Christians who were designed and ordained for diffusing the Gospel through the Cities Villages and Places adjacent and these Presbyters were as the Bishop's Children educated and formed by him being in all they did directed by him and accountable to him and were as Probationers for the Bishoprick one of them being always chosen to succeed in the seat when vacant through the Bishop's death Now all these lived together as in a little College and were maintained out of the charitable Oblations of the People which were deposited in the Bishop's hands and divided in four parts one falling to the Bishop another to the Clergy a third to the Widows and Orphans and other poor Persons and a fourth to the building of edifices for Worship Thus the Churches were planted and the Gospel was disseminated through the World But at first every Bishop had but one Parish yet afterwards when the numbers of the Christians encreased that they could not conveniently meet in one place and when through the violence of the Persecutions they durst not assemble in great multitudes the Bishops divided their charges in lesser Parishes and gave assignments to the Presbyters of particular flocks which was done first in Rome in the beginning of the Second Century and these Churches assigned to Presbyters as they received the Gospel from the Bishop so they owned a dependence on him as their Father who was also making frequent excursions to them and visiting the whole bounds of his Precinct And things continued thus in a Parochial Government till toward the end of the Second Century the Bishop being chiefly entrusted with the cure of Souls a share whereof was also committed to the Presbyters who were subject to him and particularly were to be ordained by him nor could any Ordination be without the Bishop who in ordaining was to carry along with him the conâ—urrence of the Presbyters as in every other act of Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction But I run not out into more particulars because of an account of all these things which I have drawn with an unbiass'd ingenuity and as much diligence as was possible for me to bring along with me to so laborious a work and this I shall send you when our Conference shall be at an end But in the end of the Seâ—ond Century the Churches were framed in another mould from the division of the Empire and the Bishops of the Cities did according to the several divisions of the Empire associate in Synods with the chief Bishop of that Division or Province who was called the Metropolitan from the dignity of the City where he was Bishop And hence sprang Provincial Synods and the Superiorities and Precedencies of Bishopricks which were ratified in the Council of Nice as ancient Customs they being at that time above an hundred years old In the beginning of the Third Century as the purity of Churchmen begun to abate so new methods were devised for preparing them well to those sacred Functions and therefore they were appointed to pass through several degrees before they could be Deacons Presbyters or Bishops And the Orders of Porters Readers Singers Exorcists or Catechists Acolyths who were to be the Bishops attendants and Sub-deacons were set up of whom mention is made first by Cypâ—ian and these degrees were so many steps of probationership to the supreme Order But all this was not able to keep out the corruptions weâ—e breaking in upon Church Officeâ—s eâ—peâ—â—ally after the Fouâ—th Century that the Empire became Christian which as it brougâ—t much riches and splendor on Church Empâ—oyments so it let in gâ—eat swarms of corrupt men on the Christian Assemblies And then the election to Church Offices which was formerly in the hands of the people was taken from them by reason of the tumults and disorders were in these elections which sometimes ended in blood and occasioned much faction and schism And Ambitus became now such an universal sin among Churchmen that in that Century Monasteries were founded in divers places by holy Bishops as by Basile Augustine Martin and others who imitated the Example of those in Egypt and Nitria whose design was the purifying of these who were to serve in the Gospel It is true these Seminaries did also degenerate and become nests of superstition and idleness yet it cannot be denied but this was an excellent Constitution for rightly forming the minds of the designers for holy Oâ—ders that being trained up in a course of Devotion Fasting Solitude abstraction from the World and Poverty they might be better qualified for the discharge of that holy Function And thus I have given you a general draught and perspective of the first Constitution of Churches together with some steps of their advanceâ— and declinings But I despair not to give you an ampler account and plan of their rules and forms Mean while let this suffice Phil. From what you have told us I shall propose the notion I have of Episcopacy that the work of a Bishop as it is chiefly to feed the flock so it is more particularly to form educate and try these who are to be admitted to Church Imployments and to over-see direct admonish and reprove these who are already setled in Church Offices so that as the chief tryal of those who are to be ordained is his work the Ordinations ought to be performed by him yet not so as to exclude the assistance and concurrence of Presbyters both in the previous tryal and in the Ordination it self But on the other hand no Ordination ought to be without the Bishop And as for Jurisdiction though the Bishop hath authority to over-see reprove and admonish the Clergy yet in all acts of publick Jurisdiction as he ought not to proceed without their concurrence so neither ought they without his knowledge and allowance determine about Ecclesiastical matters As for the notion of the distinct Offices of Bishop and Presbyter I confess it is not so clear to me and therefore since I look upon the â—acramental Actions as the highest of sacred Peâ—formances I cannot but acknowledge these who are empowered â—or them must be of the highest Office in the Châ—rch So I do not alledge a Bishop to be a disâ—inct Office from a Presbyter but a different degree in the same Office to whom for order and unities sake the chief inspection and care of Ecclesiastical Matters ought to be referred and who shall have authority to curb the Insolencies of some factious and turbulent Spirits His work should be to feed the flock by the Word and Sacraments as well as other Presbyters and especially to try and ordain Entrants and to over-see direct and admonish such as bear Office And I the more willingly incline to believe Bishops and Presbyters to be the several degrees of the same Office since the names of Bishop and Presbyter are used for the same thing in Scripture and are also used promiscuously by the Writers of the two first Centuries Now Isotimus when you bring either clear Scripture or
fall in the hands of Mortals are obnoxious And may not one that quarrels a standing Ministery argue on the same grounds a Ministers authority over the people gave the rise to the authority Bishops pretend over Ministers and so the Ministery will be concluded the first step of the Beast's Throne Or may not the authority your Judicatories pretend to be at the same rate struck out since from lesser Synods sprung greater ones from Provincial rose Generals and from these Oecumenical ones with the pretence of infallibility But to come nearer you that whole frame of Metropolitans and Patriarchs was taken from the division of the Roman Empire which made up but one great National Church and so no wonder the Bishop of the Imperial City of that Empire was the Metropolitan of that Church yet he was not all that neither since he had no authority over his fellow Patriarchs being only the first in order which truly were the Bishops of that Church what they were for the first four Ages it was never judged an absurdity to grant to them still tho the ruin of the Roman Empire and its division into so many Kingdoms which are constituted in various National Churches do alter the present frame of Europe so entirely from what was then that with very good reason what was then submitted to on the account of the Unity of the Empire may be now undone by reason of the several Kingdoms which are National Churches within themselves and need not to own so much as the acknowledgment of Primacy to any but to the Metropolitan of their own Kingdom And it seems the interest of Princes as well as Churches to assert this But for the pretence of the Pope's supremacy Episcopacy was so far from being judged a step to it that the ruin of the Episcopal authority over Presbyters and the granting them exemptions from the Jurisdiction of their Ordinary was the greatest advance the Roman Bishop ever made in his tyrannical usurpation over Churches I need not here tell so known a matter as is that of the exemption of the Regulars who being subject to their own Superiors and Generals and by them to the Pope were sent through the World in swarms and with great shews of piety devotion and poverty carried away all the esteem and following from the secular Clergy who were indeed become too secular and these were the Pope's Agents and Emissaries who brought the World to receive the mark of the Beast and wonder at her For before that time the Popes found more difficulty to carry on their pretensions both from secular Princes and Bishops But these Regulars being warranted to preach and administer the Sacraments without the Bishop's license or being subject and accountable to him as they brought the Bishops under great contempt so they were the Pope's chief confidents in all their treasonable plots against the Princes of Europe And when at the Council of Trent the Bishops of Spain being weary of the insolencies of the Regulars and of the Papal yoak designed to get free from it The great mean they proposed was to get Episcopacy declared to be of divine Right which would have struck out both the one and the other But the Papal Party foresaw this well and opposed it with all the Artifice imaginable and Lainez the Jesuit did at large discourse against it and they carried it so that it was not permitted to be declared of divine Right And by this judg if it be likely that the Papacy owes its rise to Episcopacy since the declaring it to be of divine Right was judged one of the greatest blows the Papal Dominion could have received as the abusing of the Episcopal authority was the greatest step to its Exaltation Isot. Be in these things what may be I am sure from the beginning it was not so since Christ did so expresly prohibit all dominion and authority among his Disciples when he said But it shall not be so among you but whosoever will be great among you let him be your minister Luke 22.26 Whereby he did not only condemn a tyrannical domination but simply all Authority like that the Lords of the Gentiles exercised over them See page 88. Crit. I confess the advantages some have drawn from these words of CHRIST for deciding this question have many times appeared strange to me their purpose being so visibly different from that to which they are applied But if we examine the occasion that drew these words from CHRIST it will furnish us with a key for understanding them aright and that was the frequent contentions were among the Disciples about the precedency in the Kingdom of CHRIST for they were in the vulgar Iudaical Error who believed the Messiah was to be a temporal Prince and so understood all the pompous promises of the New Dispensation liberally and thought that CHRIST should have restored Israel in the literal meaning therefore they began to contend who should be preferred in his Kingdom and the Wife of Zebedee did early bespeak the chief preferments for her Sons Yea we find them sticking to this mistake even at CHRIST's Ascension by the question then moved concerning his restoring the Kingdom at that time to Israel Now these Contentions as they sprung from an error of their judgments so also they took their rise from their proud ambition And for a check to both our Saviour answers them by telling the difference was to be betwixt his Kingdom and the Kingdoms of the Nations these being exercised by Grandeur and temporal Authority whereas his Kingdom was Spiritual and allowed nothing of that since Churchmen have not by CHRIST a Lordly or Despotick dominion over Christians committed to them but a paternal and brotherly one by which in commanding they serve their Flock so that it is both a Ministery and an Authority Therefore the words of Christ it shall not be so among you relate nothing to the degrees or ranks of Churchmen but to the nature of their power and jurisdiction over their flock and not to their degrees among themselves which appears evidently from the whole contexture of the words And that he is not speaking of any equality among Churchmen in their Church power appears from the mention is made of the greatest and the chief He that is greatest among you let him be as the younger and he that is chief as he that doth serve which shew he was not here designed to strike out the degrees of superiority when he makes express mention of them but to intimate that the higher the degrees of Ecclesiastical Offices did raise them they were thereby obliged to the more humility and the greater labor All which is evidently confirmed by the instance he gives of himself which shews still he is not meaning of Church power since he had certainly the highest Ecclesiastical aâ—thority but only of Civil dominion nothing of which he would assume And if this place be to be applied to Church power then it will rather
