YOU may please to observe, that Detraction sometimes mistakes her aim, and by a weak assault commends that good which it intends to villisie. Thus this Commander was here sent to rail down Hezekiah, that his cruel Tongue might make, as 'twere, the Preface unto his Ma­ster's Sword. But so fond was his attempt, that no stu­died Parasite could have more flatter'd him. So that me­thinks this Prince's Worth ne're seems more fair, than in the mouth of Rabshakeh. He's there tax'd for demolish­ing the High Places, and for the Subversion of so many Altars; Actions that were enjoyn'd him by Moses: as if a Man should accuse Henoch of Godliness, or Abraham of his Belief: who would not take such Accusations as these for no less than artificial Praises, as if some Orator had laboured to commend these by an Irony: H [...]noch a good man, but godly; Abraham holy no doubt, but that he was faithful; and Hezekiah a virtuous gallant Prince, wer't not he's so Religious?

[Page 2] I could in Charity thus interpret these Words of Rob­shakeh, were he not a Servant unto the King of Ashur: but to speak truth, His Commission makes it plain that he came to Rail: only his more friendly malice objects good­ness instead of Sin, as if here Detraction had been sub­orn'd to commend an Enemy. You may thus far trust Rab­shakeh: for in my Text he speaks exact Truth, to spite the poor King of Iudah. This you'l easily find in the prece­dent parts of this Chapter: and withal you'l there see the Hebrews in a lamentable estate, and yet indeed not so sad as ours. Their fenced Cities all taken by the Arms of Assyria, vers. 13. The Treasures of the King, and of the Temple too, all consumed, vers. 15. Ierusalem it self, the City Royal, besieg'd ('twas not yet lost, 'twas not so bad here), vers. 17. and now Rabshakeh is sent to perswade the King into Chains. He tells him, there was no hope in his own strength: for though Assyria it self should be so kind as to lend him Horses, yet (so low was he brought) he could scarce find so many Troopers. No hope in E­gypt; his old known Confederates, they were a meer bro­ken Reed. Nay, he dares add more, No hope at all in God neither: for though Hezekiah had indeed but reform­ed the Old Church, yet in Rabshakeh's sense he had set up a New one, he had forsaken God, and thrown down his Al­tars, and remov'd his High Glorious Places: and upon this false Supposition, what a Rise is here taken by this fighting Orator? But if ye say unto me, We trust in the Lord our God, is not this he? &c.

You see then 'tis no strange thing at all to find a Re­formed Church oppressed by Arms, or by Orators. But since my Text here is a part of Rabshakeh's speech, I shall leave the Soldier, and only follow him in this part of his Oration. Where, for my more clear proceeding, I shall a little invert the order of the words, and shall beseech you to observe with me these Particulars.

[Page 3] First, You may behold the Church of Iudah corrupt­ed, in these words, High places and altars, (i. e.) Altars in high places: Secondly, these Corruptions reformed, whose high places, and whose altars Hezekiah hath taken away, and hath said to Iudah, &c. Thirdly, the Reformation cen­sured; But if ye say unto me, We trust in the Lord our God, is not that he, &c. Where it's silently tax'd of Novelty and of Schism, indeed of no less than Apostacy it self, and that for this cause they had no hope at all left in God. Of these in their order. First, of the Corruptions, [ High places and altars.]

Were bare Reason put to visit the Church of Iudah, her Obliquities in the conceit of most men, might well per­haps pass for Trifles. For so God have his due Worship, a man would think, what great matter is't where't be done: The High Places may be as serviceable as the Court of the Temple: and why may not his Sacrifice be slain as well at Hebron as Ierusalem? But Israel must be judged by the Laws; and in Points of so high coneernment must learn to do, not what she fancies, but what that Text hath en­joyn'd; Take heed thou offer not, &c. Deut. 12. at the 13. Thus Moses words were plain, That God hath enjoyn'd but One only Altar, but only one for Burnt Sacrifice And lest the violation of that Sacred Law should seem some slight trivial thing, do but hear the Tenor of those severe words in the 17th of Levit. What man soever there be of the house of Isroel, that kills an Ox or a Lamb, &c. and bringeth it not to the door of the Tabernacle of the Congrega­tion, unto the altar that is before the Tabernacle, to offer an offering unto the Lord, before the Tabernacle of the Lord, Blood shall be imputed unto that man; he has shed blood, and that man shall be cut off from among his people, in the 4th vers. of that Chapter. And in the same place, vers. 9. it's again repeated, and extended too, that it may gain the [Page 4] more hold and reverence: Whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers which sojourn among you, (it must extend to Iews and Proselytes) that offers a burnt offering, or sacrifice, and brings is not to the door of the Ta­bernacle, even that man shall be cut off from among his peo­ple. A Law sharp and terrible, fit indeed for Mount Si­nai, and to be delivered in the voice of a Thunder: who would not tremble at that Offence, in the Revenge where­of Beasts shall be esteemed as Men; to kill a Lamb, as to commit a Murther: that man shall be cut off from among his People; such Devotions are no less than Capital, nor will God be satisfied for such Offences as these, till both Peo­ple and Priest become a Sacrifice.

If you ask the Ground of this severe Edict, I might well reply, That to yield a Reason, doth not still befit the Ma­jesty of a Law. Yet Iosephus tells us, That God therefore enjoined one only Altar, that thence it might become the Sacred Emblem both of his Churches Unity, and his own. We have, saith he, but one altar, [...]. For our great God is but One, and our twelve Tribes make but one People only. There are Interpreters more home, that plainly tell us, this Law was made for two Rea­sons: First, to prevent Schism; and Secondly, to prevent Idolatry. First, Schism: For had leave been given to this heady wrangling People, to do Sacrifice in many several places, the Diversity of Rites such men would have soon fallen into, might ere long have brought them into more several Factions, than at that time they had Tribes. Se­condly, to prevent Idolatry, a Sin which for a long time seem'd natural to the Iews; and what so fit course to keep it off, as to admit of Sacrifice, but only in that Place where the High Priest himself must look on, whom it so much concern'd both in point of Conscience, and of In­terest too, to serve no God at all but the true One.

