanding, &c. are common to all, i. e. none are denied them, but such as deny them themselves, by their own Negligence and Non-improvement; or by a first defect in Nature have them not, and a promiscuous admission into Debates and rational Decisions is allowable; but Church-Power, in the governing judiciary part of it, is from without, and whoever Claims it, must evidence the Devolution, and Deputation, how they were first brought into the Church, and in what Exigence: Our Judicious Mr. Hooker relates at large, that they have since been set up by Divine Immutable Right, shews only what the Pro­jects and Interests and Ambition of Men, can wrest and pervert Scripture unto, and where something of Mens own is lay'd and design'd; (for so Schismaticks and Hereticks are defin'd, De tuo infers. So Tertullian to Apelles, Lib. de Carne Christi, cap. 7. Marcion suum, lib. 4. Advers. Marcion. cap. 7.) Some­thing like truth, will be alledged in defence of it; and surely there is as little for this, as ever was urged in behalf of any Sect what­ever; the once Zealous Abettors of it in this Church and Kingdom, could not themselves believe what they pleaded for with so much shew of Zeal, and known Violence, and their design was only, [...], as 'tis said the Gentiles did against the Christians in Euse­bius; with clamorous Noises to make a shew of the want of something, to make greater the Rupture they contended for; Omnia pro tempore nihil pro veritate, as Optatus has ob­serv'd [Page 58] of their elder Brethren the Donatists, Lib. 1. Cont. Parme. to serve not Truth, but the present disorder by it; and it has the Fate of other inordinate Teachings, time makes them cease and wear out. Nor is this Platform of Lay-Elders, the Palladium they now contend for, or in the Catalogue of those Grievances and Imperfections are complain'd of. Surely there might be Governments and Helps in the Church, and Elders, which were no Lay-men; and 'tis no where said in Scrip­ture they were; and as certain it is again, there's no after-practice, either Apostolical or of Ten succeeding Centuries, in which the perpetual immutable Divine Right of it is to be bottomed, as D. Blondel has pleaded for their right of Election and Substitution of such as serve at the Altar, but with what Success has already appear'd. Besides, the ill effect of the Schism in general to the first rai­sing of which, and after Promotion it con­curr'd. This particular ill it occasioned and left among us, that the Divines of those Ages, in which the Aimers at this Platform of ruling Elders so much strove for it, as in the days of Queen Elizabeth especially, shew'd their greater, just Zeal in exposing those their un­reasonable Claims of their Consistories, to Summon Kings and Arraign them at pleasure, In Ordine ad Deum, and in defending the Rights of the Civil Power; and were less careful in stating the true Rights of the Chri­stian Church, as distinct from the Magistrates Power, and which is now to be examined and discoursed in this following Chapter.

CHAP. II. Chap. 2.

§. I THIS Power of the Church, or Power Ecclesiastical, it is not in the Prince, issues and flows not from the Secular Temporal Governor, he is not the Subject of it; he is in himself neither Bishop nor Pa­stor, can neither officiate in the high Affairs of Salvation, nor ordain, substitute and de­pute others to do it; 'tis no Duty of his, this way to Teach and Instruct the People; the Holy Sacraments are not Administred, nor can the Church Censures be executed by him. Great and vast is the Power committed by God to Kings here on Earth, peculiar is their Power, and none else may have, none else can Plead a title to it; 'tis the nearest to Infinite of any Devolution vouchsafed from the Heavens to Mankind, and the most of his Image is Characterized and enstamped on their Persons, communicated in the largest measure unto them, and God hath own'd them all along as such in Scripture, suitably severed, and separated them from the rest of Mankind, placed them [...] in the higher places of the Earth, next himself in the Ho­nors and Dignities here, above and beyond any other Order and Dignity of men what­ever; a Kingdom, and Majesty, and Glory, and Honor, by the most high God is given un­to thee, Dan. 5.18. but yet these are not the only Separates he has upon Earth, his alone Anointed and that to Publick Offices and Services; thus he had his Priests of old, and [Page 63] whose Persons and Power was separate too, Non est tuum O Ozia adolere Deo sed Sacerdo­tum, 2 Chron. 26.18. It appertaineth not un­to thee, O Uzziah, to burn incense to the Lord, but to the Priests, the Sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense, go out of the San­ctuary, for thou hast trespassed, neither shall it be for thine honor, from the Lord thy God; There is one Jesus of Nazareth, a Man ap­proved of by God, and by his right hand exalted; the Holy Child Jesus, whom he hath Anointed, whom he raised from the Dead, and made both Lord and Christ. God who at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in times past to the Fathers, by the Prophets, hath in these last days spoke unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed Heir of all things too, and who is also the Image of his Person, who hath all Power in Heaven and Earth given unto him, a Power to Teach and Baptize all Nations in the Name of the Fa­ther, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; a Power for the managery of the things, not of the Men of the Earth, but of their Souls and Persons for Heaven, a Power above that of Angels; but not to tread upon Thrones and Scepters of Princes, contemn Dignities, which Angels durst not do: a Kingdom though not of this World, yet a true one, once gi­ven him of God, and again to be delivered up by him to the Father, who is the head of his Body the Church, Colos. 1.18. contrary to whom as we are not to set up, and be beguil­ed by Angels, so neither Kings nor Princes, and not hold fast the head, from which all the body, by joynts and band, having nourishment [Page 64] and knit together, increase in the in­crease of God, Col. 2.18, 19. Nursing Fathers Kings and Queens are to be of the Church; but the Government it self is laid upon ano­ther, upon the Shoulders of this Child, and Son, born and given unto us, Isa. 9.6. and which they are to nourish, to protect and preserve, with their Temporal Government and Scepters; a Generative, Procreative Power is not in them. This Power given by the Father to the Son, was in part and some instances of it, finish'd in his own Person up­on Earth, in part, and other instances he is now managing in Heaven, what was to re­main here among us after his Ascension, was to be given to whomsoever the Son pleased; this he deputed and committed to his Apo­stles, some of which Power was to dye with their Persons, was extraordinary and tem­porary only, or at the most survived in some few only after them, and during a small time, what was designed, and universally useful for all Mankind, and for the lasting perpe­tual managing us in order to Heaven, to con­tinue to the end of the World; and in the execution and discharge of which, our Sa­viour has promised to be with us always unto the end of the World; this was all transferred, and devolved by the Apostles, on their Suc­cessors in the Evangelical Priesthood, the Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons of the Church; it was not demandated to Kings and Secular Powers, which then and for some Hundred years after, only Persecuted all that followed after that way, and call'd upon that Name, before whom they ap­peared [Page 65] only as Dlinquents; if they came be­fore them, it was for a Mittimus to the Goal, or as men appointed to be slain, not for Com­missions and Substitutions to Preach the Gos­pel; and this is the state of the World at this day, thus stand the Powers in it, divided betwixt the King and the Priest, each moving in his proper Sphere, by virtue of his spe­cial particular Grant from Heaven, and ma­naging the two great Affairs of Heaven and Earth, the Body and Soul, both of so high a concern unto us.

THAT both these Powers have been resi­ding §. II at once in one and the same Subject, and Person, 'tis most certain; and so it may be again, by a conflux of Providences, or the im­mediate pleasure of him whose the Powers originally are, and can give to the Sons of men as he pleases, nothing but dissonant, much more repugnant, in it; the King has been a Priest too, not only with Power and Autority, in order to Holy Things and Per­sons, a due Behaviour and Discharge in, and of them, [...], as Aristotle speaks, Lib. 3. Polit. cap. 10, 11. [...], to make them good Citizens and obedient to Laws, [...] to engage their Souls to Virtue, by Rewards and Penalties; cap. 13. but the Prince has had that Power which is purely and strictly Hieratical, and of the Priestly Office, [...], as Aristotle, cap. 10. abovementioned, Rex A­nuis, Rex idem Phoebi (que) Sacerdos; and that such, as of the Priestly Order, have had also the Secular Power conjoyned and annexed to [Page 66] it, it is most certain in all manner of Histo­ry; for Evidence of which, I'le only refer such as can enquire, to Mr. Selden's First Book De Synedriis, cap. 15. Hugo Grotius is of Opinion, that the Priesthood was seldom found without some Secular Power added un­to it, in his Treatise De Sum. Potest. Imper. in Sacris, Cap. 9. Sect. 4. 30. And the ancient Canons of the Church imply, that it was much in Use, for the Clergy to be engaged in the Affairs of the World, as appears by their several Cautions and Commands against it; the Circumstances of the then present Church, and particular Reasons moving them to it. So Can. Apost. 81.84. Can. 11. Con­cil. 1, 2. Constantinop. Can. 16.18. Concil. Carthag. The King and the Priest, as they are of the same Original, so are both designed for the same great End and Purpose for the Care and Promotion, Protection and Preser­vation of the Honor of God, his Worship and Service, in the ways of Virtue and Holi­ness, and Obedience to his Institutions, for the benefit of Mankind both here and here­after, and suitably have their names promis­cuously and in common, in Ecclesiastical Wri­ters. Thus Constantine many times calls him­self a Bishop, and by other Greek Writers is he called [...], equal to an Apostle. Many of these are to be seen in Potrus de Marca, de Concord. Sacerd. & Imperii, l. 2. c. 10. Sect. 6, 7. Valentinian and Marcian the Emperors are styled Inclyti Apostoli, fa­mous Apostles; and Constantine's Animus Sa­cerdotalis is mention'd and applauded in a Publick Council, ( Vid. Observat. & Notas, in [Page 67] Paenitentiale Theodori Cant. Archiep. pag. 138.) with several Compellations of the like Na­ture; And which Considerations, or rather undue Consideration of these, gives some lit­tle gloss upon their Error, who fix the full Power of the Priesthood in the Prince, ren­ders it somewhat more plausible than that of theirs who place it in the People; but the Truth is no more in reality on the one side, than on the other. These are given partly by way of Complement, Magnificent Title, or higher Eulogies, not unusual to the Emi­nencies of such Personages, as they honored and protected Religion, to transfer upon them the Honors that go along with it, of what value in themselves it matters not, so be the best it hath. Or where it has nearer answer'd the thing it self, Constantine himself has shew'd, in what Nature and Instances, in the Fourth Book of his Life wrote by Eusebius, cap. 24. Vos, speaking to the Bishops, in iis quae intra Ecclesiam Episcopi estis, Ego vero in iis quae extra geruntur. And again, Ibid. the Historian also speaks to the same purpose, Episcopus quasi Episcoporum erat Constantinus, & Curam habuit ut sint pii; both which a­mount but to thus much, That Constantine's Episcopacy only consisted in his outward care of the Church, and promotion of the Duties that belong unto her, it reacheth not to the inward Power, the [...] or [...], the Sacred Function or Office it self.

AND here now is the great Enquiry, and §. III this the main Case in Debate amongst us in this unhappy Age of ours. Whether the Kingly and Priestly Offices and Charges immediate­ly [Page 68] in their Natures and Constitutions imply and include each other? Not that they agree in one design, or more, in some Externals; but whether where the one is, there the other, as a necessary consequence, is at the same time, and by the same appointment, exist­ing? and to which I am to answer in the Negative; as to be a Priest has never inferr'd, a Secular Power, so nor to be a Prince the Spiritual. For the full cleering of this point it will be necessary first to consider the Na­ture of Gifts, Duties, Offices and Power in general, how far they include and infer one another; how far each one in it self is at­tainable, and from what Principle flowing; and 'tis a Consideration so absolutely neces­sary for whoso engages in this or such-like Debates, and their Resolutions, that he must otherwise be at a loss, and miss of the aim proposed. To Virtue and Goodness in ge­neral, there is in every Man an innate Power; he has Faculties concreated, and of his Con­stitution, [...], as Clemens Alexandrinus in his [...], and this improveable by Industry and Care, No­tices and Experiences, and God in course, as he incourages and preserves whatever is his own, gives more help: The Art of a Physi­tian and Skill of a Divine, are also attainable in the like way, by a Progress of Study and continued Observations, upon an hability, or first stock within; but this not equally gi­ven and ingraffed in each, as is a Power to Goodness, Wisdom, Knowledge is not to all. The Power of a Father over his Child is from God, by virtue and force of the relation laid [Page 69] in the foundation of it; because begetting him, and by the general concourse of Provi­dence; the Power of a Husband over a Wife, and a Master over a Servant is by the appoint­ment of God, upon a particular Covenant or Stipulation; the Power of Government and Jurisdiction in the greater extent; whether of a King in the State, or a Priest in the Church, enabling each to discharge the Pub­lick Duties belonging to them, comes quite different from each before; 'tis by no im­provement of Nature, or any thing within a Man, concreated, and a common concurse of Providence contributes not; nor can com­mon Notices, or whatever particular Indu­stry and Experience attain unto it; no par­ticular act of Man, whether Moral or Natural, is a foundation sufficient for these greater relations, and higher instances of Power, whether of his Person apart, or by compact with others; 'tis, as always lodged in seve­ral Persons, or when it was once in one and the same; so by discriminating marks, distinct symbols, in the conveyance, and appropria­tion, whereby to discern the one from the other, the Secular Power, by Descent, or Votes; or, in some instances, Conquest; the Spiritual, by the Deputations of the Bishop, and the Acts and Offices are quite apart and different; (as is the design of this Discourse to make fully appear) but in this they agree, and are as one; because immediate from God, by a special concurse and devolution, and so deposited into particular hands and Per­sons; no Force, no Virtue, no Composi­tions, or Overtures, in any Action or Per­formance, [Page 70] by any Person or Persons amount­ing to it; they are both highest Powers, in their kind and sphere; and 'tis something a­part and solitary, and which none else have which makes them so, and consequently none else can give it them, because supposed not to have it; but only he, who is transcen­dently the highest, and eminently above all, and does, and can, give to each Son of Man as he pleases. And now, since each of these Gifts, and Offices and Powers, are attain'd to, convey'd and devolv'd, in several cour­ses, methods and ways, one and the same Symbol, Compact or Act, does not produce and evidence their existence in and to the World, invest with the Power, instate in the Possession, enable and engage all men alike, to the attainment, the Duties and Offices of them; hence the Consequence is as clear in the course and chain of things, as it is in Matter of Fact, the Practice and known every day's Experience of the World, that they are not any, but two, much more all of them, in any one degree of Necessity; as to their co­existence, they do not any ways include, or infer each other; one Virtue, 'tis true, in­cludes and infers another; and all Virtues, I speak of practical Virtues, Bonum ex causa integrâ, and Goodness is all of one chain, and where true in any one instance, is all together; but yet this Goodness, in the na­ture of it, includes not Wisdom and Know­ledge, a Virtuous Man has not always the most Knowledge; nor where this Knowledge is, is it always Universal: To be a Divine is not to be a Physitian, or were it always [Page 71] Universal, this infers no one branch of Power; Solomon's poor Wise man had none at all, and so it may be with the richest and wisest, 'tis too often so; nor doth any instance of Autority and Power where existing, infer all other instances of it. To be the Husband of a Wife, is not therefore to be the Father of a Child; nor do Paternal and Despotick Go­vernment either, necessarily go together; to be a King indeed is usually to be all, but to be a Priest is oft to be neither; he is ma­ny times too poor to have Servants, and his Marriage is by some judg'd unlawful, at least by Church-Law forbidden; and every one says he ought not to be a King; to be sure he is not so because a Priest; nor is the King a Priest either because a King, they no more infer one another, than do any of the former two, or all of them; nor is their co-existence otherways necessary, than any of the other; they indeed were once united in the Worlds Infancy, and some Ages after, both seated in the first born; though by what special grant, we know not, the small account we have of those Ages hinders it; only I cannot agree with Grotius De Imper. Sum. Potest. in Sacris, Cap. 2. Sect. 4. that it was assumed by themselves, or that every man had a Na­tural right to it, and the Elder in the Family li­mited it to himself; but however it came there, it was afterwards severed by God himself, who took only the Tribe of Levi for his Service at the Altar, and governed in State, more by his own Person, (and therefore called [...]) himself sometimes appearing and giving Laws, sometimes immediately raising up one, [Page 72] and sometimes another to go in and out before his People; as from Moses, and in the days of the Judges, to King Saul. And, as I inti­mated before, these things not throughly con­sidered and digested; these courses, and bonds and limits of Offices, and Gifts, and Powers, their Posts and Stages removed or taken down; if once these Land-marks be displa­ced, become promiscuous and common, ma­king inrodes on one another, not only he will be at a loss that engages in the Debates and Resolutions in these cases, but Mankind it self, the Christian Part of the World to be sure, can no more continue in Peace, but with Invasions and Usurpations, Disorders and Confusions here upon Earth, than the earthy Globe it self, can subsist, or keep its Equi­librium, should the Elements of which it is made lose their Native qualities, and become blended together; or should its two Poles unite and kiss each other; and of this our own late Experience in our own particular Church and Kingdom, gives Testimony in abundance, when a pretence of Holiness, or the reality of it, was determined sufficient to invest in the Priesthood; the same Plea was concluded as good for the Crown, it staid not at the Pulpit, but went immediately to the Throne; all manner of Dominion was bottom'd in Grace alone, and their Saints were both the wisest upon Earth, and had all Power, were to Teach and to Rule, and to possess the Earth. All the links and contig­nations of Government were taken down, or burst in sunder; whether of the Father over his Child, or Husband over his Wife, or [Page 73] Master over his Servant, or Sovereign over his Subjects, or Priest over the People; all were Christ's Freemen, and to be Servants to none; only the knack was found out at last, that the King was to be a Priest, when both King and Priest were first disabled; and their Autority, either in design or actually taken from them. The Bible it self was then put into his hands, with a Right to all Church-Offices, when the Right to his Liege Subjects was denied him, with a Power to make the Scriptures Canonical, and to discharge all its Duties, to lay limits by his Laws to Religion, though a false one, and it is not permitted openly to draw Men off from the Profession of it, (so Mr. Dean tells us in his Sermon) when to govern his Subjects by Law is Tyranny, and Usurpation: So advantageously is this new Honor and higher Dignity, that his entrance to the Priestly-Office, placed on him, and the consequence was only this, both King and Priest was brought to a Morsel of Bread, were brought to the Block, the Saints in the Right of their Power, cut off the Heads both of King Charles the First, & the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury; the Father was against the Son, and the Son against the Father, as when the Sea-marks are removed, the Walls, & Water-locks and Floodgates are broken down, and pluckt up; this greater present deluge of professed Atheism, Prophaneness and Immorality is broken in upon us, over-spread the face of our Earth in the natural course and conse­quence of it; the Foundations are cast down, and what can the Righteous do? the Roma­nists will have their Pope to be a King, be­cause [Page 74] a Priest; these will have their King to be a Priest, and in effect no King; and 'twas only those that either first design'd, or after­wards promoted, the taking his Crown from his Head, stuck this Feather in his Cap, as in the late unnatural Rebellion.

§. IV NOR are those more successful who found the Pleas to the Priesthood, in the Unction of Kings, or in that they are anointed at their solemner Inaugurations. God Almigh­ty meant nothing less, when he said, Cyrus, Mine anointed; nor do the outward Unctions of the Kings of Israel and Judah, infer or prove any more, the Priests were equally anointed as they, and 'tis no more to be concluded that a King by virtue of his anointing hath the Pow­er of a Priest, than that a Priest by his anoin­ting hath the Power of a King, which two Sacred offices every body knows, were two quite different distinct things; though in ma­ny things they united, yet in several, they did, they might, not; it was Sacriledge on the one hand and Rebellion on the other, to attempt it. The Oyl that the Kings were anointed withal, was made of the same Un­guents that Moses had compounded to anoint both the Priests and the Holy Vessels and the Altar, if we may believe De Marca in his second Preface to his Treatise De Concord. &c. and had its effects but as design'd and apply'd to each in particular, and which suitably received thereby their several distinct Sepa­rations, for differing uses, had their pecu­liar respects and Services conferr'd upon them; it did not imply all the Offices at once in the same either Thing or Person, and [Page 75] it may be as well said, that the Holy Vessels and Altar became Kings, as that the Kings became Priests, upon the alone general ac­count of being anointed; but admit it had been otherwise under the Jewish Policy, and the King by his Unction had the full Extent and Latitude of Power and Offices conferr'd, by the Ceremony of Oyl, devolv'd and seat­ed in him. What is this to us in the Chri­stian Church? under another Head, diffe­rent Polity, and several Dispensation? or how doth it oblige us, that our Kings must be Priests, because the Kings of Israel were once so? Surely no otherwise than it oblig'd the Jews that their first-born were to be ei­ther Kings or Priests or both, because it was once so with their Ancestors and Predecessors, and which is nothing at all; unless to be a King originally and in its Nature, included the Priesthood, by a perpetual Force and Law never to be broken, and which their own instances destroy; and did not the de­sign and frame of the Governments them­selves forbid it? for the Law of Moses is the foundation and direction of both Govern­ments, both Political and Ecclesiastical, and which the Law of our Saviour is not, Civil Power is it altogether, and in every instance antecedent and independent to that Power which is from the Gospel; the Law of Christ supposes it, only adds, by its Precepts of Justice and Virtue, greater Awe and Reve­rence, new Motives for Obedience and Sub­jection; yet the particular very ill conse­quence could by no means be allow'd us, to take and give Measures and Rules to the [Page 76] Powers and Offices of the Christian Church, from the Pattern and Practice of the Jewish, for then the Power and Extent of the Evan­gelical Priesthood must be such as Christiani­ty will not bear, nor any man in his wits claim for it, the Power of the Priesthood among the Jews was mixed in some cases, and the Priest and the Levite were, in some in­stances, civil Judges apart, as betwixt stroke and stroke, betwixt Plea and Plea, &c. Deut. 17. and the High-Priest in other Cir­cumstances had no Jurisdiction at all, but as elected a Member of the Sanedrim, and which was at the choice of his Electors, not by virtue of his Priesthood, as such tell us that are skilled in their Customs, and sure we are he was still to be consulted, in the ordinary difficult Affairs of the Kingdom, concerning Wars and Peace: and gave his responses by Ʋrim and Thummim, and which is so strenuously oppos'd as unfit for Christian Bishops and Church-men, by those we have mostly to deal with in this point now under debate, and which would be of worser consequence yet, if apply'd unto Kings, to have the Princes Power such only as had the Kings of Israel and Judah, parti­cularly according as is the Model we usually receive from these Men of their Government, and is contended for as lapsed from Heaven; for their Sanedrim is still described as an Au­tority foreign and independent from that of the Prince, that could not question the King for his life, but could lay lesser Punishments upon him, if violating the Law. And the great Selden himself is at a stand, and leaves [Page 77] it to wiser heads than himself to determine, whether the Sanedrim might whip their Kings or not? De Syned. lib. 2. cap. 9. 2. 5. or in what extent soever the Kings of Judah are proposed as Patterns to our Kings for the exercise of Power in the Christian Church, in our Nine and thirty Articles, and may authorize them in it, to be sure they were never design'd Examples in this particular of Unction, or whatever Power it was they were to have as from them, our Church could not mean it should thus be derived. Our Kings of England, 'tis plain, owe no one instance of their Power to the Corona­tion it self, much less to their being then a­nointed, one but particular Ceremony in the Performance of it; and all Jurisdictions and Rights they have as Kings, they have before, and are to enjoy their whole life-time; Sup­posing they were neither anointed, nor, even Crown'd at all, 'tis all an high Ceremony, Solemn and Magnificent, Peculiar, as is the Person, and Power and Majesty of a Prince, as is becoming a Crown Imperial when set on his Head, and the anointing may be used, as very lively significant and expressing that separation of his Person, which was due and made and acknowledged before, and really in him, as has been the Custom by Oyl so to sever and set apart Persons and Things; but that the thing it self is either comman­ded, or expected by God, or design'd and used by Man to any other end, service or purpose, I never could yet understand. Da­vid Blondel, in his Formula regnante Christo, Pag. 119. tells us, that the Unction, or [Page 78] Custom of anointing Princes, was not used, among Christians, till the year of our Lord 750. and the Consecration of their King Pippin, and it was often repeated, as twice, four, five times a year, as he instances in several Princes, and makes evident it is not look't upon as an initiating investing Cere­mony, whatever else use they appropriated to it; though afterwards it was adjudged Sa­criledge to iterate it, by a growing Supersti­tion, and assum'd Opinion of it; the famous Arch-Bishop of Paris, De Marca, in his Se­cond Preface to his Book De Concord. &c. and in the Second Book, Cap. 7. of the Trea­tise it self, tells us of some in the Greek Church, that were of the Opinion, that the Prince had the Priestly Power by virtue of his Unction: And it was defined in a Synod held at Constantinople in the year of our Lord Nine hundred and seventy, that the anoint­ing of the Emperor gives him the same Power to forgive Sins, as has the Sacrament of Bap­tism; and the Greeks out of the same Princi­ple of flattery managed the same Opinion, and gave their Emperor the same Power as hath the Patriarch; but this, as we are told, depended mostly on a Faction then on foot, as it was in it self precarious and Arbitrary, & so wee'l leave it to its first bottom, which is none at all, nor needs it any farther Consideration.

§. V NON est Respublica in Ecclesia, sed Ec­clesia in Republica, 'tis the saying of Opta­tus lib. 3. Contr. Parmen. Donatist. The Common-wealth is not in the Church, but the Church in the Common-wealth, under the Head and Government of the Powers of [Page 79] the World, as to the Temporals; and that instance of the Polity of it, no Plea of Office and Deputation, what Commission or Designation soever from God, and Christ, can or ever did exempt any one Man on Earth, from it, collate or invest therewithal, a Power for Earth above it, at least as bind­ing Rules for continuance, and a pattern for future Practice. Our Saviour had it not, who made me a Judge or a Divider? and none can exercise it as from him, but by Usurpation, but the Common-wealth and the Church are no ways thus in Subor­dination and dependencies in another re­gard, as the Church is a Body endow'd with Powers Spiritual, thus they are different as the Soul and Body are in Man's Person, in their distinct Orbs and Stations, as are the Sun and the Moon in the Heavens, have a quite diverse Orb, and Powers, Influences, and Devolutions that are variant. As the Church must be always in the World, in that other sense, subject to its governance, to the accidents too oft, the frowns and high dis­pleasures of it, till the World it self is no more: So must the World be in the Church in this other sense, if that World, for whose Sins Christ died; if coming to Heaven and Salvation be subject to its Head and Jurisdi­ction, the World may not improperly be said to be as the Moon, and the Church as the Sun, receiving light and assistance, splen­dor, and glory, and beauty from it; thus influenced, and increasing with the increase of God, though the Metaphor needs not run any farther, and as it has been stretcht too [Page 80] much by some, and all this is demonstrable, and will appear as evident as the Sun in its Zenith or at Noon day; 'tis wrote as with an Adamant, a Pen of iron on a Rock, on that Pillar the Church, to be seen and read of all Men, and to all Ages for evermore, in the Original rise and succession of Church Power, in all Transactions, Records, and Histories of it; in the Matter of Fact, as notorious to the common sense of Mankind, as that one and two make three, is to his reason, and which is the only Rule in this case to be gone by. I'le begin with the Apostles, and so come down to those Ages of the Church, and Laws Imperial and Concessions, whose Truth and Interest is believed by all to be such, as not to engage them to be false, in which, all Parties agree and concenter.

§. VI PƲLCHERRIMA illa quae Ecclesia continet coagmentatio non ex Imperio Romano fluxit, Christo monstrante sequentibus Apostolis, Grot. in Animadvert. Rivet. ad Articul. 7. That comeliness of Order and Degrees in the Church, did not slow from the Roman Em­pire; but from Christ Jesus, the Apostles following and imitating of him; and as he their chief & great Master had not, so neither had they, his immediate Deputies and Succes­sors, their Power either from Man or the Will of Man, they in no instance consulted with Flesh and Blood, with any thing Humane and of the World, in the first rise, devolu­tion, and conveyance of it; but still term themselves the Apostles and Ministers of Christ Jesus; nor in the execution of this Power did they do otherwise, they consulted only [Page 81] with themselves in the arduous difficult ca­ses arising, 'tis to the Spirit of the Prophets, the Prophets alone are to be subject; they go up to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Elders there, Acts 15. and 'tis Peter, James and John consult together upon the like occasion, Gal. 2. 'tis they ordain Elders, and give Laws in all Churches; leave Timothy and Titus in Ephesus and Crete, and appoint for decency and order; they are brought before Kings, but 'tis mostly, if not always to suffer; they there take the advantages to assent and plead this their Right and Power, distinct and se­parate; to give Rules and Exhortations, but ask no Directions, receive nothing of Auto­rity from them. Nor did this Autority thus limited to themselves, cease with their Per­sons; or was it translated and deferr'd to any other than of their own assignation, by their own Hands, and on their own Deputies and Successors, the Bishops and Pastors of the Church, in whose hands, and whose alone, it was by them left, and there remained, with a Power so to depute others, and with command to be executed accordingly. The very same Church Power, I say, though not in the same particular Circumstances, avouch'd and attended in the same outward manner, nor in every single act and effusion, does it thus remain and is it to be executed upon all for Salvation, and as Christ promised to be with them always to the end of the World; and this will fully appear from the Church Records, commencing where the Scriptures end, from the Concessions of Emperors, their Laws and Constitutions made in Church Mat­ters.

[Page 82]SAINT Clemens Romanus an Apostolical §. VII Person, and one that wrote his Epistle to the Corinthians, not long after the Schism in Corinth, mentioned by St. Paul, tells us, That the Apostles being sent from Christ as from God, and Preaching the Word of God through the several Regions and Cities, made Bishops and Deacons of the elder Christians; such as were the first fruit of their labours, and whom they first converted, being found sufficient, in order to the Service of them that should believe, to the bringing more in­to the Fold, and reducing them to Christia­nity; St. Ignatius his Contemporary in part, in his Epistle to those of Smyrna, commands them to follow the Bishop. [...]. And in his Epistle to St. Polycarp, [...], That they take heed to him as God. And again in his Epistle to Smyrna, That nothing be done without him in Matters that belong to the Church and Salvation, [...], and the meaning is not ill express'd by the additional Pseudo-Ignatius, whoever he was, [...], the whole Character, what­ever of their Image and Power, God and Christ design'd to devolve and impress upon his Church; whether as to the Government or Ministery of it, are found in the Bishop; He is the Person to whose Faith and Trust the People of God are committed, and of whom, an account is required of their Souls, [...], &c. [...], he governs as Head, [Page 83] and all Church Power and Business is to be translated within themselves, as in the Apo­stles Canons, wdich bear date about this time, Can. 34.39. Irenaeus, who trode pretty near their heels, says that he can reckon up them that were Bishops instituted by the Apo­stles, and their continued Succession to his days, Lib. 3. Adv. Haeres. cap. 3. Ed. Paris. Habemus eos annumerare qui ab Apostolis insti­tuti sunt Episcopi, in Ecclesiis, & successores eorum us (que) ad nos, to whom, and only whom, the Gospel was committed; Sine quibus nullo certitudo veritatis, Ibid. And again, Episcopis Apostoli tradidere Ecclesias, that the Churches of God were committed to, and intrusted with them, Lib. 5. cap. 20. Origen if possi­ble is plainer and distincter yet; and in his Third Book against Celsus, in so many ex­press words, distinguishes betwixt the Se­nate in the Church, and that in every City, Ed. Cantab. p. 129. [...]. And so again betwixt the Rulers and Governors of the Church, and the Rulers and Gover­nors of the City, [...], Ibid. And in his Eighth Book towards the end, he declares a different Model, [...], from that of the Empire, in every City, (for which and whose safety and success, in his Wars he contends and prays for, and which he owns and acknowledges with it) a Go­vernment, framed constituted and erected, [...], by the word which is God, and which Government is the Church, whose [Page 84] great King is [...], the Word and Son of God, who has his [...], his Go­vernors still appointed, resident and conti­nued there, ruling as he hath prescribed, ac­cording to his own Laws and Dictates, the Laws of the Empire being preserved invio­lated by them. Tertullian as plainly distin­guishes betwixt the two Bodies, in the Nine and thirtieth Chapter of his Apology against the Gentiles, Corpus sumus de Conscientia Re­ligionis, & Disciplinae unitate, & Spei foedere, we Christians are a Body united in a sense of Religion, under a different Discipline, as well as hope, altogether apart, à Ministris corum & Potestatibus, à statu seculi; from their Ministers and Powers, and from the state of the World; and tells us that Polycarp was made a Bishop in the Church of Smyrna, by Saint John, in the 23 Chapter of his Book of Prescriptions against Hereticks; as also Clement, over the Romans, he returns to the Chairs of the Apostles, which remained till his time in their Succession, as the Authors of his Religion; and 'tis not from the Seat of the Empire, but from Corinth and Phillippi, from Ephesus and Rome, he dates their Power, and fetches their derivation, Ʋnde vobis au­toritas praestò est, whence its rise and devolu­tion. And in his Fourth Book against Mar­cion, cap. 5. Ordo tamen Episcoporum ad Ori­ginem recensus in Joannem stabit auctorem, says, that St. John is the Author of the Order of Bishops; a Polity and Dispensation all along, another thing from that of the Empire, flow­ing from another fountain, quite differing from, and no ways depending upon it. And [Page 85] 'tis Tertullian's Argument in his Book De co­ronâ Militis; that a Christian Souldier, who fights in the Emperor's Camp, and gives him his just Allegiance, ought rather to lay down his Arms, than wear a Laurel Crown on his Head, though a mark of Favour from his Prince; because relating too much to a reli­gious Custom among the Ethnicks, and he is no where commanded it in Scripture, nor is it traditionally delivered to him, by the Apostles, or Bishops, or Governors of the Church, either in Precept or in Practice; Quomodo enim usurpari quid possit, si tradi­tum prius non est quis deni (que) Patriarches, quis Prophetes, aut Sacerdos aut [...]? quis vel deni (que) Apostolus aut Evangelizator, aut Episco­pus invenitur Coronatus? Cap. 9. where though it was his mistake, in accounting such a thing Matter of Religion, as the wearing a Crown of Laurels upon the Commands of his Prince. This is a different thing from that command of Licinius the Tyrant, enjoyning all that would remain in his Camp to Sacrifice to Idols, as in Eusebius his Church History, Lib. 10. cap. 8. and which rather than do, Christians ought not only to leave the Camp, but lay down their Lives; yet upon the mi­stake and supposure, it is plain, that he re­mov'd from the Secular Power all Matters of Religion, such was to be received from Christ alone, from the Apostles and Bishops and succeeding Church-men; and consequently, we are thus to interpret those other places of this Father in his Works, when speaking of the Emperor in these Expressions, Illum commendo, Deo, Cui soli Subjicio, Apol. adv. [Page 86] Gentes, cap. 33. quem sciens à Deo constitui, lib. ad Scapulam, Cap. 2. Colimus Imperatorem sic quo­modo nobis licet, & ipsi expedit, ut hominem à Deo secundum, & quicquid est, à Deo consecu­tum, & solo Deo minorem; sic enim omnibus major est, dum solo vero Deo minor est, Ibid. That the Emperor is subject to God alone, as appointed by God; that he is second to God, less than God only; that he is greater than all, &c. All these are to be understood in a limited sense, suited to the present Subject he is then upon, as to the Secular Govern­ment, he being the fountain of all Tempo­rals, and God governs the World by him; nor ought, nor can any one say, what does he? as accountable to God alone, who is alone above him. But Church Power is of another Head or Species, and 'tis not deri­vable from him; nor is he the less a Prince for want of it; and it was, it must be, if rational and consistent with themselves, the least in the thoughts of this or any other Father of the Church, that has used these like Expressions, to ascribe thereby Church Power unto him. And therefore is it, that in their Writings and Declarations and Apo­logies for their Loyalty and Obedience to the Empire, as standing obliged in their Con­science, and by their Christianity, in all manner of Obedience to him; yet it is with this reserve, that they are withall to retain their Freedom and Rights as Christians, and which they own, and return to another foun­tain. So Justin Martyr in his second Apolo­gy, [...], with all joy and [Page 87] chearfulness we serve and obey you, only the Worship of the alone true God we derive not from you. So Tatianus in his Oration to the Greeks, [...], If the King Commands us to pay Tribute, [...], as a Man wee'l obey him in his Humane Laws; Religion is still exempted. So Athenagoras in his Embassy to the Empe­ror, in behalf of the Christians, declaring hee'l refuse no Tortures, [...], if they fail in these Duties, in a greater or lesser instance of them. And those excellent words of Minutius Foelix are much to this purpose, Quàm Pulchrum spectaculum Deo, cum Chri­stianus cum dolore congreditur, cum adversus minas, & supplicia & tormenta componitur, cum strepitum Mortis & horrorem Carnificis arridens insultat, cum libertatem suam, adver­sus Reges ac Principes erigit, Soli Deo, cujus est, cedit, cum Triumphator & Victor, ipsi qui ad­versus se Sententiam dixit, insultat. How Pleasant a Spectacle is it to God, when a Christian encounters with Sorrow, when he is compos'd against Threatnings, and Punish­ments, and Torments; when with Smiles he insults over the noise of Death, and the hor­ror of the Hangman, when he erects his li­berty against Kings and Princes, and gives place only to that God whose he is; when with Triumph and a Victor, he has the better of him, who gave Sentence against him?

EƲSEBIƲS all along in his Church Hi­story, §. VIII as he sets down the particular Succes­sion of the Emperors and Bishops, so he re­presents and places them upon their two distinct Thrones; So 'tis said of Simeon, in [Page 88] respect of his Diocese, and Church-Jurisdi­ction, [...], that he was worthy of his Throne, meaning his Episcopal Chair, lib. 3. cap. 11. and of Justus his Suc­cessor in Jerusalem, [...], that he was placed on the Throne of his Bishoprick, cap. 35. when entring upon his [...], or the Office of a Bishop, is expressed in ge­neral, cap. 13. [...], as 'tis varied, lib. 5. cap. 9. that his Administration, or acts of his Episcopal Charge and Office, to be performed to his People; and accordingly the execution is expressed by [...], words that imply full Power & Autority in the Bishop, if they imply it in the Prince, which have no other words to declare it to us by; and particularly the Empire of Trajan is ex­pressed, by the very same word, [...], in that very Chapter. And this Hugo Grotius has observed, Rivet. Apol. Discuss. pag. 699. and given one reason of it, Omne corpus So­ciale jus hebet quaedam constituendi, quibus ob­ligentur membra, hoc jus etiam Ecclesiae competere apparet, Actorum 15. 28 Heb. 13.17. & ob hoc jus Episcopatûs Imperii nomine appellantun; every body by virtue of its Union and Asso­ciation has a right to constitute such Rules as do oblige its Members; that this right does belong to the Church, is apparent from Acts 15.28. Heb. 19.17. and for this the Right and Power which is annexed to Epis­copacy, is call'd by the Name of an Empire; and this very Empire, Power, and Jurisdi­ction, we have executed by the Bishop in part upon Philip, who held the Roman Govern­ment, and was newly come over to the [Page 89] Christian Faith, he enrolled him not, but by the Rules and Laws of the Church, but up­on Confession of his Sins, and passing through the Order of the Penitents, and which was submitted to by him, Euseb. Eccles. Hist. lib. 6. cap. 34. and the case is farther clear'd by our Historian, lib. 2. cap. 27, 28, 29, 30. in the instance of Paulus Samosetanus (as to the distinct Power in Church and State, and the extent of each) he was Convict of Here­sie, and his Bishops Orders taken away from him, by the Jurisdiction and Power of the Bishops in Council united, who alone did give them, and who alone could take them from him, and placed another in his Bishop­rick in the Church of Antioch; But when Paulus Samosetanus would not go out of his Church-House, their Episcopal Power reached not so far as to dispossess him of his Tempo­rals; 'tis the Business of Princes alone to in­flict Banishment, or such outward Punishment upon Hereticks, and we have Theodosius a Bishop blamed for his Persecuting in such like manner the Sect of the Macedonians, in the Seventh Book of Socrates his Church History, cap. 3. Church Empire or Autority reaches not hither in any degree or instance; for this they appealed to the proper Head or Fountain, to Aurelian the Emperor (who was then their Friend, though he continued not so long) they asked the assistance of the World, and that his Secular Arm might re­lieve them; this he granted, and adjusted it to the present Bishop, consecrated there­unto; and thus was this notorious Here­tick, [...] (as the Power of the [Page 90] Prince is still called, whether exercised in the things of the Church or of the State) by the Secular Arm and Autority turn'd out of the Church, every ways dishonour'd and displaced.

§. IX I know it will be here reply'd, and 'tis so generally, All this was when the Emperors were Heathens, nay more, Opposers and Persecutors of Christianity; how could the Offices, Managery, and Concerns of Religion be intrusted with them, who did, who would not understand it, who scorned and affronted it, who to their power endeavour'd to sup­press it, by all manner of Cruelties executed on its Professors; the Church then did as well as she could, and exercised her own Prudence and Strength, that Power and Ju­risdiction, which they agreed upon and as­sum'd by particular compact among them­selves, and which, became an Escheat to the Crown, when the Empire became Christian; and Kings then executed it in their own Right, as inherent to their Secular Power, designed, and appointed and expected from them by God Almighty. And in Answer to which groundless Plea, and Objection, I shall add farther, either the Bishops and Doctors and Confessors of the Christian Church un­derstood this Case, as thus stated, That this Power was not really in themselves, and their execution of it was but accidental, forced, under the present Circumstances, and to return to such Governors in State as should become Christians, as its proper Seat or Subject? or they did not understand it? To say they did not understand it, is to im­plead, [Page 91] and represent them to all Ages suc­ceeding, guilty of Ignorance gross and in­excusable, to give that for certain Truth, which some of our Reformers have made their Libel and Objection, against these first and Holy Christians. That they were more Zealous than Wise, Pious, but imprudent less discerning men, and from whom Truth is not to be had nor expected, and which is in effect to put a baffle upon our whole Chri­stianity in general, and to lay a ground for mistrust upon each of its particulars, it must receive a great blow upon such Supposals, when reflected upon and considered, that those who alone propagated our Faith for Three hundred years together, did not un­derstand the Power and Autority they were invested with in order to it, or the true te­nor or state of it. To say they did under­stand it, then surely it had been stated by them, a Model of it drew up, and left, at least for Posterity; a thing so in course, and most usual in other cases, thus to give Speci­mens, Schemes and Draughts of the Design and Purpose; especially when to propose, attempt, and carry on something that is but new, not before received; much more when thwarting to the common Sentiments, and Apprehensions of Mankind; That no Men, but such as the Christians were given out to be by their Opposers and Persecutors, Mad­men, and Fools, the followers of a Carpen­ter and a few Fishermen, can be supposed guilty of. Certainly the occasion and mean­ing of that particular Power they then exer­cised in the Church, different from the Se­cular; [Page 92] nay, when enjoyned and commanded the contrary, by those Powers, that they act and speak no more in that Name, when Persecuted to Bonds and Imprisonment, moreover unto Death for it; had been de­clared and published, to such those Gover­nors, a Manifesto or Remonstrance made of it to all Princes of the World; certainly among the many Apologies that were made to the Empire in their own behalf, this had had a share, a room at least, in some one of them. That what Jurisdiction was then ex­ercised by them, the Pastors of the Church, was only under the present Necessity, a pre­sent contrivance of their own, to keep their Followers and Adherents in some tolerable Peace and Order; to awe and restrain as they could, better an assumed Usurped Go­vernment than none at all; that the real and whole Government was laid upon theirs, the Magistrates, shoulders alone, would they but be pleased to come in to the Faith, and sustain and execute it. What a plausible, even, cogent Argument is here all along omitted, to let the Powers of the World know, what a considerable Portion of their Birth-right, as Princes, they neglect, and disown, abdicate and relinquish? what a real damage and disadvantage they receive, in not coming in to the Church? what a princi­pal Jewel would be added to their Crown in so doing? So great and considerable a num­ber, as they which are Christians, and which grow upon the World, and increase daily, Vestra omnia implevimus, Ʋrbes, Insulas, Castella, Municipia, Conciliabula, Castra ipsa, Tribus, De­curias, [Page 93] Palatium, Senatum, Forum, cui bello non idonei, non prompti fuissemus, etiam im­pares Copiis, as Tertullian in his Apology, cap. 37. Vast Multitudes every where, of all sorts, in all Places and Offices, who as they professed all manner of Allegiance, and Du­ty to them in Seculars; so would they ac­quit, resign into their hands, their Power Spiritual; nay, it is really theirs already, and the execution falls in course upon them, an accession that must be advantageous, can­not be accounted mean and inconsiderable to a Government. Thus to be the Fountain and Head of all Rule, and every Jurisdiction, to invest or abdicate, to oblige or punish, so great, so considerable a Sect as are the Chri­stians, to constitute and influence, to depose and remove, every way, to govern at Plea­sure; their Bishops and Pastors, who thus grow upon the World, and influence all Men; the Motive could never have been neglected; the Argument must have had a great deal of room in their several Apologies and Embassies, to the Empire, in behalf of themselves and their Religion, who spared nothing like an Argument, that might but ingratiate, and insinuate into their good fa­vour, and liking; as 'tis evident from such their Writings; and yet there is not one word there of any such Pleadings, or any thing like it, but the quite contrary; as it hath been already made to appear. I'le go on farther, and assert, that 'tis very impro­bable, if not our Saviour himself, yet, that the Apostles should not have done all this, and thus stated the case down to the World; [Page 94] and yet no man sets these two Powers of the Church and State more apart than does St. Paul, and so leaves them. To instance in no more at present, he often exhorts, That they obey Magistrates, and that they also re­member those that have rule over them, who have spoken to them the Word of God, and his Bishop has his distinct care over the Church of God, 1 Tim. 3.5. has his things to set in order, Tit. 1.5. a Power to Sum­mon by Process, to receive Accusations, as in Court, as upon a Seat of Judicature, be­fore witnesses, 1 Tim. 5.19, 20. though no Power to lay either Confinement, or any other corporal outward Punishment on their Persons. The Powers of the World be­coming Christian, it must needs make a great alteration as to its Worship, and great was the advantage the Gospel received there­by; but so great a translation of Power from one Body to another, must in all likelihood have been forewarn'd of, and declared by such, as had a foresight for that very purpose, of all even Contingencies, and much more of what was to come to pass in the future Ages of the Church; and as the thing it self was so predivulg'd, that Kings and Queens should be Nursing Fathers and Mothers to the Church; and this seems reasonable and requisite to be done, were it only to satisfie mens Minds in the revolution; especially since all Revelations ended in their Persons, and 'tis only for such to believe and assent to after-translations, and new appearances in the Affairs of Religion, and not upon such notices aforehand, as expect and depend [Page 95] upon new Discoveries, and Periodical Illu­minations; whimsical and Enthusiastical Per­sons.

WHEN God was to constitute the Jewish §. X Body, engaged, and stipulating according to the Law of Moses, the present State and Ne­cessities, as well as other Occurrences fore­seen, hindring the perfection and full accom­plishment of his designed Platform, for some time; the Wisdom, and Mercy, and Provi­dence of God, which is always present with himself and his own People, and accompanies his designs, foretold and declared what they were to expect, in the particular instances, the present narrower state of things, and fu­ture ill humors of Men, prohibiting the one, and accidentally occasioning the other. As, when the Model and Shape of their Govern­ment was to be changed, into that of Kings, or a translation of Power from Person to Per­son, as is the pretended case here; it was declared long before by Moses, Deut. 17.14. as, when the Worship was to be transferr'd, (at first of necessity elsewhere, as is again al­so here pretended, that Church-Power was for a time in the Clergy) to the place that God should choose, to the Temple, at that time, not built. Men are generally in love with old ways, and call that old, they have time out of mind been accustomed to, Inno­vations are not relish'd without plain and a great Autority, nothing but Prophecy, or present notorious Miracles, or a great assu­rance from those, whom a known outward evidence makes appear, and most manifest; that 'twas delivered down from Persons, so [Page 96] assisted by God; and as God's Wisdom and Goodness is always the same, so neither cer­tainly had his Mercy and Providence been shorter to this his Body of Christians, than 'twas to that of the Jews, in the like case; had there been any like it among Christians, as indeed there was none, the Government of the Church, which is here in this Discourse asserted, remaining one and the same, and in the same succession of Persons, when the Powers of the Earth were Christian, as before, when they were Heathen; and the good Pro­vidence of God, so ordered it, that Constan­tine the Emperor's becoming Christian, and his Succession, the Church and Church-men received only new Courage and Strength; the greatest additional advantages in such their Charges and Offices, by the Imperial Countenance and Protection, with all man­ner of supplies, and abundance, as to Places, Utensils, Revenues, and Immunities, Stately Churches being immediately erected, with the greatest magnificence and elegancy of Structure; the Furniture as rich, and En­dowments as large, with a like Privilege as to Persons and Things. Investitures every ways answerable, and all assistance conferr'd, and Provision for the time to come by setled Laws, and most wholesome Constitutions, to preserve and continue what was thus done and granted, Serviant Reges terrae Christo, etiam leges ferendo pro Christo, as St. Augustine speaks in his 48 Epistle, The Kings of the Earth serve the Church in making Laws to defend her; and which Saying was occasioned by St. Augustine, and more to that purpose in [Page 97] that Epistle, by reason of the severer Impe­rial Laws and Penalties made against and inflicted upon that spawn of the Donatists, those unruly Circumcellians, who broke out into all manner of Outrages and Violence; and though the Church had not long enjoyed this Peace, but what is the woful effect of Ease and Plenty, Divisions and Breaches, arose and grew wide within her self, carried on to great Ruptures, and much was innovated and taught amiss in other Points; yet as to this particular, the Subject of Church-Power, it was never questioned, fell not under debate, much less was it wrested out of the hands of Church-men; did any one Emperor, if not withal known Heretical, either usurp it to himself, or alienate it from the Bishops, but all along acknowledge and confirm it to them? and this will be as clear from the Aera or Date of their turning Christians, as it has appear'd to have been from the first entrance of Christianity till then; and that if we continue our Method, and look into those times as we have done into the foregoing Ages.

THERE was no Man of the Age, more §. XI tenderly Conscientious in professing and pay­ing his Obedience to the Emperor, than was the holy Athanasius; how solicitously and anxiously did he Vindicate himself, when accused as an Enemy and Traducer of him, when by his cruel and most malicious Adver­saries, which were many, represented as Rebellious and Disobedient? This will ap­pear sufficiently from all such as have im­ployed their Pens in giving to the World [Page 98] an account of those Transactions, by the Arians and Meletians managed and improv'd against him, and which were numerous, and particularly from his own Apology, to Con­stantius, of which he that will take a taste, let him read the beginning of it only, if he thinks much of his labour to go through with it, he acknowledges, the Power of the Empire in Religious things; in assigning the Feasts of Dedication, and their times, [...], he acknowledges his Power over his Person, and asks his Diploma or Letters of leave for the exercise of his Episcopal Fun­ction in his own Church of Alexandria, and for the Convention of Synods, Ibid. p. 682. 754. 761. Ed. Paris. he asks the Emperor's Grant concerning the Publick Service and Churches in Alexandria; as we have out of Sozomen, Eccl. Hist. l. 3. c. 20. but yet he puts a difference betwixt the Work of a Sy­nod, and that of the Empire, and blames those that confound them, or rather refer all to the Emperor, [...], p. 730. he refuses to receive Arius into Communion upon his He­retical Terms and Principles, though the Em­peror do Command him, though he threaten him if he do not; and for refusing, he causes him to be deposed by a Synod held at Tyre for that very purpose, and of his own Con­vention, and afterwards banish'd him, and which he submits to, but not to deliver up the Rights of the Church of God; as Socra­tes tells us in his Ecclesiastical History, Lib. 1. [Page 99] cap. 27, 28.32.35. and he is so bold with Constantius, as to six the mark of Antichrist upon him, when he undertakes the Prote­ction of a wicked Religion, dissolving the received Orders of Christ and his Apostles, & creates of his own head new Constitutions, [...], as in Athanasius, Ep. ad Solit. Vit. agentes, p. 845. 860. and reproves the Emperor far­ther, that he pretends to have the judicial Determination of Bishops, but really manages and does all himself, [...], Ib. and evidently again distinguishes between the work of a Bishop, and the work of an Emperor, he goes on and is more daring and positive, [...]; when any such thing was heard of from the beginning of the World, that the Judgment and De­cision of the Church had its Autority and Measures from the Empire? or was ever any such Determination known at all? many Church Decisions have been made, but never did the Presbyters perswade the Emperor to any such thing; neither did the Prince in­termeddle with the things of the Church, [...], Ibid. And all this is recorded by Athanasius of the Divine and most Excellent Hosius, in that his Epistle Ad Solitarium, &c. Pag. 840 repeat­ing there Hosius his Epistle to [...] on the same occasion, [...], who drew up the Nicene [...] [...], one that was heard, and submitted to by all, [Page 100] his own words are these to the Emperor, [...], &c. Do not interpose thy self, nor meddle with Ecclesiastical Affairs, nor do you Command in these things; but rather learn them of Ʋs; to Thee God hath committed the Empire, to Ʋs he hath deputed what is the Churches; and as he that under­mines the Government, opposes the Ordinance of God; so do thou take heed, [...], lest forcing to thy self the things which are of the Church, you become liable to as great a guilt; for it is written, give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are Gods; It is neither lawful for us to have the Government upon Earth, nor hast thou the Power of Holy things, O King: St. Je­rome speaks of the evil Bishops (only the Cha­racter is upon them) De Ecclesiae Principibus, qui non dignè regunt oves Domini, as of Princes in the Church, with Power of Jurisdiction in themselves, in his Comments on Jeremiah, cap. 23. Sacerdos est Caput, the Priest is the Head; an Original devolving upon others, Comment. in 1 Cor. 12. and upon Romans 13. Apostolus in his quae recta sunt, judicibus obedien­dum, non in illis quae Religioni contraria sunt; the things of Religion are not to be subjected to Kings, nor any in Autority under them. And to this purpose he says again, in Isai. 1. Apostolos à Christo constitutos, Principes Eccle­siarum, the Apostles were constituted by Christ Princes of the Churches. And the same is said in his Preface to the Epistle to the Galatians, and particularly on Psal. 44. Fuere, O Ecclesia, Apostoli Patres tui, quia ipsi te genuere, &c. The Apostles, O Church, were [Page 101] thy Fathers that begot thee; now because, they are gone out of the World, you have in their room Bishops, Sons, which are created of thee, and those are thy Fathers by whom thou art governed; —The Gospel being spread in all Parts of the World, in which Princes of the Church, i. e. Bishops, are constituted. This Holy Father assigning, all Church-Power to and in it self; and if it be suspected whether these Comments on the Psalms be St. Jerome's own, I have yet here repeated this passage out of them, as most fully appearing his sense, to whoso pleases to consult his Works, especially his Commentary. St. Augustine's Opinion we have already in part spoke of, and he that will undertake an Enquiry, will find him all along of the same Opinion. I'le only instance in the differences occasion'd by the Donatists, and what Power the Empire assum'd to it self in those great and many Controversies and their Decisions, related by him; which he tells us is only to make out­ward Laws in defence of what appears to be Truth, and says he, it falls out sometimes Reges cum in errore sunt, pro ipso errore contra veritatem leges ferunt, that they make Laws against Truth, themselves being in Error; and good Men are only prov'd thereby, as evil Men by their good Laws are amended, Tom. 7. l. 3. Cont. Crescon. Gramat. cap. 51. they command that which is Good, and for­bid that which is Evil, Non solum quae perti­nent ad humanam Societatem, verùm etiam ad divinam Religionem, in things which belong not only to Humane Society, but to Divine Religion, he has Power to enquire into de­bates, [Page 102] and to provide for Truth and Peaco by the Bishops, to assign the Persons, Time, and Place, Ʋt superstitionem manifesta ratio confutaret, that Reason may gain upon Su­perstition, and Truth be made manifest, Collat. 1. diei, & 3. cum Donatist. Nor was Cecilianus purg'd and set free, but by Judiciis & Ecclesiasticis & Imperialibus, by the Ecclesiastical, as by the Imperial Judg­ment and Determinations, Ibid. nor will it appear that the Powers of the Empire have concern'd themselves any farther in those quarrels, than by abetting or discouraging by outward Laws and Punishments, what was represented as Truth unto them, and which the Church alone hath not Power to do, either to award at first or after mitigate, but by Prayers and Arguments; and there­fore the Civil Laws and Indulgences, have been sometimes severer, and sometimes too indulgent, as Accidents or Truth over-ruled, as is to be seen in his Third and Fourth Books ad Cresconium; and when these Laws went too hard upon these Donatists, and pinched their Faction too sorely, then they cried out of Persecution, denied the Empire this Power in Divine things, and that they were to stand at no humane Judicature, as is the way of all such Factions, when them­selves only persecute and invade, and whose Insolencies and Rapines are at large told us by St. Austin, in his Forty eighth Epistle, and by Optatus in his Treatise against Parmenius the Donatist. Hence that of Donatus, lib. 3. ibid. Quid Imperatori cum Ecclesia? What has the Emperor to do with the Church? [Page 103] whom Optatus there sharply upbraids, as well as reproves for it; tells Donatus of his Pride and unheard of insolency in so doing, in lifting up himself above him who is second to God alone, Cum supra Imperatorem non sit nisi solus Deus, who sits as God in all foren­sick outward Judicatures, and no man can withstand him; but Church-Power is still supposed a quite differing thing. I mean, that which our Saviour left immediately to his Church, it falls not under this head of things; 'tis derived in another stream, as the design of his whole Book declares; nor is Optatus, for this or any other like Expres­sion to be thought to refer all Church-Power into the Empire, than those other Fathers did, using much the same Expressions, and which is above observed, and he in particular returns the rise and devolution of the Bishops of Rome to St. Peter; by whose Successors it was then in Siricius the Bishop in his days, in his Second Book against Parmenius; and so St. Austin has done on the same occasion, in his Hundred and sixty fifth Epistle, and the breach of this Succession, is the Charge and Crime of Schism, they both object against the Donatists, as guilty of a Church, as well as a State-transgression, and both on several accounts, as two distinct Impieties, are they proceeded against. I'le give but one instance out of St. Chrysostom, and 'tis so full, there needs no more of those many others are producible, 'tis in his 86th Homily on St. John, where he says, Christ did invest his Apostles with Power, [...], as a King sends forth his Praefects, and [Page 104] Governors, with a Power immediately from him­self, to imprison and release, to bind and to loose, to execute of themselves all Power and Jurisdiction so receiv'd, and belonging to the Deputation. And what was the Judgment of St. Ambrose, the particular case alone betwixt him and the Emperor Theodosius, makes abun­dantly appear, occasioned by that cruel Mas­sacre committed in Thessalonica, by his, at least, connivance; the Holy Bishop remov'd him from the Prayers and Altar, durst not Communicate with him, in those Holy Du­ties, whose hands were so full of Blood; not that St. Ambrose could impose these things by force, and that his Person be so absented, by any thing like a Coercive Power, or did design or pretend to it, and that Penance which he laid upon him, and the Emperor accepted of, upon his Re-entrance, was it suited to his Imperial Power, no ways aba­ting of, or detracting from his Majesty and Soveraignty; it was to enact a Law that no Penal Decree or Edict that comes forth, be executed, till Thirty days after its first San­ction, to avoid the fury of such Proceedings for the future. No, St. Ambrose upon the either Plea or Execution of this Power, does not attempt his either Purple or Scepter, to Depose him from his Crown, or Absolve his Subjects of their Allegiance; he only exe­cutes upon him his Pastoral Charge, and which is in order to the World to come, [...], and as he reverenced his Kingly Power, so did he take care also, not to transgress the Law of his God; had the Emperor been less [Page 105] a Christian, and return'd upon him with violence, [...], he could receive the stroke with Pleasure, he did discharge his Duty as a Bishop, and he was secure within, he only lets the Emperor know, that his Purple makes him a Prince, not a Priest, that it doth not exempt him from the Laws and Discipline of God's Church; and for this he appeals to his own Education, [...], nou­rish'd up in the Divine Oracles, and in which it was clear, [...], what was the Priests, and what the Princes peculiar Office, and, which were there notoriously distinguish'd; all this was no Pragmatick, newly started, particular, ex­travagant attempt, in St. Ambrose; but a commonly receiv'd and owned Right, and Truth, what the whole Age had been taught and bred up in. And Theodosius in particu­lar, [...], knew it by his Education; and which caused his displeasure to some who were willing to abate of their Church Right, whether out of Court-flattery, or for what other Reason, for which on the contrary he so highly valued and honoured St. Ambrose, [...], as who alone was worthy of the Name of a Bishop; all which, with more is to be read in our Church Histories, particularly those of Sozomen, lib. 7. cap. 25. and Theodoret, lib. 5. cap. 18. and that which gave St. Am­brose a particular advantage in the asserting, and execution of such his Power was, that he had the Autority of Valentinian on his side; for that good Emperor had own'd all this be­fore, [Page 106] and he Sang this Hymn at his Conse­cration, St. Ambrose being then a lay Gover­nor of that Province, deputed to it by himself, [...], he gave thanks to God and Christ, that as he had committed the Power of Mens Bodies to him in that Province, so from them he had now the Power of Souls, by the [...], there mentioned, his Episcopal Chara­cter then conferr'd upon him, Theodorit. Eccl. Hist. l. 4. cap. 7.

§. XII And he that begins again where we left off in Eusebius, and goes along our first Church History, to Constantine downward, will find all along, the same Church-Power continued and asserted, and expressed in the same words too, as is that of the Empire. Nor can any man any more doubt, that there was Eccle­siastical Power, seated in some measure, in every Order of the Church, but primarily and chiefly in the Bishop; then that there was a Civil Power placed by God first of all in the Empire, and from him derived to his Praefects and inferiour Magistrates; and Da­masus Bishop of Rome had as real a Power in his Diocese, and which can no more be que­stioned upon the score of those publick Re­cords, than that Valentinianus his Contem­porary had a real Autority in the Empire of the World; the Bishop is still represented in his Chair, as the Emperor is upon his Throne, or can be by words declared, they are still called and acknowledged, [...], Euseb. Hist. l. 10. c. 3. [...], Cap. 4. [...], De Vita Con­stantini, [Page 107] lib. 2. c. 62. [...] cum Presbyteris suis, l. 3. c. 7. [...], cap. 24. [...], cap. 59. [...], & de Eustathio di­citur quòd Concilium Niceae, [...]. nimirum Antiochiae, cum & eodem tempore & Capite dicit quod Constan­tinus [...], Sozomen, l. 1. c. 2. [...] Sacerdotes Vocat. lib. 2. cap. 12. and he gives this account why the Bishops are Buried at Constantinople, with the Empe­rors, in the Church which is call'd The Apostles, [...], lib. 2. cap. ult. [...], lib. 3. c. 6. [...], De Episcopis, & [...], De Imperatore, lib. 6. c. 4. Philip, who held a Praefecture, or some kind of Government under the Empire, is called [...] in Constantinople, and which implies his Mission and Deputation from and under the Emperor; But this word is never applied to the Bishops, or any one of them, who are no Deputies of his, receive nothing like a Commission, nor have any derived Power from him, they are not the King's Ministers or Vicegerents, as are those in Tem­porals; and they owe their Autority alone to Christ Jesus, Cap. 9. And so again, lib. 4. cap. 3. [...], when mentioning the Offi­cers of the Crown, under Deputation, and all along in the History, [...], Romae, Sylvester, [...] Antiochiae, Vi­talis, & [...] post illum Phlagonius, Theo­dorit. lib. 1. c. 3. [...] (Con­stantinopoleos) [...], Flavianus [Page 108] [...] Gennadius, Evagr. Hist. Eccl. lib. 1. cap. 8. lib. 2. cap. 11. lib. 5. cap. 16. So that if things by words are de­livered to us, which must be, since we have not converse with one another, as they tell us, Angels have, or private immediate infu­sions from God, he speaks not to us, inarti­culately in Sounds, and in Dreams, as of old; we have here the thing contended for in this Discourse, viz. a real, Autoritative Power in the Church independent, equally as in the Empire; neither Subordinate to one ano­ther. The Argument and Evidence is as good as the Story is true, and the reception of those Ages; or as the truth of Matter of Fact can make it.

§. XIII AND suitably the first and most ancient Councils which are come to our hands, of the Christian Church, have still owned the Empire, and submitted to it, in its full La­titude; but yet still they reserved and asser­ted a Power within themselves, which was neither derived from, nor depended upon it in the execution, and [...] is the word they still express their Chair by; they could make Sanctions and Constitutions, oblige and bind the Conscience of themselves, and without it, the first great Council of Christen­dome; they met indeed in the Name of the Emperor, were summon'd by his Writ; nor ought they personally, and in Bodies, colle­ctively to Assemble without it; but they acted and decreed in their own Names, by their own Power and Autority, were all their Synodical Determinations made, [...]. So the great and first general Council [Page 109] of Nice, and was the after-form of the Pro­ceedings of the succeeding Councils, which still confirm'd that first, solemnly owning and receiving of it; It seemed good to the Holy Synod, to the Holy Bishops and Fathers there; as the immediately following Gene­ral Council at Constantinople explains it, [...], a form but a little abating of that of the Apostles Synod, Acts 15. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us; and as their Power is distinct, so is its Execution in different words and Penalties, so as ex­pressed, for the most part, by none else, and in all, never, executed by any, [...], Arceri, seu ejici ab Ecclesia, à fraternitatis Communione, relegari, submoneri à limine & omni tecto Ec­clesiae, Sacramento Benedictionis exauctorari, Communione interdici, abstineri, depelli; these are the words still expressing the Execution of this Church-Power, as they are to be met with up and down in the Greek Councils, and Greek and Latine Fathers; many of which Mr. Selden has took the pains to Col­lect to our hands, Lib. 1. De Synod. Pag. 257. 259. and are to be seen also in an earlier Copy, in the first Canon of the Seventh ge­neral Council, held at Nicea, there reckoned up and own'd, as bottomed on the Autority of the Apostles Canons, and the Six foregoing general Councils. And the Bishops have a [Page 110] Power [...], Con. 5. Con­cil. Anciran. [...], as before in the first Nicene Council, Can. 12. of absolving from and removing, taking off such their Mulcts laid upon them, either in whole or in part; or adding farther de­grees, suitable as their repentance and amend­ment, is perceiv'd, and approved, or not approved of, and this Power asserted in the Church by the great Council of Nice, and that of Ancyra, is the great instance of the self-existing, eminent, independent, underi­vable Power that is in the Church of Christ, wholly in her self, and in none else beside, as having Power to punish and relieve, to give Sentence and relax, in her own breast; this is, what is not done in the Civil Judicatures, where the Judge is in Deputation, who can­not correct his Sentence once given, make heavier or alleviate it, that is only in Sove­raign Power, as the Lawyers speak; but the Bishop can do it, [...]. Photius Nomocanon. Tit. 9. cap. 1. & 3. (do­ctas videas & nuperas Annotationes in Can. Niceae), there was then believed and accoun­ted a first and antecedent Right in the Church, to make ( [...]) Laws and Rules, from which, out of Contempt and Opposition, there was not allow'd any Ap­peal to be made, to the Empire or Secular Power, or Judicatures, unless by way of im­ploring Patronage, for a better enquiry, as not Canonically executed, Can. 6. Concil. 2. Gen. Constantinop. Can. 107. Concil. Carthag. and he that proceeds otherwise [...] [Page 111] [...], and not according to the Rules and Laws of the Church, is to be cast out of her Communion, if a Lay-man; if a Presbyter or Deacon, he is to be deposed, never to be restored again, never admitted, but to Plead his Cause, Conc. Antioch. Can. 11, 12. and the Clergy-man is not to leave his Bishop in Matters of Strife, and go to, [...], as the Power of the Realm is still call'd, the Secular Judges; or if he Appeal from his Bishop, it may be only, when the Case is with the Bishop himself, as a Party, and he is to appeal to the Provincial Synod, or the Metropolitan, Exarch, or Patriarch, Can. 9. Concil. Gen. Chalcedon. or he may ask and Petition the Emperor, that he interpose with his Power over all Persons in all Causes, for a farther Enquiry by the Bishop when Justice seems to be not understood, or to be denied, Can. 107. Conc. Carth. the Sin of Schism is still defined to be, when a Presbyter makes a Con­gregation, and makes an Altar [...], in despite and contempt of his Bishop, Can. 31. Apost. and so Can. 6. Con­cil. Gen. Constantinopolit. [...], when they unite for Religious Services in opposition to their Bishop; and Can. 31. Concil. 6th. in Trullo. and Can. 5. Concil. An­tioch. Can. 10. Concil. Carthag. 'Tis more express, If any Presbyter or Deacon, con­temns his own Bishop, separates from the Church, and makes a private Congregation and Altar, and disobeys farther, his Bishops Summons, to render him accountable for so doing, he is to be deposed, and if he perse­veres to make farther troubles in the Church, [Page 112] [...], as a Seditious Person, the outward Secular Power is to Chastise him, Can. 5. Concil. Antioch. where we have a thorow distinction of the two Powers, with their Offices; and the Canon goes before, that of the Church is antece­dent; and therefore when Constantius went to cast some Bishops that were clamorous and contentious out of the Church, Eleusius with Sylvanus and others, told him, That he had Power [...] of the outward Punish­ment, what reach'd the Liberties and Advan­tage of his Person; but 'twas theirs to judge [...], of Piety and Impiety, Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. l. 2. c. 27.

§. XIV I know it will be here reply'd, this was only the Judgment, Declaration and Practice of the Churchmen themselves, or some Hi­storians their Creatures, Men Ambitious and Industrious, to keep and confine to them­selves that Power which the present Circum­stances and Necessities gave occasion, even Necessity, to Profess and Practice, the Powers of the World being not become Christian, and which though it bears no Objection, as in it self; for, what ever of ill Church-men might design thencefrom, sure it is, this sort of Truth and Power relating to Christianity, was designedly and professedly committed and intrusted in the hands of Church-men alone, and by Christ himself, with whom he has promised to be, to the end of the world, and always, without any intermission, and never to forsake them. And 'tis as certain again that this is an evil Machiavel design, against all Religion, in every instance of it; [Page 113] thus professedly; endeavouring to wrest it out of their Hands, to lodge its Possession; Care and Preservation elsewhere, in the Laity; or at the best, in Kings and Secular Governors, by the flattery of a new Honor and Prerogative cast upon them; the easier to gain their assistance, and with more Suc­cess to manage their main design. Is it not now the common Discourse of the Many? Religion, and which is still by that sort of Men whose Design is to have no Religion at all, complain'd of and lamented, as decay'd and lost? what can never be retrived, or this done, continued by Church-men, whose purpose is only, by their Pride and Ambi­tion, to usurp and inclose all into their own hands, to have within themselves an Arbi­trary, Autoritative, Absolute Rule and Go­vernance over Mens Faith and Persons; and the very title of a Clergy-man gives a suspi­tion of either Unfaithfulness or Insufficiency; 'tis what is managed by the great Hugo Gro­tius, That Religion is not to be entrusted with, nor can it, as it ought, be promoted and propagated by the Bishops and Coun­cils, the Prince is alone capable of it; though it is in his raw indigested youthful Book, De Imper. Sum. Potest. in Sacris, and his Post­humous Work, after all, he then ran with the present Croud he was ingaged in, as himself afterwards acknowledges; and much certainly is to be attributed to those Untheo­logical barbarous Proceedings in the Synod of Dort; which was to be sure fresh in Me­mory, if not actually on the Stage, when he was in those his Meditations; they allowing [Page 114] neither Humanity, nor Argument, to such as were Remonstrants, whereof Grotius was one; that is, not of the Calvinistical Presbyterian, both Faith and Faction, and that in every Point, as they required. Deprivations, Ba­nishments, were their Ordinary Punishment, and the like Cruelties; nay worse, and more rigorous Proceedings, which was by the French Calvinists at that time, upon the same score, and that too, upon their own Bre­thren of the Reformation; whereof Peter du Moulin was the Head, and great Manager; of which a bitter taste and such an act of Ty­ranny, as no Story can Parallel, is to be had in the Life of Episcopius; upon these Re­flexions in all likelihood it is, that we find not only Grotius, but those, otherwise, Lear­ned and Ingenious Men, on the Remonstrants side, still to inveigh against Synods, and the unfitness of Church-men to Preside and Rule, where such controverted Cases are on foot, to be debated and determined, asserting the Prince as much the fitter Person, Oppression makes the Wise man Mad. All which is to be seen of any that are Conversant in those Transactions, particularly in the Epistles of those learned Men lately collected in one Volume, and Printed at Amsterdam. I shall therefore to take off the shew and appearance of this Objection, upon what account soever it was made, Vindicate the Integrity of true Church-men, as well as farther assert this great Truth now in hand, by adding, to what has been said already, the Publick Ac­knowledgments and Declarations of the Christian Emperors themselves. That Church-Power [Page 115] thus removed from them, is no in­jury to their Crowns and Jurisdictions, thus seated and limited in the Bishops and Church-Officers only, is no Usurpation on their parts; 'tis what is really existing in them.

CONSTANTINE, the First Christian §. XV Emperor, continues the same style, and owns the same Power in the Church, which he found in it at his Conversion, and receiving Christianity, in his Epistle to Anulinus, he says of Cecilianus the Bishop, [...], that he is Chief, and hath a Government, as a Church-man, in that Province, over which Anulinus was placed by himself, as a President in Se­culars; and enjoyns him that they that serve at the Altar be freed from all Publick Services in the State, the better to attend it, Euseb. Eccles. Hist. lib. 10. cap. 7. he calls the Bishops [...], in Vita Con­stantini, lib. 2. cap. 2. and cap. 46. [...], he writes to the Bishops as Gover­nors, having Jurisdict [...]on, not in Secular Affairs, that belongs to the Presidents of Provinces, or the Praefectus Praetorio, to whom he there directs them for assistance, and this is yet clearer in that his known saying to the Christian Bishops, when entertained by him, [...], You are appointed by God as Bishops of those things which are within the Church, I am ap­pointed by God as a Bishop of those things which are without, De Vita Constantini, lib. 4. cap. 24. and what is meant in the Ecclesiastical sense of it by [...], appears plainly by [Page 116] a like Phrase in the Tenth Canon of the Council of Carthage just now made use of by us; where to disobey the Bishop is Deposi­tion, and if they be still turbulent in the Church, and go on to Sedition, [...], the word but a little changed, the outward Secular Power is to Chastise them, i. e. by outward Penalties laid upon them, the business and work of every Prince being to Defend and Protect the Church; or if, [...], be interpreted, to relate only to the World, i. e. those that are not Christians, as some would have it; and so, the meaning is, that Constantine's Province is to govern them which are out of the Church and no Chri­stians, the Bishops can take Cognizance only of such as are in her Arms, and have submit­ted to her Discipline; the two Jurisdictions are fully owned, as a part, and distinct, and the Empire only appears a loser by the nice­ty; because his right as from hence, in Church Affairs, and over their Persons is de­nied him; Nor has David Blondel any such reason for his clamorous Exceptions against Rufinus, in his Tenth Book of Ecclesiastical History, Cap. 2. because he brings in Con­stantine speaking to the Bishops upon the oc­casion of some particular Quarrels that were amongst them, and telling them, Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes, & potestatem dedit de no­bis quoque judicandi, & ideò nos à vobis rectè judicamur, vos autem non potestis ab homini­bus judicari, that God had constituted them Priests, and gave them Power of judging Kings, and they are with just Autority judged by them, but the Bishops are not judged of [Page 117] Men; for it is all true in a duly confined and limited sense, and in which we are to under­stand the Emperor there meaning it, the last Appeals being to the Church in some instan­ces, and even Kings must come to Heaven by her Laws and Discipline, under their Spiritual Guidance and Jurisdiction; nor was this an undue or less Cogent Argument for Constantine to use to the Bishops, for the laying aside their Dissentions in lesser Mat­ters, the occasion of such his Speech; it look­ing and sounding very ill, that they who were his Judges in other Cases, and in those too of the highest concern, should become liable to his just Censures and Reproof, by reason of their want of Love and Unity with one another; he argues with them for Peace, from the excellency of their own high Cal­ling and Profession, D. Blondel, it seems, had not discerned of the difference, betwixt a Power to determine for Truth, and that which by Coercive outward means, engages to, and maintains it, or at least he would not own it; and 'tis over usual, and well known a thing with him, to blunder and be clamorous against Ecclesiastical Writers, to run cross to the received course of Church-Story, and thinks he does nothing unless he brings in abundance of Inferences and Co­rollaries, has not Examples, heap upon heap, as he has here, in how many Church Cases, and of how many Clergy-men Constan­tine was Judge, as Athanasius, Caecilianus, Eustathius Antiochenus, &c. and not one hits the Nail, all to no purpose; because in other [Page 118] Judicatures, and quite diverse causes, than Constantine or Rufinus designed; only he a­muses and confounds the Reader. If less con­sidering, he advantages and adds, to the great Transmarine design of bringing a disrepute and baffle upon Church-Antiquity; all which is to be seen in his Formula Regnante Christo, Cap. 15. Pag. 175. 6. when the Bishops Pe­titioned Valentinianus the Emperor, those who asserted the One Substance, that they might be permitted to rectifie some Errors introduced, in the Explanation of it, the Em­peror thus reply'd, [...], Sozo­men. Hist. Eccles. lib. 6. cap. 7. That he was in the Order of the People, or Laity, and it would be over Pragmatical and unlawful for him to meddle with such things, the Priests to whom the care of such things do belong, are to go and consult together where they please about it, and where we have the Power and Prerogative of the Empire giving leave, as to place of meeting; permitting it to their own choice and discretions; but the Church-Power it self, is wholly and by himself removed from him, as not his Due and Right. And a Prince he was did not use to remit of his Rights, if really his, and knew well enough to Command and Retain them; as appears, That when first ascend­ing his Throne, and the Souldiery was im­petuous, requiring him to choose a Partner in the Government, made this smart return, You chose me, fellow Souldiers, for your Empe­ror, and now what you demand is at my choice, [Page 119] within my self, and at my alone disposal; you are to Obey, I am to see to the Government. Nor would he suffer them to proceed in their Demands, or farther to advise him, cap. 6. & 21. Ejusdem libri.