prove too much that there should be no power at all among Churchmen over other Christians For since the parallel runs betwixt the Disciples and the Lords of the Gentiles it will run thus that tho the Lords of the Gentiles bear rule over their people yet you must not over yours so that this must either be restricted to Civil Authority or else it will quite strike out all Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction But how this should be brought to prove that there may not be several ranks in Church Offices I cannot yet imagine And as it is not thought contrary to this that a Minister is over your Lay-Elders and Deacons why should it be more contrary to it that a rank of Bishops be over Ministers In a word since we find the Apostles exercising this paternal authority over other Churchmen it will clearly follow they understood not Christ as hereby meaning to discharge the several ranks of Churchmen with different degrees of power But to tell you plainly what by these words of CHRIST is clearly forbidden I acknowledg that chiefly the Pope's pretence to the Temporal Dominion over Christendom whether directly or indirectly as the Vicar of CHRIST is expresly condemned Next all Churchmen under what notion or in what Judicatory soever are condemned who study upon a pretence of the Churches intrinsick power to possess themselves of the authority to determine about obedience due to Kings or Parliaments and who bring a tyranny on the Christians and prâ—cure what by Arts what by Power the secular Arm to serve at their beck Whether this was the practice of the late General Assemblies or not I leave it to all who are so old as to remember how squares went then and if the leading Men at that time had not really the secular power ready to lacquay at their commands so that they ruled in the spirit of the Lords of the Gentiles whatever they might have pretended And the following change of Government did fully prove that the obedience which was universally given to their commands was only an appendage of the Civil Power which was then directed by them For no sooner was the power invaded by the Usurper who regarded their Judicatories little but the Obedience payed to their Decrees evanished Thus I say these who build all their pretences to parity on their mistakes of these words did most signally despise and neglect them in their true and real meaning Now think not to retort this on any additions of Secular Power which the munificence of Princes may have annexed to the Episcopal Office for that is not at all condemned here CHRIST speaking only of the power Churchmen as such derived from him their Head which only bars all pretensions to Civil Power on the title of their Functions but doth not say that their Functions render them incapable of receiving any Secular Power by a secular conveyance from the Civil Magistrate And so far have I considered this great and pompous argument against precedency in the Church and am mistaken if I have not satisfied you of the slender foundations it is built upon all which is also applicable to St. Peter's words of not Lording it over their flocks Isot. You are much mistaken if you think that to be the great foundation of our belief of a parity among Churchmen for I will give you another page 91. which is this that IESUS CHRIST the head of his Church did institute a setled Ministery in his Church to feed and over-see the Flock to preach to reprove to bind loose c. It is true he gave the Apostles many singular things beyond their Successors which were necessary for that time and work and were to expire with it But as to their Ministerial Power which was to continue he made all equal The Apostles also acknowledged the Pastors of the Churches their fellow-laborors and Brethren And the feeding and overseeing the Flock are duties so complicated together that it is evident none can be fitted for the one without they have also authority for the other And therefore all who have a power to preach must also have a right to govern since Discipline is referable to preaching as a mean to its end preaching being the great end of the Ministery These therefore who are sent upon that work must not be limited in the other neither do we ever find CHRIST instituting a Superiour Order over preaching Presbyters which shews he judged it not necessary And no more did the Apostles though they with-held none of the Counsel of GOD from the flock Therefore this Superior Order usurping the power from the preaching Elders since it hath neither warrant nor institution in Scripture is to be rejected as an invasion of the rights of the Church In fine the great advantage our Plea for parity hath is that it proves its self till you prove a disparity For since you acknowledg it to be of divine Right that there be Officeâ—s in the House of GOD except you prove the institution of several Orders an equality among them must be concluded And upon these accounts it is that we cannot acknowledg the lawfulness of Prelacy Phil. I am sure if your Friends had now heard you they would for ever absolve you from designing to betray their cause by a faint Patrociny since you have in a few words laid out all their Forces but if you call to mind what hath heen already said you will find most of what you have now pleaded to be answered beforehand For I acknowledge Bishop and Presbyter to be one and the same Office and so I plead for no new Office-Bearers in the Church Next in our second Conference the power given to Churchmen was proved to be double The first branch of it is their Authority to publish the Gospel to manage the Worship and to dispense the Sacraments And this is all that is of divine right in the Ministery in which Bishops and Presbyters are equal sharers both being vested with this power But beside this the Church claims a power of Jurisdiction of making rules for discipline and of applying and executing the same all which is indeed suitable to the common Laws of Societies and to the general rules of Scripture but hath no positive warrant from any Scripture precept And all these Constitutions of Churches into Synods and the Canons of discipline taking their rise from the divisions of the World into the several Provinces and beginning in the end of the second and beginning of the third Century do clearly shew they can be derived from no divine Original and so were as to their particular form but of humane Constitution therefore as to the management of this Jurisdiction it is in the Churches power to cast it in what mould she will and if so then the constant practice of the Church for so many ages should determine us unless we will pretend to understand the exigencies and conveniences of it better than they who were nearest the Apostolical time But we
opinions or actings of all your party which when you undertake then I allow you to charge me with what you will But it is a different thing to say that no Ordination nor greater act of Jurisdiction should pass without the Bishop's consent or concurrence which is all I shall pretend to and is certainly most necessary for preserving of Order and Peace from asserting that the sole power for these sâ—ands in the Bishops person And though I do hold it schismatical to ordain without a Bishop where he may be had yet I am not to annul these Ordinations that pass from Presbyters where no Bishop can be had and this lays no claim to a new Office but only to a higher degree of inspection in the same Office whereby the exercise of some acts of Iurisdiction are restrained to such a method and this may be done either by the Churches free consent or by the King's authority As for the consecration of Bishops by a new imposition of hands it doth not prove them a distinct Office being only a solemn benediction and separation of them for the discharge of that inspection committed to them and so we find Paul and Barnabas though before that they preached the Gospel yet when they were sent on a particular Commission to preach to the gentiles were blessed with imposition of hands Acts 13.3 which was the usual Ceremony of benediction Therefore you have no reason to quarrel this unless you apprehend their managing this oversight the worse that they are blessed in order to it nor can you quarrel the Office in the Liturgy if you do not think they will manage their power the worse if they receive a new effusion of the holy Ghost And thus you see how little ground there is for quarrelling Episcopacy upon such pretences Eud. I am truly glad you have said so much for confirming me in my kindness for that Government for if you evinces its lawfulness I am sure the expediency of that Constitution will not be difficult to be proved both for the tryal of Entrants and the oversight of these in Office for when any thing lyes in the hands of a multitude we have ground enough to apprehend what the issue of it will prove And what sorry overly things these tâ—yals of Entrants are all know â—ow little pains is taken to form their minds into a right sense of that function to which they are to be initiated at one step without either previous degree or mature tryal And here I must say the ruine of the Church springs hence that the passage to sacred Offices lyes so patent whereby every one leaps into them out of a secular life having all the train of his vanities passions and carnal designs about him and most part entering thus unpurified and unprepared what is to be expected from them but that they become idle vain and licentious or proud ambitious popular and covetous I confess things among us are not come to any such settlement as might give a provision against this But devise me one like a Bishop's Authority who shall not confer Orders to any before either himself or some other select and excellent persons on whom he may with confidence devolve that trust be well satisfied not only about the learning and abilities but about the temper the piety the humility the gravity and discretion of such as pretend to holy Orders And that some longer tryal be taken of them by the probationership of some previous degree Indeed the poverty of the Church which is not able to maintain Seminaries and Colledges of such Probationers renders this design almost impracticable But stretch your thoughts as far as your invention can send them and see if you can provide such an expedient for the reforming of so visible an abuse as were the Bishop's plenary authority to decide in this matter For if it lie in the hands of a Plurality the major part of these as of all mankind being acted by lower measures the considerations of Kinred alliance friendship or powerful recommendations will always carry through persons be they what they will as to their abilities and other qualifications And a multitude of Churchmen is less concerned in the shame can follow an unworthy promotion which every individual of such a company will be ready to bear off himself and fasten on the Plurality But if there were one to whom this were peculiarly committed who had authority to stop it till he were clearly convinced that the person to be ordained was one from whose labors good might be expected to the Church he could act more roundly in the matter and it may be presupposed that his condition setting him above these low consideâ—ations to which the inferiour Clergy are more obnoxious he would manage it with more caution as knowing that both before GOD and Man he must bear the blame of any unworthy promotion And as for these in Office can any