[Page 5] And 'tis worth observing with what height of Zeal this strict Law was kept whilst the Hebrew Church remained yet Primitive. You may read the Story in the 22d of Ioshua. An Altar was set up on the other side Iordan by the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half Tribe of Manasses, their lot falling in those parts. News of this strange structure is soon brought to Shiloh, where it found at once both the Tabernacle, and the High Priest: The People murmur, the Army is straight drawn together; so that the Forces prepared against Cananitish strangers, are now designed to defend Moses Law against more than Two Tribes of Israel. But prudently first an Embassy is de­signed, Phineas is sent, and with him Ten Princes more to expostulate with these men, with what intent they had set up such an Altar as this, which must needs lye so open­ly expos'd unto that great height of Misconstruction. Their answer you may find, verse 22. The Lord God of Gods, The Lord God of Gods he knows, and Israel shall know, we have not built it in Rebellion, to offer there any Sacrifice, but only to be a Witness betwixt us and you, that though divided by Iordan, we have yet a share in the self same Altar with you. For God forbid, say they, that we should Rebel against the Lord, and turn this day from following the Lord, to build an altar for Burnt-offer­ing, or Sacrifice, besides the altar of the Lord our God which is before the Tabernacle, in the 29th verse of that Chapter. You see of so foul a Nature was this Offence then esteemed, that by more than Nine Tribes 'twas held cause enough of a War, and that a Civil War too, where­in Iews were to fight with Iews: and, but to take off the suspicion where no such crime was, it brought more than Two Tribes to the Apology you have heard, so high, and so pathetical.

[Page 6] And yet in succeeding times how constantly did they vi­olate this most severe Sacred Law? Mountains, and Woods, and Plains, they would needs turn each place in­to a Tabernacle. 'Twas then you would think the Holy Land without doubt, whose more frequent Buildings were Altars: but Palestine indeed was then farthest from God, when she all thus seemed a Temple; and there was no greater sign of Iudah's Apostacy, than too many such signs of Religion. Nay, so largely spread was this grand Cor­ruption, that you'l easily find there was scarce a Man did a­void it. Kings, and Priests, and People; some were A­gents, others Spectators, and all bore a part in this for­bidden Sacrifice. Thus Solomon, and the whole People are tax'd, 1 Kings 3. 2, 3. And you need not doubt the Priests were there too; for be the place where it would, none by Moses Law could sacrifice but the Priests. Nay, not only Solomon's, but the succeeding Records of all their good Kings still runs with this abatement; He walkt in the ways of David his Father, but the High Places were not taken away, the People still offer'd Sacrifice in the tops of the High Places. It's thus said of no less than Seven: Solomon, and Asa, Iehosaphat, Iehoash, Ama­ziah, Azariah, and Iothan. Cardinal Cajetan thinks this gross Corruption was as general, as if the Iews resolv'd to make null Moses Law by an Hebrew Custom to the contra­ry: and they had don't without doubt, were our Sins as well able to abrogate a Law, as we well know they are to break it. This is plain, that the Cardinal conceiv'd this Abuse was grown into a Custom National, which had there spread it self over all sorts and kind of Persons: So that it found no open, no constant Opposition at all from any body of men then considerable: Had it, 'tis clear e­nough, That Customs thus oppos'd, can put Humane Laws in no danger. But I need not quote such Autho­rities, [Page 7] the very word there us'd, where the Text speaks of those Kings, infers this Truth strongly enough. But the High places were not taken away, the People still offer'd Sacrifice in the High Places. For that Word, the Peo­ple, when it's put singly, and without opposition, im­plies, without doubt, the whole Nation which it points at. Thus when God commands Moses; Speak now in the ears of the people: Or in those Words to Pharaoh, Let my people go: No doubt but that Word did point at each several Iew; and though sometime it may well bear a sence less general, yet it then implies so much the far greater Number, that commonly what remains, is neither a part eminent nor considerable. Nay, to go no farther than my Text, 'tis plain enough from these Words of Rab­shakeh (who having taken so many Cities, had now spent some good time in Iewry,) that this Corruption was so universally spread, without any visible, any noted part to oppose it, that he conceived it the only true Service of the God of Israel: With what Face else could He have told the Iews, They had no hopes in their God, because their King had quite overturned his Religion? Had there indeed been any Number of Note that had oppos'd this Corruption, is't at all probable it would have been conceal'd in these Hebrew Histories? Their Pen men, we know, were all Zealous enough to preserve the Ho­nour of Iudea; and yet in this particular we find a still total silence: And if any man will needs hold the contra­ry, they who call so much for Catalogue of Names, might in Justice demand of this grand Undertaker, to shew a List of those Iews, who from Age to Age, whilst this Corruption held, did not at all worship in High Places.

[Page 8] But you'l demand perhaps, For how long a time was the Hebrew Church thus corrupted? And indeed Learned Men differ here. Some think this abuse began in the times of Othoniel and Ehud, Judges: Others plac'd it in the days of Gideon; admit either of these conjectures, and 'twill be plain in Chronology, that this forbidden worship held no less than six hundred Years; for all agree, Hezekiah was the first who durst be so good, in those bad times, as to reform this corruption. But grant we do abate of this, since great Clerks conceive, that from the time that the Ark was parted from the Tabernacle, which was no less than ninety years, from the days of Eli the Priest, when the Ark went Captive to Philistia, until they both met again in the Temple of Solomon, 'twas lawful to sacri­fice at more than one only altar, because God had promi­sed his more immediate Presence as well before the Ark, as before the Tabernacle. For this reason I say (though perhaps it hold not) grant we abate of that time; what I find established by common consent, will prove large enough to support all my whole intention. For no man dares deny, the Text is so plain, in that Catalogue of Kings I related, that this corruption held from the days of Solomon unto the Reign of King Hezekiah, and so no less than upon the Point of three hundred years, as is plain, by the computation of Arias Montanus, and by the most exact in Chronology.