[...], So Justinian the §. XVI Emperor calls the See of Constantinople, the Throne of Epiphanius then Patriarch there, Cod. lib. 1. Tit. 4. Ed. Gothofred. and he evi­dently distinguishes betwixt [...] and [...], betwixt the Priesthood and the Empire, he assigns them two distinct Offices and apart Duties, [...], one serving in Divine, the other governing and taking care in Humane things, Novel. 6. Praefat. he calls the Ecclesiastical Power, [...], and their Determinations, [...], and to which [...], the Throne of Episcopacy, the Self-existing Power of the Priest, to which the Empire gives it concurrent Vote; and thus, [...], the Bishop and the King, Divine and Humane going together, a full and due Sentence is given, Novel. 42. Praesat. And so again, [...], Ibid. cap. 1. and [...], as over and over again, upon each occasion, he distinguishes betwixt Eccle­siastical and Civil Crimes, the Bishop is Judge of the Ecclesiastical, and the Judges of the Provinces are not to intermeddle with them; it is to be done [...], according to the Sacred and Divine Laws, and which his own Laws, those of the Em­pire, do not disdain to follow, [...], Novel. 83. and Novel. 131. cap. 1. [Page 120] [...], It is decreed, That [...], the Holy and Ecclesiasti­cal Canons have the force of a Law, those composed by the four Councils of Nicca, Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon; whose Determinations we receive as Scripture; [...], and their Canons are Laws unto us. That there is something in the Priest that is not in the Emperor; though again, more in the Emperor, which is not in the Priest. Theodosius the younger declares, That he approaches the Holy Altar, only to Offer, nor does he stay within the Sept. [...], or Pretend any thing to the nigher Divinity there residing, Cod. Theodos. 9. Tit. 45. Edict. Imperat. pag. 367. Ed. Gothofred. he calls the Ecclesiastical Ministry, Principatum, a Prin­cipality, or Power within it self, Cod. 16. Tit. 5. Lex. 19. Leo the Emperor, thus speaks of the Canons of the Church, [...], that they were spoken by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost, Imperat. Constitut. 2. pag. 693. ad finem No­vel. and that his assent goes along with, and he follows in his Determinations, the Ecclesiastical Canons, [...], Con­stitut. 9. pag. 701.

§. XVII AND thus there is a plain Prospect, that the case, as to the Church, though not as to the Empire, was the same before and after Constantine, nor did he, or the succeeding Christian Emperors, alter any thing of the Church-Power, as not in it self, so nor by a change of its but Subject, asserted and pra­ctised, under those that were Heathen, the [Page 121] Empire only cast in its assistance, added Nerves and Sinews, Strength and Corrobo­ration to it; and for this we need have gone no farther than that laborious Colle­ction David Blondel has presented the World withal, in his Book De formula regnante Chri­sto, pag. 373. where it is plain, there were still acknowledged two distinct Empires in the World, two different Principalities, Governments, Kingdoms and Jurisdictions, and this as before, so after the Empire was Christian; and the Publick Monuments there produced, run thus, Sub Diocletiano Regnante Domino Christo. Sub Justiniano, Regnante Domino Christo, &c. and so down to the Thousandth year of our Saviour's Incarna­tion; and this, because it is found some­times to run, only, Regnante Christo, and the Reign of the Empire is left out, though it do no ways infer and prove that all Empire is originally in Christ, both as to Spirituals and Seculars; and that he, that is, his Suc­cession, the Church, has the disposal of the Kingdoms of the World too, Primarily and Originally in him, as some zealous Parasites of the Roman Faith, thence, it seems, have inferr'd, and against whom the main Plot of D. Blondel, in this his Book is laid, and very well; yet this it infers, and evidently proves, That our Saviour and his Succession the Church, have been always supposed to have had a Kingdom in the World, not to sup­plant and overturn, to usurp, and encroach upon; but to bless that other of the World, to render it Prosperous on Earth, and by her holier Laws and Discipline to bring all to [Page 122] the Kingdom of Heaven, when the Reign on Earth is at an end. But this D. Blondel could not, or would not see himself; and there­fore, a thing too usual with him, runs into the opposite extreme to his Adversaries, is angry when this very Church-Power and its existence, of which himself gives so evident a Demonstration, is asserted, solitary, and not in the Empire, as no ways flowing, and included in its Constitution; as the other will have no Empire, but from and in the Church (so hard a matter is it for some Men to contend for Truth, and against the Church of Rome at once) and as has above been observed; but these Oversights, if no worse, are usual with him, 'tis like his ill luck in other cases.

§. XVIII AND he that duly consults and considers the sundry Proceedings and Laws, and judi­ciary Acts of the Empire about Church-Matters, either as interspersed in our Church Histories, or as Collected and United in the two Codes, the Theodosian and Justinian, in their several Laws, Novels and Constitu­tions, will readily grant all this, and more, that the Church and State, the Worldly or Secular, and Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Power, were still consider'd, reputed and proceeded on, as quite distinct Bodies and Powers, though both flowing from the same Original and Fountain, yet as diverse, as the Soul, and Body, with several Offices and Duties on each incumbent, in different Channels con­vey'd; and all aiming at the great and ulti­mate end, the general advantage of Man­kind; and each individual, both with their [Page 123] faces to the same Jerusalem; but in several Paths, and Determinations judiciary in or­der to it. Hee'l find that as the Church, the Councils and Bishops, were ever Conscien­tious and Industrious, that they entrenched not on the Empire, withheld not from it what was its due; usurped not any thing was not their own, paid all manner of Ob­servances to Kings and Secular Governors, in all manner of Duties; as Prayers, Thanks­giving, Instructions, Directions, Admoni­tions, Tribute, Loyalty, &c. So again did the Empire preserve their Functions, Per­sons, and Estates; give them Liberties, En­franchisements, Protestations, (unless where Apostates, as Julian, where overmuch favou­ring Heresies, as some time Constantius, &c.) countenanced and provided for Truth and Holiness, and sound Discipline, according to the Rules, Canons, Directions, Interpre­tations, and Determinations, given by the Bishops assembled in Council, or occasional­ly otherways made, and recommended unto them; the Church still Petitioned and Sup­plicated the Empire, when by the Affronts and Insolencies, the greater Impieties and Obstinacies of the World, the edge of their Spiritual Sword was dulled and blunted, when Coercive outward Punishments alone could hope to prevail for Peace and Amend­ment; of this we have several Instances up­on Record, as for the deposing Dioscorus, in Evagrius his Ecclesiastical History, l. 2. c. 4. in placing Proclus in the Episcopal Throne, Socrat. Hist. Eccl. lib. 7. cap. 4. which was immediately by Theodosius, Maximinianus, [Page 124] the defuncts Body, being not yet laid in the Ground, to prevent the Tumults of the Peo­ple. To this purpose we have the Case of one Cresconius a Bishop, who left his own, and invaded another's Church, and, upon a remand from the Council, refusing to return, the President of the Country is Petitioned, and his Secular arm (which alone has a Co­ercive Power over Mens Persons) sends him back again, according to the Constitutions Im­perial, Concil. Carthag. Can. 52. just such another Case as that of Paulus Samosetanus, in the days of Aurelian the Emperor above­mentioned, and the course of Proceedings we see is the same now as then, both in Church and State, as that Laws may be made to restrain such as were fled to the Church for refuge, Can. 60. that the Riot and Excess be taken away on their Festivals, which drew Men to Gentilism again, by the obscener Practices, and which were without shame and beyond Modesty, Can. 65, 66. that the Secular Power would come in eò quod Episcoporum autoritas incivitatibus contemnitur; because the Power of the Bishops is con­temn'd in the Cities, Can. 70. ut Ecclesiae opem ferat, to assist the Church against these Impieties, so strenuous and prevailing, Can. 78. as in the Case of the unrulier Donatists, Can. 95, 96. and the Thanks of the Bishops were given for their Ejection, Can. 97. and the Emperor is Petitioned to grant Defensors to the Church, Can. 10.109. and as the Church thus supplicated the Empire in these arduous Cases, and when its assistance was wanting; so on the other side, did the Em­pire [Page 125] still advise with the Church, when designing to make Religion the Municipal Law of the Empire, to imbody it with the World, under the same Sanctions, either as to Punishments, or Rewards, to make it the Religion of the State also; they still consulted antecedent Canons, or present Bi­shops in Council, or some Ecclesiastical Au­tority, they created nothing anew, gave the help of the World, for Countenance, Assistance and Confirmation, to stablish what the Church had put its Sanction upon. And those Emperors that designed to discounte­nance Christianity, or set up some particu­lar Heresie, and stifle it in part, or depose any great Church-men, and some such there was, they attempted it not, but by the Clergy, though of their own, the Power as in themselves alone, was not pretended to, they had their own Synods and Bishops, in order to it, and what they did, was done in their Names also, and all this will rea­dily appear to any one acquainted with the Canons of the Church, and Laws of the Empire, or if it seem too hard a task, he'l find it, at least, attempted to his hand, and with Care and Industry, reduced to a little room, by Photius Patriarch of Constantinople, in his Book, therefore called the Nomo-Canon, to shew the concurrency of the Laws and Canons, the Canons still placed first, as in course anteceding. And in this sense on­ly, that of Socrates can be understood in the Proem to his Fifth Book of Ecclesiastical Hi­story, [...] (Reges viz.) [...]. So [Page 126] soon as Kings began to be Christians, the things of the Church were managed, and accomplished by them. By which things what is there intended, and what the Power came into the Empires hand by becoming Chri­stian, the next words of the Historian clears, making the Instance, [...], and the greatest Synods were by their Appointment Summoned, and still are so. I'le bring here some instances of the Power and Procedure of the Empire, in Church Businesses to ren­der all more conspicuous, if possible.

§. XIX AND the first shall be this of Calling Synods, just now mentioned, the giving leave to Church-men to meet and unite in one Body, in a certain place of the Empire, limited to them; Publickly to enquire, exa­mine, debate and determine in Religion, in which Councils, if the Emperor himself was not present in Person, he deputed some chief Minister of State there to represent him. Thus Constantine himself sat in Person, in the Case of Cecilianus, and the Donatists, Miltiades and the Bishop of Rome, and the Clergy debating it, as St. Austin tells us, lib. 1. cont. Parmen. Donatist. and Flavius Marcellinus is deputed afterwards by the Em­perors Honorius and Theodosius, in a Collation of that Nature, as a Secular Cognitor and Supervisor, 16. Cod. Theodos. Lex. 3. Tit. 11. they exercised a Power and Cognizance over all Persons in these Causes and Meetings; they were then their Subjects, as before, and whom they commanded, and though such Members were obliged, at the Summons of [Page 127] the Bishops themselves, and by consent among one another, to be present at the Council, to come in and appear there, Can. 80. Concil. Carthag. yet the Emperor retain'd a Power above them, and they might be absent alto­gether, or depart after they had appeared, if the Emperor, [...], by his Letters required it, Concil. Sardicens. Can. 7. they had a Power over the very Causes themselves, in these Conciliary, Cle­rical Debates and Determinations, and were Judges here; If all that was determined, seem'd not duly reported, or adjusted, every ways clear and plain unto them; if scruples and doubts notwithstanding, remain; if new matter proposed, and adjudged considerable, by the adverse Parties, De Clericis judicanti­bus, Praesidet Imperator ipse, & prout malè vel benè Judicat, 16. Cod. Theodos. l. 42. Tit. 2. and which Law though instancing in some Immunities, as to Publick Secular things, yet holds in other Decisions. So Constantine heard the Cause of Cecilianus and the Dona­tists a second time, when the Bishops had heard it before, and Myltiades of Rome was there, as above in St. Austin. And it was the suit of the Bishops in the Council of Chalcedon, that it might be decreed by a Law, that all things at Ephesus, since the first Sy­nod there; of which St. Cyril of Alexandria, was Chief, should not retain any force, im­plying it in his Power to revise, and recon­sider, and he may reexamine the Actions of Councils, Compend. Act. Synod. Chalced. apud Evagrium. Eccl. Hist. l. 2. cap. 18. And Pe­trus de Marca gives us several instances of the [Page 128] like nature, of Appeals made to the Empire upon the results of Councils, and he accepted them, De Concord. Sacerd. & Imper. l. 7. c. 2. that the Emperor had directed and limited in what Points, and how far to proceed, calling Councils only for particular occasions; as De Marca, Ibid. & lib. 6. c. 22. and all this the Security of the Empire required, in the common course of things, that no Men im­body, or unite locally, upon any Plea what­ever, or Pretence of what Business soever, and not by his Warrant, under his Over­sight and Protection, whose Designation and Commissions come not from him, and all which Christianity supposes, and declared for upon its admission into the World, and Kingdoms imbracing of it; it appoints eve­ry Man wherein he was called there to abide, if a state of Honesty and Justice; not, of that filthiness, sometimes reign'd among the Gen­tiles, and many times had a Chief Place in what they called Religious Worship, this Christianity was designed to rectifie and re­move, but continue to Caesar, the things that are Caesar's; adds new Obligations to Go­vernment, and gives new Arguments for Obe­dience to it; but cancels no one, takes no one subject, in any one instance, from under his Jurisdiction, nor can any Governor be secure upon other terms, that has so many Persons, so considerable, as so many Pro­fessors are, or at least may be, with Power to associate in his Jurisdictions as they shall please, and when, and not in all instances, relating to such their imbodying, his Sub­jects; or though, if not able to meet with­out [Page 129] his Call; yet when together, and not under his Inspection and Jurisdiction, not Govern'd by his Rules and Laws, with a Power to canvass and unhinge, to insinuate and propose and manage, as they shall list, and how long, in Ordine ad Spiritualia; if they judge it useful to Religion. This is the same in effect, as to meet at their Wills; no Government can bear it, can subsist on such conditions, all must, or may, at the Plea­sure or Piques, of such the associated, be un­dermined and ruined. Again, the Empire is engaged, as to preserve the Laws of the Church then in being, so that in making new ones, those the old be not entrenched upon and affronted; or that the repeals be upon equitable accounts, and agreeable with the Catholick Faith, certainly received, with former Sanctions of either their Ancestry, or their own; and these we find the Rules and Directions given by the Emperors, Ho­norius and Theodosius, to Flavianus Marcellinus their Secular Cognitor, in the Debates about the Donatists, Ea quae circa fidem Catholicam, vel certa ordinavit antiquitas, vel Parentum nostrorum autoritas Religiosa constituit, vel no­stra Serenitas roboravit, Novella Superstitione remotâ, & inviolata, custodire praecipimus, suprà Cod. Theodos. 16. Tit. 11. l. 3. and in­deed it were an Imposition not to be indured in common Business betwixt one man and another, when but a private Consent, Con­firmation and Autority is desired, to deny liberty of Enquiring, Demurring, Discour­sing or Debating, or whatsoever may seem best to tend to Information, as to particu­lars; [Page 130] and then how insufferable, if not al­low'd the Prince? when supplicated and call'd in by the Church, to make Laws, give the Royal Assent, Stamp and Character, and Protection, to their Results and Determina­tions, and which otherwise, must want the edge and advantage of it; and not upon a freedom to consider former Laws and Ca­nons, made and ratified, with future incon­veniences that may happen; this were in­deed to make Princes Lacqueys, Hackneys, or what vile and mean enough we can say, to the Church, to debase them into the order of Ideots or Pageants; all true Church-men in their Offers and Proceedings have started at, and abhorr'd it. But then we are to note farther, that when the Emperors appear'd in Councils, whether themselves in Person, or by their Proxies and Substitutes, the most Politick and Prudent, the more Acute and Ingenious; as Theodosius, or any other, they acted there, and in these Church Debates, only upon the forementioned ends and pur­poses; to secure the common Reputation both of Men and Governors, and to see that former Sanctions be not violated to judge as to Matter of Fact, and what was Law and Canon before, and that nothing destructive be admitted and imbodied into the Empire, and which many times was deputed to the Bishops themselves; as we have instance in the Comments of Jacob Gothofred, in extra­vagans de judicio Episcopali ad finem Cod. Theodos. l. 1. (and to be sure the Empire ne­ver determined, but by the Clergy in any thing else) and the Enquiry was only this, [Page 131] an Ordinavit Antiquitas? that nothing thwar­ring was introduced, and imposed. Nor can Theodosius himself be supposed to have done any more, from the Relation made of him by Socrates, Hist. Eccles. l. 5. c. 10. or by Sozomen, l. 7. c. 17. where he is engaged in Points of Faith, and which is so much in­sisted on by those that resolve all Power in­to the Prince, in the determining and com­posing all differences arising in Points of Re­ligion, Vid. Grotium: bona fides Lubber [...]i, 48. & alibi. Theodosius was an acute Man, and pursued his own Satisfaction, in those Points or Articles, he made Law, [...], and all he did upon his search was this, he concurr'd in the same Opinion with the Bi­shops, receiv'd their Reasons offer'd, and allow'd of the Grounds they proceeded on, and imbodied in the Empire the Decrees of the Council call'd by him at Constantinople, upon the occasion of the Arians; and other Business in the Eighth Chapter of that Book of Socrates. And so again in Sozomen, he gives out his Rescripts, for equal Honor to be given to the Persons in the Trinity; and declares those Hereticks which do it not, and enjoyns Theophilus to follow the Nicene Faith, for which the antecedent Church Canon is the rule, lib. 7. cap. 4, 5. 9.

THE Laws of the Empire against Hereticks §. XX are many, and for the Rule of Faith, and its Unity, and against their meetings in the ex­ercise of their Fancies, they are turned out of the Publick Churches, and expell'd the Cities, and whatever favour hath been ob­tained for a Penal-mitigation by bribed [Page 132] Courtiers misrepresenting (for such it seems there always was, and will be) the Grant is to be actually void, the Houses they meet in are Confiscated, they that have frequented them are Punished an Hundred Pounds, and such as continue at them, Fifty; no Man is to read their Books, they are all to be burned; none is to Petition in their behalf, their last Testaments are voided, they are not permitted to Buy or Sell, or Trade as do other Men; all their Gifts, Endowments, and Revenues, settled on their Sects, are transferr'd to the Churches use. Such of them as set up Schools and Teach, are to be animadverted upon Ʋltimo Supplicio, to be sure by a Punishment, greater than others; and they that learn of them are to Pay Ten Pounds. No Lay-man that is an Heretick, is to have or exercise any Government, lest they be vexatious to the Bishops and Chri­stians, all the Moderators, Governors, and Under-Officers in Provinces that neglect to execute these Laws, or permit them to be violated, are to have a Mulct of Ten Pounds laid upon them. No Civil or Military Power is to assist them in erecting their quasi Eccle­sias, falsly called Churches, Speluncas fidei suae, under the Punishment of Twenty Pounds of Gold. He that entertains a Conventicle in his House, if (vilis) of the Plebeians, he is to be beaten with Clubs; if an Ingenuous Person, his Punishment is Ten Pounds; and if they go from their Conventicles to Muti­nies and Sedition, 'tis present Death; and to such as frequent them, tis Proscription of Goods, with many more Penalties assigned. [Page 133] Some greater, and some less, as was the temper of the Law-Maker, and the appre­hended Guilt, as greater or less the Here­sie, of more or less danger in Church or State, even to some, as the Manichees, their Children were not to inherit; but then, who and what these Hereticks, and Heresies were; what made a Conventicle, or Schismatical Meeting, what constituted this Rule of Faith and Unity? this was not the work of the Em­pire, nor did it pretend to be Judge and Decide. She believed, as did the Church determine, whose Traditions and Confessions received Strength and Autority thereby, the Civil Arm and Power concurring; but the Catholique Faith is the Rule; and Praedica­tionem Sacerdotum, the Instructions of the Priests the Director. Nor is any one con­demned by the Law, but such as are Stran­gers to, and neglect the Church, who are first condemned by her; and 'tis what Anti­quity has ordained, appoints and constitutes. That Faith which St. Peter the Apostle Preached at Rome, and which was then fol­low'd there by Damasus the present Bishop, and Peter Bishop of Alexandria, Nectarius of Constantinople, Pelagius of Laodicea, Diodonis of Tarsis, Amphilochius of Iconium, Optimus of Antioch, &c. Men led by the Apostolical, Evangelical Discipline and Doctrine; far­ther taught and recommended in the Four first Councils, Determinantibus Sacerdotibus, the Bishops there determining, and the Exposi­tion of Synods, by the Imperial Autority and Laws called together. Sacram Communionem in Ecclesia Catholica, non percipientes, à Deo [Page 134] amabilibus Episcopis, Haereticos justè vocamus, Justinian. Novel. 109. Praefat. The Heresie in its own Nature consists here, when they unite and hold Communion out of the Catho­lick Church, not receiving of it from God's beloved Bishops, and so Schism is defined, [...], Can. 31. Apost. [...], Can. 6. Concil. Gen. Constantinop. when they despise, and make Assemblies contrary to their Bishops. So also, Can. 31. Concil. 6. in Trullo, Can. 10. Concil. Carthag. and more expresly yet, Can. 10. Concil. Antioch, and which we have occasio­nally made use of before; if any Presbyter or Deacon separate from the Church, contemn­ing his own Bishop, and makes a Private Congregation or Altar, [...], as in that 10th Canon, Concil. Carthag. all which, concerning Schism and Heresie and Conventicles, with a great deal more may be seen at large, and in every particular, by whoso is conversant in the Canons and Church Proceedings, and Determinations; or, which may be of more Autority with him, at least not so lyable to Scorn, and con­tempt, to whoso pleases to read Cod. Justinian, Tit. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, &c. Theodos. 16 Tit. 1. l. 28. and in the several Titles and Laws, with the various Novels and Constitutions treating expresly on these Subjects.

§. XXI THERE are as many Laws and Directions Imperial concerning Ordinations; the Per­son to be Separate and Consecrated to the Ministry of what Order soever; whether Bishops, Presbyters or Deacons, perhaps ma­ny more, as indeed they are very numerous, [Page 135] giving Rules for Elections; for the better discharge of their Duties, providing against Symony, for the daily Sacrifices, and Mini­sterial Offices, in the Liturgy, and Service for the People; give Rules to the Bishops what Presbyters are to be Ordained, inquires into, and gives Cautions and Charge for their Manners, for their Abilities, that they for­sake not their Priestly Office, claiming the right of Investitures. That no Church be built, but the Bishop be first consulted; for the maintenance of such required there to officiate. That no Church be consecrated without the Bishop, no Ideot, or taken out of the number of those Qui vocantur Laici, who are called Lay-men, presently upon the entrance into Holy Orders, ascend to an Episcopacy, he gives to the Clergy Possession of their Churches, and they are all in Depu­tation, in their Ecclesiastical Courts from the Emperor, and in Religious Matters, he gives leave for the Collects or Meeting together, confers many Priviledges on their Persons, in order to the better performing of such their Offices, that no trouble or obstruction be in Litanies, and Laws are given for the manner of their Celebration, takes care that they meet oft in Councils and Synods, enjoyns them residence on their Cures. He limits the number of such as are to be Ordained, suitable to the Revenues of the Church, that there be not an Impoverishment and Con­tempt thereby, that none be Ordain'd, but to a Title, and in relation to particular Cures, or as the present Exigence may require. He exempts certain Persons, forbidding the [Page 136] Bishops to give them Holy Orders, as such as fly to the Church for Ease and Idleness, to shake off their Secular Offices and Duty, and be acquit of their Burdens, that they may enjoy the outward Priviledges and Immuni­ties, the Clergy by the Bounty and good Grace of the Empire had granted unto them. Such as are actually in Publick Offices, to which thereby they become disabled, and the State is endamaged. As Captains, Cen­turions, &c. whom he remands to their first station, and hence some Laws we find, that the tenues fortunâ, the Poorer in the Church are only to be Ordained, though perhaps with less Prudence; and the reason was this, because the Church enjoy'd great Priviledges and Immunities, and the Rich too frequently ran to it, to shelter and advantage themselves in this World, a thing too common in our days, and the like Laws might not be amiss amongst us in some cases, when particular Men leave their Secular and Military Station, for the Profit and Grandure of the highest Church-men; he forbids that any Holy Offi­ces or Ministerial Functions be usurped, sine Sacerdote, without a Priest, appoints that every one first receive Holy Orders, e're he attempts the Execution of the Publick Mini­stry, with more of the like Nature, and which are to be seen. Cod. Justinian, lib. 1. Tit. 2.5.14. Tit. 3.9.10.11.30.31.34.36.46.52. Cod. Theodos. 9. Tit. 40.15.16.45.3. Cod. 12.104.115.121. Cod. 16. Tit. 1.3. Tit. 2.1.2.3.6.18.25.32. Tit. 11.1. Novel. 3. cap. 1.2. and Novel. 6.1.4.7. No­vel. 16.40.46.68. cap. 1.2.3. Novel. 78. [Page 137] Novel. 123. Novel. 131. cap. 8.9. Novel. 137. but then, all this amounts to only what is said to be the Office of an Emperor, Commone­facere, Cod. Justinian. l. 1. Tit. 3. to take care, warn, and see that all these things be done as they ought to be; the Rule is ante­cedent, and depends on another Authority, I mean where 'tis purely Religious, and Po­licy alone ingages not. The general Rule laid down and to be observed is this, Ne fiant Ordinationes, contra interdictiones legum & Sa­crorum Canonum, Novel. 12. cap. 12. that all Ordinations be made according to Law and the Holy Canons, to the observation of that Rule, Quam justi & laudandi & adorandi in­spectores & Ministri Dei verbi tradiderunt, Apostoli & Sancti Patres custodierunt, & ex­planaverunt, Novel. 6. Praefat. which the Mi­nisters of the Word of God, the Apostles and Holy Fathers have kept and explained. The Emperor in his own Person, never Pleads for, or attempts the Sacred Action or Office of Ordination it self, never yet laid any title to it; and the Bishop upon his Ordination receives Secular Priviledges from the Empe­ror, to be emancipated and made free from that Service, which otherwise the Laws re­quire of him, by his becoming a Spiritual Father; But the Ordination it self, the Right of a Bishop, is no where said to be, or so claim'd from the Emperor, Novel. 8. cap. 3. and although it has been disputed, only within this Hundred years, at least it never reached any farther than the Whimsical Brains of some one or two, now and then, (and what Point of Faith escaped such?) [Page 138] whether the Power of Ordaining, has been in the Presbyter, or in the Bishop only, as a distinct Order and Superior to him, and how the Votes and Concurrences of the Peo­ple, and in what degree of Necessity, they are required unto it, yet none ever asserted it to belong to any that was neither Presby­ter nor Bishop; yet Antiquity is altogether silent as to the Prince in this case, the Church always removed, nor did the Empire ever claim it; this is still represented as the pro­per Work and Office of the Bishop; what­ever the Empire did in the case, was by com­manding the Bishop to Consecrate, when such an one is designed for the Function by himself, or assenting to the Election made by others; but if any more, and not of the like Nature, the Church of God and all un­derstanding Christians did still look upon it, as not to be indured in any one, [...], to act as a Priest, [...], when never entitled to, or partaking of the Priestly Power, and it was never first con­ferr'd on him by any, it has been adjudged [...], worthy of many Deaths; as in the case of Ischyras in particular, Socra­tes Hist. Eccles. lib. 1. cap. 27.

§. XXII AND if we look into the Church censures, the Animadversions and Punishments, laid upon such as are unworthy their Christianity, that high Calling wherewith they are called in Christ Jesus: The case will appear the same as in Ordination in general; great and solicitous was still the care of the Empire, for the solemn, just and due execution of these Powers; a great many Laws and Con­stitutions [Page 139] were made in order to it, several Cautions and Directions given, that none be interdicted without a just Cause, Cod. Justi­nian, lib. 1. Tit. 3.30. That Excommunica­tion be not for light Causes, 39. 1. That no Man be excluded the Sacred Communion, be­fore Cause be shew'd, and for which the Laws and Canons have commanded it; and if any Excommunicates upon other accounts, the Person Excommunicated is to be absol­ved, and receiv'd again into Communion, Novel. 123. cap. 11. and this with the grea­test reason in the World, for the Prince is Custos Canonum, he is the Keeper of the Canons, and is to see that their Rules be duly executed, Omni innovatione cessante ve­tustatem & Canones Pristinos Ecclesiasticos, qui us (que) nunc tenuere, servari Praecipimus, Cod. Justinian, l. 1. Tit. 26. and 'tis as his Province and Work; so the great Mercy and Justice of the Empire, thus to conserve Mens Liber­ties, not to have them expos'd to the Tem­poral Punishments, which always follow'd, and severely too, upon Excommunication. Nor is it sit, that an Action of so great a weight and consequence, every ways of so great a concern both as to Body and Soul, be altogether Arbitrary, at the Pleasure, ma­ny times Pique of one Man, the Prince at this rate has not the Command of his own Subjects, and his own Laws may be executed against the interest of his Government; Ex­communications are only then supposed to have effect, Clave non Errante, when duly executed according to Church Rules, of which the Prince is, or ought to be, the [Page 140] Conserver; no one is supposed to grant Priviledges against himself, and as he en­states certain Persons, with special Immuni­ties, so is he to enquire and to be concern'd, as upon the admittance into (as in the case of Ordinations just now considered) so upon an exclusion from them, otherwise his neither Favours, nor Punishments are his own, and his Power and Government may be weak'ned by it, Ne Immunitatis Ecclesiasticae obtentu, mu­nia Publica, vel nervi Reipublicae conciderent, ad clericatum confugientibus iis, à quibus munia Publica, per Provincias sustinebantur, 12. Cod. Theodos. Tit. 1.69.104.115, &c. which way soever his Subjects may be disabled for the Service of the Empire, whether when Privi­ledges are too lavishly and inconsiderately conferr'd, or Exemptions made, the reason is one, and so is the effect, in either, and the Prudence and Power of the Empire is to be imply'd alike, for Prevention of each, and securing the Subject for his own, and the Subjects best advantage; and consequently, both the Censures and Orders of the Church, when inflicted and conferr'd, are to be un­der his Inspection. If the Empire come in with his Power to assist and strengthen the Church, and Religion gains its outward aid and Protection, it must be in dependance on such the Power Secular, whose Temporal Security, is to be consulted and included in the Execution. The Plot and Contrivance both of our common Christianity, and our common Reason, at once, do require it, and the same I have said above, as to the Power of the Empire, in all Christian Councils, [Page 141] call'd and protected by him. But the Empe­ror all this while is not found to Excommu­nicate, or Absolve, in his own Person, by his own individual formal Act; that is a Power that depends upon another Head, is derived by a differing Stream, and to a diverse Sub­ject; it is not in the force of the Secular Arm, nor does the Prince lay a Claim or Pretence unto it, Divina primum Vindicta, the Divine Vengeance, i. e. Excommunication, passed first upon the Hereticks, inflicted by the Church, and then motus animi nostri, the Pu­nishments from the Empire, those Penalties reckoned up before, and in part following, Cod. Justinian, l. 1. Tit. 1. And the same Em­peror, some Bishops falling under his Dis­pleasure, and adjudged worthy his Animad­version, for leaving their Cures and coming up to Constantinople, under Pretence of Busi­ness about Religion, without leave, and to the expence of the Church; He says, he will not lay Pecuniary Mulcts upon them, (and which was all he could do, except Ba­nishments on their Persons,) but thinks Ab­stentions to be more proper, [...], but this is to be done, either by the Patriarch of Constantinople himself, if he be a Metropo­litan that offended; or if a Bishop only of a City, by such his Metropolitan, that he is under; and which is no otherwise the work of the Empire, then that he urges a due exe­cution, Ibid. Cod. Justin. l. 1. Tit. 3.43. So again the deposition of a Bishop, which is the same as Excommunication to a Lay-man, is it made, residentibus Sacerdotibus, by the Priest­hood it self, a Synod of Bishops, the Empe­ror [Page 142] only adds his Temporal Penalties; as, if he accept not such his Deposition, but is Se­ditious, and disturbs the Publick Peace, he be banish'd an Hundred Miles from that City where he had officiated, and which he had infested; 'tis the particular Punishment of the State, 16. Cod. Theodos. Lex. 35. Tit. 2. the very same we have again, Novel. 42. Sen­tentia Sacerdotum, 'tis the Judgment and Sen­tence of the Priest makes the Deposition, the Empires Secular Arm seconds it, proceeds to a Banishment of his Person, and that his Books be burnt, [...], the first and origi­nal Right, being in the Clergy, Praefat. Ibid. & Cap. 1. and more expresly there, Cap. 3. 'tis the Appointment of the Emperor, that one Zoaras, amongst others, be anathemati­zed; but it follows, [...], the Priests Determination must pass upon it, [...], which is the Churches own inward Autority, and derived from none, [...], only the Empire makes it of more Force and Autority; that is, by a Penal Mulct annexing Banishment unto it, as it there follows, and so 'tis promised for the future, whatever are the Church censures, [...], the Laws Imperial shall corroborate and strengthen them, ibid. and so all along, the Church cen­suring, the Empire punishing, [...], Epilog. ibid. Novel. 42. and 'tis a Law of Theo­dosius the younger, that the Clergy-man that is unfaithful in his Duty, and retain'd Ser­vants at the Altar, and gave them refuge to [Page 143] the disadvantage of their Masters, be depo­sed by the Bishop, or his Animadversion be made, sub Episcopalis jurisdictionis Arbitrio, according to his Discretion, and when de­graded into the Order of a Lay-man, Motum judiciarii rigori [...] accipiat, he be given up to the Civil Magistrate, for farther Punishment, Cod. 9. Theodos. Tit. 45. l. 5. and of which more is to be seen in the Comments of Go­thofred there. And indeed all the Cautions, Rules and Directions, given to the Bishops in these instances, imply only that they might erre in the execution; the Power is all along supposed in the Church, nor is it by the Prince attempted; as he does not Excommunicate, though seeing just reason for it, so neither does he absolve upon the unjustest censures denounced; wherein one Priest has been de­fective, it has been enjoyn'd another, remit­ted, Majori Sacerdoti, to a higher Order and Jurisdiction, to the Metropolitan, or Pa­triarch, as was the Church Custom to appeal to the Superior, Novel. 123.11. So that we can readily yield to all that jus Caesareum, Mr. Selden speaks of, De Synedriis, l. 1. cap. 8. pag. 223. that Caesarian Power both as to Excommunications and Absolutions. And as Mr. Selden explains himself too, and allow his own instances, in the Jews, Pag. 234, 235. Caligula Caesar laid an Inhibition upon them, and Banished their Persons out of Rome, and denied them the exercise of their Religion; which latter is the same in effect as Excommunication. As he there argues, this Inhibition was continued by Claudius Cae­sar for some time, and afterwards quite ta­ken [Page 144] off by him, and their Religion was al­low'd after their own manner again. The meaning of which can be only this, that the Laws of the Empire gave License and Indemp­nity to their Persons in the ancient and ac­customed exercise of it, and which they ac­cepted and were thankful for. But does it hence follow that they acknowledged, and return'd their Original Right, either for their Worship in general, or Excommunication in particular, in, and to, Caesar; and that they ceased to have any because denied by the Em­pire? surely not; they only were more streight­ned in its exercise, when under his inter­dict. Nor had they less right, or stood they less bound to its Obligations, in every respect, when this liberty was not conceded, under their Vassalage; and though the Empire own'd them not, even at this very time, i. e. du­ring their Captivity, Mr. Selden says, they assumed this Discipline of Excommunication, or a naked Exclusion from outward Commu­nion, by consent among themselves, the bet­ter to keep up, and preserve this their Reli­gion, when so suppress'd by the Civil Power, Ibid. suprà, Cap. 7. pag. 141. 143. & alibi; as they would not this day, in England, or in what other Countries they are dispersed, therefore forego such their Right, should the present Government distress, and frown upon them. Nor do I know any one case or instance, coming up nearer to the state of the Power and Right of the Prince in Ecclesia­sticks, and the Right of the Church, Absolute too and Independent, than this of the Jews under the Empire; their Religion is from [Page 145] another Fountain, and the Empire does not derive it unto them, and Gallio the Secular Deputy, could discharge his Duty, without caring for any of these things, when the Matters were purely of their Laws and Cu­stoms; but yet their Persons, and the Publick exercise of it, are subject to this Govern­ment, and Jurisdiction, to limit, or enlarge, indulge, or recall, as may be the Reasons and Motives; and, is his Will and Pleasure: Thus it stood with the Jewish Church, in the days of our Saviour in the Flesh, and of his Apostles, and so it is to this day, where the Association, or imbodying is continued; nor did the Empire conceive its Power any ways intrenched upon or abated thereby, did he cease upon the account of their Worship, to continue to them his Protection; or had they any ingagement to withdraw their Obedience, only those uncircumcised in Hearts and Ears, which always resisted the Holy Ghost, and Crucified the Lord of Life; sometimes at­tempted Insurrections and Rebellions against him.

BUT however it was with the Heathen §. XXIII Emperors in respect of the Jews, Mr. Selden positively says it, that the Christian Empe­rors did actually exercise the censures of the Church, judicially Anathematize and Ex­communicate, in their own Persons and Rights, he having first swollen up himself with an Opinion, and a true one; too true it is, that himself is the great Searcher of Re­cords and Authors, and Laws, of the Books and Practice of all Ages; and if the mighty, the laborious, Selden, has said it, it must be [Page 146] so, there can be no doubt of, there needs no other search after it; otherwise he could ne­ver have ventur'd to obtrude it on the world, as out of the Imperial Code, that Princes have so Excommunicated, whose Laws, De­clarations, Practice, Positive Assertions, and Dogmatical Resolutions, are quite another ways, as I have already made it appear in these foregoing Pages; which Collection and Citations, if any one distrust, let but himself peruse the particulars, with much more that might be added out of the Nomo­canon Church-story, and Primitive Fathers, concurring with, and giving strength, to such the Relations; and the Grounds he de­livers it from is such, that a Man may swear, 'twas his bloated conceit of his Name at the Fount, like gild to the Pills, possessed with as aery a Phancy, that any thing would down of his wrapping up, in the following Pages, could engage him to it. I confess could any one have found such things out, none likelier than he, his Zeal and Industry being singular, I wish his Integrity had been so too, he sel­dom missing of any thing within the compass of his designed subject, that may be any ways useful to his present Plot and Enquiry, had he as little fail'd in his use and applying of them. The places he produces for Evidence in his Treatise De Synedriis, lib. 1. cap. 10. pag. 318. is out of the Sixteenth Code Theo­dosian, Tit. 5. Lex. 6. where Gratianus, Va­lentinianus and Theodosius, thus give the charge to Eutropius (not Hesperius as he) That all Hereticks, especially such as oppose the Nicene Faith, Ab omnium summoti Eccle­siarum [Page 147] limine, penitus arceantur, communione Sanctorum inhibentur, &c. with others to the same purpose in the following Laws, both here and in the Justinian Code. That Justi­nian oft, in his own Name, thus speaks, Anathematizamus, Anathematizentur, sub Ex­communicatione fiet, &c. and which are to be found, Code. lib. 1. That such be not suffer'd to come into the Church, be inhibited the Communion of Saints, we do anathematize them, Let him be Anathematized, let him be under Excommunication, &c. by which, all that can be meant, is only this, and which is the Province of every good Christian Go­vernor, to see that the Laws of the Church be duly put in Execution; that the royal Will and Pleasure is, it should be so; the Laws and Canons of the Church, the Rule of Faith to be believed and adhered to, requi­ring it, and to which his Imperial concur­rence is annexed, which he confirms and strengthens by his Autority, and will stand by in the Execution; as 'tis explain'd, No­vel. 42. and that is to be his sense, if the Codes may interpret themselves, which is much more proper than for Selden to do it; it being there most certain that the judicial Act was from the Church, and Phrases must be interpreted according to the present Sub­ject, and designed Matter, and no more is meant, then, that Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all Godly Prin­ces in Holy Scripture, by God himself, that they should rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their Charge by God, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal, and re­strain [Page 148] with the Sword the stubborn and evil doers, as 'tis expressed in our Seven and thirtieth Article; and he himself confesses unawares, in the next lines, having a Quota­tion to bring in, and cannot either omit it, or tell where else to do it, That they only simply judged them cursed of God, [...], as in the Georgick Laws; and that their design was, they should be notabiles, and marked out for it, by whose act and ju­dicial Sentence, 'tis not express'd. And what he brings out of the Hundred and three and twentieth Novel. cap. 11. and Photius his Nomocanon. 9.9. to prove it the Act of the Empire, is quite another thing, and none but he arrived to that strange Presumption; as to believe, that every one that reads his Book is sworn to his Name and Words, could possibly have produced them. The Emperor only there takes care that Excommunication be according to the Church Canons, suita­bly, as Ecclesiastici hoc Canones fieri jubent, (in the Nomocanon) the formal Power and Act is always supposed to be in, and to be done by the Bishop, or Priest; if the Bishop or Presbyter Excommunicate otherwise than as the Canons enjoyn, the Person so Excom­municated is to be absolved by another Bi­shop, or Presbyter, who has the inspection of them, à Majore Sacerdote in the Novel; and that Bishop or Presbyter that did the wrong, is to be censured by the Bishop, under whose Inspection, or in whose district he is, and lye under the Mulct at his Plea­sure; nor is there one word sounds that way, that the Emperor did Excommunicate. Nor [Page 149] can the Emperor with any more shew of rea­son, be said to pass the formal Sentence of Excommunication, by taking care, and ma­king Provision that it be done according to the Laws and Canons of the Church, than he can be said to make Articles of Faith, and determine in the high Points of the Trinity, for which he appoints that the first Council at Nicea shall be the Rule, and often enacts and resolves it shall be so explain'd and be­lieved, and professed accordingly, as in that Council. He may as well be said to make Creeds, which he enjoyns to be done, but by the Patriarchs and Bishops, and the par­ticular Faith, to be professed by them, or to Baptize, for which Directions are given, especially about Re-baptization, and he judges him unfit for the Priesthood, that does it, Cod. Justinian. l. 1. Tit. 6. Ne Bap­tismus iteretur, he may no otherwise be said to Excommunicate, than to obstruct Conver­sion, or hinder Repentance; and yet 'tis the Imperial Edict against, and Punishment upon Apostates, Nè unquam in Pristinum statum re­vertentur, nè flagitium morum obliterabitur Poe­nitentiâ, Cod. 16. Theodos. Tit. 6. l. 1. that they are never to return to their ancient state, that the vileness of their Manners be never blotted out by Repentance, intimating only the greatness of the Sin, and the height of his indignation against them; or that he did publickly officiate in his own Person in the daily Sacrifices, because he takes care for a just Performance of the publick Liturgies and Services, and when he declares against Oaths and Blasphemies, that the guilt is not [Page 150] antecedent, and from another Sanction, No­vel. 78. and to put an end to these like in­stances, that he Ordains in Person, and makes Priests, by whom so many Laws and Rules, and Limitations, and Qualifications are set and appointed, as is above to be seen. But as for this last instance, Mr. Selden has found out so handsom an expedient for the Original of Holy Orders otherways, and thereby ren­ders them so accidentally trifling, inconside­rable a thing, that he answers his aim, eva­cuates and baffles so effectually, all Church-Power; and indeed, upon his Hypothesis, so inconsiderable a thing it is, that a Church­man would not desire it upon such terms; much less is it a Prerogative fit for a King; a Jewel for the embellishing the Crown Impe­rial, so that he needs not contend to have this in the Magistrate as he doth the Church Censures; He tells us, De Synedriis, lib. 1. cap. 14. pag. 569, 570, 571. and lib. 2. cap. 7. pag. 313, 314, &c. That Holy Orders has no more in it, than an imitation of that particu­lar School, wherein St. Paul was educated under Gamaliel; where it was usual for one that had arrived to a degree of Eminence above others, as that of a Doctor; to ap­point and send out others under, and after, him. And so St. Paul did in the managery of his Apostleship. But did our Saviour also take this great Example of Gamaliel's School in his Eye, when he sent forth his Twelve and Seventy? or was it from his particular Edu­cation in some such place, he took his Au­tority and Platform? or did the Holy Ghost do the l [...]ke, when placing Overseers in that [Page 151] Church, which Christ had Purchased with his own Blood? was not, as the Purchase, that of his own Blood, so the Power by which he gathered and established it, that All Power in Heaven and Earth, first given unto him, pe­culiar and extraordinary? or did St. Paul himself say, it was from Gamaliel's School, or from the Will of any Man, or from the Will of God, he received his Apostleship himself? and thereby had a Power to depute others, as Timothy and Titus. And surely un­less his bare fiction of Story, and Eutopian Plot, must go for Truth, and without any search and enquiry, there can be nought in it to engage any assent, or adherency unto it; it is so precarious a begg'd thing, that only those that deserve to be begg'd them­selves can believe it; and Mr. Selden doubt­less pleased himself mightily, to think how many fools it would meet with, and he was sure of others of as ill a mind and design with himself, to tread under foot the Mini­stry when it was down, that it rise no more, especially at that time, when he wrote, at least, laid the contrivance of, those his Tracts De Synedriis, when the Sword of the Liber­tine alone bore rule, and he took the advan­tage of it. Nor has any one reason to be­lieve that he bore better Will to the King than to the Church, for he was a Member of that Rebellious Parliament of Forty Two, and continued actually amidst them, and bore a special sway in their Traiterous Actings; and however his Pretence was, That all Church-Power as from Christ was an Imposture; and invading the Prerogative [Page 152] of the Crown, it was in reality only to serve his Parliamentary Designs, to take away the chief Support of the Crown, that Church which mostly upheld it; and 'twas a sadder Sight yet, to see it, not only the usual fate of common Subjects, but the Case of the greatest Prince then in Europe, to be first stript of his Crown and Kingly Power, to be made and publish'd a Bankrupt in the State, lost as to his worldly Imployments, and then made a Priest, to have only the Power and Benefit of his Clergy, remaining in, and confirm'd unto, him.

§. XXIV THE sum of all is this, The Empire it self never made any thing Law, that related to the Church, but what was first made Canon, by the Church it self, and those Powers al­ways took their Direction from Church-men, either in full Council, or from the Practice of particular Churches, or eminent Bishops of the Christian World, and superadded their own Sanctions, put under it their Secular Arm, adjoyn'd their Autority, to support, and stablish them; all those Directions to the several Patriarchs, Exarchs, Primates and Metropolitans, were only to see their own Results at Councils practiced, all the Edicts, Laws, Novels and Constitutions, were first Church-Law, and then the Law of the Em­pire, receiv'd into the World and imbodied with it; and all the Injunctions, Rules, Di­rections and Limitations, we there meet withal, were Rule before, only the outward Penal Coercive part (which Power the Church never had, never pretended to) was conjoyned with them, for the surer more due [Page 153] Execution, even where the Empire was in­clined to Heresie, as sometimes it was; their own Bishops and Councils were first call'd and consulted, their Advice and Directions followed. What was purely Secular, the Emperor's own, and of himself, was his Grace and Royal Favour, in condescending and yielding to the Church's Determinations, and the many Immunities he invested their Persons withal, were all his own choice, as it was to be a Christian, no Power besides could, none attempted to, force it upon him; none ever made Canons, but Church-men; that is, Rules purely relating to the Church of God, only the Prince has the outward Coercive Power, by force, and bodily pre­sent Penalties to constrain and compel their Execution. Or where Princes assumed of their own devices, as particular Extravagant Actions still have been, and will be again; nor do they amount to the breaking a gene­ral Rule, the Church still so far opposed, as to remonstrate upon the encroachment, to assert their Supreme Power as from Christ, although they suffer for it, and after Empe­rors have altogether voided them. This I have already made good in part, and it will farther appear from the several Emperors Concessions, Acknowledgments, and Decla­rations to the World; that none but bare, open, foreheads to any thing, dare gain­say it.

HONORIƲS and Theodosius the Emperors §. XXV make Laws and imbody in the Empire, what Canons they found made, and if any farther Doubts arise, they are to be reserved Sancto [Page 154] judicio, for the Holy Judgment of the most Reverend Patriarch of Constantinople, as Su­preme in Religion, and to the Convention of the Clergy, Cod. Justinian, l. 1. Tit. 2. Lex. 6. and which he transcribed out of the Theodosian Cod. 16. Tit. l. 45. and, by recei­ving into his own, confirmed. Valentinianus and Marcian make void all Pragmatick San­ctions, which by Favour or Ambition were gained against the Ecclesiastical Canons, 1. lib. Tit. 12. l. 1. Zeno calls it the state of Ty­ranny, where there is Innovations against the Church, and its setled Constitutions, he calls the times wicked, and those Laws and Constitutions impious, and confirms all the Priviledges his Royal Predecessors had grant­ed to Holy Church, Lex. 16. ibid. 'Tis De­creed that all the Canons or Holy Ecclesiasti­cal Rules made by the Four first General Councils, obtain the force of a Law, Novel. 131. cap. 1. Nor can we think that the Christian Empire could do less, when these very Canons are esteemed by them as the Holy Scriptures, ibid. Novel. 131. [...], God himself directing the Speakers of them. As Leo the Emperor of the Canons in Gene­ral. Constitut. 2. ad finem Novel. and which Expressions, though they might be over ex­travagant; yet it shews to the World, how the Emperors thought of the Autority and Canons of the Church, what a Precedency they gave unto them. Justinian openly speaks it, and calls them Sacras & Divinas Regulas, Holy and Divine Laws, Quas etiam nostrae se­qui non dedignantur leges, and that himself [Page 155] in framing his Laws, does not disdain to follow them, and which he Commands his Praefectus Praetorio to make known by Publica­tion to the whole World, Epilog. ibid. and Novel. 6. Epilog. what he enjoyns all Patri­archs, Metropolitans, Bishops and Clergy, under a civil Punishment, if not observing it, is only what Church-men had before ap­pointed; 'tis all [...], by virtue, and in observancy, of the Sacred Canons foregoing, [...], the Judgment of the Empire concurs with that of the Church, adding Nerves and Au­tority to its Predeterminations, and what to the Church seemed most convenient, Novel. 42. cap. 3. [...], Zeno Im­perator. Constitut. 9. when the Patriarch of Constantinople required of the said Emperor Zeno, that it might by the Law of the Em­pire be determined, concerning the time of Baptizing Children, and resolved him that he might do it without a formal Council, (which to call together to consult only about one Point, might be inconvenient) being directed as to the particular Matter; the Em­peror yielded to him, but told withal the Patriarch, Such things were to proceed from the Church, and not originally from him; and that in Holy Matters his Holiness ought to pass the Sanction, Constitut. 17. and if in these lesser things, and Circumstantials, much more in the weightiest Church-Matters, as Abstentions, Excommunications, Depositions, is the Church to be followed, are her De­terminations [Page 156] and Judicial Acts to precede, and so they did. Among all the Temporal Punishments upon Hereticks and Schisma­ticks, none was inflicted, till by the Coun­cils and Bishops rejected, the Clerk that is unfaithful in his Office, the Bishop is com­manded first to depose him, and then fol­lows the Secular Judgment; as in the Theo­dosian Code. supra ultimum Supplicium, a far­ther Punishment succeeds, and which Diony­sius Gothofred interprets to be Death, in his Notes upon Cod. Justinian, lib. 1. Tit. lib. 3.3. (though I cannot assent to him in that, find­ing no Sanguinary Laws in those Cases) with many more of the like Nature which we have already produced.

§. XXVI AND now I think here is opportunity suf­ficient for Information, to any one into whose hands these Papers shall come, or that will receive it, what the Church-Power is in it self, and what the Power of the Empire, in Religious Matters; And particularly for Dr. Tillotson Dean of Canterbury, who in his Sermon April 2. 1680. Pag. 11, 12, on Joshua 24.15. has thus expressed himself: And to speak freely in this Matter, I cannot think (till I be better informed, which I am always ready to be) that any Pretence of Conscience warrants any Man, that is not extraordinarily Commissioned as the Apostles and first Publishers of the Gospel were, and cannot justifie that Com­mission by Miracles as they did, to Affront the Establisht Religion of a Nation (though it be false) and openly draw Men off from the Pro­fession of it, in Contempt of the Magistrate and Law, all that Persons of a different Religion can [Page 157] in such a case reasonably Pretend to, is to en­joy the Private and Exercise of their own Con­science and Religion; for which they ought to be very thankful, and to forbear the open making of Proselytes to their own Religion (though they be never so sure that they are in the right) till they have either an extraordinary Commission from God to that Purpose, or the Providence of God make way for it by the Permission of the Magistrate. That there has been always a Spiritual, Ecclesiastical Power in the World, as derived, and received once by the Holy Ghost, and not of Man, so preserved, and propagated, devolved and continued from the same Fountain, in order to the first great end, for the support and continuance of the same Religion, though the extraordinary Com­missions have ceased, which the Apostles and firsh Publishers of the Gospel had, though by present Miracles not to be justified. And this equally enabling and warranting the Church of God, such as can evidence the Succession of Power, in its own and appointed way, as when Miracles were annexed, to affront, is an improper Speech, but to Teach, Declare and Protest against the Establish'd Religion of a Nation if a false one, openly to draw Men off from the Profession of it, in Contempt, is again an ill Expression, but in different ways and rules of Duty, then those false ones of the Law and Magistrate; though the Men of the World do Publish their dislike and threaten and punish, and go on into a Law against them, as they did when Christianity was first Taught, and Church-Power first came down, was setled and professed in the [Page 158] World; though the Kings of the Earth stand up together, and the Rulers take Council, they rise up as one Man, as did Herod and Pontius Pilate, and all the Gentiles, against the Child Jesus; as it was then the Apostles, so is it no less our Duty, thus to speak before Kings, and not be ashamed. Church-Power came first into the World, as not from the School of Gamaliel, so nor from the Thrones of Kings; and 'tis independant and distant as in its rise, so in its execution, though em­bellish'd, assisted and strengthened, advan­taged much, by the outward favours of Prin­ces, their many Adjuncts and royal Appen­dages, and which where conferr'd, will equally embellish and add to their own Crowns, to be sure, in Heaven. And upon these terms to suffer, will be our Duty, if what we profess be not received, it will amount to Martyrdom. If the King's wrath be the return, and our Doctrine with our selves be cast out; and if we do not this, it will come too near the Traditores, in the days of the Donatists, or to those that offer'd at Heathen Shrines in the Persecutions be­fore, what will it be, but to give up our Bibles and Profession, upon the Summons of any prevailing Party, to give up, to be sure, our Church-Power, and which amounts to, in effect the same; nor can Christianity con­tinue without it, when upon Perswasion of the Arians; first, upon point, as he thought, of interest, receiving his Father's Will from an Arian Priest; and then by the Miletians, joyning with them, Constantius the Emperor engaged against the Faith of one Substance; [Page 159] and great and rigorous Persecutions were its consequent. Athanasius and his followers, that adhered to the Nicene Faith in that Do­ctrine, did not therefore in point of Consci­ence submit, and say nothing, with but si­lence, give over and desert the Truth; but the rather were more vigorous, and active for it, even to the greatest Calumnies and Distresses, which through the malicious in­stigations of the Arians and Meletians, (as evil Men always unite against Truth) the Empe­ror laid upon them. And though Liberius of Rome and Hosius of Corduba, (this latter the ancientest Bishop then in the Christian World, and who was one of the Council of Nice, and Penned that Creed,) and Gregory Nazianzen, and others, even the whole World becoming Arians, (as St. Jerome complain'd) by the height of Threats, and succession of Miseries, after sharp trials and resistancies, did at length submit and subscribe to their Doctrines, yet it cost them both repentance and tears; as Gregory Nazianzen declares in particular in the Life of Athanasius. And all this they did, and thought themselves bound in Conscience to do, not as extraordi­narily Commissioned as the Apostles and first Publishers of the Gospel were, as warranted and justified by Miracles, but as commissionated, in course by their Holy Orders, instated with the same Autority, though not in so open a shew, and equally bound to render an account to God, of such their trust and charge committed then and therewith unto them, as the same Stewards of his Mysteries, and this, not upon the receipt of any new [Page 160] Revelation from Heaven; but upon the score of their ordinary Ministry, con­tending for the Faith once delivered to the Saints, guided and directed by the Tradition of Faith, delivered by the A­postles, and conserv'd in the Church by a continued devolution, and to which St. Athanasius and all the Catholick Bishops, which strove against Arianism, always re­ferr'd themselves, and is evident on all Oc­casions from Church History; as Socrat. Eccl. Hist. l. 2. c. 46. l. 3. c. 7. Athanasius, ad Se­rapion. ad Epictet. Ep. that Faith into which, when recommended to him, and explain'd, the Emperor Theodosius was Baptized, Socrat. Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 6. upon which rule all the Councils proceeded, in their Conciliary Acts and Determinations, as Can. 13. Conc. Nic. 1. Can. 19. Conc. Hab. in Trullo. Can. 2. Conc. 2. Nic. Athanas. Orat. 1. Cont. Arios; and they proceeding upon this bottom what they De­creed, is to be receiv'd for Truth by all Christians, is to be subscribed and assented to, is to be taught before Kings, when de­nying of it; 'twas this Theodosius himself ac­knowledged at his Death, 'tis reputed as the Law, the Voice of God himself, as St. Basil ad Diodorum among his Canons, apud Pan­dect. Can. Beverig. and so by Constantine the Emperor, in Socrates, Hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 9. & Sozom. l. 1. cap. 20. 25. and in particu­lar, it will be expected, that that common [...], that usual shift be omitted, so u­sual among us, when this known Power of the Church is urged. That 'tis accidental only in its Original, introduced by the pre­sent [Page 161] necessity, and upon a common consent and compact; the Christians being then un­der Heathen Governors, to whose Judicatures it was neither for their Safety nor Honor to Appeal, and stand their Trial and Verdict; and therefore they resolv'd it all into the chief Church-men, and which Power, Con­stantine becoming Christian, and so the suc­ceeding Emperors, confirmed by his Royal Autority, and continued, of his own choice and motion unto them. This is the common tattle of the wiser Men, as they think, and are generally so reputed, reporting it to the World, with much Confidence; and yet upon no other ground than old Womens Stories are told and bottom'd, at the far­thest; they'l tell you, that Mr. Selden and Mr. Hobs said so; and every one is as secure of its Autority and Credit, as if they had read it in the Gospel of our Saviour, or in one of St. Paul's Epistles, when 'tis all as false as the Gospel it self is true. Great and many were the Priviledges, Royal Favours and Im­munities, that Constantine bestow'd upon the Church and Church-men, he receiv'd them with both hands, and with him in the Come­dy, could he have found a third, he would have gave it them. He annex'd to them Ad­juncts and Appendages, which their Lord and Master, Christ Jesus, did not, could not, would not do, his Kingdom being not of this World; nor was it his business to divide In­heritances, and he had all the reason in the world for it, Christianus nulli Inimicus praeser­tim Imperatori, as Tertullian; a Christian is an Enemy to no Man, especially the Emperor, [Page 162] whom he acknowledges, as a Man immedi­ately under God, that receives his Power only from God; nor hath any Man a Power above and beyond him; to Obey and Serve him is his Conscience, his Religion, and he expects his Heaven, his eternal Salvation by it; and indeed Christianity is the great, truly rational, permanent Support of King­doms, and Bodies Politick. What favour Constantine shew'd the Christians, was his real particular Interest, and perhaps he could not have retain'd his Empire, had not the Christian Bishops been of his side, without their Aid and Assistance; and, as by them his Crown might be fixed the more firm and se­cure on his Head, who yet gave him not his Original Right unto it, for that was his, up­on other terms than his Christianity he pro­sessed; nor did they add one cubit to his Power in this sense, Dominion is not founded in Grace; so did they receive from him his outward aid and assistance, for the more due and advantageous execution of that Power they had, but not from him; they had exer­cised before he was Emperor, though per­haps with less success, by a Donation ante­cedent to his, by a Right from Christ Jesus; thus the Empire became their Nursing-Father, to support and encourage, but did not, could not give their Power, as Church-men unto them. As God gave to the Empire the Go­vernment of the World, so he gave to the Bishops the Government of the Church, and which they were to use for the Empires ad­vantage; but might not use it against him: And all this Constantine well knew, and was [Page 163] highly sensible of, as were his Succession that was Christian, still acknowledging Church-Power from another hand; nor was it in the arm of Flesh, by favour or frowns, as to its Power purely from above, to extinguish or enlarge it. I'le con­clude this Section and Chapter with that of St. Austin, Ep. 165. Quia Constantinus [...] aus [...] est de causa Episcopi judicare, eam discu­tiendam & finiendam Episcopis delegavit. And again, Ibid. Imperatores non si in errore es­sent, quod absit, pro errore suo contra verita­tem leges darent, per quas justi & probarentur & coronarentur, non faciendo quod illis jube­rent, quia Deus prohiberet. Religion, as such, falls not under the Determination of the Prince; and if he gives Laws against Truth, the Just will be both Tried and Crown'd in disobeying him.

Chap. 3.CHAP. III.

IT returns then with more force and strength, what was laid down in the §. I beginning of the foregoing Chapter, That Church-Power is a Specifick, a Consti­tution of its own, originally from Heaven, deliver'd by Christ to his select Apostles, Men chosen from all other, fill'd with the Holy Ghost for the Service of Mankind, in the propagating Christianity, to speak be­fore Kings, every where and in all Circum­stances, to declare and publish it, a Power li­mited to their Persons, to be retain'd within themselves; and as no Heads but their own receiv'd it, so no Hands but their own could devolve and conveigh it to others, only as their own Prudence saw fit, was it derived, and in what measures and degrees they plea­sed, [Page 166] as the World came into the Church, Believers were made, the Harvest grew great, and there needed more Labourers to be sent forth into it; a Power, I say, recei­ved for the use of others, the advantage of Mankind, in the Successions of it; not for one single Purpose and Action, as were seve­ral Commissions and Delegations both before and under the Law, and one at the entrance of the Gospel, viz. That given to St. John Baptist, but to erect a new and standing Go­vernment, and this to continue till the World is no more, and then only is the Kingdom to be delivered up to the Father, whose is the Kingdom and the Power and the Glory, for ever and ever, Amen. And St. Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Romans, and which place we had occasion to use before, tells us, That the Apostles receiving Commands, and im­bued with a full certitude by the Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and confirmed by the Word of God, with all fulness of the Holy Ghost, they went out declaring the com­ing of the Kingdom of God, and Preaching through the Regions and Cities, they consti­tuted Bishops and Deacons, in order to those that should believe, knowing by our Lord Jesus Christ, that Contentions would arise by reason of the Episcopacy, or Power of the Ministry; and therefore having a perfect fore-knowledge, as they constituted the fore-mentioned Bishops; so they afterwards gave them Rules for Ordinations, that others, Approved Men, might succeed in the Places of such as should die, and execute such their Offices; the Consult and Design was laid [Page 167] for future Ages also. A Power and Autority framing and fashioning Believers into a Body, not an accidental casual concurrency of Peo­ple only, but a Community, well and duly associated, every part proportionably fitted and put together, increasing with the increase of God, in which all things are to be done, [...], decently and in order, as the Lord commanded, [...], as St. Clemens there goes on, not without Rea­son and Rules, [...], where, at appointed, fixed seasons and hours, Oblations and Holy Servi­ces are to be offered and performed, [...], and in what Place, and by what Persons. God has appointed, that all things being religiously Performed, and according to his Will, they may be grateful and ac­ceptable unto him, where every Man has his Order and Station, [...], and therein gives his Thanks to God, or serves him in his Publick Worship, expressed by that one principal Branch or Performance. To the chief Priest, [...], are his Offices appropriated, to the Priest or Presbyter, [...], a special Province is assigned, and the Levites have their own Ministry incum­bent upon them. The Lay-man, [...], is confined to his Laick Affairs, a Body it is like to that of an Army, and which this Apostolical Person there recommends to their Consideration, where the Souldier is under the Captain, [...], how in order? how in readiness? and in all subjection, executing Commands, and Obeying, where all are not [Page 168] Praetors or Rulers of Thousands, nor Rulers of Hundreds, nor Rulers of Fifties, every one in his Station and Sphere, discharges, what of the King and Tribunes is enjoyned him, where the great cannot be without the less, nor the less without the great; in which is a yielding, a mixture and condescension, and all becomes useful, [...], &c. May then this our Bo­dy be kept whole and entire in Christ Jesus; and every one be subject, according to that Order in which by the Grace of God he is placed. So that Apostolical Person goes on, and so are his Prayers, as well as Directions; as is to be seen at large in that his Epistle. A Collection, Community, or Body, gather'd out of the World; and so not of it, as with a differing Head, so by another infusion, dif­fering Laws, diverse Offices, for quite ano­ther end, and with Powers for a present Peace, which the World cannot give unto us, Ye are my Body, saith our Saviour; and each one Members in particular; his Body which is the Church, ye are not of this World, so Christ tells his followers again, are neither the Subjects of it, nor from its Powers, receive neither Rules, nor Measures, by it.

§. II AND surely then, as a Body in and of it self, so to Rule and Govern it self, to exe­cute its own jurisdiction, to pass its own Laws and Sanctions, to allot its rewards and penalties, to receive and shut out, to censure or remit, to provide for a Succession; in e­very thing furnished for self-existency and preservation; in a word, if there be a [Page 169] Church upon earth, a body, whose head is Christ, and each Believer, Members in par­ticular, if any thing like a visible Associati­on, the Rules, and Laws, and Reasons, of all Associations in general enjoyn this; nor can that Community be supposed, such as is the Christian in particular, to subsist under another, live in dependency upon, or by its concessions, whose call and separation was on purpose to be another thing from it, which had the grant for its being, to reduce and recall, in some Cases to gainsay, and thwart it, which is so fram'd and contrived, as to be, and increase, under the severest of its frowns, and the most raging Persecutions, from those very Powers of this World, which in its lay and make, was to have the Kings of the Earth stand up, and the Rulers to take Council together against it. Our Saviour, who knew all things, who had the full design of his Father in his Head, and before him, knew also the several Accidents and Contin­gencies that would befall the Church, and his Wisdom provided suitably; he did not leave his Church, as the Ostrich in Job did her young ones, that every foot might crush and kill them; nor did he Build upon those Sands either, that every Wind which blows, and Storm which descends, could destroy her, and which he must have done if founding his Church purely in Subordination to the secu­lar Arm, to the Wills and Passions of Prin­ces; which Experience tells us, how various, how mutable, and disorderly they have some­times been; even the best of them, has but the breath in his Nostrils; and yet even the [Page 170] worst of them, the greatest, and a succession too, of Tyrants, has never been able to dis­solve this Community, to erase its Founda­tions. To erect a Body solitary and alone, without its own Laws, and a strength, that is singular, to subsist and be Ruled by a Fo­reign Power, and that is extraneous to it, is in course to be swallow'd up, throughly ab­sorpt thereby. And 'tis again as bad or worse, where every private Member is not obliged to such its own Constitutions, and Jurisdictions, this is Anarchy and Confusion, which God cannot be the Author of; the So­ciety must on these terms equally dissolve and perish, be as liable to Invasions as before. Our Saviour therefore erected his Corporation in­dependent to the Secular Power, but depen­dent, and in subordination, as to its own Members, and to one another; and if any be unruly, and do not submit, to the Laws of their Body, some of which are unchangea­ble, and as the Sun, for evermore; others occasional, and in the Prudence and Discre­tion of the present Governors, Penal Laws, Abstentions, Interminations, Excision it self is to follow, the Church Censures most justly pass upon them; nor ought they to have any benefit of that Body, can they indeed, if such disorders permitted, which they so rent in pieces, and which by such their Rebellions, in course must decay, be rendred unservice­able to themselves and others.

§. III AND that this special Power is derived and thus limited to the Church, is what, as as the common reason, so the common sense of Mankind, must assent and submit unto, it [Page 171] is notorious to the common Senses; nor is there any one Demonstration carries more Evidence along with it; 'tis as plainly and legibly set before our Eyes, as Christ Cruci­fied, was before the Eyes of the Galatians, Gal. 3.1. upon the common Sense, and tra­ditional conveyance of Mankind, as evident­ly seen from one to another, by handing it downwards, as those particular Persons who stood under the Cross, did see and behold Christ distended and dying upon it; and yet so foolish and bewitched were those very Ga­latians as to dissent from, and make of none effect Christ Crucified unto them; and there are of the same unhappy temper still amongst us, that deny and exclude this Succession of Church-Power now, and in whom to recti­fie and undeceive. By answering such Obje­ctions they produce in their own behalf, is what I am in the next place to undertake. Their grand Objection runs thus. To assert a Church-Power independent, and residing in differing Subjects, from that of the State, must be a restraint to the Civil Power, or that Power of the State, to erect an Autority against it; because not of, and under it; that Prince cannot be said to be Supreme, if a differing Power within him; To be Su­preme is to be above all, there must be no Power apart from his, who is the Supreme, if so, he is not Supreme. This they urge with a great deal more to the same purpose, and is the Stone that the great Hugo Grotius stumbles at, in the entrance to his Treatise, De jure Summarum Potestatum in Sacris, and which occasions so many more falls he has all [Page 172] along in that Discourse; it being stuffed with inconsistencies to it self throughout; and no wonder, when bottomed on so false a Principle, that the Power of our Saviour is an Usurpation on the State; nor does one absurdity go alone. A Suspition upon Church-Government that has not the Honor to be new, 'tis as old as our Saviour in the Flesh, and Herod we know started it against him so soon as Born in the World, and his Title as King was known unto him; for this he sought to kill him when an Infant, and the little Children in Bethlehem were barbarously Mur­dered, hoping the Babe Jesus might have died in the croud; distrusting, if he esca­ped, he would have supplanted him of his Kingdom. Nor did his Apostles after him, escape the Suspition and Censure; and yet, our Saviour all along his life-time upon Earth, and notoriously at his death, still clear'd himself of the Aspersion, asserting and maintaining his Power and Kingdom de­livered him of the Father, that All Power in Heaven and Earth; and so did his Apo­stles too, retain and exercise the same Power, and with the same Innocency. Nor do I doubt but to Vindicate his Body the Succeed­ing Church, still claiming the like Power, and that to every rational considering Per­son, to each one, that with Herod, has not a design, and believes it his interest, to kill our Saviour, to blot out his Power, and Name and Memory on Earth.

§. IV AND indeed to pass by the particular An­swers to the Objection, which will follow in course upon our Procedure, the Objection [Page 173] must fall of it self, to any one of common sense, that exercises not his Enquiries more about Tricks and Phrases, to wheedle, de­lude, and carry on his own particular Plot, and Party; then about that which is notori­ous Matter of Fact, certain Truths, and rea­lities. One thing I know, that whereas I was blind I now see, a Man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the Pool of Siloam, and wash; And I went and washed, and I received sight. He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. This was the Answer of the Man that was born Blind and cured by our Saviour, John 9.11.15.25. and this great notoriety to common sense baffled all the Malice and Purposes, superseded all their trifling En­quiries, designed to obscure the Power and Miracle of our Saviour's working that mighty Cure upon him; as whether it was done on the Sabbath Day! the Person was a Sin­ner! &c. and the same common sense and notoriety of Matter of Fact, will be our Evi­dence and Avoucher in this our particular Case also, and is the alone Answer we need to give in, able indeed to baffle whatever the Skill of an Objector can lay, or whatever in­consistencies the wit of Man may urge a­gainst us. Can any, even a Pharisaical race of Men, ill-natur'd and Perverse, give out and believe, That, that Body of Christians, their Bishops and Governors, should Assert and Maintain a Kingdom and Jurisdiction up­on Earth, destructive to that of the Empire, or Secular, by whose breath, they in their Persons professed to subsist; for whose Per­sons [Page 174] and Government, and the Prosperity of both, they always Pray'd; and in the first place, as by whose Influences they were to live Godly lives, in all Godliness and Ho­nesty, whose Battels they fought, whom they Honoured with all the titles of Power, and Majesty, and Magnificence, whom but to think Evil of, to Curse in their Hearts, in their Bed-Chambers, much more openly to Defame and speak Evil of, was their Sin and Irreligion, whom they acknowledged upon Earth, as under God alone, and to God alone accountable for all their Actions and Designs, nor could any Man say what doest thou? And all this they still Remonstrated and Publish'd to the World, under the deepest sense of Religion and Zeal, with the most solemn Pro­testations, as in all their Apologies, Defen­ces and Writings does appear; who made it a term of their Communion, to Serve, Sup­port, and Assist the Emperor; to shew them­selves Faithful and Just, and Conscientious towards him, equally as to serve their God and Saviour, as to say their Prayers for themselves, and live Righteously and Sober­ly in the World; and the contrary was a just occasion for their Censures, an Intermi­nation upon the Offender, who too often died under their Tyranny, came peaceably to the Stake, neither accusing nor reviling, as under the stroke of God himself, sealing with their Blood, such their Obedience. Nor in all our first Church-Story do we find the Catholick Christian engaged in any thing like a Plot, or Council, against his Governor, his either Person or Power; much less an [Page 175] open Rebel against him, when either an Heathen or Heretick, and his professed Per­secutor; for an Heretick has been no less Cruel than an Heathen: and when to make up the Charge by their Malice, as in the particular case of Athanasius, accused, as de­signing against the Empire by the Arians and Meletians, to be accused was his great trou­ble, to be under the Suspition of so foul a Crime, being otherways able to acquit him­self, and so he did; and indeed so generally received a Truth was it, that a Christian could not be a Rebel, or attempt any thing upon the Empire. So much was it concluded of the Essence of his Profession, that when his Enemies thought effectually to blemish, and make him appear no Christian, they li­bell'd him as a Rebel; the more and the better a Christian, the more did his Prince confide in him, and 'tis very well urg'd by our Adversaries, that Constantine did look upon them as his great Support and Preser­vers; nor could the Empire in all Probabi­lity have been continued to him, without their Aid and Fidelity; and for which his Fa­vours and Temporalities, were deservedly large unto them; but this is their Error when they tell the World, that all Church-Power was then, and is still, continued upon this score, and by the alone favour of Princes.