thing be more rational than that the inspection into their labors their deportment their conversation and their dexterity in Preaching and Catechising be not done mutually by themselves in a parity wherein it is to be imagined that as they degenerate they will be very gentle to one another And when any inspection is managed by an equal it opens a door to faction envy and emulation neither are the private rebukes of an equal so well received nor will it be easie for one of a modest temper to admonish his fellow-Presbyter freely And yet how many things are there of which Churchmen have need to be admonished in the discharge of all the parts of their function especially when they set out first being often equally void of experience and discretion But what a remedy for all this may be expected from an excellent Bishop who shall either if his health and strength allow it be making excursions through his Diocese and himself observe the temper the labors and conversation of his Clergy or at least trust this to such as he hath reason to confide most in that so he may understand what admonitions directions and reproofs are to be given which might obviate a great many indiscretions and scandals that flow from Churchmen And the authority of such a person as it would more recommend the reproofs to these for whom they were meant so it could prevail to make them effectual by a following Censure if neglected If the confusion some keep matters in have hindered us for coming at a desired settlement the Office of Episcopacy is not to be blamed whose native tendency I have laid out before you and in a fair idea but in what was both the rule and practice of the ancient Church and wants not latter instances foâ— verifying it In a word I must tell you I am so far from apprehending danger to the Church from Bishops having too much power that I shall fear rather its slow recovery because they have too little which might be managed with all the meekness and humility
in your Principles to answer this and see how you will clear this practice of Discipline from Tyranny since to debar men from the Sacraments is a greater dominion over Consciences than the determining about Rituals But to come nearer home there was a certain Society you have heard of ycleped the Kirk which had divers Books of Discipline containing rules for that and a Directory for Worship which had no few rules neither they had also a frame of Government the Supreme Judicatory whereof was composed of three Ministers and one ruling Elder from each Presbytery a ruling Elder beside from each Burrough two being allowed the Metropolis and a Commissioner was sent from each University and in this High Court the King came in with the Privilege of a Burgh for though the Metropolis had two he was allowed to send but one with a single Suffrage to represent him and this Court pretended to an Authority from Christ and their Authority was Sacred with no less certificate than he that despiseth you despiseth me Now how a Power can be committed to delegates without any Commission for it from the Superior will not be easily made out And they will search long ere they find a Divine Warrant for this Court unless they vouch Mary Mitchelsons Testimony for it whose hysterical Distempers were given out for Prophesies And whereas they are so tender of Christian Liberty that no Law must pass about the Rituals of Religion yet their Books of Discipline and Model of Government were not only setled by Law but afterwards sworn to be maintained in the Covenant wherein they swore the Preservation of the Reformed Religion in Scotland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government These were the tender Consciences that could not hear of any Law in matters indifferent and yet would have all swear to their Forms many of which they could not but know were indifferent which was a making them necessary at another rate than is done by a Law which the Legislator can repeal when he will and never were any in the world more addicted to their own Forms than they were An instance of this I will give which I dare say will surprise you When some designers for popularity in the Western parts of that Kirk did begin to disuse the Lord's Prayer in Worship and the singing the Conclusion or Doxology after the Psalm and the Minister's kneeling for private Devotion when he entred the Pulpit the General â—ssembly took this in very ill part and in a Letter they wrote to the Presbyteries complained sadly Of a Spirit of Innovation was beginning to get into the Kirk and to throw these laudible practices out of it mentioning the three I named which are commanded to be still practised and such as refused obedience are appointed to be conferr'd with in order to the giving of them satisfaction and if they continu'd untractable the Presbyteries were to proceed against them as they should be answerable to the next general Assembly This Letter I can produce authentically attested But is it not strange that some who were then zealous to condemn these Innovations should now be carried with the herd to be guilty of them I am become hoarse with speaking so long and so I must break off having as I suppose given many great Precedents from History for the using of Rites in divine matters without an express Warrant and for passing Laws upon these and have cleared the one of Superstition and the other of Tyranny Eud. Truly all of you have done your parts so well that even Isotimus himself seems half convinced It is then fully clear that as nothing is to be obtruded on our Belief without clear revelation so no sacred duty can be bound on oâ—r Obedience without a Divine Warrant but in Rituals especially in determining what may be done in a variety of ways to one particular Form there hath been and still must be a Power on Earth which provided it balance all things right and consider well the fitness of these Rites for attaining the designed end doth not invade God's Dominion by making Laws about them Nor will the pretence of Christian Liberty warrant our Disobedience to them It remains to be considered who are vested with this Power and how much of it belongs to the Magistrate and how much to the Church Basil. I now engage in a Theme which may perhaps lay me open to censure as if I were courting the Civil Powers by the asserting of their rights but I am too well known to you to dread your jealously much in this and I am too little known to my self if flattery be my foible I shall therefore with the greatest frankness and ingenuity lay open my sense of this matter with the Reasons that prevail with me in it but I desire first to hear Isotimus his opinion about it Isot. I do not deny the King hath Authority and Jurisdiction in matters Sacred but it must be asserted in a due line of Subordination First to Christ the King of Kings and the only Head of his Church And next to the Rulers and Office-bearers of the Church who are entrusted by Christ as his Ambassadors with the Souls of their Flocks and who must give him an account of their Labors therefore they must have their Rules only from him who empowers them and to whom they are subject They must also have a Power among them to preserve the Christian Society in order to which they must according to the practice of the Apostles when difficulties emerge meet together and consult what may be for the advancement of the Christian Religion and whoso refuseth to hear the Church when she errs not from her Rule he is to be accounted no better than a Heathen and a Publican And since the Church is called one body they ought to associate together in meetings seeing also they have their Power of Christ as Mediator whereas the Civil Powers hold of him as he is God they have a different Tenor distinct Ends and various Rules therefore the Authority of the Church is among the things of God which only belong to him And indeed Christians were very ill provided for by Christ if they must in matters of Religion be subject to the pleasure of secular and carnal Men who will be ready to serve their own Interests at the rate of the Ruin of every thing that is Sacred It is true the Civil Powers may and ought to convocate Synods to consult about matters of Religion to require Church-men to do their duty to add their Sanctions to Church Laws and to join with the sounder part for carrying on a Reformation But all this is cumulative to the Churches intrinsick Power and not privative so that if the Magistrate fall short of his duty they are notwithstanding that to go on as men empowered by Iesus Christ and he who despâ—seth them be his quality what it will despiseth him that sent them See p. 105. to p. 109. and p. 467. to
p. 486. Basil. In order to a clear progress in this matter I shall first discuss the nature and power of the Church by which a step shall be made to the Power the Magistrate may pretend to in matters Sacred The Apostles being sent by Iesus Christ did every where promulgate the Gospel and required such as received it to meet often together for joint Worship and the free profession of the Faith wherein they were particularly obliged to the use of the Sacraments The Apostles and after them all Church-men were also endued with a double Power The one was declarative for promulgating the Gospel the other was directive which properly is no power and by this they were to advise in such matters wherein they had no warrant to command So S. Paul wrote sometimes his own sense which he did by permission and not by commandment only he advised as one that had obtained mercy to be faithful But because Christ was to be in his Church to the end of the World the things they had heard were to be committed to faithful men that they might be able to teach others All Church men being thus the Successors of the Apostles they are vested with a Divine Authority for solemn publishing the Gospel but with this odds from the Apostles That whereas they were infallible their Successors are subject to error And the power of Church-men consists formally in this that they are Heralds of the Gospel and by their preaching it a solemn offer of it is made to all their hearers which to despise is to despise him that sent them But in this power they are bound up to the Commission they have from God so that what they say beyond that is none of the divine Message Yet because many particulars may fall in about which it was impossible Rules could be given they have a directive Authority which if it be managed as S. Paul did we need fear no tyrannical imposition from it And therefore in these matters their definitions are not binding Laws but Rules of advice for in matters wherein we are left at liberty by God if Church-men pretend to a Dominion over our Souls they make us the servants of Men. And indeed it is the most incoherent thing imaginable for these who lay no claim to Infallibility to pretend to absolute obedience It is true the Laws of peace and order bind us to an association if we be Christians and therefore we ought to yield in many things for peace but since we are all a Royal Priesthood why Church-men should pretend to Authority or Jurisdiction except in that which is expresly in their Commission wherein they are purely Heralds I do not see It is true Christians ought to assemble for Worship but for the associations of Churches in Judicatories I cannot imagine in what corner of the New Testastament that shall be found In which I am the more confirmed since all the labor of that Pamphleteer from p. 126. to 144. could not find it out For it is a strange Method to prove a divine Warrant because some reasons are brought to prove it must be so to have cited the words where a shorter and clearer method of proof since to prove that such a thing must be and yet not to shew that it is is only to attempt against the Scripture for being defective in that which it ought to have contained But if the phrase of one body conclude a proof for Associations then since the Body includes all Christians the whole faithful must meet together in Councils For where have you a difference in that betwixt the Clergy and the faithful Laicks But here yielding your Laick Elders of divine Institution and to have from GOD an Authority of Ruling as well as the Ministers have then why do they not all come to Presbyteries And why but one deputed from them Was not this an Encroachment on them For if they have from CHRIST a power to Rule as well as Ministers why should not all the Elders meet in Presbyteries and Synods as well as Ministers And why but one Elder from every Presbytery when three Ministers go