So then, three things are here very considerable; first, the Nature of this Corruption, 'twas in the Censure of Gods Law no less than the sin of Murther; and in the Censure of the Iews, it deserved no less than the Revenge of a plain Civil War. Secondly, the Extent of this Cor­ruption; it had spread it self throughout the whole face of Iudea; so that all that was at that time, God's Visible Church, was at once involv'd in this Error. For I need [Page 9] not now speak of the Ten Tribes; their high places were made waste, as is plain enough from the Calves of Dan, and of Bethel. Thirdly, the Continuance of this Corrup­tion; it held probably for six, but no man can deny, that it remained in the Church of Iewry upon the point of three Centuries of years.

Hence 'twill follow clearly; the whole Visible Church may be so far corrupted, that though she forsake not God, and so run in Non Ecclesiam, to be no Church at all, yet for a long time she may do Publick Worship in a most gross forbidden manner; and this kind of Abuse may be so dangerous, that upon its full discovery, both Prince and People may be in conscience bound to embrace Refor­mation.

Has God's Church of the Law been so foully blemished, and may that of the Gosyel boast of a more constant Beau­ty? Are the Promises of this kind more large to us, than they were to that Church wherein God's own Son was born? She in as plain Terms was then call'd the Spouse of God: I will betroath thee unto me for ever, saith the Lord, Hos. 2. His People and his Flock: We are the peo­ple of his pasture, and the sheep of his hands, Psal. 95. Yea, his Sons and his Daughters; Thou shalt call me, my Father, saith the Lord, and shalt not depart from me, (Jer. 3. 19.) True: the Gates of Hell shall not so prevail, but Christ will still have a Church; and could the Gates of Hell prevail against her that was betrothed God's own Spouse for ever? That is, at least till Christ came. No, they could not prevail to make her run in non Ecclesiam, to be­come no true Church at all; and yet they might prevail to make her run in Corruptam Ecclesiam, into a Church so much corrupt in her Publick Worship, that she might much need a Reformation. And indeed, 'tis a strange thing that any Christian Church which God has plac't among Gen­tiles, [Page 10] should be so puffed up with a thought of her own strength, that she cannot fail in this particular. For 'tis a Truth clear in the Text, that there's no Church of Gen­tiles, but like a Branch from the Vine, it may be quite cut from Christianity. And which is worth observing, St. Paul has indited this self-same Truth to the Romans, in the 11th chap. verse 21. Be not high minded, but fear; for if God spar'd not the natural branches, take heed lest he spare not thee. And that this Text implies the Christian Gen­tiles may be all cut off quite from Christ, is here the Con­clusion of Stapleton, and of the Remists Notes on that Text, and of divers of their way.

And to say the plain truth, that Text I named can well bear no other comment, unless we'l fondly affirm, that St. Paul warns the Gentiles to take heed of that mischance, which yet indeed could not possibly fall out. And then I beseech you observe, if that same Church which boasts most of strength, may yet run in Non Ecclesiam, may be­come no Church at all, she may much more run in Corrup­tam Ecclesiam, into a Church so corrupt in her Publick Wor­ship, that she may now need a Reformation.

I say, she may run into a corrupt Church: and do but consider her new claim of Infallibility, and you'l easily yield, 'tis a Victory to prove, that Rome may be conquer­ed: to make this appear, She may err, is enough to convince her of no little part of her Errors. If you ask me to shew more, I shall beg leave to reply, That' tis an Argument I affect not; for I had much rather be employed in discour­ses of good life, than in these of controversies; as holding that, in all kind of Contentions, to be the most fit Christian Prayer, Give peace in our time, O Lord. Yet since I here meet with such Disputes and Waverings; in some I'le think out of Conscience; in others, either out of Vanity, to en­tertain their time, or that under pretence of searching Chri­stian [Page 11] Truths, they may indeed drive a Trade; I must hence hold it a Duty I owe unto most of those that now hear me; yea, a Duty I owe to that venerable Church that baptiz'd us all, though our now poor afflicted Mother, to keep the Fruit of her own Womb from thus trampling on her; to keep them, as much as in me lies, from being gull'd and cheated from her Unity, and withal from communicating too deeply in sin with those who have now cast her on the ground.

If you ask then for the corruptions of the Western Church: suppose I instance but in one alone, She took the Cup from the People: An Abuse set up against as clear Text as e're the High Places were. Drink ye all of this, saith our Saviour, St. Mat. 26. And again (as they interpret that Text), Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you, in that 6th chap. [...]o St. Iohn. Mark [ye have no life in you]; I know they de­fend this, and make no question at all, but some witty Scribe might have been as well able to defend the Iews; who, for ought I know, might have said, as they do, That the Hebrew Church had power over the Sacraments, (and Sacrifices are no more) or by their new Doctrine of Con­comitance, they might maintain much more probably, that their High Places and Altars were but only us'd as Parts, as Appurtenances, as Concomitants of the Tabernacle, than these, that Shed-blood lies in the Host. For Shed-blood it must be; This is my very Blood which is shed for you: So that to tell us of Blood in the Body, of Blood running in the Veins, is indeed to shew forth the Lord's Life, but not, as he commands, to shew forth his death till he comes. Nay, admit the Doctrine of Concomitance, (which yet in this point is but a meer perfect fiction) yet Christ en­joyns, Drink ye all of this. And I appeal to your own Sences themselves, whether to eat Christ's Blood, be to drink it. [Page 12] Their Publick Service in an unknown Tongue, is it not as clearly against the Doctrine of St. Paul, 1 Cor. 14. How, saith he, shall the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understands not what thou say'st? in the 16th verse of that chapter. Two things you see the Apo­stle there takes for granted; first, that the unlearned ought to say Amen at God's Publick Service: Secondly, they cannot joyn that consent of theirs, but to those words they understand.

I might instance in many more particulars; as in the Adoration of Images, of Saints, of the Eucharist, in the Doctrine of Purgatory, and those other Articles of the New Creed of Trent; whereof some are of dangerous practise; nay, (as Learned men amongst themselves have confess'd, Gerson, Espensaeus, and many others) they are of practice, among the Vulgar at least (some doubt not to add, and among the Learned too) no less than Idololatri­cal. Others again are made Articles of Faith, which yet for ought appears either in the Text, or in Antiquity, are indeed not so much as probable Opinions: So that to say truth, there are store of men who have not Ignorance e­nough to believe such Articles. And yet the Western Church has forced many Souls into the Faith of this New Creed, both by the Prison and the Stake: And in this Tyranny hath shewed her self far worse than e're old Iu­dah did. For though we read of no visible conspicuous number that did avoid the High Places, yet in Charity we may think there were some few that did so, and yet in this regard we read not so much as one either punished, or dis­graced by an Hebrew Magistrate.