IF it be said that all this was the effect §. V alone of common Prudence, and usual Wis­dom, they thus provided for their interest, the Security in general of their both Reli­gion and Persons, and which all Wise Men do in the first place take care of, they were [Page 176] wanting both of Power and Opportunity to do otherwise; and had it not been so, the Hypocrisie had ceased, they had both appea­red and acted, as their Principle of indepen­dent Power, receiv'd of the Lord Jesus, did influence and in course suggest unto them, set up against and oppose the Empire. So Bu­chanan and Knox give the reason, why the Apostles did not Mutiny and Rebel for the Gospel, as they did in Scotland; because they wanted Power, had neither Force, nor Opportunity as had they. And the same was the usual Plea, of our Presbyterian Classical Men, both in their Pulpits and Printed Pam­phlets, in defence of their Rebellions Refor­mation against King Charles the First; and too many of the Romish Doctors urge the same for the Maintenance of the Bishop of Romes Omnipotency, laying claim to both Swords; the wielding and executing both Governments, and disposing of the Kingdoms of Princes, from a Donation and Right by Christ Jesus. To which my Answer is, That whatever particular designing Sects may have asserted or done, and which I cannot be sup­posed to be engaged to defend; nor need I attempt their Confutation, where the Plea in it self is so Notorious and Criminal, to urge and conclude these things against these Primitive Professors and Doctors of the Church, against the Apostles themselves, to suggest against and implead them of, Hypo­crisie and unsincere Dealings, underhand De­signs and Actings, against the most frequent Protestations to the contrary, where no one outward, overt Act has appear'd, or but col­lateral [Page 177] Evidence, or one Circumstance, im­plying it; where the whole course of their Lives and Conversations visible to outward sense, was quite contrary, this is what is against the common Faith of Mankind; and the whole race and make is impleaded and condemned at once, as reserved and persi­dious, without Faith or Honesty, and in par­ticular, is it Scandalous and to the dishonor of our common Christianity, when the first Divulgers, and most eminent after-Professors of it, upon whose Fidelity alone depends its Reception and Imbracement, by whose hands it came to us, and who sealed it with their Blood, are so notoriously double-hearted and handed, are not to be believ'd in their com­mon Actions, and singular Protestations; and the censure it self is the more odious and abominable, because in all Probability, they did not want Power, and the Objectors them­selves suppose and concede i [...]; for they say the Christians were the Support of Constan­tine's Crown, and indeed so numerous and considerable, of so much repute were they, and so great influence had the Christians in and over the World, as to turn the Scale which way they pleased to lean, to declare for and assist, and consequently ground e­nough they had to have themselves grasped the Scepter, had they believed it annexed to their Christian Kingdom, had it been de­rivable from Christ Jesus, or had they had but thoughts of making attempt upon it, an injured right lies not long concealed, especial­ly on such bottoms, nor is a Zeal for its recovery, usually long suppressed, the late [Page 178] Boutefeaus, and Zeloti of the Age, upon a like mistaken ground, give over fresh instances to the contrary. He that reads over the 37 Chapter of Tertullian's Apology against the Gentiles, will there find, That the Christians in his time, were no ways inconsiderable, ei­ther as to Number, Power, or Opportuni­ty; they could in one Night burn down their City, or joyn openly with Neighbour-Ene­mies, which were numerous, and greater than all the World besides; such as the Mar­comanni and Parthians; they fill'd both their Cities and Isles, and Castles, and Corpora­tions, and Councils, and Tents, and Tribes, and Companies, the Palace, and the Senate and Market, they only relinquisht their Tem­ples, they were ready for any War to inequa­lity, they could baffle them, without Wea­pons or Fighting, only by Discords and Se­parations made among them, by leaving their Cities, and leaving only their Enemies there, to their amaze and astonishment, tran­planting to other Colonies; and besides all, lay them open to the incursions of Devils, and which they alone kept off, exorcised, and expelled from them. Now under all these advantages, whether real, or supposed, it matters not, so long as certainly believed, and thought such, where so many favouring Circumstances, could any Men sit down un­der an Usurpation? their right over Kings must have been asserted and demanded, and contended for, had they had any, or but fancied it, Qui tam libenter trucidamur, si non apud istam Disciplinam, magis occidi lice­ret, quam occidere, to be sure they could ne­ver [Page 179] so willingly have suffer'd and been kil­led, without resistance and opposition, only such was their Discipline and Instructions, rather to be killed, than to kill. Had they ever had thoughts of assuming to them­selves the Empire, or but exempting them­selves, by their Charter as Christians, from the Government of it.

'TWILL be much more agreeing with the §. Designs of our present Adversaries, and their Adherents, and also to the looser debaucht part of the Age we live in, and which will not be the only instance they oblige them in, to say these Holy Primitive Men were fools, that is, as they in their great Modesty phrase it, Men of weaker heads, and so allow of their Simplicity, and Integrity; and this is the more plausible and likelier way to render them cheap and contemptible, and their Ex­amples of no force; and so indeed they are at this day represented and accounted of, as Men of more Zeal, but less Knowledge, which Character goes for Current, and has the great Masters of our Assemblies, for the ei­ther Authors or Patrons of it. They thus through Ignorance and Inadvertency of the designs of our Saviour, usurp'd a Power and Regiment in the Church that was never pur­posed for, nor committed to them; and then through the same Ignorance, and super-added Zeal, farther asserted and defended it, not seeing the absurd and ill consequences at­tending it, the infinite unlimitedness of that Power, the vaster force and influence of such their Principles, grasping in all Govern­ment whatsoever, giving Laws and Rules to [Page 180] the Empire, when improved as it will bear, and more cunning Heads take it into their hands, have their particular Interests and Designs to serve upon, and maintain by it. But all this admitted, that the then Clergy were so stupid and sottish, serving only pre­sent Zeal and Ignorance, its Mother, that there was not one wise Man among them, to foresee, and consider, and determine, and which, with less Perswasions may be done, we can endure this Scandal upon our com­mon Faith, we contend too usually to have it so; what! was it so with the Laity too? with the Emperors themselves, their Court and Senate? or was it reserved alone for Mr. Selden and Mr. Hobs, and some few more of their Adherents, to see in such Causes, these fatal and noxious Effects? That a Church-Government, derived from Christ, independent to that which is Temporal, is not only an Usurpation in it self, but upon all Civil Government also, that these two are wholly inconsistent, and can no ways stand together? If they must all go for Fools in these great Mens opinions, undiscerning, un­considering Persons, we cannot help it. Sure it is they both acknowledged and abetted this very Church-Power, and saw not these killing Consequents, were aware of no such destroying aim upon themselves, thought the Power of the Empire not one whit the less, or their Persons to receive any abate­ment by it; and yet Men of reputed Fame and Renown, for all manner of Wisdom and Prowess in their Generations, nor would they actually forego, or but endure a lessening [Page 181] discourse of their Prerogative; and particu­larly their Care and Provision, in respect of Church-men was great and Eminent, that no Damage return to the Crown, upon any Pleas of Exemptions, or Priviledges derived from them. How severe they were in limit­ing them in their Ordinations, we have al­ready observed; that, by any Excessive Pra­ctice of that special Power, acknowledged in the Bishops alone, and still remov'd from themselves, the State might not be weakned, it being it seems too usual for Men of great Fortunes, and sufficient Abilities otherways, to Serve their Prince in his Wars or other Secular Imployments, to come into the Church, and receive Holy Orders, only to exempt themselves for the advantage of those Freedoms and Immunities invested in the Clergy, to crowd under the Church's Prote­ction for Ease and Idleness. And therefore the Bishops were forbad to Consecrate any such Persons, and many other such like Re­strictions are to be seen in the Imperial Laws and Constitutions. I'le instance in one or two of them. As that the Jews when Crimi­nal and under bad Circumstances, turn'd Christians only for Favour and an easier dis­charge in the Courts of Justice, were not to be received into the Church, nor imbodied among the Christians; Nor Servants and Debtors, which fled to the Altar to avoid their Masters and Creditors; and the Clergy that received them were first to be deposed, and then to be delivered over to the Civil Power, for farther Punishment, Cod. 9. Theodos. l. l. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. And surely the [Page 182] Empire that was so Industrious and Vigilant to preserve from Church-incroachments, such the Accessories of their Power and Govern­ment, that the meanest of their Subjects be not oppressed, by any such Plea or Charter; much greater must be their severity upon that Body or Community, if suspected in the Make and Constitution, to strike at the Ori­ginal Power it self, to lay Limits and far­ther inconveniencies upon their own Persons and Actions, to wrest the Government it self out of their hands; to Countermand and Supersede with their Canons, the most Sacred and Solemn of their Sanctions and Determi­nations. And though Clergy-men, as to eve­ry particular Person, or some lesser Colle­ction of them, may not be altogether Inno­cent, as to some attempts and incroachments upon the State, through Zeal ill guided, or incogitancy, or some particular designed in­terest, (for who Pleads that they are all ex­empted from all faults?) and suitably strict Provision was made by the Imperial Laws, to prevent or restrain, or punish; yet no one Law, or but Provision, was made, that we read of, against the Body of Christians themselves (unless by the Heathen Power de­signing an Extirpation) or their Power and Government as from Christ, because not un­der such a Suspition, its frame and make was such, as designed for the Support, but no ways for the Injury of the Empire. The best and wisest of Emperors, at the same time that they write to the Patriarchs and Bishops of the Church, as its Supreme and Universal Governors, and own'd and remon­strated [Page 183] their Power as from Christ Jesus a­lone, yet reserved among their own Titles, that of Pontifex Maximus, the chief Priest, as Mr. Selden according to his usual Industry has Collected several Inscriptions of theirs to this purpose, lib. 1. De Syned. c. 10. and by which Title, if they meant the same, he would have them to have done, as it matters not now to inquire, since the Church and Empire still gave and allow'd one another these Compellations interchangeably, the In­ference is strong on our side, that they were not conceived to carry and imply any thwar­ting or opposition to one another; and upon what account soever Julian the Emperor was so obliged by, and tenacious of the Title, we have reason to believe he did it not on this account to affront in others, and ingross to himself Church-Power, Antistes legis Chri­stinae, being the Title also in his days of the Bishop; and so Bishops are still occasionally call'd, by Ammianus Marcellinus, an Heathen Historian of his time, whose History is most­ly made up of his Actions and Praises, and may not amiss be called his Parasite, as well as Historian; nor can he be thought to give that to Church-men, which in its execution carries so great an Opposition to the Prero­gative of his admired Master. But that which comes nearer, is this; when the Em­perors submitted to the Laws of the Church, as from God himself, made them their Rule for their civil Sanctions, disdained not to follow them, gave them every Eulogy, or Character that might declare them of an Heavenly stamp, a Divine race and infusion, [Page 184] as I have already shew'd; yet did they not believe their own Laws and Sanctions the less from God by reason of it, or of a lower In­stitution, and suitably still expressed them­selves, in the Heads of their Laws, the Forms and Preambles of their Constitutions, in these following manners, Quem ex coelesti Arbitrio sumpserimus, [...], as Justinian. Code. l. 1. Tit. 1.1.3. The Laws themselves are called Oracula, Sacra absolute. And then again, Leges Sacrae, Sanctio sacra, Sacratissi­ma, Sacratissimae leges, Judicium Sacrum, Prae­ceptio Sacra, Praeceptum Sacrum, Sacrae literae, Sanctionibus Consecratae, Oraculum Coeleste, Di­vales Sanctiones, Divina Precepta, Divino ar­bitrio Decreta, Divalia Beneficia, Divale Prae­ceptum, Lex Divalis, Divalia Scita, Divalia Statuta; all which, and more, he that will not Peruse in the several Laws, may read at once Collected to his hand by the Excellent Jacob Gothofred, 1. Cod. Theodos. Tit. 1. Pa­ratitlon. & Tit. 2. Paratitlon. Hereby decla­ring the Laws both of the Church and Em­pire to come alike from God, and to be equally Heavenly, although by differing conveyances, upon Persons of different Orders, for parti­cular diverse ends; but both uniting in, and serving the great End, the Universal Good, and Directions and Government of Mankind; and yet each one to act in, and keep its Sphere and Order, and so independent; and the Objection was not raised in those days, just now recited, nor was any thing like a thwarting suspected, and which is now con­tended for; nor indeed can their hitting and justling be otherwise supposed, than can that [Page 185] be of the Orbs, or that Dissonancy of the Spheres talked of, the one or both must be­come Eccentrick, be Perverse and Irregular, the whole Universe be untuned, in disorder, and suffer by it; as our own Experience has been a great Evidence of late, and whether has lost more by it, the King or the Priest, is not easily determined, though the Pretence was on the Princes side laid, by those that set the Controversie on foot, and with shews, to disenthrall and enlarge him.

WHAT is the reason of such our mis­understandings? §. VII that we cannot think and discern with the Ages before us? is it that this Power has been abused in later Ages of the Church, as by those of the Roman and Ge­neva Discipline? who out of a Plea to one, took both Swords, invaded Kings and King­doms by it. Let but the same Rule take place here, as in the other Points of the Re­formation, and all will soon be well again. Return to such the beginning, those first and purer Ages of the Church, to be ruled, and governed by, where the Platform is plain, the Model easie for any Capacity, and the Aberrations of some cannot in reason pre­judice it. But this will not do, the ground of the Quarrel has really another bottom, and their Reasons are another thing; as must be obvious to him that is conversant with the Writings either of the Principal Authors of these new started Opinions, or such as were accidentally only their occasion, or after Abettors of them. They cannot see, nor assent to any Government, as existing in the World; but what is visible and sensible, has [Page 186] its Operations and Effects upon outward Sense, and its Organs, upon the Person or Estate, the Life or Bodily Action of Man­kind; and this to be presently inflicted. Men they are that will allow no Corpora­tions or Societies but those of this World, for Buying and Selling, for Trading and Trafficking, for the Belly and the Back, for outward Peace and Ease, to Preserve them­selves from one another at Home, and Inva­sions from Abroad, for the present Mess of Pottage, good and gain on Earth; nor can any other Power but such as this, or in or­der to it, be apprehended. We have above observed, That Herod the King, was the first Man that suggested this great Error, and that the Kingdom of our Saviour must sup­plant and abolish the Kingdoms of this World, his Power and Caesar's could not stand together. And this was managed by the Jews all along after, who united with Herod to destroy our Saviour as an Usurper, allowing and owning no King but Caesar, upon that one Design and Principle. And these Men we have now to deal with, are every ways as blind, as gross and carnal in this particular Point, as were the Jews their Predecessors; and the Veil of Moses is it so over their Faces, that they are stark Blind either beyond or besides it. The Jews of old did not with more Zeal and Industry contend for his Temporal Canaan and Pro­mises, Ordinances and Administrations, or with greater Blindness rest himself in them, or with greater Malice, scorn and pursue such as said they saw beyond it; then do [Page 187] these Men now adays deride those that say, there is a Spiritual Kingdom which is our Saviour's, a Power originally from Christ derived by Succession to his Body the Church, to remain till the Restitution of all things, that there is, or can be, any King but Caesar, resolving all Power whatever into that which is Secular, and rejecting all other, as Opposite to the Dignity and Prerogative of Princes.

IT is not much to be marvelled at the §. VIII Pamphlets that went about of this Nature in 1641. 'Twas the Design of that time to un­hinge and overthrow every thing well esta­blished, and the Argument was less odious, that began with the Church and its Power, particularly I have by me a small Treatise which came forth in that year, call'd The true Grounds of Ecclesiastical Regiment, &c. but the Title within is, The Divine Right of Episcopacy refuted, the more to ingage the Reader; for Episcopacy was first to be ta­ken away, and he had the most advantage to do it, it being the particular quarrel; but the after-game was at all Church-Power in general, and which he endeavours to erase upon this score, as against the Soveraign Dig­nity of Kings, for which he seems Zealous, when to Dethrone Church-men, but at last sets a Thousand more upon the Throne with him, his Princes in Parliament, as he calls them; nay, he sets them above the King, and says, though to Princes on their lawful Tribunals, something is more due than at other times; but to Princes something is more due than at other times, but to Princes in Parlia­ment [Page 188] there is most of all due; all Power being not derived to the King without them, and whose Ecclesiastical Power he there discourses. And which I therefore here repeat, to shew what was designed for our Kings by these Men, when so much Pleading for a Power belong­ing to them which is the Church's; and his chief Argument all along against Church-Power, independent to Princes, is, that it is not like, nor does it enter into any Riva­lity with that solid, sensible, coercive Power wherewith God has invested his true Lieute­nants upon Earth; and therefore is it but Imaginary and Improper. That Power which is proper, must include not only a Power of Commanding, but also an effectual Virtue of forcing Obedience to its Commands, and of subjecting and reducing such as shall not render themselves obedient; that, as among the Jews, the Church and State was the same, had the same Body, the same Head, the same Sword; and that Head was Temporal, and that Sword was Material; and therefore 'tis so with Christians, nor have they any Sword or Head that is Spiritual. Christians ought not to be so contrary to that excellent Disci­pline of the Jews, which God himself or­dered, and to introduce I know not what Spiritual Rule, in prejudice of Temporal Rule; nor does he expect any Satisfaction from his Adversaries, why there should be less Division betwixt Church and State, among the Jews, and less use of two several Swords; and because Adultery was Punish'd with Death, Christians ought not to be Excom­municated for it. If God has given them [Page 189] sole Knowledge to Determine all Controver­sies, and Power to Enact all Ecclesiastical Canons, doubtless he has given them some binding Coercive force correspondent there­unto, and if so, why do they not expel all Dissention by it? If their Virtue extend no further than to Exhortation, why do they urge Commands upon us? If they have a Commanding Power, why do they not se­cond it with due Compulsion? it is plainly clear'd to us, that Adultery by God's Law was Punish'd by the Temporal not Spiritual Sword; and that the Abscissio animae amongst the Jews, was only Corporal Punishment by Death, the infliction whereof was only left to the Temporal Magistrate; and that there was no difference observed between Crimes Spiritual and Crimes Temporal. And there­fore there ought to be none in the Church of Christ; the form or essence of Law, is that Coercive or Penal Virtue by which it binds all to its Obedience; if Priests had any such Spiritual Sword, doubtless it would have some sensible Efficacy, and work to good Ends, and Men would not, nor could not choose, but bow and submit themselves under it. Thus he.

Mr. Selden who was Contemporary with §. IX this worthy wight and Man of Sense, and no question but his Confident, engaged and suc­ceeded him in the very same Cause, and by the very same Motives and Arguments, on­ly he appear'd not in the World till Nine years after, and so had the advantage of much time, and was imboldned by the horrid Anarchy, and dismal Confusion of it, and by [Page 190] an incessant Industry of his own, improv'd the Argument to a greater height of irreli­gion and audaciousness, and contemptuously treads upon whatever is like a Church Power in any instance of it, which his Friend was a little shy of, who allows in Church-men a Power for Non-communion or Abstention in some Cases, which, though he'l by no means call it Excommunication, and acknowledges that Justinian did only command that the Bishop proceed against the Faulty, by Ex­communication, Suspension, Deprivation; but Mr. Selden says, with the greatest assu­rance and impudence, it was his own judicial act, with that truth we have already consi­dered; but his Argument and course of pro­ceeding is all along the same, and upon the supposition founded in the constitution and practice of the Jewish Church, and which he proves by a vast reading and in­tolerable expence of Pains to have used only outward, Bodily, Penal, Coercive Pu­nishments, whether before, or after gi­ving the Law in Sinai, so he tells us, it was with Adam and Cain, the one upon his fall, the other upon his murder, both banished their Countries for it, the Sword is the pu­nishment for Murder, Gen. 9.3. And they were to be stoned that came near the Mount at the giving the Law, Exod. 19. And the punishment was only secular upon the viola­tion of the Seven Precepts, given to the Sons of Noah, the uncircumcised was to be pu­nished, though not forinsecally, yet by Gods own immediate hand; and a particu­lar judgment of the same nature was the Curse [Page 191] upon Meroz, the punishment of Kore, Dathan and Abiram, nor do the words, [...], Anathema, &c. as used by the Prophets ac­cording to the Septuagint, or other Greek Translations, signifie any thing else, nor are there used for Excommunication, or after­wards by the Apostles, as in St. Paul's deli­vering up the incestuous to Sathan, &c. and the Jews took up that Excommunication which was of later years exercised among them by special Compact with one another, in the time of Captivity, and for the pre­sent Exigence, when the Temporal Power was taken out of their hands, and which was no ways appropriated to the Priest, or any other Order of Men, either now under their Captivity, or for the infliction of those o­ther Punishments before or after the Law; and what Excommunications were practised in the Apostles times, and the first Century (where by the way, his great Master Erastus will allow of none, in his Hundred Theses answered by Theodore Beza in his Tractatus Pius & Moderatus de verâ Excommunicatione, & Christiano Magisterio) was first Judaick, in imitation of the Jews; for there was none of the Christians for many years after our Saviour's Ascension, which were not either Jews originally, or Greek Proselytes, and were accounted as Jews in common repute, and members of their Synagogue, and so u­sed their Customs and Rights as before, and of which this of Excommunication was one, and so living among the Jews, and call'd by the same Name, when Caesar indulged the Jews, and they had the liberty of their own [Page 192] Religion, the Christians enjoy'd the Privi­ledges together with them; and thus their Excommunication became Caesarean, their Church Acts derived a Publick Autority from the Empire; (having none before but by private Covenant) and by this Autority they held Presbyteries, had Judicatures, relating purely to their Religion, and retained a Power to Punish under Death, as did the Jews, and if not thwarting the Laws Impe­rial; and which grant of Favour, though abated by succeeding Emperors, they not­withstanding retained a Body, and Union among themselves, upon their own terms for Confederation, till the days of Constan­tine, and the Empire became Christian; and then the Church being taken in to the State, the Jurisdiction wholly became his, as natu­rally annexed to the Crown, and there to reside till all Autority and Power ceaseth. This is the chief of Mr. Selden's Plot, for the overthrowing the Power of Christ's Kingdom, in the Polity, Laws and Rights of it, Lib. 1. De Syned. cap. 3. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. 11. and which has with much more advantage been very lately represented to the Age, than I am able to do, by a great and Learned Hand, Dr. Parker, Arch-deacon of Canterbury. Nor needs there any thing more to be added for the satisfying the World of the vainer Attempts, and undue Consequents there raised, only the general Design of this Discourse engages, that it be not wholly passed by, and which otherwise could not be answer'd.

[Page 193] THOMAS Erastus, Mr. Selden's great and §. X admired Master, though not licking and sha­ping his Beastly & Abortive brood so through­ly, Missing in many things what the other has Hit upon; yet in his forementioned Hundred Theses he urges much the same way; as, that because the Sword was the Punishment among the Jews, so all Offenders of what Nature soever are by the Coercion alone of the Magistrate to be Corrected, and the Christian Church is to go no farther than theirs did, and the Civil Magistrate has all the Care of Religion, that it is very difficult to conceive, how there can be two Heads in one Body, both to have right to Punish and Exercise Domination over the same Subjects, still supposing no Power to have, or that can have, existency, but that of outward Coercion. And which Plea, however it might be forced from him, and seem neces­sary, and makes a plausible shew of Truth, in regard of Beza's Lay-Elders and the Con­sistorian Government of Geneva, and in whose irregular Power he instances, laying Penal Mulcts and outward Restraints, as do the Civil Magistrates; and the Consideration of which ran him upon this his, as groundless, Extreme. Yet as to the Constitution and Practice of the truly Catholick Christian Church, it has no Pretence or likelihood at all, as will hereafter be made to ap­pear.

CLAƲDIƲS Salmasius, though he was §. XI a Man very much if not altogether of Beza's Complexion; yet is he not so ingenuous, and true to their common Cause, as was Beza in [Page 194] his Writings against Erastus; for in his Ap­paratus to his Book De Primatu Papae, a long rambling, indigested, tedious Discourse, pur­posely made against the Divine Right of Bi­shops; he there to pursue home his Design, takes away all Church-Government whatso­ever at the same rate of arguing. And if he concludes any thing at all, and which is not easily seen, it is this, That a Bishop is so far from having a distinct Power above a Pres­byter, solitary and apart from him; that he has neither [...] nor [...] in general, no Government nor Jurisdiction at all. And the reason he backs it with is this, Christ did not invest his Apostles with the Power of worldly and civil Magistrates, when he sent them out to Preach. If so, he should have ad­joyned to them so many Lictors and Appari­tors, furnished them with Whips and Axes; and not having done it, there is no Magistracy at all, nothing of Power residing, because able to engage none by Violence; neither Corporal nor Pecuniary Mulcts can be infli­cted by them. And so in his Dissertation De Episcopis & Presbyteris contra Petavium, under the Name of Walo Messalinus, he con­cludes Episcopacy to be Curatio only, and which he distinguishes à Magistratu, Potestate & Imperio, from all sorts of Government. And says expresly, That any Jurisdiction of one Clergy-man above another came from Constantine, Cap. 6. and so Zealous is he to make Episcopacy but an Humane Disposition, that he delivers it as his Opinion, and takes a great deal of pains to prove it, That the Presbyters themselves, are no other than Lay-men, [Page 195] have nothing of a Distinction, or of a Power different from the Laity, as the Priest­hood of old had amongst the Jews. That as Lay-men did Baptize, as well as any, and which is acknowledged, so that Bishops and Presbyters do Administer the Sacraments of Christ, 'tis only as dedicated to it, by the choice of the People, and in whose absence Laicks may Consecrate all Believers, and not only the Apostles, receiving the Com­mission and Power at Christ's Institution; and suitably was it done in every Family, and after Supper, for some Ages; and the diffe­rence betwixt the Order Ecclesiastical, and the People in common, has nothing of Di­vine Institution. That Ordination by Im­position of hands, gives nothing at all of new Power; only ranks them in such a Body and Order, as First, Second and Third. And the Door-Keepers have as much a place and order in the Church, as either Deacon, Pres­byter or Bishop; the Bishop and Presbyter were only the more Honorable and Honest part of the People. And thus he brings in his Lay-Elders to have an equal Right and Government in Church Matters with them, by a Primitive Devolution, and which Offi­cers once were in every Church, but now re­mains only in the Affrican, though with the addition of the Order of Presbyters, for which there is no footstep in the Primitive Apostolical Church. And at last is angry with Petavius, that he perstringes the Wal­denses and Luther, because they retained no Priesthood at all, under the Gospel; but believe that just and faithful Laicks may do [Page 196] all that is needful in the Church of God, and discharge every Ecclesiastical Office, re­ceiving a Power by the Imposition of the hands of the Presbytery; that is, the Se­nate not Ecclesiastical but Laick; in which whether Petavius injures the Waldenses and Luther or not, is not the matter now to be enquired after; sure it is, Salmasius adopts these their imputed Opinions, and they are his. And he thinks it the Mind of St. Peter too, whom he cites, Cap. 2. calling the Laicks that are faithful, an Holy Priesthood, to offer Spiritual Sacrifices acceptable to God through Christ Jesus, a Royal Priesthood, Ibid. and all which Petavius the Jesuite makes no small advantage of, to the Infamy of the Reformation. Neither have I done Claudius Salmasius any injury in ranking him among those that deny all Church-Power as from Christ Jesus; for he is worse than those I have mentioned before him, he takes the civil assignation from the hands of the Prince, and puts it into the People. So that every Man may as well Ordain himself; as in the days of Jeroboam. And hence we cannot but take notice with what furious, inconside­rate, malicious purposes some Men have pursued Episcopacy, and rather than have it stand, they'l fall themselves, deny what is otherwise their Diana and great Delight, the Divine Right of Presbytery, take away all Church-Power for ever with it; And indeed the Principles that these Men go upon are such, when to throw down Episcopacy, that they strike at our whole Christianity with the same blow, as does his Friend David [Page 197] Blondel in particular; and there cannot, un­der their Guiding and Conduct, be any such thing as either Truth or Heresie; the one to be convincingly Vindicated, or the other solidly confuted; as might be easily made appear.

BUT what is mostly to be admired, the §. XII great Hugo Grotius goes along with them in part, and can apprehend only a Power that is outward and compulsive, and working by sensible force. And whatsoever Power is erected in the Church independent to the Secular, is an abating its Arm, an Usurpa­tion, a sharing with the Prince in his Go­vernment, De Imper. Sum. Potest. in Sacris. Sect. 3. cap. 1. cap. 5. & Sect. 9. That there is no Empire by Divine Right granted to the Church. The Ministry of the Empire is the Sword, but the Weapons of the Church are not Carnal, Cap. 4. Sect. 9. And again argues, That there is no Jurisdiction belong­ing to the Church, because none that is Coa­ctive or Commanding, Cap. 9. Sect. 3. with more to this purpose all along there. As al­so in his Ordinum Holland. Pietas, &c. Orat. Habit. in Senat. Amstelodam, bona fides Si­brandi, Lubberti, &c. and yet that this was not his constant, lasting, through digested opi­nion, 'tis again as certain, he going quite t'other way, and fully thwarting, even in that very Discourse of his of the Power of the Supreme Magistrate in Holy Things, and much oftner in his other Writings. He will not allow the Pastors to be Vicars of those very Powers, any otherwise then as Subjects; and that, besides their Pastoral charge, they [Page 198] receive aliquid Imperii & Jurisdictionis, some­thing of Empire and Jurisdiction, Cap. 1. Sect. 3. cap. 4. Sect. 1. that Kings are the Ob­ject of this Power, not only as the Gospel is tendred unto them in the way of Preaching, but by the application of the use of the Keys, Cap. 4. Sect. 3. & Cap. 9. Sect. 18. That the Church is Coetus, a Body and Association, not only permitted, but instituted by Divine Right; and whatever naturally belongs to any other Body, this belongs also to the Church, Cap. 4. Sect. 9. That the Church destitute of the Protection of the outward Government, doth not cease to be a Church, Cap. 8.2. He asserts a Church-Power to ex­clude from their Congregations, for either Heresie, or Immorality, and that distinct from the Magistrate, who constrains for fear of Punishment, Annot. in Mat. 13.41. which Annotations he proposes for the Pattern of all his other, and if from any Writings of his, we may hence conclude his maturated Judg­ment. And again, in his Annotations on St. Luke 6.22. he instances in two Branches of this Power, Baptism and Excommunica­tion. And in St. Joh. 20.23. and when the Apostle only advises to shun Evil Men, he con­cludes the Presbyterium or Association, was not then setled at Rome, otherwise he had order'd, that they had then been Excommunicated. In Rom. 6.17. and in 1 Cor. 5.11. by the Keys of David, he understands, not only he that hath the Power of Death and Hell, but he that hath Plenissimum Imperium, the entire Power in the House of God, as Eliachim had in the House of David. Ad Apoc. 3.7. and, [Page 199] then which, what more can be desired by us, and how consistent with himself any one may see. I'le only add the words of our Profound Mr. Thorndike in his Treatise of the Laws of the Church, p. 395. He that in his Preface to his Annotations on the Gospel shall read him disclaiming whatever the Consent of the Church shall be found to refuse, will never be­lieve that he had admitted no Corporation of the Church, without which, no Consent thereof, could have been observed. And 'tis, I say, from these his Annotations on the Gospels, we are to find and know what are his Sentiments; if any where, he desires us to have recourse hither, if we will read his other things with Profit, in his Preface to the Reader. Now, that those above cited Treatises in which his Errors as to Church-Government are so visi­ble, were all wrote when he was young, 'tis certain; and that he was too much pre-occu­pated and prejudiced by his Education and particular Converse and Business at Amster­dam, in such his Youth, follows in course, and himself was afterwards sensible of, and lamented it throughout his whole Life. And thinks it less Candid and Ingenious in Andrew Rivette, that he objects those things against him, that he had wrote some times since, Cum illi multarum rerum conspectum adimeret nimius Patriae amor; cùm esset Parvulus, loque­batur ut Parvulus; when the over-much love to his Country, did take from him the sight of many things. When he was a Child, he wrote as a Child, Rivet. Apol. Discuss. Pag. 732. And it must be also very harsh and severe in us, should we object against him [Page 200] that his particular Treatise of the Power of the Supreme Magistrate in Holy Things, which that it is a Posthumous work 'tis most apparent. And farther, That he disown'd it when it was wrote, and never design'd it for the Press, 'tis more then probable; espe­cially if we give Credit to what account our Herbert Thorndike gives of it, in his Laws of the Church, the last Chapter, That at his be­ing in England, he left it with two great Prelates of our Church, Lancelot Lord Bishop of Winchester, and John Lord Bishop of Nor­wich, to peruse; and both of them advising him not to Print it, he rested in their Judg­ments, and 'twas laid aside till his Death. And indeed, that that Treatise was not the issue of a fixed Judgment, but to serve a Par­ty, appears from the unevenness of the Dis­course, contradicting it self frequently, and contending against the very design of it; the great Argument of a raw imperfect confused Notion. And particularly, if we consider, he was every ways an adherent to the Holland Remonstrants, a sort of Men, that in Preju­dice to the Church, so extremely flatter'd the Civil Magistrate; as our Author makes it appear, Ibid. suprà; though he never drank so deep of the Cup, as to take off the Dregs, as he himself farther pleads to Rivet, con­cerning some Presbyterian Tenents, imbibed in his Youth, Ibid. suprà, and acknowledges much to the Mercies of God, that when com­passed round with their so great Power, he could never be brought to Approve that which is proper to Calvinists, Ibid. And how easily these things slide into Mankind, how in­credibly [Page 201] they work, and how difficultly cast off, Experience too much Evidences; The Natural Love to a man's Country, the Pre­judice of his Education, the higher Imploy­ments in it, its Applause and Acclamations: All which Grotius had in a great measure. The latter alone is able to spoil a Judgment; it must do it, where entertained and pursued: and though he that reads over Grotius, and says he is not the better for him, such is his excellent and incomparable Notion, must be either a great Fool, or very ill natur'd; yet 'tis to be doubted some of these never quitted him quite, his Theological Works, lately Printed together, give too great a Presump­tion; all Amsterdam, somewhere or other being to be found in them, and every one may pick out, or very near it, his own Reli­gion. So fatal is it, for Men of great Parts to set out, without some first Principles, as he did, and frame their Scheme of Divinity to the present Notion and Conception, no regard had to something receiv'd, and cer­tain. So in course does it follow, what in him is to be found, and nothing could have done him so much right, as, in the setting out of his Works, to have given account to the World, of the particular time, when they were each of them Composed, and first made Publick. All that I shall add more concerning Grotius, is this, In the pursuance of his assumed Notion of Supreme, laid down by him in the Entrance to his Treatise De Imperio summarum Potestatum in Sacris, and which is the chief occasion of his following Mistakes. As, To be Su­preme [Page 202] is to be above all, indefinitely in the full Latitude of things, and where fixed and attributed to any one Person or Sub­ject, the very Design and Nature of the Expression, will allow none to be ex­cluded, or exempted from a Submission and Subjection; no other Power can be supposed, and not in Subordinacy and De­pendency upon, to be and subsist, with­out and besides it. He is so unhappy, as to fall into and pursue the same Mistake, the Jesuit had done in Doctor Bilson's Book of Christian Subjection, and Obedience, in the Second Part, who there thus ar­gues against the Oath of Supremacy. ‘If Princes be Supreme Governors over all Persons in all Causes; then in vain did the Holy Ghost appoint Pastors and Bi­shops to govern the Church, then are they Superior to Christ himself, in ef­fect being Christ's Masters; then may they prescribe which way to Worship God.’ And goes on a little farther, and declares his dislike to Supreme in the Oath, because, that word maketh Princes Supe­rior to God himself, for Supreme is Su­perior to all; neither Christ's own Per­son, nor his Church excepted. Now, I say, this one and the same Notion of Gro­tius and the Jesuit, if adhered unto, and both will continue to allow it; they are upon equal Grounds, and with the same advantage sight against one another, and the Combat may be Eternal, only of Skir­mishes and some Blows; but no Victory on either side. When Grotius goes along with [Page 203] our Church of England, and makes his Ma­gistrate Supreme in all Causes, and over all Persons, the Jesuite tells him, That to be Supreme is above all, to be Supe­rior to all, and he sets up his Prince above God and Christ, and the Church; when the Jesuit asserts the Supreme Power of the Church of God, Grotius upon the same Ground replies the self-same thing upon him. That he exalts the Church-Power a­bove God and Christ, and the Magistrate, as all their Masters. And indeed, accord­ing to these Mens Notions, to apply the Superlative to any Person or Thing, is the height of Blasphemy. For why? God is not excepted. And the most common Phrases, of a most Mighty Prince, a most Holy Place, a most Wise Counsellor, are all instances of it; nor can any one Attri­bute of Gods, be otherwise applyed to the Creature. Whereas, if the Word be under­stood and used, as in common use it is to be, and in complyance with things it must be, suitable to the present Subject it is as­sign'd and limited to, and the particular things it is conversant with, as under such and such Heads and Orders, all is easie and plain. Thus God is the alone Supreme, all Rule, Governance and Autority being originally in him and eminently. Christ is Supreme, as Head of the Church, to whom all Power is given of the Father, for bringing Mankind to Heaven; the Apo­stles and their Successors, the Pastors of the Church, were and are now Supreme on Earth, in the same Power derived from Christ, [Page 204] by the Apostles unto them. The Prince is Supreme, and hath all Power from God committed unto him; as to Government relating to this World; over all Things, Persons and Causes, to appropriate or alie­nate, to Endow, Limit, Restrain, Coerce or Compel, as the alone Supreme Law­giver upon Earth, and none may oppose; and the great and gyant Objection, that is only wrangling about and mistaking of words, falls to the ground, as it is in it self nothing.

CHAP. IV. Chap. 4.

[Page 211]HAVING produced the chief and first §. I: Arguments and Autorities that are de­pended upon, and urged in this Controver­sie; an Answer to some of which, I have al­ready prevented; others fall in pieces of themselves to an easie Capacity; the rest I shall indeavour to refute, in these following Conclusions, and which will tend much to the cleering the whole Subject; and I'le be­gin with the first and great Error of Mr. Sel­den, and his other Friends, and which is laid down and insisted on as the Foundation of the whole ensuing Fabrick. We are told that all Punishments both before, and after, the gi­ving the Law in Sinai, from Adam to Christ, were bodily and outwardly Coercive, and in­flictive, the distinction of Sins Spiritual and Temporal was not then known, nor was there any such different Regiments and Go­vernors, in regard to them; the Sword pu­nish'd Adulteries as well as Burglary. And therefore 'tis so still under the Gospel, by the Institution of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; nor was there a Jurisdiction separate and apart, relating alone to Spiritual Church Affairs, designed, or erected, by him. An Inference (granting the truth of the Premi­ses) surely as wide as their keenest Adversa­ries can wish it to be, and the Consequence had been every ways as due and firm, in re­spect to the Law given by Moses, that there were never any such Levitical Rites, and Ceremonies given from God by him, such a Polity erected, because nothing like it, that [Page 212] we know of, was given to Adam, in Para­dice; nor is there one Rule, Law or Dire­ction since given to his Succession, the Patri­archs in particular, but upon the same force and account, must still be exemplary, nor ought there, can there be, any institution that is diverse from them received; if a di­stinct Power, from all the World before him, be admitted and allowed in Moses the Ser­vant, much more in Christ a Son over his own House, by whom God hath spoken to us in these last days, as in times past he did to the Fathers, by the Prophets, whom he ap­pointed Heir of all things; by whom also he hath made the worlds; who is the bright Image of his Person, upholding all things by the word of his Power, Heb. 1.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. who had greater Autority, more full and larger In­structions and Commission, and more signally evidenced to the outward sense of Mankind, than any Prophets or Messengers of Gods had before, who had all Power in Heaven and Earth committed unto him, both spake and acted as never Man did. And in the same pe­culiar manner did he gather and stablish and six his Church, or Body upon Earth; and at his going away into Heaven, send down his own Gifts in the face of all Nations at the Feast of Pentecost; erected his own Kingdom, appointed his own Officers, assign'd his own Members, influenced them by his own Spirit, governed them by his own Laws, associated them in his own Method, and nothing of it was of this World. He made a new Cove­nant, stablish'd on better Grounds, incoura­ged with better Hopes and Promises, insti­tuted [Page 213] new Ordinances, made new Seals and Conveyances, gave new Liveries, and Pledges that were diverse, a Government to last for ever, till the restitution of all things, with a respect to nothing future, but Heaven, and all this absolute in it self, and independent, abstract and separate from any, or all the Powers and Associations in the world beside; complying and yielding to no one Circum­stance, Exigence, or Necessity whatever; so contrived and ordained, that as himself, her Head, so the Church his Body, and every Member in particular hath life in it self, de­rived only from him; their own Powers and Capacities, and Institutions, and the gates of Hell are not to prevail against them; and then surely special Commands, and different Offences, may be allowed, there must be new Animadversions and Corrections, Discipline and Punishments; and these in such hands as is his Pleasure. However, to infer, there is now no such things, or in such a manner, and such hands, because never in the World be­fore, is hugely inconcluding; nor do any Men that are in earnest, or out of a Plot, believe, or declare themselves any otherwise obliged by such the forementioned Instances and Pre­sidents, whether in Law or Government, any farther than the Parity of Reason, and Cor­respondency of things enforce and engage; and there would be mad work were it other­wise. Only Mr. Selden and his Friends, are, it seems, to be excepted, who thus argue, Adam and Cain, for their Offences against God, had a civil Banishment. Achan's Body and all his Goods were a devoted thing for [Page 214] his Sacriledge. Others were Slain or Stoned, or swallowed up by the Earth for their grea­ter Impieties, Excommunication was not at all amongst the Jews for some time, and since, it was received only as a Compact among themselves to keep their People in awe and order, when they were in Captivity, and without the benefit of the Civil Magi­strate, and their Penal Laws to correct and restrain them. And therefore there are not, neither ought to be, any other Punishments under the Gospel; All the Anathema's, De­votings, Cuttings off, Separation, Absten­tions, Interminations, Excommunications, are nothing else. The Primitive Christians, without any Pre-obligation from Christ, upon the same score entred into their Disci­pline, and govern'd themselves also as they could, while the Empire was Heathen; be­cause not capable any otherways to subsist, keep their Body together and Protect it, and which ceased when Constantine became Chri­stian, who took it all into his own hands, managed it as occasion, and as he pleased; in whom, by right, alone it resided. And the Argument is every whit as good, as to Baptism and the Lord's Supper, which were imitations of the Jewish Customs; and that there is no more in either, than was in their Baptizing and Washing when they made Pro­selytes, or in their Cup of Blessing, Drink­ing a Health, Eating and Banquetting toge­ther, and which must be in the Power of the Supreme Magistrate, to cancel or continue at his Pleasure. And much wider yet is a farther Conclusion of his in his Twelfth [Page 215] Chapter, That there was no Excommunica­tion at all amongst the Jews; nor is therefore to be any among Christians, because no men­tion of it, in an old Jewish Manuscript Ritual, which he has by him, and there produces; and the courses of Penance and Repentance, are all Innovations, because his Priest of Ma­homet neither knew nor discovered any thing of it; and which must be the alone Inferen­ces from all his great Pains and Reading there shew'd to the World, if there can be any at all. And indeed, had he not intended more to amuse the World with a bulk of Stuff and Reading, as is his usual way, and by a confusion of things first to confound his Reader, the easier to impose upon him, the usual way of all Hereticks, as Tertullian has observ'd Adversus Praxean Cap. 20. Proprium est omnium Hereticorum, pauca adversus plura defendunt, & posteriora adversus priora. Scri­bis tanquam ad Croesum & Pyrrhum Loxias; as Marius Mercator of the Pelagian; First, to involve and entangle; he would have omitted all these Impertinencies, and gone directly to the Business, As whether such a Kingdom was once erected? Such Power was left upon Earth or not? and this indeed he attempts, but 'tis in the After-Game, the Bustle, and Distraction. And he does it only too in compliance with his own false Supposi­tion. He considers nothing of the Kingdom of Christ, the Nature of his Commission, it's Power, Reasons, Design, End and Reward, he wrests particular passages of Scripture, to his perverted purpose, and I'le bring as ma­ny Readings and Expositions with their tricks [Page 216] and turnings, quite against him. And par­ticularly intermixes and confounds the mira­culous, especial Actions of the Apostles, when inflicting Death and Temporal Punish­ments, for the Testimony of their Commis­sions, and terror to the present Offendor, and warning to future Ages, and which were to cease, with that setled fixed Power of theirs, design'd for a Perpetuity. And his Mistake is as great in his numerous Instances of the Imperial Acts and their Constitutions; of their Titles of Episcopus Episcoporum, Summus Pontifex, and the Application of them, all which are [...], and which is already shew'd. The Power of the Church, purely as such, and which is alone the Subject of the Debate, is entire and within it self, sup­ported and maintained; but never invaded, by the Titles and Acts Imperial. Nor need all be let pass, as for granted, that he thinks himself so secure of, as an unshaken Medium, for his undue gathered Conclusion. And certainly there was more than a Bodily Tem­poral Punishment in Adam and Cain, a single Punishment was not all they had inflicted on, or was intended to them, there was a with­holding something Spiritual too; a Suspen­sion, at least, of inward Strength and Assi­stances, a turning out from some other out­ward Advantages and Enjoyments, and which is imported, by the turning out from the Presence of God, and the change of the Earth, was not the alone Deprivation. And sure I am, we have as good Grounds that it was more, as Mr. Selden has produced to the con­trary, (though his Enumerations are great, [Page 217] and his little Autorities are many; as in­deed he does nothing but what is abun­dance in that Sense,) did the clearing the present Truth any ways depend up­on it.

2.That then which will be more conside­rable §. II is this, and which renders an evident account, why all the Offences, under the Levitical Dispensation, were punishable on­ly by the Civil Power, and with Temporal Awards, and by one and the same hand of Justice, the distinction between Sins Spiritual and Temporal, were less obvious, or none; and the Power of the Priesthood was not so distinct and apart, and yet no necessity of the like Constitution, in any one instance now under Christianity; the principal reason of all, I say, seems to be this. The great di­sparity betwixt the Jewish and Christian Bo­dy, as to their particular Form and Consti­tution; the Jewish Church was imbodied in the State in the design and frame of it; and the Laws of both were one and the self-same Law of the Nation, the Government was blended, and so mixed together, that is, was all one Polity, dispersed by the hands of the Priests and Levites and Judges of the Gates, each had their original share; and the so much magnified Sanedrim, is allowed to be of the same Complexion, or mixed multitude together, and united for present Govern­ment. And hence is it, as Mr. Selden says very well, That when a Conquer'd People and in Captivity, under the Civil Govern­ment of a Foreign Power, and which consi­der'd not their Religion, it had no Power to [Page 218] Protect it self; and therefore by Compact among themselves, they submitted to Excom­munication. A Politick accidental Contri­vance of their own, to keep themselves to­gether. The Offices of the Priests and Le­vites, though appropriate and distinct as to some Acts and Powers, yet not as to Govern­ment; they, as such, were placed only in the Services of the Tabernacle, the Temple and Altar. And Grotius well describes them, Judices erant de arduis Legis, ut viri caeteris Eruditiores, in Deut. 17.9. They executed the Offices of Judges, as Men more Skilled and Learned than others; it flowed not pure­ly from their Priestly Delegation. That Power came another way, perhaps as Elected into the Sanedrim, if there was such a conti­nued Society for Government, which from the Old Testament appears not, however in use in the days of our Saviour. And which makes me admire some Men among us, who contend so much for the letter of the Scrip­tures, and run down whatever is Tradition besides it; and yet so much adore their mag­nified Sanedrim, upon the alone talk of some Jewish Doctors which were but of Yesterday. And it was a great Error in Theodore Beza, and argued in him more Zeal than Judgment; who, in answer to this Part of Erastus in his forementioned Hundred Theses, asserts the Jewish Church and State to have been two Bodies, with different Powers for Judica­ture. And who is followed herein by Matthew Sutcliffe, De Presbyterio, and others; besides the very Stipulation and Compact betwixt Moses and Israel was for the Temporal Ca­naan, [Page 219] upon Temporal Promises and Rewards, the Milk and Honey, and quiet Possession of it; Nor did the Levitical Covenant as such engage for any more. Whatever good things to come, were expected by the more discern­ing part of them, they receiv'd another way. By accidental occasional Notices, they saw in the Glass, through the Veil, in the Type and Shadow (for so the Law was in the Plot and Design to be unto them,) or by the ad­ditional Advantages of the Prophets which God all along sent unto them, whose Business it was, at least a great part of it, farther to reveal, unfold, and discover the End and Purport of the Law unto them, and whose report was very hardly believed: and conse­quently, as were their Covenant, and In­dentment; so were their Awards and Punish­ments. In course they were to be Bodily and Temporal, no wonder that Adultery was Punish'd by the Sword, and they quite cut off from that good Land, as it afterwards happened unto them. So Saint Jerome speaks of the Jews, Qui ob Praesentia tantum bona, Legis praecepta custodiunt, ut terrenae Foelicita­tis & longae vitae Praemium consequuntur— Qui te ob praesentia tantum rerum promissa venerantur, Ep. Damaso. Tom. 4. who kept the Law only for the present Advantage, for long Life and earthly Felicity; and for the present Promises worship God. And St. Cle­mens Alexandrinus, Strom. 1. dividing the Law into Four parts, he leaves out that Branch [...], which belongs to Morality, and concludes [...], the Letter or Historical part to be [Page 220] alone Nomothetical, and to oblige as a Law. And so we find this one Reason of that one Branch of the Law which consists in Sacrifices (not excluding that which is Typical of it) as a tryal of the Jews Obedience to God, that the Blessing of the Covenant may be conti­nued unto them, Quâ Populum pronum in Idolo­latriam & Transgressionem ejusmodi Officiis Re­ligioni suae voluit adstringere. Tertul. adv. Marcion. l. 2. c. 18. [...], Just. Martyr. Dialog. cum Triph. Jud. facilem ad Idola reverti Populum erudiebat. Irenaeus, l 4. c. 28. So St. Jerome, l. 2. adv. Pelag. Tom. 3. And in Jerem. 7.22. Isai. 1.12. in Mat. 5. and all which are followed exactly by Gro­tius Comment. in Exod. 15.26. in Mat. 5.17. Eph. 3.10. and De Veritate Religionis Chri­stianae, l. 2. Sect. 9. l. 5. Sect. 7. So that to speak to the whole at once, the Disparity between the Jewish and Christian Govern­ment, being every ways, in the both Frame, Practice and Reward so great, the Inferences from the Jewish against the Christian, cannot be due and just, and must be also wide and in­consistent. The Advantage by their Scheme and Objection, as drawn up, is on our side; and we thence claim these following Conclusions, which no Man, as in themselves, can deny; though in their thwartings, as to the Design of our Adversaries, and compliance with ours, they are bluster'd against and misrepre­sented.

§. III THAT as the Levitical Discipline in its first make and design, had only corporal Rewards and Punishments promised and in­flicted suitably as the Command and Indent­ment [Page 221] was Carnal; So the Body of Christ which is Spiritual hath its Rewards and Pu­nishments which are Spiritual and like it self, suitable to its Nature and Constitution, and the Spiritual Commandment. The earthly Magistrate, or worldly Secular Power (as call'd in Antiquity, and which has been suffi­ciently already observ'd) can have no first, original share, in the Churches Sanctions, and Denunciations, Administrations and Di­stributions, because a Body in its frame in­dependent, in its design call'd out from the World, capable of the World's favours; but not of either a rise or dissolution by it. And this Mr. Selden must submit unto, upon the Supposition, that the Church is a Body, no body subsisting without its Laws, as he lear­nedly argues, and concludes soundly, in his first Book De Synedriis, and not to have Laws within it self, but what are Arbitrary, or borrowed from others, is to destroy the Sup­position, and make it no Inclosure, or Self-Community. Or if the Levitical Polity does any ways relate to and infer upon the Chri­stian, as the Christian Church affirms it to do; 'tis as its Type and Shadow, the Law being a Shadow of good things to come, as the Author to the Hebrews speaks; for though other Reasons are given, or rather proposed only, by the above-mentioned Fathers of the Church, for the Sacrifical part of the Law, and that it was given upon other Motives; yet they exclude not that design which is Typical, but suppose it in the first place, and the principal purpose of the Law-giver, was by Types and Shadows to represent the [Page 222] succeeding Gospel. So St. Clemens Alexandri­nus, l. 7. Strom. [...], that the Sacrifices under the Law did allegorize, or speak in other things our Worship under the Gospel, [...], as he speaks, Ibid. the Sacrificing our selves, or that we present our selves a living Sacrifice, holy, acceptable, which is our reasonable Service, Rom. 12.1. Mentem ipsam pro Sacrificio, as Lactantius, l. 5. Sect. 19. where the mind it self is the Sacri­fice, [...], Tem­perance, Righteousness and Humanity, is of­fer'd, in Justin Martyr. Apol. 2. Opima hostia Oratio. de Carne Pudicâ, De anima innocenti, de spiritu sancto profecta, as Tertullian, Apol. c. 30. and 'tis Prayer out of a chast Body, an innocent Mind, and an Holy Soul, is the Sacrifice of fat things, Qui justitiam Deo libat, qui fraudibus abstinet, propitiat Deum, qui ho­minem periculo surripit, opimam victimam caedit, haec nostra Sacrificia, haec Dei Sacra sunt, as Minutius Foelix to the same purpose. And Justin Martyr, Respons. ad Quaest. 101. ad Orthodoxos, or whoever was the Author, calls the Law [...], the Gos­pel in the Prophecy, or Pre-published, and the Gospel, [...], the Law ful­fill'd, or in its Completion. Origen calls the Law [...], the Flesh of the Scriptures, speaking of the literal sense of it, [...]. Cap. 1. Ed. Spencer. and divides the Scrip­tures into [...], the Body and Soul, and Spirit. The Body as to the Jews, the Soul to Christians, and the Spirit, rela­ting to life Eternal. And again, That there [Page 223] was a [...] in the Writings of the Old Te­stament, which the Jews understood not, Lib. 2. adv. Celsum. Nova veteris adimpletio. So Lactantius, l. 4. And Tertullian says, l. 4. adv. Marcion, That the Earthly Promises of Wine, and Oyl and Corn, in Spiritualia figu­rari à Creatore, did prefigure Spiritual things; In illa Ʋmbram, in hoc veritatem esse dicimus, the Law is the Shadow, the Gospel is the Truth; So St. Jerome in his first Book against Pelagius, Imò singulae penè Syllabae, &c. ad Paulinum, he makes every Letter there, almost of the same Nature; and he more than once asserts, the Three Orders of the High Priest, Priest and Levite, to be the fore-runners of the Bishop, Presbyter and Deacon, under the Gospel-Priesthood. And St. Clemens in his Epistle to the Romans said the same before him. And though St. Au­gustine seem'd to blame some, that all things there are involved in Allegorical Expressions, as 'tis too usual to outdo things; yet he admits of such as duly thence draw Spiritual Senses, Civ. Dei, l. 17. c. 3. But that which Hugo Grotius cites out of him, and receives, and Publishes as his own, in his Annotations ad Deut. 17.12. is more full and apposite to our purpose, Hoc nunc agit in Ecclesia Excom­municatio, quod agebat tunc interfectio, quaest. super Deut. 5. c. 38. Excommunication does now the same in the Church, as putting to Death did under the Law. And De fide & Operibus, Cap. 6. Phinehes Sacerdos, Adulte­ros simul inventos ferro ultore confixit, quod utique Degradationibus & Excommunicationi­bus significatum est esse faciendum hoc tempore. [Page 224] Phinehes the Priest stroke through the Belly with a Dart the Adulterers, when found by him together, and which signified, what is to be done now by Degradations and Excom­munications in the same Case. So that the summ is this, If Mr. Selden will say, That the Levitical Law, and the other Judicial Acts among the Jews concern us not at all; and therein affront the concurrency of Chri­stianity; then all his Design and Labour, declaring what their Acts and Punishments were, his main Plot, falls to the Ground, is altogether to no purpose; and he needs no answer. If it does concern us, and thus typifies the Gospel; and which, I think, can­not be denied; then all he has done is against himself, and his particular design; for it flings it unavoidably upon him; that the Spiritual part is now ours, as theirs was Carnal; they punish'd by bodily Mulcts, and Death; we punish by Spiritual, either Suspension, Degradation, particular Penan­ces for a time, or total cuttings off; as, by Excommunication.

§. IV THAT as Government is absolutely neces­sary for the continuance of any one Body or Community, and such as live without Laws, are defined by Aristotle, Polit. l. 1. c. 2. [...], to be a Beast or a God; in­capable in their Natures, or above the In­conveniencies of it; though God himself does not manage the World by his Suprema­cy alone, and higher incontrollable Power; but according to his Justice, and Equity, and Mercy, and other Attributes; and which perhaps Aristotle did not consider. And this [Page 225] the Jews were so sensible and aware of, that when their Power was given over into the Enemies hands, and they had lost the Advan­tages and Protection of it, to keep their Body together and entire, and to which they thought themselves obliged, by the antecedent Bonds of their Religion, they framed and submitted to an Institution of their own, in order to their present Preservation. And can we then but suspect the incomparable Wisdom of our Saviour to have so far failed in this Point, to institute a particular Socie­ty, and leave it originally, and in its design, in the hands of its Enemies, under the deepest Obligations of a visible Prosession, to conti­nue so imbodied; but without any Laws and enforcements of its own, only what is to be received of its Enemies? this certainly can­not fix upon the thoughts of a seriously con­sidering Person; at least upon the [...]rs we have now to do with, who so much admire the Policy of the dispersed Jews in this parti­cular, and even obtrude it, as the Pattern for succeeding Government; for our Sa­viour Christ to do this, is so far from out­doing all the Law-givers that have been be­fore him, as it is justly contended he did; that it sinks him below the meanest and most inconsiderable. The words of the Learned Grotius seem here most apposite, Quando qui­dem Ecclesia coetus est, Divina lege non permissus tancum sed & institutus (De aspectabili coetu loquor) sequuntur ea omnia quae coetibus legi­timis naturaliter competunt, etiam Ecclesiae com­petere, De Imper. Sum. Potest. &c. Cap. 4. Sect. 9. that since the Church is a Company [Page 226] not permitted only, but constituted by God, (I speak of a Company that is visible) all those things which naturally belong to law­ful Associations, do also belong unto her. And again, Omne Corpus Sociale jus habet quae­dam constituendi quibus membra obligentur, hoc etiam jus Ecclesiae competere apparet, ex Act. 15.28. Heb. 13.17. Rivet. Apol. Discuss. every associated Body has a right of constituting such things by which its Members may be obliged; and that this right does belong to the Church is apparent from the Fifteenth of the Acts the Twenty eight, and the Thir­teenth to the Hebrews the Seventeenth.

§. V THAT as these Jews by the naked influ­ence and force of this their Excommunica­tion, where nothing outward and violent to coerce and constrain them, (for such Power is supposed to be gone, when this took place, the Empire cared not for it, as relating to their Religion) did oblige their Members, to preserve that unity, they believ'd themselves oblig'd unto, did govern, and reduce them upon each occasion; and upon this one score are they continued as one Body in the World at this day, the Secular Power giving them no advantage; the case is plain that there may be Mutatio Statûs, as Mr. Selden ex­presseth it, a change of the present Condi­tion, Capitis quaedam apud suos diminutio, in his Description of Excommunication, De Syned. l. 1. c. 7. abatement of Priviledges in respect of that Body, and which is not Death, on any other Bodily infliction, as he there explains it, falls under no outward forcible Restraint; for whatever was of this kind, [Page 227] was annexed to their Excommunication, by the Empire; and is by Mr. Selden acknow­ledged not of its Nature, Ibid. nor indeed in their Captivities could they execute it. And this considered, will abate what is so much objected against Church-Government, that it cannot be at all, because not, as is the Secular, sensible and coercing, not outward­ly forcing a compliance, no such Penal Vir­tue and Efficacy, that Men cannot choose but bow and submit unto it. The loss of that Communion to which once imbodied, suita­ble to the Advantages expected in, or Peril incurr'd upon a disunion from it, is Motive sufficient, even coercively obliging to him; who on rational and true Grounds closed with, and submitted to the Association, and this particularly to the Christian, who im­bodies for Eternity, whose loss is Heaven, whose Punishment is Hell, if fully and justly cut off; who believes, that out of this So­ciety, Church or Collection of Persons, there is no Salvation.

THAT God's particular Wisdom and Pro­vidence §. VI did go along with the Jewish People, in whatever they were to do or suffer; and that all had a special Relation and Prospect to Christianity which was to succeed. This appears more than probable, it was in the Plot and Design, to disenclose the Jews by degrees, to lead them by steps and grada­tions without the Temple into the Church-Catholique, to work them off from their Carnal Ordinances, and Expectations; and prepare the way for the coming of Christ, and the Worship in Spirit and Truth; to accom­plish [Page 228] upon them with more case, and facility and obviousness, what was at first design'd for a full End and Period. And that the Gospel might with less prejudice, and more readiness be received at its Promulgation. And we have several Instances of this kind, both before, all along throughout, and the midst of the Levitical Dispensation. Such as were not of the Descent of Abram were still taken in, and Gentiles admitted to Sal­vation, and not upon either the Levitical, or Abrahamitical Compact or Indentment. So Job in the Land of Huz. So the Ninevites upon the terms alone of Repentance and Amendment. Of the same sort were the [...], or Graecian Worshippers amongst the Jews, call'd Proselytes of Righteousness, known to every Body. This was one great end why Christ sent his many Prophets early and late unto them, to take them off from the Carnal Services, to open and unfold the true and farther meaning of them, and in what respect they were enjoyned. That it was not the Sacrifice it self and burnt Offe­rings, new Moons, Incense and Oblations, God then required, but Purity, Judgment and Humility, to obey the Voice of God. As is evident in every one of the Prophecies, each of their Sermons and Discourses; par­ticularly Isa. 1. Jer. 7. Micah 6. and the nearer they came to their end, the more Zealous and Active were they; witness the Prophet Malachy, the last of all. Unfatho­mable and undiscernible Providence, save only in its Effects, so order'd it, that their Captivities are the greatest instances in this [Page 229] Nature, they more sensibly and forcibly pre­vailed in order to it; disinvested them of their Temple, without which they would not have thought they could have lived one day, and so led them by the same Necessity, to that Worship, and Service and Form of Government, which in the Design and Ap­pointment of God was to overspread the whole Earth, and remain to the Restitution of all things. Thus came it about, that the Seventy and two Jews, themselves Translated the Holy Bible into Greek, the most known Language of the then civilized and learned Part of the World, and which at some times to have done was Piaculous; and what then this, could more tend to the Conversion of the Gentiles? This occasioned that Design of those Pious Persons, Jesus the Son of Syrach, and the Author of the Book of Wisdom, who­ever he was, of drawing them off from Ju­daism, and instilling the Gospel-Service and Obedience, which was by and by to succeed, and to be Eternal; whose devout most Holy Pens taking the advantage of their present Captivity, and forlorn State, without their Pompous carnal Ordinances, uncapable of the Temple Duties, instructed and urg'd up­on them that Religion, which the Accidents or Contingencies of the World could not deprive them the Exercise of. Neither time, nor Place, nor Person, could obstruct the Performance, true Holiness, Obedience, and Judgment to come; and which alone would bring them Peace at the last. And we may safely say, That in these Moral Wri­tings of theirs, there is, though not more [Page 230] of the Gospel; yet it is more plain here, and open and intelligible, than in all the Books of the Old Testament beside; what is there only in either Shades and Types, the Mystical allegorical Sense, or else upon the glance, and by accident, spoken, is here with open face, in the intent and purpose. And I may speak it out, That the Resurrection of the Body is so evidently Professed by the Mother of the Seven Sons in the Maccabees, Cap. 2. v. 7. that the like was not done be­fore it. Sure I am, not in the Levitical Law, which is at the most but shadow'd there, and even the wiser scarce saw and discern'd it; and for certain, a Sect there was among them, those of the Sadduces, that were Zealous for the Law, and yet believed neither Angel, nor Spirit, nor the World to come; so great Enemies to themselves, to the early ap­pearance of Christianity, to a great Evidence for it against the Jews, are they, who refuse and reject, this so huge an advantage of these Apocryphal Writings, and that will not read them, though Saint Paul did, and hence made Evidence to his Auditors, that the Resurre­ction in those days was believed, Heb. 11.33, 34, &c. because the Evidence is less clear, that they were indited by the immediate im­pulse of God, as were the other parts of the Old Testament, being Penn'd since the days of Malachy, after whom we have no avouch­ment for any other Prophets, and therefore call'd Apochryphal; because thus hidden and obscure in their Original. St. Austin, Ep. 4. to Volusianus a great Contemner of Christia­nity, among other Arguments of God's Power [Page 231] and Wisdom in the managery of it, brings this for one, Reproba per Infidelitatem gens ipsa Judaeorum à sedibus extirpata per mundum us (que) qua (que) dispergitur, ut ubi (que) portet Codices Sanctos, ac si Prophetiae Testimonium qua Christus & Ecclesia praenuntiata est, nè ad tempus à vobis fictum existimaretur, ab ipsis Adversariis Pro­feratur, ubi etiam ipsos praedictum est non fuisse credituros. The Jew carries with him the Bible into what Nation he is dispersed, and Christ and his own belief, so plainly there foretold, never want a Testimony thereby, of his own, asserting the one, and upbraiding the other. And on these Grounds it is we may probably Collect, that this Association of the Jews, in a voluntary Discipline, occa­sioned by reason of such their Captivity, and which a rigider Necessity brought them to, being depriv'd of their proper Government, and depending on themselves alone, was an early instance of the like imbodying and Ju­risdiction in the succeeding Church of Christ; a Prelibation of that his Kingdom, not long after to come down from Heaven, and such its abstracted independent Polity is therein anticipated.

WHEN Mr. Selden goes on and tells us. §. VII That the Government of the Church was Caesarean, only, because it was imbodied in the State, at least indulg'd by the Empire, this has as little of Argument as any one could wish, unless he had prov'd the Church had had no other bottom to stand upon; that to Institute and Protect were all one; and that it could not be from Christ and from Cae­sar in different respects, the contrary to [Page 232] which has been made to appear all along in this Discourse; and the Churches in Jerusa­lem, Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, Rome, might all be, and were, of an Antecedent Institution, though the Owning and Prote­ction from the Empire was much to their ad­vantage; or why should this be concluded against the Christians, and not against the Jews? who are supposed to have instituted their own Discipline under the Captivity, before Judea was reduced to a Province, and they professed Subjection to the Empire, and all along retain'd it, and all other Rites, or at least so many of them as their conquer'd Condition did render them capable of Pra­ctising, as immediately from God, and inde­pendent to the State; nor will any one ven­ture to assert otherwise. The Law was given by the Mediation of Angels, indeed; but Princes were not so much as instrumental in it, and after its first giving, even to the days of St. Paul, both the Law, and the Temple and Caesar, were distinct Powers, created different Obligations, and he Pleads for him­self as injurious to neither of them, in the Acts of the Apostles, and the Deputy Gallio there had failed much of his Duty, when caring for none of these things, had the Mat­ters of their Religion resolv'd it self imme­diately into Caesar, especially since Mr. Selden contends that all the Priviledges the Chri­stians enjoy'd as to their Religion, they had as Jews, going under their Names, and, as such, reputed. Nor could the Empire upon this his Supposition, assume any Power as to their Religion, he did not over the Jewish. [Page 233] And to make good this his Precarious and impertinent Presumption [That for some years after our Saviour's Ascension, the Jews and Christians went under the Name of Jews, and were reputed as one] he is more preca­rious yet; and goes on in his Arbitrary way, and tells us, That no Gentiles during that time were admitted Disciples to Christ, but such as were before Proselytes, either of the Gates, or of Justice, or first Circumcised: all which, if true, is nothing to his designed end; for the Christians might shelter them­selves under that Name, to partake of, by that means, the Priviledges and Immunities, the Empire bestow'd upon the Jews, and re­tain their distinct Rites and Character, their own particular Sentiments, as other Sects did, Multis in locis Judeos Christum sequentes in Synagogas admissos fuisse credam, dummodo ritus servarem Judaicos (Grotius Appendix ad Comment. de Antichristo.) That in many pla­ces the Jews which followed Christ were ad­mitted into the Synagogue, it may be believed, especially if we consider, that the Jewish Rites were observed for some time, together with the Christian, at least not publickly absented from and declar'd against. So St. Paul had his Vow, and Paid it in the Tem­ple, upon a Private Consideration and future design; so he caused Timothy to be Circum­cised. But though the Empire might consi­der them no farther, then as Men of another Profession, as to Religion in general, from it self, and so grant one Toleration for them all, and the Christians upon particular occa­sions might intermix with the Jews, yet that [Page 234] they were visible and distinguishable, as distinct Bodies, and different Associations, the Case of St. Paul makes manifest, when Purifying himself in the Temple, how the Jews which were of Asia soon discovered him and ran tumultuously upon him, and drew him out of it. And that those Greeks then with St. Paul, were no Proselytes at all, ei­ther of the Gates or of Justice, though Chri­stians, as Mr. Selden supposes all Christians were, is more than likely, Acts 21. and the whole Book of these Acts of the Apostles, renders notorious; whence otherwise all those other Persecutions from the Hebrews? and that their Women so raved and blasphemed, when the Gentiles were received as equal sharers in the Mercies of God with them­selves, if all were Proselytes before and no more was now pretended to? The Chri­stians did not suffer more afterwards, by the Heathen Powers, than they did thus early by the unbelieving Jews, so far as they were able, which certainly is no mark of being of the same Body, and using the same Synagogue and Service; the Jews in general and the Christians were so far from thus associating in one Body, and appearing every ways the same (however upon particular occasions some of them might) that the Believing Jews and the Gentile Christians, still made a Sepa­ration for a good pretty while after our Sa­viour's Ascension; how wide the rent, and great the distance was, we read in the Epistle to the Galatians, even to a with-drawing and Separation. And the Church Story is evident they had their distinct Bishops and Congrega­tions [Page 235] in the same City; as St. Peter and St. Paul at Rome, and so continued till after the Siege at Jerusalem, when the Christians departed to Aelia, as Grotius tells us, in his Annotations on the Eleventh Chapter and Third Verse of the Revelations.

BUT these at the most are but trifling §. VIII Discourses, and altogether Foreign to the point in hand, nor could Mr. Selden design them any otherwise than as a Gild and Var­nish to his main Body, and ill managed Dis­course preceding; That which is his funda­mental Error, the bottom of his whole de­sign, and which all his Complices begin with and manage together with himself, is this; That there can be no Government, which is not of this World, but what is by the Powers, Managery, Methods and Instruments, Courses, outward Compulsions and Penalties of it; each of whose Forces and Ligaments must operate by the outward Organs, sensi­bly and in a visible manner. In this Suppo­sal is his whole Discourse laid, as we have already from himself, stated it, in the latter end of the Third Chapter, in some instances shew'd the weakness of the Plea it self, how inconsistent with his own Schemes and Concessions; and what seems farther ne­cessary to a thorow Answer, and the car­rying on withal, and clearing this my own particular Discourse, follows in the suc­ceeding Sections.

