were reformed in the last Age were Erroneous or Idolatrous than any supposed Irregularities that might be in the way of managing it can never blemish that Work. It is certain that all Rules are only for quiet times in the days of Peace and Order the transgressing of established Rules is without doubt a very censurable thing but this must not be applied to all times For tho in a setled time we know how much respect we owe to Judges and Ministers of State yet if these very Persons will go to set on a Rebellion and authorize it all that respect ought presently to be thrown off CHAP. II. Some general Considerations upon what is alledged of the uncanonical Proceedings in the Progress of our Reformation IT hath a very ill Grace to see a man of the Roman Communion talk so highly of the Obligation to obey the Canons of the Church so as almost to Vnchurch us upon some supposed Irregularities in our Reformation For what is the whole Constitution of the Papacy but one continued Contradiction to all the Ancient Cannons And what is the whole modern Canon Law but the Exaltation of the Papal Authority above all the Canons of the Church Is there any thing clearer in the Primitive times than the establishing the Authority of Metropolitans that was confirmed by the Council of Nice the equalling the Bishops of Constantinople to the Bishops of Rome which was done by the 2d and 4th General Council the establishing the Independency of those Churches that were in Possession of it and so freeing them from all Subordination to other Sees which was done by the 3d General Council And yet tho here we see the four first General Councils all concurring to establish this form of Government the Papal-power is no other than a breaking in upon all these Canons What is more uncanonical than the establishing Legatine Courts the receiving of Appeals the obliging of Bishops to sue for their Bulls in the Court of Rome the dispensing with all the Canons of the Church the exempting all the Regulars from Obedience to their Bishops which is not only contrary to the express Canon of the Council of Chalcedon but is plainly contrary to that Authority that Bishops derive from Christ to govern the Flocks committed to their care In short the whole System of the Church and Court of Rome is so direct a revolt from all the Primitive Canons that it is a degree of Confidence which I do not envy in our Author for him to talk of uncanonical Proceedings Canons are Rules established either by Provincial Synods or more General Councils which import no more but that they ought to be commonly observed for it is plain that there is no Church in the World that hath looked on the Canons of the former times as things so sacred and unalterable that they could never be dispensed with The Schism of the two Popes at Rome and Avignon and all that was done in consequence of it was uncanonical with a Witness and yet how was all that buried by the Council of Constanâ—â— And tho one of the two Obediences was certainly in a state of Schism yet all that was passed over and without any Submission of either side all was healed up The whole Constiution of Metropolitans with their Provincial Synods which was the ancientest and clearest of all the Primitive Rules arises only out of the several Divisions of the Provinces of the Roman Empire when then the Civil Constitution of all Europe is so much altered from what it was then all that Fabrick subsists now rather upon a respect to ancient Rules than from the Authority of those Canons which can no more remain the ground upon which they were built being now removed And one may as well pretend that we are bound to obey the old Roman Law or the Feudal Law because those Laws were once received amongst us as to tell us that we are bound to obey all the ancient Canons especially those that had a visible Relation to the Constitution of the Roman Empire Therefore the Subordination of Churches of Synods and Metropolitans and Patriarchs that was only the knitting into one Body and under several degrees of Subordination a Church that was all under one Civil Society and Empire hath sunk with the Roman Empire So that the tearing that Empire in pieces hath quite put an end to all that Ecclesiastical Subordination And if there is any thing of that yet kept up amongst us it is rather for the preserving of Order than that we are under any Obligation of Conscience to submit to such Constitutions And therefore as oft as a great Conjuncture of Affairs carries along with it considerations that are of more weight than the adhering to ancient Forms then all these may be well superseded For all Rules are temporary things and made according to several Emergences and Occasions which altering frequently it were a very unreasonable thing to expect that every Church should at all times conform it self to them And tho we condemn that Dissolution of all the Canons which the Church and Court of Rome hath brought into the World yet on the other hand we cannot acknowledg any such binding Authority in them that they can never be dispensed with The methods of those men with whom we deal are wonderful Now they reproach our Church with a Violation of ancient Canons and yet when we lay to their charge some of the Canons that their Councils have made in these later Ages such as those of the Lateran for the Extirpation of Hereticks and for the Pope's power of deposing Heretical Princes they tell us that great difference is to be made between the Decisions of the Church in the Points of Faith and the Decrees