'Tis true then, that God's Church, yea, his Christian Church, may be stained with some gross foul Corruptions. But what? Because she may thus err, shall each giddy Brain be allow'd to controul, or each private Hand to reform [Page 13] her? Admit this Disorder once, and let a Church be in­deed most Apostolick, yet you may be assured she shall ne're want Reformers, if she have either Sons to be employ'd in Rebellion, or Lands to be enjoyed by Sacriledge. A Co­rah then will dare to tell Moses to his face, That all the Congregation is holy, as holy as himself, or the best em­ploy'd in the Tabernacle; all Kings and Priests then; and all this stir is rais'd, not so much that he dislikes the Order of Aaron, but that indeed he likes his Revenue. And there­fore in my Text there's care had of this. A Reformation follows; but you'l find it brought in by no less than by the Power Royal, whose high places, and whose altars Hezekiah hath taken away, and hath said to Iudah, &c.

This part affords Varieties; and I must therefore divide it. Here's then first the Prime Agent in this Reformation I nam'd, Hezekiah the King. Secondly, the Extent of the Reformation, 'twas only brought into his own Territories, Iudah and Ierusalem. Thirdly, the manner how he setled it; 'twas done as well by teaching truth, as by reforming corruptions: He took away the High Places, and he said, Ye shall worship before this altar at Ierusalem. First, of the Prime Agent, Hezekiah the King.

But to remove these Abuses here, did not this Prince first abuse himself, to fit his hands for this work? Did Hezeki­ah the King make his Person no less than plain Head of the Church of Iudah? Were some Modern Tongues to have supplied Rabshakeh's place, this is the Theam, and this is the Phrase they'd have chosen. And yet I assure my self this pious Prince would have stood to't, that he was supreme Governour, in all Causes, and over all Persons; so that upon provocation given, he could no doubt have depos'd the High Priest, as Solomon once did Abiathar. But yet (I beseech you observe) 'tis one thing to burn Incense, ano­aher [Page 14] to enjoin that this Service be still duly done: One thing to offer Sacrifice, another to command that no Sacri­fice be offer'd, but on that one Altar at Ierusalem; The first of these belonged unto Aaron's Sons, the other to the Heirs of David. To bar Hezekiah this Power in the Church, were to impair his Royalties, and to deny that to the Crown of Iudah which all Princes have still challenged; yea, those without the Church, the Kings of Nineveh, and Monarchs of Assyria; Their Swords were Ecclesiastical. Thus that King proclaims a Religious Fast, Ion. 3. And Nebuchad▪ Dan. 3. 29. Thus from the beginning Christi­an Princes have still done the like, and have let us see by their Laws, that in point of Coercive Power they still kept the Church-supremacy, as clearly appears in the Theodosian Code, and in that of Iustinian in the Capitulars of Charles the great, and such other collections. Iustinian, in an Ec­clesiastical Novel, comes fully home in this point; Iubemus beatissimos Archiepiscopos & Patriarchas, (i.) Senioris Romae, & Constatinopoleos Novae Romae; We command, saith he, (and as some Copies have it under the pain of Deposition too) the most blessed Archbishop, and Patriarchs (i.) of Old Rome, and of Constantinople, then call'd New Rome, &c. If that Emperor might command all the Patriarchs them­selves, and that in a business Ecclesiastical too, where then lay the Church-supremacy? And these Novels of his were in so high esteem with St. Gregory the great, that 'tis plain in his Epistles, he decides Church-causes by them, and that with an Ita decrevit Dominus noster Imperator; Our Lord the Emperor hath thus rul'd it in his Laws.

Besides, most plain it is, that the Old Hebrew Kings held the Work in my Text to belong to them as in chief. And this Opinion God himself confirm'd; for throughout their whole story you'l find, that Kings only are check'd when the Church was corrupt, and they only prais'd when she [Page 15] mended. In those Scriptures we read but of Three Noted Reformations, and they were all done by their Kings. By King Asa, by this King in my Text, and the last by King Iosiah. Those High Places alone were pulled down by A­sa which were set up to the worship of a false God. Heze­kiah goes farther, and destroys them too, which were set up for the false worship, though of the true only Deity. Io­siah goes on, and removes the Groves, and such devices as those which Solomon, and other Kings, having of old set up, they were again renew'd in the wicked Reign of Ma­nasseh.

But grant a Christian Church to be indeed corrupt, or that really men think it is so, is't not allowed by Christ's Law, either for Subjects, or others, against the Will of the King, into whose care she's put, by force of Arms, to con­strain, or beat her to a Purity? A case of conscience you'l find, whereby to resolve this, decided by our Saviour's own Mouth, in the 9th chap. of St. Luke; where entring, saith the Text, into a Village of Samaria, the Inhabitants were so far from receiving the Doctrine he intended to preach, that indeed they endur'd not his Person. Hence Iames and Iohn, the Two Sons of Thunder, begin straight to shew their Temper; What! not receive Christ, nor the Christian Faith! Master, shall we command fire from heaven? For if Perswasion will not draw men unto the Gospel thou bring'st, it must be done by Fire, or by Sword. Our Saviour replies, Ye know not of what spirit ye are: Ye understand not at all what thing 'tis to be a Christian. I came not to destroy mens Lives, but to save them; I came not to plant a Religion in Blood; no, I leave that to Turks, and to Mahomet: Had that been my Intent, you Iames and Iohn had been no Apostles for me: I would then have made choice of Commanders from an Army, not of Fisher-men from their Nets. And yet in [Page 16] these times have not we the like Sons of Thunder? What I will they not receive the New Holy Discipline, the very Scepter of Christ, the Throne of his Mediatorship (and in­deed they could do little, if they knew not how to cloath their new Fancies in good Words), Lord, shall we com­mand Fire from Heaven? or if you will, Fire from Hell? Shall we raise a Rebellion? Shall we by a Covenant swear Christ into his Throne, or forswear the King out of his? What think ye will be replied to these, and the like kind of men, but ye know not of what spirit ye are? It's not lawful by Blood to bring in Christian Faith; and is it lawful by Blood to bring in that thing which they of late call a Christian Government? It's not lawful to plant a Church by such Force; and is it lawful thus to reform it? They who think it is, truly for my part, I neither at all know of what spirit they are, no, nor of what reason neither; This I well know, of what spirit they are not; they are of no spirit Evangelical.