AND part of my Answer shall be by way §. IX of Concession, yielding to him in some mea­sure, what he contends for, That the King­dom, Government and Jurisdiction of the [Page 236] Gospel is not, cannot be outwardly forcing and Coercive, by the either Instruments or Penalties of this World. To assert such a Power erected by our Lord and Saviour Je­sus Christ, is immediately and with the same breath, to publish it a Cheat, an Imposture and Usurpation, 'tis in the very letter to Affront and Contradict, the very Plot, Frame, and Con­stitution of it, since Christ himself has de­clared that his Kingdom is not of this World, neither laid in the contrivance, either su­stain'd or supported in the ways and courses of it. If it had been so, he had surely never appeared in the World in that meaner form and lower order he did, a different way then by dying upon the Cross had been design'd for the managery and accomplishment of it, he could have call'd for Fire from Heaven as E­lijah did upon the Head of his Gain-sayers, a course of Proceedings agreeable enough to that present Constitution, whose Rewards and Penalties were Carnal, in the hands of a Tem­poral Jurisdiction, or have had Millions of Angels his Seconds, to smite, as they did Sennacherib's Army, in one Night, one Mi­nute, all that opposed, that sat in Judgment against him; or with but one word from his Mouth, laid any one gain-sayer flat upon the ground; as he did those few that came first to lay hold of him, when he was betrayed; He was not sent into the World weak and una­ble, with less perfect Credentials and Instru­ctions, or lesser Power, than other Prophets or Holy Men had, which were sent into the World before him, all was full and perfect, in order to the Message and Embassy, the [Page 237] Errand he came into the World for, he came with more, with all, Power in Heaven and Earth given him, the Power of the Kingdom wholly and solely delivered up unto him; only he came of a different Errand and De­sign, than some others had come of before him, he was of another Spirit, and to work his work quite in another manner, and by other Weapons; not such as were Carnal, but Spiritual, mighty indeed, to the beating down strong holds, but of Sin and Sathan; he came not to destroy, but to save that which was lost, to lay hold on the Seed of Abram, when he passed by the fallen Angels, lest they come into their blackness of dark­ness, those Chains they are now reserv'd in for Judgment. And let any one but seriously peruse, and consider this great Mystery of Godliness; God manifest in the Flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of Angels, Preach'd unto the Gentiles, believed on in the World, and received up into Glory, let him look over the History of his Saviour, his first coming from Heaven, his whole Life, Actings, Suf­fering, Dying, rising again and ascending into Heaven, and he can discern nothing like an outward sensible, worldly Regiment and Jurisdiction to be erected or executed by him, any outward force upon Mens either Persons, or Lives or Fortunes, in bringing about that work he was sent for into the World by the Father to do, is the intent and purpose of it; and as he had not, neither can he be conceived to have had, a design in his own Person to exercise a worldly Do­minion, or did he delegate others, his Apo­stles [Page 238] and principal Ministers, to any such Office and Undertakings; his being Preach'd to the Gentiles and believed on in the World, implied or inferr'd nothing of it, but the quite contrary; nor could any be his Adhe­rents and Followers, on any such purposes. With an industrious Zeal he still removed it out of the apprehensions and thoughts of his Disciples when on Earth among them; he told St. Peter he was an Offence to him, when savouring these things of Men, fancy­ing him to reign as a Temporal Prince on Earth; with outward force and Power to repel the Injuries of his Adversaries, St. Mat. 16.21, 22, 23. As also when his Disciples required him to call down Fire from Heaven upon the Heads of his Enemies in St. Luke's Gospel, urging to St. Peter, and all of them those quite different Doctrines of his Gos­pel, That if any man will come after him, let him deny himself, and take up his Cross and follow him; that whosoever will save his life shall lose it, and whosoever will lose his life, shall save it; and 'tis to save the Soul, not gain the World, is to be their aim in becoming his Disciples. And thus did they Preach Christ ever since the Holy Ghost so fully came upon them; reproving the World of Sin, of Righteousness, and Judgment, the work of the Comforter, Joh. 16.7, 8. And that trifling Argument, as if want of Power and Prudential forbea­rance made them not to attempt any thing more, is what cannot fall under the thoughts of a considering Person. He that by Twelve mean Persons, as were the Apostles, could [Page 239] convert so great a part of the World, by the same Power and Instruments could he have over-ruled the Persons of the rest of the World; to Master and bring into Captivity to the Law of Faith, an undisciplined, un­ruly Understanding and Will, is as great a Work of the Almighty, as to subdue the whole Person. The Mind is as difficultly conquer'd as the Body, and more difficultly too; because no immediate outward force can be put upon it. He that when meer Idiots and Ignaro's gave them the Under­standing and Tongue of the Learned, could also have given them the Arm of the Mighty and Valiant. St. Peter, who with but one word from his Mouth struck dead Ananias and Saphira his Wife for cheating the Church, might with one word from his Mouth also have reversed the Edict of Nero, appointing him to be crucified at Rome, have enfeebled those hands of the Executioner, that nailed and fixed him on the Cross. St. Paul who struck Elymas the Sorcerer Blind, might have smote Ananias on the Bench, made that offi­cious reviling Orator Tertullus to be Dumb, and baffled Nero with all his Power, had outward Coercion and Force been the assign­ed way to Plant and Propagate Religion, a general course set up, a standing Rule, ei­ther for the present, or Succession of Ages. However God thought fit to give special In­stances of such his Power upon particular no­torious Sinners, by the hands of his Apostles, to let the World see it was not against the Nature of the Gospel, though not in the in­tent of it, thus to have them dealt with in [Page 240] particular Cases; to preserve the horror in remembrance, till the appointed time, till the Empire became Christian; in whose hands, not the Apostles, and their Succession, this outward sorcing punishing part does re­side, in its constant perpetual Seat or Sub­ject, Ita tunc Deus supplebat id quod Magistra­tus Ecclesiae praestare debent, & tunc non Prae­stabant, Grotius, in 1 Cor. 4.21. Then God did supply what the Magistrates ought to have discharged, and did not; instancing in these very Punishments of Ananias and Saphira struck Dead, of Elymas the Sorcerer struck Blind, and of the Bodily Diseases sent out upon others. Our Saviour Christ in his Life designed and contrived upon every occasion, when any appearance that others should suspect him, or when any apt opportunity to express and declare himself, that he was nei­ther to exempt himself from any instance of Subjection to his Governors, nor exercise in any Case the Jurisdiction that was theirs, and for this he Pays Tribute, refuses to divide Inheritances; nor did he invade any one private Person, and we read of but one Colt, that he commanded to be brought unto him, to which, as what was his Title we do not read, so are we not told of any injury done by it; nor of any Complaint made in the Streets on the occasion. And his Death, though pre-ordained in the fore determi­nation of God, for no one worldly end or design, to serve no one Political Purpose, but solely and altogether to satisfie for the Sins of Man, to make compleat our Redemption; yet it was ordered that the earthy Governors [Page 241] should have a Power given them from above, for a legal Process and judicial Trial upon him; he died in a course of Law, and a Po­sture of Obedience to them: And although it must be granted that some of the ancient Fa­thers, and most eminent first Christians did Believe and Publish to the World, that Christ should come again and reign upon Earth in his Person, as Supreme Governor of all, and his Saints with and by him in the independent, full freedom, use and advan­tage of the Goods of this World, and of Sense, that Jerusalem should be Rebuilt, its Streets enlarged and inhabited by them. So Justin Martyr, Dialog. cum Tryph. Jud. Irenaeus lib. 5. cont. Heres. c. 32. Tertul. lib. 3. cont. Marcion. c. 24. with Lactantius, and others; yet it amounted not to an Universal received Opinion of that Age. Justin Martyr acknow­ledges there were many [...], Holy and Pious in their Judgments which did not acknowledge it. And Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, lib. 3. cap. 39. gi­ving that slender account of its rise and ori­ginal from Papias, tells us that many, but not all Ecclesiastical Writers, led by a shew of the Antiquity, assented unto it; but yet this was not by any of them expected during this state of things on Earth, and in the Re­generation, Sed alio statu, utpote post resurre­ctionem, as Tertullian. Tom. 4. inter fra [...]menta, [...], as Justin Martyr supra. Ibid. Post Resurrectionem, coram judicio, terram posside­bunt. As Irenaeus, Ibid. but not till after the Resurrection, ante coelum, before their As­cension [Page 242] into Heaven, as Tertullian again, Ibid. when all Rule and Autority and Power has had its just Time and Period upon Earth, is put under foot alone by God; it seeming just that in what condition they had laboured and been afflicted, tried and proved by all manner of ways or Sufferings upon Earth; they there receive the Reward and Fruit of such their Sufferings, as Irenaeus ill argues, in qua enim conditione laboraverunt sive afflicti sunt, omnibus modis probati per sufferentiam, justum est in eâ recipere fructus sufferentiae; they cannot be conceived to have thoughts of either evading or invading the Civil Power, which then was supposed to be none at all, because after the Resurrection, and of which during its time for continuance by God af­fixed, they were the most Zealous Maintainers and Asserters, as has been already shew'd. So far do they erre from the Spirit of these first and eminent Christians, who pretending to the same Millennium, or reign upon Earth, oppose and fight against their present Gover­nors, to hasten and effect it.

§. X BUT then to argue on the other hand, that because it was not the design of the Gospel to erect a Temporal Kingdom upon Earth, Christ and his Apostles design'd and erected none at all, they had really no Power, no Autority, committed unto them, this is as wide from Truth, this runs from one ex­treme to the other; which indeed is the usual course of such as are designed for error. Clemens Alexandrinus, in his Admonition to the Gentiles, observed it of old among them, and that their Ignorance still led them into [Page 243] one of the two Extremes, of either Ignorance or Superstition, [...], either they Worshipped their many ridiculous beastlier Gods, or else none at all, denied the only true God. On this score Evenemus Agrigentinus, Nicanor Cyprius, Diagoras, Hippo, Melius and Theodorus, with some others were called Atheists; Men that considered not the Truth, only saw the Error of the then abominable Worships and Ac­knowledgments. And the same is easily ac­knowledg'd throughout the whole Ecclesiasti­cal Tradition, how, as Atheists before, so Hereticks since, have still run the same way; and their Heresies, by these courses, been ei­ther started or maintained. Thus that Pesti­lent Sect of the Arians united, not only with the Miletian Scismaticks, but with the Hea­thens too, the more to oppose, and make numerous their Party against the Catholicks, as we have it in Sozomen, Hist. Eccles. lib. 1. c. 15. Athanas. Orat. 1. Cont. Arium. and in his Apology, Pag. 731. and his Epistle Ad Solitariam vitam agentes. And the same did the Donatists after them, who set open the Idol Temples, that themselves might have liberty, applauded and sided with Julian the Apostate, and gave opportunity for the Pub­lick Worship of the Devil, that they might with full freedom serve their own particular Designs, and their Malice and Revenge be gratified, as St. Austin and Optatus at large declare, Contra Petil. cap. 8. 92. Ep. 48. &c. Contr. Parmen. Donatist. lib. 2. I might all along trace them down, I'le only make my farther instances in what comes more nearly [Page 244] up to the case in hand, because there may be such a thing as Domination over the Clergy. Therefore there is no real Power to be exer­cised over them, because Diotrephes affected a Superiority where it belong'd not unto him; therefore a Bishop and a Presbyter must be of equal Power. The Church of God must not exercise Autority as do the Kings of the Gen­tiles; therefore whatever the Power they execute is, must be Tyranny and Usurpation. The Church of Rome have notoriously ex­ceeded their Commission, Pretended to what they never had, either from Christ or St. Pe­ter, as to depose Kings, to acquit their Sub­jects of their Allegiance, exercising Tempo­ral, outward Coercive Power, as in their Charter by Religion. Therefore the Church of God has no Charter at all, is no Body or Corporation Autoritative and Juridical; or as Mr. Selden and his Friends argue, we read of no other Power in the World before, but what was sensible, outward, and coercive; and all Gospel-Power must be such or none, a Plea to what is otherwise, is a Cheat and Imposture. And in answer to which, I must here repeat in part what I have said in the beginning of the Third Chapter of this Trea­tise upon another occasion.

§. XI THAT the Church is a Body, but of a quite differing Nature, a various Design and Constitution, for another purpose, according to that eternal purpose, which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord, Eph. 3.11. a Body, but the Body of Christ, framed and fitted a­lone according to the fulness of the measure of his Stature, his Body which is the Church, [Page 245] Eph. 5.23. an Association of People incor­porated and united under him their Head, in one Spirit, one Lord, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all, Eph. 4.4, 5. growing up into him in all things, who is the head, even Christ, Ephes. 4.15. a Body that is to be vi­sible, subject to outward sense, but 'tis by an Holy Life, and Religious Conversation; that which Men are to see, is their good works, and glorifie their Father which is in Heaven; and all grants to its Officers, Power, Means, Ordinances, are only in order here­unto; the only change here design'd, is the change of our vile Bodies, that they may be like unto Christ's glorious Body, according to the mighty working whereby he is able to sub­due all things unto himself. A Lordship there is, but not over Kings and Scepters; 'tis Death and Sin Christ Jesus treads under his Feet only. He is the Lord of the Sabbath invested with all Power in Heaven and Earth, relating to God's Worship and Service, his Adoration and Homage, to appoint, stablish and fix, as he pleases, for ever.

A BODY or Corporation, with its diffe­rent §. XII Organs, Parts and Members; the Eye to see, the Ear to hear, and the Foot to walk, with Parts more and less Honorable; with diverse Gifts and Graces, according to the measure of the Gift of Christ, some to Go­vern, others to Obey; some to Preside, o­thers to Submit, and be ruled by them. Some of which Governors were to remain only for a time, others to continue for ever; as, the [Page 246] Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons; Orders of Men, instituted and invested by Christ, not with an improper, as some speak with abatement, but with a true real Praefecture, ‘Power and Jurisdiction in the Church, that sitting upon Twelve Thrones and Judging, that Spiritual Grace and Investiture, to be collated, and so Promised, in the [...], the new Age or State beginning just after the Resurrection of Christ; it is an Auto­ritative, Paternal Power of Chastisements, Discipline and Government, to be exer­cised on all its Subjects; each one that has given up his Name unto Christ, (that ex­pects any benefit of the incorporation) for the keeping them in some compass, with­in the terms of a Peaceable, Holy, tru­ly Christian Congregation;’ As are the words of our Learned Doctor Hammond, in his Treatise of The Power of the Keys, Cap. 1. Sect. 1.

§. XIII AN Incorporation with differing Offices and Duties, Powers and Capacities, from any other in the World; to be call'd out from others, from the World or any Society in it, and to unite in a diverse Association, which has peculiar Laws and Rules, even of Morality, is not enough to specifie consti­tute and express the Church of Christ, to signalize that Collection or Association which is Christian. All believe and assent so far that there is such a Sect and Coalition of Persons as are called Christians, in the World, and is usually call'd a Church; 'tis Matter of Fact, self-evident, and not to be denied. But this Body or Church is not known and acknow­ledged [Page 247] to have such means of Salvation, such Power and Efficacy, such Properties and Pri­viledges, as the true Church of Christ im­plies and contains. The name Church ( [...]) belongs to Prophane, as well as Ecclesiastical Congregations; whether in Athens, Corinth, Alexandria, or Jerusalem, as Origen argues against Celsus, lib. 3. but all have not the Powers & Operations alike. The Church of God is a Society, as with differing Members and Offices, Services and Obliga­tions: So, to differing Ends, with differing Gifts and Endowments; For the perfecting the Saints, for the work of the Ministry, for the edifying the Body of Christ, Ephes. 4.12. the building, and raising them to Heaven, in the unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God. Sciendum est illam esse veram Ecclesiam, in qua est Confessio & Penitentia, quae peccata & vulnera, quibus subjecta est imbecillitas car­nis, salubriter curat, as Lactantius, Lib. 4. Sect. Ʋlt. Ʋbi Ecclesia, ibi Spiritus Dei, & ubi Spiritus Dei, ibi Ecclesia & omnis gratia, So Irenaeus, l. 3. c. 40. that is the true Church, where Confession is and Repentance, with wholsome means to cure those Wounds and Sins, to which the weakness of the Flesh is subject; where there is the Spirit of God and all Grace, as in the Armory of David, those many Shields of the Mighty, Divine Assistances and Remedies for Eternity. Ca­tholicum nomen non ex Ʋniversitate gentium. Sed ex Plenitudine Sacramentorum; as St. Au­stin relates of the Donatists, well replying, Collat. cum Donatist. Tertii Diei, the fulness of the Sacraments, not the bare Coalition of [Page 248] all the Nations in the World, makes the true Catholick Church. And St. Austin him­self says the same, Ep. 48. Vincentio fratri, where there is that [...], and [...], first and second cleansing and Purga­tion, the one the Effect of Baptism, the other of Repentance. In Sozomen's Church History, l. 1. c. 3. Now these different Powers and Duties, as distant from all others in the World besides; so being diverse also as to themselves, and in respect of one another, according to the several Gifts and Relations; these are either common to the whole, each Member of the Association, every Believer, or else, they are limited and appropriate to particular distinct Orders and Offices in the Body. What Duties and Offices are com­mon, and what appropriate, I am now to de­clare, and explain.

§. XIV AS Christians in common, all of one Bo­dy, and under one Head, so had they one common Faith, which every one Professed, to which each assented, and gave up his un­derstanding whole and entire, and which was a first instance of their Union, as an In­corporation, a signal Badg or Mark, by which as a watch-word they were known to one another, and distinguished from the whole World besides; Now this object of belief, and to which they declared their Adhesion, was indeed, Jesus the Son of God, or Christ and him Crucified, as delivered by Christ and the Apostles down unto them; but because these Rules must be many and Instructions numerous, as they are to this day as given in the Scriptures; and every good Christian, [Page 249] and who is instructed for the Kingdom of Glory, cannot be supposed with Knowledge and Judgment enough, so to digest them, as to be ready to answer to every Man that asketh a Reason of his Faith that is in him, or so as his own need shall require, in his daily Confessions and Acknowledgments to God. I'le add, so as the Duties in common, to be performed by all as Christians, even the most learned Scribe among them shall exact; for the rehearsing their Faith, and open Confession of it before Men, was a branch of their constant Devotions. And it must be as impertinent, and unhandsom, when they come together, if every one have a diverse Interpretation, Digestion and Ex­pression of his Faith, as if every one should have a differing Prayer, Hymn, or Thanks­giving; the World must believe them all Mad; nothing can be done to Edification, nothing of Order and Peace, only Confusion be in the Churches of God. Hence that Summary of what is to be believed and con­fessed, the Apostles Creed, was composed, 'tis generally concluded, by the Twelve Apostles themselves; and to which, if St. Paul's form of Doctrine delivered, Rom. 6.17. his form of sound words, that good thing com­mitted to Timothy's trust, to be kept by him, and to be conveigh'd to others, 1 Tim. 2.20. 2 Tim. 1.13, 14.2.2. related not; yet thus much may certainly be collected thence, That they had Summaries of Chri­stianity, antecedent to St. Paul's Epistles, and which suppose these Doctrines receiv'd; and pursuant to which St. Paul wrote his Epi­stles, [Page 250] as general needs, and in course re­quir'd, or upon particular occasion of false Teachers coming in, those vain Bablings and Oppositions of Science falsely so called, which some Professing, have erred from the Truth; and by which Summaries they were to censure and exclude them. And the same may be St. Peter's Holy Commandment deli­vered, 2 Pet. 2.21. And St. John's Unction received; or that which they heard from the beginning, and which he Exhorts them to abide in, and it will teach them all things, 1 John 2.20.24.27. but of whatever use they were to the conserving of Truth, and ejection of Heresies (and which falls not un­der this Head now to pursue.) Certain it is Creeds they had and Collections of Faith to be assented to and Professed by all that were Baptized, or any ways admitted into the Body and Society of Christians. Baptism is a Stipulation, Agreement and Assent. Ali­quid respondentes, as Tertullian speaks, de Co­rona Militis, Cap. 3. There is something an­swer'd, professed, and engaged in. And Dio­nysius in Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. l. 7. c. 9. there mentions [...], Questions and Answers in use of Baptism, and which were made in part relating to what they believed, and receiv'd as Christians. Thus Irenaeus Cent. Haereses, lib. 1. c. 1. speaks of [...], a Canon or Rule of Truth which is receiv'd when Baptized. So Tertullian, Lib. de Spectaculis, c. 4. Cum aquam ingressi, Chri­stianam fidem in Legis suae verba profitemur. Going into the Water, we make Profession of Christianity. St. Cyprian tells the same, [Page 251] Sed & ipsa interrogatio quae fit in Baptismo testis est veritatis. Nam cum dicimus, Credis in vitam Eternam, & remissionem peccatorum per Sanctam Ecclesiam, intelligimus remissionem peccatorum non nisi in Ecclesia dari, The Question at Bap­tism is a witness of the Truth. And when we say we believe Forgiveness of Sins, and Life Everlasting, and the Holy Church; we understand that Remission of Sins is given only in the Church, Ep. 70. St. Jerome adv. Luci­ferianos says also, Solenne sit in lavacro post Trinitatis Confessionem, interrogare, Credis in Sanctâ Ecclesia! Credis remissionem Peccato­rum. 'Tis usual at Baptism after the Con­fession of the Trinity, to ask, Dost thou be­lieve in the Holy Church, and Remission of Sins? and l. 2. adv. Pelag. in Confessione Baptismatis, lavat nos à Peccatis sanguis Christi, in our Confession at Baptism, the Blood of Christ, washes us from our Sins, Interrogamus an Cre­dat Deo. So Optatus, l. 5. cont. Parmen. Do­natist. We ask if he believes in God, Credo, inquis, in Deum. Thou sayest, I Believe in God; having renounced the World and Devil at Baptism. Salvian, l. 6. De gubernat. Dei. And accordingly are they found together in Euse­bius, Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 8. [...], Faith and Confession, i. e. Baptism and Con­fession; for so is the frequent Ecclesiastical Phrase of Faith, Nec secundas post fidem nup­tias permittitur nosse, they must not Marry a­gain after Baptism, or after Confession of Faith, by which Baptism is expressed, Ter­tul. Exhort. ad Castitat. c. 1. with many of the like Nature, Lib. de Pudicit. Cap. 16. Scorpiac. c. 8, &c. where Fides and Baptisma [Page 252] are but diverse Expressions of the same thing, Baptism being a Publick Confession of Faith in and Adhesion to the Gospel of Christ Je­sus; an open undertaking of it upon its Terms and Conditions. And so in the Im­perial Laws, Cod. 16. Tit. 7. l. 4. to violate Baptism is to violate Faith given up to Christ. And the ancient Church distinguishing of Christians into Fideles and Catecumenos; those were the [...], or Faithful, who were Bapti­zed; in opposition to the Catechumens, which were not, and in that sense not Believers. And all this is acknowledged by Theodore Beza, in his Eighth Epistle written to Grin­dal Archbishop of Canterbury, when they were baptized Adults, and at the years of Understanding. But upon what account In­fantulus de fide compelletur, a little Infant should be interrogated, or have such Que­stions put unto him; what Covenant can here be entred he knows not. What was the Arch-Bishops return to him I have not yet met with. I shall at present only reply in the words of St. Austin de Baptismo contra Dona­tistas, c. 23. Ideò cum alii pro iis respondent, ut impleatur erga eos celebratio Sacramenti, va­leat uti (que) ad eorum Consecrationem, quia ipsi respondere non possunt. Their Susceptors or Undertakers answer for them, because they cannot answer for themselves; and upon such their undertaking, the Sacrament becomes effectual unto them.

§. XV AS Christians, and with one Faith; so had they the same Laws and Rules for Obedience and Holy Living, in this did they Associate and Confederate together. Of this we read [Page 253] an eminent instance, Tertul. Apol. c. 2. in the words of Pliny to Trajan the Emperor, Nihil aliud se conserisse quam Coetus antelucanos— ad confederandam Disciplinam, Homicidium, Adulterium, Fraudem, Perfidiam & Caetera scelera Prohibentes. They entred Compacts, and a State of Discipline against Murder, Adultery, Fraud, Perfidiousness, and other Wickednesses. And which Indentment or Compact, upon what particular occasion it was then undertook, the main design and purpose of it, was then, by all that were Baptized, and has been all along since an­swer'd in such their Baptism. Another branch or instance of which Vow is this, To forsake the Devil and all his Works, the Pomps and Va­nities of the wicked World, and all the sinful Lusts of the Flesh, and to keep all God's Holy Commandments. Cum aquam ingressi renun­ciasse nos Diabolo, & Pompae & Angelis ejus, contestamur, Tertul. De Spectaculis, l. 4. and De habitu Muliebri, c. 2. his sunt Angeli qui­bus in lavacro renunciamus. And, De Coronâ Militis, c. 3. Aquam adituri sub Antistitis manu contestamur nos renunciare Diabolo & Pompae & Angelis ejus. So St. Cyprian, Ep. 7. Seculo renunciaveramus, cùm Baptizati fuimus. So Optatus, Interrogamus an renunciat Dia­bolo, Lib. [...]. Cont. Parmen. Donatist. And Salvian says the same, Quae enim est in Baptismo Salutari Christianorum prima Professio? Quae sc. nisi se renunciare Diabolo ac Pompis ejus ac spectaculis & operibus profitentur.—Quo modo O Christiane post Baptismum sequeris quae opus Diaboli confiteris, De Gubernat. Dei, l. 6. And all which is but the Baptismal Vow in [Page 254] Latine, with a severe check to those whō after their Baptism, and so solemn an En­gagement to the contrary, are over-ruled by the Devil, and follow after the World's Pomps and Vanities, and sinful Lusts of the Flesh. And St. Jerome, Ep. ad Paulam, calls the Monastical Vow, Secundum Baptisma, a Second Baptism; and 'tis that St. Austin cau­tions the Donatists, Ne seculo verbis solis re­nunciant, l. 5. De Baptism. cont. Donatist. that they renounce not the World in words only. Nor were the Christians of old, their Body or Association, discernable and apart from the whole World in any thing more then in their good Life, their stricter and most heavenly Conversation.

§. XVI THIS Union of Christians as one Body and Association, is farther expressed by Tertul­lian, Apol. Cap. 39. Edam nunc ipse negotia factionis Christianae, Corpus sumus de Con­scientia Religionis, & Disciplinae Ʋnitate, & Spei foedere, coimits in coetum & Congrega­tionem ut ad Deum quasi manu factâ Preca­tiones ambiamus Orantes: Haec vis Deo grata est; Oramus etiam pro Imperatoribus, pro Mi­nistris eorum & Potestatibus, pro statu seculi, pro rerum quiete, pro morâ finis, cogimur ad Divinarum literarum Commemorationem; si quid praesentium rerum qualitas, aut praemonere co­git, aut recognoscere, certe fidem Sanctis vo­cibus poscimus, spem erigimus, fiduciam sigimus, Disciplinam Praeceptorum nihilominus inculca­tionibus densamus: Ibidem etiam Exhortatio­nes, castigaetiones, & censura Divina. I will now declare the Offices of Christianity, We are a Body in the Conscience of Religion, [Page 255] in Unity of Discipline, and Covenant of Hope; we come together in one Company and Congregation, that making Prayers al­together and at once we may procure his Fa­vour and Blessing; this force is grateful to God. We Pray also for the Emperors, for their Ministers, and such to whom their Power is deputed; for the State of the World; for the quiet and due accomplish­ment of all things. The Divine Letters are urg'd upon us, either to Premonish us against what we may expect to come, or stablish in us what we have received; our Faith is nou­rished, our Hope increased, our Confidence fixed, and Duties frequently inculcated upon us. There are Exhortations, Castigations, and the Divine Censure. And to the same purpose in his Book De Anima, Cap. 9. Scripturae leguntur, Psalmi canuntur, Adlocu­tiones Proseruntur, Petitiones delegantur, the Scriptures are Read, Psalms are Sung, Ad­monitions are made, and Petitions are sent forth by us. Deum Principem, ac rerum cun­ctarum Dominum adorans, obsequio venerabili invocare. Arnob. lib. 1. adv. Gentes; and lib. 4. Huic omnes ex more Prosternimur, hunc colla­tis precibus adoramus, ab hoc justa & honesta, & auditu ejus digna deposcimus,—in quibus summus oratur Deus, Pax cunctis & venia po­stulatur Magistratibus, Exercitibus, Regibus, Familiaribus, Amicis, vitam adhuc degentibus, & resolutis Corporum unctione, in quibus nihil aliud auditur nisi quod humanos faciat, nisi quod mites, verecundos, pudicos, castos, &c. we there adoring, with Obsequious reverence call up­on God, the Chief and Lord of all things; be­fore [Page 256] him, as is the Custom, we are Prostrate, asking of him what is Just and Honest, and worthy his hearing; we Pray for Peace and Pardon to all in Autority, for the Armies, for Kings, for our Familiars and Friends, whe­ther dead or alive; nor is any heard from us, but what makes us Humane, Meek, Mo­dest, and Chast. And the same account we have in Justin Martyr, in his second Apology, [...], &c. Praying and sending up Hymns of Thanksgiving suitable to our Powers; for that he Created us, gives us Health, Plenty, fruitful Seasons, and will bestow upon us a blessed Resurrection. We there worship and adore God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, the Blessed Trinity; and so in the close of that Apology, [...], upon Sunday we meet together, [...], in Common Prayers and Supplications for themselves, all Chri­stians, all Mankind, giving one another the Holy Kiss, celebrating the Communion, gi­ving thanks to the Creator of all things by Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost, to which the People say Amen; reading the Writings of the Apostles and Prophets as the time will bear, the President or Bishop discoursing to them upon some one or more Portions of them, and against this it is he Cautions; that upon any Pets or assumed Anger, upon what differences may happen, they do not absent, and go apart, from the Communion in Prayers, [...], Ep. ad Zenam & Serenum. So also Origen in his Third and [Page 257] Fourth Books against Celsus. Clemens Alexan­drinus in his Seventh Stromaton. Eusebius, l. 7. c. 9. Eccl. Hist. and De Vitâ Constantini, l. 4. c. 17, 18. And Eccl. Hist. l. 10. c. 3. Concil. Laodicen. Can. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19. and eve­ry one of them to the same Purpose. This indeed being the chief Office of the Body of Christ, the great End of the Christian Incor­poration; thus to assemble▪ and be one in the Common Services of God, its undoubted Right and Property; though not in every instance peculiar to it, and incommunicable, Thus to confess with their Mouths that Jesus is risen from the Dead, to assent to the Gospel by Faith, evidenced in an Holy and Innocent Conversation, attending the Sacraments of Baptism and the Supper of the Lord, the Common Prayers, Praises, Thanksgivings and Recognitions due to God Almighty, as Created, Preserved, and Redeemed by him; all of what order and rank soever thus joyn­ing and uniting in Heart and Hand and Mouth, every Man taking and performing his part; Priest and People, saying that Amen mentioned in Justin Martyr, and after him by St. Austin, Per tot gentes in quibus respon­detur unâ penè Voce Amen, & Cantatur Hale­lujah; That Amen which is answer'd, and Halelujah which is Sung with one almost Voice, throughout so many Nations, Lib. 2. adv. Literas Petiliani Donatistae, & super Ge­stis cum Emerito Episcopo. So Athanasius in his Apology, [...]. How De­cent and Holy is it to hear in the House built for Prayer, the People say Amen, [...] [Page 258] [...], with one sound and consent there men­tioned, Carmen Christo quasi Deo dicere Semet invicem; saying a Hymn to Christ as God, in courses with one another. As Pliny, lib. 10. Ep. 97. and is referr'd to by Tertullian in his Apology, [...], Singing back again to one another in St. Basil, [...], Praying betwixt one another, Ep. 63. Ad Clericos Neocesariensis Ecclesiae, in amoi­beunis, and alternate Responses. The Priest Parat mentes fratrum dicendo, sursum Corda, ut dum respondit Plebs, habemus ad Dominum. As St, Cyprian upon the Lord's Prayer, pre­paring the Minds of his Brethren, saying, Lift up your hearts; and the People answer­ing, We lift them up to the Lord; this the great and common constant Service of the Church of God. The usual manner of old in the Performance of it; and an earlier Pattern we have yet, as to the Substance of it. So soon as we meet with a Church gathered, the Holy Ghost descended, and those Thousands Converted by St. Peter, Acts 7. he there opens to them the Scriptures, they receive the Word and are Baptized; they go on, and continue stedfast in the Apostles Do­ctrine, and Fellowship and Prayer, attend the Holy Communion, Praising God, Poeti­cally extolling of him. And thus became Pe­ter in the letter of it, a Rock, a first Stone, or principal Pillar in the Church, or People of God.

§. XVII BUT then besides their Publick Worship of God, did this Union, into one Body or Corporation farther express, and oblige the Members, in their Duties and Services to [Page 259] one another, in the Supplies and Assistances of all its Members, whose either special Offi­ces and Imployments in the Service and Sup­port of the Church, Body, or Association, rendred uncapable of undergoing the Cares and Offices of the World for the providing themselves sustenance suitable to their Office and Quality in the Trades and Imployments of it for the Body of Christians, though a Collection and Incorporation for Heaven, yet is to remain its due time and abode upon Earth, and to subsist whil'st on Earth, by the usual and lawful courses of it; it does not therefore immediately receive Food from Heaven, or else whose unavoidable Want and Poverty, by the unaccountable disposal of things, and the many Contingencies of this mutable state here, lays before them, in their Streets, and High-ways, in the rode to this Jerusalem also, as Objects of Pity and Com­miseration, Relief and Charity; for their Saviour has told them, That the Poor you must always have with you, and to them belongs the Kingdom of Heaven. And this is to be done, and is the general Duty of the whole Body; and each Christian there in particular, not only by the tenure of the special Charter from God, and it is imply'd and made up and required in the Donation it self; but by the common course and Laws of things, no Body can subsist without it, it must run to Decay, Degeneracy and Contempt, either through want of Instruction, Order and Government on the one hand; or by Idleness, Destitu­tion and Distress, on the other; and those weighty Reasons and Motives which engaged, [Page 260] freely of their own choice, no outward force compelling, as in the Associations of the World, in order to Governance and Subsisten­cy, to unite in God's Service; it then neces­sitates that such ways and means be used here, as in the sustaining other Societies, and this upon the same Consideration and Mo­tive, as they believe it useful to be of such the Association, and in Communion with one another, especially where the force of the World enjoyns no other Provision, as it did not till the Government became Christian, and the World came in, to the Support of the Church, for which, our Saviour did and must, in reason, provide, upon failure; otherwise Religion can no longer subsist then as the civil Empire pleaseth.

§. XVIII AND first this general Care always exten­ded, and was made for such as labour'd a­mong them in the Word and Doctrine, such as attended the Altar, and ministred in Holy Things, and this not only to the maintaining their Persons, but to the maintaining them in order to their Function, and consequently in supplying them with all Utensils, and whatsoever else was then thought necessary, for the due and more solemn Performance of the Worship of God, and the maintenance of his Service. This is that St. Paul so much Pleads for, and with so great earnestness and weight of Argument, 1 Cor. 9.1, 2, 3, 4, &c. and tells them plainly, That if he be an A­postle, as he most certainly is to them, who are the Seal of his Apostleship in the Lord, then he hath a right to their Estates. Have we not Power to eat and drink? Have we not [Page 261] Power to lead about a Sister or Wife? and to forbear working? Who goeth to warfare at any time at his own Charges? Who planteth a Vine­yard, and eateth not of the Fruit thereof? or who feedeth a Flock, and eateth not of the Fruit of the Flock? Do ye not know that they that minister about Holy things, live of the things of the Temple? and they which wait at the Altar, are Partakers with the Altar? So hath the Lord ordained that they which Preach the Gos­pel, should live of the Gospel. And this the Church-men had not as Stipendiaries and Sa­lary-men; but the Believers brought in of their Goods and laid them at the Apostles feet, which made a Common Stock or Bank, to be at their Prudence in the disposal, call'd the Lord's Goods; and in relation to this Com­mon Stock or Bank in the hands of the Apo­stles, in which every Christian, upon occa­sion, had a right, it is said, That all things were common among these first Christians, in the Book of the Acts; for that no one had Property besides, cannot be believed, and the fault of Ananias and Sapphira was not, that they did not bring all they had, and lay it at the Apostles feet, reserved nothing of their Estate to themselves; but this was their guilt, they kept part back, and said it was the whole, their lying to the Holy Ghost, otherwise it was their own, and they might have reserved to themselves what of it they pleased. Now these common Gifts and com­mon Purse, as it was first intrusted with the Apostles, so upon their failure did the trust descend and remain with the Bishops their Successors, who distributed to the Necessities [Page 262] both of Churches and Church-men, their Offi­cers and Attendants, as occasion required; a competent Portion whereof, was set apart, and reputed their own Persoanl Goods, which they had Power to give, by Will, to their Executors or Relations, as they had need and they saw cause. This is plain out of the For­tieth Canon of the Apostles, [...], &c. The Goods of the Bishop are to be proper to himself, and manifestly distinct from those of the Church, and which are more peculiarly call'd the Lord's Goods. That the Bishop may have Power at his Death, to leave that part which is his own, to whom he please, and not un­der pretence of a title of Church Goods to have them entangled and lost; especially, if he have either a Wife or Children, or Kin­dred, or Houshold Servants.—These were not to be cut off and left in want by reason of the Church, and occasion Curses upon the Bishop when he is dead. And indeed, how else had the Churches their Endowments and Provisions Temporal, as Houses, Gardens, &c. before the days of Constantine, and which were by the Rules and Obligations of Chri­stianity, as their Freehold, 'twas Sacriledge, the blackest Guilt, to invade them, and which Constantine only restored when preyed upon and spoiled by the Heathen Persecutors, as Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. l. 10. c. 5. and we have the famous Case of this Nature in Paulus [Page 263] Samosetanus, who when deposed for Heresie, kept Possession of his Church-House, till Au­relian the Emperor, no Christian, assisted the Catholicks, and, by force, dispossessed him; The heathen Power sometimes conniving at these Donations of the Christians, and took not advantage of the Forfeitures their Laws gave them, now and then countenancing them against Invaders; but never, by the Impe­rial Laws, giving a full Settlement and Con­firmation of them.

BUT then besides this, another Portion §. XIX was to be reserved by the Apostles and Bi­shops, for the Necessities of the Poor, and destitute People; for the Bishops were not the Alms-Men themselves, as they are now adays termed; but the Treasurers and Tru­stees, to receive and keep the like Provisions, and dispose them at their Prudence; thus the Goods were brought in and laid at the Apostles feet, Acts 4.37. and the Complaint was made to the Apostles, when the Grecian Widows were thought to be neglected; and, who determined, that a new Order of Dea­cons should be constituted, and appointed for this business, the better and more im­partial looking after the Poor, Acts 6. and this continued course of Charity and Good­ness is apparent in the succeeding Church-Practice. Tertullian tells us, they had Quod­dam arcae genus, a kind of Chest in which every Month, or when they will, or if they will, and if they can, every one puts in something; and this to be expended not in Banquets, and Gluttony, but to sustain, or bury such as died in Want, Children desti­tute [Page 264] of Parents, and the Maintenance of old Men, such as suffer'd Shipwrack, work'd in Metals, were banished into Islands, and such as were in Prison, in the Thirty ninth Chap­ter of his Apology. So also Justin Martyr, who was earlier a little than he, after the Holy Communion, [...] &c. Such as were rich and willing, offered every Man what he pleased, and it was deposited in the hand of the Bi­shop, for the Relief of Orphans and Widows; such as by Sickness or any other Accident were brought to want, if in Bonds or Stran­gers, and the care of all that were indigent in general was upon him. St. Cyprian in his Book De Opere & Elecmosynis, will not allow him that is rich and abounding, to keep the Lord's-Day at all, if he passes by the Cor­ban, or Poor Man's Box, Qui in Dominicum sine Sacrificio [...]en [...], and comes into the Lord's House without a Sacrifice, tying them up more strictly to that of St. Paul, 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. Now concerning the Collection for the Saints, as I have given order to the Churches of Gal [...]tia, even so do ye. Ʋpon the first day of the Week, let every one of you lay up in store as God hath prospered him. And 'tis the Injun­ction of the One and fortieth Canon of the Apostles, [...]. We Command that the Bishop have Power of the Goods of the [Page 265] Church, to assist by the Presbyters and Dea­cons such as are in want, and to care for his own Necessities, (if he have any) and for the Brethren that are sustain'd by Hospitali­ty—that there be nothing wanting among any of them. And suitably in the Eighth Canon, Conc. 4. Gen. held at Chalcedon, Care is there taken, That if the Bishop be transla­ted out of one See into another, that he car­ry nothing with him of the Goods of his for­mer Church, [...], whether of those belonged to the Martyrs, or the Hospitals, or the En­tertainment of Strangers.

AND thus hath this Body or Association §. XX its Duties and Offices in general, and which every particular Member is concern'd in, no one to be excepted, as Occasion offers, and Circumstances permit. Now besides these, there are Powers and Offices distinct and appropriated by Christ, the Head and Foun­tain of what Power is devolved, to particu­lar Members, such as never was design'd to be communicated in common and promiscu­ously, neither can they, without a ceasing of the Corporation, its ruine and dissolution; for if all the Body were the Head or the Eye, where were the Foot? it could not continue. No Association can stand and preserve it self, without special Officers and Governors, in­vested with a solitary Power and Jurisdi­ction, to keep and restrain every Member in those Bounds and Duties, in the Confinement to, and Performance of which, the Associa­tion subsists, all have their Stations and Ser­vices here; some after this manner, and [Page 266] some after that, according to the measure of the Gift which is given, and every one in their own order. God is not the God of Confusion but of Peace, as in all the Chur­ches of the Saints; a Power limited to Church-Officers only, such as were at first thereunto called, appointed, and invested by Christ in his own Person, or by his Succes­sion. Nor may any Member in common, or barely as a Believer, take unto himself this Honor and Function; and the select Persons herein deputed, were either the Apostles, and Seventy, appointed by our Saviour in Person; or afterwards those Prophets, Evan­gelists, Pastors, Teachers, Eph. 4.11. with others then, as occasion deputed, according to the present reason of the Churches first Planting and Propagation, by those more im­mediate Descents of the Holy Ghost. And all which, with the reason and design of them ceasing, what Power was adjudged fit and useful to remain, was afterwards devolved, fixed, and limited to the three Orders of Bishop, Presbyter, and Deacon; and so to continue, till the Power and the Kingdom is delivered up to the Father. These three Orders, I say, still remain upon the Rolls of Antiquity, in the [...] in the Hieratical Priestly Order and Catalogue, as 'tis in 15 and 18 Canons of the Apostles. And in others of those Canons, in opposition to the Readers, Psalmists, Door-keepers, all Ecclesiastical Officers, but not in the same Catalogue. So in St. Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom. 6. [...], these three of the Bishop, [Page 267] Presbyter, and Deacon, are the whole Pro­gression, and several Orders and Ascents in the Church-Ministry. These those [...], all the degrees of the Priest­hood; as Zonaras in Can. 8. Apost. Omnes gradus Sacerdotales; as 'tis in the same words in the last Canon of the first and second Council at Constantinople, and which, that Canon provides that every one must go through that becomes a Bishop. The Bishop Presbyter and Deacon are opposed to the Laity, and placed in the number [...] of such as preside in the Church, Can. 1. Conc. Antioch. [...], these are fellow-workers in the Ministry, as in the Council call'd against Paulus Samosetanus, Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 3. And again [...] in the Life of Con­stantine, Lib. 2. Cap. 46. [...], Socrat. Eccl. Hist. l. 1. c. 11. [...], Can. 58. Conc. 6. in Trullo. None in the Order of Lay-men may deliver to them­selves of the Divine Mysteries, or Admini­ster in Holy things, the Bishop, Presbyter or Deacon being present, where the Publick Offices of the Church are again limited to these three. St. Jerome places them in Supe­rioribus ordinibus Ecclesiae, in the higher Or­der of the Church, Comment. in Ep. ad. Tit. Cap. 2. in the same Language runs the Im­perial Laws, as are plain and obvious in the Theodosian Codes, especially with the Notes and Commentaries of the Learned Jacob Goth­fred, [Page 268] the Bishop Presbyter and Deacon are the Sacerdotalis assumptio, one or all of them, 16. Cod. Tit. 5. Lex. 5. & 52. and are called Primi, the First, in respect of the Readers, Door-keepers, &c. ibid. Tit. 2. l. 24. and as Gothofred explains it. And the same is again, l. 41. and he calls them Primi Clerici the first of the Clergy, ibid. Tit. 8. l. 13. and Justi­nian after him speaks the same, Novel. 6. c. 1. and all this is expressed by our Judicious Mr. Hooker, and call'd the Power of Orders, Degrees of Order Ecclesiastical, in which there are three Degrees, Bishops, Presby­ters and Deacons, distinguished from Servi­ces and Offices in the Church, as Exorcists, Readers, &c. in his Preface to his Ecclesiasti­cal Polity, at the end of the seventh Section, and in his Fifth Book, seventh and ninth Section.

§. XXI THIS Power and Jurisdiction, though con­fined to these three Orders; yet is it not given to each alike, and in the same degree of Autority; whatever is in the Nature of the Church Priesthood, is in one of them; but every one has not all that is in them, [...], there were degrees one above another in the Priest­hood, to the highest of which every one was not suffered to arise, in Justinian, Novel. 6. Cap. 6. our Saviour himself did not confer all Power alike upon all that he chose for his spe­cial Service; nor did the Apostles, or their Successors, [...], hic dici videtur qui in Ecclesia sublimiorem caeteris consecutus gradum, ut Apostoli erant consecuturi, & post eos Epis­copi, as Grotius in Lucae, 22.26. the Ruler or [Page 269] greatest there mentioned by our Saviour seems to be such, who had gain'd a higher, more sublime degree in the Church, such as the Apostles were to have and after them the Bishops. In the Church are those [...] above-mentioned in Clemens Alexandrinus; Progressions and Promotions from one Order to another, as, from Deacons to Presbyters, and from Presbyters to Bishops: Sacerdotes secundi in honore Ecclesiastici gradus. Hieroni­mus, Comment. in Jerem. 13. the Presbyters are second in the Honor of Ecclesiastical de­grees. And so in Ezek. 48. and Sacerdos pri­mus ordo in Sophoniam, c. 3. the Bishop is the first Order. Sacerdos being a word applied to the Bishop or Presbyter as occasion; as [...] includes the whole of Church-Power, as is above-noted, and applied, as occasion, to each of the degrees. Optatus in his first Book against the Donatists mentions, besides Lay-men, which have no Power in the Church, or any one degree of the Priesthood, Tertium, Secundum Sacerdotium, & apices, Principes (que) omnium Episcopos, the Third and Second Priesthood, and the top and chief of both, the Bishops. As Eusebius still expresses the Ministry in general by [...], as is alrea­dy at large observ'd. So, his [...], those of the second Throne or Order, are Presbyters, Eccl. Hist. lib. 10. Cap. 39. the Presbyter is major Sacerdotio then the Deacon, hath more of the Priesthood, Hiero­nimus ad Evagrium, Tom. 3. Presbyter Proxi­mus gradu ab Episcopis, Presbyter secundi ordi­nis Sacerdos, a Presbyter is next in degree to a Bishop, a Priest of the Second Order, so [Page 270] all along in the Phrase of the Imperial Laws, Cod. Theodos. 5. Tit. 3. Cod. 12. Tit. 1. Lex. 121. Cod. 16. Tit. 2. l. 7. Tit. 5. l. 9. Con­stantine the Holy Christian Emperor writes to Chrestus Bishop of Syracuse, that he would take with him to a certain Synod [...], two of the second Throne or Order, two Presbyters, Euseb. Eccl. Hist. lib. 10. cap. 5. in a word, this is the current voice and distribution of all Antiquity, as might be shew'd more largely, or, were it the design of this Discourse, to treat of the Three Orders particularly, as the Bishop, Presbyter and Deacon are Primi Clerici, the first Clergy, in respect of the Readers, Sin­gers, &c. for the word Clérus, or Clergy, is applied to all Ecclesiastical Officers in ge­neral, as well Reader, &c. as Presbyter, &c. among the Ancient Writers, so among the Primi Clerici, those Three which are first, Summus Sacerdos qui est Episcopus, the Bishop is the First there; as in Tertullian de Baptis­mo, Cap. 17. his is Maximum Sacerdotium in Lactantius, Lib. 4. Sect. Ʋlt. Sacerdotii Sub­lime fastigium. So Cyprian, Ep. 52. [...], Can. 10. Conc. Sardi­cenf. his Power is the greatest and topmost, most full and comprehensive of all, and all Power in Heaven and Earth, now abiding in the Church, and purely relating to Church Affairs, and the bringing Souls to Heaven, in the ordinary course and known appoint­ments is it fixed, and so far limited, in the Person and Office of the Bishop, by Christ and his Apostles, as that from, and only from, him, is this Power to be transferr'd [Page 271] and transmitted, as is the Harvest and com­mon Need, in the particular devolution and distribution of it; a great part of this, is still given by the Bishop, to the Presbyter, an Order or Station in the Church, for the Ser­vice of Souls, invested with a large share of the Priestly Power, at his Ordination or De­putation to it, but comes short of the whole, is limited to particular Instances, and much below that of a Bishop. Presbyterorum ordi­nem Patres Ecclesiae generare non valentem, per regenerationis lavacrum, Ecclesiae filios, non Pa­tres aut Doctores genuisse, as D. Blondel him­self in his Apology pro Hieronimo, Pag. 311. quotes Epiphanius, Haeres. 75.4. the Presby­ter though not able to beget or constitute Fa­thers, or Bishops, or Doctors in the Church, can he yet by Baptism beget Sons, create to the Adoption of Children; he can Baptize, but he cannot give Power and enable others to do it, and which the Bishop can. And a share of this Power is also given to the Dea­con, but a much less than that to the Presby­ter, and yet is he more than a Lay-man; there is something [...], of the Priestly Function enstated on him, Can. 1.2. Conc. Ancyr. [...], Can. 10. Conc. Naeocesar. he hath an Order there, Con­cionatur in Populos, Diaconus gradus in Ecclesia, cui Obediendum, assurgamus Diacono, he Prea­ches to the People; 'tis a Church degree, to whom Service and Respect is to be paid. As St. Jerome Comment. in Ezek. c. 48. in Mi­cah, c. 7. a Person above all Men not to be suspected to give the Deacon more than his due, as will appear to whoso has read over [Page 272] that his smart Epistle to Evagrius, reproving the insolency of some Deacons, that set themselves above Presbyters. And indeed had they been design'd only to serve Tables, little reason can be given, why they had so Solemn an Ordination and Separation at their first Institution, Acts 6. and so distinct are these Orders, and their Powers so perempto­rily limited and consined, in the Intent, Prayer and whole Performance at their Or­dination, ‘That 'tis equally an Usurpation, for a Deacon to undertake the Office of a Presbyter, or a Presbyter the Office of a Bishop without a distinct Ordination, or a farther Commission granted; as for a Lay­man, as such to intrude into any one and more of them without Ordination at all; 'tis in either or all of them, the Sin of Ʋz­zah and the Bethshemites, a Robbery and Invasion.’ 'Tis not my sense alone, they are the words and determination of our great and profound Dr. Thomas Jackson, in the second Volume of his Works, Cap. 6. p. 377. according to the last Edition. I find two great Cases upon Church Story, con­cerning the Ordinations made by Ischyras and Colluthus; the former had no Orders at all, the other was only a Presbyter, and they were both null'd, and declared void alike; and those ordained by the Presbyter, equally as by the Lay-man, were reduced to, and reputed in the Laick Order. So Athanas. Apol. pag. 732. Ed. Paris. & Ibid. p. 784. & Socrates Hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 27.

§. XXII THERE are some Objections which rea­dily arise and present themselves against this [Page 273] Primacy of Bishops in the Christian Church, as thus asserted the first and immediate Sub­ject of Church-Power, the chief Fountain and Head, next under Christ, from whence all instances of Church-Autority are devolved, and derived to particular Offices, and Mem­bers of it. I shall omit that Plea of those who contend that the Presbyter is really e­qual with the Bishop; that the Bishop is not invested with a true, and distinct Power above him, and the whole Priesthood, or Power of the Ministry, is in every Presbyter by his Orders in Actu Primo and habitually, radi­cally and intrinsecally, (in which very words, their sense is very stoutly stated in the late Irenicum, p. 197. 276.) only limited in the Execution, for present convenience; be­cause what is the sense of Antiquity, and our particular Church in part, I have but just now declared, and who give it in the Nega­tive, and the distinct Power of the Bishop above the Presbyter is notorious; and I may have occasion hereafter in this Discourse to instance farther in the sense of Antiquity about it, it falling again in the way. I shall only insist upon what either the whole Church of God has allow'd and assented to and pra­ctised, giving and fixing a Precedency to certain Church-Officers beyond these of Bi­shops, as Patriarchs, Exarchs, for some time to be sure; but to Metropolitans, Primates, Arch-Bishops, or whatever the Titles were, (into which an Enquiry is not now to be made) all frequent in Church-Story, and their Prerogative and Jurisdiction above and apart is there as frequent also; or else what [Page 274] a great part of the visible Church, so nume­rous, as next to an Universal, have still, for some Hundreds of years together with great ostentation and clamor both of Argument and Autority, contended to be in the Pope or Bishop of Rome in particular, as Superior to, not only all other Bishops in Christen­dom, but even these Patriarchs, and all other Metropolitanes too be sure, and to this im­mediately enstated and invested by Christ in the Person of St. Peter, with a first and ab­solute Power, as Universal Governor and Bishop of the believing World, whence even all and every, even Bishop himself, must de­rive what Autority he has, or can duly receive, and legally execute, to whom each Metro­politan, and Patriarch is an Homager and Subject, in Dependency and Subordination unto, and all this inseparably annexed to St. Peter's Chair, and to descend through all Ages, in the Succession, till time be no more, and to the restitution of all things. What was the sense of the Church as to the Nature, Reason and Designment of the former, and what the no Ground and Foun­dation of the latter, I shall endeavour to declare and evince, not in that extent the Subjects require; for that is the work of Volumes: But with that brevity seems re­quisite, to the clearing and better managery of this particular Discourse.

§. XXIII AND first, as to the single Solitary Power residing in one Person, above and beyond that of a Bishop, whether Patriarch, Ex­arch, Metropolitan, Primate, Arch-Bishop, or whatever Title it went under, as it needs [Page 275] not, so would it be too long and excursive now to enquire; as when the Name Patri­arch came first into the Church; how it dif­fers from that of a Metropolitan; when the change of Names, as to these two, or any other, and which Ecclesiastical Men discourse. Certain it is, that the Power was there very early, and the Bishops themselves were un­der Canonical Obedience to their Primate; they were in some instances inferior to, go­verned and ruled by them, and as certain it is again, this their Prerogative and Presi­dency flowed not from any thing conferr'd in their Orders; the Power given to a Bi­shop, is the utmost, is or ever shall be, in that Holy Rite or Sacrament collated; nor is there any thing in Holy Orders beyond it. And when the Patriarch, Metropolitan, or Primate was constituted, or whoever that [...], or Primae sedis Episcopus was, men­tioned so often in the Council of Carthage, we do not read in the ancient Church Ri­tuals, or any Practice apart from them, of any farther new or solemn Ordination that was used at their Enstalment. There is no [...], none of those solemn Services of Prayer and Invocation of the Spirit of God, as Ordination was performed with; and is so related by Zonaras in Can. 1. Apost. no imposition of hands devolving, and collating a new real Power, and which is done at the Consecration of a Bishop, Primacies have been many times translated, not only as to Places, and which Bishopricks have been but as to Persons, from one Person to another, [Page 276] and that not by Deposition, as when Crimi­nal, (and which indeed cannot be call'd Translation) a thing usual in the Church by way of Discipline; but when the same Bi­shop abides in his Chair, and his Episcopal Power with him, only the Primacy removed, and which could not be by any Power what­soever, it would be equally Sacriledge, to de­pose a Primate or Metropolitan, as it is for a Bishop to degrade himself into the Order of a Presbyter, Can. 29. Conc. Chalced. the Me­tropolitan has no more Power from his Or­ders than has the Bishop; only the Metropo­litan's Jurisdiction is larger, and under other Circumstances. And therefore as we read of a twofold Ecclesiastical Audience in the Affairs of Religion, the one before [...], the Bishop of the City, who himself is Judge. The other upon Appeals, before a Synod of Bishops united under their Metropolitan; this latter is called [...], a greater Conflux of Bishops. The original Power is one and the same in both, only Circumstan­ces alter the course of Proceeding, it may be the Bishops own concern, and so he not so fit to be the alone Judge. And which Pro­ceedings of the Church, whoso please may read more at large, and therein what sense she had between the Bishop and his Primate, in the Comments of Jacob Gothofred upon the Sixteenth Theodosian Code, Tit. 2. l. 23. And 'tis easily observable by such as are Con­versant in the Acts and Determinations of the Councils, and Bishops of the Church, about the Subordination of its Hierarchy, that 'tis no where contended for, but in the [Page 277] sense now mentioned, as the same Original Power enlarged; a Precedency of Power retained by the Apostles, over all the Chur­ches of their own first Conversion and Plant­ing, and particularly deputed by St. Paul to Timothy and Titus in Ephesus and Crete, and which is a Platform still obliging, in gene­ral, and immutable, admitting the Church to continue in that sense Catholick, i. e. not to be limited again to one House or Congre­gation, or even City, and which may easily be granted, where the Church under the like Circumstances is to be governed; and that it did actually continue so, all along down­ward. 'Tis as certain, there was a Prero­gative in those Churches in the Sixth Coun­cil of Nice, whether Patriarchical or Metro­political only the design of this Discourse does not now exact an enquiry; and so Eu­sebius in his Ecclesiastical History, Lib. 5. cap. 23. there giving an account of the Con­vention of several Synods of Bishops in their respective Districts, about the keeping of Easter, (and which was earlier, than the Council of Nice) as of Palestine, Rome, &c. Tells us also how every Epistle ran in the Name of their particular Governor or Head; as Theophilus of Caesarea, Narcissus of Hieru­salem, Victor of Rome, Irenaeus of France, and Palmas of Pontus, who as [...], did preside as the most ancient Bi­shop of the Diocess; but as to the particular Seats of this Power, and in which these Me­tropolitans did reside, is not the thing any farther worth the considering, then as the cer­tainty of the Power, as always actually in [Page 278] the Church, is thereby made evidently known unto us, and Palmas might have the Prero­gative in that particular Synod, whether for his Age, or whatever else accidental Motive, though not Amastris his Episcopal See; but Heraclea, was the constant Metropolis of Pontus, as Vallesius there notes unto us; the assignment of Places and of Persons, Judica­tures, and Primates, depends purely upon occasion, and the present Circumstance, and have been still appropriated and fixed, either at the Discretion of the Clergy themselves, and by the Laws and Canons Ecclesiastical; and suitably the first and famous Council at Nicea, in her sixth and seventh Canons con­firms and settles those four first and known Primacies of Alexandria, Rome, Antioch, and Aelia or Jerusalem; as what before was re­ceived and submitted to, in the ancient Pra­ctice and Usages of the Church, and for which, as not having any antecedent right, but as bottom'd alone on the Church Sanction and Reception, Peter de Marca contends, De Concord. lib. 1. cap. 3. and the Confirma­tion were by Canon were impertinent, was the Right fixed antecedently, inseparable and immutable; So also the general Council at Constantinople, Can. 2. appoints that no Bi­shop goes beyond the Bounds of his Diocese, in his Ordinations or other Administra­tions, &c. or else this was done at the Dis­cretion and Pleasure of the Empire, when become Christian, and that either by esta­blishing in Law, what the Church had pre­assigned, as to those four great Churches just now mentioned, Novel 135. or else by tran­slating [Page 279] the See, as Reasons and Motives ap­peared, and were pressing. Thus Justinianea Prima, a City in Pannonia Secunda, and after call'd Bulgaria, was made a Metropolitan by Justinian the Emperor, invested with all the Priviledges, Pre-eminences and Jurisdictions in such the Provinces subjected to it, as had old Rome; because it was the Place and City of the Emperor's Birth, and is therefore reckoned among those Churches which are [...], govern themselves and are Inde­pendent, by Balsamon in Can. 2. Constantinop. all which Privileges did once belong to Fir­mium a City in Illiricum, till the Civil Go­vernment remov'd to Thessalonica, upon the inrode made by Attila, King of the Huns, and the Bishop there upon pretence of the chief seat of Government, had it settled on him, and so remained till this occasional re­moval by Justinian, as is to be seen, in the Preface to his 11. Novel, and Nov. 131. cap. 4. And Theodosius Translated the Primacy from Antioch to Laodicaea, because the People of Antioch in a Sedition overthrew and offer'd farther violence and contumely to the Statue of Flaccilla his Empress. As Theodorit Eccl. Hist. lib. 5 c. 20. so that 'tis plain what first fixed, and again removed, these Primacies, though for the most part they still went along with the Civil Government, and the chief Seats of Judicatures, and the Civil and Ec­clesiastical Government was in the same place; the both Canons of the Church and Laws of the State having respect thereunto. Hence the greatness and transcendency of Rome in particular, Cui propter Potentiorem [Page 280] Principalitatem necesse est omnem Ecclesiam con­venire; there was a Necessity that every Church went thither as the more Potent Principality, as Irenaeus, l. 3. Cont. Heres. cap. 3. and to the same purpose St. Cyprian after him, Pro Magnitudine sua debet Roma Carthaginem precedere; That Rome ought to have the Precedency of Carthage by reason of its greatness, Ep. 49. and upon this occasion, first contending which should be the greatest City; great Controversies once arose betwixt the Bishops of Rome and Ravennas, as we are told by Dionysius Gothofred, in his Comments on the Eleventh Novel; and whose Pleas of Autority and Jurisdiction, not only over the Bishop of Ravennas, but all the Bishops of the Christian World, as the Universal Bi­shop of Christendom, we are now to en­quire into.

§. XXIV WHAT is Pretended by those of the Ro­man Faith in the maintenance of this their universal Primacy, seems to come short of that Evidence is required to settle an Article of Faith, to fix an Order in the Church, a continued Power and Successive Constitution, immutable, and for ever. And all that can with any ground be challenged for the Bishop of Rome, as what was in the best Ages of the Church, will hardly amount to any more than an occasional particular Presidency, or first Chair, and which others have some­times had, no singular, solitary Special Power connate and inhering; but only such as by occasion of Business and particular Emergencies interposing, and of meerly Ec­clesiastical humane assignation; for them to [Page 281] claim and urge it, as the Successors of St. Pe­ter, seems very begging, and places more in the Conclusion, than appears in the Pre­mises; for it is no where evident, either from St. Peter's Commission in general, or from any other special Donation apart or at other times made by our Saviour, that this particular Power beyond and above the other Apostles was deputed and made over unto him. There appears no difference in their Call in general, either in Words or Offices, when first leaving all, and enjoyn'd to fol­low him. Nor was it otherwise in their after-Influences and Instructions, they were all a­like breathed upon at once, receiv'd the same Autority, to retain and remit Sins; the Holy Ghost fell equally upon them all at once at the Feast of Pentecost; there univer­sally and visibly on their Heads in the face of all Nations; and each one went out a Theopneust, Independent and self-autoritative, to Preach, and constitute Churches; they were only liable to be advised, and directed and reprov'd by one another, if occasion; Ʋnde Petrus à suo posteriori Apostolo salubri ad­monitione correctus; as St. Austin lib. 3. Cont. Gaudentium, and St. Peter had a great share of the latter. Nor was there any one of them more notoriously withstood to the face, than he was in the Business of the Gentiles. Cardinal Bellarmine solves all indeed, would a single apposite reply and distinction do it, a nicer, exact stating the Question serve the turn, and in which his accuracy must al­ways be allowed. Nor is there any Man in such cases that goes beyond him. Caeteros [Page 282] Apostolos parem cum Petro potestatem accepisse, sed ut legati extraordinarii, Petrus ut Ordina­rius, & Caput Successionis, Controvers. 3. Gen. de Rom. Pontif. Tom. 1. l. 1. c. 13. The rest of the Apostles received equal Power with Pe­ter, but as Embassadors Extraordinary; Peter as Ordinary, and the Head of the Succession; theirs was only for the present Service, du­ring their Natural lifes, or till recall'd by that same Autority that they received it from, his to abide with his Person, and de­scend in the Succession, and from whence each influence and supply, each instance of Church-Autority is to be derived throughout all Ages for evermore. So that St. Peter's Power was more than the rest in regard on­ly to the abode and during use of it. But the bottom here is altogether sandy; nor does he produce any thing that is Evidence for such the Privilege either to his Person or Succession. Thou art Peter, upon this Rock will I build my Church. And the Confession preceding, Thou art Christ the Son of the li­ving God, feed my Sheep. His first Call, if he had it; and his being left to Posterity with his Name in the head of them, cannot any one, or all of them, imply any thing like it, to a rational considering Person. These were occurring Discourses, particular Ap­plications, and accidental; such as in course must be supposed to fall in and to be, where a constant Converse, and so known a Design as was then on foot amongst them; and the Contingencies of the World cannot be other­wise conceived of, or adjusted. That same is now the Confession of every Christian, and [Page 283] to be sure, was then of all the Apostles, at least e're their Commissions were fully delivered, and their Power deputed unto them. The second Call might be as full and extensive as the first, nor does the Precedency imply in its Nature any thing otherwise. One branch or instance of the Church was first founded on St. Peter's personal Preaching, and other Administrations and Church-Offices, in which he officiated, Acts 2. and the other Apostles in the same Way and Duties and Power did found and constitute others. St. Paul had his Apostleship equally evidenced, nor were its seals less notorious, our Saviour might as particularly urge the Care of the Church to others, as he did to St. Peter, and we ought to believe nothing less then that he did; that they all see to their Duty, in feeding and governing of it. He might have a differing Confidence in one above another, as we are sure his love was unequal; and that something might happen extraordinary in Discourse by Acknowledgment and Approbation, all this may easily be allowed; but that a Commission and Power more lasting, a special Headship and Charge is hereby granted and seated for ever, is hence to be inferr'd, and in conse­quence follows, none that understands a Syl­logism, or enquires into but obvious Infe­rences, can submit unto it. And therefore Estius abates a little in his Treatise on the Sentences, Lib. 4. Dist. 47. Sect. 9. and says, Verè est Ʋniversalis Episcopus, &c. that the Bishop of Rome is truly an Universal Bishop, if he be call'd Universal Bishop who has the care of the whole Church; but if you under­stand [Page 284] a Universal Bishop, Qui solus omnium Provinciarum & Civitatum Episcopus sit, sic ut alii non Episcopi sint, sed unius Episcopi, seu Pontificis, sunt Vicarii; who is Bishop a­lone of all Provinces and Cities, so as others are not Bishops, but Vicars of this one Bi­shop, or High Priest; then it is plainly to be denied, that the Bishop of Rome is an Uni­versal Bishop. He seems to distinguish be­twixt the Power of giving of Holy Orders, and the Power of governing the Church; the former he will not allow the Bishop of Rome to be singular in, and apart from other Bishops, Caput Successionis, as Bellarmine will have him to be, the alone Head and Fountain of Priestly Succession; as if illegal, and want­ing when not derived from his Chair; the latter he peremptorily affixes upon him, and believes him alone invested with a Power Universal, for the governing the Church of Christ, all Christian Bishops by whomsoever Consecrated, and his Arm is to rule them, whosesoever's Hands were laid upon them; and this solitary, and by himself; nor is any one a sharer with, or out of subjection to him. To which I shall reply, that though the distinction in it self, will with very much difficulty be admitted of, and the or­daining and governing Parts will be very rarely found asunder. Nor do I believe there can be an instance given of but one Bishop, who at his Consecration had the Power of governing left out of the Office in which that other of Ordination together with this were not design'd at once and transmitted, though the Objects have many times been [Page 285] changed, either enlarged or limited, as they have been both suspended altogether; yet, allowing the distinction, it may possibly do Estius this present Kindness, lookt upon as a Disputant, and oppressed with an Argument, giving him the opportunity of something like an Answer, and with some shew he may escape that severity of words, and blacker censure he there acknowledges to be passed by St. Gregory, in several Occasional Epi­stles, against whomsoever it is shall style him­self Universal Bishop, or Bishop of all Bi­shops. That the very Name is Prophane, Proud, Sacrilegious, Diabolical, a Name of Blasphemy, and the forerunner of Antichrist; and all this Estius there tells us was occa­sion'd from this Holy Father, by reason of the Patriarch of Constantinople's Ambition in that Nature; declaring, that as the Empe­ror did alone hold the Empire, and all Infe­rior Governors were sent by him, and held of him the Head, and not to do it was Usur­pation and Treason; so did he alone hold the Episcopacy, and all Holy Orders were to descend and flow from him, and to receive them, and not from him, was to climb up the wrong way, and by intrusion come in. But then, what more right he has on his side, or better Autority than Bellarmine has on his; or how he can prove a solitary peculiar Care and Government demandated to, and in its special Constitution, settled on St. Peter, and by his Succession at Reme, or which way soever else it was, over the Universal Church or whole Gospel-Priesthood, so as to consti­tute him and them its immutable perpetual [Page 286] Head to Govern, though not to Ordain them; and which was not in the rest of the Apo­stles Persons, to be sure not in their Succes­sion; this does not readily appear, the Scrip­tures are favourers of both alike, and indeed give to neither any bottom at all. Nor does any such thing appear in the best Antiquity, or succeeding Matter of Fact in his behalf; no ill Argument of ever a Divine Right, were it on their side.

§. XXV THE first instance we have from the An­cients of this Pretended Power, is in Victor Bishop of Rome, in the year One Hundred ninety four, who threatned Excommunica­tion against the Asiaticks, because they com­plied not with him in the Observation of Easter. The Succession of the Bishops of Rome is all along delivered down in Church-History, from the beginning to this day, each Bishop particularized, under the Title of Romanae Ʋrbis Episcopus, Antistes, &c. there's no one note of Singularity affixed un­to him, and this is the first time we meet with any thing like a Superiority there pra­ctised, and at the most he is but ranked with the other Metropolitans. Now whether this was attempted by Victor, purely out of Zeal for an Apostolical Custom, and we have ma­ny examples of Eminent Bishops that have intermeddled without their own Districts; or whether as supposing himself really in­vested with a Power for Inspection and Ani­madversion upon all other Christian Bishops; certain it is, this his Power was disown'd and rejected, by an eminent Branch of the Church Catholick, and as eminent Bishops [Page 287] as any She had; the Autority and Practice of St. John is set up and Pleaded against that of St. Peter, as what every way balances; nor doth it any way submit unto it. And Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in France, and none of the Quartodecimane, but one who com­ply'd with Victor in the Observation of Ea­ster, yet asserts the Asiaticks [...] and Self-Autority; nor is any Foreign Power to over-rule and controle them, or the Peace of the Church to be broken on such occasions, all which is to be seen in Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 23, 24. and if we descend some time lower, we shall not find any thing re­ally more advantageous to him. Constantine the Great, Complements indeed Eusebius of Caesarea, and tells him he is worthy of the Episcopale, or Government of the whole Church, De Vita Constant. apud Euseb. l. 9. c. 6. but that such an extent of Power was then in the Person of any one Bishop, is no where said; nor is there any probability to suppose it. 'Tis true, that some Privileges have belong'd to the Bishop of Rome, and which have been claimed as their due in good times; Julius is very angry with the Cler­gy of Antioch, that they did not call him to a Synod, and urges it as [...], a Law of the Church; that whatsoever is done with­out the Bishop of Rome is to be void. Sozom. Eccl. Hist. l. 3. c. 10. and in an Epistle of his to some, whom he accuses of Contention, and want of Charity, not consulting the Peace of the Church, in the cause of Athana­sius, he farther adds, Are you ignorant that this is the Custom, that we are first to be [Page 288] wrote to, that what is just may hence be de­fined? Inter. Athanas. Opera, Tom. 1. Ed. Paris. Pag. 753. But then whatever this Pri­vilege was, that it did not arise from any Connatural Right to his See; but Ecclesia­stical Canon, is most plain out of Socrates his Church History, l. 2. c. 8. [...], &c. and he may not have so much, for what Vallesius in his Annotations there can produce for it. Which is the alone Autority of Ferrandus that is Christian, & Am­mianus Marcellinus an Heathen, an Historian that concerns himself as little with Christia­nity and Church Affairs, as any one can be supposed to have done that attempted an Hi­story of the Times, in which so much of the Church concerns, its Power, and Autority was Transacted; as in the days of Constantius and Julian, and whose times make up the best part of his Story. The latter he studi­ously affects to represent to the World with what advantages he can both living and dy­ing. And for the Christian Religion, he does not, I am confident, so much as name it Twenty times in all his Books, and then accidentally, and very slightly; and the greatest advantage that he gives us, is, we have his Testimony, that such a Sect call'd Christians was then in the World; and for that particular passage quoted by Vallesius, it makes, if any thing, against himself; for he tells us, That when Constantius the Emperor, who is known to be Athanasius his great and mortal Enemy, and mov'd every stone to ruine him, had procur'd the Sentence of a Synod against him [licet Sciret impletam] and [Page 289] which he knew was sufficient and cogent of it self, yet he endeavour'd all he could, thereby to render him lower, and more con­temptible, to have it corroborated and con­firm'd by that Autority, Quâ potiuntur Aeternae Ʋrbis Episcopi, which the Bishops of the Eternal City, or of Rome did enjoy; which Autority what it was, is still in the dark for him, there's no mention of it in any one Degree; and 'tis mostly agreeable that he endeavour'd it, as the more great and popu­lar Bishops of the World, by reason of that Ʋrbs aeterna (as the City of Rome, for its Pompous Magnificence is all along through that History call'd) that eminent City, the seat of their Residence, Lib. 15. Pag. 75, 76. Ed. Lugdun. in Duodecimo; nor does it from this whole History appear, that there was then, as not any distinct Power, so nor any but Title affixed to the Bishops of Rome, which other Christian Bishops had not. The Bishops in general are called Christianae legis Antistites, and Liberius of Rome has but the same Title, or that of Episcopus Romanus, and Ʋrbis aeternae Episcopi, is what the whole Succession is call'd by, Ibid. suprà. Et lib. 20. Pag. 261. lib. 22. p. 329.