to the National Synod For it is folly to say because Ministers have a power of teaching therefore in Presbyteries and Synods the Elders must only equal their number and in National Synods be near half their number for that will only say that in matters of doctrine the Elders should be quite silent but in matters of discipline why all should not come if any have a right from Christ will not be proved And is not this to Lord it over your Brethren And do not your Ministers thus tyrannize over their Elders But the reason of it was visible lest the Elders had thereby got the power in their hands had they been the plurality in the Judicatories which was well enough foreseen and guarded against by your Clergy who though they were willing to serve themselves of them for a while yet had no mind to part with their beloved Authority But for Synods if the obligation to them be from the unity of the Body then nothing under an OEcumenical one will answer this which yet is simply unpracticable Now as for your National Synods it is visible they are and must be framed according to the divisions of the World in the several Kingdoms for according to the Rules are pretended from Scripture tell the Church the binding and loosing of sins or the like it follows that Parochial Congregations and the Pastors in them are vested with an authoritative power now why they should be made to resign this to the plurality of the Church-men of that Kingdom will be a great Atchievement to prove in your Principles For why shall not a Parochial Church make Laws within it self And why must it renounce its priviledg to such a number of Church-men cast in such a Classis by a humane power As likewise where find you a divine Warrant for your delegating Commissioners to Synods For either they are Plenipotentiaries or such as go upon a restricted deputation but so as their Votes beyond their Commission shall signifie nothing till they return and be approved by those who sent them if they go with a full power assign a Warrant for such a delegation or that many Church-men may commissionate one in their name and that what shall be agreed to by the major part of these delegates shall be a binding obligation on Christians and yet I know you will think the Independents carry the Cause if it be said that the appointments of these superiour Courts have no authority till ratified by the inferiour which will resolve the Power into the inferiour Courts By all which I think it is clear abundantly that the associations of Churches into Synods cannot be by a divine Warrant But I must call in some relief for I grow weary of speaking too long Eud. I suppose none will deny the association of Churches to be an excellent mean for preserving
unity and peace but to assert a divine original for them methinks is a hard task and truly to assert the divine Authority of the major part which must be done according to the principles of Presbytery is a thing fuller of Tyranny over Consciences than any thing can be feared from Episcopacy since the greater part of mankind being evil which holds true of no sort of people more than of Church-men what mischief may be expected if the plurality must decide all matters And to speak plainly I look on a potion of Physick as the best cure for him who can think a National Synod according to the model of Glasgow is the Kingdom of Christ on Earth or that Court to which he hath committed his Authority for he seems beyond the power or conviction of Reason Crit. The Scripture clearly holds forth an authority among Church-men but visibly restricted to their Commission which truly is not properly a power residing among them for they only declare what the Rule of the Gospel is wherein if they keep close to it they are only Publishers of the Laws of CHRIST and if they err from it they are not to be regarded It is true the administration of Sacraments is appropriated to them yet he that will argue this to have proceeded more from the general rules of Order the constant practice of the Church and the fitness of the thing which is truly sutable to the dictates of Nature and the Laws of Nations than from an express positive Command needs much Logick to make good his attempt It is true the ordaining of Successors in their Office belongs undoubtedly to them and in trying them Rules are expresly given out in Scripture to which they ought to adhere and follow them but as for other things they are either decisions of opinions or rules for practice In the former their authority is purely to declare and in that they act but as Men and we find whole Schools of them have been abused and in the other they only give advices and directions but have no Jurisdiction It is true much noise is made about the Council of Ierusalem p. 106 as if that were a warrant for Synods to meet together But first it is clear no command is there given so at most that will prove Synods to be lawful but that gives them no authority except you produce a clear Command for them and obedience to them Next what strange wresting of Scripture is it from that place to prove the subordination of Church Judicatories for if that Council was not an OEcumenical Council nor a Provincial one which must be yielded since we see nothing like a Convocation then either Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch as from one sister Church to ask advice of another and if so it proves nothing for the authority of Synods since advices are not Laws or Antioch sent to Ierusalem as to a Superior Church by its constitution which cannot be imagined for what authority could the Church of Ierusalem pretend over Antioch And indeed had that been true some vestige of it had remained in History which is so far to the contrary that the Church of Ierusalem was subordinate to the Church of Cesarea which was Metropolitan in Palestine was subject to Antioch the third Patriarchal Sea It will therefore remain that this was only a reference to the other Apostles who besides their extraordinary endowments and inspiration were acknowledged by all to be men of great eminency and authority and therefore the authority of Paul and Barnabas not being at that time so universally acknowledged they were sent to Ierusalem where S. Iames was resident and S. Peter occasionally present Now the Authority of the Decree must be drawn from their infallible spirit otherwise it will prove too much that one Church may give out decrees to another But will the Apostles mutual consulting or conferring together prove the National constitution and authority of Synods or Assemblies Poly. All that hath been said illustrates clearly the practice of the Iews among whom as the High-Priest was possessed with a Prophetical Spirit which sometimes fell on him by illapses as apears from what is said of Caiaphas and sometimes from the shining of the Stones in the Pectoral called the Urim and Thummim so the Priests and Levites being the chief Trustees and Depositaries of the Law Their lips were to preserve knowledg and the Law was to be sought at their mouth yet they had no Legislative Authority they had indeed a Court among themselves called the Parhedrim made up of the heads of the Orders and of the Families but that Court did not pretend to Jurisdiction but only to explain things that concerned the Temple-worship nay the High-Priest was so restricted to the King and Sanbedrim that he might not consult the Oracle without he had been ordered to do it by them neither do we ever hear of any Laws given out all the Old Testament over in the name of the Priests And in the New Testament the Power it seems was to be managed by the body of the faithful as well as by Church-men It is true the Apostles were clothed with an extraordinary power of binding and loosing of sins but no proofs are brought to justifie the pretences to Jurisdiction that are found among their Successors For in the Epistle to Corinth the Rules there laid down are addressed to all the Saints that were called to be faithful so also is the Epistle to the Thessalonians where he tells them to note such as walked disorderly and have no fellowship with them which are shrewd grounds to believe that at first all things were managed Parochially where the faithful were also admitted to determine about what occurred but for Synods we find not the least vestige of them before the end of the second Century that Synods were gathered about the Controversie concerning the day of Easter and the following Associations of Churches shew clearly that they took their model from the division of the Roman Empire and so according as the Provinces were divided the Churches in them did associate to the Metropolitans and became subordinate to them and these were subordinate to the Patriarchs by which means it was that the Bishops of Rome had the precedency not from any imaginary derivation from St. Peter for had they gone on such Rules Ierusalem where our Lord himself was had undoubtedly carried it of all the World but Rome being the Imperial City it was the See of the greatest Authority And no sooner did Bizantium creep into the dignity of being the Imperial City but the Bishop of Constantinople was made second Patriarch and in all things equal to the Bishop of Rome the precedency only excepted Much might be here said for proving that these Synods did not pretend to a divine Original though afterwards they claimed a high Authority yet their appointments were never called Laws but only Canons and Rules which could not pretend to a Jurisdiction Basil.
ought to be much more determined by the Laws of the Land which in all such matters have a power to bind our consciences to their obedience till we prove the matter of them sinful Now discover where the guilt lyes of fixing one over a Tract of ground who shall have the chief inspection of the Ministery and the greatest Authority in matters of Jurisdiction so that all within that Precinct be governed by him with the concurring votes of the other Presbyters if you say that thereby the Ministers may be restrained of many things which otherwise the good of the Church requires to be done I answer these are either things necessary to be done by divine precept or not if the former then since no power on earth can cancel the Authority of the divine Law such restraints are not to be considered But if the things be not necessary then the Unity and Peace of the Church is certainly preferable to them I acknowledge a Bishop may be tyrannical and become a great burden to his Presbyters but pray may not the same be apprehended from Synods And remember your friends how long it is since they made the same complaints against the Synods and the hazard of an ill Bishop is neither so fixed nor so lasting as that of a bad Synod For a Bishop may die and a good one succeed but when a Synod is corrupt they who are the major part are careful to bring in none but such as are sure to their way whereby they propagate their corruption more infallibly than a Bishop can do And what if the Lay ruling Elders should bend up the same plea against the Ministers who do either assume a Negative over them directly or at least do what is equivalent and carry every thing to the Presbytery Synod or General Assembly where they are sure to carry it against the Lay-Elders they being both more in number and more able with their learning and eloquence to confound the others But should a Lay-Elder plead thus against them We are Office-Bearers instituted by CHRIST for ruling the flock as well as you and yet you take our power from us for whereas in our Church Sessions which are of CHRIST's appointment we are the greater number being generally twelve to one you Ministers have got a device to turn us out of the power for you allow but one of us to come to your Synods and Presbyteries and but one of a whole Presbytery to go to a National Synod whereby you strike the rest of us out of our power and thus you assert a preeminence over us to carry matters as you please Now Isotimus when in your principles you answer this I will undertake on all hazards to satisfie all you can say even in your own principles Next may not one of the Congregational way talk at the same rate and say CHRIST hath given his Office-Bearers full power to preach feed and oversee the flock and yet for all that their power of overseeing is taken from them and put in the hands of a multitude who being generally corrupt themselves and lusting to envy will suffer none to outstrip them but are tyrannical over any they see minding the work of the Gospel more than themselves And must this usurpation be endured