So then, to attempt to reform a Church in despite of the Prince whom God has now placed her under, is to in­vade Royal Power, and can be indeed called but a more zealous kind of Rebellion; since to cure a Church by such drenches as these, is, no doubt, at the same time to give Poyson to a Kingdom: and 'twas therefore decreed in that most ancient Council of Eliberis (twenty years before that of Nice,) ‘That if in hatred to Idolatry it self, a private man would needs pull down Images, he should by no means be esteemed a Martyr, if he lost his life in that service.’ And the Fathers there give their Reason, because we have no example for this either from Prophets or Apostles. No, 'twas their part to preach down High Places, or Idols, but they well knew 'twas the Duty of Kings, of Supreme Powers to remove them: And he can be no Martyr for the first Table of the Law, who is in the [Page 17] same deed a Transgressor of the second: nor will God at all thank him as a Reformer of his Church, who in the self­same Act is no less than a plain Traitor to his Deputy. So that as for Subjects to take up Arms against their Kings, is by the Doctrine of St. Peter and St. Paul, in all cases dam­nable: so specially to do this in point of our Religion, which so much commends and blesseth Patience, and Suffe­rings, and Martyrdom, either upon pretence to plant it where it now is not, or to reform it where it has been planted, is of all other kinds of Contentions or Wars, the most Turkishly Antichristian.

And therefore to avoid Quarrels and Blood, 'twas He­zekiah the King who here reforms the Church of Iudea; But yet, durst he adventure alone upon an attempt so sa­cred and so great? No, you'l easily find in the circumstan­ces of the Text, that he had both a Council, and withal a Rule to direct him; for if you read the 30, and the 31, of the 2d of Chron. you'l see this Reformation was made in the time of a most solemn Passover, where the Priests and Levites, the Princes and the People met; and when, Saith the Text, chap. 30. ver. 30. Hezekiah had spoke com­fortable words to all the Levites that taught the good knowledg of the Lord. Yea, Iosephus seems to put into this Kings mouth a Synodical Oration in the ninth of his Antiquities. I say, when upon the Kings encouragement the Levites had once taught that good Knowledg, then upon such counsel, such direction as this, then came the Reformati­on; For so Moses was plain in the blessing he gave upon the whole Tribe of Levi: They shall teach Iacob thy judg­ments, and Israel thy Law, Deut. 33. at the 10. And as he had a Council, so 'tis as plain by the self-same words he had a Rule too to go by, 'twas the good Knowledg of the Lord, which is in Moses phrase his Iudgments and his Law: And lest he should perhaps err in the Interpretation of that sa­cred [Page 18] Text, he had the help of the best Comment too, as you but now heard from the 22d of Ioshua, 'twas the sense and practice of the Hebrew Church, whilst she was yet Primitive.

That the Church of England was reformed by the Power Royal, by a Power that made use of the like Counsel, and like Rule▪ is a truth I think none here doubts of; if any do, 'twill be soon clear'd both from our Stories and our Laws; that first Our Liturgy which Reform'd Gods Publick Service, was compos'd by Bishops and others of great Knowledg in Antiquity, many whereof attained the Honour of Martyrdom: And then the Book of our Articles which reformed the Theological Tenets, the com­mon Doctrines of our Church, were Compiled by Synods, by Convocations, by the two Solemn Provincial Councils of London, or if you will, the two National, because both our Provinces concurr'd in the same truth, in the years 52 and 62. And that our Rule was the same they here used in Iewry, Gods word interpreted by the Sense and Practice of the Ancient Church, appears in the next Synod after, where 'tis decreed in plain words, ‘That whosoever un­dertakes to teach any truth as necessary to salvation, which he is not able to make good by Text, as 'twas un­derstood by the Fathers, and the Ancient Church, shall be expos'd to Ecclesiastical Censure, and Cano­nical Correction.’ And we cannot think our Church would enjoyn a Rule to her Sons, which yet she had not kept her self. In this Point then we are hand in hand with Iudah; the same Power, the same Council, the same Rule. I go to the next following, The Extent of the Reformation: 'twas only set up in his own Territories, Iudah and Ierusalem.