AND now the whole of the Matter is dri­ven §. XXVI into this one Point or narrower room, what the Power and Extent of this Church-Law or Canon Ecclesiastical was; in what sense it was imposed, own'd, and receiv'd in the Church; If universally and what was design'd for all Christendom, and obliging, let them produce the Rule, it is not to be found in any thing yet we have consider'd, [Page 290] and then reconcile it with the general Pra­ctice of the Church, which appears another thing; and to enlarge this Power, whatever that above mentioned is, as claim'd by the Bishop of Rome, beyond a limited Exarchy or Primacy, or that it any ways reaches to Antioch, is to go beyond the whole Story Ecclesiastical, in any tolerable Age of it. 'Tis to go beside the Acts of every General Council upon every occasion, and all the Im­perial Courses and Proceedings in point of Jurisdiction, when the state came into the Church, engaged for its Governance and Ju­risdiction, and turn [...]d their Canons into Laws. There is nothing in any one Council, whether General or Topical, that either re­fers to, determines actually, or but implies any such thing, unless what was foysted into the Canons of the first Council of Nice, and recommended to the Council of Carthage, for an Approbation, with the rest of those Ca­nons, by Faustinus an Italian Bishop and Le­gate of Rome, be since made Canonical. Sure we are, it was then detected and exploded for a Cheat by the Holy Bishops of that Council, and who there and then disown'd the Superior Universal Power in the Bishop of Rome; all which with the several Circum­stances, is to be seen in the opening of the Synod. The See of Rome is still represented as but equal, and in the same rank with the other Four great Churches of Christendom; and its Bishop neither Presides in the Coun­cils, nor Over-rules in the Definitions of Christendom; nor is the Autority any ways defective upon his absence, or if convented [Page 291] without his License, than upon the absence of, or when not licensed by, any other Bi­shop. There is not an Instance of any one Reference or Appeal in Church-Affairs, but still the either Patriarch, Exarch, Metropo­litan, Primate, or Private Bishop is to ac­commodate and rectifie all, as the alone Judges and Determiners, under a Synod of Bishops, or a Council; and if new Canons be want­ing, 'tis the Imperial Direction that the Bishop of Constantinople, and the Convention of Priests be convened to consider of, and to make them, Cod. Justin. l. 1. Tit. 2.6. Et Cod. Theodos. 16. l. 45. Tit. 2. As for that of the Council of Sardica, Can. 3. 4. and which seems to fa­vour the Bishop of Rome, in the right of hea­ring and adjusting Foreign Causes, not to make any Reflexions on the Synod it self, whatso­ever it is, 'tis bottomed neither on Scrip­tures, nor ancient Tradition or Custom; but seems in particular Cases to be allow'd him for the honour of St. Peter, nor can we be­lieve it could run against the different Deter­minations of general Councils; (if so 'tis to be of no Autority) particularly the first of Nicea, considering also that Hosius was Pre­sident both at Nice and here. I shall add, it cannot be conceiv'd to run against it self, whose Tenth Canon places the top and up­permost of all Church-Power in the Bishop, [...], and which is not consistent with a Superior Order in the Church, fixed and immutable, whether as to Jurisdiction and Ordination, or Government only. As Bellarmine and Estius are not agreed, and those several Exempts we have an account [Page 292] of in Church Story, [...], and govern'd within themselves; as Cyprus, Bulgaria, Ibe­ria, Anglia, whatever they relate to; and so called in respect of whether Patriar­chacies, Exarchies, or this pretended Mo­narchy Universal, or howsoever they came so to be, they are Evidence sufficient, against this claim of Rome, and that every Church is not therefore Schismatical because disown­ing a dependency upon her, especially if we reflect, how strongly these Privileges are contended for in the Eighth Canon of the Council of Ephesus, occasion'd by some Usur­pations attempted upon Cyprus in particular, and 'tis there made Law, that no inrode be made upon them. And that which is farther considerable is, that among all the Orders and Directions issued out to Church-men by the Empire, for the executing the Canons, and preserving the Discipline of the Church, the Persons in Charge are the Bishops, Me­tropolitan, or Patriarch; the Bishop under the Metropolitan, the Metropolitan under the Patriarch, and the Patriarch is always last and uppermost; and 'tis very strange to reflect, that if there was an Order above these, a Power Universal, residing in any one Person, with a care over all the Churches in Christendom, so setled by Laws Ecclesiastical, and Superior to all the afore-mentioned Or­ders, in Jurisdiction and Government, and this Person and Power should still be over­look't, and disregarded, no one Direction and Application made unto him, in the Af­fairs so immediately his; of his Charge and Inspection, and this too in the days of Justi­nian, [Page 293] especially since whatever was done by the Empire was in Prosecution of what was Church-Law and Canon before, according to the Appointments and Decisions of it. And that this is all so, 'tis most manifest in our Church Story, Acts of Councils, and parti­cularly the Proceedings Imperial, in the two Codes, and the Novels. Vid. Cod. Justinian. lib. 1. Tit. 3.43.2. Novel. 5. Epilog. Novel. 6. Cap. 3. Epilog. & alibi saepius. Not that the Empire was shye, in giving the See of Rome any Power or Title was its due, as it must be acknowledg'd very great things were own'd, and attributed as hers, in those days of the Church. Justinian writing to John Patriarch of Old Rome, as he there stiles him and his See, Novel. 9. says enough of the See it self, Sortita est ut Originem legum, ita & summi Pontificatûs apicem, nemo est qui dubitet. And he goes on and calls Rome, Patriam Legum, Fontem Sacerdotii, veneranda Sedes summi A­postoli Petri. She is the venerable Seat of the chief Apostle St. Peter, the top of the Ponti­ficate, the Mother of Laws, and Fountain of the Priesthood. By all which, thus much is only imply'd, That Eminent and Renowned was that See at that time, great and huge her Care and Service in the Church of God; something peculiar was effected, but that the Original Power and Autority was special al­so, and by which she acted, none other equal­ling of her, this cannot be granted. The Applications and Instructions for Govern­ment had then in course been accordingly, which we have observed was to none higher than the Patriarch. And let but Justinian [Page 294] explain himself, as 'tis all the reason in the world he should have leave so to do, and all will be plain and easie. Papa veteris Romae est Caput omnium Sacerdotum Dei, vel eò maxi­mè, quod quoties in iis locis haeretici pullularunt, & Sententiâ & recto judicio illius Sedis coerciti sunt, Cod. l. 1. Tit. 1.7. The Pope of Old Rome is the Head of all the Priests of God, upon this account especially, that in those Places, or within his Districts, Heresies did spring up, and by the Sentence and right Judgment of that Venerable Seat they were Suppressed: meaning he was more expedite and happy, strenuous and successful than o­ther Bishops in such those like Undertakings. Otherwise Peter of Alexandria, as well as Damasus of Rome, are proposed as Leaders and Examples of the Catholick Faith, in that very Code & Title. And the Four first General Councils of Nice, Constantinople, &c. are the Conviction of Hereticks, and such reputed Hereticks that refuse Communion, not with the Bishop of Rome, but with Procerius of Alexandria, Tit. 5. Ibid. 8.3. And so 'tis again, Cod. Theodos. 16. Tit. 1. l. 16. and this very often elsewhere, and these very Complements, or rather due Characters, we have here given to the Bishop of Rome, we find given also to much privater Bishops on the like Occasions, for their particular learn­ing Piety, and Service in the Church. So Acholius is called by St. Ambrose murus fidei. And Gregory Nazianzen, calls St. Basil, [...], and which are produced by Jacob Gothofred in his Comments on the fore-men­tioned [Page 295] place; and no Inserences of a solitary appropriate Power and Jurisdiction was ever thence inferr'd or but attempted. But this is the usual proceeding with the Romanist Zelot, from some one or more occasional Character, Power, Concession, or particular Priviledge; devolved, granted and affixed on the Bishop of Rome, to deduce general Rules, and manage them to a Perpetuation; give them in charge as standing marks, and Laws immutable exclusive to all others. What if Athanasius did Appeal to Rome in his Cause? was it that none else could equal­ly hear, and legally determine it? He fled thither perhaps, as Sozomen tells us his Suc­cessor Peter did; because of the same Faith with him, Lib. 2. Hist. Eccl. cap. 22. or ra­ther because his Vogue and Autority was more in the World, than that of Eugubium; the far abler to Protect and give Autority to his Sentence given for him, as no one in Eng­land but would fix upon Canterbury, rather than Landasse, had he the like occasion. Be­sides, each Bishop, as such, has the Care of the Universal Church committed unto him; 'tis given in his Orders. And since the seve­ral Districts by after Laws, particular Bi­shops have oft interposed, and intermedled, by their Care for some Churches and Procee­dings foreign to their particular Exarchies, or Bishopricks; and 'tis recorded as their true Zeal and Merit, of which we have abun­dance of instances given us by Spalatensis, De Repub. Eccl. l. 2. c. 7. Sect. 6, 7, 8, 9, &c. and which might be the Motive in the case of Holy Athanasius. The Council of Sardica [Page 296] gives something to Rome for the honor of St. Peter. And how the Cyprians have gain'd much for the honor of St. Barnabas, because his Reliques were found in their Island, with the Gospel of St. Matthew upon his Breast, fairly written with his own hand, we are in­formed Lib. 2. Tripart. Hist. Eccl. Theodori Lectoris, set forth by Vallesius at the end of the Ecclesiastical Histories. Their Metropo­lis thereby became free and independent, as much as Rome it self, not subject to Antioch as formerly. Peter upon whom by the favour of our Lord the Church is founded. This is the usual saying of St. Cyprian, Peter, James, and John are the Pillars of the Church, and upon them is the Foundation of the Church laid; So St. Jerome Comment. in Galat. Cap. 2. with more to the same purpose; and any one that is but a little skill'd in St. Cyprian, and the Church-Affairs by him transacted, will not easily believe that he resolved his Faith into the Bishop of Rome, his own Opinion together with them of Carthage, where he was Arch-Bishop about Rebaptization, are too notorious Evidences to the contrary; and no one gives to St. Peter and his Succes­sion more glorious Epithetes than he all along does. And that the [...] or Privileges at­tributed to Rome, and in which Constanti­nople is to be second, Can. 3. Conc. Gen. Con­stantinop. are not of real Power, but only of Place and Honorary, is plain from the 36 Can. Conc. in Trullo. For the same Privilege Rome hath before Constantinople, Constantino­ple has before Alexandria, and Alexandria has before Antioch, and Jerusalem▪ is the lower­most; [Page 297] Neither of which Four are pretended by any; nor will the Church of Rome to be sure admit, to have any thing of real Power over one another. I shall end this Section, and all that I have to say on this Head, with that of the 42 Can. Conc. Carthag. [...], &c. That the first Bishop, or Bishop of the first Seat be not called [...], the Prince of Priests, or the chief Priest, but only the Bishop [...] of the first Seat, and which first Seat that it is in no manner de­pendent on Rome; and the [...], so of­ten mentioned in the following Canons, ows not thither any Appeals, nor can the Bishop of Rome wrest the Audience out of his hands, is so clearly the sense of that Council, that nothing can be more, it being there Positively and on set purpose decided and determined against him, upon the detection of that Fraud of the Bishop of Rome's, design'd upon them in the very Case, and but just now by me mentioned, or more plainly in the Scholia on Aristenus upon that Canon. The Dignity of the Priesthood is one and the same in all; and this shall not be called the chief Priest, and that a Priest less Perfect; but all are equally Priests, all equally Bi­shops, as who all have equally receiv'd the Gift of the Holy Spirit; the Metropolitan Bishop, as having the first Chair, with ad­dition, shall be called Bishop Metropolitan; or which seems mostly apposite for a present Conclusion (if any thing can be more than that which is already brought) in the sense of those three Bishops, Can 8. Conc. Gen. Ephes. [Page 298] Whatsoever is nominated contrary to the Eccle­siastical Laws, and the Canons of the Holy Fathers, and which toucheth the common liberty of Christians, is to be renounced and rejected.

§. XXVII I shall now therefore resume what I have already laid down and prov'd at large, that those of the Bishop are the full Orders, every one instance of Power design'd for the stan­ding lasting use of the Church is in his, and consequently is he uppermost in the Church, can there be no one branch or design of Power above and beyond him; this his Power in some instances of it, hath been by consent, and for weighty Reasons moving, intermit­ted and suspended in the execution, as to the Persons of particular Bishops, where the Church increased and multiplied into various Bishopricks, and occasions grew, and causes arose betwixt one and the other, or some­times arose in one alone, and within it self, which could not be heard and determined, but by different Persons, thus Metropolitans were constituted but with no new Power which was not in Episcopacy; nor was there any new Consecration, only so much devol­ved upon one for the occasional business. An occasion of which we have in part set down by Hosius in the entrance of the Council of Carthage, [...], &c. if by chance an angry Bishop (though such an one ought not to be) is over-sharp against a Presbyter or Deacon, or over-sudden, care is to be taken for better satisfaction, and he may appeal to a neighbour-Bishop, who is not to deny him audience. And that Bishop who first gave Sentence, whether right or [Page 299] wrong is to bear the Examination, and his Animadversions to be either confirmed or cor­rected, as occasion; or else the Bishop de­rives so much of this Power to the two Orders below him, as the Presbyter and Deacon, whose Power is more solemnly conveigh'd by laying on of Hands and Prayer, and then conferr'd, so fixing a Character indelible, save only by that Power which devolved it, and upon a succeeding Guilt, and which for themselves to lay down and desert is Sacri­ledge, and these sent out by the Bishop as is the Harvest great or small, so more or less in number, in subjection to and dependency upon him. So that the standing Church Offi­cers are these; the Metropolitan which is only a Bishop with larger Jurisdiction, and with the execution of a Power the Bishop has not, and the naked Bishop with his Presby­ter and Deacon, in the ordinary course of officiating in order to Salvation, and which three, or some one or more of them, as is the occasional Service, are still to be present, and in their spheres and courses, according to their several proper Provinces and Offices, as already described, and particularized, to attend and officiate in each Holy Assembly, in every Congregation that is Publick and Chri­stian, where the Worship and Service of God is so performed, as by the rules of the Gospel is order'd and appointed. Thus Tertullian among the many absurdities of his time reckons up this, Laicis munia sacerdota­lia injun [...]unt, the Lay-men undertake the Priestly office, De Praescript. cap. 41. the [...] the People united Sacerdoti suo, [Page 300] to their Priest, and a Flock with their Pastor, Cypr. lib. 4. Ep. 9. that is no Church quae non habet Sacerdotem, which has no Priest, as St. Jerom. adv. Luciferianos. And he that reads over St. Austin's Sermon super gestis cum Eme­rito Donatist. Episcopo. Col. 631. will there find a great many Divine Services, and all without acceptance and advantage, because thus extra Ecclesiam, without the Church, no one belong­ing to the Priesthood there officiating for them. The Church of God is either Episco­patus unus Episcoporum multorum concordi nume­rositate d [...]ffusus, as St. Cyprian again speaks, Ep. 52. that one Episcopacy diffused and overspreading the World in the Union and Concord of its numerous Bishops, and these either make a general Council, or are under their several Metropolitans, and are the Church representative; or else it is in Epis­copo & clero & omnibus stantibus constituta, as Cyprian again Ep. 27. Cum Episcopis, Pres­byteris, Diaconis & stantibus, Ep. 31. in the Bishop and Clergy, the Presbyter Deacon and Laity, the latter expressed by the stantes, the People standing without in the time of officiating, according to the ancient Ecclesi­astical Custom. And so also Optatus lib. 1. adv. Parmen. Donatist. speaks of Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons and turbam fidelium the Believers in general. Si tantummodo Chri­stianus es, hoc est non Apostolus, Tertul. adv. Marc. cap. 2. such as were Christians at large and not Publick Officers, nor of the Priest­hood; and this as Members of a particular Church, Parish, or Congregation, or how­ever as relating to the publick Service of [Page 301] God, to be discharged by all Christians, and which cannot duly be perform'd without the Bishop in Person, or in his Proxies, by his Power lodged in the Presbyter or Deacon. Thus he is called a Schismatick that erects an Altar without the consent of the Bishop, Can. 3. Apost. even though the Confession of Faith is otherwise sound. If thus [...], if thus dividing from and meeting against his Autority, Can. 6. Conc. gen. Constantinop. the very Clergy themselves are not to administer in their Oratories with­out license had of the Bishop, Can. 31. Conc. 6. in Trullo. And to the same purpose is Schism again desined, a recession from the Bishop erecting an Altar against an Altar, Can. 13, 14, 15. Conc. 1, 2. Constantin. Can. 57. Conc. Carthag. and Can. 6. Conc. Gangrens. as the Church is there defined a Congregation of the Faithful, with their Bishop; so is it there peremptorily determined that the Anathema or Curse is due to those, that privately and apart from these do convene and congregate themselves. Nor is it Schism only, but He­resie also; so reputed by the imperial Consti­tution, Sacram Communionem in Ecclesia Ca­tholica non percipientes à Deo amabilibus Epis­copis Hereticos justè vocamus. We justly call them Hereticks that do not receive Commu­nion in the Catholick Church from the Bi­shops which are beloved of God; for as such, they were then look'd upon, and that more eminently than others, in the then Christian account, and it was the Bishop's common Epithete, Deo amabiles Episcopi, how­ever the opinion and style of them is now al­ter'd, [Page 304] Justinian. Novel. 109. Praefat. And now these Church-Officers being thus set out and enumerated, what their peculiar Power and Jurisdiction is, their appropriated Acts and Duties and Influences are peculiar to them­selves, apart and from the rest of Believers, the tantummodo Christians in Tertullian, take in these following instances.

§. XXVIII TO preside and govern in such their Assemblies, in the common constant return of the Worship of God, to appoint and as­sign the decency and order of it, to be the Mouth of the People to God in their Prayers and Thanksgivings put up and offer'd to him in their Name, and to be the Mouth of God to them, to teach and instruct, to admonish, correct and reprove; to Bless them in the Name and Strength of God Almighty, for though this be the Duty of every Christian, each private Member of such the Body and Incorporation, thus to instruct, correct, and pray for one another; yet in Publick Assem­blies it is not, it is rather their Sin, and to be sure their Presumption, President probati qui (que) seniores, as Tertullian goes on, descri­bing the coition or meeting together of Chri­stians in his days, Apol. cap. 39. above men­tioned, their Seniors or Elders there pre­side, and are in the Head, and governing such their Holy Convocations, [...]. So Justin Martyr, Apol. 2. the Bishop makes an Instruction and Exhortation in remem­brance of God's Mercies; and he that reads over those Directions he gives to Zenas and Serenus two Presbyters, how to behave them­selves [Page 305] in their Duties, will readily see who it was in those days that spoke to and ex­horted the People, and that this is a branch [...] as he calls it, of their Govern­ment and Jurisdiction, the Directions are these, [...], that they be not affected and conceited in the discharge of their Ministry, over-pragmatick and officious in the services of it; but do it [...], in an even and regular way, in the Seasons and Places affixed, otherwise they'l appear like Dancers on the Ropes, be admired only by the idle People, [...], holding out their Necks like so many Geese, and gaping at the vainer Glory; that they be neither clownish nor unskilful on the one hand, nor clamorous in their manner of speaking, an instance of worldliness and fe­racity, to be avoided; be cautious against the Actions of those, who make the Publick Oratories a Stage to divulge what is iller composed by them, personating Orestes, who appear'd terrible and great to Fools, for his wooden Feet, his made Belly, his odd Habit, monstrous Face, that vaunt in a freedom of speaking, studious of Emulation and Conten­tion, and like the Bacchae, under the habit of Peace, and a shew of Holy Duties, carry Swords and Spears. He there cautions against those unequal forced Countenances, one while pleasant, another while sower and te­tricous, and particularly against that histrio­nical way of those who are every day speaking and acting their Play divided into so many parts on purpose, and the Presbyter de­posed for Sedition against his Bishop is [Page 304] called [...] Can. 18. Conc. Ancyran. and in several Canons is the same expression on the like occasion; he is one not allow'd to Preach any longer, [...], Just. Mart. Apol. 2. and this President, These Elders or Church-men, they suitable to their strength, and in all due manner, send up Prayers like­wise and Thanksgivings for the People, who still go along and joyn with them in such their Invocations, [...] we rise up all together, Sermon be­ing ended, and go to our Prayers, as 'tis there expressed, & suprà ibid. be their Mouth, and they speak after him. Thus the ordained, or they, whose Office is affixed to attend in holy things, are Paraphrased in Justinian, Novel. 137. Cap. 1. [...], the assign'd to Pray for the People; and these are those Prayers [...] in Ignatius his Ep. ad Ephesios, of the Bishop and the whole Church, and which that Apostolical Martyr there sayes are so prevailing. And now having come to that passage of Justin Martyr just now mentioned. I cannot but take notice of the chief Argu­ment that is there raised by our Enthusiasts, for their gifted Extempore Prayer, the Presi­dent say they, there prayed, [...], ac­cording to his private gifts and abilities, as he could conceive and utter words, and not in a form set and prescribed him. To which I answer, That as the Phrase imparts no such thing, so we have reason to believe that the Author meant nothing less by it. What did the whole Congregation, and every man in it [Page 305] thus Pray after his own conceiving? and yet the same Father, in the same Apology tells us, that all pray'd with their President, and in the same Phrase is their Praying expressed too, p. 60. Ed. Paris. and the meaning can alone be this, they prayed [...], as 'tis ex­pressed before, both Priest and People all at once pour'd out their Prayers together, ani­mo intento, as 'tis translated, with Souls in­tent and fixed upon the Duty, De pectore as Tertullian varies it, Apol. c. 30. (and which place they pervert to their purpose also) from their Hearts and Consciences, with that Attention, Zeal, Faith, and other Qua­lifications, that make Prayers acceptable, and which is the alone praying with the Spirit. Like Phrases we have in other Ecclesiastical Writers, but not one makes any thing to their purpose. So Origen in his lib. 8. cont. Celsum, [...], they say Hymns to God with all their might and power, like the Amen with all their might among the Jews, and of which the Hebrew Doctors have this observation, whoso saith Amen with all his might the Garden of Eden is open unto him, vid. Thorndike. The Service of Reli­gious Assemblies, p. 234. So Eusebius Hist. Eccl. l. 10. c. 3. the Presidents of the Chur­ches had their Panegyrick Orations [...], quantum quis (que) poterat ingenio; as Vallesius translates it, according to his fa­culty in Oratory, which no man presumes to be otherwise than preconceived, to be an ex-tempore effusion and inpremeditated. And so 'tis said in that Chapter, that every age and the promiscuous multitude of each Sex, [Page 306] [...], toto pectore as translated, with all the strength of their Mind and Thoughts, did officiate in Prayers, and giving of Thanks, worshipping with cheerfulness of Mind; and surely these Men, Women and Children, did not every one Perform, Pray and give Thanks in an extempore way; besides, if we consider the manner of their Worship, which was in set composed Hymns, and Songs, speaking in courses and interchangeably one to ano­ther, as is above observed; all which must be preconceived and penn'd down, it must in each instance be familiar to them before; to all which add how repugnant these casual effusions are to that course of Liturgies and set Forms of Prayer which we have as much reason to believe these first Christians used, as that they served God at all; or let them consider with what Spirit it was they said the Lord's Prayer, which St. Jerome says our Saviour taught the Apostles every day to re­peat in their Liturgies, Sic docuit Apostolos suos, ut quotidiè in corporis illius Sacrificio cre­dentes audeant loqui, Pater noster, qui es in Coe­lis, &c. Lib. 3. Cont. Pelag. versus finem.

§. XXIX A second Instance peculiar and appro­priate to Church Officers, and which is not in the Body mixt and promiscuous, is the Power of the Administration of the Sacra­ments, viz. the Holy Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, together with that other Sacrament, (as 'tis also call'd by the Ancients) or Rite or Ceremony of Confir­mation, and which are, and ever were, ad­ministred by Men in Holy Orders; and then, and only then adjudged, duely discharg'd, [Page 307] valid, and serviceable, as all do agree, that acknowledge either, or both, or all of them, to be Christian Institutions. As for that of the Lord's Supper, that it was consecrated by the Bishop, and from him, by the Deacon, delivered to the People; 'tis evident of Justin Martyr's second Apology, [...], &c. the Bishop giving thanks, i. e. having consecrated the Elements, the Deacon distributed; for the manner and virtue of Consecration did not consist in pronouncing so many words over the Elements, as 'tis weakly contended by some in the days that have been since, but in the office of Prayer and Thanksgiving by the attractation of, or some other signal appropriation to the Ele­ments, particularly applied unto them; [...], Can. 4. Conc. Carthag. Ver­borum solemnitas, & sacra invocatio nominis, & signa, institutionibus Apostolicis, sacerdotum Ministeriis, attributa, visibile celebrant Sacra­mentum, &c. Cypr. de Baptism. Christi ad initium, the solemnity of words, sacred in­vocation of the Holy Name, and Signs, added to the Apostolical Institution, by the ministry of the Priests, celebrate the visible Sacra­ment; the visible part, or thing it self, is form'd and shap'd by the Spirit, perfecting and crowning all, and so in the forementioned place of Justin Martyr, the action of conse­crating is call'd, [...], nourishment thankfully receiv'd by Prayer, and the action of consecration is expressed in Irenaeus, lib. 1. c. 9. by [...], to give thanks, [...], extending the word of invocation, ibid. as Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 8. [Page 308] and the same is in Ignatius before them all, Ep. ad Smyrnenses, [...], and so general was it, that the very Hereticks, who usually ap'd it after the Church when to their advantage, used this very way, and 'tis said of Marcus the Here­tick and Conjurer, that designing to delude his followers, and represent to them an ap­pearance, as of Blood, distilling into the Chalice, and mock-Sacrament, Simulans se gratias agere, seu [...], quod hodiè, conse­crare dicimus, post longam invocationem; purpu­reum & rubrum apparere faciebat, feigning to give thanks, which is the Phrase for Conse­cration, after a long invocation, he made it look like purple colour and red, as Pamelius gives the account, Annot. in Tertull. cap. 4. cont. V [...]l [...]ntin. num. 32. and though the Pres­byter do desist from Consecration in the pre­sence of the Bishop, Can. 13. Conc. Neocesar: yet 'tis in his Orders, enabling him to it, and either he or the Bishop are said [...], to give the Bread in Prayer, (as it is now in our Communion Book) that [...] that immaculate Communion Can. 23. Can. 6 in Trullo. And Zonaras in Can. 78. Apost. says that a blind man, or one without his right hand, ought not to be or­dained; for how can he officiate in holy things [...], or handle the holy Elements, or distribute to others of them? I'le only add what I find in Eusebius his History, l. 7. c. 9. concerning one that was dissatisfied in his Baptism, which he receiv'd from Hereticks, and desired Ca­tholick Baptism of one Dionysius, a then pre­sent [Page 309] famous Bishop, the words are these, and give a good account of the offices of private Christians in those days. The holy Bishop tells him he dares not Rebaptize him, and that a daily and constant Communion with the Church will suffice; for he that shall fre­quently hear Prayers, and answer Amen with the rest of the Congregation, who places himself at the holy Table, there stands and reaches forth his hand to receive the holy Food, who there very often receives it, and is partaker of the Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. I dare not baptize him again, but appoint him to go on and persevere in such his Religious Duties. And the same is as notorious of the Sacrament of Confirmation. This is sufficiently cleer out of St. Jerome adv. Luciferian. Tom. 3. that those which were baptized by the Pres­byters and Deacons in lesser Cities, Episcopus ad invocationem Spiritus Sancti manum imposi­turus excurrat; for the invocation of the Spi­rit of God, the Bishop runs forth, or takes his Circuit, and lays his hand upon them, the only difficulty appearing is as to the Sacra­ment of Baptism. St. Austin's Judgment is, Laicus urgente necessitate, possit baptizare, Tom. 7. l. 2. cont. Parmen. cap. 13. a Layman, if ne­cessity urges, may baptize. And St. Jerome says the same adv. Luciferianos, and that it was in use in his days; and the Practice be­ing permitted in our Church, made up a part of the Canvass betwixt Thomas Cartwright, and our two learned Writers Archbishop Whitgift, and Mr. Hooker, as is to be seen in their Writings; but the case goes farther [Page 310] in that of Athanasius, who when a Boy, and at play on the Sea-shore, acted a Bishop, and baptized such of his play-fellows, as were not before initiated by that Sacrament, and when examined by the Bishop, and upon an after consultation with his Presbyters, the Baptism was allow'd of, Sozom. Eccl. Hist. l. 2. c. 17. The deep sense and apprehension they had of but one Baptism, and the danger of being rebaptized, which is branded by the name of Incest and Sacriledge, and the Priest was to be deposed that did it, as appears in the Imperial Laws provided in the case, 16. Cod. Theodos. and the great trouble that the Church of God had at that time, occa­sion'd first by St. Cyprian and his Bishops pleading it, upon the former usuage of the Church, and afterward managed to the evil of a great Schism by the Donatists, who fol­lowed St. Cyprian in his Error, but forsook him in his Obedience, who refused to make a rent in the Church upon the occasion, as all Scismaticks do. These Considerations might make them very careful, and perhaps too nice; how they admitted of Rebaptizations, and which were only admitted in case of cer­tain Hereticks who denied the Trinity, ( Vid. Can. 47. Apost. & 49. & Can. 9. Conc. Nic. 1.) or else where there is a doubt, and no sure witness to avouch the Baptism, pretended, once to be administred, or the Persons them­selves are not able to give an account of the Mysteries then delivered unto them, as Can. 57. Conc. Carthag. and which Canon was occa­sioned by their Embassador with the Moors, who usually brought such Children from the [Page 311] Barbarians; but yet there is no instance in the first Canons of rebaptizing those who were certainly known to be baptized in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, upon any accident, by Lay­men; and yet such we have reason to believe there was. Hence Baptism once appearing to have been administred as to the Matter and Substance of it, and in the words of the In­stitution, and by such as were not of the Hieratical Order, they adjudged it the safer way, to trust the Mercy and Goodness of God for a supply of whatever defect might be in one or two outward Circumstances, than to run the hazard of an attempt, of what seemed so visibly and notoriously un­lawful, viz. a second admission by that Sa­crament, or a violation of that known and sa­cred rule, or instance of our Belief; one Baptism for remission of Sins. And this, as in all defects, and where something is wanting, it ought to be permitted and pardoned only under the present and unhappy Circumstan­ces (as also in the after practice of the Church,) but never produced and urged as a Rule, enacted into a Law. Infirmities are never made Presidents, unless for Pity and Pardon, and to quicken future care and watchfulness against them, the common course of things abhors; nor is it to be endur'd if otherwise, Potestatem regenerationis demandans suis discipulis, cum dixit iis, Euntes docete omnes gentes baptizantes, &c. Iren. l. 3. c. 19. Christ Jesus then demandated or devolved the Power for Regeneration unto his Disciples when he bad them go and teach all Nations baptizing [Page 312] them, &c. and certainly such as attempt it, ought first to receive the same Autority in Succession from him, without which his Disci­ples, that in Person attended him did it not. Tertullian represents it, as the height of im­pudence and irregularity for a Woman to bap­tize, forsitan & tingere, a more sawcy act, then to teach in the Church, De praescr. c. 41. then which no Book was ever wrote with a more Primitive Spirit, and speaks of it as a thing in general forbad a Woman, de Virgin. Veland. c. 9. He limits it to the Bishop, Pres­byter and Deacon; only in necessity it comes to the Lay-man, Sufficiat sc. ut in necessitatibus utaris, sicubi aut loci, aut temporis, aut personae conditio compellit, tunc enim constantia succur­rentis excipitur, quam urgit circumstantia peri­clitantis, De Baptism. c. 17. and surely that which is but one, never to be reiterated, 'tis Sacriledge, 'tis incest, to do it, to which so many and great Titles, Eulogies and Effects are given by the Ancients, it would be end­less to repeat them; so many to be sure, more, are not spoken of any one Service in the whole City of God. That which first enters us in­to the Body and Association of Christians, with so large Promises, upon such solemn ties and obligations, the Expectations and Duties of our whole life following; and that which is performed and obtained with the same solemnity and invocation, as in other Holy Mysteries, invocato Deo, Sanctifi­cationis Sacramentum consequuntur aequae, Ter­tul. de Baptism. c. 4. it is not agreeable, that the Consecration and Solemnization be left and assigned promiscuously and to every hand, [Page 313] and which is not in other Sacraments, it must in course be equally peculiar and separate; as to the separation of the Persons that are to be entrusted with the administration of it.

A further appropriated distinct Power to §. XXX the Officers of the Church is to unite and determine in Council, in the affairs of Reli­gion, as to Matters of Faith, when less cleer, when unhappily wrested and perverted by Hereticks, in fixing things indifferent in their Nature for the more usefulness, order and uniformity in the Worship of God, for the setling of Consciences in the private appre­hension of them, and governing suitable to such the Laws and Canons in each case so made and constituted by them. For this end the Apostles and Elders met together and united in Council at Jerusalem, and deter­mined concerning things offer'd to Idols and eating of Blood, &c. Acts 15. so those many subsequent Councils, whilst the Empire kept off from the Church, as against that Error of the Arabians, that the Souls sleep upon the separation, Euseb. Hist. l. 6. c. 37. in that against Novatus, Cap. 43. against Paulus Sa­mosetanus, l. 7. c. 29. with several others in History transmitted to this purpose was that Body or Collection of Canons, bearing the Title of the Apostles Canons, upon several occasions made for the use and direction, and government of the Christian Incorporation and Society, such were the four first general Councils, when the Empire became Christian, and receiv'd the Church under its wings and protection. The first under Constantine held [Page 314] at Nicaea against Arius, and asserted the Eter­nity of the Son of God, that he was not a meer Creature. The second held at Constan­tinople, under Theodosius the Great against Macedonius, and asserted the Eternal divinity of the Holy Ghost; who said the third Person was a meer Creature. The third was held at Ephesus under Theodosius the lesser, against Nestorius, who own'd the both Godhead and Manhood of Christ, but divided him into two Persons. The fourth at Chalcedon under Marcian, the Emperor, against Eutiches, who consounded the two Natures in one Person, as Nestorius divided the Persons, with others, whether Oecumenical or Topical, during or succeeding these, and whose either Declara­tions, as to what Faith was at first delivered and since received, upon a just and traditional enquiry, even to the placing some Books in­to the Canon of Scripture, which were not with the earliest admitted; or constituted Canons in Church-Polity, were still thought obliging to all good and peaceable Christians, determined and ended the present debate, and only a Compliance was the issue of them; and that either to all Christendom, or particular Churches, suitable as were the Councils, ei­ther Universal, or under single Metropolitans, or particular Bishops, accordingly did they oblige. And this Legislative Power, as ori­ginally given only to Church-Officers; so is it alone residing in them, to rule and to go­vern, receive or reject, to punish or reward, according to such their own Laws, as the reason and nature of such the Societies and their Constitution will direct and bear, as [Page 315] unhappy Differences and Debates arose, they were thus to be decided by the Convention of Councils, who either confirmed what they found was well done before, or passed farther Sanctions where the occasion was new, or up­on notoriety of failure, in former Declara­tions. For the Power of Councils was never asserted, as absolutely Autorative in it self, and infallible in its Determinations, as to make Truth, but declarative only of what was Truth from the beginning, as the best expedient on Earth to find it out, and the alone Autority on Earth to pass Sanctions up­on present appearance for present Settlement, Peace, and Unity, every man had his liberty still entire, and reserved for farther enqui­ries where he saw or suspected occasions; but this to be proposed in the next Council, 'twas to be brought to the Apostles and Elders there, whose Autority alone was to reject or admit it. As to Publick Confessions, what room and autority the Empire had, and is always to have in these Councils is already declared, Cap. 2. and though the Faithful or Believers at large many times had conflux thither, and were permitted either for their diversion, or private satisfaction, or information; yet no one ever passed his Vote judicially, or con­curred in the Power Legislative, as has been above also shew'd, ibid. This still goes in the Name and Power of the Bishops, and Cler­gy alone, as must appear to every one, from the both first derivation of that Power, and after-practice, both in that Apostolical first Synod at Jerusalem, and all other succeeding, excepting such who on purpose set their Face [Page 316] against what with their Eyes they never did and will not see.

§. XXXI A fourth instance of this especial appro­priated Power is the exercise of Discipline Ecclesiastical, and this either in fixing set Stations, particular rules and orders of Duty and Performances upon such as were newly brought off from Heathenism, become Peni­tents and Converts in order to the Kingdom of Heaven and Christianity, or else in laying Punishments, Penal Duties upon those, who after their admission and undertaking Chri­stianity, when they had throughly known the ways of Righteousness, been enlightned and tasted the good gift of God, revolt and turn back again, will not abide the terms of it, by way of Penance and Satisfaction, and this some­times by corporal Punishments with a Power reserved for Indulgencies and Abatements, a relaxation upon proficiency, or non-profi­ciency under them, placed in the power and discretion of the Bishop or Pastor; for the best Antiquity is not at all shye in these terms and expressions, she spake as she acted. Thus in the Catholique Epistle of St. Barnabas set out by Isaac Vossius Sect. 1. ad finem Epistolae, [...], that he work with his hands to the purging away his Sins. So Lactantius, l. 6. Sect. ult. Si quid mali fecerit satisfaciat, that satisfaction be given for his evil. St. Cyprian Ep. 50. gives an account of the Epistle he had received from Fidus his Brother, who tells him how Therapius his Colleague did reconcile to the Church over-hastily Victor a certain Presby­ter, Antequam penitentiam plenam egisset, & [Page 317] domino Deo, in quem deliquerat, satisfecisset; before he had completed his Repentance, and satisfied God against whom he had sinned, and for which St. Cyprian admonisheth his Friend that he do so no more, ibid. And again, Ep. 64. Satisfaction is what is required upon a sense of having sinned, ut se peccasse potius intelligant & satisfaciant; to give all the in­stances were to spend too much Paper, what is here brought may suffice, or he that desires more may have it from the learned Hugo Gro­tius Rivetian. Apol. Discuss. Pag. 700. ed. Lond: and all this placed in such as have the Keys of the Church, whence they are to receive satis­factionis suae modum, the measures of their Pe­nance and Satisfaction, as he there cites St. Austin, no man was admitted into the Church of Christ but by degrees, but as through so many Posts and Stations, through which they were to pass, [...], as 'tis Can. 4. 6. 9. Conc. Ancyr. and then to go on to that which is more perfect, to be admitted to the Holy Communion, the top instance of Devotion and Communion, or be received [...] with an oblation, as 'tis expressed, Can. 7, 8. ibid. for by the words of [...], &c. that holy Sacra­ment was by the Ancients still expressed. Thus we read in the Church Story and Pra­ctice, as remembred and referr'd unto, but as not then instituted, being antecedent, and of more antiquity, of the [...] the hea­rers only in the Church, a set order of Peni­tents permitted only to hear the Word of God, with the Hymns and Songs and Praises, placed without the Temple, and these were [Page 318] the lowermost form in order to something else, to farther Duties, as thus instructed and fitted for them, and such as staid here, and would only hear, engage and incorporate no farther, neither come to the Prayers nor the Holy Sacrament in the set Order, and assigned Times for it, were reputed as if they had not been initiated at all; the Council of An­tioch turns them quite out of the Church, Can. 2. and by which rule what will become of the greatest part of our now adays profes­sing Christians, let them look to it; or per­haps, let such as preside over them have the government and power of Discipline in their hands. Then we have the [...], such as advanced to the publick Prayers, next the [...], those that came to the Sacraments. See Can. 11. Conc. Nic. 1. together with the Scholia's of Zonaras and Balsamon; and Can. 14. we have the [...], who it seems were those that were Auditors and more, were Baptized, as by the Scholia there appears, and the same we find before this Council of Nicea, Conc. Ancyr. Can. 4, 5, 6. and the [...] or Demoniacks, who had their distinct station, Can. 17. Cum scholiis. And these courses of Discipline we have alluded to in several places of Tertullian, (and there­fore were extant in the Church very early, Tertullian being sometime before any of these now mentioned Councils) but most fully and at once, of any that I have observed in them, in his Book of Prescriptions, Cap. 41. and which I shall therefore here repeat; where he reproves and prestringes such those Hereticks he writes against, for [Page 319] the perverting & violating such this received customary Discipline, Non omittā ipsius etiam conversationis hereticae descriptionē, quam futilis, quam terrena, quam humana sit, sine gravitate, sine autoritate, sine disciplina, ut fidei suae con­gruen [...]; imprim [...]s, quis catecumenus, quis fidelis, incertum sit, pariter adeunt, pariter audiunt, pa­riter orant, etiam ethnici si supervenerint, san­ctum canibus, & porcis Margaritas, licet non veras, jaclabunt, simplicitatem volunt esse prostra­tionem disciplinae, cujus penes nos curam lenocini­um vocant, pacem quoque passim cum omnibus miscent; nihil enim interest illis, licet diversa tractantibus, dum ad unius veritatis expugna­tionem conspirent, omnes tument, omnes seditio­nem pollicentur, ante sunt perfecti catecumeni quam edocti. ‘I will not omit a description of the heretical even conversation, how fu­tile, how vain, how humane it is, without Gravity, without Autority, without Disci­pline, how congruous with their faith? first of all, who is the catecumen, who the faithful 'tis uncertain, they go together, they hear together, they pray together, even the Ethnicks if they come among them, they will cast the holy things to dogs, and the Margarites to Swine, though not true ones, they will have simplicity to be only a pro­stration of Discipline, the care of which that we have, they call a cheat or the work of a Pander, they give their peace promiscuously with one another, nor are they concern'd, though different in them­selves, whilst they conspire to the destructi­on of one Truth, all are puffed up, all swell, all pretend to science, they are first Cate­cumens [Page 320] ere throughly learn'd.’ Or he that would see this course of Discipline in its fuller draught, let him peruse the late learned Annotations in Can. 11. & 14. Con. Nic. 1. printed at Oxford, now suitable to these stations and orders and degrees, in which such as came over to Christianity were placed, and according to their proficiency and due behaviour were promoted; so were they the rules and measures the ancient Church took for the exercising discipline upon those persons, that having passed through them, been baptised, confirm'd and admitted to the Holy Communion, became of the Lapsi, fell back again from the grace re­ceived, Apostatized from their most Holy Or­der and Profession, and that according to the circumstances of such their departure, as more or less of guilt appeared. And this is plain from the forementioned Canons and others, thus in the Can. 11. Conc. Nic. 1. Such as without any necessity, no violence to their Goods offered, or any sensible danger appear­ing, did recede under Licinius the Tyrant, their Penance or Discipline was upon a true repentance, to be placed back again, and become hearers only for three years, and af­ter two years more among the Orantes, they were readmitted to the Holy Altar. So Can. 14. The proportionate punishments were inflicted on the Catecumeni and others lapsed, in Can 4. Conc. Ancyr. They on the other hand that sacrificed by force, but yet did eat at the Idol Feasts, without any remorse expressed either in their habits and counte­nance, though not adhering to them, their [Page 321] Punishment was less; to be Hearers only but one year, to become prostrate three, two years to attend the place of Prayer, and then to go on to that which is perfect, to be ad­mitted again to the advantage of the great mystery, and highest instance of Christian Devotion, the partaking of the holy Altar; and Can. 5. those that eat with apparent present remorse, evidenced by their tears, being substrate two years, in the third year they were fully restored, and so according to the proportion of the demerit; and as the more or less guilt appear'd, such was the Amerciament, as is to be seen in the following Canons of that Council, and I have produ­ced my instances out of these two Councils, both for the greatest autority, and very near, greatest antiquity, they being very ancient, of these Ecclesiastical Penances, and the way used by the Church in the laying of them. And all this, that it was appropriated and peculiar to the Office of the Priesthood, in whose alone hands it resided, and in the obe­dience alone and subjection to whom it was adjudged acceptable in the performance is equally evident, [...]. Ignatius Ep. ad Philadelph. ed. Voss. when re­penting they come to the Unity of the Church, and the Regiment and Subjection to the Bi­shop, these are of God, and the Lord will forgive them. Penitentiam autem ille agit, qui divinis Praeceptis mitis & patiens, & sacerdo­tibus Dei obtemperans, obsequiis suis & operibus justis Deum promeretur. He it is that is the [Page 322] true Penitent, who meekly and patiently ac­cording to the Divine Precepts, and submit­ting to the Priests of God, by his Obedience and just Performances, regains, or obtains favour anew of God, Cypr. Ep. 4. ed. Pamel. As it is even necessary to examine [...], the rise and kind of the Repentance, in order to the due Punishment. So this Power is in the Bishop, to whom it is lawful [...], to consult in order to Mercy or Severity, Can. 12, 13. Conc. 1. Nic. So Can. 5. Conc. Ancyr. the Bishops have Power to exa­mine the manner of the Penitents conversa­tion, and to use Clemency, [...], or to add to the time of his Discipline, [...], to add to, or abate of the Penance; and all this as very ancient in Church Story, so is it a transcript of that which is from the beginning of St. Paul's own hand and original, in that Person under the Church censures, 2 Cor. 2.6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Sufficient to such an one is this Punishment infli­cted by many; so that contrariwise ye ought to forgive him, lest perhaps such an one be swal­low'd up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you, that you would confirm your love to­wards him; for to this end also did I write that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things, to whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive; for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it, in the Person of Christ, lest Sathan should get the advantage of us, for we are not igno­rant of his devices.

[Page 323]THERE is a fifth instance of Power pecu­liar and appropriate to the Gospel Ministry, §. XXXII invested alone in it, which is Excision or Ex­communication, a Power of cutting off from this Body or Association, upon the failure of those terms and conditions of Duty, in the Performance of which, either the Body in general, or the interest and advantage of each particular Christian can be preserved. And this is more than an Abstention of which we have an instance out of St. Cyprian, Ʋtar eâ admonitione quâ me uti Dominus jubet, ut in­terim prohibeantur offerre, a forbidding the Holy Altar, Ep. 10. ad finem, but there is a censura Evangelica, a Gospel censure which follows upon this Discipline or Ecclesiastical Punishment, if contemned, and mentioned to­gether with it by St. Cyprian, Ep. 52. ad finem, & [...] to be cast out of the Church, or excommunicated; by which words Excommunication is expressed. Can. 2. Conc. Antioch, is a farther Act or Punishment upon such as had first passed the other Sentence upon themselves, turned themselves out of the Communion of the Church, in its Prayers and holy Eucharist; and which seems the sense and design of that [...] Can. 9. Apost. that farther Separation to be made of such, as in a case very like it, would come to Church and hear the Scriptures, but separate from Prayers and the Holy Communion. An act or censure that is forensick, judicial and au­toratative, pronounced by those sitting on twelve Thrones in the Gospel, the Church-Governors, judging the Tribes of Israel; Plenissimum imperium in domo Dei, having a [Page 324] complete thorow Power in the House of God; as Grot. in Apoc. 3.7. and all which thus on Earth by them transacted is bound and con­firm'd in Heaven; So 'tis expressed by St. Cy­prian, à spe Communionis & Pacis prohibendos esse, 'tis a prohibiting from the Hope and Communion of Peace, so long as continuing in the Impiety; or as the Church sense is given of it to us before him by Tertullian, Apol. c. 39. Summum futuri judicii prejudicium, si quis ita deliquerit, ut à Communione Orationis & Conve [...]ûs & omnis sancti Commercii rele­getur, it is the greatest, most certain Pre­sumption and pre-occupation of the Judg­ment to come, upon a Delinquent that is banish'd from the Communion of Prayer and Conventions, and all holy Commerce, Quodam­modo ante diem judicii judicant. So St. Jerome of the Priests, Ep. ad Heliodorum, spoken with some abatement of Expression, but to the same purpose, they in a manner judge before the Day of Judgment. And if some Fathers in the Council of Ephesus refused Subscriptions to the Anathema's and Excommunications of the Nestorian Hereticks there condemned, and rather turned the Sentence upon them­selves in absenting from their Communion, as Mr. Selden de Syned. l. 2. c. 12. reports it from Acacius; this argues only the great ten­derness of these holy Men, and how dreadful and tremendous the Ordinance appear'd un­to them, the same Blessing is denied, only with a shew of more, I had almost said foo­lish, Pity and Love, it returns at length to the same thing, and with more weight and argument, that such as are unruly, and will [Page 325] not obey the Truth, are to be turned out of the Church Communion, even the most ten­der and affectionate to their Persons, dare not congregate in holy Duties with them; a Power in the Church which in course fol­lows, supposing it to be a Church, admitting such the imbodying and incorporation that is here contended for, what is natural in all other Bodies and Associations, and which must be concluded in this, without a great affront on the wisdom and foresight of the Institutor; for otherwise it has not what is necessary for its Preservation, nor can it sub­sist without such a jurisdiction over contu­macious Offenders. And indeed to allow in Church-men a Power for admission by Bap­tism, and to enstate in Church Priviledges, which none that own Christianity dare deny, and to deny this power for Punishment and Correction, upon the breach of the Baptis­mal terms, and which how many among us that are zealous for the former, do, is what is as incongruous and inconsequential as any thing in the world, as any thing in common apprehensions can be; only men are rash and heady, and do not throughly consider. And it is as easily conceivable to men that give themselves a due liberty of thinking, that the same Power in Heaven may equally con­cur with and ratifie what is done in Earth, in the cutting off and due Exclusion from the Church, upon breach of the terms on which admitted to it, as at the first admission, and when on those terms enjoyned, the disadvan­tage, as the Priviledge must be equally al­lowed; nor is there any thing of thwarting [Page 326] more in the one than the other; a branch of Discipline once executed only upon Lay-men, the first Canons of the Church not permit­ting Excommunication to pass upon any of the [...], within the Order of the Priesthood, these were to be deposed from such their high office upon Crimes commit­ted; 'twas the other only was excommunica­ted, when the offence was adjudged worthy of it, and which in effect is but the same Pu­nishment, and the same inconveniencies at­tend the one as the other in their several Stations; there was a deprivation to both, the Clergy of his Ecclesiastical, and the Laick of his Baptismal advantages, it was not law­ful to joyn in religious Duty with a Lay-man excommunicated, neither with a Clergyman deposed, as in the tenth and eleventh Canons of the Apostles.

§. XXXIII THE next instance of Church Power that follows in the course of things, is the Power of Absolution, as of retaining, so of remitting Sins, they are both put together by our Sa­viour, and of the same Donation, and so firm­ly depend on one another, that, as relations of the first order, they include one another and are inseparable. A Power in the Church to shut out, and not to readmit, to cut off, and not to reunite, were a Power for Destru­ction only, not for Edification, and which the great Gospel design of Mercy and Salva­tion, of abatement and remission cannot en­dure; 'Tis true, Excommunication is, as the last Sentence of the great Judge, ('tis the an­ticipation of it) equally as firm and irrever­sible upon the persevering incorrigibly guilty, [Page 327] as is from the Ancients in the foregoing Chapter observ'd; but herein it differs from that last Sentence, because inflicted as a Re­medy, and not only as a Punishment, it leads by Hell gates for Heaven; 'tis on this side the Pit, that its mouth be not shut upon us for ever; 'tis inflicted in order to Mercy and Remission, which no Punishments from the Sentence of the great Judge are; and this our Judgment, 'tis only then without mercy and irreversible, like as is that, when the Sinner perseveres, as do those damned, in the height of his non-repentance. The formal act of Excommunication is expressed by St. Paul by a word which signifies to mourn, and ye have not mourned, i. e. excommunicated that wicked Person, 2 Cor. 5.2. 'tis done with remorse and sorrow, and rescinded again with joy, those hands which cast out, have arms wide open to receive again with Kisses and Em­bracings, as it was with the returning Prodi­gal in the Gospel; 'tis a departure for a time, that they may be receiv'd for ever, by a sen­sible feeling of the loss, to set a more value on the Blessing; and therefore 'tis not infli­cted on those that are without, as St. Paul, 1 Cor. 5.12. do we not judge them that are within, but them which are without God judgeth, v. 19. ibid. and which, were it only as a Pu­nishment, and but to aggravate, or ensure their Damnation, were it only a bare Cur­sing out of the Church, as the licentious and Enemies to God's Discipline still slanderously report of it, it were equally proper for both, Sinners without, as Sinners within; but 'tis quite otherwise, an excision, or cutting [Page 328] off only, where formerly Members, and which the act supposes in the bare expression; 'tis somewhat lay'd on those that have had once a sense of the benefit of the heavenly Associa­tion, and have tasted of the good Gifts there­of, and to teach them in the absence and de­privation, that advantage they would not otherwise consider, at least they set no va­lue upon. Amongst others, this was one er­ror of the Novatians, that remission is not to be expected from the Priest, but from God alone, as Socrates tells us, Eccl. Hist. l. 1. c. 10. and was condemned by the Church amongst his other mistakes, Ad exomologesin veniunt, & per manus impositionem Episcopi & Cleri, jus Communionis accipiant. So Cyprian, Ep. 10. they came to Confession, and are received into the Church, by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop and Clergy. And in that Epistle and the eleventh just following, he reproves the Presbyters, because Nomen offer­tur, Eucharistia datur, their readmission and enrollment is granted. And not only St. Cy­prian, but the whole Clergy of Rome, (ad quos perfidia habere non possit accessum, Ep. 55.) when not work'd out, as since, for their per­fidiousness, concur with him, and condemn such, se pacem habere dicentes, & non ab Epis­copo, who said they had their Peace from Heaven, and did not ask it by the Bishops. I'le shut up this Section in the words of our learned Bishop Richard Montague, Orig. Eccl. Tom. 1. Pars Poster. Sect. 40. Vere penitentes absoluti per verbum Sacerdotis, aequè absolvun­tur ac si Angelus de Coelo, Propheta internun­cius, imo ipse Deus, diceret, Remittuntur tibi [Page 329] peccata tua. The truly Penitents, absolved by the words of the Priest, are equally ab­solved, as if an Angel from Heaven, with the Message of a Prophet, even God himself should say, Thy sins are forgiven thee.

THE last instance of this special Power §. XXXIV of the Priesthood, is of substituting and de­puting others in the same Power, for the like Services in the Church, and to supply their Mortality, to continue the Power in Succession, till Christ's coming again. And 'tis what must be supposed in course, and is every ways as necessary, as 'tis evident, that our Saviour at first so design'd it, and the Apostles and Bishops ever after have put it in practice, otherwise all Church-Officers must have died in the Persons of the Apostles, and been buried in their Graves, a perpetual Ob­livion been put upon them; or else, which alone could countervail, a new Feast of Pen­tecost come at each Ordination, the sending forth every particular Person into the Mini­stry, or which is every ways as unlikely, the whole race of Bishops be Cheats and Usur­pers, at every one of their Consecrations, a private spirit of a particular incitation can­not avouch, or but recommend to a publick Profession, or justifie the Undertakers; nor is there any other than one of the two ways, to be proposed, or that can with any shew be pleaded; and the latter no man when consi­dering, and in his wits, will lay claim unto; in pursuance of this it is we are told by Eu­sebius, that when St. John was return'd out of Patmos, upon the Death of Domitian the Ty­rant, who had banish'd him thither, he betook [Page 330] himself to the neighbouring Provinces there, constituting or ordaining Bishops, setting whole Churches in order, and placing in the Ministry or lot of the Lord [...], such as either the Spirit of God pointed out unto him, or such whom he found suitably qualified with spiritual Gifts, whe­ther one or t'other, or both ways, his own seposition or co-optation into the Office was over and above requir'd, Eccl. hist. l. 3. cap. 23. and the same course St. Clemens, an Aposto­lical Person in his Epistle to the Corinthians tells us all the Apostles used, [...], &c. and our Apostles knowing by reve­lation through our Lord Jesus Christ, that contentions would arise about Episcopacy; and for this cause being imbued with perfect knowledge, they constituted approv'd men to be Bishops and Deacons, to these they gave Rules and Prescriptions and Power to continue the Succession, and that other ap­prov'd men succeed in the place of such as dye, and receive their Office and Mini­stry; so that not only the matter of Fact, but the reason and necessity of it, that it must be so, is here declared; this Power is it thus to be propagated and carried on by trans­mission and devolution from hand to hand in the Succession, every one deriving it from his Predecessor, who was himself so visibly stated in the Power, otherwise no security of the Power at all, Contentions and Dissatisfactions would arise concerning Church Orders, and no test or rule left to sedate and compose them, the Priests of Jeroboams Order have equal Plea, as those of the Sons of Aaron, [Page 331] and every one that will may consecrate him­self; and which Succession, if once visibly and notoriously lost, without a new Indent­ment and Mission in general, and upon a course of Miracles avouched; or else, a single particular Miracle upon the head of every one when coming into these Offices, together with the hands there lay'd on, or what else soever it is they do unto him, all Church Power must fall to the ground; that there is in it any thing of Heaven cannot be made to appear to any particular Person. Mr. Calvin therefore when he first set up for a Lecturer at Geneva, having allow'd this Succession quite lost, and seemingly, at least, lamenting of it, Fateor optandum est ut valeret continua Successio, ut functio ipsa quasi per manus trade­retur, as is to be seen in his Epistle to the King of Polonia. And the same thing is done by his Successor Theodore Beza, in his fifth Epistle to one Alamannus, and in his Tracta­tus de Minist. Evang. Grad. cont. Saraviam, ad cap. 2. lib. 1. finding their People must be at a loss, and enquiring whence their pub­lick Call and Ministry (as if they did not, they had reason enough for to do.) For vin­dicating themselves, they there tell them, that they were immediately call'd and sent by God extraordinarily commissioned, as were the Prophets and holy Men of old, Abram, Moses and Samuel, as was Christ Jesus him­self, and that they came as signally into Ge­neva to reform it, as he did into the Tem­ple, turning out the Money-changers and purging it, as were the Apostles and Evange­lists. So Calvin in express words, again, [Page 332] Institut. lib. 4. cap. 3. Sect. 4. Alios tres, ni­mirum, Apostolos, Prophetas, Evangelistas, initio regni sui Dominus suscitavit, & suscitat etiam imerdum prout temporum necessitas postulat.— Quamquam non nego Apostolos postea quo (que) vel saltem eorum loco Evangelistas interdum exci­tavit Deus, ut nostro tempore factum est, talibus enim qui Ecclesiam ab Antichristi defectione redu­cerem opus erat, &c. and all this is what pure necessity, and the present distress put them upon: 'tis what was to follow in course, and by the same force of consequence, that one absurdity comes upon the neck of another, they had knock'd their own Bishop oth' head, and disown'd all other of the Christian world, in whom alone the Power of giving Orders was lodged, and to whose hands confined; and this so acknowledgedly, that Calvin and Beza themselves did not believe to he in any other on Earth besides, (that trick, that all Power was radically and virtually in the Pres­byters Orders, was not then invented) and their pretended Power must be either of Man or from Heaven, there can be but one of these two ways proposed, the one failing the other must be introduced, otherwise there must be an universal failure of the Power it self; and therefore they are sent as was Christ Jesus, as were his Apostles and the Disciples in the Acts; and so necessary is it that Cal­vin still go for an Apostle, by all such as now claim a Succession from him. 'Tis soundly as well as wittily argued by the Author of those Questions and Answers going under the name of Justin Martyr, Respons. ad Quest. 78. ad Orthodox, the Child which was illegitimate [Page 333] by Bathsheba died. God would not have Christ descend in the Flesh, but by such as were born to David by lawful Marriage, his descent as the Son of David, was to be in the legally received way, and such are to be his descents according to the Spirit, it is by a due and regular course and succession he de­volves and continues his Power amongst us, is his Kingdom supported. And though there has been several cases in Church Story, and Plea's and Bandyings about the validity of Ordinations, and some Irregularities as to Canon have been passed by, and the Ordina­tion notwithstanding, admitted; but yet where it plainly appear'd that the Person ordaining was no Bishop himself, nor re­ceiv'd that Power by a devolved Succession, which he pretended to give to others; all debates presently ended, the Ordination was, I cannot say, nulled and voided, because de­clared to be none at all, as in the case of Maximus Cynicus, Can. 4. Conc. 2. Gen. Con­stantinop. for this it is Socrates Hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 27. tells us, that Ischyras was reputed wor­thy of many Deaths, [...], that having attained to no one degree of the Priesthood, he durst attempt to officiate in holy Things, no one Plea of Necessity, or Circumstance whatever could gain a liberty for this, or but a connivance. In some cases the Canons were dispensed with, and in time of Persecutions Bishops might attend and officiate in foreign Ordinations, and so they did, as we read in Sozomen, Hist. Eccl. l. 7. cap. the common safety and succession of the Church was their great aym, and particular [Page 334] Rules and Canons had no force in such cases. Thus we read Can. 2. Conc. 2. Gen. Constan­tinop. of some distant barbarous Countries, which had no Bishops planted among them, and there it was lawful for any Bishop to Or­dain, that they could either procure, or of him­self would take the pains. And so it appears also from Can. 102. Conc. Carthag. that several discerptions and regions there were, which had not their proper Bishops; and the same in all probability was the case of the Church of Carthage, an account of which we have from Victor in his History De Persecutione Vandalorum, l. 2. pag. 627. as bound up with the tripartite History, who tells us there was no Bishop there for twenty four years together, till Zeno the Emperor interposed with Hunnericus the King of the Vandals, who had invaded Africa, and Eugenius was conse­crated their Bishop; and this the London Mi­nisters have observ'd to our hands in their Divine right of the Evangelical Ministry, cap. 5. pag. 80. with what Zeal, and how many Miles some have travelled for Episcopal Ordination; and that our Neighbours in Scotland did not do the same, admitting what is pretended, that once they had only Pres­byters among them, I could never yet meet with any thing to convince us. Sure I am their having none of their own, does not im­ply they used none, the instances above given refute a necessity of that, or if they did not, but consecrated one another, such as urge it a Pattern to all Christian Churches, ought first to have given the world Satisfaction, that it was not their imperfection, their guilt, [Page 335] and indeed Insolency and Usurpation in so doing: But when Musaeus and Eutichianus who were no Bishops, had ordained, and Gau­dentius the Bishop of the place, did contend to have their Ordinations valid and confirm'd, by that Synod, and gave the very same rea­son why it should be confirmed, because at that time Troubles and Seditions were many, and there seemed a necessity for what they had done, his Reasons were not accepted of; Necessity and other accidents do plead for, and excuse what is only uncanonical, but where want of Power in general, it does not. And Hosius that most Holy and Reverend Bishop stood up and publickly declared in the Council, that we ought indeed all to be quiet and meek, and to contend for it; but neither Eutichianus nor Musaeus were Bishops, had any Power at all for what they preten­ded, and therefore their Consecration was invalid, and themselves were only to be ad­mitted into Lay Communion; of all which who so pleases may have an account, Can. 18, 19. Conc. Sardic. with the Scholia's of Bal­samon and Zonaras, and the Annotations of William Beveridge; these are certain Rules, Habere nam (que) aut tenere Eccelsiam nullo modo potest, qui Ordinatus in Ecclesia non est; he can­not any ways have or hold a Place in the Church, who is not ordained in the Church, Cypr. Ep. 76. Sine successione Sacerdotum totus ordo cadit, without a succession of Priests, the whole Order falls. St. Jerome, lib. 2. adv. Lucifer. Tom. 3. [...], where the Succession is cut off, a Communication of the Holy Ghost ceaseth, [Page 336] Can. 1. St. Basilii ad Amphilochium, apud Pan­dect. Can. Beveridg.

§. XXXV AND now I hope this Objection is fully answered, that the Church can be no Body separate and apart from the State, because no Powers and Officers of its own, nothing outward, sensible and coercive, and conse­quently with neither Rewards nor Penalties annexed, all must return into the Prince, or set up against the soveraignty of him, if at all and in being; for the Church's rise and original is sufficiently declared to be from another Fountain, its imbodying and incor­poration to be apart, with its own Powers and Acts, Offices and Officers, Laws and Rules, Rewards and Penalties, Censures and Punishments, Hopes and Expectations. And all different from that of the Soveraign in the State, no ways against the either Power or Soveraignity of him, the influences distinct; but no ways so opposite to one another, as thwarting or destructive, Fratres dicuntur & habentur qui unum Deum patrem agnoverunt, unum spiritum biberunt sanctitatis qui de uno utero ignorantiae ejusdem ad unam lucem expave­runt veritatis, as Tertullian describes the in­corporation Apol. cap. 30. Christians are called and accounted Brethren who have acknow­ledged one God and Father, who have drank of one Spirit of holiness, who have broke through with astonishment one Womb of Ig­norance, into one Light and Truth. I do not know how better to give an account of this Kingdom of Christ than in the answer of those Kindred of our Saviours to Domitian the Tyrant, related by Eusebius Eccl. hist. l. 3. c. 20. [Page 337] Domitian was afraid of Christ's Kingdom as Herod had been before him; he had the same apprehension that still is in the World, de­rived from most excellent Presidents Herod and Domitian, that Christ's Kingdom and Caesar's could not stand together; whereupon such Christ's Kindred, were summoned and accused as of the stock of David; who upon demand, acknowledging they were so, and giving an account of their Meanness and Po­verty as to this World, and shewing their hands which were hard and callous, with the assiduity of labour for a daily sustenance, and not to be suspected to be Invaders of the King­domes here, they were at length deman­ded concerning Christ and his Kingdom what the nature and quality of it was? and when, and in what places he was to appear? and to which they also answered, [...], &c. that Christ's Kingdom is not of this world or earthy, but heavenly and Angelical; to be accomplished in the conclusion of Ages, when coming in Glory he shall Judge the living and the dead, and retribute to every one according to his works.

IN the mean time, and till such his Per­sonal §. XXXVI Appearance in Glory with outward Power and force, as well as splendor, to sit visibly as a Judge, and every one to receive in his Body, by way of Punishment what evil he hath done in the flesh, to say his Power is none at all, because not of the same quality, in the same form of Process, and by sensible Awards, is to discourse as those that are equal­ly [Page 338] ignorant of the Reasons of such God's ter­rible Proceedings at the end of the World, that Fire and Brimstone in Hell, as they are of the nature of his Church and Association, its Rules and Laws and Discipline here on Earth And our Saviour therefore and then personally and bodily afflicts for ever; be­cause his Moral spiritual Laws, his Church Injunctions, so often urged, have been belie­ved on these mens Principles, to be of no account, to have no edge or force, because no present destruction of the flesh, nothing sensible restraining or coercing, had they been received and obey'd, as in the design from God, such his fearful doom had never reached them: and to contend that the Ec­clesiastical Church Power is now none at all because not such as at that great Day, or not the same as of a secular Judge at an Assize, to send to Prison, Whip, or put to Death; is with the same Argument to contend, that there is no force or obligation in any one, o [...] all the Gospel moral Precepts either, whose utmost return, by way of outward Penalty▪ upon such as receiv'd them not, was to cas [...] off the dust of their Shoes upon them; As the Seventy we know were by our Saviour alon [...] enjoyn'd, who had neither Whips or Axe [...] Goals nor Gallows committed unto them, wh [...] could only deny them the advantage of tha [...] Gospel which themselves refused, when it was Preached unto them. To say Church Power can be none at all upon this score, is to deny all Evangelical Power, for present Judgment is not there speedily executed, and the Law of Love and Virtue are alike precarious, and [Page 339] of no Autority and Jurisdiction that's en­gaging, as are the Laws Ecclesiastical, if their reason be good they give against the latter; because voluntary in the submission to, and acceptance of them, and no one is forced, ex­cept he please, to covenant at first; or if he does covenant, he's as much free from all out­ward force, whether he pleased or not, to put his part in practice, he may renounce and rescind it at his liberty. Surely no Cords tye, no Irons bind, like those that enter into the Soul, whether it be by Love or Fear, by Punishments or Rewards, by the Comforts and Hopes of the one, or the Terrors and Consternations of the other; a wounded Con­science who can bear? its burdens are insup­portable, and which comes not by Weights and Engines, inventions of Man, pressing and over-powering (and according to the Princi­ples of these men there can be no other) but by reflex actions, and a sense of non-perfor­mance of Duty, and the horrid black guilt annexed, from a sense of that loss, which like the Conscience it self is spiritual, and which over-bears and over-rules, very oft to the neglecting of the flesh, to the undergoing any Tortures and Cruciatings of the Body, as we know despairing Persons do; when, as with Esau, the Blessing is sought, and 'tis too late, there's no room for Repentance; but which is not the first and immediate punish­ment and burden, and surely a sence of Duty performed; and the Expectations of a good man are no less binding on the other side, [...]ngage and tye the Soul, that is not feared with an hot iron, is sensible and considering; [Page 340] and he that believes and is fully possessed, that without the Pale of the Church, if not a Mem­ber of this Body and Association, as above described, there is no Gospel advantages here, nor life hereafter, no other way re­vealed to us by God in his Word to follow and adhere unto; he needs no other Motive and Bo [...]d, for his keeping within this Pale, for his submission to the Laws and Discipline of it; and if any one does not believe it, he is to be dealt with, as those are, that say the flames of Hell are painted also, that deny the reality and truth of those eternal Punish­ments: and 'tis the great folly of those men▪ who first suppose there can be no Association but by outward ties, and then upon this begg'd Principle of their own, conclude a­gainst this of the Church, and which is only spiritual. The sum of this Section is this, if the Church on Earth has no Power, be­cause no outward coercion, neither has any one instance of the Gospel; if these Men's reasons conclude any thing. And Mr. Hobb [...] is to be done thus much right in the case, that he speaks so like an Honest man, that is to one that is true to his Principles; and all along asserts, That ‘the New Testament is only Canonical and Law, as made so by the Civil Magistrate; and to say it is a Law in any place, where the Law of the Common-wealth has not made it so, is contrary to the Nature of a Law; and more particularly, as to the present point in hand, that the Decrees of the Council at jerusalem, Acts 15.28. were no more Laws, than are those other Precepts, Re­pent, [Page 341] be Baptized, keep the Commandments, believe the Gospel, come unto me, sell all that thou hast, give it to the Poor, and follow me; which are not Commandments, but Invi­tations and Callings of Men to Christiani­ty,—the Kingdom which they acknow­ledged, and to which they invited, being not present but to come; and they that have no Kingdom, can make no Laws; nor did any sin in not receiving the Doctrines of Christ.’ All which is to be read with more to the same purpose in his Levia­than, Part 3. cap. 42. Of Power Ecclesia­stical.

NOR are they less out of the way, when §. XXXVII arguing, that this Power of the Church must of necessity clash with that of the State, and oppose the Soveraignty of Princes; for there is no outward Execution in a form of justice, can be supposed as from Christ; whatever of that Nature is, is from the other secular Fountain, till Christ Jesus appears himself at the Day of Judgment; no Person [...]l compul­sive Summons from him, till to that great Bar; and all earthy Power, and Dominion and Magistracy, is to submit and appear to his Jurisdiction; because to be at an end, to be deposed by God himself, ripe as a sheaf of Wheat lay'd up in the Barn, with its due, just and designed Period and Completion, and then this Kingdom of Christ also shall be delivered up to the Father, that God may be all in all, they are both as to continue upon Earth, so to end together, but neither de­stroying one another, and the alone Council and Pleasure of the Almighty makes the disso­lution, [Page 342] and which as the sense of the Primitive and first Christians is cleer, by the account that is given of the Kindred of our Saviour in the above-mentioned place of Eusebius, of the constant course of their Tribute, out of the assiduity of their labour, and lower con­dition in the World, they pay'd unto Caesar, no one relation to Christ, as not of the Flesh, so nor of the Spirit, either as Men or Chri­stians, giving but any shew of Title unto the Government that is Civil, or of exemption from any one Tax or Imposition by that Go­vernment laid upon them, a Truth that has been opened, illustrated and deduced down through this Discourse, and in some compe­tent measure, so as to satisfie upon a rational enquiry, and it may be farther cleer'd up, and rendred more easie and convincing yet, to a due understanding, if the several acts and offices of this Body the Church be resum'd again in their distinct Considerations; and it will farther appear, that these Powers, as they never have in Matter of Fact, so in their Nature and Constitution, they do not any ways impinge upon, much less silence and depose, any ways justle with and usurp, those Powers that are Secular; let us run them over, as in their order already set down.

§. XXXVIII THE first instance of their Union and Asso­ciation is in their Articles of Faith, joyning and consenting together in this belief, that Jesus is the Christ, and which makes the Christians a Sect, sever'd, distinct and apart from all others. The sum indeed of all the Gospel, as Mr. Hobbs with great industry and [Page 343] pains does collect and prove, and 'tis what is own'd by him as reconcileable with our obedience to the civil Magistrate, be he Chri­stian, or Infidel; for their Faith is internal and invisible, as he goes on and tells us, they have the license that Naaman had, and need not put themselves into danger for it, Levia­than, Part 3. cap. 43. or admitting farther, and which Christianity surely obliges to, that publick Professions of this Faith are to be made, (and for this the several Creeds, as the Apostles, &c. were drawn up, open Con­fessions of them were made, and Subscrip­tions to them, to the incurring of danger from the Civil Power) they only hereby en­gag'd themselves to suffer, to dye, and be­come in that signal manner Martyrs and Wit­nesses for and of them at the stake, but never so to oppose, as to rebel, in the defence and maintenance of them; there was nothing there believed and professed, or from any other Obligation or Contract that did engage them so to do.

THEY next covenanted against Sin and §. XXXIX Iniquity, Murder, Fraud, Perfidiousness, &c. and was of old and is still, a particular Act of this Christian Body or Association, as in the Covenant at Baptism; nor is any one any farther a Christian than he performs it: and this cannot by Malice it self be termed a co­venanting against the Prince, or his Power. None are indeed and throughly good Sub­jects but such as are good Christians; thus vow, and pay. Evil manners abate of a just sense and Conscience of Justice and Honesty; the Prince cannot have of such men so full a [Page 344] security of their due and true Allegiance and Fidelity to him; why should they be more true to him than they are to their God? and besides, they expose the Government to his Wrath and Vengeance. And 'tis not upon this account the late Solemn League and Co­venant, was adjudged by the publick Auto­rity of the Nation to be injurious to the State, as ingaging to Repentance, and to be burnt by the common Hangman.

§. XL A farther instance of this Association is, an assembling and joyning together in the Publick Service of God, in those offices of Christianity which belong to all in common; as in the Duties of Prayer, Praises, Lauding with one Mouth, and Praising God for all his Mercies to Mankind, and to themselves in particular, this is a Church Office which must endure so long as the Sun and Moon, as there is a Church, a Body, or Collection of men upon Earth professing Christianity; if Pub­lick Prayers and Praises cease, the Church, the People of God must cease; particular Christians may be confined and incapacitated in the Performance; and where one is, though with Jeremy in the Dungeon, or where two or three are met together, God will be with them; but the daily Sacrifice cannot wholly be abolished till Days and Nights are no more; should I say they are to be longer, and to remain in Heaven, it were not amiss, to be sure the Praises will, and why not the Prayers? so far at least as a signal acknow­ledgment of our dependency upon God, the Perfection of that State, and full growth we there arrive unto, does not invest us with [Page 345] any of those first and nearest of God's attri­butes, and which are therefore call'd incom­municable, as peculiar to his Essence, and particularly those of Self-existency and Inde­pendency, his Autarchy and All-sufficiency, and which Duties, if discharged, as required by God on Earth, imply and enjoyn our ac­knowledgment and obedience, as to our God, so to our Prince, in his distinct relations to us, and that by all the ties and obligations, the performance of so solemn a Duty, as Prayer and Praises are, can lay upon us, least found perfidious Hypocrites, and unfaithful to our God, as all that are false to their King in the long run will appear so to God Almigh­ty: the very Form and Nature of our Prayers and Praises run so; that therein we are first to Pray and give Thanks for Kings, and there, and in that most solemn manner, own them, 1 Tim. 2.1, 2, 3. a Reb­bel cannot say his Prayers at all, but in the very action publish himself a Rogue, if saying them as St. Paul has appointed, so as accepta­ble to God our Saviour. 'Tis true this Duty is not with the same Circumstances performed as are the two former, it requires personal local uniting, and which if without the Per­mission of the Prince, may be termed Sedition or Riot, or, if against his Commands, Rebel­lion; or whatever criminal Characters the present Laws put upon such like Conventions; the first Christians therefore, when under those harder Necessities, by the severer Edicts of the Heathen Emperors, went still to pray out of the Cities, met before day and in the Woods; and when discovered and impleaded, [Page 346] 'twas alone the great and tried innocency of both their Religion and Persons was their ad­vocate and rescue, as in the days of Traj [...]n the Emperor, who occasioned particular search to be made into them, and such their Assem­blies, or else they did it with more privacy, abating of their Numbers in particular Meet­ings, as less discerned; or if discerned, less offensive and obnoxious, not so liable to jea­lousies of State, and suspitions; or if this did not do, and gain a connivance, as many times it did not, they then became Martyrs and Suffer'd, whether by Confiscation of Goods or Banishment of their Persons, by the Prison or Death, as they were appointed to it, and engaged to undergo, for their Faith it self, and the Profession of Christianity; there was no Pleas for exemptions of their Persons from such the Laws, because Chri­stians, as if beyond their inspection, and above their Punishments. And St. Cyprian Ep. 7. blames particular Christians, that when under interdict, return'd home again without the leave of that Government by which exi­led, Et deprehensi jam, non quasi Christiani, sed quasi nocentes, pereant, as bringing guilt with such their Punishments on their Heads; there was no other strivings, or struglings in the Streets, unless for their last Breath, when upon the Racks, and by other Cruelties. As their case was every ways like that of the Prophet Daniel, so was their behaviour too, and the most open inhibition, and most se­vere, as to Penalties, must not cease the dai­ly Sacrifice and Praises of God Almighty, they still own'd their Religion and their God [Page 347] its Author, and so they did their Prince in his due Subordination; praying with such their last Breath for him. There was no Arms, nor one Shield of the Mighty, but Prayers and Tears; and the late Field Con­venticles and Rendevouzes of Rebellion were in those days unheard of.

THAT these Christians by a common Shot §. XLI or Purse maintain'd their own Poor, carries no more exception or opposition, than do any other acts of Charity, in what Body or Association whatever, and of which this per­haps, of the Christians, was the most eminent that ever was in the World. Charity we know falls under no other Law than that of St. Paul, that every one give as his God has prosper'd him, readily and of a willing mind; nor is it, can it be, against any Law, any ways blame-worthy, when fixed on due ends and objects, when design'd for, and dispended on, only the Poor and Indigent; but when preferr'd to and justling out of doors acts of Justice and Equity, when set up and practised against, always necessary and immutable Duties, and against which these Christians always provided, their own Ful­minations, or Church-censures, by way of Penance, and correction still proceeded upon any defect or perverser design discovered, and 'twas their abhorrency; and so ought the Secular Power to animadvert, and proceed in its courses of Restraint, Coercion, Seizures, Confiscations, or whatever is the ways and Methods the present Government in such ca­ses instructs and enables them to. Though where the Church is in the Common-wealth, [Page 348] as it is now, that the Civil Polity is Chri­stian; this case cannot so usually fall out, as it did before the days of Constantine, a com­mon maintenance being provided for such by Law, and the case as to the general, is now none at all.