and submitted to And let me ask you freely what imaginable device will be fallen upon for securing the Church from the tyranny of Synods unless it be either by the Magistrates power or by selecting some eminent Churchmen who shall have some degrees of power beyond their brethren In a word I deny not but as in Civil Governments there is no form upon which great inconveniences may not follow so the same is unavoidable in Ecclesiastical Government But as you will not deny Monarchy to be the best of Governments for all the hazards of tyranny from it so I must crave leave to have the same impressions of Episcopacy Crit. But suffer me to add a little for checking Isotimus his too positive asserting of parity from the New Testament for except he find a precept for it his Negative Authority will never conclude it and can only prove a parity lawful and that imparity is not necessary I shall acknowledge that without Scripture warrants no new Offices may be instituted but without that in order to Peace Unity Decency and Edification several ranks and dignities in the same Office might well have been introduced whereby some were to be empowered either by the Churches choice or the Kings Authority as Overseers or inspectors of the rest who might be able to restrain them in the exercise of some parts of their functions which are not immediatly commanded by GOD. And you can never prove it unlawful that any should oversee direct and govern Churchmen without you prove the Apostolical function unlawful for what is unlawful and contrary to the rules of the Gospel can upon no occasion and at no time become lawful since then both the Apostles and the Evangelists exercised Authority over Presbyters it cannot be contrary to the Gospel rules that some should do it To pretend that this superiority was for that exigent and to die with that age is a mere allegation without ground from Scripture for if by our LORD's words it shall not be so among you all superiority among Churchmen was forbid how will you clear the Apostles from being the first transgressors of it And further if upon that exigent such superiority was lawful then upon a great exigent of the Church a superiority may be still lawful Besides it is asserted not proved that such an authority as S. Paul left with Timothy and Titus was to die with that age for where the reason of an appointment continues it will follow that the Law should also be coeval with the ground on which it was first enacted if then there be a necessity that Churchmen be kept in order as well as other Christians and if the more exalted their office be they become the more subject to corruption and corruptions among them be both more visible and more dangerous than they are in other persons the same parity of reason that enjoyns a Jurisdiction to be granted to Churchmen over the faithful will likewise determine the fitness of granting some excrescing power to the more venerable and approved of the Clergy over others neither is this a new Office in the House of GOD but an eminent rank of the same Office Isot. You study to present Episcopacy in as harmless a posture as can be yet that it is a distinct Office is apparent by the sole claim of Ordination and Iurisdiction they pretend to and by their consecration to it which shews they account it a second Order besides that they do in all things carry as these who conceit themselves in a Region above the Presbyters Phil. I am not to vindicate neither all the practices nor all the pretensions of some who have asserted this Order no more than you will do the
not succeed he openly made War against Constantine And as he was preparing for it he made War likewise against GOD and persecuted the Christians because he apprehended they all prayed for Constantine and wished him success whereupon he made severe Laws against the Christians forbidding the Bishops ever to meet among themselves or to instruct any Women afterwards he banished all that would not worship the Gods and from that he went to an open Persecution and not content with that he by severe Laws discharged any to visit and relieve such as were in Prison for the Faith Yet notwithstanding all this none that were under his part of the Empire did resist him nay not so much as turn over to Constantine against him for ought that appears But upon these things a War followed betwixt Constantine and him wherein Licinius was defeated and forced to submit to what conditions Constantine was pleased to give who took from him Greece and Illyricum and only left him Thrace and the East But Licinius returning to his old ways and breaking all agreements a second war followed wherein Licinius was utterly defeated and sent to lead a private life at Thessalonica where he was sometime after that killed because of new designs against Constantine This being the true account of that Story I am to divine what advantage it can yield to the cause of Subjects resisting theiâ— Sovereign for here was a Superior Prince defending himself against the unjust attempts and hostile incuâ—sions of his Enemy who was also inferior to him as Eusebius states it whom consult 10. Book 8. â—â— and 1. Book of Const. life ch 42. and 2. Book ch 2 c. And for your instance of the Persians imploring the aid of the Romans I am afraid it shall serve you in as little stead for the account Socrates gives of it lib. 7. cap. 18. is that Baratanes King of Persia did severely persecute the Christians whereupon the Christians that dwelt in Persia were necessitated to fly to the Romans and beseech them not to neglect them who were so destroyed they were kindly received by Aticus the Bishop of Constantinople who bent all his care and thoughts for their aid and made the matter known to Theodosius the second then Emperor but it happened at that tune the Romans had a quarrel with the Persians who had hired a great many Romans that wrought in Mines and sent them back without paying the agreed hire which quarrel was much heightned by the Persian Christians complaint for the King of Persia sent Ambassadours to remand them as fugitives but the Romans refused to restore them and not only gave them Sanctuary but resolved by all their power to defend the Christian Religion and rather make War with the Persians than see the Christians so destroyed Now it will be a pretty sleight of Logick if from Subjects flying from a Persecution and seeking shelter under another Prince you will infer that they may resist their own King And for Theodosius his War we see other grounds assigned by the Historian and the Politicks even of good Princes in their making of Wars must not be a Rule to our Consciences neither know I why this instance is adduced except it be to justifie some who are said during the Wars betwixt their own Sovereign and the Country where they lived to have openly prayed for Victory against their Country and to have corresponded in opposition to their native Sovereign But I must next discuss that Catalogue of Tumults in the fourth and fifth Century which are brought as Precedents for the resisting of Subjects and here I must mind you of the great change was in Christendom after Constantine's days before whom none were Christians but such as were persuaded of the truth of the Gospel and were ready to suffer for its profession so that it being then a Doctrine objected to many Persecutions few are to be supposed to have entred into its discipline without some Convictions about it in their Consciences but the case varied much after the Emperors became Christian so that what by the severity of their Laws what by the authority of their Example almost all the World rendered themselves Christian which did let in such a swarm of corrupt men into the Christian Societies that the face of them was quickly much changed and both Clergy and Laity became very corrupt as appears from the complaints of all the Writers of the fourth Century what wonder then if a tumultuating Humor crept into such a mixed multitude And indeed most of these instances which are alledged if they be adduced to prove the corruption of that time they conclude but too well But alas will they have the authority of Precedents or can they be look'd upon as the sense of the Church at that time since they are neither approved by Council or Church-Writer And truly the Tumults in these times were too frequent upon various occasions but upon none more than the popular elections of Bishops of which Nazianzen gives divers instances and for which they were taken from the People by the Council of Laodicea Can. 13. It is also well enough known how these Tumults flowed more from the tumultuary temper of the People than from any Doctrine their Teachers did infuse in them And therefore Socrates lib. 7. cap. 13. giving account of one of the Tumults of Alexandria made use of by your Friends as a Precedent tells how that City was ever inclined to Tumults which were never compesced without blood And at that time differences falling in betwixt Orestes the Prefect and Cyril the Bishop who was the first that turned the Priesthood into a temporal Dominion they had many debates for Orestes hating the power of the Bishops which he judged detracted from the Prefect's authority did much oppose Cyril and Cyril having raised a Tumult against the Iews wherein some of them were killed and the rest of them driven out of the City Orestes was so displeased at that that he refused to be reconciled with him whereupon 500 Monks came down from Nitria to fight for their Bishop who set on the Prefect and one of them named Ammonius wounded him in the head with a stone but the People gathering they all fled only Ammonius was taken whom the Prefect tortured till he died but Cyril buried him in the Church and magnified his Fortitude to the degree of reckoning him a Martyr of which he was afterwards ashamed And their being in Alexandria at that time a learned and famous Lady called Hyppatia whom the People suspected of inflaming the Prefect against the Bishop they led on by a Reader of the Church set on her and dragged her from her Chariot into a Church and stript her naked and most cruelly tore her body to pieces which they burnt to ashes And this saith the Historian brought no small Infamy both on Cyril and on the Church of Alexandria since all who profess the Christian Religion should be strangers to killing
hair and another Lewis were chosen Kings of France and the chief Persons who at that time were most active were these Dukes Counts and Bishops who afterwards were made Peers Hugo Capet therefore taking possession of the Crown for securing himself peaceably in it did confirm those Peers in that great Authority they had assumed which if he had not done they had given him more trouble And their constitution was that if any difference arose either betwixt the King and any of the Peers or among the Peers themselves it should be decided by the Council of the whole twelve Peers And he proves from an old Placart that they would not admit the Chancellor Connestable or any other great Officer of France to judg them they being to be judged by none but their fellow Peers These were also to be the Electors of the King But Hugo Capet apprehending the danger of a free Election caused for preventing it Crown his Son in his own time which was practised by four or five succeeding Kings And Lewis the Gross not being crowned in his Fathers time met with some difficulty at his entry to the Crown which to guard against he crowned his Son in his own time and so that practice continued till the pretence of electing the King was worn out by prescription Yet some vestigies of it do still remain since there must be at all Coronations of France twelve to represent the Peers and by this time I think it is well enough made out that the Count of Tolouse was not an ordinary Subject And as for your confounding of Subject and Vassal Bodinus lib. de Rep. cap. 9. will help you to find out a difference betwixt them who reckons up many kinds of Vassals and Feudataries who are not Subjects for a Vassal is he that holds Lands of a Superior Lord upon such conditions as are agreed to by the nature of the Feud and is bound to protect the Superior but may quit the Feud by which he is free of that subjection so that the dependence of Vassals on their Lord must be determined by the Contract betwixt them and not by the ordinary Laws of Subjects And from this he concludes that one may be a Subject and no Vassal a Vassal and no Subject and likewise both Vassal and Subject The Peers of France did indeed give an Oath of homage by which they became