that are made in matter of Discipline since tho they assert an Infallibility in the one yet the other are transient things in which we ought not to admit of so absolute an Authority This is false with relation to Decrees that declare a Christians Duty or a Rule of Morality For Decrees in such matter do import an Article of Faith or Doctrine upon which they are founded And therefore a Church may indeed even in the Opinion of those who believe her Infallible err in a particular Judgment against such or such a Heretical Prince for that being founded on a matter of Fact she may be Infallible still even tho she were surprised in matters of Fact. But she cannot be Infallible if in declaring the Duty of Subjects towards Heretical Princes or of the Popes Authority in those cases she hath set Rules contrary to the Word of God. In such matters as these are I do acknowledg the Decrees of the Church are for ever Obligatory upon all those who believe her Infallible Therefore since our Author urges so much the Authority of the Canons I would gladly know what he thinks of these which are not I confess Ancient yet they were enacted by the Supream Authority of that Body
reckoned up to shew that this could not fail and so they infer the certainty of this method of conveyance Now this is so extravagantly ridiculous and so contrary to the common experience of all mankind that all that can possibly be said to support it signifies no more but to shew how many fine things a man of wit can say to prove the impossibility of a thing which yet every man of sense knows is not only possible but is so certain an effect of such an Oral Conveyance that it is rather impossible it should not fail How was the first Oral Tradition of the Religion delivered to Adam corrupted Tho the long lives of the first Patriarchs is a much stronger Argument for proving the impossibility of such a corruption than any that these Gentlemen can alledg How was the Jewish Religion corrupted in our Saviour's time tho the only Scene of their Solemn Worship being at Ierusalem and the assembling of their whole Nation in their Temple three times a year are much stronger inducements to make us conclude that it was impossible for an Oral Conveyance to miscarry among them than any that can be pretended to amongst Christians Do we not see that the most common Transactions are so diversified after they have passed through a few hands that Truth is very soon lost when it hath no better Standard than Fame and Chat Do not all Languages change so much in a course of some ages that those who lived here 500 years ago would be no more understood if they were now among us and yet it were easie to point out the Infallibility of the conveyance of a Language with much livelier colours than these men can lay on here If Oral Tradition hath any pretension to certainty it must be chiefly with relation to such things as are sensible and visible and that fall under the observation of all men for in matters that are speculative it is natural for every man to dress them according to those explications with which he cloaths them and if his Reputation either for Piety Learming or a true understanding of matters is established it is so probable that these will be so well received that what was believed in one age in some general words will be believed in another with the addition of those new explications that it were indeed a wonder if it were otherwise especially in Ages of Ignorance and Superstition If it is found that in things which are sensible this Oral Tradition is so certainly changed that we are as sure of it as we ean possibly be of any matter of History then it is a vain thing to go about to perswade us that this is an infallible conveyance in matters of Doctrine since it is plain that the one is much more like to be sure than the other can ever be supposed to be if in the Worship of God the Adoration of Images and Saints and an infinity of new Rites are brought in if in the Sacrament the Adoration of it the denying the Cup to all except the Priest the denying the Sacrament to Infants if in the Government of the Church the Popes have not only brought the other Bishops to become subject to them but have broke through the Authority of Metropolitans and the Equality that was setled between themselves and the other Patriarchs tho these things were enacted by the first General Councils if Popes have got possession of an Authority over Princes when they were either Hereticks or were favourers of Hereticks and have maintained this Possession these last 600 years if I say all these things which are not only sensible but are very contrary to those Inclinations and Interests that are the powerful Springs of human nature have yet been brought into the world so manifestly is it any wonder if in dark ages in which a blind Obedience and an unreserved Submission to Church-men were looked on as the chief Branches of Catholick Religion a great many new Doctrines that were infinitely for the advantage of a corrupt and designing Clergy were introduced and received Instead of wondring at the success of all these Innovations we should have had much more reason to wonder if they had not prevailed But upon the whole matter all these new Methods shew us that those who manage them see the weakness of the old ones and that their Cause cannot be maintained on that bottom on which the Writers of Controversy had at first put it and that therefore they must a little change their way and this being an age in which Wit and fine Thoughts