§. XLII NOR doth that other Publick maintenance of such as laboured among them in the Word and Doctrine, carry in it self any more of Encroachment or Usurpation, or but suspi­tion of Danger, on the Powers of the World, then that other just now mentioned; and which was their pure Charity, and a thorow incapacity for subsistence otherways induced to it; for this Contribution for their Clergy was purely voluntary, what every one of his own motion brought in, and lay'd at the Apostles feet; was it not thine own? and in thine own Power? as St. Peter argues with Ananias on the like occasion, no motives from Christianity tend to any thing of force, or lay any outward Coercion, as not to the Per­sons, so nor on the Estates of any; their Goods are equally their own, as are all their other lawful Rights and Properties, after their coming in to be Christians as before; every man is to abide in that calling, state or advantage as to this World, in which he was called, if not sinful; 'twas their own hands and hearts did offer and dedicate their Goods to the Service of the Church; they still re­main'd in their own Power, and they might, for any restraint as to their Profession, or relating to any such particular Church En­dowments, use them, as all men may their own, to what end they please; if not to [Page 349] the prejudice of their Prince, or their Neigh­bour. And so far were these first Christians and their Church Contributions and religious Enfeoffments from being suspected of bring­ing dammage, or but any one incommodious­ness to either, that I do not remember any one thing like a charge of that nature, drawn up against them for it; though great Sums of Money were brought in to this purpose, and the Church had great Possessions in the time of the Heathen Emperors, and which the Empire confirmed sometimes to the Church, by its Princely Edicts; as Aurelius did in particular in the case of Paulus Samo­setanus, and which is above-mentioned; or if at any time they were suspected, as by their Apologies and Remonstrances in their own behalf it may be inferr'd, and their Church-Houses and Gardens, their Patrimony alone might be their Crime, as what too usually falls out; nor was they altogether free from violences, as appears by the Restaurations made by Constantine, at his Possession of the Empire: and which is also above noted; they then not only made publick such their Protestations, but their Practice too, to the contrary, and which avouched and vindicated their innocency. So Justin Martyr, in his Apology to Antoninus for the Christians, [...], we only Worship God, Confessing Kings and Governors of Men; and praying for them. So again Athenagoras in his Embassy for the Christians, [...], &c. and if it so falls out that we are accused, as doing injustice to any more [Page 350] or less, we refuse not to be punish'd; we are worthy of it in the highest Nature. And Justin Martyr again in his Epistle ad Di­ognetum, speaks of the Christians in general [...], they obey their appointed Laws, and by their exacter Lifes and stricter Conversa­tions, go beyond the Laws, supererogate and are more perfect than their Rules require, or Sanctions enjoyn them. To which I'le add that of Octavius to Cecilianus in Minutius Faelix, De nostro numero carcer exaestuat, Christianus ibi nullus est nisi aut reus suae Religionis aut Pro­fugus; your Prisons swarm, the Walls will scarce contain them; but there is no Chri­stian, unless Runawaies, and Desertors of their Religion; and when we assert the di­vine Right of Titles, and that God himself assigned and separated such a Portion of the goods of the Earth for the maintenance of the Evangelical Priesthood also, and which San­ction is to endure together with the King­dom, and to take away this is to rob God, we do not then maintain them with any such Clause in the Charter or Conveyance, war­ranting and enabling a forcible violent En­try, as in the usual cases of Right and Pro­perty upon dispossession; that Power St. Paul speaks of, as to Eat and to Drink not, to work with our hands, but to live upon the Gospel, and which we believe to descend with the Gospel, is together with holy Orders invested in him, is quite another thing, and neither implies nor supposes Power like it; it is bottomed only on the Grounds and Reasons of our Association, nor has it any other mo­tives [Page 351] but those which make us Christians, and which did not at all depend on outward force. Hence it was, till the world came into the Church, that the Priesthood was maintained by what every one offer'd, upon the forementioned inducements; and as he that denied this maintenance to him that served at the Altar, was supposed still to deny withal his Faith, and place in the Body of Christians; and suitably is it with the greatest equity and proportion of things, still the continued Practice of the Christian Courts, to Excommunicate or cut off such an one from the Church Communion; so neither could they which saw no reason why them­selves should become Christians, be supposed to be convinced, by other reasons, of the ne­cessity of maintaining those who claimed no other right for the maintenance, than their Preaching and Publishing such that Religion. And therefore when upon with-holding of Tithes, or the Churches Revenue, we pro­ceed farther than Excommunication, to Per­sonal Confinement; or whatever outward restraint, we have no Warrant or Power for this, but from the Prince, and the Laws of the Land alone enable us to do it. 'Tis true, to have a Body or Government in it self di­stinct and apart from that which is Secular, and with its own obligations for maintenance, which way soever it arises, but more espe­cially when from so prevailing a motive and engagement, as that which makes men Chri­stians, and entitles them to Eternity, to have their own bank or stock, to what ends or on what Persons soever erogated and expended, [Page 352] it matters not, whether on their Poor, or on their Clergy, (to which add the Power to assemble for religious Worship, upon the same Considerations) is what may carry some appearance for Suspitions and Jealousies from the State, and advantages are possible to be taken for undermining and overthrowing of it, upon each occasion; a Government, in­deed, ought to be watchful, and jealous in such Cases; Premunires, Eschetes and Con­fiscations, are but due and equitable Provi­sions, as by Law assigned; that surely is a very unsafe Rule, I find among other as bad, laid down by Mr. Dean in his Sermon, in a case not very unlike to this in hand, He that acknowledges himself to derive all his Autority from God, can pretend to none against him. Unless wee'l suppose there can be no Cheats nor Hypocrites, double dealings in the World; or that a power or trust duely received, can­not be abused and estranged; such as design­edly Act against God, pretend mostly to his Autority, and often have it really in them. And the truth is, nothing but the peculiar constitution of this Christian Body or Incor­poration, could have then by any one been permitted, as it was by some before Constan­tine, or now be pleaded for, whose humble, innocent, peaceable temper and complexion, as above described, was so undoubted and no­torious, in every instance experienced, whose very essence was obedience, whose design of making good Christians, was to make them good Subjects; the very Plot of the Gospel was in part this, that Government be every ways preserved and entire, administring new [Page 353] Motives and Arguments for it, and that Princes if possible be more Sovereign and Glorious thereby; whatever the Gospel Preaches and Commands is all along with a just regard, and even subordination to it, But then again since thus it is by the Blessings and Pro­vidence of God, that Kings and Queens themselves are become Nursing Fathers and Mothers of the Church, since our Church Doors are set wide open by their command, our Revenues in our hands, at the publick disposal of our Bishops, to which is super­added their own Royal Bounty and Endow­ments, together with more from the Piety of others their Subjects, and eminent Chri­stians among us, and all by Law Established and Confirmed unto us, as the rest of our Tenures; still to plead the example of the Primitive Christians, who were under no one of these Advantages, to keep a part in distinct Assemblies, to make Privy Purses and Fonds, brings such as practise it under as great a suspicion of Hypocrisie, and private ill-laid designs as those first Christians were notorious for their integrity when so doing and unsuspected; not only that Government under which they live, but all good Chri­stians have ground enough for jealousie of their underhand, indirect purposes, to im­plead and seize on the one hand, and to ad­monish and censure on the other, as Delin­quents; no one consideration of State can countervail the Damage, a toleration or con­nivance of such may bring unto it; nothing can justifie the Practice it self, but that alone which was pleaded by the Primitive Chri­stians, [Page 354] and was their real case; that the Asso­ciation and Assemblies of Christians, for the Profession and Service of the Gospel must cease and fall without so doing; that Chri­stianity it self cannot otherwise stand, and which our supposal overthrows, as to any such Pleas now adays; nor indeed dare any of our Dissenters openly say it.

§. XLIII THAT the Clergy alone preside in their several Districts is no more prejudicial to Government in State than any of the other, and which will appear from their Offices there performed, as to be the Mouth in Prayer and thanksgiving; and which is already consider'd, to Catechize, Teach and Instruct the People, and admonish them in the ways to Heaven, by Virtue, and the instances of all sorts of Obedience, as indispensably re­quired, and nothing but a thorow after-repentance, and amendment upon failure, will regain the Inheritance forfeited; and I [...]le take it to be only an ill Phrasing or in­consideration in the Expression, when Prea­ching the Gospel, in the due sense of it, in op­position to a false Religion, whether by an extraordinary Commission and justified by Mira­cles; or as ordinary Pastors of the Church, (for 'tis all one as to the Gospel it self, which is the same which way soever Preached) is said to be an affront and contempt to the Ma­gistracy and Law. As again in Dr. Tillotson's Sermon, it being quite contrary, and to Preach Christ crucified, is to honour, pro­fess and maintain whatever is in Magistracy and Law; nor is it truely Preached, but when in a due dependency upon them: And if the [Page 355] Jesuites practice be otherwise, and he depo­ses Kings to propagate his Faith, Mr. Dean's Observation ought there to have been li­mited and fixed; and not to have drawn so universal a Rule, so notoriously making way for the silencing the Gospel for ever; if a false Religion be once by Law in that parti­cular Kingdom or Nation, or if to be ima­gined, over the whole World established, be­cause no way supposed to publish it, but by the affront and contempt of the Magistracy and Law; but this is too usual a course of too many in the world, who if they can but shew their Zeal, and produce a present po­pular Argument against a Jesuit, they consi­der not the common Christianity which is most certainly destroy'd by it; as indeed all Church Power on this supposal is gone; nor ought it to be pretended to amongst the pu­rest and most Catholick Professors (I might say, there can be no Professors at all) which have no more extraordinary Commissions, nor are they any other ways justifiable by Miracles, than we believe the Jesuits; and sure we are to boot, that Men of these Principles will never invade the offices of an Apostle or Evan­gelist, to go forth and convert Nations, be first Setlers of the Gospel among them. The other instances of this Power, is to admini­ster the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper; the one admits and enters into this Body upon the terms of the Gospel, and far­ther engages by that Vow and Stipulation there contracted in order to a secure Perfor­mance; The other accepts of, owns, con­firms and revives it. So oft as we approach [Page 356] that Holy Table, and no Justice of Peace in the Parish ever yet suspected that his Pastor, when officiating in these Administrations en­tred into, and laid the grounds of a Plot or Engagement against his but confined and lesser Jurisdiction in the County. These Pro­testations, Covenants and Engagements were never concluded Illegal, nor such their pra­ctice, State Usurpations.

§. XLIV THE Censures of the Church are injun­ctions laid upon her Members, either by way of Discipline only, in order to a better pro­gress and more expedite increase of holiness, or by way of Penance, Mulcts and Amercia­ments upon failures; but neither of these do externally compel or lay confinements upon the Persons of any, any otherwise than by their own intendments and voluntary sub­mission and whatever more their refusal or perverser obstinacy does provoke, is only Excommunication, or a cutting off from the benefit of that Indenture, and which cuts asunder no one relation, either of Servant to his Master, Husband to his Wife, Father to his Son, Subject to his Prince, and so back again, or one Friend to another; takes away no one Privilege that is Secular, and all ties and compacts, whether from Nature, or by After-obligations, remain as before; Chri­stianity dissolves no one that was lawful when entertained, but adds more nerves and strength, greater force and bonds unto them, by new Arguments, Motives and Rewards, and leaves all in the state they were in before, only makes sure provision for Heaven. Nor are those Rules and particular Observancies [Page 357] for holy living, and satisfaction injoyn'd by the Confessor, to take any Place, to have any force upon the Penitent or Candidates Con­science, if the Performance be inconsistent with, and thwarts any one Duty, by any one of the forementioned relations arising, if common-fidelity, Justice, or Charity be ex­cluded thereby in any one instance of them, or any be contracted against humane Con­verse and Society. And the tenth Canon of the Apostles forbids to Pray with an excom­municate Person, but permits to have con­verse with him; the less is still to submit to the greater obligation: And the World with its Necessities, I, and Conveniencies too, is always considered; there can be no com­pensations which infers omissions in another kind, especially where the Duty neglected is more obliging; nor is the Arrearage paid by a differing Debt contracted. And by the like Rules also is Excommunication it self to he limited, upon the very same terms has it its assigned force and efficacy; and which, as of it self, neither invests with, nor deprives of any earthy Goods, any one instance of Wealth, Power or Dominion; so is it to he executed alone in compliance with the Necessities of Mankind, with those Laws of that Body and Society to which, as Men, they stand related; this Discipline cannot it be either a Contempt or Affront to the Magistracy or Law; and then too, when all this is, as it ought to be, duly observed, as to these generals, a great deal is left to the prudence and discretion of the Instrument, 'tis pursued only on rational Grounds and Motives, and [Page 358] the effect to be considered, with the best foresight, which, as is already shew'd, is not always immediate and irresistible; the ad­vantage or disadvantage is to be weigh'd, whe­ther as to particular Persons, or as to Publick. And therefore this instance of the Power of the Keys, though deputed to every one that is ordain'd a Presbyter; yet by Church Laws and usuage, upon Prudence and Prediscern­ment, the execution is limited, and the Bi­shop only has it, or some other in special de­putation from him, to that particular purpose, and since the Empire became Christian, the Laws of it have prescribed, and gave limits to the Bishops themselves, as to Persons, and the reasons of their Excommunications, and which the Church in good Ages of it did own and comply with. There were many other notorious offenders in the Church of Corinth, and deserved St. Paul's Animadversions too, as well as that one incestuous Corinthian, who alone was there Excommunicated by him. Longè aliter ista, longè aliter vitiosa curanda & sananda est multitudo; but the proceeding against a multitude is to be of another Na­ture, than that against one single notorious Sinner; a Schism may be occasioned, and the Wheat be pull'd up with so many Tares, and instead of curing the Distemper it spread farther; as St. Austin, Tom. 7. Post. Collat. lib. cont. Donatist. cap. 20. and we read in Socrates his Church History, l. 4. cap. 23. of one Arsenius, that he never did exercise his Discipline upon, and separate from their So­ciety; a Monk that was a Novice, and not of much continuance in the Fraternity, though [Page 359] he might for his offences deserve it; and his reason is, that the utmost course or excom­munication, might render such an one but the more obstinate; 'twas only those that had experienced the advantage of their Commu­nion for a good while, would be sensible of the loss, be apprehensive of the sorrow and burden of it; and that all Excommunica­tions were not to take effect, in the first times of the Church, we have Origen for an example, who when excommunicated by De­metrius, with the assistance of other Bishops, continued still a Presbyter, and publickly associated as such. And Vallesius annot. in Euseb. hist. l. 6. c. 23. gives these two Rea­sons for it, because his Sentence was denoun­ced when absent, and he had not legal Cita­tions, and it was not confirmed by the Bishop of Rome; though to me a more probable rea­son may be given than either, for the illegality of the proceeding and the no effect it had, the ancient Canons of the Church still forbid­ding any one of the hieratical Order, whether Bishop, Presbyter or Deacon, to be excom­municated. Excommunication was the Pu­nishment for the Laity; the Clergies was Deposition; nor were the Clergy subject to the other, till removed from the Priesthood. And certainly then much less can it be con­ceived in reason, and as agreeable with the common courses of foresight and discretion, that other things are managed in the Gospel with, that this Ordinance should on such terms be instituted and put in execution as to reach Kings themselves, and with less re­gard and consideration, than to Persons in [Page 360] Holy Orders, and be concluded more pe­remptorily and immediately to take effect upon them, as if inconveniences, and that over-ballance whatever the proposed advan­tage may be, may not here be a consequent also. Princes, 'tis true, are equally subject to the Laws of Christ and his Church, and they must come to Heaven in the same Path that the meanest of their Subjects do come in; they are to be urg'd and taught publickly, as are others, and particularly in private, and where due opportunity to be severely war­ned of; but then upon a supposed failure to proceed to an open publick Exclusion; this, if in any one instance else, ought first to be weigh'd and consider'd, whether it be likely to have due effect, to be for the good of the Church in general, which his outward arm alone can protect? and whether instead of reducing him as to his Person, it may not much more harden him, and especially since his Person falls under no farther Coer­cion, than his engagements to Christianity lay upon him. Examples of Kings are strange­ly influential and prevailing, and whether a greater deluge of Prophaneness may not be let in by so doing? or again, whether the exposing him to shame and contumely, would not withal expose his reputation to the contempt of his People; and thus not only Religion and Morality, but the out­ward Peace and Quiet of the Realm might be exposed to danger, and the both Church and State be liable to inrodes and violence thereby, we believe it to be what was appointed by God, and supposed by [Page 361] our Saviour, in the lay and frame of our Christianity, that the Secular Power receive no abatement; but on the contrary, every of its Prerogatives be strengthen'd, by its spreading over and reception in the World. Since every other relation is to continue and be obliging, so also must this of Kings, which came into the World with the first, is connate and coaevous with Pa­ternity, the Foundation was laid for both at once, and Kings and Subjects are to re­main so long as Fathers and Children, the race of Mankind is on Earth continued; and suitably to this first contrivance, no sooner did the Empire come in to the Church, and engage in Christianity, but Emperors de­clared themselves, and the Church joyfully receiv'd them for its Nursing Father, and the Prince is the Supreme Governor there, the Laws and Judicatures are the Kings, and our Bishops give Citations in their own Names, but by an antecedent Power derived from, and by the Prince devolved unto them. And the Bishops of old, were so far from assuming to themselves any such outward Coercive Power, as to make Citations of mens Persons, to proceed by Court Process and Penal Mulcts, that when they laid the Plot for Lay-Deputies, Chancellors, Com­missaries, Officials, or whatever title they went under, to sit in their Courts, and give occasional Judgments (for what private rea­sons I cannot tell, but the pretended is this, that it was less decent that they being Spi­ritual Persons should mingle themselves in Secular Affairs.) they could not constitute [Page 362] such their Deputies, nor erect such an Order, but by a special Grant and Seal from the Em­peror (a firm Argument that the Power was not originally theirs) and they suitably sup­plicate him in order to it, and he yields to their demand, but gives a Caution that the Church be not dammaged thereby, a thing in course to be suspected; and perhaps the ad­vantage the Church has since had, that the Courts for her Justice are the Bishops, and her Causes fall not immediately under a Se­cular Cognitor, are so little and inconsidera­ble, that though the first Piety and royal In­dulgence is apparent; yet the present bene­fit is hardly discernible at this day among us, Vid. Cod. 16. Theodos. Tit. 2. l. 38. and the Story is to be seen at large in the Commen­taries of Jacob Gothos [...]red upon that Law. And can we now with any shew of Reason suppose that in the design of our Saviour, and the execution of Church Power, no regard is to be had to the Prince, and that Proceedings are to be alike as upon other Persons and promiscuously, though all so far under the same Circumstances, as equally Members of the same Association for Heaven? Those rules of Policy which were contrived, com­plyed with, and submitted to in the first planting the Gospel, seem not consistent with such an after-practice, a Presbyter was not to be Excommunicated till first deposed, and yet then shall each single Presbyter Excom­municate his Prince? I do not say till depo­sed, as was by the ancient Canons the Pres­byter to be, and then Excommunicated, for that is what no Power on Earth can do, and [Page 363] the Church of God never pretended to it, 'twas what she always abhorred; but that the Considerations must needs weigh more, and be much rather cogent; that the censure go not out against a Prince, and greater incon­veniences must hence follow, whatever they were the ancient Church did apprehend to be a consequent to the other, and the com­mon foresight of things could not also allow it. The single Corinthian was Excommuni­cated by St. Paul, when the whole Body of them, each one full of iniquity had not the like Animadversions from him; and what may not be connived at in him who is more than ten thousand? and by which there is less Security that the edge of the censure will not be more abated and dulled thereby? in whom is all Strength and Power, in whose hand it is to expose all to the malice and vio­lence of the Enemy, to reduce the Church so near to the first state under the Heathens, and which condition, though it is rather to be hazarded, then to comply with and imbody into us any thing that is sinful, even to gain a Protection for other instances of Virtue and Duty; yet nothing but that which strikes at Religion it self, will ingage or be a War­rant to proceed in this extreme, utmost way upon him, whose alone is the outward Co­ercive Power, and who can weild his Sword at pleasure, deny the Church that support, countenance and assistance, which our Saviour designed Religion should outwardly flourish under, be in some respects propagated and preserved by, become more notoriously visi­b [...]e and conspicuous to all Nations. And what [Page 364] is said of Excommunication and other Church censures, is to be said of Absolution, which though a Power enstated alone in the Priest­hood by Christ; yet is not to be executed in an Arbitrary way, and that not only as to the Laws of Christ, but the Laws of King­doms also, in many cases, especially where Christian. I'le end this Section and Head of Discourse in the words of our Learned Dr. Hammond in his Book of the Power of the Keys, Cap. 1. Sect. 1. ‘The Power of binding and loosing, is only an Engine of Christ's invention to make a Battery or impression upon the obdurate Sinner, to win him to himself, to bless not triumph over him; it invades no part of the Civil Judicature, nor looses the bonds thereof by these Spiritual Pretences; but leaves the Government of the World just in the posture it was before Christ's coming, or as it would be supposed to be, if he had never left any Keys in his Church.’

§. XLV THAT the Church as a Body and Corpo­ration of it self judiciarily determines in Council, and lays obligations to Obedience, infringes and inrodes no more than her other acts now mentioned; if it be declarative of matter of Faith or Duty indispensably, as re­ceived originally from Christ by Church conveyance, the Determination is no more than the first Teaching and Promulgation of it was; if it be constitutive of Laws and Canons, for setling and enjoyning of Disci­pline, the matter in it self indifferent, but limited for present use and service, and of which, and to which purpose, all Humane [Page 365] Laws Ecclesiastical or Civil are made and tend, these Church Canons are, as in the make and obligation, so in the Practice and execution to retain that just regard to known Duties, especially those of Allegiance, that such the other Church acts and censures do, and as already shewed. 'Tis true the great transcendent regard and reverence the Em­pire when Christian has had for the institu­tion as from our Saviour, for Religion it self, in whose defence the Canons were made, and for the high Dignity and Office of the Bi­shops his Commissioners, that it still has made antecedent Canons the Rule of all Laws enacted, if relating to or but bordering upon affairs Ecclesiastical (as instances are already produced) quas leges nostrae sequi non dedig­nantur, Novel. 83. and to command contra venerabilem Ecclesiam, against the venerable Church, Nullius est nisi Tyrannidis, cujus actus omnes rescinduntur, is reputed as the Act of a Tyrant, and such Acts are null'd, Cod. Justin. l. 1. Tit. 2.16. nay farther, Canones, ubi agitur de re Ecclesiastica, jure civili sunt prefe­rendi; and if the Canon and Civil Laws, those of the Church and the State, have happened to be different and in competition, in any Ecclesiastical case, the Canons have took place and obliged, as in that Code and Title Sect. 6. and their general care and industry was most­ly for these, as the Determinations more im­mediately for the good of their Souls, No­vel. 137. but this was from the greater Indul­gence and Grace of the Christian Emperors, and in particular cases, and it cannot be sup­posed that the Church should designedly set [Page 366] up her Bishops and Laws, above or in oppo­sition to that Government which the frame of their Religion includes, in Subordination to, and by Protection of which it was to be propagated and preserv'd; but of this we shall have occasion anon to consider farther. And if it be reply'd, that a Council cannot be convened or meet at all, without the Prince's Grant, at least his Letters of leave, and how then can they have any Autority in­dependent? or should they otherwise assem­ble, they are reputed Seditious, Disturbers of the Peace, and of Majesty, and punishable; as is the Law imperial 16. Cod. Theodos. Tit. 1. l. 3. To this I answer, neither can they, nor ought they, nor did ever any Chri­stian Council otherwise unite in their Per­sons, then by the Grant and Letters Impe­rial; and that censure was just, if any did otherwise attempt it. But then it is farther to be consider'd, that the form, essence and force of a Council, that which gives a right for Sanctions, and invests with Autority Ec­clesiastical, is not their local personal meet­ing, as in one place, there convocated and sitting; but a joynt-enquiry and resolution as to the Truth's debated, and concurrency as one man in the Laws enacted, upon the true Motives and Reasons of Faith and the Gospel, as by Tradition transmitted, or in Discipline, for Government and Peace useful, and which may be done by the Bishops and Clergy dissite, and in diverse Countries by their Letters Missive and Communicatory, those Literae signatae or systaticae, or circular Epistles to one another, and which has been done under di­verse [Page 367] Circumstances, and when the state of the Church was so low, and its Capacities not enabling her to do it otherwise, as is plain from Church Story and Practice; and that this was the course of the Church's 'tis more than probable, when that debate arose about the keeping of Easter, an account of whose Epistles we have, appearing to this pur­pose, given us by Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. l. 5. c. 23.

AND lastly, that this Church Power is de­rived §. XLVI only from the Church and her Bishops to others in the Succession, exclusive to Kings, and the Clergy are not in this sense his Mini­sters, he ordains and substitutes them not, carries nothing of opposition in the action it self, nor any thing in the design, than what the Incorporation and Offices themselves im­ply, and which has been hitherto rendred al­together innocent. The Leviathan scruples not to say, That they all derive their Offices and Power only from the Prince, and are but his Ministers, in the same manner as Magi­strates in Towns, Judges in Courts of Justice, and Commanders in Armies are; and his ac­count, why they must be so, is, because the Government could not be secure upon other terms. If the Soveraignity in the Pastor over himself and his People be allow'd of, it de­prives the Magistrate of the Civil Power, and his Peoples dependency would be on such their Doctors, both in respect of the opinion they have of their Duty to them, and the fear they have of Punishment in another World, Part 3. Cap. 42. but this mistake of his has been enough discovered all along in this Trea­tise, and will be more hereafter; and he will [Page 368] suppose no Power to be, but what is out­wardly Coercive; and for his two Reasons he gives, they are no less apt and ill placed, for that Duty and Obedience Christians are en­gaged in by St. Paul, and suitably owe to their Doctors, them that are set over them in the Lord, reaches no farther than does their Com­mission, which is only in order to Heaven, and fear of Punishment in another World, arises in a particular manner, from their Re­bellion and Disobedience to Princes; this is one of the Sins is there to be Punished; and for Church-mens being no less subject to Am­bition and Ignorance than any other sort of men, which he adds for another reason, no­thing in particular can justly be inferr'd from it, because others are equally liable to them, and which he does not deny.

CHAP. V. Chap. 5.

THERE is but one thing now behind that §. I seems to me to be considered, as requi­site for the cleering this Discourse; and 'tis in the case just now stated. As suppose the Canons of the Church, and the Laws of the State, should really and actually stand in competition, that they enjoyn and prohibit the same action at the same time, or at least so as the designs of both cannot at once be served and complied with, and which is easi­ly to be supposed, and must fall out, where are two Soveraign independent Powers over one and the same Subjects. This Mr. Hobbs aggravates as that Kingdom divided in it self and cannot stand, it must necessarily distract a People, and expose them to the greatest inconveniences; 'tis a dividing the Soveraign Power, here is a Supremacy against Sove­raignty, Canons against Laws, a Ghostly [Page 372] autority against the Civil, two Kingdoms and each Subject to, must obey two Masters, who both will have the Commands observ'd as Law, which is impossible. This he places among his other effects of an imperfect insti­tution, is reckoned up and urged by him among the Infirmities of a Common-wealth: nay more, as what is, against the Essence of it, in the number of those things that weaken and tend to its dissolution, Leviathan, Part. 2 cap. 29. And all this as objected by Mr. Hobbs, is easily answer'd, and has been over and over again in this Discourse, for it proceeds alone upon that false precarious supposition, and pertinaciously resolv'd upon Principle of his, and his other Friends above reckoned up; as Erastus, Selden, Salmasius, &c. which have formerly perplexed the World therewith, and still do in their Adherents. That there is no Power but what is outwardly cogent upon mens Persons or Estates or Liberties, working by sensible force and impressions, no other Kingdom but what is of this World, unless a Kingdom of Fairies, in the dark, as Hobbs ridicules it, for thus he argues against Bellarmine, and concludes his Enquiries all in vain, whether the Power of the Pope of Rome ought to be Monarchical, Aristocrati­cal or Democratical; because all these Powers are Soveraign and Coercive, and consequent­ly none of them can belong to him as from Christ, Part 3. c. 42. And hence he argues on in the next Section, For if the Supreme King have not his Regal Power in this World, by what autority can Obedience be required of his Officers? with abundance of [Page 373] the same almost every where. But yet, be­cause there appears some shew of objection in the thing it self, and it may fall under some doubt with a less, but conscientious, considering Person, whether it be likely, and also consistent with obedience to, and the ends of Government, that two such Powers, both obliging, should be erected over one and the same subject, and in what case it will be that they are to obey. I shall add far­ther,

THAT if this Conclusion be good, That §. II therefore there ought to be no Church Power nor Laws at all distinct from those of the State, because at some one time or other both may stand in competition; and the same Action, at the same time may fall under an Injunction and Prohibition; and these Laws of the Church must of necessary conse­quence overthrow and over-rule those of the State: the same is equally deducible from the Laws of God and Christ, immediately given by them, or their Messengers the Apo­stles; all which will be as much liable to the same consequence, and found some times or other, many times, to be sure, as in­consistent in the particular practice, as to what the Secular Power may be necessitated to command. The Duties to be performed in the Congregation, as Prayer, attending the Sacraments, &c. are what are the ap­pointment of Christ, and obliging every Christian; and yet in the time of War, in order to publick Justice, by the very acci­dents and contingencies of man's life, do and must come cross in Mr. Hobb's sense, and [Page 374] the Governments dissolution must be also ha­zarded thereby; and 'twill be the same where the Gospel-Commands reach the Imperate Acts of the Will, as they speak, or organical Duties, and which require set times and place, and motions in the Performance; and yet these were Soveraign Laws notwithstan­ding, when actually, and in their persons given by Christ and the Apostles; then, Mr. Hobbs acknowledges them to be such, on­ly to be superseded on diverse Considerations, not so particularly engaging the Performance at some times, and yet still continuing to be obliging, as in their several designs and pur­poses; and none do any more. And Herod indeed, suspected a Dissolution of the Govern­ment by it; these very Laws of God compa­red with one another, as with those of the Civil Magistrate upon these mens inferences, must cease, were unduly imposed, because they are not at all times, by reason of one another, practicable; and 'tis equally im­possible to Mourn and to Rejoyce, to Fast and to be Hospitable, to be upon my knees at Prayer, and to be doing Justice on the Bench, to obey God and my King in the same Person, at one and the same time, and in the same Duties, as to obey Soveraignty and Supre­macy, Canons and Laws, a Ghostly and a Civil Autority, and all or none; are on the same account to be placed in opposition. If the Objection has any force, as Mr. Hobbs thinks it has, and lays his full stress against Ecclesiastical Laws upon it: And again, if whatever is from a due institution, and from just autority, then looses its Sanction and [Page 375] Nature, is to be null'd and to cease; if up­on other Considerations suspended for some time, something more weighty, more use­ful, or absolutely necessary may intervene, and it is not at that time to be practised and complied with; or thus, because not always practicable it ought not to be enjoyn'd at all, then sundry of God's own Laws must cease to oblige and that for ever, or were unjust in their Enactions; because obliging to practice only in their due times and circumstances. The affirmative Precepts of the Ten Com­mandments themselves will fail one way or both; nor does any pretend in his Exposi­tions on the Decalogue, to make but sense of such those Precepts, without first laying down that distinction of semper and ad sem­per, presupposing and taking it for a truth, that, that which is always a Law, and of it self obliging, does not actually engage to performance at every time, has only its pro­per seasons for practice; if then a compro­mising and adjustment is not allow'd to be made in one instance, 'tis not in the other; and, if in any one, 'tis in all; we can as ea­sily reconcile the Laws of the Church in their Practice with the Laws of the State, as we can the immediate Laws of God and Christ, as we can the Laws of God with one another, and thorow Obedience in every respect, is equal­ly possible, the same humane Prudence and Discretion, one and the same; but course of things, their Natures and Obligations con­sidered, will determine and adjust in one as in the other, and which not presupposed, and made use of in all, there will be indeed, [Page 376] only justling and thwarting, as to all our Ob­ligations, and at last, [...], an Univer­sal Dissolution. Now in order to this, in regard to the Soveraignty and Supremacy, Laws and Canons, Civil and Ghostly Obe­dience, as 'tis phrased, and which is at pre­sent the particular concern; what I have al­ready said in the former Chapter concerning Church Censures, Penances, Excommunica­tions, and the Canons of Councils, and their particular Obligations, might suffice in gene­ral, and satisfie any serious inquirer. No­thing of this nature is to be of force, if shutting out any antecedent immutable known Duty, implying Rebellion and Sedi­tion, thwarting what is upon any occasional Necessity, or appearance of a conveniency, commanded by the lawful Civil Power; the Church always asserts, owns, and pleads for Princes, and what she enjoyns cannot be be­lieved to be of force, or by her intendment, if against them. But my purpose is to go a little farther in compliance with this present opportunity, and to consider the Laws of the Church, in the large acceptation, as in­cluding the Laws of Religion in general, whether meerly Humane and Ecclesiastical, or more purely and immediately Divine, given by Christ and his Apostles in their Persons and Instances, whether as to Positive institutions or Moral, and in regard to each of which, what is the force and autority of a civil Command, how far it either suspends, or disengageth; and I the rather also do it, take this latitude, because the one when well considered, will add light, and much [Page 377] contribute to the better understanding of the other; especially to the clearing of the point of Ecclesiastical and Civil Power, their extent and obligations.

NOW in order to this, Mr. Hobbs himself §. III has given us an excellent Key, and his Me­thod in general is to be followed by us; I'le here transcribe his words, than which no­thing can be more apposite. ‘But this diffi­culty of obeying God and the Civil Sove­raign on Earth, to those that can distin­guish betwixt what is necessary, and what is not necessary for their reception into the Kingdom of God, is of no moment; for if the command of the Civil Soveraign be such, as that it may be obey'd without the forfeiture of life eternal; not to obey is unjust, and the Precept of the Apostle takes place, Servants obey your Masters in all things; and the Precept of our Saviour, The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses Chair; all therefore they shall say, observe and do; but if the Command be such as cannot be obey'd without being damned to eternal Death, then it were madness to obey it; and the Council of our Saviour takes place, ( Mat. 10.28.) Fear not those that can kill the Body, but can kill the Soul. All men therefore that would avoid both the Punishments that are in this World to be inflicted for Dis­obedience to their earthly Soveraign, and those which shall be inflicted in the World to come for Disobedience to God, have need to be taught to distinguish well between what is, and what is not necessary to eter­nal Salvation, Leviathan, Part 3. cap. 43.’

[Page 378] §. IV NOR is it Mr. Hobbs his Rule only, but the Rule of those who were as much better, as they are ancienter than he; I mean the Ancient and Holy Fathers of the Christian Church, whom we find thus laying down these distinctions of necessary and not neces­sary, or rather more and less necessary, for the adjusting and determining concerning the degrees and measures of Duty, whether to God or Man. In Clemens Alexandrinus, we have the [...], & [...], Tenents that are Principal and of a first Or­der, and others that are higher, and go be­yond them, Strom. l. 6. pag. 675. and Lib. 4. p. 538. [...], whatever is impossible is not necessary, and what is necessary is easie, [...], there is no want or inability to such things, we are indispensably to do. Idem. [...], l. 2. c. 1.148. [...], Strom. lib. 7. pag. 737. in the Life of Constantine by Eusebius, l. 2. c. 70, 71. there is mention'd [...], the Head and Uppermost of the Commandments in the Law, which will admit of no debate and demur in the assent unto them; and [...], to the same purpose in Evagrius, Eccl. Hist. l. 1. c. 11. which are Principles and not to be innovated in or dissented from, which to do is certain Punishment, in some points a liberty to change is granted, but not in all; as it is in that Chapter. St. Austin discourses of some things, ad ipsa fidei pertinent funda­menta, as the foundation and support of Re­ligion; and which if taken away, Totum quod [Page 379] in Christo auferre molitur, Christianity it self is gone with it, and in others he leaves a la­titude, and good and Learned Men may dis­sent about them, Lib. 1. cont. Julian. Pelag. cap. 6. & Ep. 157. ad Optatum; and not thus to consider things is occasion of distraction among Christians, nor can Conscience re­ceive a just satisfaction in discharge of her Obedience. I do not know how to express my self better than in the words of our Learned Dr. Hammond. Serm. on Acts 3.26. Vol. 2. ‘There is not a more noxious mistake, a more fatal piece of Stoicism among Chri­stians, than not to observe the different degrees and elevations of Sin, one of the first, another of the second magnitude; it is the ground, to say no more, of a deal of desperate prophaneness.’ And it is this in particular is lamented in John Calvin by Ar­noldus Poelengburgh (one friend enough to him) that he did not apprehend and separate inter fundamentalia & non fundamentalia, be­tween what was fundamental and what not; Ʋberiori cum fructu arduum opus reformationis promovisset; and which had he done, his Reformation had been with much success car­ried on by him, inter Ep. Eccl. pag. 328. Am­stelodam.

BUT then what is necessary and what not, §. V and such the degrees of it, is that which will be harder yet to determine, unless we go on with Mr. Hobs in that Chapter, and then in­deed 'tis easie enough done. For he tells us, All that is necessary to Salvation is contained in two Virtues, Faith in Christ, and Obedi­ence to Laws, and the Laws we are to obey [Page 380] are only what the Civil Soveraign has made so, and the Precepts of the Bible oblige no otherwise, then as he so commands and puts his Sanction upon them, and this all the Obe­dience is necessary to salvation, and by Faith he only means, that Jesus is the Christ; thus indeed it is not hard to reconcile our obe­dience to God with our obedience to the Civil Magistrate, as himself there very well infers, because on his terms we owe, and are to pay, no obedience to God at all; all the faith we are not to violate, and all the Laws we are to obey, are only this, that Commandment to obey our Civil Sovereign, and whatever rules he assigns for our obedience, nothing upon these accounts, can make demur, or but lay a scruple upon conscience; for the point is plain and easie, and decided to our hands, that 'tis Man and not God we are to obey, un­less man please to receive and imbody into his Codes or Laws, what God in Scripture has proposed and recommended unto us, not unlike that Law of the Senate, decided and exposed by Tertullian Apol. cap. 5. Ne quis Deus ab Imperatore consecretur nisi à Senatu probatus, apud nos de humano arbitrio divinitas pensitetur, nisi homini Deus placuerit, non erit Deus, that none must be consecrated a God, unless approved of by the Senate, the Apothe­osis is from man, by his favour and grant, and unless God pleases man he shall not be God.

§. VI AND all this is not much to be admired in Hobbs and Spinosa his Scholar, whose known design is to depretiate, and make nothing at all of the Gospel of Christ, to render both God and his Church insignificant; but the [Page 381] admiration and astonishment is this, to see it publickly Preach'd, and then Printed in our Church of England, and by him that is of a higher Order and Dignity there, as by the Dean of Canterbury, as in his Sermon above mentioned; and he that takes but a little pains to run over that train of absurdities collected out of Mr. Hobbs, by the great Arch­deacon of Canterbury, in his late Treatise of the [Obligation of Christianity by Divine Right] and compares them with that passage of the Sermon, and the following part of the Section, the occasion of this Discourse will find very little difference in the expression and delivery. So many of those most fulsome Positions, to come so very near what is said by the Dean, as his own present Judgment, that no less than an Ambition of being suspe­cted for a Hobbist, if not embraced as really such, could have drawn it from his Tongue and Pen; and the next wonder must be, that two such opposite Judgments, and at this time o'th' day in the Church of England, should be found fellow members together, and with the two Head Titles, in her famous Metro­political Church of Canterbury. And had I been of the same Judgment with Mr. Deane, or but inclinable to a perswasion, in order to it; and had Yorkshire been my Country, and I to Preach a Sermon to my fellow Natives of it, of Love and Peace, as he once did, I would never have laid the Surplice and Cross and Kneeling at the Altar upon the Bishops, but plainly told them, that they were made Law, and establish'd by the Civil [...]veraign, and they were to thank God it was no worse, [Page 382] and did the King command to adore the Lin­nen, or Font, or Tables themselves, they are not to gain-say and affront, because affronting Laws and Magistracy, to pretend to a farther obligation from Conscience, and to oppose even a false Religion, or to make Proselytes to their own, though they be never so sure they are in the right, is to be guilty of gross hypocrisie, without an extraordinary Commission from God to that purpose, they are no more obliged to do it here at home, than to go into Spain, or Italy, or Turkey, and there make Converts, and which no Protestant holds himself obliged to do. Sure I am the Bishops had had more Justice done them than they found in the Ser­mon, and it seems very unequal, that they should be supposed to redress, and be left wide open to a popular Odium, because not doing, what never was in their Commission, what would have been their gross hypocrisie in attempting, because having neither an extra­ordinary Commission for it, nor hath the Pro­vidence of God made way by the Permission of the Magistrate, and all that can be reply'd is this, that Mr. Dean chang'd his Judgment upon the writing his next Sermon, which he hath declared to be by Nature mutable, and thereby has this advantage, is always ready for better information, or rather to act the Aecebolius as occasion; and to do him all the right I can, this is to be said for him, that he dissents from Mr. Hobbs something in this very passage of his Sermon; for the inference on his side is strong, that where extraordina­ry Commission by Miracles is evidenced, a false Religion is to be opposed, and the true one to be [Page 383] Preach'd, though the Magistracy and Law be otherwise; which Mr. Hobs will by no means allow, he will not permit it to the Apostles, Leviathan, Part 3. Cap. 42. but then how Mr. Dean will avoid this Consequence, that there is no Church Power on Earth; nor is it lawful for any one to Preach the Gospel, when it is not Law by the Civil Soveraign, since those Miracles, which alone were in the Apostles time, and which is, though less of it, every whit as rank Hobbism, I have not sagacity enough to see, that he desires to do it, is not very certain; all that can be said for him is, that he seems to have been but raw in the Controversie, and is ready, as all such ought to be, to submit upon better In­formation, and to which if these Papers con­tribute, they so far answer the design of the Author.

BUT whatever either Mr. Hobs or his Ad­herents §. VII have wrote or preached, sure we are our Saviour calls for Confession before Men, for the owning asserting and publishing his Truths, and most of all then, and most pub­lickly, when mostly opposed, with the grea­test hazard and jeopardy, even before Kings, and not to be ashamed, when the Kings of the Earth stand up, and the Rulers take Council together against us; and Christ risen from the Dead is not only to be believed in the Brain and Heart, but to be confessed too with the Mouth, if Salvation the effect of it; as St. Paul tells us, 1 Cor. 10. whatever ante­ceding Law against us, or what Power soever enacting; 'tis our very case now as was St. Peter's in the Acts; and we are to obey [Page 384] God and not Man. And as sure I am also that this was the Practice of the succeeding Holy Fathers and Professors of the Church, in the best Ages of it, who still opposed what­ever Religion was false, by what Law soever established and abetted, and still possessed and preached the true in opposition to it, with the hazard of whatsoever was merciless from this World could attend them for it. Nor was it then thought a Contempt or Affront to the Persons, or Laws, or Offices of the Civil Magistrate; nor was it believed so to be by the Empire it self, where satisfaction desi­red, or enquiry made; as appears particu­larly in the days of Trajan, who ceased his Persecutions and Jealousies too, being well assured that they met before day, to Pray and give Thanks to, and Praise God and Christ; covenanting against Adultery, Mur­der, and such like Iniquities, [...], and that they acted nothing at all against the Laws, and the Government was not affronted, nor endanger'd by it; an account of which is to be seen, Tertul. Apol. c. 1. and in Eusebius his Church History, Lib. 3. c. 33. and not to Profess Christiani­ty, was to deny it, and nothing but that [...], that second Baptism, as 'tis call'd in Sozomen's Church History, that ini­tiation or entrance by a new Engagement, a thorow Change, and severe Repentance, could give again a Name or Interest in Christ, re­place such among the Candidates for Heaven. And those that offered at the Heathen shrines at the Command of the Emperor, that fell away and disown'd the Faith in the time of [Page 385] Persecution, were not received, nor had their Libellum Pacis, admitted to a Reconciliation and Unity with the Church, but upon seve­rest Penance, and a larger trial of after-adherency, and such were never admitted in­to Holy Orders, to any Charge, or Publick Power in the Church, or if in Holy Orders before, he was deposed for ever; of so much blacker a guilt was it not to Preach Christ, than not barely only to confess him, (however Mr. Dean places no Duty at all in it, but the quite contrary) as appears all along in the Story of those times, and the Rules and Ca­nons of the Church made occasionally on such accounts. And we have instances in some, that when dragg'd to the Idol, with Cenfers in their Hands, and there forced to offer; as it was one of the Devices of the Devil, thus outwardly to gain Countenance to his Worship, Men of greater Eminency in Christianity being reserv'd for this purpose, and whose Examples were more prevailing, and apter to perswade, being represented as such that had freely offer'd; these Christians did not satisfie themselves in their own inno­cency, and that the Church did so repute and receive them, but when released, openly declared the force in the face of the Magi­stracy, and their greatest Conventions, and were again laid hold of for it, went imme­diately to the stake, or the Beasts, suffer'd Martyrdom for it; though the Laws of the Land Prohibited it, and the doing of it was Death, though indulged by the Church, and the present Circumstances indemnified, if not done; yet all did not perswade, when but [Page 386] in shew to the World their Christianity was not own'd, and to the appearance of many denied by them, they could on no other terms believe themselves Christians, nor con­sequently design to live upon Earth, than as on Earth they confessed their Saviour be­fore Men; on this account only did they ex­pect that Christ should own them before his Father which is in Heaven. And they were only the worst of Hereticks and of Men, which, in that Age, taught and practi­sed otherwise. Simon Magus, and his Sect, [...]. He was receiv'd to be the Ring-leader of all Hereticks; nor was there any thing so im­pure which he and his followers did not out­do them in, as Eusebius tells us, Hist. Eccl. lib. 2. c. 14. and particularly he tells us, lib. 4. c. 7. that these were the Tenents of Basilides, [...], that it is indifferent to eat what is offer'd to Idols, and deny the Faith in the time of Persecution, and suitably I find this account of them in Irenaeus, That whatsoever they outwardly committed against the rules of the Gospel was no Sin, that they were not saved by their just actions, that there was no such thing as Martyrdom, and by the Redemption it was so ordered, that the Judge had no advantage over them, Ed. Fenard. Paris. l. 1. c. 20. l. 4. c. 64, &c. that they were in their own opinion of themselves, [...], a Kingly Royal Priesthood, and People, in this sense, because above all Laws and Rules of good living, as St. Clemens, [Page 387] Strom. 3. p. 438, 439. Ed. Sylburg. and no doubt but Mr. Hobs has been very well ac­quainted with these Men, though he may pass for an Original, with many of his Wel­wishers.

IT then appearing that Obedience is due §. VIII from a Christian, to both God and Man, to his Church and his Prince, and Religion and Loyalty are what he must Profess and Pra­ctice; what is the case that the one may and must yield to the other in, abate and be suspen­ded for some time, and in some distinct Acts and Offices, and neither be violated, be af­fronted, or contemn'd, in the true intent, design and purpose of both, I do now under­take to give Satisfaction; and in order to which we are to range and limit the Laws of Religion under these three general Heads, that the Duties in each Branch may the more particularly appear, to whoso considers them. 1. They are such as are Arbitrary in their Sanction and Enacting, without any antece­dent Necessity, as to the particular instance, and might have been these or other, but are Humane only and Ecclesiastical, constituted and limited by the Bishops and Governors of the Church, in their Canons and Rules to that purpose, and which together with the decency, and aptness, and useful­ness of the things themselves, renders obli­ging. 2. They are such as are equally Ar­bitrary, and without any foregoing Obliga­tion, as are the former, the reason and force of which depends upon the choice and Auto­rity of the Law-giver; but here is the diffe­rence, these Laws are Divine, their Author [Page 388] and Institutor is Christ, or such as were im­mediately inspir'd, miraculously and in an extraordinary manner commissioned by him in order to this very thing. Such are the Sacraments, &c. and which might have been other than they now are, had he pleased. 3. They are such as are no ways Arbitrary in the instance, but follow necessarily and na­turally upon the supposal and reception of Religion, and this, whether the Religion be that of Nature, immediately flowing from our Natural Relations and dependency to and upon God, and one another; such are all the Acts of Natural Religion, as Faith and Relyance upon God, Prayer and Praises, and Thanksgivings to him, an Imitation and Copying out of his Purity and Holiness, Love, and Faith, and Justice, being tender-hearted and affectionate to one another, with more of the like nature, and to which all Mankind is oblig'd immutably and for ever, not by any positive-superadded Law or In­junction, but by the force and necessary re­sults of his Creation, connate and congenious with mans being and subsistency, and the first Notions of Religion; Man must fall from his Orb, cease his own proper instincts and operations without them; or whether the Religion be founded in the Offices of Christ, to which he was since deputed of the Father upon Earth, as a King, Prophet and Priest, in order to Man's Redemption, and is in part now executed in Heaven, to govern, teach, satisfie and intercede for him; and which implies and includes, in the first de­sign and purpose, whatever Duty and Ser­vice [Page 389] is Natural, as above, and its farther distinct Acts and Obligations, are, that this Saviour and Redeemer be believed in, in­wardly and from the Heart, and suitably be obey'd and submitted to as is required of us by him; and this to be publickly own [...]d and confessed in each of his Offices, even on the Cross it self, when in the greatest hazards, when call'd before Kings for his Name sake, and this so immediately and indispensably every Christian's Duty, that not only his Honour and Advantage is placed in it, but he must cease to be a Christian without it, and his Saviour will not upon others terms own him before his Father which is in Heaven, the Religion cannot be where it is not, we cannot suppose a Saviour to come in that Nature into the World, so to dye and live for us, upon other terms, 'tis all connate with the being and offices of a Redeemer. I'le consider them each in their order.

1. THE Laws of Religion are Church §. IX Laws, Determinations of what are in them­selves indifferent, so order'd in the course of things, as to be the Subject of Laws Eccle­siastical, for the present Power to enact and repeal, limit or enlarge, suspend or execute as occasion and circumstances direct and urge, and tend to the more decent and uni­form, apt and suitable Performance of what is in an higher order of Duty, and farther degree of Necessity, and to which there is no antecedent fixed Rule given; nor can the most Lesbian rule of what Latitude, or how comprehensive soever, be so at once contri­ved and made, upon the greatest foresight of [Page 390] the Law-giver, as to be so fitted for and an­swer each Case that offers, or Circumstance that may happen, to fall in of it self, and comply with the present accident, and then, if no present Power to oblige and over-rule, only disorder and confusion in the Church will be the consequent. Now these Laws though in themselves obliging, and each Christian, as a Member of that Society, stands immediately engag'd unto them; nor can any other Foreign Power repeal or null them as to their Sanction, yet there may be, there is to be, a Cessation as to Practice un­der some Cases and Circumstances, and the particular local Performance may be super­seded at present, or suspended for the fu­ture; nor do the terms for Heaven consist in the forbearance, or shut out of the Church-Society because of it, little Accidents and Contingencies, not to be foreseen, nor pre­vented, will oft obstruct, and become lawful Impediments; and much more where the Civil Power comes thwarting upon us, and renders Church Laws impracticable, a Secu­lar inhibition upon Penalties and Inconve­niencies, which tend to the greater Damage of our common Christianity if incurr'd, and to the silencing and abating from Duties of a higher concern. Acts of Charity, we know, are to cease in respect of Acts of Justice, nor does the Practice of Charity oblige at all, but as qualified, and in set Capacities; every one is to give as he is able, and yet both ob­lige in their kind and order, and the engage­ment is always the same and perpetual, the former is not null'd by reason of the present [Page 391] incapacity, or doth it end with the Cessation, as to Practice, or hath the veriest Lazar, a Charter thereby, for inhumanity. And up­on the same account it is, and the Parity of Reason, that even particular Acts of the Po­sitive Institutions and Worship of God, give way to Obedience to Governors, and when the common Political good of Mankind is en­gaged, as I shall have occasion to instance farther hereafter. Upon these accounts it is, that the Laws and Magistracy are not to be affronted or contemned, nor can the Magi­stracy it self subsist with the Church upon other terms. Obedience is to be preferr'd before Sacrifice, the positive Appointments even of God himself, and much more may the Obligation cease, and which created in us a Duty, in Laws purely Humane and Eccle­siastical. 'Tis true, these Powers did never yet clash, or break out into publick Opposi­tions; from the time that the Empire be­came Christian, and so along in the best and flourishing Ages, as is above observed, the Empire still consulting the Church, and her Canons were made Law; or if otherwise▪ and some particular Indulgences and Abatements there was, as to Church Duties, by good Em­perors, upon the score of their alone Impe­rial Power, granted, as some there was, upon what rules of Policy and Necessity, is not now needful to enquire, and which we have reason to believe the Church never consented to, and to be sure there was no antecedent Canon to go by; yet we know this, that the Church submitted, and her Discipline was so far relaxed and abated thereby. Constantine [Page 392] the Great was always a favourer of the true Catholicks, and upheld and maintain'd them in each their Privileges and Immunities, suf­fering no one Sect to advance above, to op­press and invade them; and yet he sometimes gave Indulgencies to all Sects whatever, the Heathens not excepted, and laid Penalties upon none, because of their Religion, and the Novatians in particular had again special favour, when all other Conventicles were put down, Euseb. Hist. l. 10. c. 5. De Vit. Con­stant. l. 2. c. 59. Socrat. Hist. l. 5. c. 10. and that they had their Churches in Rome it self, and flourish'd there in many Congregations, and with great Auditories Socrates also tells us, till removed by Pope Celestinus, l. 7. c. 11. and that most Pestilent Sect of the Donatists, all along condemn'd by the Catholick Church, was so long indulg'd by Constantine, till in­courag'd by his Mercy, they brake out into Tumults and Seditions, and the Empire was unsafe, even shaken by them (the Natural effect of all Schisms) and there was a Necessi­ty for recalling their Grants of Liberty, as aso by their other continued outrages upon all that was Sacred and Separate, whether Persons or Objects; all which is to be seen at large in Optatus and Saint Austin, especially Lib. 3. Cont. Cres. con. Donatist. or he that desires an account of them more briefly, let him read it, given by Vallesius in his Treatise entitled De Scismate Donatist. bound up at the end of his Eusebius Church History. Now in these Cases, the Church Power and Laws are to cease in part in the Execution, though the right remains, nor were they so exercised [Page 393] against these Schismaticks, as otherwise they ought and would have been. If God's Name cannot be glorified on Earth, in that decent, befitting, reverend useful way, agreeing with his Nature and Worship, and our relations to him, and the whole Earth be filled with his due Praise at once, the Church Power and Laws which provide that it may, are not to be stretched beyond those Designs for which she is endowed with a Power for Sanction, nor can any Society suppose themselves obliged to promote by such means as God never put into their hands; the holy Bishops therefore and good Christians of old, praised God for the Liberties and Advantages they had in their own Persons and Congregations, adorn­ing their Professions by Zeal and good Works, they could not remedy in others what Power and Laws, which they had not, did indulge and indemnifie them in. Or if this by a Law he denied to themselves, the Laws purely Ecclesiastical were never design'd nor urg'd, so to oblige against the state, as that the par­ticular Practice is in the immutable indispen­sable Duties for Heaven, and in such cases 'tis only their equity, reasonableness, higher use and advantage in the Christian Worship is to be insinuated, pleaded and perswaded unto. Autority over mens Persons or Actions was never placed in Church-men, nor has it any other influence or effect upon either, than to exclude them the Kingdom of Hea­ven; nor will omissions of this Nature, and under the same Circumstances amount unto that, nor can any man lose his Heaven for it, it may be a Sin in such, as with too much liberty, or too little regard indulge or re­strain, [Page 394] or in such as too gladly accept of it, to the neglect, or abuse, or contempt of the Service of God; but there can be none in those, where Necessity lays the force, and the harder terms and obligations from the Powers of the World, makes the intermission and Vacancies in the Performances.

§. X TO say the whole and alone Power to make Church Laws, and six Rules in God's Worship is in the Prince, is against the sup­posal that the Church is an Incorporation by Divine Appointment with its own Laws and Officers, a City within it self, with its own Rules for Unity within its self, and those that place all here, and such there be, and urge the unreasonableness of Separation upon the account of things indifferent, because against the civilly established Polity of a Na­tion, which has appointed their present use and observancy, seem to make the terms for Unity and Compliance too wide▪ as others do too narrow, and the accidents of the World may occasion inconveniencies insupportable; the very naming it is Scandalous, that a Chri­stian is originally engaged by his Profession to receive Rules in Holy Worship from an Atheist, or a Mahumetan, for such Persons may be, and so then it must be, upon these Principles; 'tis one thing to want what ought to be, or what is most useful, through an un­due Administration of Justice, and which my Religion may engage me to undergo, and quite another thing to be antecedently en­gag'd in their Determinations. Nor again on the other hand, can the Church be suppo­sed to ingage immutably and peremptorily by [Page 395] those Laws of her own, though never so apt and useful, to the Practice of which, the Per­sons, and other Advantages from the World are necessary, and which she hath not in her Power, as she is a Society of our Saviour's In­stitution, where the Prince has made Edicts inconsistent with their Practice, and in whom the Church does acknowledge the Advanta­ges of the World to be seated, and which declares him to be Supreme over all Persons, in all Causes, Actions and Performances what­soever; Abatements then as to Practice there may, there must be, where that Common­wealth overbears out of which the Church cannot be or subsist, where Necessity and Accidents prevent and obstruct, even many times in order to Union and Uniformity; that first Zeal of the Asiaticks, afterwards abated about the time of keeping Easter, and which they accounted not a thing necessary, as succeeding Practice has declar'd, and most­ly when Religion may be in hazard, otherwise these, as they are of an after-Institution, so must they yield in place to that which is ante­cedently God's Worship, and in order to which alone they are acceptable. Julian the Apostate, among other Diabolical Stratagems and Infernal Devices he had for overthrowing and erasing Christianity, ( Hist. Tripart. l. 6. c. 29.) had this for one, he instructed and a­dorned the Heathen Worship in all the Forms, and Rites, and Customs, with every Order, and Habit, that was in use among Christians in their Worship, hereby believing to gain from them a value upon his Idol Services, to flatter and cheat the Christians into a com­pliance [Page 396] with and entertainment of them; but this work'd not all upon the most holy Bi­shops and Confessors of the Age, the outward form was reputed nothing if not leading to that within the Veil, nor did one way of Worship at all prevail, if so be without, if engaging to deny, that one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all; the Ceremonial part never had any other esti­mate than in order to the more Substantial, and 'twas in course that the Veil was rent at our Saviour's Passion, when the Oracle was gone, and that Worship to be no more; and should it so fall out, that what is in it self so advantageous to the true Worship, be allow'd, but upon severer terms, and inconsistent with our Christian Profession, as it was by Julian; & or the Carved or Polished works of the Tem­ple only be beaten down, and which is now so much contended for, by those among us that own one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, and which Julian did not do; in the former case we are alto­gether to refuse, in the latter we are to sub­mit to the force, and God must be served by us as he was by the Children of Israel, for some time in the Brick Kilns, and in the Wil­derness, and all along till the Temple was built by Solomon, with allays and abatements, as to what was better, what their Lord God had chose, and was otherways laid and de­sign'd by him, Persons and things in the or­dinary course, retarding and obstructing, and which the Wisdom of God thought not con­venient by an extraordinary Power to over­rule and prevent, for the more speedy accom­plishment.

[Page 397]BUT then on the other side, to be so un­equal §. XI and uneven, so rash and precipitant, so heady and unfixed in the solemner Duties of Worship and higher Performances to God Almighty, as to hold to no Rules and Orders in the discharge, to innovate and change in the Forms and Ways and Expressions, as we do in our Cloths, as is usual in the shapes and modes of our Apparel, another manner of Spirit sure becomes a Christian, these are not befitting those goings of the Sanctuary, nor are they like unto them, as they were of old, it argues every thing in the worshipper, that can render the Worship it self little and mean and low, in his conceit and apprehen­sions, nothing can more abate of it, and make it cheap in the Eyes of others, or appear less revering and becoming that God that is wor­shipped, this still brings Neglect and Con­tempt in any case, and upon what Persons or Performances soever, and much more in those that are religious and terminate in God, where none can be supposed as discharged, but up­on the deepest Considerations, the best weighed Reasons, the highest Prudence, and a thorow apprehension of the decency, signi­ficancy, exact proportion, and every ways usefulness and advantage of it, and what evil Consequences have hereby reach'd Religion it self, too sensible Experience makes evident; and since our innovating and quarrelling about the Modes and Circumstances of the higher Performance in Religion, how has Religion it self been scorned, and the most solemn Performances neglected, disused, and even ceased, as at this day, in our Land? And [Page 398] as to our particular Church of England, her Rites and Ceremonies, when I hear and read them reported in Publick to be the best Model and Constitution the Christian World affords, that she has even slit the Hair in each instance, Order and Canon, Rubrick and Injunction, and is answering to every end of Piety and Devotion in the Worshipper, of reverence and regard to God that is worshipped, and full of Helps and Advantages all along in or­der to a suitable discharge of each. When I hear her Wisdom and Prudence, thorow and weightiest Considerations in the composing of each, so exalted and extoll'd, as is very usual both in Discourse, and from the Press; and yet again in the very next Breath or Page, Proposals made for comprehension and com­promisements, as is frequent also for Repeals or Abatements of what is thus Prudent and Discreet, Honorable and Beneficial, every ways apt and significant, and then to super­sede this most holy Worship in so useful a way perform'd, or, which is worse, to alie­nate it, give it up for a Sacrifice, to be burnt, offer'd up, and devoted to strange Gods, the private Designs, and perverser Enmities, the Lusts and Passions, and peevish interests of a never-satisfied Faction, and Party among us, such as have still turn'd the World upside down, wherever having Rule, and now at­tempt it in the ways of God's Worship among us, and whose Spleen seems to swell and be fixed among us, as did theirs of the City of Rome heathen, against God himself, Civitas Romana omnes omnium gentium Deos colebant, praeterquam Judeorum Deum. Arnob. Adv. Gent. [Page 399] l. 1. which worshipp'd all the Gods of the Gentiles, only they receiv'd not the God of the Jews, every thing is complied with, but that which is thus by Law establish'd among us. This, I say, is what I dare scarce trust to my Ears in, when giving the conveyance, I am rather apt to suspect an Indisposition in the Organ, that the words are distorted, and come cross to the design of the Speaker; and seeing, I can hardly believe I see it, I still suspect either the Medium is undue, the Op­tick is weak, or 'tis by a false Gloss, by some one or more Errors in the conveyance, what­ever it is, represented unto me. And how­ever I might be over-born by that Power, which as a Christian I am not commissioned to resist, and so may not escape the force, and the worship must cease in Publick; yet I would as soon cut out my Tongue as speak, or cut off my Hands, as subscribe, for the abolishing or ceasing of it; and that upon any other terms, than the omitting God's Worship altogether, or that my Religion it self is not retainable with it. He that values God's Worship it self must in a due Propor­tion value that which comes so near to it, or at least he apprehends so to do, which is so congruous, so decent and so advantageous to, and in, the Performance of it. And as my Religion in general is to be preferr'd before all things, so is that which seems most apt, and best answering with, and proportion'd to its discharge to be next in my thoughts and designs, to retain and continue, and in the next degree would I become its Advo­cate. These Proposals then of Moderation, and [Page 400] from these Persons, break and are inconsistent in themselves, there is a repugnancy in the terms, and then surely not allowable with a thorow considering Person. If I believe the Service Book in the Church of England, the best and aptest Instrument of God's Publick Worship, I am no more to forego and give it over, than I can satisfie my self that the Blind and the Lame, and wither'd in the Flock, was acceptable to God of old, then I may devote my Body to his Service under the Gospel, and leave out the best Member of it that I have, or give but half of my self unto him, and the worser part too, my Body without my Spirit, the life and soul of it. The Controversie about the precise Day on which Easter was to be kept, was high amongst the ancient Bishops, and yet the more consi­dering of them all the while counted for it in the order of those things which in their first Nature are indifferent, and it might be kept on this day or on that, no peremptory fixation of God's supervening, nor does in­deed the limiting and fixing it to any time, conduce so much to the ends of Devotion, and the Service and Honour of God, as many other instances now under debate do, only Victor Bishop of Rome, incited, whether by Zeal or Ambition, went too high, limiting Church Communion to one set time, for the observancy, and did, to be sure, threaten Non-Communion with the Asiaticks upon their dissent from the Western Churches in it; but yet the first indifferency and original immutability of the thing it self, was not con­cluded by them a ground sufficient to lay [Page 401] aside, or alter that Custom, when, whatever it was in the Bishop of Rome, because below an antecedent Command in the Gospel, whether Zeal or Ambition demanded it; none far­ther from imposing on other Churches, what was the alone particular Practice of their own, or from censuring what was differing from them, and none again more strenuous in defending and maintaining their own way and time; they did not recede from what so great and contiguous a tradition of most holy Bishops and Autority, even Apostolical, had devolved, they had immediately receiv'd from and transmitted to one another, and all along in an unalterable Practice upheld and maintain'd, and recommended, and Rome's Universal Power had not then gain'd so much in the Church as to over-rule and constrain them, all which is to be seen at large in the account given of it by Eusebius, Hist. lib. 5. cap. 23, 24.

I do not say that Apostolical Practice it §. XII self in the like instances is immutable and always obliging, for the present case of keep­ing Easter contradicts; Apostolical Practice was on both sides, and several other Actions and Synodical Determinations by the Apo­stles do not now oblige Christendom, being occasional Decisions and Canons; But this I say, where the concern is not only the same, but higher, as in the Publick Service of God in our Church, and which more neerly re­lates to God in his Worship, and with equal heat its abolishment is endeavour'd, as was the time of keeping Easter, after the manner of the Jews by the Bishop of Rome, when [Page 402] equally bottom'd on the same both Autority and Antiquity, even to Apostolical, for so the Asiaticks pleaded the Autority of St. Phi­lip and St. John, and the Malice and Industry of our Opposers cannot gainsay us. I'le add, where every thing concurs to the procuring Reverence, Piety, and Devotion, and in which case Calvin himself contends for Ceremonies in the Church of Christ, when Christ is, so, illustrated by them, Ergonè inquies nihil Ce­remoniarum debitur ad juvandam [...]orum imperi­tiam? id ego non dico, omnino enim utile illis esse sentio, id modo contendo, ut modus ille adhibeatur qui Christum illus [...]ret, non obscuret. Institut. l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 14. and for us to abate of these Rites, to change or lay aside our either times or ways of Worship, because perhaps a Neighbouring Church is differing, and requires, or perhaps, and which is worse, demands it of us, as the Church of Rome did of the Church of Asia, this hath no Precedent of Example, no rule of Religion to enforce us to submit to, or comply with; we have a President of as famous Apostolical a Church, as the Primitive Story acquaints us with, that is against it, and that Church which so urges and requires of us, savours too much of the present Usurpations of Rome, not improbably first attempted in Victor their once Bishop.

§. XIII AND much less is that Church to submit when the unruliness and disobedience of her own Members attempt the alteration, when private Pets and open Ambition in order to engrossing Superiority and Rule in them­selves stimulate thereunto, as in our late pre­tended [Page 403] Reformations, and which is at this day only without Arms; but with the same virulency of Spirit, carried on in our Streets, when at the best the Infirmities, but ra [...]her the impetuousness and madness of the People promotes it, this no reason can indure; and yet it is the great and popular Plea for the nulling our Laws Ecclesiastical now among us, when the rule bends to the obliquity, the right Line warps and complies with that which is crooked, both become disorder'd and perverse together; and, which is the mise­ry of all, no standard supposed to remain, to reduce them. When the Laws of the Church submit to that Extravagancy they are design'd to prevent or remedy; and the only reason why they are to be no more is, because every Man may, and must, do what seemeth him good in his own eyes, their Will, and Lusts, and Passions must reign, and give Laws, this is the height of Anarchy and Confusion, or farther, and for which there is something more of shew and pretence, because Pity may be a Motive, to give up all to the weak and infirm, that is, to those of the least under­standing and discernment, for St. Paul has no other sense of a weak Brother, or a weak Conscience, then that which is more igno­rant; what is this, but to place the Discre­tion and Government of the Church, in the hands of Ideots, and half witted? against the rules of all Policy that was ever heard of till now, that the womanish part, and such as are less able, direct, nay over-rule, the more able and knowing, and to pay our Obe­dience and Obligations hither; to set up this [Page 404] sort of weakness as the rule, their suggestions and demands for the Voice from Heaven, is not with more seeming semblance to be com­pared to any thing in the World, than to those most absurd Homages and Acknowledg­ments of the Heathens of old, so ridicul'd and laugh'd at by the Primitive Apologists, and first most holy Christian Writers, which were made to Fevers and Agues, to their sla­vish Fears, and weaker Passions, paying Sa­crifices and Devotions to them, who made Gods of Calamities, and worshipped the vi­cissitudes and courses of evil Accidents, adored the bad Genius, Eumenides and the Furies, [...], Clem. [...], Ibid. the very Entrails and Ordure of the Beasts over-ruled in their Councils, over-aw'd and over-bore them; if defects be the rule, then let the Monsters and Exorbitancies of Nature (which have present Necessity enough to plead) be the Patterns of the whole Creation, let us take our Ideal knowledge of the Universe from its Wens and Excrescencies, the contingen­cies and accidents of it; and by the same rule we shall exclude God from its Government, supersede his Providence, as we do the Laws of the Church, we may as well, every one of us, cut off our Legs and become Cripples in the Streets, lay our selves in the High-ways and become Beggars; as if the Sun in the Firmament was only then to be Copied, as most beauteous and obliging, when labouring, and in an eclipse, or the whole Earth in its due Posture when in a Paroxysm, a Rup­ture [Page 405] and Consternation. Surely these were not the infirmities St. Paul glorified in, nor this that depressed, dethroned condition of the Church, of which the Ancient Fathers make so large Eulogies, reckon up unto us so many advantages, and though something has always been allow'd and abated upon such the like Exigent, and unavoidable Necessity; yet it was never on this manner carried on and improved, to appear against and affront fixed and established Rules and Laws, the particu­lar Connivance, or Exception, did never cancel the rule, but rather confirm, and give new Obligations, as the exception is said to strengthen in all cases and instances besides; 'tis the great end and design of Government to observe and animadvert where deficient, to make stronger, assist and enable, where declining. So was Job in the Land of Huz, Eyes to the Blind, Feet to the Lame, enabling the Faculty, and helping on, in Duty and Obedience, and this though to be the work of Prudence and Deliberation, in applying the general Rule; yet 'tis the most deplora­ble condition, when the rule comes quite over to the obliquity, gives it self up to the defect, its Guidance and Directions, its Ty­ranny indeed, and Depredations; and which to prevent or redress, to relieve and rescue from, is its office. On these terms no means are left for recovery, [...], the Disorder goes on to infinite, all bounds and limits taken away, 'tis a running always down hill, and the bottomless Pit is to be its last Post or Period, perpetual horror, desolation and confusion for ever more.

[Page 406] §. XVII 2. THE Laws of Religion are those Laws of Christ and his Apostles, instituted and or­dained by them; such are the two Sacraments generally necessary to Salvation, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord, such are the other Ordinances of the Gospel and the means of Grace, as the Ministry in general, with its appropriate distinct Powers and Offices, all like those of the two Sacraments, the general common ways and means to Salvation, but all as Arbitrary in their Sanction, and no ways reaching to an antecedent Right or Ob­ligation, and our Saviour might have ap­pointed others or none, had he so pleased. He once made Eye-salve of his spittle, and the clay in the Streets, and other times cured with a word from his mouth, so are they not absolutely and immutably necessary in the practice, nor are the Rules and Laws of their positive after Institution such as indis­pensably to be practised under all Circum­stances and Accidents, and no other accep­tance with God, and access to Heaven; the Christians of old banished to the Islands and the Mines, as under the heathen Persecuti­ons, cannot be supposed always, perhaps at any time, in such their durance and slavery, capable of it in any one instance, much less in all, and yet Afflictions are so far from being an hindrance in Religion, that they are its greatest advantage, or if these be not, 'tis because they are not duly made use of, and improved. And the Fathers of the Church still made use of this as their chief Topick or Common-place for Patience and Consola­tion to those poor Souls, from the good [Page 407] and benefit came thereby unto them, the greater devolution of help and assistance from the Heavens, the greater reward and glory annexed. Ambulatis in metallo, captivo quidem corpore sed corde regnante, praecessit dis­ciplina, sequetur & venia. Cyphr. Ep. 8.77. haec pala illa quae & nunc dominicam aream pur­gat, à quo certamen edicitur, nisi à quo corona et praemia proponuntur. Ecclesia in attonito est, tunc fides expeditior. Tertul. lib. de fuga in per­secut. cap. 1. tota paradisi clavis tuus sanguis est. speaking of the Martyrs lib. de anima. cap. 55. and whom he places immediately in Hea­ven nearer to God himself, excelsoque throno coruscans, martyribus septus. poem. de ult. ju­dicio, cap. 7. [...]. Clem. [...] l. 1. c. 7. [...]. Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. [...]. Ep. ad Rom. per dentes bestiarum molor ut mundus panis Dei inveniar, as in that Epistle ad Rom. and which is cited by Ireneus, lib. 5. c. 28. nor is the Church always secured a­gainst the like Obstructions in the best of her conditions, and under the protection of those Governors that are Christian, the usual contin­gencies of the World, and which in course succeed, so long as day and night succeed one another, must make the intermission, nor is the casualty to be avoided. But then, these do not intercept betwixt the Christi­an and his God, no more than did the Met­tals and the Thunder-claps, the stake and the wild Beasts, to those first Christians just now mentioned, or should the case really be, and which is so often feigned, and not always to [Page 408] due purposes, that Christians are alone in a Ship, or cast on a desert Shoar, where nei­ther Bishop nor under Church-man, and the Ordinances cannot, as in the design of their institution, be celebrated among them. And surely then the commands of a Soveraign are to have some room in the like cases, when in the due execution of that Power intrust­ed with him by God and a good Christian, who is also a good Subject, is to abate of what Duties and Performances he in some instances immediately owes to Religion and his Saviour; in obedience to those Secular injunctions, to which if not engaged to sub­mit, the Government cannot subsist and be managed as in these particular instances did a pretence to, or the actual present exercise in religious Worship exempt and disingage. Every one is born a Subject, owes a duty to his Prince and the Government, as soon as he is indebted for his Being to his Ma­ker: and an after-dedication of my Person by holy Orders, does not cancel that first dependency, my Saviour himself hither all along had his regard, and he laid his Reli­gion in relation to it: and when in the Pul­pit, or, which is more, at the Altar, in the midst of my Office, am I to give up my Per­son to that Civil Power by my Christianity supposed, and by the same God placed o­ver me. The severer Rules and Laws of the Sabbath, were to give place to the saving the life of a Man, in the design of Moses, as our Saviour expounds him to the Pharisees; and much more for the support of King­doms and Communities, and so in all other [Page 409] Instances of this sort of Holiness, called Re­lative, and which is good only from the in­stitution and positive appointment, and no greater more notorious Cheats than those in Ordine ad Deum, that manage and abet Disobedience by a Charter from Religion: 'tis that very Corban in the Gospel, so se­verely chastised by Christ, the saying it is a gift and robbing my Father and Mother. That absence from Divine Service or religi­ous Worship, which is in it self a sin, up­on a single instance of Charity, for the ad­vantage and relief of the neighbour-hood, (and then surely of a whole Community,) is a duty: on this score Christians fight their Battels on the Lord's-day, the very Ass is to be pulled out of the Pit, and how the rea­sons and ends of Government, for its better manag [...]ry and conservation did stiil over-rule in the Christian Church, in each of these like religious Performances, in the best and most flourishing Times of it, and the Empire when Christian gave Laws, Directi­ons and Limitations, as to the Collectae and Publick Assemblies in Ordinations, Excom­munications, Absolutions, &c. for the more orderly administration of the Civil Affairs, is already shew'd in this discourse; and yet the things themselves are immediately from Christ, that power is not from the Prince, which warrants and makes effectual the In­stitutions and Offices of each of them.