the Liegeâ—men of the King but were not for that his Sâ—bjects for the Oath the Subjects swore was of a far greater extent And thus I am deceived if all was asserted by the Conformist in the Dialogues on this head be not made good Isot. But since you examine this instance so accuratly what say you to those of Piedmont who made a League among themselves against their Prince and did resist his cruel Persecutions by Armies See pag. 423. Poly. Truly I can say little on this Subject having seen none of their Writings or Apologies so that I know not on what grounds they went and I see so much ignorance and partiality in accounts given from the second hand that I seldom consider them much Isot. The next instance in History is from the Wars of Boheme where because the Chalice was denied the People did by violence resist their King and were headed by Zisca who gained many Victories in the following War with Sigismund and in the same Kingdom fifty years ago they not only resisted first Matthias and then Ferdinand their King but rejected his authority and choosed a new King and the account of this change was because he would not make good what Maximilian and Rodolph did grant about the fâ—ee exercise of their Religion and thus when engagements were broken to them they did not judge themselves bound to that tame submission you plead for See p. 424. Poly. Remember what was laid down as a ground that the Laws of a Society must determine who is invested with the Sovereign Power which doth not always follow the Title of a King but if he be accountable to any other Court he is but a Subject and the Sovereign Power rests in that Court If then it be made out that the States of Bohemia are the Sovereigns and that the Kings are accountable to them this instance will not advance the plea of defensive Arms by Subjects That the Crown of Bohemia is elective was indeed much contraverted and was at length and not without great likelihoods on both sides of late debated in divers Writings but among all that were impartial they prevailed who pleaded its being elective Yet I acknowledge this alone will not prove it free for the People to resist unless it be also apparent that the Supreme Power remained with the States which as it is almost always found to dwell with the People when the King is elected by them Bodin doth reckon the King of Bohemia among these that are but Titular Kings and the Provincial Constitutions of that Kingdom do evidently demonstrate that the King is only the Administrator but not the fountain of their Power which is made out from many instances by him who writes the Republick of Bohemia who shews how these Kings are bound to follow the pleasure and Counsel of their States and in the year 1135 it was decreed that the elected Prince of Bohemia should bind himself by his Coronation Oath to rules there set down which if he broke the States were to pay him no Tributes nor to be tied to any further Obedience to him till he amended See Hagecus ad ann 1135. And this Oath was taken by all the following Dukes and Kings of Bohemia which is an evident proof that the States had authority over their Kings and might judge them To this also might be added divers instances of their deposing their Kings upon which no censure ever passed These being then the grounds on which the Bohemians walked it is clear they never justified their Resistance on the account of Subjects fighting for Religion but on the liberties of a free State asserting their Religion when invaded by a limited Prince The account of the first Bohemian War is that Iohn Huss and Ierome of Prague being notwithstanding the Emperors Safe-conduct burnt at Constance the whole States of Bohemia and Moravia met at Prague and found that by the burning of their Doctors an injury was done to the whole Kingdom which was thereby marked with the stain of Heresie and they first expostulated with the Emperor and Counsel about the wrong done them but no reparation being made they resolved to seek it by force and to defend the Religion had been preached by Huss and did declare their design to Winceslaus their King whom the States had before that time made prisoner twice for his maleversation but at that very time he died in an Apoplexy some say through grief at that After his death Sigismund his Brother pretended to the Crown of Bohemia but not being elected was not their righteous King so in the following Wars
may fairly infer with Sir Iohn Sheen Title 8. of the heads of our Laws drawn up by him That all Iurisdiction stands and consists in the King's Person by reason of his Royal Authority and Crown and is competent to no Subject but flows and proceeds from the King having Supreme Iurisdiction and is given and committed by him to such Subjects as he pleases Eud. I must confess my self pleased with this discussion of these points you have been tossing among you and though I have sate silent yet I have followed the thread of all your discourse with much close attention and was mightily confirmed in my former Perswasion both by the evidence of Reason the authorities of Scripture and these instances of History were adduced But there are many other things yet to be talked of though I confess this be of the greatest Importance and the satisfaction I have received in this makes me long to hear you handle the other matters in debate Phil. I suppose we have forgot little that belonged to this question but for engaging further at this time I have no mind to it it being so long passed Midnight we shall therefore give some truce to our debates and return upon the next appointment Eud. I were unworthy of the kindness you shew me did I importune you too much but I will presume upon your friendship for me to expect your company to Morrow at the same hour you did me the favor to come here to day Isot. I shall not fail to keep your hour tho I be hardly beset in such a croud of Assailants but Truth is on my side and it is great and shall prevail therefore good night to you Basil. I see you are not shaken out of your confidence for all the foils you get yet our next days discourse will perhaps humble you a little more but I refer this to the appointment wherein we hope to meet again and so Adieu Eud. Adieu to you all my good Friends THE SECOND CONFERENCE Eudaimon YOU are again welcome to this place and so much the more that your staying some minutes later than the appointment was making me doubt of your coming and indeed this delay proved more tedious and seemed longer to me than the many hours were bestowed on your yesterdays Conference but methinks Isotimus your looks though never very serene have an unusual Cloud upon them I doubt you have been among the Brotherhood whom your ingenious Relation of what passed here hath offended Their Temper is pretty well known to us all some of them being as the Pestilence that walketh in darkness with the no less zealous but scarcely more ignorant Sisterhood they vent their pedling stuff but of all things in the World shun most to engage with any that can unmask them and discover their follies And their safest way of dealing with such Persons is to laugh at them or solemnly to pity them with a disdainful Brow And that is the best refutation they will bestow on the solidest Reason or if any of them yelp out with an Answer sense or nonsense all is alike the premises are never examined only if the conclusion be positively vouched as clearly proved from Scriptures and Reason the sentence is irreversibly past and you may as soon bow an Oak of an hundred years old as deal with so much supercilious Ignorance Tell plainly have you been in any such Company Isot. What wild extravagant stuff pour you out on better men than your self but I pity your ignorance who know not some of these precious Worthies whose Shooe Latchets you are not worthy to unloose But the truth is you have got me here among you and bait me by turns either to ease your own Galls or to try mine yet it is needless to attempt upon me for as I am not convinced by your Reasons so I will not be behind with you in Reflections and I will â—â—ow and fight both as a Coâ—k of the Game 〈◊〉 Hold hold for these serve to no use bâ—t t◠〈◊〉 pâ—â—vish humâ—rs I will therefore engage you in another subject about the Civil Authority which our yesterdays debate left untouched which is the obedience due to their Commands let us therefore consider how far Subjection obligeth us to obey the Laws of the Civil Powers Isot. Had you not enough of that yesterday Is it not enough that the Magistrate be not resisted but will not that serve turn with you or do you design that we surrender our Consciences to him and obey all his Laws good or bad and follow Leviathan's Doctrine of embracing the Magistrates Faith without enquiry which is bravely asserted by the Author of Ecclesiastical Policy This is indeed to make the King in God'â— stead and to render Cesar the things that are God's which is a visible design either for Pâ—peâ—â— or Atheism Philâ—r Truly Sir you consider little if you â—uâ—ge submission to the Penalties of the Lawâ— to be all the duty we owe Superiors It is true where the Legislators leave it to the Subjects choice either to do a thing enacted or to pay a Fine in that Case Obedience is not simply required so that he who pays the Mâ—lct fulfils his Obligation But wheâ—e a Law is simply made and Obedience enâ—oined and a Penalty fixed on Disobedience in that Case nâ—thing but the sinfulness of the Command can excuse our disobedience neither can it be said that he sins not who is content to submit to the punishment since by the same method of arguing you may prove that such horrid Atheists as say they are content to be damned do not sin against God since they are willing to submit to the threatned punishment The right of exacting our Obedience is therefore to be distinguished from the power of punishing our faults And as we have already considered how far the latter is to be acquiesced in it remains to be examined what is due to the former But here I lay down for a Principle That whatever is determined by the Law of God cannot be reversed nor countermanded by any humane Law For the Powers that are being ordained of God and they being his Ministers do act as his Deputies and the tie which lies on us to obey God being the foundation of our subjection to them it cannot bind us to that which overthrows it self Therefore it is certain God is first to be obeyed and all the Laws of men which contradict his Authority or Commands are null and void of all obligation on our Obedience but I must add it is one of the arts of you know whom to fasten Tenets on men who judge these Tenets worthy of the highest Anathema For if it be maintained that the Magistrate can bind obligations on our Consciences then it will be told in every Conventicle that here a new Tyranny is brought upon Souls which are God's Prerogative though this be nothing more than to say we ought to be subject for Conscience sake If again it be proved that the