are highly valued those who fancied they were Masters in those hoped to raise a sunk Cause which how successful soever it may be when it is managed by Dragoons yet hath never appeared more naked and despicable than it hath done of late years Therefore they have given this new Air and Turn to the common Subjects of the Authority of the Church and of Tradition and have betaken themselves to the certainty of Oral Tradition as their last retrenchment and after all those Declamations that have been made of late against those who pretended not to carry the assurance of our Religion beyond a moral certainty they now fly to a Plea which if it were true is but at most a moral certainty but is so far from being true that we have as much certainty as we can have for a negative Proposition that it is and ever must be false The Author of this Treatise offers us a new Essay of one of these late Methods for instead of attacking our Reformation in any of its essential Parts he goes about only to prove that it was not Canonical and all this when it were granted to be true amounts to no more than this that the Corruptions of the Church of Rome having been extreamly advantageous to the Clergy the greater part of them were too much locked up in Ignorance and too much addicted to their Interests to admit of any change and that therefore the lesser part was forced to make use of the Civil-power to support them in reforming those Abuses But this must be acknowledged to be lawful otherwise all National-Reformations from received Errors are no more to be thought on For suppose an Error hath overspread a National Church which is a Supposition that none can deny since how infallible soever the Catholick Church may be supposed to be it is past dispute that every particular Church may be so over-run with Errors that the greater part may be infected and if this falls to be in a Conjuncture in which a General Council cannot be called and if the Heresy is new such as for instance the Pelagian was when it first appeared so that it had spread far before it had been condemned by a General Council what must be done in such a case if the Prince may not support the Sounder tho the Lesser Part So that according to this Supposition if those Doctrines and Forms of Worship that
who went about and taught the People He did also set up in Ierusalem a Court made up of Levites Priests and the chief of the Fathers of Israel for the iudgment of the Lord and for the controversies among the people and appointed Amariah the Chief-Priest to be over them in the matters of the Lord Hezekiah when he came to Reign commanded the Priests and the Levites to sanctifie themselves in order to the reforming the Worship in which he went on tho a great many of the Priests were not very forward in doing it but he made use of those who had sanctified themselves and as he bore with those that did this slowly so no doubt he would have turned out any that had been refractory and finding that the Priests could not be ready to keep the Passover in the first Month he with his Princes and the whole Congregation put off the Feast from the 1st to the 2d Month. Now the distinction of days and the observance of those Festivities being so great a part of that Religion and it having been so expresly regulated by the Law of God that it should be kept on the first Month a Provision being made only for such as were unclean or such as were on a Iourney that they might keep it on the 2d Month yet here the Civil Authority makes a Law appointing the Passover to be entirely cast over to the 2d Month because of the Uncleanness of some of the Priests Ezra took a Commission from Artaxerxes impowering him to set up Magistrates and Iudges who might judg them that knew the Laws of his God and teach them who knew them not and one of the Punishments on the Disobedient is Separation from the Congregation to which our Excommunication answers And we see what a Reformation Ezra made in the virtue of this Commission Nehemiah by virtue of such another Commission turned out a Priest for having married a strange Woman These were all as high stretches of the Civil Power as any that can be objected to our Reformation But in the next place it ought to be consider'd that suppose this turning out of the Clergy had been an illegal and unjustifiable thing yet that doth not strike at the Constitution of our Church The High-Priesthood among the Iews by the Law of God was setled on the eldest Branch of the Family of Aaron and it went so during the first Temple and likewise for some considerable time under the second Temple and yet tho afterwards this sacred Function came to be set to Sale so that Dr. Lightfoot hath reckoned up fifty three that purchased it for Money by which prophane Merchandize one might infer that those Mercenary High-Priests were no more to be acknowledged yet our Saviour and after him St. Paul owned them to be High-Priests Our Saviour answered to Caiaphas when he adjured him upon Oath and it is said by St Iohn that Caiaphas as High-Priest for that year prophesied From all which it is clear that tho these wretched men were guilty of the highest Profanation and Sacrilege possible yet that was a personal Sin in them but since they were in Possession of the Dignity and adhered still to the Law of Moses and performed the Offices of their Function according to his Institution the solemn yearly Expiation was still made by them which was the highest Act of the whose Jewish Worship and they were to be submitted to and acknowledged as High