AND if it be replied, that this seems §. XV to come too near to what the design of this discourse is laid against, or to be sure was the occasion of it. If the Magistrate and the [Page 410] Law are to silence and limit in the exercise and profession of these higher Instances of Christianity, what is this less than to sub­mit my Religion to their pleasure? To which I answer, the case is not at all the same, this is only adjusting of Duties in or­der to a due performance, a suspension upon a higher reason and duty intervening, and both which are equally Christian, or at the most a but concealing some truths upon pre­sent reasons and motives, and which every one allows may be done. Should the Prince command me not to say my Prayers at all, as he did Daniel, to preach or speak no more in Christ's Name, as the Sanedrim did the Apostles, that Ordinations and Censures be no more, Church, both Officers and Offi­ces cease for ever, or which is the case in Mr. Dean's Sermon, should a false Religion be commanded in their rooms, and be made the Religion of the Nation, this is the case in which I am to speak before Kings and not be ashamed, when my life is in my hand, as 'tis the expression of holy David, with a great many more to that purpose in the hundred and nineteenth Psalm; then I am not only to exercise what is my duty as a private Christian, but to make what open Proselytes I can to that Religion, which I am sure is in the right, to draw off all I can from that which is false, and imposed by the Magistrate and Law. This is that confession with the Mouth call'd for all along in the sacred Epistles, Confession at Matyrdome, that [...] in St. Clemens Strom. l. 4. p. 503. an eminent way to gain Mercy for [Page 411] our sins, and 'tis call'd by the Church [...] §. XI perfection, as he there tells us, pag. 480. [...], as the high­est act of Charity, the greatest demonstrati­on of love, when expressed to Souls in the profession of a right, and rescuing from a false Religion, at so great a distance was it set from gross hypocrisie, and which Mr. Dean demonstrates to be such in the next Para­graph of the Sermon. I'le go on so far with his Worship and Consent, that where nei­ther Miracles to justifie the extraordinary Com­mission, as had the Apostles, nor the providence of God makes way by the permission of the Ma­gistrate, the Proselytes are very like to be few, and since the former is ceased altoge­ther and never to be more expected, the countenance and protection of the latter is what usual course and common Prudence di­rects to wait for upon any attempt for con­verting and reducing of Nations from a false Worship. I find the Proposal and the Com­plaint recited and made both at once by our learned Doctor Hammond Serm. 10. in Joh. 7.48. Vol. 2. I'le here use his own Words. ‘If we should plant Christianity in Turkey, we must first invade and conquer them, and then convince them of their Follies, which about an hundred years ago Cleo­nard proposed to most Courts in Christen­dom (and to that end himself studied Ara­bick) that Princes would join their strength and Scholars their brains, and all surprize them in their own Land and Language, at once besiege the Turk and his Alcoran, put him to the Sword, and his Religion to the [Page 412] touch-stone: first command him to Chri­stianity with an high hand, and then to shew him the reasonableness of the Com­mand. Thus also we may complain, but not wonder, that the reformation gets ground so slow in Christendom; because the Forces and potent Abetters of Papacy se­cure them from being led captive to Christ, as long as the Pope is invested so fast in his Chair, and as long as the Rulers take part with him, there shall be no doubt of the truth of their Religion, unless it please God to back Arguments with steel, and to raise up Kings and Emperors to be our Champions, we may question, but ne­ver confute his Supremacy. Let us come with all the power and rhetorick of Paul and Barnabas, all the demonstrations and reasons of the Spirit; and yet as long as they have such Topicks against us, as the autority of the Rulers and Pha­risees, we may dispute out our hearts, and preach out our Lungs and gain no Prose­lytes, we shall get but a Scoff and a Curse, a Sarcasm and an Anathema in the words next after my Text, this People that know not the Law is accursed, there is no heed to be taken to such poor and con­temptible Fellows.’ But yet if any one's zeal does engage him to expose his Autority and Person upon the stock of his own single strength and oratory, and he does encounter with these many, almost impossibilities, in order to the converting of Nations, 'tis to be ranked with those heroick Actions which are above the ordinary rule: some may pi­ty [Page 413] him, and others may applaud him, but none ought absolutely to condemn him. But then, that he that keeps his ground at home, asserts what is right and detects the false, when the one is opposed, and the other ob­truded, must in so doing, be a hypocrite and act without any obligation of Conscience, and which is singularly to be observed, for this reason, because he does not hold himself ob­liged to go and preach up his Religion and make Converts in Spain and Italy; because he does not think himself bound in conscience to preach the Gospel in Turky to convert the Mahumetans, is as wide of true reasoning, and as far from a due conclusion, as is Eng­land from either, or all, of them: and sure­ly Mr. Dean's is the only Pen that such a notion of Hypocrisie ever dropt from. And this is the top of the argument, no Protestant Minister thinks himself bound to go and preach the Gospel in Italy or Spain: and therefore 'tis hypocrisie when he does it at home, if in the danger he suspects to be there, it has scarce appearance enough to make a popular argument from a Pulpit a­gainst a Priest or Jesuite, and the lesser wo­manish understanding, cannot but see the invalidity of it. And admit a Protestant Mi­nister now in England had no other disswa­sives from his going to convert Spain (as surely he may have many more) than the danger that must attend such an underta­king: Surely this alone (though our Ser­mon is never to the contrary) will abate something as to the obligation of Consci­ence: Circumstances and Objects are usual­ly [Page 414] said to specifie and constitute in these like duties, otherwise our whole Church at a blow falls under the guilt of gross hypocrisie, whose Canon 67th confirm'd by King James appoints every Minister upon notice to go and visit the sick in his Parish, unless it be certain, or but probable, that the Disease is contagious; and surely a Spanish Inquisition is no less fatal and tremendous, than a Plague-Sore, and the censure is very severe, that e­very Minister is an hypocrite, that visits not every Pest-House in his Parish, and the danger only throws off the false pretence and disguise that he before walked under. And I can­not but say it here again, how glad I should be to see the Priests and Jesuites so confuted and exposed, as that Religion it self comes in no hazard by it, and our selves be not hit through their sides, not to say mortally wounded.

§. XVI 3. THE Laws of Religion are such as are no wayes arbitrary, but necessarily slow from Religion it self, whether they be those of Nature arising with our Beings, that im­mediate dependency to God and one ano­ther in which created, and which the Gos­pel supposes and includes, gives new Obli­gations, Arguments and Motives to their discharge and performance, or whether com­mencing together with the Gospel it self, as immediately slowing from its publication and reception, as do the former from our natural Beings: nor is it a farther after In­stitution that gives the Sanction, and by which they become obliging, and 'tis these, and only these Laws which are necessary; [Page 415] and only so, bind under each circumstance and immutably, as depending on no Law that is super-induced; so neither is there a­ny distant Power can but suspend, much less repeal and null them, and in ceasing in a­ny one instance and degree in these Duties, we cease so much, and in the very same in­stance of being Men and Christians; I may suffer under, but am not to obey, the high­est Power on Earth, if enjoyning it. God himself cannot impose it upon the publish­ed Terms of our Creation and Redemption, having first made us Men, and afterward by his Son in our flesh redeemed us, I am al­ways to believe in, and relie upon God and Christ, praise and make my Prayers unto them. I am always to own and confess my Saviour on the cross, to propose and make him my example in all Godliness of conver­sation. I am never to be unmerciful or un­just, to be cruel or bloody, to be hateful and hating, to be an adulterer or unclean, to be a Rebel or an Extortioner, this is the Rule set up, wrote as with an Adamant, as on a Rock to remain for ever, whoso doth these, or such like things, shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of God.

AND thus we at length come to that one §. XIV thing necessary, and the due inquirer may have information, in what he is to obey God and in what to obey Man, in what instances of Religion he is indespensably and immu­tably bound, and in what not, and how his Salvation is upon each depending; we see here the infinite Wisdom of God, in the frame and constitution of his Church; a bo­dy [Page 416] it is, and Association, a City, compact and at unity in it self, with its own Laws and Rules, and yet Ecclesia in Republica, this Church is in the State or Commonwealth, with a due regard and observancy to it, each ruling and obeying in their courses, neither clashing or interfering, both, of force and ob­liging, in the several Reasons and Designs of each. We see farther, the same infinite love and tender care of his towards Man, every ways providing for his Heaven and Salvation, in that, having placed him here in this World, liable to the Accidents and Obstru­ctions of it, the changes and chances of this mortal Life, what otherways was his Duty, and Heaven not attainable, but in observancy of its Laws and Rules, is upon these like scores abated and remitted to him; where either the Natural incapacities, or other Ne­cessities of the World, in order to its Con­duct and Government injoyn it, and no one thing for Eternal Salvation is always a Duty, in the intendment of the Sanction, with the execution or rigorous exercise of which the Advantages that are are Temporal, and their due conservation are inconsistent. Grace does not destroy Nature, and where God is to be obey'd, and not Man, where the Commands of both are incompetible, and such we have shew'd there are, or may be, the Obedience to God, as in all reason, is first to be per­form'd, so is it, what alone is the benefit of Mankind, there is not one instance of what is antecedent Duty, or is really beneficial unto him, abated thereby, and we cannot be either good Men, or good Subjects, if vicious in [Page 417] our Morals, if once we renounce these higher Duties of Christianity. God has not made that the immutable term of Man's Salvation, but what is in his own Power, and of which if he fails, 'tis his own perverse will and choice that is debauch'd and betrays him to it; the Carved works of the Temple may be beaten down, the Church-Discipline be weakned, and her Laws and Rules for Holi­ness become of less force; her Towers and Bulwarks be taken away, and the Se­cular Protection be withdrawn. I may have neither tongue to speak, nor hands to lift up in prayer, nor feet to walk to the House of God; there may be no Houses of God in our Land, the Tyrant may pull out, or cut off the one, or pull down the other, the dai­ly Sacrifice my cease, and the Priest-hood too, as to particular Persons; and when we say, where Episcopal Power is not, there is no Church, we do not so mean, that where it is not Men cannot go to Heaven; these all may be supplyed by an upright heart, and due intentions; God accepts of a Man according to what he hath, and not according to what he hath not. The Sacraments are only generally necessary to Salvation, and so of other duties in the same Order of Sanction. God does not oblige us to the Tyranny of Impossible Com­mands; to climb up to Heaven, and go down into the Deep, and fetch thence our Eternity; ask of us ten thousand Rams, or a thousand of Rivers of Oyl, or those Cattel upon a thousand Hills for a Sacrifice, [...], as St. Clement argues to the Gentiles. [...]. and 'tis our own Lust, not others we are to [Page 418] answer for, if not Subdued and Conquered, he does not bind us to go to Heaven when we have no Legs, Move without Faculties, Act without Strength, Live when Dead Men, and with Paralytick Joynts, Enfeebled by Irreco­verable Weakness to work out our own Sal­vation; every Brick-bat, will then make an Altar, and Prayers are to be made every where, with Holy Hands lift up, or but De­vout Hearts, without Wrath, and without Doubting; nor is it by Subduing Kings, and Conquering Worldly Powers, we are to go to Heaven, Faith, Love, Dependence upon God, &c. are among those acts of the Soul usu­ally called Elicitae, whose Practice depends on no outward Faculty; and if some Virtues e­qually indispensable, are otherways seated, and among those Acts call'd Imperatae, and to be perform'd by the outward Organs of the Body, yet are they equally free from out­ward Force, so seated in each ones Self, and lodg'd in his Person, that no Violence but from a Mans own self can reach them, those the only Enemies that are of his own House, and 'tis every ones own hand that draws his Sword, and makes him a Rebel; his alone Adulterous Eyes and Heart, Promote and Actuate whatever of uncleanness is from him, and 'tis neither Person, nor Object, nor Quality, any thing that comes cross, or is of force from within, or without himself; whe­ther Devil, or Tyrant, or Lust, any one ac­cident, or contingency, that can either dis­member him from the Church, or disunite him from his God, deprive him of sufficient Means here, or Eternal Life hereafter; even [Page 419] the Tyrannies, and Deaths here, will but Advance the Crown, and these lighter Afflicti­ons, work for us that more Eternal Weight of Glory; and which Considerations, are to be the great Support, and Comfort of all Christians. Should it so happen in the courses of Providence, and Kings and Queens cease to be Nursing Fathers and Mothers unto us. Should a Nero, or a Domitian, a Parliament of forty two, a Cromwel, or a Committee of Safety; or what Association soever be set up against, and Tyrannize over us, plane volu­mus pati, verùm eo modo quo & Bellum miles, nemo quippe libens Bellum patitur, cum et trepida­ri, & periclitari necesse sit, tamen & praeliatur omnibus viribus, et vincens in praelio gaudet, qui de praelio querebatur, quia & Gloriam consequi­tur & praedam, they are the words of Ter­tullian, Apol. c. 5. to those Scoffers of the Heathens in his days, and whom Julian the Apostate after imitated, telling the Christians Afflictions was their Advantage, and to be Loved by them, because their Martyrdom, and Crown. ‘We must willingly suffer, and engage as the Souldier does in War, and 'tis the expectation of Victory, and that re­compence of Reward, makes us fight on, and Rejoyce under that Banner, which o­therwise the present Difficulties, and Dan­gers, working on our fears, would engage us to avoid and run from:’ 'twas the con­stancy and evenness of the Christians, for the Truth, and in Gods Service, [...], together with their Gravity, Sincerity, their Freedom and Modesty of Con­versation gain'd upon their Enemies, both [Page 420] Greeks and Barbarians, and silenced their ba­ser Slanders, and Calumnies against them; thus, together with the learned discourses and endeavours by Writing, and which were not few, the Church grew and multiplied, as Eusebius tells us, Hist. l. 4. c. 7. These the Weapons of a Christian Warfare, and the many Shields of the Mighty, these the Spoyls and Trophies they contended for. I know not how in fitter words to conclude this Chapter, than in those of our Noble Historian Eusebius, in his Preface to his fifth Book of his Church History, giving an ac­count of those many, and Eminent Martyrs in the days of Antoninus Verus [...]. ‘ &c. Others ma­king Historical Narrations, have delive­red in their Writings, Victories in War, and Trophies over their Enemies, the great Actions of Captains, and the Va­lour of Souldiers, that had stained their hands in Blood, and a thousand Battels, for their Children, their Country, and their Fortunes; but the History, or the Narrative of the Divine Common-wealth, and Enrollment which is of Heaven, writes on Eternal Pillars, those Peace Designing Battels, in order to the Peace of the Soul, or that are Spiritual Those that fight in these Battels, for Truth, rather than their Country, for Religion, rather than their Children. The constancy of the Contenders for Piety and their Fortitude in their manifold Suffe­rings, their Trophies against Devils, and Vi­ctories obtain'd against the Invisible Powers, or Enemies, making publick their Crown, for an Everlasting Remembrance.’

CHAP. VI. Chap. 6.

THE last general of this Discourse now §. I follows, and I am to shew that what hath hitherto been said, concerning Church Power, as a Specifick, and distinct from any thing in either the People or the Crown, is agreeable with the particular Establishments by the Laws of our Kingdom made for the owning and defence of Christianity, and by consequence with the Religion it self so own'd and professed in our Church since the Reformation.

AN undertaking I do not therefore engage §. II in, as if these Doctrines of our common Chri­stianity, receiv'd from the beginning, and devolv'd all along downward in the first Ages, as is already shew'd, could obtain further Au­tority, or expected an after Sanction and Establishment from us, and e're fully assented to and received, wanted force and obliga­tion, was to be abated of, or abolished, where not according to our particular ordering, model and constitution, framed and drawn up, autorized and made publick, Fifteen hundred years after, this is absurd in the Pro­posal, and must be worse in the Practice; it runs, as it ought to do, contrary to our selves, to the Plot and Design of this our [Page 426] Church, in each of her Collections, Articles, Injunctions, Canons, Constitutions, and Ho­milies appointed to be read in the Churches in the time of Q. Elizabeth.

And altogether to our purpose are the Ho­milies composed by the Bishops, limiting Church-Power to the Priesthood, and appa­rently distinguishing betwixt the Autority and Laws of the Church and State, assigning different Ends and Effects unto each.

Part 2. Of the Sermon of Good Works. ‘This arrogancy God detested, that Man should so advance his Laws, to make them equal with God's Laws, wherein the true honou­ring and worshipping of God standeth, and to make his Laws for them to be left off. God hath appointed his Laws, where­in his Pleasure is to be honoured: His Plea­sure is also, That all mens Laws, not being contrary unto his Laws, shall be obeyed and kept, as good and necessary for every Com­mon-wealth; but not as things wherein principally his honour resteth, and all Civil and Mans Laws, either be or should be made, to bring Men better to keep God's Laws, that consequently, or followingly, God should be the better honoured by them.’

Part 2. Of the Sermon of the right Ʋse of the Church. ‘And according to this Exam­ple of our Saviour, in the Primitive Church (whipping the Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple) which was most Holy and Godly, and in the which due Discipline with seve­rity was used against the wicked, open Of­fenders were not suffered once to enter into [Page 427] the House of the Lord, nor admitted to Common Prayer, and the Use of the Holy Sacraments with other true Christians, until they had done open Penance before the whole Church; and this was practised, not only upon mean Persons, but also upon the Rich, Noble, and Mighty Persons. Yea, upon Theodosius, that Puissant and Mighty Emperor, whom for committing a grievous and wilful Murder, St. Ambrose Bishop of Millain reproved sharply, and ('tis in the Margin, he was only dehorted from recei­ving the Sacrament, until by Repentance he might be better prepared, Chrysost.) did al­so Excommunicate the said Emperor, and brought him to open Penance; and they that were so justly exempted and banish'd (as it were) from the House of the Lord, were taken (as they be indeed) for Men di­vided and separated from Christ's Church, and in most dangerous estate; yea, as St. Paul saith, even given unto Sathan the Devil for a time, and their company was shunn'd and avoided of all Godly Men and Women, until such time as they by Re­pentance and publick Penance were recon­ciled.’

Part 2. Of the Homily of Fasting. ‘It is necessary that we make a difference between the Policies of Princes, made for the or­dering of their Common-weals, in provision of things serving to the most sure defence of their Subjects and Countries, and be­tween Ecclesiastical Policies in prescribing such Works; by which, as by secondary means, God's Wrath may be pacified, and [Page 428] his Mercy purchased. An instance of the one is in enjoyning Abstinence from Flesh; for the increase of Victuals, and the better sustenance of the Poor, and the furniture of the Navy, the forbearing some piece of licentious Appetite upon the Ordinance of the Prince, with the consent of the Wise of the Realm. An instance of the other is, prescribing a form of Fasting, to humble our selves in the sight of Almighty God, and which binds the Conscience, as to time and occasion, and other Circumstances as the Church requires, and which has Power to enjoyn or relax; as is to be seen in the Homily.’

Each Law of the Kingdom relating to Re­ligion, which still suppose whatever is taught and reported, enacted and made Law, receiv'd and submitted to, maintain'd and protested, as the Establishments of our Church and State, to be bottomed on the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, and what the Catholick Fa­thers and ancient Bishops have thence Collected, particularly in the four first General Councils, or any other General Council, 10 Elizabethae, Cap. 1. Sect. 36. Nor does our Reformation commence upon any other Grounds, than a supposed depravation and defection, as to such that first depositum; those Rules and Practices depending, and with a purpose to restore and reinforce them; and did I believe our Church of England not to have followed this Rule, did I find her any wayes but swer­ving from, and much rather then if running cross to, any one or more of those Primitive Standards, designedly erected for the Pillars [Page 429] of Truth, the constant Marks and Copies for the practice and adherency of future Ages, al­ways obliging (for all Church Laws and Practice are not so, even of the most Primi­tive Church, even the Laws and Practice Apo­stolical.) I would be so far from abetting, or closing with such her Autority, and Actions, that I would immediately go over to and em­brace the Rule wherever, or if any where, to be found, in the Isle of Patmos with St. John, or in the Cave with Holy Athanasius; as not Magistracy and Law, so not the Reformed Church of England, should be my either fear or obligation to the contrary, be the crosser Circumstances whatsoever or wheresoever, that attend me, could I not joyn with a pre­sent visible Church, or Body of Believers, in the Enjoyment and Profession of it. This is only that, which as my own Satisfaction, so I endeavour to make it others, that as Born and Baptized in the Church of England, and still in Union with her, and my self in par­ticular, as a Presbyter there, have subscri­bed to her Articles, Canons and Constitutions; so 'tis to and in that Church which is every ways Primitive and Apostolical, and parti­cularly in this instance of Church-Power; and that it is so is easily and readily to be de­monstrated, and which I shall endeavour to do, Methodo Synthetica, as they speak, as it lies in the course of things and actions. 1. In the Judgment and by the Determinations of our Church, in her conciliary Acts, Articles, Canons, Rubricks, in her Book of Ordina­tion, &c. 2. By the publick Acts and De­terminations of the Prince both in Parliament [Page 430] and out of it, in his Statutes, Injunctions, and Proclamations, making Law these Ante­cedent Church Determinations, and Autori­ties preceding. 3. From our own parti­cular Doctors, in their several Tracts and Writings.

§. III THAT this Power is not any ways sup­poseable in the People in our Church or Kingdom, 'tis clear in the form of ordering Deacons and Priests, and which is made Law in the Realm, where all that the Bishop ad­dresses himself to the People for is this, Whe­ther (as supposed to be more conversant with them) they know any notable Crime they are guilty of, and which may render them un­fit for the said Holy Function; the words of the Bishop are these, Brethren, if there be any among you that know any Impediment, or nota­ble Crime in any of these Persons for which he ought not to be admitted into this Holy Ministry, let him come forth in the Name of God, and shew what the Crime and Impediment is. The Peo­ple are no more concern'd in Ordinations, then as Testimonies of the manners of those who are to be Ordain'd, and in which alone they were concern'd of old, and in the Articles and Constitutions taking care that fit Men he admitted to Holy Orders; what relates to the People, and they are to be enquired of, is a Testimony of their Conversations; and if the Bishop lay hands on suddenly, and without due Enquiry and competent Satisfa­ction, and the Person ordained prove unwor­thy, the Orders notwithstanding are valid, the Penalty is laid on the Bishop, he is to be suspended, and to ordain no more for two [Page 431] years. Articuli pro clero 1584. Constitutiones Ecclesiasticae, 1597. ut homines idonei ad sacros ordines admittantur.

IT were needless Pains to insist on, and §. IV shew the particular judgment of our Church, Whether this Power be in her Pastors alone, exclusive to, as the People, so the Prince al­so; the Rubricks in the Common-Prayer Book suppose, and farther invest, all Offices there in the Hieratical Order, what ever re­late to the Divine Worship and Service, and which are by them alone to be perform'd, the Prjest is still distinguished from the Peo­ple or Laity, nor is the Prince there consi­dered, but as of the Laity, in attendance in Common with the other Worshippers: and to be sure in the Book of Ordination, 'tis the Bishop lays on Hands and Consecrates, he the origin and head of all Power derived, whe­ther to Bishop, Presbyter or Deacon, and in what degree soever of Power it is that is given. That Person which by open denunciati­on of the Church is rightly cut off from the Ʋni­ty of the Church and excommunicate, ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the Faithful as an Heathen and Publican, until he be openly reconciled by Penance, and received into the Church by a Judg that hath Autority thereun­to; as among the Articles of Religion 1562. Article 33. and this Judg is neither Chan­cellor, Official nor Commissary, &c. but a Bi­shop or Presbyter: the Arch-Deacon cannot do it, if not a Presbyter, and but in Deacon's Orders, in these alone is the Power of both retaining and absolving, in the Articuli pro clero, 1584. and the libri quorundam Canonum, [Page 432] &c. and in the constitutiones Ecclesiasticae, 1597. and all set out by Queen Elizabeth; he that would once for all be satisfied what is the sense of our Church, let him but once read over our seven and thirthieth Article of Re­ligion, together with the occasion of it, and he must be convinced that her Judgment is on our side, however 'tis received, whether as Orthodox or Erroneous by him. Among other Articles agreed upon by the Bishops, and other learned Godly Men in the Convo­cation held at London 1552. this was one. The King of England is supreme Head in Earth, next under Christ, of the Church of England and Ireland. Many bad Inferences were made, and sinister Consequences affixed, and particularly that the King was declared a Priest, impower'd to administer in Divine Service. In the Reign of Queen Elizabeth 1561. (and till which time, during the Reign of Queen Mary, the Objection, to be sure, had been urged sufficiently, and im­proved) a Convocation being called, and Articles agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops of both Provinces, and the whole Clergy, in the 37th Article; and in answer to the Objection, they more fully ex­plain themselves in these Words, and de­clare,

AND this is all is laid claim to by our §. V Princes themselves, and that the Statute-book or any other claim of theirs entitles to and invests them withal, in the late colle­ction of Articles, Canons, &c. made by An­thony Sparrow now Lord Bishop of Norwich, I meet with nothing done by King Henry VIII. save what is mentioned by King Ed­ward VI. in the entrance to his Injunctions 1547. and which are there transcribed with his own additions: the design and end of which is only to procure publick and general obedience to the Laws and Duties of true Reli­gion, and that every Man truely observe them, as they will avoid his Displeasure and Penalties annexed. All that Henry VIII got by the submission of the Clergy in the five and twen­tieth year of his reign cap. 19. was this, as there set down in the Statute: That the Cler­gy [Page 434] would not for the time to come assemble in convocation without the King's Writ, That they would not enact, promulge or execute any new Canons, Constitutions, Ordinance provincial or other, or by whatsoever Name they shall be cal­led in Convocation; unless the King's Royal license be had, his Assent and Consent in that be­half. That all Canons, Constitutions before made prejudicial to the King's Prerogative Roy­al, repugnant to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm, or overmuch onerous to the Subject, be abrogated and of no value, all other stand­ing in their full strength and power, the King's Assent first had unto them. The meaning of all which appears only to be this, That no­thing relating to Church-Affairs and Pro­ceedings, is to be made Law, or to be pro­ceeded for or against in any outward Court whatever in a forensick judicial way, but by the leave and autority of the King; without his Royal Assent first had, and his hand set to it. And this is that Title of the supreme Head of the Church of England, which he hereupon assum'd to himself, and which some little time afterwards confirm'd to him in full Parliament, his Heirs and Suc­cessors: the Power of the Church it self is not at all abated, as purely such, and from our Saviour, only brought to a dependency upon the King, which before was upon the Bishop of Rome, and who had exercised here that headship and still claims it.

§. VI AND that this was really all the King then aim'd at by the submission of the Clergy, viz, a Right and Supremacie of Inspection over all Persons in all Causes within his [Page 435] Realms and Dominions, and that no Pleas of Religion, or the service of Christ, is to exempt them from the judicial Cognizance and Jurisdiction of their Prince: this will appear more plain and evident by the seve­ral Proceedings and Acts concerning Church-Affairs made by this King, in that 19 cap. and five and twentieth year of his Reign, where the submission of the Clergy is turn­ed into an Act, and in the several Acts en­suing, in all which it does not appear that he ever assumed to himself and exercised any other, than such like external Power and Autority in spiritual Matters; he intermed­les not with any one Instance of Priestly Power as purely such, but on the contrary cautions, with Clauses and Preventions, lest any such thing should be, or be sup­poseable so, in the Objection, the several Acts are these. That no one Canon of the Church have the force of a Law, but what is appointed by such Inspector of the Canons as he shall name and appoint. That no Appeals be made to Rome upon the Penalty and Danger contained and limited in the Act of Provision and Premunire made in the 16th year of King Richard II. That all the Canons not repug­nant to the Laws of the Realm, or to the Da­mage of the King's Prerogative Royal, are to be used and executed, as they were before the mak­ing this Act. That no license is to be required from the See of Rome, for the Consecrating and Investiture of Bishops. That 'tis in the King a­lone to nominate and present them. That the Pope has no Power in Spiritual Causes to give Licenses, Dispensations, Faculties, Grants, &c. [Page 436] all this is to be done at home by our own Bi­shops and in our own Synods and Councils. cap. 21. and this Provision is particularly made Sect. 19. ibid. provided that this Act, or any thing or things herein contained, shall be hereafter in­terpreted or expounded: that your Grace your Nobles and Subjects intend by the same to de­cline or vary from the Congregation of Christ's Church, in any thing concerning the very Ar­ticles of the Catholick Faith of Christendom, or in any other things declared in Holy Scrip­ture, and the Word of God necessary for yours and their Salvation: but only to make an Or­dinance by Policies necessary and convenient to repress Vice. And for good conservation of this Realm in Peace, Ʋnity and Tranquility from Ra­vine and Spoyl, insuing much the old ancient Customes of this Realm in that behalf, not mind­ing to seek for any Relief, Succor or Remedies, for any worldly things and humane Laws in any case of necessity, but within this Realm at the hands of your Highness, your Heirs and Succes­sors, Kings of this Realm, which have, and ought to have, an Imperial Power and Autori­ty in the same, and not obliged in any worldly Causes to any Superior.

§. VII IN the 26th year of his Reign cap. 1. when declared Supreme Head of the Church of England in Parliament, as before recogni­zed by the Clergy, the Power he thereby is invested with is also declared, viz. To visit, redress, reform, order, correct, restrain and a­mend all such Errors, Heresies, Abuses, Offen­ces, Contempts and Enormities whatsoever they be: which by any manner of spiritual Autority or Jurisdiction ought or may lawfully be re­formed, [Page 437] repressed, order'd, redressed, corrected, restrained or amended, most to the pleasure of Almighty God, the increase of Virtue in Christ's Religion, and for the conservation of Ʋnity, Peace and Tranquility of this Realm. cap. 14. he appoints the number of suffragan Bishops, the Places of their residence, and the Arch-Bishop is to consecrate them. In the 28th year of his Reign cap. 10. The King may nominate such number of Bishops, Sees for Bishops, Cathe­dral Churches, and endow them with such Possessions as he will. In the 31th year cap. 14. he defends the Doctrine of Transubstantia­tion, the Sacrament in but one kind, enacts that all Hereticks be burnt and their Goods forfei­ted, that no Priest may marry; for Masses, Au­ricular Confession, &c. in the 34, 5. cap. 1. re­course must be had to the Catholick Apostolick Church for the decision of Controversies. And therefore all Books of the Old and New Testa­ment in English, being of Tindal 's false Transla­tion, or comprising any matter of Christian Re­ligion, Articles of the Faith or Holy Scripture contrary to the Doctrine set forth sithence An­no Domini 1540. or to be set forth by the King, shall be abolished; no Printer or Book-sel­ler shall utter any of the said Books, no Persons shall play or interlude, sing or rhime contrary to the said Doctrine, no Person shall retain any English Books or Writings concerning Matter a­gainst the holy and blessed Sacrament of the Altar, or for the maintenance of the Anabap­tists, or other Books abolished by the King's Pro­clamation. There shall be no Annotations or Preambles in Bibles or new Testaments in En­glish, the Bible shall not be read in English in a­ny [Page 438] Church, no Women, &c. to read the New Te­stament in English, nothing shall be taught con­trary to the Kings Injunctions, and if any spi­ritual Person preach, teach or maintain any thing contrary to the King's Instructions or De­terminations made or to be made, and shall thereof be convict, he shall for his first Offence recant, for his second abjure and bear a fagot, for the third he shall be adjudged an Heretick, and be burnt, and loose all his Goods and Chat­tels. In the 37. year cap. 17. The full Power and Autority he hath by being Supreme Head of the Church of England, is, To correct, pun­ish and repress all manner of Heresies, Errors, Vices, Sins, Abuses, Idolatries, Hypocrises and Superstitions, sprung and growing within the same, and to exercise all other manner of Jurisdiction called Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. Sect. 1. and Sect. 3. 'tis farther added, To whom by Ho­ly Scriptures all Authority and Power is wholly given to hear and determine all manner of Cau­ses Ecclesiastical; and to correct Vice and Sin whatsoever, and to all such Persons as his Ma­jesty shall appoint thereunto. And so far is all this from deriving to himself, and exercising any thing of the Priest-hood, that he is toti­dem verbis declared and reputed only a Lay-Man in the first Section of that Chapter: nor do any one of these Instances here pro­duced, amount to any more than to the de­fending and guarding by Laws, Truth, and punishing and repressing Errors, whether in Doctrines or in Manners, at least such as are so reputed by the Church and State.

§. VIII'TIS true and easily observable, that just upon the assuming to himself the Title of [Page 439] the supreme Head of the Church, there was ground enough for suspition that the Church her self, and all her Power was to be laid a­side: and whereas the reason and end of e­very particular Parliament before, and of each of his till then is still said to be for the honor of God and holy Church, and for the Common-Weale and Profit of this Realm, 'tis a­bated, and said only for the honor of God and for the Common-Weale and Profit of this Realm, the benefit of holy Church, is, in words at least, left out, and in the room of it is once added to the conservation of the true Doctrine of Christ's Religion. As if the design was accor­ding to the Models now adayes framed and endeavour'd by private Persons to be set up. That the care was to be only of Do­ctrines, in which, and in charity and love and abatements to one another, the Essence of Church-Unity in general, and each Chri­stian with another consists. But yet however this so hapned, or upon what design either in himself or others, 'tis certain he abridg­ed not the Church-Men of any one Instance of that Secular worldly Power (as that of the supremacie derived unto them is called 25 Henry VIII. cap. 21.) in the outward Courts and Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical: nei­ther did he in his Practice, either in his own Person, or the Persons of Church-Men, by a Plea of deriving the Power unto them from him­self, take upon him any thing essential to the Priest-hood, as to determine in Matters of Faith, decide Controversies, to offiociate at the Altar, to ordain, &c. even to appoint Laws and Canons for discipline or Proceed­ings [Page 440] in that Convocation called and conti­nued by his Power, but as there first debated and determined, framed into a Rule, and in presiding over whom his headship so much consisted.

§. IX WEE'L go on from King Henry VIII. to King Edward VI. and in the first year of his Reign cap. 2. Sect. 3. we meet with a nota­ble alteration made in Words, and though no more, yet may make a shew, as if he as­sumed a farther new Power to himself, as supreme head of the Church, which King Hen­ry VIII. did not do before him: and where­as the Arch-Bishops, Bishops, and other spi­ritual Persons do use to make and send out their Summons, Citations and Process in their own Names, and with their own Seals, it is enacted, That they be made and sent out in the Name and with the Seal of the King, &c. but this relating only to the Courts Ecclesiastical, as in the Words of the Statute, and by which the King is own'd the Supreme by the Clegy, as 'tis also in the Sta­tute worded and acknowledged; nor can a­ny Arch-Bishop, Bishop, &c. summon any of the King's Subjects to any Place without his leave, and not enabled by him; the King may authorize them in what form he please, whether of that of the Common-Law, or in any other, as in that of Majors in Corpora­tions, or Vice-Chancellors in the University, or Court-Leets, which latter was the form, and is by this Act abolished, and the first brought into its room, and upon what rea­sons soever this Act was laid and passed in King Edward's days, or repealed by Queen [Page 441] Mary, as to be sure the two Parties, the Pu­ritan and the Papist, thought they served themselves and particular Designs in it, it was never re-enforced by any succeeding Parliaments, nor attempted, that I have met with, in the days of either Queen Elizabeth or King James, or King Charles the first or second. The Prince was not thought to loose or gain any thing, as to his Autority, in Spirituals, which way soever it went, nor the Bishops to have any Plea of inroding the Errors, by so using it, as they now do, in their own Names, and with their own Seals, as by the male-contented and puritanical Party in the days of King Charles the first it was objected they did; and they libelled and traduced for it, but are sufficiently vindicated therein by the reverend Father in God Robert Sanderson late Lord Bishop of Lincoln in a Treatise called, Episcopacy (as e­stablished by the Laws in England) not pre­judicial to regal Power. And even in this very Statute of Edward VI. the Bishops are to use their own Seals and Names in all faculties, dispensations, collations, institutions, inductions, letters of Orders, &c. and in limiting which also to his own Name and Seal the King's supremacy had been equally asserted, nay, more concern'd, because peculiarly enlarged, if that the thing was aimed at; for the gran­ting Letters of Orders is what is purely hie­ratical, and solely Episcopal, seated in the highest Order of the Priest-hood, a peculiar embellishment to the Crown and the Bishops, by acting in the other Instances in their own Names and by their own Seals, must have in [Page 442] as his high a degree invaded, a most singu­lar and choice Prerogative of the Prince, the right of Investiture, admission into Tempo­rals, Institution and Induction into Benefices are Acts purely worldly and secular and ori­ginally in the Crown; could an Objection be framed from the particular Form either ways, and such its Circumstances, as indeed and really cannot be.

§. X I come next to Queen Elizabeth, where we shall find that as she reassumed the Suprema­cie in the first year of her Reign, alienated by Queen Mary, and this by Act of Parlia­ment cap. 1. in which is the Oath of Supre­macy to be taken, as in that Act ordered and limited: and because a great many Cavils were made, and sinister malicious Constructi­ons. The Queen her self in that very Year endeavors to rescue her Subjects, and disen­tangle them from all such Jealousies, and among her Injunctions 1559 for Peace and Order in the Church and State, there is an admonition to simple Men deceived by Mali­tious. The Words are these, which, though many, I'le here transcribe, and in effect but the same with those of the Convocation 1562. on the very same occasion. ‘The Queens Majesty being informed, That in certain Places of the Realm, sundry of her Native Subjects being call'd to Ecclesiastical Mini­stry of the Church, be by sinister Perswasion and perverse construction induced to find some Scruple in the form of an Oath, which by an Act of the late Parliament is pre­scribed, to be required of divers Persons for the recognition of their Allegiance to [Page 443] her Majesty: which certainly was never meant, nor by any equity of Words or good Sense can be there from gather'd, would that all her loving Subjects should under­stand, that nothing was, is, or shall be meant or intended by the same Oath than was ac­knowledged to be due to the most noble King of famous Memory King Henry VIII. her Majesties Father, or King Edward the VI. her Majesties Brother. And farther, her Majesty forbiddeth all manner her Subjects to give ear and credit to such perverse and malicious Persons, which most sinister­ly and maliciously labour to notifie to her loving Subjects how by word of the said Oath it may be collected, that the King and Queens, Possessors of the Crown, may challenge Autority and Power of Ministry of divine Service in the Church; wherein her said Subjects be much abused by such e­vil disposed Persons, for certainly her Majesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any Au­tority than that was challenged and lately used by the said noble Kings of famous Me­mory King Henry VIII, and King Edward VI, which is and was in Ancient time due to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, that is un­der God to have the Soveraignty and Rule over all manner of Persons born within these her Realms, Dominions and Countries, of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Tem­poral ever they be, so as no other Foreign Power shall or ought to have any Superio­rity over them; And if any Person that has conceived any other sense of the Form of the said Oath, shall accept the same Oath [Page 444] with this interpretation, sense or meaning, her Majesty is well pleased to accept every such in that behalf as her good and obedient Subjects, and shall acquit them of all man­ner of Penalties contemn'd in the said Act against such as shall peremptorily and ob­stinately refuse to take the same Oath.’ And because this is more private, her Majesty de­clares in Parliament this very same thing, in her first year, Cap. 1. Sect. 14. ‘Provided also that the Oath expressed in the said Act, made in the first year, shall be taken and expounded in such Form as is set forth in an Admonition annexed to the Queens Majesties Injunctions Published in the first year of her Majesties Reign, that is to say, To confess and acknowledge in her Majesty, her Heirs, and Successors, none other Autority than that was challenged, and lately used by the noble King Henry VIII. and King Edward the VI. as in the said Admonition more plain­ly may appear.’

§. XI KING James, who is next, comes up to the same Point, and in his Proclamation be­fore the Articles of Religion, thus declares, ‘That We are the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, and if any difference arise about the external Polity, concerning Injunctions, Canons, or other Constitutions whatsoever, thereunto belonging, the Cler­gy in their Convocation is to order and set­tle them, having first obtained leave under Our Broad Seal so to do, We approving their said Ordinances and Constitutions, provided that none be made contrary to the Laws and Customs of this Land.—That out of Our [Page 445] Princely Duty and Care, the Churchmen may do the Work that is proper for them; the Bishops and Clergy from time to time in Convocation have leave to do what is neces­sary to the settling the Doctrine and Disci­pline of this Church.’

SO that I think no more need be said to §. XII satisfie any reasonable Person, that the King and the Church are two distinct Powers, in the sense of the Statute Book or in Parliament Language; nor do our Kings interpose in Re­ligious Matters, any otherways than to make Religion Law, what the Church in Convo­cation determines, and recommends as the Tradition of Faith, as agreeing to the Holy Scriptures, and the Collections of the Ancient Fathers and Holy Bishops therefrom, and to the guarding it with Penalties to be inflicted on such as oppose and violate it, just as the first Christian Emperors did. Nor can our Religion since the Reformation be any other­waies called a Parliament Religion then it might have been called so before, where the same Secular Power is equally extended and executed, as in case of the Lollards certain supposed Hereticks, Subverting the Christian Faith, the Law of God, and the Church and Realm, to the extirpating of them, and taking care that they be punished by the Ordinaries, II. Henry V. Cap. VIII. and so before IV. Hen­ry IV. Cap. XV. where the Laws are these, None shall Preach without the License of the Diocesane of the same place. None shall Preach or Write any Book contrary to the Catholick Faith, or the Determination of the Holy Church. None shall make any Conventicles of such Sects [Page 446] and wicked Doctrines, nor shall favour such Prea­chers. Every Ordinary may Convent before him, and Imprison any Person suspected of He­resie. An obstinate Heretick shall be burnt be­fore the People. And VI. Richard II. Cap. V. Commissions are directed to Sheriffs and others to apprehend such as be certified by the Prelates to be Preachers of Heresies, their Fautors, Maintainers and Abettors, and to hold them in strong Prison until they justifie themselves ac­cording to the Laws of Holy Church. And which is more remarkable, in the II. and III. of this King, Cap. VI. the choice or Pope Ʋrban is made Law, and confirmed in Parliament, and 'tis by them Commanded that he be accepted and obey'd. But does the Pope of Rome therefore return and owe his Autority to the Parliament of England? how would they of Rome scorn such a thing if but insinuated? and yet the Act of Parliament was in its de­sign acceptable and advantageous to them; they had the Civil Autority thereby to back and assist them as occasion, and which might work that Submission to the present Election; his Holinesse's Bulls could not do, at least, so readily and effectually. That this Nation did always understand the outward Policy of the Church, or Government of it, in foro ex­teriori, to depend upon the Prince, a lear­ned Gentleman, late of the County of Kent, Sir Roger Twisden Knight and Baronet, has given a very satisfactory account, to them that will receive any, in his Historical Vindi­cation of the Church of England in Point of Schism, &c. Cap. 5. practised by the best of Kings before the Conquest, Ina, Canutus, Ed­ward [Page 447] the Confessor, whose Praises are upon Record in the Romanists account of them; and the last a Canonized Saint, and to which they were often supplicated by the most Ho­ly Bishops. Upon the same Grounds are we to laugh at their Folly or Madness, or rather Malice, when they taunt us with a Parlia­ment-Religion, which has only the benefit of the Government for its Protection, and our Kings do but that Duty is laid upon them by St. Paul, take care that under them we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all Godliness and Honesty. Christianity it self ever since Constantine's time, may be as well reproach'd, that it was Imperial, or, which is in effect the same, Parliamental. Since the Empire was Christian and defended it; nay while it was Heathen, for some particular Emperors, up­on some occasions have adhered to and pro­tected it, and that it had no other bottom than Reasons of State, and a worldly Com­plyance (and the lewd Pen of Baxter in his Prophaner History of Bishops, &c. Cap. 1. Sect. 37. gives the same account of the Church's increase under Constantine, on the score of Temporal Immunities. That a Mur­derer that was to be hang'd, if a Christian, was but to be kept from the Sacrament, and do some confessing Penance, &c.) for those Governors then assum'd the same Power in Religious Matters, as have done our Kings since the Reformation, as must appear to him that compares the two Codes, Novels, and Con­stitutions at large, (or if hee'l not take that pains, the Abridgment is made above) with our Statute Book, both which only take care, [Page 448] that the Religion receiv'd and own'd in the Church and by Churchmen, be protected, and every Man in his station do his Duty in order to it, if the common words in the Statutes carry the usual common sense, and are to be apprehended by him, that is not a common Lawyer, and which the Author of these Papers does not pretend to be.

§. XIII ONLY Mr. Selden inrodes us here again, and comes quite cross too against us: he tells the World other things. That Excommu­nication in particular (and then they may as well do all the rest) is what belongs to the Parliament, and which has actually Excom­municated, and the Bishops are impower'd, only by Parliament to proceed in the like censures, and but by a Derivation from both Houses; he says in plain terms, that all Power and Jurisdiction, usually call'd Church Power and Jurisdiction, is originally and immedi­ately from the Secular; and this he thinks he has demonstrated from several Acts of Parlia­ment to this purpose, and because Erastus his Works were Licensed for the Press, and Published by the Autority of the Kingdom in the Days of Queen Elizabeth, and which would not have been done, did not the same Autority receive, and own, and espouse and submit to his Doctrines, and which are whol­ly levell'd against the Church-Power, as inde­pendent, and not derived from the Magistrate. I'le consider each.

§. XIV THE Acts of Parliament he produces, are V and VI Edw. VI. Cap. IV. That if any Per­son or Persons shall smite or lay any violent hands upon any other, either in any Church or Church­yard, [Page 449] or draw any Weapon, then ipso facto eve­ry Person so offending shall be deem'd Excommu­nicate, and be excluded from the Fellowship and Company of Christ's Congregation, Sect. 2, 3. and III James, Cap. V. That every Popish Re­cusant that is or shall be Convict of Popish Recu­sancy, shall stand and be reputed to all ends and purposes disabled as a Person Excommunicated by Sentence in the Ecclesiastical Court. Which two Acts being put together by Mr. Selden, De Syned. lib. 1. c. 10. p. 320. as one and the same, and suitably he backs that of King Ed­ward with this of King James, Simili modo ex latâ Lege, &c. 'Tis all the reason in the World they should interpret one another; Now King James says expresly, That lawful and due Excommunication is when denounced and Excommunicated according to the Laws of this Realm. That is by a Sentence in the Eccle­siastical Court, and this by a Bishop or Presby­ter in Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions, by a Judge that hath Autority thereunto, Article 33. and which, to be sure, in the Act it self, be­ing not done as by Law, and by the acknow­ledged Laws of the Land, in such the Statute; the Parliament rendred uncapable of doing of it, being not the Judges appointed, Mr. Sel­den must in course be supposed so intolerably absurd in his Inference, that the Secular Power Excommunicates, that common sense is not able to endure him: And the true intent and meaning of the Parliament can only be this, That these Offenders, though they be not Excommunicated, and which the Parliament, though the Higher Court of England, have not Power to do, being not Judges with Auto­rity [Page 450] thereunto; yet they shall have the usual Secular Punishments inflicted, and which are usually laid upon such as are duly Excommu­nicated, the imposing which is the Act of Parliament alone, and which, as they may remove, so they may impose when they please, without any respect to the Excommunication anteceding, They shall be deemed as such. So King Edward, They shall stand and be reputed to all ends and purposes as such. So King James. The particular Punishment instanced in by King Edward, is Exclusion from the Fellowship and Company of Christ's Congregation; which indeed comes somewhat nearer to what al­ways and immediately follows Excommuni­cation it self, in the first Institution and Pri­mitive Practice, Ʋt à Communione Orationis & conventus, & omnis Sancti commercii rele­getur, Tertul. Apol. Cap. 39. where so much Power over Mens Persons is obtained as to be able to exclude them their Oratories; and the Christians usually absented themselves, and 'tis agreeable with the Practice and In­junction Apostolical, with such an one not to accompany, 1 Cor. 5.11. but yet this is not of the first Nature and Essence of it; be­cause this may be where the Excommunica­tion is not; 'tis supposeable to arise from a different Autority and Motive; and so, the Secular Arm, if agreeable to its self, its own Power and Proceedings, and in relation to which it is to be interpreted, must be con­cluded to appoint and execute in this Statute, and no otherwise. As every Science, so eve­ry Power, is to be conceived of, as on its own object, and proper work; and those [Page 451] Apostatizing dissenting Christians of old, who laid this Punishment upon themselves, and out of peevishness, or whatever undue ground, turn'd themselves out of Communion with the Church, in her Prayers and Eucharist, the Church proceeded notwithstanding to Excommunicate them; her own censure, as a Church-Act did judicially proceed against them, See Can. 2. Conc. Antioch. & fusius suprà; Cap. 4. Sect. 31. and since our Parliaments have so frequently declared the Practice and Inferences of the first Doctors and Holy Bi­shops from the Old and New Testament, to be their rule in all their religious Procee­dings they have so often hither limited and confined themselves, every one of such their Proceedings must in course be interpreted, in Subordination to and complyance with them; they are not to be concluded, where Words and Actions, and things will bear any favou­rable Construction, to run cross to, and Head against them; or if they do, and no Friendly office can be done them, and a better gloss is not to be put upon it; 'tis to be reputed as that particular Error, from which they plead not an Exemption, and the general Design will weigh down, if coming in Competition. But the Statute of King James instances in and confines to a Punishment, that is not pleadable to be otherwise than Secular and Worldly, nor can be interpreted of any im­mediate Spiritual consequence upon whom 'tis inflicted. The Punishment is, to be disabled as to Suits at Law, and which every Body knows, the alone Laws of the Land and Power of Parliament can impose, and which may be, [Page 452] and is imposed upon sundry other occasions, and not that of Excommunication only, and so supposed in the Act.

§. XV WHAT he brings out of Edward VI. and Queen Elizabeth in their Acts, for authorizing and making Law the Common-Prayer-Book, ibid. p. 386. as ranked by themselves, so are they of different Complexions, nor does the Prince there attempt any thing but what as Supreme Governor in all Causes, as well Ecclesia­stical as Civil, he is enabled to do, as Mr. Sel­den there very well refers to such his Title for his Evidence; that is, to see that every one does his Duty in his Order and Station, enabling and protecting him thereunto; the Prince is thereby to be interpreted no more enabled by his own Power, whether in his own Person, or the Person of any other to discharge the Office of a Priest, than he is supposed to have the Skill and Capacity of any Artist, Mechanick, or what other Trades­man, whom he Empowers by his Letters Pa­tents, or any otherways, in Law acquits or indemnifies, in the managery and publick Profession of such his Art and Invention his Trade and Employment, and no otherwise can the Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Offi­cers be said there to be impower'd to proceed by censures against all such as will not come to Church, II. III. Edw. VI. Cap. I. Sect. XII. I Elizabethae, Cap. II. Sect XVI. nor do any of those many many instances, which his usual intolerable Pains has heaped together in several Pages both before and after in that Chapter, about the Prince, or [...]ecular Powers, interposing, limiting and restraining in [Page 453] Excommunications, prove any thing at all to his purpose, but on the contrary, are all against him; himself has given so good an account of it, that nothing needs here to be added, but the recital of his own words, whatever Power there is executed in the Church Semper à jure Anglicano civili tempe­ratum est & restrictum, ut inde planè modos suos & limites perpetuò receperit, pag. 387. receiv'd modes, and rules, and limits by the Laws of the Land, Prohibitions and Injunctions in or­der to a search and enquiry, whether not de­structive to the Prince, to the Justice of the Subject, and into the merit and demerit of the Cause, or Person, all follow as naturally as any thing in the World, that in a Chri­stian Kingdom, where the Church is prote­cted, the Power of her Officers asserted and maintained, its Acts and Executions assisted and abetted, licensed and indulg'd in every thing that may be advantageous to the pro­moting this Power, rendring it considerable and effectual, as in the first design, institu­tion and purpose of it, that the Prince do not wholly denudate and divest himself by his Grants and Concessions, that the Church re­ceive Rules back again, and not act indepen­dently, but with a regard to that arm which thus upholds her, and 'tis to be the care of a Prince, that as not himself, so nor his Sub­jects be burdned and oppressed with the vexa­tious proceedings of the Courts Ecclesiastical by Excommunications, or otherways. But then as to the force of Mr. Selden's Argument on this Concession, I'le only here use the words of Mr. Thorndike in his Treatise of the Laws [Page 454] of the Church, Cap. ult. pag. 394. ‘But will all this serve for an Argument that there is no such thing as a Church in the Opinion of Christendom, but that which stands by the acts of Christian Powers, because they pre­tend to limit the abuse of it? when as the very name of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in the Title of those Books, and those Actions is sufficient Demonstration that they ac­knowledge and suppose a right to Jurisdi­ction in the Church, which they pretend to limit, as the neither Church nor the rest of their Subjects to have cause to complain of wrong by the abuse of it.’ And since Mr. Selden has here Pag. 387. instanced in the first Christian Emperors, wee'l accept of their both rules and limits, Laxations and Temperatures, as he calls it, and who as they never attempted to Excommunicate in their own Power and Persons, so neither did they obstruct or declare against in their Laws, the Divine immutable Right and Precept of its Institution, as is plainly made appear in my Treatise above about it, and all that which Mr. Selden has brought to the contrary is on­ly some shew of words and expressions which he has wrested to his purposes, as he does here in our Statute-Book; and that which he brings of the Rump Parliament, Pag. 387. and that Excommunicationi Presbyterali retinacula & repagula quae egride ritè ea nequiret, di­versimodò prudenter assignabant, &c. they gave Laws and Rules to the Presbyterian Ex­communications, in their Assembly at West­minster, and which, though not without some Arguments to the contrary, were submitted [Page 455] unto, and also of Geneva it self, whose Church-Power was thus limited in its Proceedings by State-Rules, and for the better Security of the Power; all this proves nothing less than what he designs and produces them for; for these are the very Men and particular Incor­porations, as to Faith and Discipline, he in­stances in Pag. 325, 326. who assert and de­fend Excommunication, as subjected in them­selves, and instituted by the preceptive Com­mand, and positive Appointment of either Christ and his Apostles, or of both; and the Inference thence can be only this, That a Subordination to the Christian State, and sub­mission to the Rules of Policy in the Execu­tion, for order and conveniency, and the more effectually compassing the end of the Ordinance, is not inconsistent, as such, with the Gospel-Institution, it no ways invests the thing it self, or Original Power in the State; and that which the Assembly-men demurr'd upon, when the Parliament laid their Restri­ctions in all Probability, was, not that it enterfeired with the Divine Right, or en­croach'd upon it; but as inconsistent with that Omnipotent Power, and Self-existent, their aim was to erect in their Presbytery, or Consistoritorian Seigniority, made up of Lay, and Church Elders, as accountable to none, but themselves, or the Classis or Synod, for the Proceedings of such their Parlour, whe­ther King or Parliament demanded it, all being there but Subjects, that were not by Election, of that precise Order and Frater­nity, and as unlucky an instance he has brought above, Pag. 320. out of the Parlia­ment [Page 456] of Scotland, III Jacob. VI. Cap. XLV. that the Parliament did there Excommunicate also, a thing so abhorring to the Kirk, and every ways disagreeing to the both humour of those People, and its then present Constitution, as reformed by Buchanan and Knox, in the height of Calvinism, that no one that valued the Reputation of his Book among but easie considering Men, would have inserted such a Quotation; and yet it serves as well as five hundred more do, with which his Margin is all along stuffed.

§. XVI THE next Reason given why there is no such thing as Church-Power, distinct and apart, but is derived from the Crown, is be­cause that Erastus his Works were Licensed by Autority and Printed, in the days of Queen Elizabeth, by John Wolfe, the Queens Bookseller, and it stands so Entred in the Booksellers-Hall at London to this day, De Syned. l. 1. c. 10. Pag. 486. to which I an­swer, that every Book Printed by Richard Royston His Majestie's now Bookseller, and Licensed by Autority, is not therefore to be necessarily the sense of the Autority of the Kingdom, and the same Latitude was in Li­censing Books in the days of Queen Elizabeth, as has been since, and the same liberty taken. Nor is it cleer that the Book was really Li­censed by Autority from what Mr. Selden says, for the Entrance into the Booksellers-Hall on­ly is, that it was reported by Mr. Fortescue to be allow'd by the Archbishop of Canter­bury; 'tis not said that the Archbishop's hand, or the hand of any other in Autority was set to the License, and Books are not usu­ally [Page 457] Entred for the Press upon a Report that they are Licensed, but when a Licence is re­ally not to be had, and the Bookseller con­trives as good a Plea as he can, for his false Entry and surreptitious Impression; what is added, that the Archbishop had the Book in his Study fairly Bound, and with a Golden Motto on the outside of it, will not do, be­cause Heretical, it was not fit for many other Studies than his, and which is the only thing else urged by Mr. Selden that he Licensed it; yet admit it was Licensed duly, whether by those viri summi of the Ecclesiastical Order and great Statesmen, who got the Copy of Erastus his Widow, or of Castelvetrus her second Husband, as Mr. Selden suggests, or by the Archbishop himself; what is necessa­rily hence to be inferr'd, I'le here again give in the words of our always to be reverenced Mr. Herbert Thorndike, of the Laws of the Church, Cap. Ʋlt. Pag. 394. ‘Neither is the Publishing Erastus his Book against Excom­munication at London to be drawn into the like Consequence, that those who allow'd and procur'd it, allow'd the substance of what he maintain'd, so long as a sufficient Reason is to be rendred for it otherwise: for at such time as the Presbyterian Pretences were so hot under Queen Elizabeth, it is no marvel if it was thought to shew England how they prevail'd at home; first, because he hath advanced such Arguments as are re­ally effectual against them, which are not yet, nor never will be, answered by them, though void of the Positive Truth, which ought to take place instead of their Mistakes, [Page 458] and besides, because at such times as Popes did what them listed in England, it would have been to the purpose to shew the English how Machiavel observes they were hamper'd at home, and for the like Reason when the Geneva Platform was cried up with such Zeal here, it was not amiss to shew the World how it was esteem'd under their own Noses in the Cantons and the Pala­tinate.’

§. XVII I am now to shew the concurrency of our Doctors in the Church, and who still go a­long with me and say the same thing, that Church Power, as such, is not from the Ci­vil Magistrate, and his supremacy in all Cau­ses and over all Persons infers it not, an in­duction would be too numerous, the Parti­culars being so many. I'le only instance in two, the one is Thomas Bilson then Warden of Winchester and afterward Bishop there, in his Book entituled, The true difference between Christian Subjection, and un-christian Rebelli­on, perused and allowed by publick Autori­ty and dedicated to Queen Elizabeth, and for writing of which he had his Bishoprick; the other is Robert Sanderson, then the King's Professor at Oxford, and after Bishop of Lin­colne, in his Book called, Episcopacie (as establed by Law in England) not prejudicial to the Regal Power, written in the time of the long Parliament by the special Command of King Charles the I. but not published by rea­son of the Iniquity and Confusion of the Times, and since printed and dedicated to our present gracious Soveraign King Charles II. two Divines, as they flourished in our [Page 459] Church at a great distance of time from one another; so are they at as great distance for their Worth and Merit, beyond the genera­lity of the Divines of their times, and by which, as we have the advantage of their greater Autority as to themselves, to which add, That they acted herein as publick Per­sons, by Autority appointed to write in the Name of the Church of England, and in such Cases Men generally are more careful how they vent their own private Niceties and Conceptions, so also have we a farther benefit hereby, that this was and is the con­tinued constant Doctrine of our Church and Church-Men, from Queen Elizabeth to King Charles II.

Bishop Bilson thus speaks, part. 2d. pag. §. XVIII 124. printed at Oxford. ‘It is one thing who may command for truth, and another who shall direct unto truth. We say Prin­ces may command for Truth, and punish the refusers: this no Bishop may challenge, but only the Prince that beareth the Sword, no Prelate has Autority from Christ to compel private Men, much less Princes, but only to teach and instruct them, these two Points we stand on, pag. 125. 126. he tells the Jesuite, the Prince is Supreme to establish those things Christ has command­ed;’ and so he all along shews it the design of the Oath of Supremacy, against the pre­tended outward Jurisdiction of the Pope, claiming, as Christ's Vicar on Earth, a coer­cive Power in order to spiritual things, over the Persons of all Christians whatsoe­ver, whose Subjects soever, and in whatsoever [Page 460] Causes, even our Kings themselves. And ‘that it is no more thence to be inferr'd, that Princes, because supreme Governors over all Persons in all Causes, are therefore su­preme Judges of Faith, Deciders of Con­troversies, Interpreters of Scripture, Ap­pointers of Sacraments, Devisers of Cere­monies, and what not? then if it should be inferr'd, Princes are supreme Gover­nors in all Corporal things and causes, ergo, they are supreme Guiders of Grammar, Moderators of Logique, Directors of Rheto­rick, Appointers of Musick, Prescribers of Medicines, Resolvers of all Doubts, and Judges of all Matters incident any wayes to reason, art or action. We confess them to be supreme Governors of their Realms and Dominions, and that in all Spiritual things and causes, not of all Spiritual things and causes, we make them not Governors of the Things themselves, but of their Subjects: we confess that her Highness is the only Governor of this Realm, the Word Go­vernor doth sever the Magistrate from the Minister, and sheweth a manifest difference between their Office, for Bishops be no Governors of Countries, Princes be; these bear the Sword to reward and punish, those do not, pag. 127. They have several Com­missions which God signed, those to dis­pense the Word and Sacraments, these to prescribe by their Laws, and punish by the Sword, such as resist them, within their Dominions, pag. 128. That no Clergy-Man, by God's Law, can challenge an ex­emption from earthly Powers, pag, 129. [Page 461] Princes have full Power to forbid, prevent and punish in all their Subjects, be they Lay-Men, Clerks or Bishops, not only Murders, Thefts, Adulteries, Perjuries and such like Breaches, of the second table; but also Schisms, Heresies, Idolatries, and all other Offences against the first Table, pertaining only to the Service of God and Matters of Religion, pag. 130. as the Kings of Israel did, who are the Christian Princes exam­ple, pag. 132. and it is the duty of Christi­an Kings to compel from Heresies and Schisms to the confession of the truth, con­sent of Prayer and Communion of the Lord's Table, to compel Hereticks and Schismaticks, to repress Schism and Here­sie with their princely Power, which they receive from above, chiefly to maintain God's glory, by the causing the Bands of Virtue to be preserved in the Church, and the Rules of Faith observed, pag. 133. this is the Prince's charge, to see the Law of God fully executed, his Son rightly served, his Spouse safely nursed, his House timely filled, his Enemies duely punished; and he tells the Jesuite, if he grants this, he will ask no more. And these the causes and things that be Spiritual as well as Tempo­ral, the Princes power and charge doth reach unto, or in the words of St. Austin, that Princes may command that which is good, and prohibit that which is evil with­in their Kingdoms, not in Civil Affairs on­ly, but in Matters that concern divine Re­ligion.’ Cont. Crescon. l. 3. c. 51. pag. 134. to page 145. and this, or power of the like [Page 462] nature, was what was claimed and used in causes Ecclesiastical, which he proves thoughout the Church Historians, Fathers and Imperial Laws, thus declaring, assenting to and practising, pag. 146. ‘If by the Church you mean the Precepts and Promises, Gifts and Graces of God preached in the Church, and poured on the Church, Princes must humbly obey them, and reverently receive them, as well as other private Men: so that Prophets, Apostles, Evangelists, and all other builders of Christ's Church, as touching their Persons be subject to the Princes power: Mary, the word of God in their Mouths, and Seals of grace in their hands; because they are of God and not of themselves, they be far above the Prin­ces Calling and Regiment, and in those Cases, Kings and Queens, if they will be saved, must submit themselves to God's e­verlasting truth and testament, as well as the meanest of their People; and yet they are for all this Supreme, and subject only to God, as to outward Process, either from the Pope, or from any other Power.’ And so pag. 147. he brings in those Passages of Tertullian, Optatus and Chrysostom, à Deo se­cundum, solo Deo minorem, parem super terram non habet, &c. ‘the word Supreme was added to the Oath; for that the Bishop of Rome taketh upon him to command and depose Princes, as their lawful supreme Judg; to exclude this wicked presumption, we teach, that Princes be supreme Rulers, we mean subject to no superior Judg, to give a rea­son of their doings, but only to God. pag. [Page 463] 164, 165, 166.’ it must be confessed he speaks not home, as might be required: when ex­plaining how Kings, as well as other Chri­stians, are comprized under the duty of o­beying their Rulers, and to be subject unto them, &c. surely there is a true real obedience due even from Princes to Church-Officers, and their Power devolved from Christ, and this learned Man seems here, and in other places, not to be rescued from that common prejudice and possession seized upon too ma­ny, and all along continued, upon casting of the Popes Superiority here in England: that there can be no Church-Power at all, uni­versally obliging and requiring obedience: but what implyes and infers corporal bodi­ly subjection, a change in Seculars: 'tis this puts him upon that great mistake, that the Pastors of the Church, are not influenced by the Kingly power of Christ; and what is re­gal in him, is given to the Civil Magistrate, and who only succeed him in that Office, (perpetual Government of the Church cap. 10.) and Arch-bishop Bancroft confounding these two Powers, gives Beza and Cartwright as much advantage in that Particular, as their Disciples and Followers can now really wish; and because they say, that Christ as a King prescribed the form of Ecclesiastical Government being a King, the head of the Church, doth ad­minister his Kingdom per legitime vocatos pa­stores, by Pastors lawfully called; he runs them upon this absurdity, that their Autority must be without any controul. The Pastors must be all of them Emperors, the Doctors Kings, the El­ders Dukes, and the Deacons Lords of the Trea­sury, [Page 464] &c.] survey of the holy pretended dis­cipline, &c. cap 24.] and yet after all 'tis mostly Name [...] and Titles that occasions this or the accidental pressing an argument, as there will be occasion to consider anon; and Bishop Bilson goes on, and acknowledges all in effect, only Bishops and Pastors are left out, and tells us, ‘That the Church may be Superior, and yet the Pope subject to Princes, Princes be Supreme and the Church their Superior, the Scriptures be superior to Princes, and yet Princes supreme, the Sacrament be like­wise above them, and yet that hindreth not their Supremacy; Truth, Grace, Faith Pray­er and other Ghostly Virtues, be higher than all earthly States, and all this notwith­standing, Princes may be supreme Govern­ors of their Countries, and which, though in over abating Terms, and with too scrupu­lous a fear, where no fear ought to be, de­clares as fully as can be, the thing it self, viz.’ That Princes are to be subject to the Govern­ment in the Church settled by Christ in its Bishops and Pastors, and which both as a Pro­phet, a Priest and a King, he derives unto them. Church-Officers have a Power unde­rived, and independent to the Crown, only 'tis ill worded by the Warden, Things, Powers, Gifts, Virtues, &c. as standing and settled on Earth, and not invested in Persons, can real­ly be of no force and command at all, or ra­ther, and which at last will amount to the same, will be what every one shall please to make them; and the Prince will have as ma­ny Supremes, as are pretenders to these Gifts of the Spirit, and which will be enough, as [Page 465] experience taught us: this only then can be meant by these Circumlocutions, and why it might not have been spoken in down-right terms, I cannot imagine; that the Bishops and Pastors of the Church, with the Bible put in­to their hands, as it is at their Ordination, with full autority given for the Offices mini­sterial, have a real Power and are truly Ru­lers in the Church, have a Supremacy and Su­periority peculiarly theirs, and all that will come to Heaven, must come under this Mi­nistry or Government, it's jurisdiction and discipline; be they Princes or Subjects on Earth, or what ever worldly Government they are possessed of, unless he'l say, every Man hath these Ghostly Virtues, which can urge a Text of Scripture, and which cannot be con­ceived of him; and to this purpose he goes farther, pag. 167, 168. ‘Though the Mem­bers of the Church be subject and obedi­ent to Princes; yet the things contained in the Church, and bestowed on the Church by God himself, I mean the light of his Word, the working of his Sacraments, the gifts of his Grace, and fruits of his Spirit, be far superior to all Princes;’ The plain meaning of which, can be but this. Cer­tain separate Persons invested by God, be­yond Christians at large, with such Gifts and Graces, the Bishops and Pastors of the Church; and in which respect a good Em­peror is within the Church and not above it, as St. Ambrose is to this purpose here quoted by him, pag. 171. ‘You must distinguish the things proposed in the Church, from the Persons that were Members of the [Page 466] Church; the Persons both Lay-Men and Clerks by God's Law were the Princes Sub­jects, the things comprized in the Church, and by God himself committed to the Church; because they were Gods, could be subject to the Power and Will of no mortal Creature, Pope nor Prince; the Prince is above the Persons of the Church, not above things in the Church, pag. 173. 176. 178. you know we do not make the Prince Judg of Faith; we confess Princes to be no Judges of Faith, but we do not encourage Princes themselves to be Judges of Faith: but only we wish them to di­scern betwixt truth and error, which eve­ry private Man must do, that is a Christi­an, pag. 174, 175, 176. he approves of Ambrose's Answer to Valentinian, that is, was stout, but lawful, constant but Christi­an, when he refused to give up his Church to the Arians, denied the Emperor's power over truth, and to determine in Doctrines:’ The Emperor might force him out, if he plea­sed, neither might he resist the force, his Weapons being only Prayers and Tears; but the truth must not yield up to him, and he give his consent or seem to do it, by his own departure, that the Arian Doctrine be there preached, this was not then thought an Affront to the Magistrate and Law, nor had St. Ambrose a Commission immediate from Hea­ven and abetted with Miracles, or was he judg­ed a hypocrite in so doing, because he did not go and preach the Cause against Arius amongst the Goths and Vandals, who sub­scribed to his Creed, at their receiving [Page 467] Christianity, though Mr. Dean of Canterbury tells us, he that pleads Conscience and prea­ches it in England, and does not go and preach it also in Turkey, is guilty of gross hy­pocrisie, pag. 203, 213. ‘We do not make them Judges and Deciders of Truth, but Receivers and Establishers of it, we say Princes be only Governors, that is, higher Powers, ordain'd of God, and bearing the Sword, with lawful and publick Autority to command for truth, to prohibit, and with the Sword punish Errors, and all o­ther Ecclesiastical Disorders, as well as Temporal, within their Realms; that as all their Subjects, Bishops and others must o­bey them, commanding what is good in Matters of Religion, and endure them with patience, when they take part with Error. So they, their Swords and Scopters be not subject to the Popes Tribunal, neither hath he by the Law of God, or by the Canons of the Church, any Power or Pre-eminence to re­verse their Doings nor depose their Per­sons: and for this Cause we confess Prin­ces within their Territories, to be supreme, that is, not under the Popes jurisdiction, neither to be commanded nor displaced at his pleasure, pag. 215, 216. There be two Parts of our Assertion. The first avouching that Princes may command for Truth and abolish Error. The next that Princes be Supreme, i. e. not subject to the Popes ju­dicial Process, to be cited, suspended, de­posed at his beck. The Word Supreme ever was, and is defended by us, to make Princes free from the wrongful and usurp­ed [Page 468] Jurisdiction which the Pope claimeth o­ver them, pag. 217. 219. Bishops have their Autority to preach and administer the Sacra­ments, not from the Prince, but Christ him­self—only the Prince giveth them pub­lick liberty without let or disturbance to do what Christ hath commanded them, he no more conferreth that Power and Functi­on than he conferreth Life and Breath, when he permitteth to live and breath, when he does not destroy the life of his Subjects. That Princes may prescribe what Faith they list, what Service of God they please, what form of Administring the Sa­craments they think best, is no part of our thoughts, nor point of our Doctrine, for external Power and Autority to compel and punish, which is the Point we stand upon, God hath preferr'd the Prince be­fore the Priest, pag. 223. touching the Re­giment of their own Persons and Lives, Princes owe the very same Reverence and Obedience to the Word and Sacraments, that every private Man doth: and if any Prince would be baptized, or approach the Lord's Table, with manifest shew of un­belief or irrepentance, the Minister is bound freely to speak, or rather to lay down his life at the Princes feet, than to let the King of Kings to be provoked, the Mysteries to be defiled, his own Soul and the Princes endanger'd, for lack of oft and earnest Admonition, pag. 226. by Governors we do not mean Moderators, Prescribers, Directors, Inventers, or Authors of these things, but Rulers or Magistrates, bearing [Page 469] the Sword, to permit and defend that which Christ himself first appointed and ordained, and with lawful force to disturb the Despi­sers of his lawful Will and Testament. Now what inconvenience is this, if we say that Princes as publick Magistrates, may give freedom, protection and assistance to the preaching of the Word, ministring of the Sacraments, and right using of the Keys, and not fetch license from Rome? pag. 236. Princes have no right to call and confirm Preachers, but to receive such as be sent of God, and give them liberty for their prea­ching, and security for their Persons, and if Princes refuse so to do, God's Labourers must go forward with that which is com­manded them from Heaven, not by distur­bing Princes from their Thrones, nor in­vading their Realms, but by mildly sub­mitting themselves to the Powers on Earth, and meekly suffering, for the defence of the truth, what they shall inflict.’ A private liber­ty and exercise of their own Conscience and Religion was not then thought enough, if the Religion of a Nation be false, and though auto­rity do abet it, nor would the Autority in Queen Elizabeth's days have own'd that Per­son, asserting and maintaining of it, though not stubbornly irreligious; but only wanting information in so notoriously a known case of practice, pag. 238. ‘In all spiritual Things and Causes Princes only bear the Sword, i. e. have publick Autority to receive, esta­blish and defend all Points and Parts of Christian Doctrine and Discipline within their Realms, and without their help, tho [Page 470] the Faith and Canons of Christ's Church may be privately professed and observed of such as be willing, yet they cannot be ge­nerally planted or settled in any Kingdom, nor urged by publick Laws and external Punishments on such as refuse, but by their consents that bear the Sword. This is that we say, refel it if you can, pag. 252. to de­vise new Rites and Ceremonies for the Church, is not the Princes vocation, but to receive and allow such as the Scripture and Canons commend, and such as the Bi­shops and Pastors on the Place shall advise, not infringing the Scripture or Canons, and so for all other Ecclesiastical Things and Causes: Princes be neither the Devisers nor Directors of them, but the Confirmers and Establishers of that which is good, and Displacers and Revengers of that which is Evil, which power we say they have in all things be they Spiritual, Eccle­siastical or Temporal; the Abuse of Excom­munication in the Priest, and contempt of it in the People; Princes may punish, ex­communicate they may not, for so much of the Keys, are no part of their Charge, pag. 256. The Prince is in Ecclesiastical Disci­pline to receive and stablish such Rules and Orders as the Scripture and Canons shall decide to be needful and healthful for the Church of God in their Kingdoms.’ It is the Objection indeed and undue conse­quence the Church of Rome makes against us, and the Oath of Supremacy, and which is urged by Philander in this Dialogue be­twixt him and Theophilus, or betwixt the Chri­stian [Page 471] and the Jesuite, pag. 124, 125. ‘That we will have our Faith and Salvation to hang on the Princes Will and Laws, that there can be imagined no nearer way to Religion than to believe what our temporal Lord and Master list, in the Oath we make Princes the only supreme Governors of all Persons in all Causes, as well spiritual as temporal, utterly renouncing all foreign Jurisdictions, Superiorities and Autorities; upon which Words mark what an horrible Confusion of all Faith and Religion ensu­eth; if Princes be the only Governors in Ecclesiastical Matters, then in vain did the Holy Ghost appoint Pastors and Bishops to govern the Church: if they be Supreme, then they are superior to Christ himself, and in effect Christ's Masters: if in all Things and Causes spiritual, than they may prescribe to the Priests and Bishops what to preach, which way to worship and serve God, how, in what Form to minister the Sacraments, and generally how Men shall be governed in Soul; if all foreign Jurisdiction must be renounced, then Christ and his A­postles, (because they were and are For­reigners) have no Jurisdiction nor Autori­ty over England.’ But this is what only the ill Nature and Malice of our Adversaries would have us to believe and assert, and give out to the World we do; 'tis what is, and all along has been repell'd with scorn and indignation both by our Princes in their single Persons, and in their Laws in Parlia­ment: and though some of our Divines have wished the Oath had been more cauti­ously [Page 472] Penn'd, and think it lies more open to little obvious Inferences of this nature than it needs, and which amuse the unwary less discerning Reader, yet all own and defend it as to the substance and design and intent of it, and which is throughly and sufficient­ly done by the learned Warden in this Trea­tise, as appears by this Specimen or shorter account is now given of it, and he that per­uses the whole Treatise will find more, and John Tillotson Doctor in Divinity and Dean of Canterbury, is, if not the only, yet one professed conforming Divine in our Church, that publickly from the both Pulpit and Press, has given the Romanist so much ground really to believe we are such, as they on purpose to abuse us and delude others, give it out we are, and complyes so far with their Objection and Calumny just now recited, as by Philander drawn up against us, gives so much of Force and Autority to it.