for one would expect it must be a very concerning matter which hath occasioned so much bloud and confusion and continues still to divide us asunder with so much heat and bitterness I confess my discerning is weak which keeps me from apprehending what importance can be in it to exact so much zeal for it that it should be called the Kingdom of CHRIST â—â—â—n Earth his Interest Cauâ—e and Work which therefore should be â—aâ—nestly contenâ—ed for Iâ—ot The natural man receiveth not the things of GOD and theâ— are 〈◊〉 to him but Wisdom 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—dren That we plead for is CHRIST's Kingdom which is in opposition both to the proud aspirings of the Prelates and to the violent invasions of the Civil Powers We are therefore on CHRIST's side asserting that none in earth can institute new Officers in his House but those he hath appointed and that he hath appointed none higher than ordinary preaching Presbyters among whom he will have an equality observed which whosoever contradict with Diotrephes they lâ—ve the preeminence and Lord it over GOD's inheritance Phil. Though I will not fly so high with my pretensions in big words yet the issue of our Discourse will declare if I have not better grounds to assert Episcopacy to have descended from the Apostles and Apostolical timeâ— into all the Ages and corners of the Church who received it and that there is nothing in Scripture that contradicts â—uch an Institution But I shall â—efer the deciâ—ion of thiâ— to all impartial minds Basil. Truly when without a particular Examen I consider the whole matter in general I can see little to except against Episcopal Government that I cannot avoid the severe thoughts of suspecting the great aveâ—sion many have at it to be occasioned from the â—â—â—rit of contradiction is in many which lusâ—â—th to 〈◊〉 or from their opposition to these in Aâ—thority â—or I doubt not but if Presbytery had the same countenance from the Laws it should meet with the same contradiction from these who seem to adhere to no principle so firmly as to their resisting the Powers that are ordained of GOD. But the handling of this with that fulness and clearness which the noise made about it requires will take up more of our time than we can be now Masters of and may well claim a new Conference Therefore we shall remit any further discourse about it to our next meeting Isot. It is agreed to and I shall let you see that for all the Railings of these days Discourse my patience is yet strong enough to allow of another enterview though I confess my self weary of so much bad Company whose evil Communications are designed to corrupt my good Principles Phil. I confess my weariness is as great as yours though upon a very different account For I am â—urfeited of the Contention and heat hath been among us and long for an end of our Conferences upon these Heads which I shall now go through once for all being encouraged to meet with you again because this penance is near an end out of which if I were once extricated I am resolved to meddle in such contentious Themes no more Eud. Having swallowed the Ox we must not stick on the Rump It is true your Converse is extreamly agreeable yet my stomach begins to turn at so much disputing But I hope to morrow shall put an end to it And therefore I doubt not of your return to finish what you hitherto carried on And so a good night to you THE FOURTH CONFERENCE Isotimus I COME now upon our last Nights appointment to pursue this Conference to its end and to examine what these grounds are which endear Episcopacy to you so much especially considering the great disorders and conâ—usions its re-establishment among us hath occasioned For my part I cannot see what can reconcile the World to it much less what should enamour you so of it as to make you adhere to it notwithstanding all the evils spring from it and all these black Characters of GOD's displeasure are upon it which really appear so signally to me that it seems a fighting against GOD to adhere longer to it Phil. Truly you and I enter on this Sâ—bject with an equal surprize though upon very different accounts For I must tell you freely that after I have with all the application of mind and freedom of thoughts imaginable considered what could engage so many in this Island into so much zeal and rage against the Order I am not able to satisfie my self about it That venerable Order having such a native tendency for advancing of true Religion Peace Order and every thing that is excellent that the aversion and prejudices so many have drunk in against it seem as unjust as unconquerable and look like a part of GOD's controversie with us whereby we are blindly carried into so much unjustifiable zeal against that which if well managed might prove an excellent mean for reviving the power of Religion that hath suffered so great decays I shall not deny but on our part there have been great failings for which GOD's anger hangs over our heads and that he permits all this opposition we meet with for punishing us for our sins which have justly provoked GOD to make us base and contemptible in the sight of the people And this I hope shall be an effectual mean of humbling us and of purging us from our dross whereby this holy Order being again managed with the ancient Spirit may appear into the World in its Pâ—imitive lustre and be attended with the blessings that then followed it to the wonder and conviction of all men But let me add the opposition some firy spirits have given the establishment of Episcopacy deserves much of the blame of its being so little succesful in the great work of the Gospel for always bitter envy and strife produce confusion and every evil work therefore when you are to view Episcopacy in its amiable and lovely colors let me send you back to that cloud of witnesses who for the testimony of IESUS endured all manner of torments were torn by beasts slain by the sword burnt in the fire and in a word who preached the everlasting Gospel through the World How many Churches did these Bishops found with their labors in preaching and water not only with their tears but their blood how sublime was their piety how frevent were their Sermons how constant were their labors how strict was their discipline how zealous were they against heresies and how watchful against vice In a word read but the Histories and Writings of those great Worthies who were by the confession of all men Bishops and had more absolute Authority over the Inferior Clergy than is pretended to among us and then tell me if you have not changed your verdict of that order Have there been such men in the Christian World as were Ignatius Polycarp Iâ—â—naeus Cyprian Thaumaturg Athanasius Basil Nazianzen Martin Ambrose Chrysostome Augustin and
more For I am sure had he but read over those Canons which might be done in half an hour he had argued this point at another rate and had he seen the Edition of Dionysius Exiguus he had not accused the Conformist for citing that Canon as the fortieth since it is so in his division who was their first publisher in the Latine Church tho it be the thirty ninth in the Greek division But I will deal roundly in this matter and acknowledge that collection to be none of the Apostles nor Clement's since all that passed under Clement's name was accounted spurious except his first Epistle to the Corinthians Nor was this a production of the first two ages For the silence of the Writers of those Centuries gives clear evidence for their novelty They not being cited for the decision of things then in controversie wherein they are express as in the matter of Easter the rebaptizing Hereticks and divers other particulars Yet in the Fourth and Fifth Century reference is after made to some Elders rules of the Church which are to be found no where but in this Collection The Apostolical Canons are also sometimes expresly mentioned and this gives good ground to believe there were from the Third Century and forward some rules general received in the Church and held Apostolical as being at first introduced by Apostolical men This was at first learnedly made out by De Marca Concord lib. 3. c. 2. and of late more fully by that most ingenious and accurate searcher into Antiquity Beveregius in his Preface to his Annotations on these Canons Yet I am apt to think they were only preserv'd by an oral tradition and that no collection of them was agreed on and publish'd before the fifth Century It is certain the Latine Church in Pope Innocent 's days acknowledged no Canons but those of Nice And many of the Canons in this Collection we find among Canons of other Councils particularly in that of Antioch without any reference to a preceding authority that had enjoined them which we can hardly think they had omitted had they received the collection I speak of as Apostolical And that of the triple immersion in Baptism looks like a Rule no elder than the Arrian Controversie They began first to appear under the name of the Apostles Canons in the Fifth Century which made Pope Gelasius with a Synod of seventy Bishops condemn them as Apocryphal though I must add that the authority of that pretended Council and Decree though generally received be on many accounts justly questionable And yet by this we are only to understand that he rejected that pretended authority of the Apostles prefixed to these Canons In the beginning of the Sixth Century they were published by Dionysius Exiguus who prefixed fifty of them to his translation of the Greek Canons but he confesses they were much doubted by many At the same time they were published in the Greek Church with the addition of thirty five more Canons and were acknowledged generally Iustinian cites them often in the Novels and in the sixth Novel calls them the Canons of the holy Apostles kept and interpreted by the Fathers And the same authority was ascribed to them by the Council in Trullo These things had been pertinently alledged if you had known them but for your Friends niblings at them if you will but give your self the trouble of reading these Canons you will be ashamed of his weakness who manageth his advantage so ill And to instance this but in one particular had he read these Canons himself could he have cited the eighty which is among the latter additions and passed by the sixth which is full to the same purpose But for that impudent allegation as if a bare precedency had been only ascribed to Bishops by these Canons look but on the 14. the 30. 37. 40. 54. and 73. and then pass your verdict on your Friends ingenuity or his knowledg By the 14. No Churchman may pass from one Parish to another without his Bishop's sentence otherwise he is suspended from Ecclesiastical Functions and if he refuse to return when required by his Bishop he is to be accounted a Churchman no more By the 30. A Presbyter who in contempt of his Bishop gathers a Congregation apart having nothing to condemn his Bishop of either as being unholy or unjust he is to be deposed as one that is ambitious and tyrannous and such of the Clergy or Laity as join with them are likewise to be censured By the 37. The Bishop hath the care of all Church matters which he must administrate as in the sight of God By the 39. The Bishop hath power over all the goods of the Church and the reason given is that since the precious souls of men are committed to him it is much more just he have the charge of the goods of the Church By the 54. If a Clergy-man reproach their Bishop he is to be deposed for it is written Thou shalt not curse the Ruler of thy people And by the 73. A Bishop when accused is only to be judged of by other Bishops Now from these hints judg whether there be truth in that Assertion that only a precedency is asserted in these Canons and if all the power is now pleaded for be not there held out not to mention the Canon was cited by the Conformist that Presbyters or Deacons might finish nothing without the Bishop's Sentence since the Souls of the people are trusted to him As for the sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction I am sure none among us do claim it but willingly allow the Presbyters a concurrence in both these And as to what your friend saith of Cyprian it is of a piece with the learning and ingenuity that runneth through the rest of his Discourse from page 150 to page 160. where for divers pages he belabours his Reader with brave shews of Learning and high invention so that no doubt he thinks he hath performed Wonders and fully satisfied every scruple concerning the rise and progress of Episcopacy Isot. I pray you do not fly too high and make not too much ado about any small advantages you conceive you have of my Friend but upon the whole matter I am willing to believe there was a precedency pretty early begun in the Church which I shall not deny was useful and innocent tho a deviation from the first pattern Neither shall I deny that holy men were of that Order but when it is considered what a step even that Precedency was to Lordly Prelacy and how from that the son of perdition rose up to his pretence of Supremacy we are taught how unsafe it is to change any thing in the Church from the first institution of its blessed Head who knew best what was fit for it according to whose will all things in it should be managed Poly. It hath been often repeated that nothing was ever so sacred as to escape that to which all things when they