Priests by the People for which our Saviour's practice is an undisputed warrant Now if all this was lawful under the Old Testament in which all the smallest parts of that Religion were marked and enacted much more expresly than they are under the New then it will be a hard performance for any to perswade us that the Civil Authority may not make such Reformations in the Christian Church as the Kings of Iudah did in the Jewish In this matter I have not so much as mentioned the Orders and Regulations made by David and Solomon tho they are very clear Precedents for justifying all that Supremacy to which our Kings have pretended But since I know some have endeavoured to set all this aside by saying that they being assisted by immediate Inspirations acted in those matters not as Kings but as Prophets Tho it were easy to shew the falshood of this Allegation yet since I would shorten matters all I can I will not digress into a controverted Point Under the Protection that the Christian Church received from the Emperors that became Christians we see that they appointed Triers to examine the Matters that were objected to Bishops and these under Constantine judged in Cicilian's Matter upon an Appeal made by the Donatists after it had been already judged in several Synods Constantine did likewise by his own Authority put Eustathius out of Antioch Athanasius out of Alexandria and Paul out of Constantinople It is true these Matters were much complained of as unjust and as flowing from the false Suggestions of the Arrians But it is as true that it was not so much as pretended that the Emperor had no just Authority to do it For the disputing the Justice of the Exercise of an Authority is very different from their disputing the Authority it self It was afterwards a common Practice of the Christian Emperors to have a Court of some selected Bishops who waited on them and to whose Cognizance most Causes relating to Bishops were left who acted only by Commission from the Emperor I have enlarged a little upon this Point because it seemed necessary to dissipate many of those Prejudices which arise out of it The 4th Thesis is That a Provincial or National Synod cannot lawfully make Definitions in Matters of Faith and concerning Heresies or Abuses in Gods Service contrary to the Decrees of former superior Synods or to the Iudgment of the Vniversal Church in the present Age shewed in her publick Liturgies This is founded on the Supposion of the Infallibility of the Church so if that is not true then this falls to the ground and that is not pretended to be proved by our Author who seems only to proceed upon the Subordination that is in the Ecclesiastical Body But if the majority of this Body is not Infallible then that Obligation to submit to it must be only a matter of Order and by consequence it hath its limits If this had been the Rule of the Church in Theodosius's time how could the several Provinces have reformed themselves from Arrianism after so many General Councils had declared for it or at least had rejected the word Consubstantial but in our condemning the Papal Authority over us we had both the Council of Nice for us that had established the Independent Authority of the Metropolitans with the Bishops of their Province for all Matters relating to their Province and the Decree of the Council of Ephesus which appointed all Churches to continue in the Possession of that
still the Priviledges of such a See when all those Reasons which at first procured to it those Priviledges come to cease As for the Third which are more perpetual we pay them all respect and have never changed them but the Dispensations of the Church of Rome hath so destroyed them all that it is a peculiar degree of Confidence for any that are in Communion with that Church to assert such an immutability in the Ancient Canons that a National Synod may not be suffered to alter any of them and yet that one single Bishop whom all Antiquity considered but as a Collegue and fellow-Fellow-Bishop to all the rest of the Order should be alloweed an Authority to break and dissolve them all This may serve to shew how weak all those Foundations are upon which our Author builds I come in the next place to examine his Defective and False Account of the Matters of Fact which will engage me into a tedious opening of many Particulars that will be little for our Author's Honour but no Discoveries will affect a Man that could stifle his Conscience for 25 Years and that now hath the Impudence to own it FINIS REFLECTIONS ON THE Oxford Theses Relating to the ENGLISH REFORMATION PART II. Amsterdam Printed for J. S. 1688. REFLECTIONS ON THE Oxford Theses Relating to the ENGLISH REFORMATION IN the former part of these Reflections the general grounds on which our Reformation was attacked were examined the matters of Fact come now to be considered but before I enter upon these alledged by our Author I thought it fitting to begin with an Enquiry into a very important matter relating to that time that hath been lately objected to our Church by one of the Church of Rome which as it is New so it is likewise of great Consequence A Sheet has appeared that was well and decently writ and with a very specious appearance of Reason to prove that Q Elizabeth was a Bastard not upon the common pretence of the Nullity of K. Henry the Eighth's Marriage with her Mother because his former Marriage with Q. Katherine was still in force but upon a Precontract in which Ann Bullen was engaged before her Marriage to K. Henry which being