[Page 19] Indeed Hezekiah wrote Letters, and sent to the remains of the Ten Tribes, to joyn in this great Action with him; but they, for the most part, contemn'd his Message, and slighted his Attempt, 2 Chron. 30. The King did exceed­ing well: For 'twas to be much wished, that in a Design so highly pious as this, all Israel would have been unani­mous: But yet if Ephraim, and others, will refuse to hear, Iudah must mend alone. How generally a Reformation was desir'd in these parts of Christendom, by men of the choicest Note, both for Learning and Piety, 'twere no hard Task at all to shew you. Nay, in the very Council of Trent, Ten several Kingdoms and States desir'd the Cup for the People, both by their Ambassadors, and their Prelates: Many press'd for a Redress of Service in an unknown Tongue; many for many other particulars: All were re­fus'd, and the Reason plain; Order was there taken (you may guess by whom), that there were more Italian Pre­lates, sometimes by Twenty, sometimes by an Hundred, than there were of all the World besides; so that in effect all this Christendom would have reformed her self, had not Italy oppos'd it. Nor can that be call'd a General Coun­cil, ('twas but Patriarchal at the largest) since the Bishops of the East, and other great Churches, were not there, no, nor those Three long since so most famous Patriarchs of Constantinople, and Alexandria, and Antioch, who though they may be deceiv'd in that Tenet of the Procession of the Holy Ghost, yet whatever Error they are in, in that point, they are in no Heresie, as is confess'd by P. Lombard him­self, and has been oft made unanswerably good, by Men as well vers'd in controversal Points, as any Christendom has bred. But 'tis the Artifice of the Western Church, to per­swade the World, that those ancient parts are now fallen from the Church, that so within the Curtains of their own Patriarchate she may have General Councils, and an [Page 20] universal Church; and so though she now make not near a Third part of the Christian World, yet with the Dona­tist, she dares profess her self the only Catholick Church, and so damns all Mankind without her. Neither yet do I deny, nay, I affirm it rather, That a true General Coun­cil could best prescribe Remedies unto so large a Disease; but to convoke that, was extreamly difficult, and we are all sure 'twas not done. For what Christian Princes can now give safe conduct to the Bishops and Patriarchs of those remoter parts of the Church? So then, if neither a true General Council, nor free Patriarchal, could be had, were't not strange Imprudence to refuse a Cure, because we could not use the best Physicians? In this case no doubt it un­questionably holds, what Gerson, the Learned Chancellor of Paris, has spoken out without Limitation, and he (as Bell. affirms) was, Vir doctus & pius; he was a learned and a good man too; and you shall hear that good mans words; Nolo tamen dicere, &c. ‘I will not say, faith he, but the Church may be reformed by parts; yea, this is necessary, and to effect it Provincial Councils may suffice, and in some things Diocesan:’ 'tis in his Tract. de Gen. Con. uni­us obed. And indeed Particular Churches have gone far­ther in this kind than our dear Mother e're dream'd of. For four things there are chiefly of Synodical Cognizance, Articles of Faith, Forms of Divine Worship, Theological Conclusions for the Peace of each Church, and the points of Ceremony. Only these Three last were the Subject of our Reformation, we still adhering unto the Three Creeds, which are the Faith of the Church Catholick. But whence came Filio (que) in Two of these Three Creeds, if not in a Provincial Synod? In a General, no man thinks it did: And some Learned men ascribe that Addition of Faith to the Eighth Synod of Toledo. And if a Provincial of Spain may thus decide Points of Faith, I understand not why a [Page 21] National of England may not be heard in far less matters. Nay, in the Fourth of Toledo 'twas challeng'd by the Fa­thers, as the proper Right of a National Synod, that it might decide Points of Faith, as clearly appears in the 3. Can. of that Council.

You see then the Parallel still holds; Hezekiah reform'd but his Two Tribes, and our English Princes but their own Territories. I come to the last of this Second General. The manner of the Reformation; He did as well teach the truth, as reform the corruptions: He took away the high pla­ces, and he said, Ye shall, &c.

Ye shall worship before one altar; so his words are set down, 2 Chron. 32. at the 12th. He did not only remove their Errors, as if that past Triumph might suffice them; but for the future he enjoin'd the People to employ their Devotion according to God's sacred Law. And did not we so too? Witness our Catechisms, and our Liturgy, our many Forms of Devotion to God, and our many enlarge­ments of those Moral Duties we owe to the several ranks of our Neighbours. 'Tis then but a Calumny, and a fond one too, to call our Faith a Negative Religion, as if to believe that some Men are erroneous, were the sole Article of all our Churches Creed. Truth is, we may thank them for it, that 'tis with us as with Iudah; our Profession must needs now contain some Negatives: High places are not al­lowable, maim'd Sacraments must not be suffered, nor Ima­ges ador'd; but yet they may soon see our Positive Tracts are more large than our Polemicks, and that we have taken more pains to make men good, than to make them Learned or Judicious.

I heartily wish I could in this regard as well defend some Sons of our Church, as I am sure I can our Church it self. For many mens ill carriage seem to divide the two clauses here, which are so nearly join'd in my Text. They, [Page 22] like well to remove High Places and Altars, in this regard, none shall shew more Zeal than they; nay, under preten­ces of such corruptions as these, if you please, remove Church and all. But when we once come to this, Ye shall worship before one altar; ye shall bow down, ye shall bend your selves (for so the word here imports), ye shall be devout, and religious; and this not only in your inmost thoughts, but in your outward Forms of Deportment; they like no such Reformation; 'tis enough to save them, that they have learned to hate Rome, and that they are no superstitious Persons. Let not such men deceive them­selves. 'T will one day rise up in Judgment, 'twill plead a­gainst them, and severely too, that they have been bred Members of such a reform'd Church, and yet neither in their Devotions, nor their Lives themselves, have they shew'd the least Reformation: What good will it do these to have been so Christianly allow'd the Blessed Cup in the Sacrament, when yet either they come not at all, or come in their sins to receive it? What will it avail thee to have God's Service perform'd in a Language thou understand'st, when either very seldom thou hearest it read, or dost not heed at all, though thou hear it? How will that poor man, whom perhaps thou now pitiest, plead against thee at that Last Bar of Christ's Judgment? I indeed came seldom, and with small Devotion to that Sacrament, because I was there robb'd of that sacred Cup which I know Thou thy self had'st left me. I seldom came to God's Publick Service; and being there, I fix'd my Mind on some secular Lusts, be­cause I could not understand it: And in punishment shall I be equall'd to him who was allowed the Cup, and in Di­vine Service might have understood both all Hymns and Prayers? Believe it, the Reformation was made not to boast of, but to use: And he who shall declare, that he likes the thing, and yet is no whit the better for it, runs [Page 23] at the best but into a kind of Covetousness, (a sin St. Paul call'd Idolatry) for, with such miserable Churls, he loves indeed to have the power of this great Wealth, and yet he doth ne're mean to use it. But we ought to know, that when Hezekiah has once removed these High Places here, 'tis to this great end especially, that thenceforth we should be the more carefully devout before that allowed Altar at Ierusalem: And yet when we have done this, we must look for Scorns and Reproaches; For if Iudah, or any Child of hers, be grown good, you may surely expect there will be straight work for Rabshakeh, as you'l see in my last part, The Reformation censur'd, it's tax'd of Novelty, and Schism, and the like. But if ye say, We trust in the Lord our God, is not that he, &c.

'Twas in St. Hierom's time, an Hebrew Traditon, that this Rabshakeh was born a Iew; so that Father upon the 36th of Esay. Indeed so it often falls out, that Iudah has no man a more bitter Enemy, than when one of the Cir­cumcision becomes a Fugitive. Nor has our Mother­Church been by any more violently oppos'd, than by the hands who have left her, by the hands of those sicklemen, whose persons she did once baptize.