§. XIX BISHOP Sanderson in his Treatise now mentioned has a different task from Bishop Bilson, the one was to vindicate the Prince, that he invades not the Church, the other the Bishops or Church that from usurping on the Prince. Bishop Sanderson among many o­ther things urged by him, and as his Sub­ject requires, is express in these Particulars, pag. 121. ‘That there is a supreme Eccle­siastical Power, which by the Law of the Land is established, and by the Doctrine of our Church acknowledged to be inherent in the Church, pag. 23. That regal and Episcopal Power, are two Powers of quite [Page 473] different kinds: and such as considered pure­ly in those things which are proper and as­sential to either, have no mutual relation unto or dependance upon each other, nei­ther hath either of them to do with the o­ther, the one of them being purely spiri­tual and internal, the other external and temporal: albeit in regard of the Persons that are to exercise them, or some acciden­tal Circumstances appertaining to the ex­ercise thereof, it may happen the one to be some wayes helpful or prejudicial to the other, pag. 41. that the derivation of any Power from God, doth not necessarily infer the non-subjection of the Persons in whom that Power resideth to all other Men; for doubtless the power that Fathers have o­ver their Children, Husbands over their Wives, Masters over their Servants is from Heaven, of God and not of Men, yet are Parents, Husbands, Masters in the exercise of their several respective Powers, subject to the Power, Jurisdiction and Laws of their lawful Soveraigns, pag. 44. The King doth not challenge to himself, as belonging to him, by virtue of his Supremacy Eccle­siastical, the Power of ordaining Ministers, excommunicating scandalous Offenders, the power of Preaching, adminstring Sacra­ments, &c. and yet doth the King by vir­tue of that Supremacy, challenge a Power as belonging to him in the right of his Crown to make Laws, concerning Preach­ing administring the Sacraments, ordina­tion of Ministers, and other Acts belong­ing to the Function of a Priest,’ pag. 69, 70, [Page 474] 71. it is the peculiar reason he gives in be­half of the Bishops, for not using the King's Name in their Process, &c. in the Ecclesia­stical Courts (the occasion of the whole dis­course) and which cannot be given for the Judges of any other Courts, from the diffe­rent nature and kind of their several respe­ctive Jurisdictions, which is, ‘That the Sum­mons and other Proceedings and Acts in the Ecclesiastical Courts, are for the most part in order to the Ecclesiastical Censures and Sentences of Excommunications, &c. the passing of which Sentences and others of the like kind, being a part of the Power of the Keys, which our Lord Jesus Christ thought sit to leave in the hands of the A­postles and their Successors, and not in the hands of Lay-Men: The Kings of England never challenged to belong to themselves but left the exercise of that Power entire­ly to the Bishops, as the lawful Successors of the Apostles and Inheritors of their Pow­er, the regulating and ordering of that Power in sundry Circumstances concerning the outward exercise thereof in foro exteruo, the Godly Kings of England have thought to belong unto them, as in the Right of their Crown; and have accordingly made Laws concerning the same, even as they have done also concerning other Matters appertaining to Religion and the Worship of God; but the substance of that Power, and the Function thereof, as they saw it altogether to be improper to their Office and Calling; so they never pretended or laid any claim thereunto, but on the con­trary [Page 475] renounced all claim, to any such Power or Autority.’ And for Episcopacy it self, the Bishop sets down his opinion in a Postscript to the Reader; the words are these, ‘My opinion is, That Episcopal Govern­ment is not to be derived merely from Apo­stolical Practice or Institution; but that it is originally founded in the Person and Of­fice of the Messiah, our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ; who being sent by his Heavenly Father to be The great Apostle, [Heb. 3.1.] Bishop and Pastor [1 Pet. 2.25.] of his Church, and anointed to that Office imme­diately after his Baptism by John, with Power and the Holy Ghost, [ Acts 10.37, 38.] descending then upon him in a bodily shape [ Luk. 3.22.] did afterwards, before his Ascension into Heaven, send and impower his holy Apostles (giving them the Holy Ghost likewise as his Father had given him) in like manner as his Father had before sent him, [ Joh. 20.21.] to exercise the same Apostolical, Episcopal and Pastoral office for the Ordering and Governing of his Church until his coming again, and so the same office to continue in them and their Successors unto the Worlds end [ Mat. 28.18.20.] this I take to be so clear from these and other like Texts of Scripture, that if they shall be diligently compar'd together, both between themselves, and with the fol­lowing Practice of all the Churches of Christ, as well in the Apostles times, as in the pu­rest and Primitive time nearest thereunto, there will be left a little cause why any man should doubt thereof.’

[Page 476] §. XX AND now I have done, only Mr. Selden is once more to be encountred with, who ap­pears against all this, and says, that the Do­ctors of our Church are quite of a different Judgment, and have declared the same to the World in their Writings, De Syned. l. 1. cap. 10. pag. 424, 425. As the two Univer­sities at once, Published in the Reign of Hen­ry VIII. 1534. called Opus eximium de vera differentia Regiae Potestatis & Ecclesiasticae, & quae sit ipsa veritas, & virtus utrius (que) Stephen Gardiner Bishop of Winchester, in an Oration de vera Obedientia, Joannes Bekinsau, de Su­premo & absoluto regis Imperio, with abun­dance more which he tells us, was to have been Printed in King Jame's days, but the Printer was in the blame. The Manuscripts in the Cottonian Library, where an account is given of Henry VIII. entrance upon the Re­formation 1540. and the Question among others, is, Ʋtrùm Episcopus aut Presbyter pos­sit Excommunicare, & ob quaenam delicta, & utrum ii soli possint, & jure divino, whether the Bishop or the Presbyter can Excommu­nicate, and for what Offences, and whether they alone can do it, by Divine Right? and about which great Divines were distracted in their Opinions, but the Bishop of Hereford, St. David, Westminster, Dr. Day, Curwin, Laighton, Cox, Symons, say that Lay-men may Excommunicate, if they be appointed by the high Ruler, or the King; and all those Wri­tings in every Bodies hands, De primatu regio, de potestate Papae & Regiâ, against Bellarmine, Tortus, Becan. Eudemon Joannes, Suarez, &c. in the time of King James, and whose Au­thors [Page 477] were Bishop Andrews, Bishop Bucke­ridge, Dr. Collings, Bishop Carlton, &c. and, in which three first Mr. Selden instances; a great appearance of Adversaries and conside­rable withal, and did not Mr. Selden give in the Catalogue, whose unfaithfulness and im­posings I have so oft experienced in this kind, would be much more terrible in reality, than they at first look appear; incouraged there­fore by former success, I'le encounter him once more, and undertake an Examination of so many of them as I have by me, and it is very pardonable if I have not all; we that live remote in the Countrey, and but poor Vi­cars there, have not the advantage of Sir Ro­bert Cotton's Library, cannot attend Auctions, or but common Booksellers Shops, and have not Money to imploy others, especially for the obtaining such Authors as these, most of which are out of Print, and some very rarely to be had by any; and I am the more encou­raged to the search, just now finding, in that Book of Bishop Sanderson's, I had so lately occasion to make use of, some of these Au­thors made use of on the contrary side; as those, who by the occasion of the title of Supreme Head, our Church being charged with giving to the Prince, the Power, Auto­rity, and Offices of the Priest openly disavow and disclaim it; and I think I may as soon rely upon Bishop Sanderson's report, as Mr. Sel­den's, his skill as Divine, and Integrity as a Christian, can be no ways below him, even in the Judgment of Mr. Selden's Friends.

THE Opus eximium de verâ differentiâ, &c. §. XXXI comes first; the work he says of the two Uni­versities, [Page 478] I do not know why the Universities are entitled to it, but upon Mr. Selden's re­port, for this time, will grant it readily, be­cause the Autority how great soever, is really on my side; nor does it answer any thing at all of Mr. Selden's design in producing of it. The first Part is, De potestate Ecclesiasticâ, and is wholly levelled at the Power of the Pope, and discovers his Usurpations over the Chri­stian both Kingdoms and Bishops; that his pretended both Spiritual and Temporal Plea has no ground either on the Scriptures, or Fathers; for it is altogether begged and sandy. I cannot so much commend the clear­ness of it, when discoursing of Church-Power, as in it self, and purely in the Donation, and which he allows and defends, he appearing not to have the true Notion of Church-Laws, and stumbles at that so usual block, that all Laws must be outwardly Coercive, or they cannot be call'd Laws, and so can be only in the Prince, whom he well enough proves to have alone that Power, and what he allows, the Church, is to make Canons, i. e. rules to be receiv'd only by those that are willing; but not Laws which enforce, with more to this purpose, something too crudely, and which the then present Age will plead something; for, Confirmant quidem praedicta potestatem Ec­clesiasticam, sed Dominum regant, tribuunt au­toritatem non jurisdictionem admonere, hortari, consolari, deprecari, docere, praedicare, Sacra­menta ministrare, cum charitate arguere, in­crepare, obsecrare, certissimis Dei promissis spem in Deo augere, gravibus Scripturarum commi­nationibus a vitiis deterrere, eorum sit Pro­prium [Page 479] qui Apostolis succedunt, & quibus etiam dictum est, quorum remiseritis peccata, &c. Le­ges autem, poenae, judicia, coerciones, sententiae, & caetera hujusmodi, Caesarum, & Regum, & aliarum Potestatum; but surely all these are Laws too, and have real Penalties, if our Sa­viour himself be a Law-giver, and have Au­tority, and do oblige the unwilling, only they break in sunder the bonds of Duty, on whose Truth, these their Admonitions, In­crepations, &c. are to be founded, by whose Virtue the Sacraments have their Influence, and the Power of retaining is executed, un­less the Pains of Hell are only painted or have no force, because not inflicted so soon as denounced: there is a Dominion sure goes along with Christ's Kingdom too, accompa­nying his Ordinances, only 'tis not by the Rules, and with the Consequents of the other Jurisdictions of the World, and on this ac­count Men have been so unwary as not to di­scern it, to speak against it, or unwilling to speak plainly out concerning it, a mistake has been observed in others, and 'tis here pretty aged, but 'tis most sure and certain this, 'tis most plain and conspicuous, the whether Pote­stas or dominium, autoritas or jurisdictio, as they distinguish, Power or Dominion, Autority or Ju­risdiction, that is allow'd to be Ecclesiastical, is no where in the Treatise, attributed to Kings, to those that have Secular Dominion, this is only eorum qui Apostolis succedunt, theirs that succeed the Apostles. The second Part is, De potestate Regiâ, where first the Divine Right of Kings is asserted, and then their Power in the Church, or over-spiritual things, [Page 480] where their Right of Investiture is declared from Gen. 47. and the Priests received their Benefices from them, as also over the Power and Persons of the Priests, to Correct and Punish them, to whom the Priests are to pay Tribute, and this all along from the Exam­ples of the Kings of Israel, from our Saviour, from St. Peter, this contrary to the practice of the Pope, who claims these Powers and Advantages to himself, and in his own Power & Person executes them; 'tis the Princes Pro­vince assign'd him in the Scripture to Punish and Coerce, to enforce Penance and Restitu­tion, and that evil-doers be cut off according to St. Paul, to prohibit and smite such as re­fuse to serve God according to the Priests instruction, as did Hezekiah to the Worship­pers in the Groves and high places, destroy­ing them, as did the King of Nineveh compelling the whole City to Repentance, forbidding for the future by terrible Laws, as did Nebucadnezzar; thus Justinian the Emperor gave Laws in Religion, concerning Faith and Hereticks; Churches, Bishops, and Church-men, Marriages, &c. and the same, and only this Power have the Kings of Eng­land assum'd to themselves, as he instances all along to the End of the Book; particularly in the Church Laws made by several Kings in this Island; as Canutus, Etheldred, Edgar, Edmund, Adelstan, Ive, Oswin, Egfrid, Wil­liam the Conqueror, in his Letters for the Endowment of Battle, with its Priviledges and Immunities, and which Mr. Selden makes use of to his purpose, though no ways serving it; for he only exempts the Church from [Page 481] Episcopal Visitation; but neither in this or any other of their Letters, Rules, Laws and Injunctions given to the Church, is any thing of Church-Power as such, own'd, claimed, appropriated, or but pretended to, by virtue of the Crown or Regal Power given them of God; but the two Powers are supposed di­stinct and disparates, and so in particular, King Edgar, in that his severer, correptive Monitory-Oration or Letter to the Clergy of England, their faults appearing then very no­torious, he at length thus addresses himself unto them, Ego Constantini, vos Petri, gla­dium habetis in manibus, jungawus dexteras, gladium gladio copulemus, ut ejiciantur extra castra leprosi, ut purgetur Sanctuarium Domi­ni, & ministrent in Templo silii Levi. I have the Sword of Constantine, you have the Sword of Peter in your hands, let us joyn right hands together, let us couple Sword with Sword, that the Leprous may be cast out of the Tents, and the Sanctuary of the Lord be Pur­ged, and the Sons of Levi minister in the Temple. And a little farther applying him­self to Dunstan the Archbishop, he tells him, Contempta sunt verba, veniendum est ad verbera, urguisti, obsecrasti, at (que) increpasti, Admoni­tions will do no more good, he must come to blows, and thereunto directs him to joyn with himself Edwald Bishop of Winchester, and Oswald Bishop of Worcester, Ʋt Episcopali Censurâ & regia Autoritate, turpiter viventes de Ecclesia ejiciantur, &c. by the Episcopal Censure and Regal Autority, the one assisting, but neither usurping upon, and destroying the other, these evil Men be cast out of the [Page 482] Church, and better placed in their rooms. So unlucky is Mr. Selden in this first Quo­tation.

§. XXII STEPHEN Bishop of Winchester in his Oration de vera Obedientiâ comes next, but brings nothing more of advantage to his side, and as it was Printed 1537. and but a year after the Opus eximium, &c. so does he as to the Substance copy after him, and asserts Henry VIII. Head of the Church, i. e. all Chri­stians within his Dominions, as were the Kings of Israel over all the Jews, i. e. to take care of their Morals, and see that they do their Duty to God, their Neighbour, and themselves; as Justinian gave Laws to the Church, and the Causes of Heresies were agitated with the Caesars and Princes that were Christians, and Laws made, promulga­ted and enjoyn'd execution, both by our Kings here in England, and also by others elsewhere, and particularly refers to that Oration of Edgar, just now mentioned; and adds farther out of it, how Dunstan that most holy and excellent Archbishop of Canterbury, submitted to this his Jurisdiction, and most willingly embraced that word of the King, Quâ se gladium gladio copulaturum edixit, ut dissoluti Ecclesiae mores, ad rectam vivendi nor­mam aptarentur; in which he engaged to joyn Sword to Sword, in order to the reducing the Church to a just and due way of living, meaning his Kingly Power to the Power of the Church, assisting the Spiritual with the Temporal Arm, for so the Bishop goes on and interprets these two Swords, and instan­ces in Excommunication, as a branch of that [Page 483] which is in the Churches hands, Altero gla­dio ad illud Pauli alludens, quem verbi ministri docendo & excommunicando exercent; altero praeminentiam ostendens jure divino concessam, cui omnes parere, quotquot Principis ditioni sub­jecti Ecclesiam constituunt, omnino debent; By one Sword alluding to that of Paul, which the Ministers of the Word exercise in Teaching and Excommunicating; by the other shewing that Pre-eminence granted by God, and to which all must obey, that, subjected to the Jurisdiction of a Prince, constitute a Church within his Dominions, and which two Pow­ers, though requiring different Obedience to divers Persons and Governors, as to the Bi­shops and Ministers of the Word of God, and to the King, are not at all adverse to and against one another; nor is any thing more detracted from or diminished thereby of the Obedience to the King, than when a Wife obeys her Husband, and a Servant his Master, by the general Command of God; and yet this is another of Mr. Selden's Autorities, which with his usual forehead he brings for the sense of the Doctors of our Church in the days of Henry VIII. and that the Church-Power is none at all but as derived from the Crown, and the Prince can Excommunicate I wonder how he omitted the Oration of Ri­chard Samson to this purpose, and at the same time, he being Dean of the Chappel to Hen­ry VIII and which would have made a [...] shew in his Margin, which is the main thing he aims at, it certainly came not to his hands, and it would have serv'd his turn as well as any of the other, there being in him not one [Page 484] word concerning the Power of the Church left by Christ, and he only asserts the King Supreme Head of the Church of England, the Church, as made of so many Persons, imply­ing a Body politick too, and they Subjects equally as Christians; nor could any man think that is but ordinarily considering, or designs not by Names, and Attempts, to de­ceive the unwary, but credulous World, and so is a Knave; that the two Universities at that time, or the eminenter of the Clergy at Court, should assert the Supremacy upon other terms, who in all Probability, were, a secretis, of his intimate Council, when de­signing for the Supremacy, and to be sure could not be ignorant of the King's Publick Declarations, and the Statute in Parliament; that in assuming of it, he did not design to in­fringe and invade any Power of the Church, and it least of all Vindicates Mr. Selden's inno­cency, in urging them, with whose Reputa­tion it is as little consistent, to say, he is ig­norant of the Statute Book, being by Profession a common Lawyer.

§. XXIII THE ancient Papers in the Cottonian Li­brary, seem to be the very same with that Ma­nuscript of Doctor Stillingfleet's, at least to be upon the same occasion, and which the Doctor publish'd in part in his Irenicum, and since, it seems he thought it not publick enough there, communicated it to his Friend Doctor Burnet, and who has Printed it at large in the Third Book of his History of the Reformation of the Church of England, and they seem to bear date about the same time, according to the Computation given by John [Page 485] Durell, since Dean of Windsor in his Ecclesiae Anglicanae Vindiciae, Cap. 28. placing it in the Days of Henry 8th. and so has Doctor Burnet since, Correcting Doctor Stillingfleet's Mistake, that it was in a Conference in the days of Edward VI. and entitling it to the Autority of the Reformation; and though Doctor Stil­ling­fleet only mistook in the time, yet both he and Burnet have joyn'd together in that which is worse, and have dealt unfaithfully in the transcribing of it, if we may believe the Dean of Windsor's account, who tells us, in his forementioned Vindiciae, out of the Manu­script it self, which Dr. Stillingfleet gave him the opportunity to peruse, that when Arch­bishop Cranmer had affirmed, 1. That it was not only in the Power of a Bishop to create a Pres­byter, but in the Power of a Prince; yea, in the Power of the very People to create a Presbyter. 2. That he who under the Gospel is designed a Bishop or Presbyter, wants no Consecration; that the Election and Designation is enough in order to it; and Leighton a Doctor of Divinity gave his Opinion in these words, 1. I suppose a Bishop according to Scripture to have Power from God, as his Minister of creating a Pres­byter, though he ought not to promote any to the Office of a Presbyter, or admit to any other Ecclesiastical Ministry in a Common-wealth, un­less the leave of the Prince be first had; but that any other have Power according to Scripture, I have neither read, nor learned by Example. 2. I suppose Consecration to be necessary as by imposition of hands, for so we are taught by the Examples of the Apostles; such says the Dean was Cranmer's Candor, and so great his love [Page 486] of Truth, he doubted not to yield to this Opinion of Leighton's, and this is plain in Doctor Stillingfleet's Manuscript, in which is to be seen Th. Cantuariensis, set with his own hand below Leighton's Name, in token of his Approbation of it, and of which both the Doctors have given no account to the World, being omitted in two Impressions. Why Do­ctor Stillingfleet did leave out this passage in his Irenicum 'tis plain, because it thwarts his particular design, and he had lost the advan­tage of so considerable a Name and Autority, as Cranmer's, before his most false Assertion, That Ordination is not appropriated to Bishops; and for which in that Treatise he so contends, it takes down somewhat of their Top-gallant. As I remember, somewhere in that Book, he expresses their solitary Power, he wondred no question with himself how at those years he could find out such a Book to present the World with, and indeed well he might, and when he had read so far as served his present turn, went no farther, otherwise he would have enquired also a little better into the time when this conference was, and not ob­truded it on the World, as done by the Au­tority of our Reformation; though 'tis agree­able enough with the following Testimonies of the Bishops and Doctors of our Church in the same point of Episcopacy, and which, to say no worse of them, are lame and imper­fect, as is here his account of the Manuscript. But what should move Doctor Burnet to omit it I cannot imagine; that it was not his purpose to leave Cranmer to Posterity, as ei­ther an Erastian or Independent, and of which [Page 487] he is justly to be suspected otherwise; this is plain from his own account of him, Lib. 3. Pag 289. where he tells us, ‘In Cranmer's Paper, relating to this very Conference, some singular Opinions of his about the Na­ture of Ecclesiastical Offices will be found; but as they are delivered by him with all possible Modesty; so they were not esta­blished as the Doctrine of the Church, but laid aside as particular Conceits of his own, and it seems that afterwards he changed his opinion;’ and having said this, why might he not have Printed out the whole Manu­script, and which is but the very same thing, only more satisfactory to the World, and the Doctor had dealt more clear and ingenuous in the Matter, nor is he quite to be acquitted from some little sinister end, and clawing therein a thing not to the advantage of an Historian; especially since he Printed out of another part of that Manuscript the Arch­bishops judgment so fully, with Eight other Bishops concerning the Supremacy, denying the Prince any Church-Power thereby, and which is peculiar only to those that are cho­sen and sent by Christ Jesus, as his Father sent him into the World, and invested him with it, and also in a Declaration of the Fun­ction and Divine Institution of Bishops and Priests, Subscribed by him, and the Arch­bishop of York, and Eleven Bishops, and Twenty Divines and Canonists; declaring that the Power of the Keys, and other Church Functions is formally distinct from the Power of the Sword, Printed in his Ad­denda, Num. 5. at the end of his History; [Page 488] and indeed that Archbishop Cranmer did so alter his Judgment, as the Dean of Windsor tells us he did, in Doctor Stillingfleet's Manu­script; there is Evidence sufficient from the alone Book of Ordination, and the Preface to it; which was composed and made publick by him, and others, to be sure some of them, these very Bishops and Doctors mentioned there, and by Mr. Selden, in his Cottonian Manuscript, it being done in the first year of King Edward's Reign, and where the Or­ders of Ministers wholly depend on the Apo­stles and their Institution; but when all is said and done that can be, such particular Conferences as these, if duly considered and in their Circumstances, can avail little for or against either Party, nor can Cranmer's Opinion, or any other Doctors be reported with Justice, out of any such their Papers. The greatest advantage the Reformation had in the days of King Henry VIII. was that eve­ry one had encouragement to think, and li­berty to offer, and in Conferences some must act the adverse part, and every thing must be stated, and proposed, and urged too, and though the opportunity and curiosity of some, did not do amiss in collecting and pre­serving such Discourses, yet I cannot but think it less Discretion in Printing and Pub­lishing them, and least of all, to say no worse, in urging them as the sense and judgment of our Reformers, and not to be endured, when in opposition to our received and established Church Articles, Laws, Rubricks and Book of Ordination, which and which alone, upon the full enquiry and debate, each Proposal [Page 489] and Objection, and which must be many, an­swered and satisfaction given, is to be con­cluded the sense of every particular Doctor; and admit the Conference had been, as Do­ctor Stillingfleet Mistook it, appointed by King Edward and his Council, and by Law, in or­der to the Reformation, and which was be­gan in that King's days, the Judgment of the Church of England was to have been repor­ted, not from the particular bandyings pro and con amongst them, or the draught or draughts of any one or more men, and which in their Season was useful, nay necessary, but from the joynt unanimous result of the whole, and which we are sure as to that particular of Church-Power and its Subject, ended and united in the Book of Ordination; nor upon a general account, can those Collections, whe­ther in the Cottonian, or any Library, be in any better repute among us, than any other, of all the Pamphlets, Models of Church and State Government, Attempts and Proposals, the late unhappy Revolutions in our King­dom gave occasion to, and produced, the Condition, as to Religion, being just such in King Henry VIII. days, as it was then; and the Autorities an Hundred years hence, if all shaked in a bag together, will be much at one too, every man contrived, said, proposed and wrote as his own either Fancy or Interest or Curiosity, or sometimes Reason prompted and directed him, and though they may make a Pleasant History, with much of diversion, yet little of the Sense and Autority of the Nation can be collected and urged from them.

[Page 490]I am now come to the last of Mr. Selden's §. XXIV Friends, and our supposed Adversaries, those general Tracts De Primatu Regio, & de pote­state Papae & regiâ adversus Bellarminos, Tor­tos, Becanos, Eudemon Joannes, Suaresius, &c. mostly in the days of King James, and which were wrote by Lancelot Bishop of Chichester, John Collins, and the Bishop of Rochester. The two last I have not by me, nor do I remem­ber I ever saw, nor is it of any concern whe­ther I have Bishop Andrews either, in order to the answering what is by Mr. Selden brought against him, any one that has but heard of that once flourishing Prelate in this Church, will easily grant him on our side, and much more must he that has read and conversed with his Works find him so; and indeed all that Mr. Selden brings out of him, and the other two, is really ours; so far as he reports them to have asserted, that the execution of all Ecclesiastical forensick Juris­diction, and by consquence, that of Excom­munication, receives measures, and is ruled by the King and his Laws, as Head and Mo­derator and Governor of the Church and Realm, and so it ought to be, whereas with us, the Prince and Realm is Christian, and the Church-censures are backed and suppor­ted by his Penal Laws in course annexed to and following them, the Prince cannot be supposed, so void of foresight, as to leave himself no Power of inspection in such Pro­ceedings, as thus to put his Power into ano­ther Man's hands, and who is not accounta­ble to him in the Execution. Thus the King's Autority is capable of being used against [Page 491] himself, and it must in course so happen, to his best Subjects 'tis that traiterous Position to be abhorr'd; and 'tis peculiarly provided that it be so, and publickly too, by the Laws of our Land, in the Act for Ʋniformity of Pub­lick Prayers, and it is a great deal more horri­ble in Church-Affairs, as more immediately entitling our Saviour therewith, the great abhorrer of all, and who we are sure renoun­ced all Pleas in dividing and disposing in Secu­lars; and did all the Power Bishops legally execute in this Kingdom, or in others that are Christian, belong to them as of Divine Right, or was it any other ways so devolved and sixed upon them, as thereby enabled, in an Arbitrary way of Proceeding, without the leave, or against the Power of the King with no respect to the Laws and Customs of the Realm, to put it in Execution, the Bishop and the King thus Independent, were also incon­sistent; any thing, or person, may and must be inroded and offer'd violence to, when the Bishop will, and the greatest worldly Punish­ments, next under Capital, whenever, or upon what Grounds soever, he is pleased to Excommunicate, be necessarily inflicted; this is Imperium cum Jove, to erect an Empire with­in an Empire, and no Governments thus di­vided and distributed, can stand, and I hear­tily wish such as upon these Considerations most readily detest it in the Bishop, would make their Reflexions in other Persons and Cases also; But if Mr. Selden mean, as he must do if he continue on the design of his Book, that Church-Power and Jurisdiction, as such, and coming from Christ, naked and void of [Page 492] all outward Secular Additions, and implies only the forfeiture as a Christian, with no one worldly inconvenience, no forfeitures of Personal outward Liberty or Estate, that the execution and force of this depends on the Prince, and Humane Pleasure, to temperate, restrain and abolish, nor is it duly exercised other ways, this is overthrown already throughout this Discourse, and I'le only add the Autority of Mr. Selden's mistaken Friend, but our real one, the great and most learned Bishop Andrews, who all along in those ve­ry Pages to which Mr. Selden in his Margin refers, asserts the quite contrary, and the Power of the Prince and the Priest are decla­red by him two distinct things, and not in Subordination; he tells us how God institu­ted in Israel a Kingdom and a Church, and which never coaluerunt in unum, procul se ha­buit Imperium ab Ecclesiâ, so came together by coalition, as to make one, but were still diverse and two things, had different Works and Offices; and thence concludes, Conjungi debent Regnum & Ecclesia, confundi non debent, they ought to be united, but not confused to­gether, and he reckons up the several Offices and Duties of the Prince, to take care of Re­ligion in general, to see that every Order do their Duties, to reprove, to correct and co­erce in order to it, Non licuisse tamen Davidi arcam contingere; so Tortus objects upon him, and to which he answers, Nec regi quidem nostro licet, nec ulli, aut Sacra administrare, aut attrectare quicquam, quod potestatis sit mere Sacerdotalis, ut sunt Leiturgiae, conciones, claves, Sacramenta, arcam figunt suo loco reges, attin­gant [Page 493] post illi, quos ea cura tangit, ex suscepto munere Ministerii sui. But it was not lawful for David to touch the Ark, neither is it lawful for our King, nor for any, either to administer holy things, or to attrectate any thing, which is meerly of the Sacerdotal Power, as are Leiturgies, Sermons, the Keys and Sacraments. Kings six the Ark in its place, those afterwards touch it, whose care it is, by the receiving the Office of their Ministry; and though Solomon's de­dication of the Temple implyes something extraordinary, yet he denies it to reach to any thing in the Temple, which is Sacerdotal, sed neque in iis quae sunt pontisicalis muneris regi jus facimus. We give the King a right to do no Office which is the Priests, semel autem habe sententiam nostram, it is a thing so often said by our Doctors, that he is a weary, ita coccyzare, of the Cuckow tone, and speaking it so over and over again, nos non regi potestatem tribuimus quam habere vo­luit Osias, solam illam quam Josias habuit, we do not give to our King the Power of O­sias, as Tortus says we do, but the Power a­lone of Josias all this, and more is; to be seen in Tortura Torti, from pag. 363 to pag. 370. nor is there any thing more on his side in the responsio ad Bellarminum, cap. 1. and to these he refers the Reader, so shameless is he in his Quotations, and he must first slat­ter himself into a belief that the pointing of his finger from the Margin is direction and autority enough, and supersedes all farther Inquiry. Nor is he less disingenuous in his dealings with the Bishop, when he there says [Page 494] that he corrected Grotius de sum. Potest. in Sacr. &c. for the Press, when Andrews o­ver-rul'd him that he printed it not, and it was at last but a posthumous Work. So that unless Arch-Bishop Whitgift be an Erastian, because Mr. Selden once in his Library at Lambeth, saw Erastus's Works neatly bound up in yellow Leather, with this Motto in Gold upon the out-side of it, Intus quam extra formosior, as he tells us, and 'tis his chief Argument de Syned. lib. 1. cap. 10. pag. 437. he is like to go without a Doctor in the Church of England on his side, for ought I know, or as he knew either, for he seldom misses a Name that bears but the likelyhood of an Autority; hav' y' any Work for a Coo­per, I remember makes it the serious part of that scandalous Libel to upbraid our Church and Church-men, that the Prince makes them Bishops and Presbyters, and their Religion is what the worldly Power pleases, with a deal of stuff to that purpose. I know not now where that Pamphlet is, and 'tis not worth searching after, though the Author might be a Doctor for ought I know. I am only sure he was not a Doctor of our Church. Or unless the Lord Falkland turn­ed Doctor, as he might deserve it, by the larger Character Mr. Dean of Canterbury gives of him, joyn'd with Mr. Chillingworth, as I remember in the Preface to his first Book of Sermons, and then Mr. Selden is se­cure of one of his side, and we of an adver­sary from within our selves: though he im­pleads us in a different way, owns it for our Judgment, and states it very well, abating [Page 495] some malicious Terms, and ranks it among those abundance more Grievances of the Na­tion, (and the placing this together with those other, is as great an honor he could have done us) that we have evidently labour'd to bring in an English, though not a Roman, Po­pery, equally absolute, a blind obedience of the People upon the Clergy, and the Clergy upon themselves, and inveighs against them alto­gether, according to the then zealous and modish way, in that very ill Speech of his to the House of Commons, 1641. I'le repeat part of it, as I find it transcribed and prin­ted by a very good friend of his, and one that seems to honor him, as much as Doctor Tillotson does.

‘Mr. Speaker, he is a great stranger in Is­rael, who knows not that this Kingdom hath long laboured under many and great Oppressions, both in Religion and Liber­ty, and his Acquaintance here is not great or his Ingenuity less, who doth not know and acknowledg, that a great, if not a prin­cipal Cause of both these, hath been some Bishops and their Adherents.’

‘Mr. Speaker, a little will serve to find them to have been the destruction of Uni­ty, under pretence of Uniformity, to have brought in Superstition and Scandal, under the Titles of Reverence and Decency, to have defiled our Churches, to have slackned the stictness of that Union which was for­merly betwixt us and those of our Religi­on beyond the Sea, an Action as unpolitick as ungodly.’

[Page 496] ‘As Sir Thomas Moor says of the Casu­ists, their business was not to keep Men from sinning, but to inform them, quàm prope ad peccatum sine peccato liceat accedere. So it seemed their Work (meaning the Prelates) was to try how much of a Papist might be brought in without Popery, and to destroy as much as they could of the Gospel, without bringing themselves into danger of being destroy'd by Law.’

‘Mr. Speaker, to go yet farther, some of them have so industriously labour'd to de­duce themselves from Rome, that they have given great suspicion, that in gratitude they desire to return thither, or at last to meet it half way. Some have evidently la­bour'd to bring in an English, though not a Roman Popery, I mean not the out-side of it only and dress of it, but equally ab­solute: a blind Obedience of the People upon the Clergy, and the Clergy upon themselves, and have opposed Papacy be­yond the Sea, that they might settle one beyond the Water; nay common fame is more than ordinarily false, if none of them have found a way to reconcile the Opini­ons of Rome to the Preferments of England, be so absolutely, directly and cordial Pa­pists, that it is all 1500 l per Annum, can do to keep them from confessing it.’

‘We shall find them to have both kindled and blown the common fire of both Nati­ons, to have both sent and maintained that Book of which the Author hath no doubt long since wished with Nero, Ʋtinam nesci­rem literas; and of which more than one [Page 497] Kingdom hath cause to wish, that when he writ that he had rather burn'd a Library, though of the value of Ptolemey's. We shall find them to have been the first and prin­cipal Author of the Breach, I will not say of, but since the Pacification at Barwick, we shall find them to have been almost sole Abetters of my Lord Strafford: whilst he was practising upon another Kingdom, that manner of Government he intended to settle in this, where he committed so many, so mighty and so manifest Enormi­ties, as the like have not been committed by any Governor in any Government since Verres left Sicily, and after they had call'd him over from being Deputy of Ireland, to be in a manner Deputy of England (all things here being govern'd by a Juntillo, and that Juntillo governed by him) to have as­sisted him in giving such Counsels, and the pursuing such Courses, as it is an hard and measuring Cast, whether they were more unwise, more unjust or more unfortunate, and which had infallibly been our destru­ction, if by the Grace of God, their share had not been as small in the subtilty of Serpents, as in the innocency of Doves.’

A pretty knick-knack of Speech-making every body must own it to be, but as to the occasion and matter of it, each line as evi­dently deserves a lash, and is as lyable to it; there appears only passion and prejudice, ran­cor and malice in the height, and truly scarce sense under some of the pretty cadencies and chiming Words; but not one dram of that incomparable reason Mr. Dean magnifies [Page 498] him for, and once saw in him, but for him to own it here, will not be, at least, conve­nient, could he find it out, as perhaps he may, though another cannot. All I shall say at present, is, and 'tis as mostly relating to this present discourse, how wonderfully the same Fate has still attended the Crown of England and the Church of England, the King and the Bishops of it, and the Power, the Institution and Autority of both as from Heaven and not of Man is still, if either of them, decried and run again at once and by the same Person; and ten to one it had not come into my mind, had not a Man of his own complexion in Loyalty (in the late life of Julian) told it the world, much to the honor of this great and loyal Lord, as he thinks, that the Doctrine of Dr. Manwa­ring's and Dr. Sibthorp's Sermons long before the War broke out, was as ridiculous to him, as it appears from this his Speech in 1641. was then the Autority and Actions of the Bishops, and the divine Right of Kings as well as the divine Right of the Church, in­dependent to the People, are both but Pulpit Law; that is in his admired most ingenious Expression, and which alone then confuted, and still confutes Doctor Manwaring, the prate and tattle of idle Church-men from the Pulpit, and the both King and Church fell at once and together, and which him­self particularly experienced at Newbery, when 'twas too late to help; what himself, by Speech-making and Scoffings had promo­ted, and Abner's Epitaph, seems in this re­spect exactly fitted for him, nor know I in [Page 499] what other terms his death could be lamen­ted better: had the Pulpit laws been more frequently made, more encouraged and exe­cuted, in teaching the Peoples dependency upon Kings and duties to them, that unnatu­ral Rebellion had never followed; had not those worst of Principles publisht in Scotland by Buchanan de jure regni apud Scotos, and Knox in his Appel. and Church-history, pla­cing both Church and Crown in Subordination to the People, come hither into England, and by their Country man the Lord Falkland, in the House of Commons, incouraged, and those now a-days mend the Matter bravely, that rescue us from the People, and put us under the Prince. Herein enlarge his Pre­rogative beyond his Progenitors, that he is uppermost in Religion, are zealous for him to be a Priest, but leave him as King in the hands he was before, and below the People; and thus in sight strike at both Monarchy and Religion at a blow, as is the Priest so is the King, to take their Measures and Prote­ction from others: a false Religion is to be obeyed if the Religion of a Nation, lest af­fronting Magistracy and Law, and every one may Petition and libel the Government that pleases, the Bible is put into the King's hand, and the Scepter taken out; the King may excommunicate, but he may not govern his People, and both Prince and Priest are in a pretty Condition; and the notorious contempt Church Power and Offices lye un­der at this day amongst us, is an evident Te­stimony of the mock Addition they design and contend for to his Crown; in that the [Page 500] Power Sacerdotal is with so much noise and bussle seated in him, 'tis only to ridicule both at once, and with the same Argument render them contemptible, nor can any in the course of things, as well as in common Experience, be found to give to Caesar the things which are Caesar's, but he that gives to Christ the things that are Christ's; No Bishop No King, is and will be a Maxime still, a first truth, and not to be gain-sayed.

§. XXV IT is to be confessed there are Passages in the Writings of some of the Principal of our Doctors in the days of Queen Elizabeth and King James, as Arch-Bishop Whitgift, Arch-Bishop Bancroft, Bishop Bilson, &c. that lean too much to the Erastian Way, or ra­ther by an incuriousness of Expression, do not give that account of Church Power, nor state it so clearly, as may be expected, and 'tis not impossible, where a design, to ren­der them as of the Party. Something of this nature has been observ'd already, in Bishop Bilson and Arch-Bishop Bancroft, and he that reads over the first Book de Politeia Ecclesia­sticà, cap. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. &c. wrote by Ro­bert Parker, and printed at Frankfort, 1616. and only reads him, will conclude them not only almost but altogether such; he was a Man vehement and of extremity of Spirit, and his business is in his whole three Books, to set and continue our Church against her self, o [...]e of her Members against another, and all of them opposite to Christ Jesus, ex­actly answering his Title, de Politeia Eccle­siastica Christiani & Hierarchica opposita, and indeed most that have appear'd since him a­gainst [Page 501] the Government of the Church, and with appearance of pertinency, have not on­ly sharpned, but borrowed their Weapons from this shop of the Philistines: it is their Ma­gazine and Store-house, as another Armory, like that of David's in Israel, wherein are Mille Clypei, all sorts of Weapons for these Mighty, and with which they have still made their Attempts, even Batteries and Breaches upon us. Our learned Doctor Pearson, since Lord Bishop of Chester, in his Vindiciae Epi­stolarum Ignatii, in his first Chapter or Pro­eme, there relates him to be, though not the first setter on foot and contriver of that unworthy, most shameful Design upon Igna­tius's, Epistles, in representing them spuri­ous and imposed on the World; and that not one of them was wrote by that most Ho­ly and Apostolical Martyr, whose name they bear; yet he was more bold, and went far­ther in the Attempt, than any one had done before him, and with whose Conjectures Dailee's dissertation is stuffed, and he may be said a principal Cause why it spread so far, and has been so successful to the great disadvantage of our common Christianity, from him or Dialee, or both, unless Blundel and Salmasius be added, and which are much the same thing, it is Doctor Stillingfleet tran­slates what he has on this Subject, in his Irenicum, and who may have the honor to be the first that made it English, for any other I have met with, and tells us in the Mother-Tongue, The story of Ignatius (as much as it is defended with his Epistles) doth not seem to be any of the most probable, cap. 6. [Page 502] Sect. 16. I have heard I confess of Doctor Owen's Preface to his Book of Perseverance, and then, to be sure, he is with abundance of honor, his second, and, to omit the other ill Adventures in that unlucky Book of parti­cular Forms of Church-Government, and which savour too much of Robert Parker's musty Vessel, the Doctor is beyond measure unfor­tunate, who having by a notorious Mistake urg'd the Autority of our whole Church re­presentative in King Edward VI day's, to a­vouch his most false Assertion. That Episco­pacy is not necessary and immutable. That the King's Majesty may appoint Bishops or not ap­point them, or appoint other Officers for the Go­vernment of the Church, cap. 8. When he goes on further, to prove this by the parti­cular Autorities of our Doctors since, as Whit­gift, Cozius Whitgift's Chancellor, Lowe, Hoo­ker, Bridges, &c. he is, if possible, more un­lucky yet, and his Mistake more shameful, he not only transcribes every Quotation out of Parker's second Book De politeia Ecclesia­stica, cap. 39.42. and the very Book, Page, Chapter, Section and Figures, stand all in Parker's Margin, as they are wrote in his Book, and which is no great Matter, but, and which is the harder Fate, he urges and appeals to them, as his Autority, that Epis­copacy is mutable and of but humane assig­nation, and which thing Parker all along there owns and declares, was not these Doctors Opinions, he upbraids and taunts them for asserting the contrary, as contradicting themselves, and putting Cheats upon others; because they believe Bishops by divine Right [Page 503] and perpetually obliging, 'tis his Objection up­on them, that their own Principles will not bear them out in it. This is the case, these Doctors assert over and over again, as they must do, if agreeing with our Church, and their own Subscriptions, that the Scriptures are not a full and perfect Rule for Disci­pline and Government, and there is still a Power in the Church to make Laws, as oc­casion offers, even to vary from Examples of Discipline and Government, which has there been practised. Parker thinks he has the advantage, and concludes upon them, that then the Government by Bishops is changea­ble also, and which is sounded only on Scrip­ture Example, and who reply, that though they can make Laws in some Cases, and al­ter them as occasion, yet in all they cannot: though some Examples in Scripture do not, yet others do necessarily oblige, and the Ex­amples they produce necessarily obliging are these. Imposition of Hands in Ordinations, that to impose Hands is appropriated to Bishops, as the Apostles Successors. The observation of the Lord's-Day. The institution of Metropoli­tans, &c. and this very account Parker him­self gives us, as to these Instances, and all which will readily appear to any one that reads over Parker, l. 2. cap. 39, 40, 41, 42. particularly cap. 42. Sect. 8. 9. and that con­sults farther than Titles and Margins. And that this Power of making Canons and Laws for the Government and Discipline of the Church, is one of the main Foundations of the Hierar­chy, and therefore Parker sets himself with might and main to oppose it. This will be [Page 504] yielded to Doctor Stillingfleet, 'twas this a­lone, by which the Courts Ecclesiastical kept them within some moderate Bounds; nor did they break out into Rebellion and Schism, till that Power was abated in the execution, and which made the Bishops so odious to them: but that Episcopacy it self is as Arbitrary, in its original, and occasionally only, as are many Church Laws, and in the Power of a­ny order of Persons, or any Person now up­on Earth, to alter or confirm it. This Parker by arguing would willingly infer upon these Doctors from their own Princi­ples, but acknowledges they did not own, contrary to their Principles, this Dr. Stil­lingfleet every ways mistakes and reports, out of Parker's ill gathered Conclusion and Objection, as their both Principles & Practice, and so every ways defames them; and I shall only propose it to the Doctors conside­ration, whether some satisfaction may not, ought not to be required of him, for the injury he has done to so many Worthies of our Church hereby. I can assure him, it has been long expected, and if it be not done suddenly, he may believe, the World ere it be much older, will be particularly disin­formed: at present I shall return to those Doctors mentioned in the beginning of this Section, and who are not yet freed from the Contumelies laid on them by Parker, as these are from his, though I do not question, but I shall equally vindicate both.

§ XXVI IT is an easie thing to make any Man's Writing, in a plausible shew to run thwart to and contradict themselves, the occasion [Page 505] and Circumstances not considered, and if particular Occurrencies be not abated for, the worst of Heresies will thus shelter them­selves under the best Autorities. How large­ly and frequently do the Ancient Fathers of the Church speak of the Powers and excel­lence of Nature and Reason, when disputing against the Gentiles, when Apologizing for and recommending to them the Christian Religion, Justin Martyr, Apol. 2. goes so far, as to say the wiser sort of the Greeks were Christians, such as Socrates, Heraclitus, &c. [...], &c. because living up to the Rules of Reason, but must not those be wide Arguings that say (and some have said it,) the Fathers thought the use of Reason alone able to direct and assist us for Heaven, when 'tis the coming of Christ in the Flesh, his additional super-natural Re­velations of Grace and Truth, those farther discoveries and assistances to Mankind, is the occasion and general subject of their Wri­tings, and a belief of which is that they en­deavor to bring the Greeks unto, to make e­vident and rational to all Men, when 'twas only the particular application of an Argu­ment they aim'd at, and in the design is most true, that every one so far as truly ra­tional, he is Christian, Christianity is no new thing nor strange. [...]. Whoso­ever pursues Justice and Honesty, and other commendable Actions suited to the universal, eternal Rules of Nature, is acceptable to God, by this both the Jews under the Law, and the Patriarchs and holy Men from the [Page 506] first Creation, through the knowledg of Christ were saved, as Justin Martyr disputes cum Tryphone Judeo, and Eusebius has a whole Chapter to this purpose, Eccl. Hist. l. 1. c. 4. Every one that is read in that History knows, that the great cry of the Arians against the Council of Nice was, they were Innovators, (and a licentious Pen has of late managed and pursued it afresh, Sandius hist. Enuclea­ta) as using Words, and bringing in Do­ctrines which were not either in Scripture, or in the Writings and Determinations of the ancient Doctors of the Church; when asserting and explaining the one substance, or eternal Generation of the Son of God: which though it be in part a great untruth, and both Athanasius Synod. Nicen. Cont. he­res. Arian. decreta, p. 277, 278. Ed. paris. et Ep. de Synod. Arimini et Seleuciae, p. 889. & Ep. ad ubique Orthodoxos, &c. p. 943. and Theodorit Eccl. hist. l. 1. c. 5. & 12. refer them to the Writings of the eminent Bi­shops and Doctors, who lived an hundred and twenty years before the Synod of Nice, and then used this Word Consubstantial in ex­plaining the Divinity of the Father and the Son, and 'tis what Sandius in effect confesses, only he thinks it for the dishonor of the Cause that all the Hereticks that were in the Church before Arius were Homousians, hist. Enucleat. l. 1. and which in truth is only this, the worst of Hereticks did not arrive to that height of impudence as to deny so received an acknowledgment in the universal Church. Yet what Athanasius replyes upon Arius himself ( Tom. 1. disputat. cum Ario [Page 507] pag. 134.) making the Objection is a bet­ter answer here, that what was in the Council asserted and declared, was alwaies in the Scriptures by way of consequence, and occasion was not given the Church, till the rise and spreading of that Heresie, for that particular and precise explication. He­resies and Novelties must be, and 'tis the work of Councils to detect and determine against them, but there would be mad work in the Church, should that go for Innovati­on, which an upstart Heresie forces the Church in new Terms to state and declare against, and explain themselves thereby; it must be declamed against, as defective in Au­tority and Precedents, because former Do­ctors had not sagacity enough, the very A­postles had not Spirit of Prophecy enough to anticipate the Fictions of every Brain; so to word it before-hand, that the particu­lar Heresie in its Nicety, must be antidated and pre-abide upon Record bassled and con­tradicted. He that reads over St. Jerome lib. 1. Cont. Jovinianum will find him there, so urging Chastity, as if Marriage it self was a sin, and which that Father never design'd, as his Opinion: and Dailee confesses that he only speaks comparatively, and is so to be understood, as do, and are to be, many more of the Fathers, cap. 5. de usu patrum, though he will not allow it him in other Cases, and when to serve his own particular Design of him, I mean as to his Judgment of Episco­pacy, and will have his Epistle ad Evagrium, and his Comments on Titus to the same pur­pose, to be absolute, and with no regard to [Page 508] those great, even just Provocatious from the Bishops, in preferring the Deacon before the Presbyters, who as he well argues, are of so much more Power and higher Order in the Church, as that a Bishop is oft call'd a Pres­byter in Scripture and Antiquity, when so injurious were the Bishops to the Presbyters, and so partial to the Deacons and indulgent, that the Deacons scorn'd the Presbyters Or­der, qui ignorantes humilitatem status sui, ul­tra Sacerdotes, hoc est, Presbyteros, intumescunt, [...] putent, si Presbyter ordinetur. Their nearer attendance on the Bishops Person, and familiarity with him, with other ad­vantages attending, occasioned that they found it an Injury to be promoted to the Presbyters Order, as he tells us, Comment in Ezek. cap. 48. and which together with the great superciliousness and insulting pride of John Bishop of Jerusalem, exercized over him, and giving some disturbance to his Monastick ease in the holy Land, ( Ep. 60, 61.) something rai­sed his spleen, and in vindicating his own Order, he spared not some little flourishes or Arguments abating of the Episcopate, if thereby these indecencies might cease. What effects all this had at that time, we read not, and that it was afterwards lookt upon by the Church, as his alone Passion and parti­cular Provocation, we have all the reason in the World to believe, it all ceased with his Person to be sure, if not with the Passion; nor do we find any one follower he had, or is his Autority ever used against the solita­ry appropriated Power of a Bishop above a [Page 509] Presbyter, 'till of late in these parts of Chri­stendom: who thence take the rise for their Schism, and 'tis the ground they stand up­on, for the battery and abolishing the whole Order, and with-drawing their obedience, and which to be sure St. Jerome never did, nor attempted, and herein they are particu­larly unlucky, they beat down Bishops by St. Jerome's Autority, to bring in their Schism, and 'tis the main Argument, they still urge against them, in the height of these Divisions and Distractions are now on foot in Europe, and then too when they contend, that St. Jerome knew no other occasion or use of Bishops, but ad tollenda Schismata; because Schisms and Divisions cannot be kept out of the Church, but by them. So that, St. Jerome's Autority, if any thing in their present Case, must be against them, and if complying with him, they must for the pre­sent expedience, submit unto Bishops, whom they'l allow to have acknowledged this ne­cessity and usefulness of them, what ever reasons else he saw for their institution and continuance. 'Tis that which Doctor Du­rel pleads for Arch-Bishop Cranmer; that admitting him guilty of Erastianism, and he did resolve the Power of the Keys into the Prince, as Doctor Stillingfleet says he was, and did, his present Circumstances will plead much for him, and the other Doctors of his time, if of the same mind then with him, he had been educated in many Errors, with which the Church, the whole Age, at that time abounded, and though a Reforma­tion was on foot, no wonder if in some In­stances [Page 510] he was in the wrong, 'twas then their work to abdicate the Bishop of Rome, and case him of that Primacy and usurpation he had exercised over this Church, and it might so happen that in giving to the King what was his, he abated too much of the Power of the Priesthood and the Church, and which was hers, and not to be given to any other, and yet even this Error did he see at last, ac­knowledged it to Doctor Leighton, submitted to and subscribed the truth against it, as the Dean of Windsor tell us he read it in Doctor Stillingfleet's Manuscript, and in his presence. And there is enough to be plead­ed of this nature in the behalf of those in­considerable Offers are made against our three eminent Bishops, Whitgift, Bilson and Bancroft, and which will so thoroughly ac­quit them of the but suspition of Erastia­nism; that the Bill must in course be flung out, that is drawn up against them, every one knows, that is conversant in those their Writings, whence Parker's Objections are taken. The Point under debate, was most­ly, very near altogether in King Henry VIII. day's betwixt the King and the Pope, whe­ther was supreme in the forensick, outward Ecclesiastical Courts and Proceedings on the Persons of Men within this his Majesties Kingdom: the Pope had usurped it for some time, the King reassumes it, Religion it self was not thought to be concerned, 'twas what was reputed only secular, and the most emi­nent, and very near all the Bishops, were zealous Sticklers against the Pope, or, at least, submitted to it, then, when zealous [Page 511] for the Roman Catholick Religion, Doctrines and Worship, and to which they adhered in King Edward's days and Queen Elizabeth's, when the Reformation went on farther, and was settled, as now, by Law in the Church. The Supremacy was not then the Characteristical Mark, though since, to keep up the Parties, it is so, and which oc­casioned that warm Dialogue betwixt the Je­suite and Doctor Bilson, of which I have gi­ven so large an account already, the Do­ctor's design being to vindicate our Church, from the Opinions of Erastus, urged in ef­fect upon us by the Jesuite, and that by as­serting the Prince Supreme in all Causes o­ver all Persons; we give not to him any thing that is Church-Power, enstated by Christ on the Apostles, and by them derived to the Bi­shops, their alone Successors herein, this be­ing thus settled and over-ruled against the Romanist, another Enemy, Man comes with his Tares, and which are scattered in the seed-Plot, and grow up together with it, the Puritan starts up in the midst of us, and the Point is, That this Power of the Keys is in the Presbytery, their Eldership, made up of Lay-Men mostly, call'd Lay-Elders, and these for the greatest part (as must be in abundance of Parishes) Mechanicks, and the meaner sort, who have the Power of laying on of Hands, Ordaining and Excommunicating, nay more▪ these inconsiderable Persons are not on­ly invested with the Power of Bishops and Church-Men, but with that Power and Supremacy, is by us given to the Prince, to Preside over and Govern all Per­sons [Page 512] and Causes, by Process, to Cite, Sum­mon and Convene, before them, to implead, acquit, or condemn, amerce or punish, even to confinement, in their Consistories, and no Cause or Person to be exempted, if ma­nageable in order to Religion, they emulate and succeed the Pope himself, and in the highest instances of his pretended Power and Soveraignty, even to Summon and Censure Kings, of whom Personal Attendance is re­quired; now against this it is, these Wor­thies change and wield their Weapons accor­dingly, as a good Fencer is ready at all, against these New Popes, as they call them; and whoso please may read in Bishop Ban­croft's Survey of the pretended holy Discipline, cap. 22, 23, 24, 25. and in his Book of Dan­gerous Positions and Proceedings published and practised within the Island of Britain, under pretence for Reformation, and for the Presbyte­rial Discipline; In Bishop Bilson's Perpetual Government of Christ's Church, Cap. 9, 10. and Bishop Whitgift's Defence of the Answer to the Admonition, Tract. 17. pag. 627, 628, 629, 630, &c. against these it is their warmth and Argument is spent, in Defence of the Rights of the King and Church, in scorn and detestation of such those pretending Igna­ro's. Their words are these, with a deal more to this purpose; As though Christ's So­veraignty, Kingdom and Lordship were no where acknowledged, or to be found, but where half a dozen Artisans, Shoo-makers, Tinkers and Tay­lors, with their Preacher and Reader (Eight or Nine Cherubins forsooth) do rule the whole Parish. So Bancroft, Dangerous Positions, &c. [Page 513] l. 2. c. 2. That the King must submit to the Pastor, and be content to be joyned in Commis­sion with the basest sort of People, if it please the Parish to appoint him, and if over-ruled must be contented, and the Prince loses all Au­tority in Ecclesiastical Matters, and he must maintain and see executed such Laws, Orders, and Ceremonies, as the Pastor with his Seniors shall make and decree. So Bishop Whitgift, ibid. p. 656, 657. That the Church-warden and Syde-men in every Parish, are the meetest Men that you can find to direct Princes in judging of Ecclesiastical Crimes and Causes; a wretched state of the Church it must be that shall depend on such silly Governors, as Husbandmen and Ar­tisans, Ploughmen and Craftsmen, and we de­scend to the Cart for advice in Church-Govern­ment. So Bishop Bilson, Perpetual Government, Cap. 10. and if thus in behalf of the Regal and Sacerdotal Power, the Magistracy and the Ministry (and which are the only Gover­nors of the Church of Christ, as they con­tend) against these monstrous sort of Peo­ple, with their High-shoo'd feet and Clowns hands invading both, the King and the Church be set as one man to oppose them, and their distinct Powers not so nicely and distinctly stated at one time, as they are and require an another, and appear but as one Weapon, that with present advantage it may be well­ded against them; this is to be imputed to the warmth and zeal of the Disputant, whe­ther as Aggressor or Defendant; his settled particular judgment is to be fetch'd from his particular designed Decision and Determina­tion in other Cases; and when the naked [Page 514] Cause is alone and before him, the immedi­ate proper object of his Consideration; and it must be confessed (neither do I believe the great reason and choicer learning of that ex­cellent Prelate, were he now alive again, could, upon second thoughts extricate him­self) that Bishop Bilson's Argument against Lay-Elders ( Cap. 10. Pag. 148. and which Robert Parker so much twits him with) is wide of a Conclusion, and very ill laid, it runs thus. ‘I cannot conceive how Lay-Elders should be Governors of Christ's Church, and yet be neither Ministers nor Magistrates; Christ being the Head and fulness of the Church which is his Body, governeth the same, as a Prophet, a Priest, and a King; and after his Example all Go­vernment in the Church is either Propheti­cal, Sacerdotal or Regal; the Doctors have a Prophetical, the Pastors a Sacerdotal, and the Magistrates a Regal Power. What fourth Regiment can we find for Lay-Elders?’ All that can be said is this, there appear'd an Argument against a Lay-Elder, he was thought thus shut out from having any Place or Power as from Christ, not considering the ill distri­bution of the offices of Christ, in general, and his bad-placed Successions, and more espe­cially the worser consequence, that must at­tend, a deriving the Magistrates Power from the Mediatorship, and 'tis what neither Whitgift nor Bancroft did Consider. As a King, Priest and Prophet, he erected and settled his Church on Earth, by virtue of that Commission; and All Power given him of the Father, Mat. 11. but he did not, as such, [Page 515] meddle with the Kingdoms on Earth as the Mediator, he was himself a Subject, and pro­fessed and practised Subjection and Obedience, demanded only the Subjects right, Protection by the Government he found established in the World by his Father. But however the present Argument was wrong laid, and whencesoever the Magistrates Power is de­rived, 'tis all along, and by them all, suppo­sed and maintained quite different and apart from that of the Ministry, or the Priesthood, and they are asserted two quite diverse offi­ces, and their Powers do not reach to one another. I'le only now instance in Bishop Bilson, Cap. 9. pag. 113. ‘As for Excommu­nication, if you take it for removing the un­ruly from the Civil Society of the Faithful, until they conform themselves to a more Christian sort of life; this he takes to be the Power of a Christian Magistrate: and he goes on and says, I am not averse that the whole Church where he is wanting, did and should concur in that action, for there­by the sooner, when all the Multitude joyn with the Pastor in one Mind to renounce all manner of conversing with such, will the Parties be reduced to a better mind, to see themselves rejected and exiled from all com­pany; but 'tis the Pastors charge only to deliver or deny the Sacraments, Pag. 114.147. but otherwise Lay-men that are no Ma­gistrates, may not challenge to intermed­dle with the Pastors Function, or over-rule them in their own Charge, without manifest and violent intrusion on other mens Callings without the Word and Will of Christ, who [Page 516] gave his Apostle the Holy Ghost, to remit and retain Sins. And so expresly again, p. 149. If you joyn not Lay-Elders in those Sacred and Sacerdotal Actions with Pastors, but make them Overseers and Moderators of those things which Pastors do, this Power belongeth exactly to Christian Magistrates, to see that Pastors do their Duty exactly ac­cording to the Will of Christ, and not to abuse their Power to annoy his Church or the Members thereof; neither is the case alike betwixt Pastors and Lay-Elders. Pastors have their Power and Function distinguished from Princes by God himself; insomuch that it were more than Presumption for Princes to execute those actions by them­selves, or by their Substitutes. To Preach, Baptize, retain Sins & impose Hands, Princes have no Power; the Prince of Princes, even the Son of God, hath severed it from their Callings, and committed it to his Apostles, and they by imposition of hands derived it to their Successors; but to cause these actions to be orderly done according to Christ's Commandment, and to prevent and redress abuses in the doers, this is all that is left for Lay-Elders, and this is all that we re­serve for the Christian Magistrate,’ and that no other Church-Power was then thought by any to belong to the Prince; he was not at all considered as its Subject, there was no such thing as a pretence then on foot, 'tis most plain, Cap. 9. pag. 108. and among the many Conceits about the Power of the Keys, and Subject, this never entred into the heart o [...] any; his words are these, ‘The Power of the [Page 517] Keys, and right to impose Hands, I mean to ordain Ministers, and to Excommuni­cate Sinners, are more controverted than the other two, (the Word and Sacraments and which were never questioned) by reason that diverse Men have diverse Conceits of them, some fasten them on the liking of the Multitude, which they call the Church; others commit them to the judgment of cer­tain chosen Persons as well of the Laiety as of the Clergy, whom they call the Presbytery. Some attribute only, but equally, to all Pa­stors and Preachers, and some especially re­serve them to Men of the greatest gifts, ri­pest years, and highest calling among the Clergy. But there's none mentioned that they are in the Prince.’ 'Tis, I know, the usual Expression in the Pulpit Prayer, and the King is placed next under Christ in these His Majestie's Realms and Dominions, and which as that Prayer it self, has no good bot­tom, that ever I could meet with, for such the use of it, a meer Arbitrary customary thing; where did God ever make Christ his Deputy, and the King Christ's, as to the worldly Powers and Secular things of this life? his Commission to our Saviour ran quite contrary, and nothing less can be ga­thered from it, this is to found right of Do­minion in Grace with a Witness, our Kings did not receive, or rather reassume it upon these terms, nor do they since acknowledge it as so derived, King Henry VIII. did not, and there's no such thing in any one Act or Statute in his days. Doctor Burnet indeed in his Collection of Records, gives us two in­stances [Page 518] wherein the Title of Supreme Head under Christ of the Church of England. Supre­mum Ecclesiae Anglicanae sub Christo Caput. The one in the Injunctions to the Clergy made by Cromwel, Pag. 178. Num. 12. the other in the Commission by which Bonner held his Bishop­rick of the King, Pag. 184. Num. 14. but in his Addenda, Pag. 305. Num. 1. in the Pre­amble to Articles about Religion, set out by the Convocation, and Published by the King's Au­tority, 'tis only, and in Earth Supreme Head of the Church of England, and which is of more Autority than the other, because in Convocation; It is once or twice used by King Edward, be­fore his Injunctions, Articles, &c. and some­times lest out, but no mention of it, but ne­ver used by Queen Elizabeth, in any of hers, or in her Proclamations; nor is it comman­ded in her Form of bidding of Prayer, nor in the Canons, or Form of bidding Prayer in the days of King James; 'tis neither in the Oath of Supremacy or Allegiance, and which is to be seen in the account we have of them by Anthony Sparrow now Lord Bishop of Nor­wich, in his Collection of Canons, Articles, Injunctions, &c. and our Seven and thirtieth Article of Religion gives the Queens Majesty, that only Prerogative was given all Godly Princes by God himself in Holy Scriptures, that which had the Kings of Israel and Judah, that which had the Kings of the Gentiles, the King of Nineveh, in the Prophecy of Jonah, and which is an instance I find given by our Divines of the preceding Power in other Princes, we contend for, and have determi­ned to be in ours, and with which if the [Page 519] Prince be not invested, he has no Govern­ment over his People; a great part always will, and all may when they will, exempt their Persons and Actions from his cognizance and inspection, upon pretence of their Faith, and Religion, but there is not a word of any one Derivation as from Christ; nor as the Mediator, doth he, can he, bestow any such Power upon them, or are Kings thus under him, or any ways, then as Members of his Body, and as Christians; they are to submit to, and receive his Laws in order to Heaven, and these Laws are to be their Rule in their Government upon Earth, which they are to obey and protect, which indeed supports and exalts them, as Righteousness does a Nation; but 'tis in and by that Autority they were invested in before Christ, and they were in­deed in a feeble piteous Case if no other Power to rule with, than what the crucifyed Jesus can give them, whose Kingdom was not of this World; nor did he manage any thing by the Powers of it; I know it is the least of the Designs of such that still use this Expres­sion in their Prayers and Discourses, and they have great Examples for it, and of those who abominate the natural and direct consequen­ces are thence to be drawn, where the Civil Power is return'd into the Mediator; but it throughly answers their Expectations, who contend to have their Prince a Priest too, and would delight more to see him in his Rochet, and at the Altar, Blessing and Consecrating, than on his Throne and with his Scepter, sweying and governing his People, and for which latter they believe themselves equally [Page 520] capacitated and enabled as he, and their be­lief on these Grounds is well bottomed; for Christ when ascending up on high, gave no other Gifts to Men, than what either enabled to the work of the Ministry, and which alone were for peculiar Persons; or what made Christians good and virtuous men only; and which were to all promiscuous and common. And had our Church in her Article, given to Kings that only Prerogative they saw given to Aristotles Prince, and which is extended to the [...] also, as is above shew'd, to the things of Religion, it had been the same, though less popular and perswading; I shall only add the Autority of Doctor Hammond, in his Practical Catechism, Lib. 2. Sect. 11. that Christ in his Sermon on the Mount med­led not with the Fifth Commandment. ‘Though he were as God, the King of all Kings, and might have changed and disposed of their Dominions as he pleased; yet he was not pleased to make any Alteration, but to continue and settle all in that course wherein it formerly had been placed by God himself,—What he added to Moses in this Matter was only greater reverence and aw to the Father or Magistrate, or Civil Power,—he left the Woman taken in Adul­tery, and other Offenders, to the ordinary legal course, and would not upon any im­portunity usurp or take upon him any thing in that Matter; and more considerate Papists, as he goes on and tells us, discerning this, and yet unwilling to devest the Pope of his so long usurped Power, have found it neces­sary to pretend another tenure for him, and [Page 521] therefore style the Pope, not the Vicar of Christ (for that would give him no Power, so much as of a Civil Judge) but the Vicar of God, whom he hath set up to be the Vice­gerent of all the World.’ The whole Dis­course might not unfitly be here transcribed, only 'tis, as it ought to be, in every bodies hands.

BUT what if these Doctors were in the de­sign §. XXVII against us, as we do not resolve our Faith into one Doctor, or Bishop at Rome; So nei­ther do we into three, or twice so many at home, of what Order and Autority soever, and which adds in it self, just nothing to the Skill of a Divine, nor is the Tradition of Truth broken by it. And indeed there are so many Accidents in the World, and with so great force upon Mankind, so often influen­cing and over-ruling, that Christianity in its particular Articles, and sometimes the highest of them, would be but in a bad Condition, were it responsible for what every particular Doctor has said or wrote, and which comes not up unto them; whether out of a tender­ness of Disposition, a mistaken Zeal for Union and to reconcile, Moderation and Compre­hension, a keeping present Peace, or a design of working more effectually for the future; or whether through a fear and impotency of Nature, averse to and unable for Struglings, wearied out by daily Provocations, or a fore­sight of some Calamities foreseen and approa­ching, and every one is not an Athanasius al­ways undaunted, or real misapprehension in the understanding; or which is a thing very frequent upon the rise of an Heresie, to set [Page 522] up for a middle way, and which is as inju­rious, to gratifie either lust in general, or that itch of Ambition in particular, and to become the Head of a Party, whether out of peevishness or revenge, or to magnifie their own Parts and Eloquence, lead by the Auto­rity of Names, or by self-interest, blinded by one or more of which ways, errors and differences in Religion are either occasioned or started, managed and pursued. No sooner was his Master Justin Martyr dead, but Tatia­nus grew Proud, and puffed up with an opi­nion of being uppermost in the School, turn'd Heretick, Iren. adv. Haeres. cap. 31. l. 1. Ba­silides was a Master of luxury, and was to do something extraordinary to disguise it, as St. Jerone. Tom. 3. l. 2. adv. Jovinian. and so was Marcion, as Tertullian Prescript. Cap. 51. and Lactantius tells us of several others who affecting the highest Order in the Church, studying Honour and Greatness, and sailing of it, made a Secession from the Church, not enduring Subjection, Lib. 4. Sect. ult. and so did Valentinus because he lost a Bishoprick, Tertul. adv. Valent. cap. 4. as did Aerius, No­vatius, &c. and Theodorit describes Hereticks in general ambitioni & vanae gloriae mancipatos, Eccl. Hist. l. 1. c. 2. and Sozomen complains of a worser effect they have yet in God's Church, Nonnullos in vias medias adigunt, Eccl. Hist. l. 1. c. 1. occasion the setting up somewhat like Truth which is not Truth, when they write Irenicums, and set up for Reconcilers, make a hotch-potch of Truth and Falshood together, a sure way to elude and baffle Truth, and insinuate Error, the abate­ment [Page 523] being still on Truth's side, and the Er­ror is brought to become tolerable, and which would not in plain terms have been endured, but thus gets ground onward, and so much of Truth is destroyed and erased, to give place to the Falshood. This was the most devilish Plot of Julian the Apostate, by which he baf­fled Christianity, he mixed his Paganism with it, complied in many instances of its Perfor­mances, that the less discerning might be the easier carried over to it; a very ill conse­quence of Error, mostly ruining Truth, and mostly to be abominated; the Ape is the more deformed because like a Man, and is not one. Tertullian turn'd Montanist, in disdain of the Pride of the greater Clergy at Rome, as inter fragmenta Tertull. and Hieron. Cata­log. Script. Ecclesiast. no one stands fairer in the Church Story for Piety and Morals than Pelagius, and he and his Scholars, Julianus, Celestius, &c. seduced many by it, designed and perverted it to that alone purpose, even Men of great Fame and Learning became thereby inclined to them; as Sixtus at Rome, John of Jerusalem, Cyril in Egypt, and Sulpitius Severus in France; And particularly the Rich and Potent Women, whom he strangely insinua­ted into by all manner of Flatteries, Hypo­crisies and Delusions; (and which generally are the Engines Hereticks have work'd by, as in Church Story) and for which Austin and Jerome sufficiently shrape him; as an account is given at large by Joannes Garnerus, the late Publisher of the Works of Marius Mer­cator. Dissert. 4. De Subscript. &c. Cap. 3. who was, or who could be more stout and [Page 524] couragious for the Nicene Faith, than was Liberius Bishop of Rome, and which appeared in his behaviour all along, particularly in his personal Conference with our Emperor, suf­fering Banishment for it, an account of which is given by Athanasius, Apol. pag. 833. Ed. Pa­ris. & Sozomen Eccles. Hist. l. 4. c. 11. and yet lassus injuriis, provoked and tired out by oppressions, he forsook Athanasius, and went over to the Sect of the Arians, Pag. 837. ibid. and so did the Divine Hosius, then ancientest Bishop in the Christian World, and who was in a manner the Author of the Determina­tions of the first Council of Nice. Sulpitius Severus suspects he might be in his dotage, and there is ground enough for the Suspition, being an hundred years old, as 'tis in his Hi­storia Sacra, lib. 2. a Man, if any that ever lived could be, to be exempted, one would think, from so great an Apostasie, as will appear by the Character Athanasius gives him, Ep. ad solitariam vitam agentes, pag. 840. and yet tormenta longaevus, plagas (que) perpessus est, unde etiam necessitate vehementi, expositio­nibus tunc editis Syrmiensi Synodo consensit, at (que) subscripsit, Hist. Tripartit. l. 5. c. 9. being of a great Age, and by reason of his many Suf­ferings, through a more than usual force, he consented and subscribed to the Expositions set forth in the Synod at Syrmium. Gregory Nazianzen says in the Life of Athanasius, that there was very sew to be found, that were not contemptible for their obscurity, or very eminent for virtue, as the seed and root re­maining in Israel, whence the Truth was to spring out and reflourish; as it did upon the [Page 525] return of Athanasius, which did not for fear or gain, by flattery or through ignorance, tempori obsequi, qui quamvis mente haudqua­quam prolapsi fuerint, subscribe with their hand, amongst whom he confesses himself to be one, but withal, and which is not usual, obliges the World with his Publick Acknow­ledgment and Recantation. This is the time when St. Jerome adv. Luciferian. and in his Comments in Ps. 133. says, Totum orbem fu­isse Arianum, that the whole World was Arian, and which only can be understood, as St. John must be, when he tells us, if all that our Sa­viour did were written, the whole World could not contain the Books, i. e. there would be a great many; and for this St. Jerome him­self will become his own avoucher, who in his Comments on Ezekiel, cap. 48. thus be­speaks the Catholick Priests, Audiat hoc sacer­dotalis gradus, &c. that though over-power'd by the Arians, yet, as holding the true Faith, so their manners be accordingly; and that the Homousians were numerous and visible, even then might be made to appear, were I now to write that History. I'le add but one more way by which particular Persons are seduced and misled into Heresie; 'tis by Lies, underhand Dealings, and downright Forgeries, obtruded upon Mankind. Thus the Pelagia grew and was numerous, still ma­king use of the Names and feigned Counter­feit Letters of Bishops and Eminent Men in his Commendations, and the savour of his Heresie, as the same Publisher of Marius Mer­cator gives us an account also, Ibid. And then since so much uncertainty in the Autorities of [Page 526] particular Doctors, since liable to so many failures, and under so many ill and provoking Circumstances, and to many of which good Men are liable, are over-sweigh'd and over­ruled thereby for some time; how unequal, unjust a thing is it to urge them, each Circum­stance not considered, but most of all when an accidental saying, or pressing a present Argument is reported to the World, the sense and judgment of a Doctor, against the whole course and design of all his other Writings, and the publickly declared Doctrines of that Church of which he is a Member, which he owns and professes, submits and subscribes to? That of Tertullian in his Prescriptions, Cap. 3. is the more substantial and rational way, Quid ergo si Episcopus, si Diaconus lapsus à regula suit, ideò haereses veritatem vid [...]bantur obtinere? ex personis probamus fidem an ex fide personas? what if a Bishop, or a Deacon, or whoever he be falls from the Rule, shall Here­sie thence obtain Truth? shall we prove the Faith by the Persons, or the Persons by the Faith? if Theodosius the Great design'd any more than a Committee of Triers, when ap­pointing such a set number of Bishops, to exa­mine every one that was admitted to a bene­fice in the Church, as so many Doctores Pro­babiles, as he terms them, in Communion with whom all must be, that are instituted or indu­cted, or whatsoever was the way and expres­sion of then giving Titles and Possession, Cod. Theodos. 16. Tit. 1. l. l. 2, 3. his Rule is un­safe, and the Church may be imposed upon by it, though the Bishop of Rome was one, for Liberius once subscribed to Arianism, nor [Page 527] indeed did he design any more, and they were only as so many Examiners according to the Nicene Faith, and which the Piety and Zeal of that Holy Emperor did design and endeavour to have took place throughout his Dominions, and which is express in the Laws. Nor was that so great a Secession from this Faith in the days of Constantius, and then much less of one or two particular Doctors of the time, thought to break off the Succession of such the Doctrine, or render it less Ca­tholick; but it is, notwithstanding, decla­red to have continued from St. Peter the Apo­stle, by Damasus and Peter, Bishops of Rome and Alexandria, us (que) nunc, to his days, that then Period of time, safe and inviolated.