imaginable and indeed ought to be always accompanied with the advice and concurrence of the worthiest persons among the inferior Clergy But till you secure my fears of the greater part in all Societies becoming corrupt I shall not say by the major part of them but by the better part Isot. I see you run a high strain and far different from what was the discourse of this Countrey a year ago of an accommodation was inâ—ended wherein large offers seemed to be made but I now see by your ingenuous freedom that though for a while you who were called a great friend to that design were willing to yield up some parts of the Episcopal Grandeur yet you retain the â—oot of that Lordly ambition still in your heart and so though for some particular ends either to deceive or divide the LORDS people you were willing to make an appearance of yielding yet it was with a resolution of returning with the first opportunity to the old practices and designs of the Prelats of enhansing the Ecclesiastical Power to themselves and a few of their associats And this lets me see what reason all honest people have to bless GOD that these arts and devices took not for an Ethiopian cannot change his skin Phil. I confess to you freely I was a little satisfied with these condescentions as any of you and though they gave up the Rights of the Church to a peevish and preverse party whom gentleness will never gain and therefore am no less satisfied than you are that they did not take and so much the more that their refusing to accept of so large offers gave a new and clear character to the World of their temper and that it is a faction and the servile courting of a party which they design and not a strict adherence to the rules of conscience otherwise they had been more tractable Eud. Let me crave pardon to curb your humor a little which seems too near a kin to Isotimus his temper though under a different character For my part I had then the same sense of Episcopacy which I have just now owned But whâ—n I considered the ruines of Religion which our divisions occasioned among us and when I read the large offers S. Augustin made on the like occasion to the Donatists I judged all possible attempts even with the largest condescentions for an accommodation a worthy and pious design well becoming the gravity and moderation of a Bishop to offer and the nobleness of these in authority to second with their warmest endeavors for if it was blessed with success the effect was great even the setling of a broken and divided corner of the Church if it took not as it fully exonered the Church of the evils of the Schism so it rendered the enemies of Peace and Unity the more unexcusable Only I must say this upon my knowledg that whatever designs men of various sentiments fastened upon that attempt it was managed with as much ingenuity and sincerity as mortals could carry along with them in any purpose I know it is expected and desired that a full account of all the steps of that affair be made publick which a friend of ours drew up all along with the progress of it But at present my concern in one whom a late Pamphlet as full of falshoods in matters of fact as of weakness in point of reason hath mirepresented the case of Accommodation Page 31 shall prevail with me to give an account of a particular pasâ—ed in a Conference which a Bishop and two Presbyters had with about thirty of the Nonconformists at Pasley on the 14th of December in the year 1670. When the Bishop had in a long Discourse recommended Unity and Peace to them on the terms were offered he withal said much to the advantage of Episcopacy as he stated it from the rules and practices of the ancient Church offering to turn their Proâ—elyte immediately if they should give him either clear Scripture good reason or warrant from the most Primitive Antiquity against such Episcopacy And with other things he desired to know whether they would have joined in Communion with the Church at the time of the Council of Nice to carry them no higher or not for if they refused that he added he would have less heartiness to desire communion with them since of these he might say Let my soul be with theirs But to that a general answer was made by one who said He hoped they were not looked upon as either so weak or so wilful as to determine in so great a matter but upon good grounds which were the same that the asserters of Presbyterian Government had built on which they judged to be conform both to Scripture and Primitive Antiquity But for Scripture neither he nor any of the meeting offered to bring a Title only he alledged some differences betwixt the anciâ—nt Presidents as he called them and our Bishops But this was more fully enlarged by one who is believed to be among the most learned of the Party whose words with the answer given them I shall read to you as I take both from a Journal was drawn of that affair by one whose exactness and fidelity in it can be attested by some worthy spectators who read what he wrote after the Meeting was ended and Judged it not only faithful but often verbal And that he was so careful to evite the appearances of partiality that he seemed rather studious to be more copious in proposing what was said by these who differed from his opinion whereas he contracted much of what was said by these he favored The account follows Mr. said That he offered to make appear the difference was betwixt the present Episcopacy and what was in the ancient Church in â—ive particulars The first was that they had nâ— Archbishops in the Primitive Church It is true they had Metropolitans but in a Council oâ— Caâ—thage it was decreed that no Bishop should be â—allâ—d â—ummus Sacerdos or Princeps Sacerdoâ—um sed primae sedis Episcopus 2. The Bishops in the ancient Church were Parochial and not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in every Village 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for even in Bethany we find there was a Bishop 3. Two Bishops might be in one Church such was not to mention Alexander and Narcissus at Jerusalem Augustin who with Valerius was ordained Bishop of Hippo. 4. Bishops were elected by their Presbyters so Jerome tells us that in Alexandria the Presbyters choosed one of their number to be Bishop and finally the Bishops were countable to and censurable by their Presbyters for either this must have been otherwise they could not have been censured at all For though we meet with some Provincial Synods in Church History as that of Carthage in Cyprians time for the rebaptizing of hereticks and that at Antioch against Samoâ—atenus yet these instances were rare and recurred seldom therefore there must have been a power in Presbyters to have censured their
But that I may not seem to rob the Church of all her Power I acknowledg that by the Laws of Nature it follows that these who unite in the service of GOD must be warranted to associate in Meetings to agree on generals Rules and to use means for preserving purity and order among themselves and that all Inferiours ought to subject themselves to their Rules But as for that brave distinction of the Churches Authority being derived from CHRIST as Mediator whereas the Regal Authority is from him as GOD well doth it become its inventors and much good may it do them For me I think that CHRIST's asserting that all power in heaven and in earth was given unto him and his being called The KING of Kings and LORD of Lords make it as clear as the Sun that the whole OEconomy of this World is committed to him as Mediator and as they who died before him were saved by him who was slam â—â—om the foundation of the world so all humane authority was given by vertue of the second Covenant by which mankind was preserved from infallible ruin which otherwise it had incurred by Adams fall But leaving any further enquiry after such a foolish nicety I go now to examine what the Magistrates Power is in matters of Religion And first I lay down for a Maxim That the externals of Worship or Government are not of such importance as are the Rules of Iustice and Peace wherein formally the Image of GOD consists For CHRIST came to bring us to GOD and the great end of his Gospel is the assimilation of us to GOD of which justice righteousness mercy and peace make a great part Now what sacredness shall be in the outwards of Worship and Government that these must not be medled with by his hands and what unhallowedness is in the other that they may fall within his Jurisdiction my weakness cannot reach As for instance when the Magistrate allows ten per cent of inâ—â—rest it is just to exact it and when he bringâ— iâ— down to six per cent it is oppression to demand ten per cent so that he can determine some matteâ—s to be just or unjust by his Laws now why he shall not have such a power about outward matters of Worship or of the Government of the Church judg you since the one both in it self and as it tends to commend us to God is much more important than the other It is true he cannot meddle with the holy things himself for the Scripture rule is express that men be separated for the work of the Ministery And without that separation he invades the Altar of GOD that taketh that honor upon him without he be called to it But as for giving Laws in the externals of Religion I see not why he may not do it as well as in matters Civil It is true if he contradict the divine Law by his commands GOD is to be obeyed rather than man But this holds in things Civil as well as Sacred For if he command murder or theft he is undoubtedly to be disobeyed as well as when he commands amiss in matters of Religion In a word all Subjects are bound to obey him in every lawful command Except therefore you prove that Church-men constituted in a Synod are not Subjects they are bound to obedience as well as others Neither doth this Authority of the Magistrate any way prejudge the power Christ hath committed to his Church For a Father hath power over his Children and that by a divine Precept tho the Supreme Authority have power over him and them both so the Churches authority is no way inconsistent with the Kings Supremacy As for their Declarative Power it is not at all subject to him only the exercise of it to this or that person may be suspended For since the Magistrate can banish his Subjects he may well silence them Yet I acknowledg if he do this out of a design to drive the Gospel out of his Dominions they ought to continue in their duty notwithstanding such prohibition for GOD must be obeyed rather than man And this was the case of the Primitive Bishops who rather than give over the feeding their Flocks laid themselves open to Martyrdom But this will not hold for warranting turbulent persons who notwithstanding the Magistrates continuing all encouragements for the publick Worship of GOD chuse rather than concur in it tho not one of an hundred of them hath the confidence to call that unlawful to gather separated Congregations whereby the flocks are scattered Phil. Nay since you are on that Subject let me freely lay open the mischief of it It is a direct breach of the Laws of the Gospel that requires our solemn assembling together which must ever bind all Christians till there be somewhat in the very constitutions of these Assemblies that renders our meeting in them unlawful which few pretend in our case Next the Magistrates commanding these publick Assemblies is certainly a clear and superadded obligation which must bind all under sin till they can prove these our Meetings for Worship unlawful And as these separated Conventicles are of their own nature evil so their effects are yet worse and such as indeed all the ignorance and profanity in the Land is to be charged on them for as they dissolve the union of the Church which must needs draw mischief after it so the vulgar are taught to despise their Ministers and the publick Worship and thus get loose from the yoak And their dependence on these separated Meetings being but precarious as they break away from the order of the Church so they are not tied to their own order and thus betwixt hands the vulgar lose all sense of Piety and of the Worship of GOD. Next in these separated Meetings nothing is to be had but a long preachment so that the knowledg and manners of the people not being look'd after and they taught to revolt from the setled Discipline and to disdain to be câ—techised by their Pastoâ—s ignorance and profanity must be the sure effect of these divided Meetings And in fine the disuse of the LORD's Supper is a guilt of a high nature for the vulgar are taught to loath the Sacrament from their Ministers hands as much as the Mass and preaching is all they get in their Meetings so that what in all Ages of the Church hath been looked on as the great cherishing of Devotion and true Piety and the chief preserver of Peace among Câ—â—â—tiâ—ns is wearing out of practice with our new modelled Christians These are the visible effects of separating practices But I shall not play the uncharitable Diviner to guess at the secret mischief such courses may be guilty of Basil. Truly what you have laid out is so well known to us all that I am confident Isotimus himself must with much sorrow acknowledg what wicked Arts these are that some use to dislocate the Body of Christ and to sacrifice the interests of Religion