But leave the Man, come to his Words; If ye say unto me, We trust in the Lord, &c. You see Rabshakeh himself was grown so much a Divine, as to aver openly, That he who puts his Hand to overturn that Religion he professes; yea, that puts his Hand to overturn it too at the same time while he likes it, pretend what he will, he trusts not in God, he trusts perhaps in the Syrians, or in Egypt.

He goes on, Is not this he whose altars, &c. He, Iu­dah's old God; and therefore 'twas no less than plain No­velty to leave him: These High Places and Altars, as he conceiv'd, were his too: And to leave off to communi­cate [Page 24] in that Service they once us'd, what can this be less than a Schism? And have not we been long since; nay, are we not reproached even unto this day with the very self-same Imputations? They have set up a new Church; they are wicked Schismaticks: So that should the most modest man entertain that Dream of Pythagoras, of the transmi­gration of Souls from one body to another, he would not stick at all to affirm, that he who was once Rabshakeh, was since some tart Pen-man of this latter Century.

I'le speak first of that Tax, the reproach of Novelty: And I beseech you mark how Rabshakeh has here fram'd his Words. He strives to lay all upon this Present King; He­zekiah took away, and Hezekiah said; No mention that this Fact was enjoyn'd by Moses; aud practis'd too by the Hebrew Church, whilst she was the Primitive. Thus let but Rabshakeh once tell the tale, and a Church larely re­form'd shall indeed appear to be but a late founded Church. Ignorance may perhaps excuse this Commander here in my Text; but some Learned men in our times are more ex­treamly to blame: for you'l soon see how fond are their main Exceptions, do but suppose their Words put into the Mouth of Rabshakeh, when as here in my Text, at Ierusa­lem he be-spake the besieg'd men upon the Wall; ‘Hear, O ye Iews, will your aged Synagogue at length turn No­velist? Your Fathers worshipp'd in these High Moun­tains; but ye now say, Ierusalem's the place; where was the Church before Hezekiah? Was't no where, or in­visible? Were your Predecessors blinded with one joint consent? Or are ye only become more clear of sight, what! than Solomon the wise, or Asa the religious? Does your God sometime forsake his Church, or will for Hun­dreds of Years suffer it to be so constantly obscur'd? Let not this pure Prince deceive you still with these fond up­start toys; for 'tis your Iudah's greatest Fame that she's thought very Ancient.’

[Page 25] What Iew, I wonder, could this speech move, unless 'twere to laughter? Where was their Church before Hezeki­ah? In the same place, and among the same People, and 'twas still the very self-same Church: I say, the same in truth of essence (for so's a Thief a True man) but not in condition or in quality: for formerly it was corrupt, now reform'd by the Law of Moses; formerly it had heen dan­gerously diseas'd, but 'twas now cured by Hezekiah. Let them ask Naaman too, where was he before Elisha had heal'd him? Would he not divide the Question, He was long before, but he was withal Leprous: And Palestine had still a Church, but God knows 'twas a corrupt one. So then he who calls a reform'd Church new, because 'tis new­ly reform'd, might as well call Naaman a child too, because after his cure the Text plainly says his flesh came again like a child's. But in earnest, is our Age to be accounted from our recovery? Or is a man no Older than his Health? By this Philosophy they might perswade the Leper, that he bore Office in the Syrian Court before he was a Year Old. Let therefore the Modern Rabshakeh's cease to upbraid us with such known petty Cavils, our Church was no more invisible than that of Iudah, and might as well be before Luther was, as theirs before Hezekiah.

Secondly, They tax us of Schism; which is questionless a great sin, being in frequent Texts very sharply condemn'd in Scripture. 'Tis then committed when there is a Scissure, a Breach, an uncharitable Division made, betwixt those men especially, which in point of Religion were once joyn'd aud linkt together. So that were this Rupture is, there is sin without doubt; all the Question is, on which side the Crime must lie; sometimes it may lie on both, but it ever lies on him that gives just cause of Di­vision, not ever on him that divides. Abraham did divide from his Idolatrous Kindred, and so did St. Paul from his [Page 26] old friends the Iews. The Orthodox Christians were forc'd to do the like when Arrianism did prevail: and yet in the opinon of these Rabshakehs themselves, neither Abra­ham, not St. Paul, nor those old Christians were Schis­matical. Thus when Hezekiah once had reform'd the Church of Iudea, no man can think a Conscientious Iew would at all communicate in the service of these High Places; he did divide from it without doubt, although before, either by custom or ignorance, or the like, he did it frequently without Scruple. And yet might such a Iew be held guilty of Schism? no more sure than Hezekiah, who both did and enjoyn'd the like▪ and yet the Holy Ghost in this History here does in express terms commend him; in the fourth verse of this Chapter he commends him as much for reforming the Church as he does for be­ing like David. So that to tax him, were indeed to affirm, that the Spirit of God commends a Schismatick himself for the very act of his schism.

Thus then they are not still they who divide, but they who give or continue the just cause of Division, who are guilty of that sin we speak of. But yet since in Church-controversies 'tis not so easie to judg what makes that just cause I nam'd, and that no wise man can think it fit it should be left to each private judgment: since in such di­visions as these, men are extreamly apt to forget all bonds of Peace, and for possession sometimes of a little suppos'd truth, quit indeed their whole Estate of Charity: therefore the Ancients do oft define schism by these two grand notes or Characters.

First, when men make Divisions in point of Religion a­gainst the consent of their lawful Pastors: 'tis so defined by St. Cyprian, and St. Ierom, and others. Secondly, when men cast out of the Church Catholick, and so damn to Hell all that hold not their opinions. And this St. Austin doth oft times call schism in the Donatists.

[Page 27] And now take Schism in what sense, under what note you please, our Mother Church is guiltless of that impu­tation. First take it for a Division in Gods publick Ser­vice; She did no more in that point than what was here done by Hezekiah: since she had as clear Text, and so as just cause, To give the Cup to the People; to turn their Devotions into a language they understood, as this King here had, to bring the Iews from their Old Mass in high places, unto that one Altar at Ierusalem. Nay the cause we had, was more just than that of Iudah: because the cor­ruptions of the Western Church were all backt by Ty­ranny, Men were constrain'd into Errors; when yet we read not at all that if a pious Iew would have kept him­self unto that one Altar at Ierusalem, he was either checkt by their Kings, or opprest by their Priests, or condemn'd to Tophet by their Sanhedrim.

Secondly, Take Schism for an opposition made against our lawful Pastors: and our Church you'l find was not guilty in this matter neither. For at that time when the Re­formation was made, we were under our own Synods only, and with what readiness they joyn'd in this grand Work, you have heard in my second General. 'Tis true, that for some hundreds of years we had been under a known Fo­reign Power (but yet such a Power as came not amongst us but by the breach of a great General Council, as is clear from the last Canon of the first of Ephesus) A Power, I say, Patriarchal, and so meerly of Ecclesiastical Right, not of Divine Institution. A Power which in the Ancient Church had been set up by Emperors, as that of Iustiniana prima by Iustinian in his 11th Novel: ‘Nay 'twas openly main­tained in the great Council of Chalcedon, that all the Patriarchs had gain'd their Power meerly by Custom, and by Imperial Countenance:’ So that 'tis a Power that may be taken away, without all doubt taken away, other­wise [Page 28] Gerson the wise Chancellor of Paris would not have written in France, De au [...]eribilitate Papae. England went f [...]rther, and did indeed remove that, which others did but say was removable: but removed it was before the Re­formation; that removed it not, as men well know that know our Laws; and so we were left but under our own Synods only; to that now besides a General Council which we are willing to hear, we can resist no lawful Pastors but our own.

Lastly, Take Schism for that monstrous height of un­charitableness, when with the Donatists those men who are but a part of the Church, dare call themselves the Church Catholick, and so dare damn all the rest of Man­kind, who refuse to imbrace their opinions; I could name you those who are guilty of this, but I am sure our Dear Mother is not, who has been so mild to those that have most highly oppos'd Her, that besides the Reproaches of Novelty and Schism, you all well know she hath been long reproached for her Charity. And yet when St. Cyprian be­ing Primate of Carthage, did in his full Synod against the sense of the whole Church set up plain Rebaptization, St. Austin defends him from the Tax of Schism, only be­cause he began that Provincial Council with this charita­ble Clause, Nemineni damnantes, nec a jure Communionis quempiam, si diversum senserit, removentes, ‘We decree this, saith he, but yet we damn no man, nor do we bar any from the Communion of Africk though he think the quite contrary.’ And how punctually have we ob­served this Rule of good old St. Cyprian? In these late Church-Controversies, Opinions indeed, and Actions we condemn (and so did that Father too) but yet we damn no mans Person. For 'tis he Tenor of God Laws, Thou shalt love thy Neighbour, his Person, as thy self; but 'tis not said, Thou shalt love his Deeds or Opinions. For though what [Page 29] men act or opine may be in it self damnable, yet (where they are not wilfully perverse) customary breeding joyn'd with ignorance or the like, may excuse the men from dam­nation. And how far we have been, in such differences as these, from debatring any Man or Communion, yea, even those that heretofore did oppose, and now perhaps do disdain us, I appeal to the first twelve years of Queen Elizabeth, where men apparently known to have kept their old opinions, were not only received into the Service of our Church, but were admitted to the Eucharist it self, the very highest act of Communion.

And now I have gone through my Text, and shall only add, That I scarce know any Scruple, any Query they make, that may not well be solv'd from this Parallel. They ask why their opinions should be condemn'd for Errors, if we know not the precise time when they rose? yes, the High Places here were gross Errors, and yet the most learned dare not say, whether they rose in the time of the Iudges, or in the days of King Solomon. They ask whether our Forefathers were damn'd, who, we grant, dyed in their Religion? And we demand, whether for so many hundred years were all the Iews damn'd that did worship God in High Places? I think they were not, if they liv'd pious lives, and kept themselves from all wilful ignorance. For then, tho the Errors of both Churches, the Hebrew and the Christian too, were in themselves no less than damnable; yet by ignorance, or by the like Apology with this, tho they made no express repentance for a sin they knew not; yet by the ordinary dispensation of Divine Grace, the men, we think, escap'd damnation. But I have one Query more, a Case of Conscience to leave with you. ‘Suppose a Jew that had been rightly bred in the Reformation of King Hezekiah, should at length fall back to do Sacrifice in the High Places, upon confidence that his Forefathers might well be saved in that Service, [Page 30] whether were not this man indeed guilty of murther, ( Lev. 17. 4.) and so not in state of Salvation, unless by express Repentance he turn back to God, for this very Apostacy?’ The Resolution is easy, it scarce needs Levi's help: and I beseech you let it be thought on, and then I hope, to turn Apostate from a true Reformed Church will be held no slight trivial matter.

All this is to let you see the great Likeness betwixt the two Churches I have nam'd, Iudah and England, both, were reform'd, by a Power, by a Council and Rule most ap­provable, without Schism, without Rebellion; in both the Ceremonies remain'd decent, the Service of God dayly, and honourable, and which is more than this, tho they both remov'd the forbidden Altars, yet both kept the old Priesthood too. And since God in so clear Text did ap­prove the one, why should any man ever doubt the other? And yet Iudah in my Text was almost eaten out by the Sword: Alas, we are in this but too like her: Although perhaps we are more like this poor Church, when she was yet more miserable, when she mixed her tears with the sad tenor of those words: Ps. 13. 7. By the waters of Baby­lon we sat down and wept, when we remembred thee, O Sion. For let me assure you, 'twas a distressed reform'd Church they there remembred, and no marvel then if that memo­rial were in tears: either in tears of Repentance, that their own foul sins had brought on this great Desolation: or else in tears of longing to see that famous Church once re­stor'd, to see God again serv'd in the beauty of holiness, that their Ravished Souls might once more ascend in Prayers and Hymns, or Hallelujahs, in one of the Old Songs of Sion. Let us but sow in such tears as these, and I should certainly hope we should e're long reap in joy; in joy temporal, to see our King and our selves in Peace, and in joy spiritual, to see that Church of God re-established Which God, &c.