confessed by her self the Marriage was null of it self and was judged to be so by Arch-Bishop Cranmer whose Sentence was confirmed by the Subsequent Parliament So that here is a Nullity and by consequence a Bastardy It is true this Assertion is new so tho it may raise the Credit of him that hath discovered it since it must be confessed that it looks very like good reasoning yet on the other hand it is some prejudice against it that it doth not appear it was ever objected to us before now and no mention being made of it while the whole matter was fresh in Mens memories and while that Queen reigned whose Title this seems to weaken much more than all the other things that were alledged to shake it is a great Presumption that the Men of that time knew there was no force in it So that tho the Novelty of it may please yet it is really a strong prejudice against it But after all it must be confessed the thing is specious and it is of great consequence not only with Relation to the Credit of our Church and of its first Reformation but with Relation to our present Establishment For tho the Writer of that Sheet makes no other use of it but to blemish our Church as guilty of Sedition and Disloyalty for owning a Bastard against the Queen of Scots who was the next lawful Heir yet it will bear another Consequence that is more important in our present Circumstances For as a Precontract infers a Nullity of the Marriage and disables all the issue of it so an ill Title in a Queen infers a Nullity upon all her Laws all her Acts of Government as flowing from an Usurper and therefore this strikes not only at the Honour of our Church in the last Age but at its Settlement in the present and I believe this last is chiefly aimed at For as to the former it may serve in a great measure to justifie our Church that Q. Elizabeth was put in Possession of the Crown by the Nation while it was yet Popish and by the Body of the Clergy that were of that Religion so that all that those of our Church did was to maintain her in that Possession in which we found her and in which our Enemies had put Her. And it must be acknowledged that an anxious weighing of Titles is not so necessary after one is in a legal and peaceable Possession acknowledged by all Parties within the Kingdom as well as by all Princes without it I do not pretend to say That a Possession will justify a bad Title tho there is older Law relating to the Possession of the Crown of England passed by King Henry the VII but an undisputed Possession does certainly very much excuse those who acknowledge and submit to one that is bonoe fidei Possessor Which was plainly Q. Elizabeth's Case But because it may be with great colour of Reason alledged that Right is Right still and that Possession or Prescription are only pretences of Law which may have perhaps weight before a Judg yet these are not sufficient to extinguish a just Title when matters are examined in themselves and abstracted from those Pleadings that may perhaps be legal yet as some will alledg are scarce rational So I will examine this matter as fairly as I must confess it is stated by that Gentleman and will first propose the matter of Fact as Dr. Burnet hath put it who is the only Author that is cited and therefore he must be supposed to have some Credit here Queen Ann Bullen was attainted of Treason upon some pretended Proofs of Adultery and so Judgment was given That she should be either Burnt which is the Death that the Law prescribes for the Traitors of that Sex or Beheaded Two days after the Sentence she is prevail'd on to confess a Precontract before Arch-Bishop Cranmer and so her Marriage with the King is declared void and null and in consequence of that the Issue is illegitimated yet this was so secretly carried that one of the Iudges of that time writes of it as a thing that was only reported and in the subsequent Act of Parliament no mention is made of a Precontract tho no doubt she had confessed it with the circumstances of Time and Person Yet in the Act of Parliament it is only said that she had confessed some just and lawful Impediments by which it was evident that her Marriage with the King was not valid It cannot be now known how this matter was expressed in the Sentence given by Cranmer all these Records being burnt But it is most probable that the matter was more distinctly specified Now the only Reason we can give of those general Words in the Act of Parliament is that this pretended
of ours XIX Our Author excepts to King Henry the Eighth's abrogating those Laws That were established by the Authority of the Bishops of Rome as if this included all those Laws that were passed by the Councils in which Popes presided since the Canon-Law is composed of Synodal as well as of Pontifical Laws In this we will freely own to him that since the time that the Popes have so far enslaved the Bishops as to make them swear Obedience to them we look upon all the Laws that have been made in Synods composed of men so pre-engaged as Papal Laws but this doth not at all touch those Laws that passed before that Authority was claimed And indeed there never was a grosser Abuse put on the World than the whole Canon Law. For as for the first and soundest part of it which is Gratian's Decree it was only a Common-place Book drawn up by a Man that was indeed considering the Age in which he lived of great Learning and good Judgment But he was at that time so ill furnished with all necessary helps to make him judg a right of his Matter that it is an impudent thing in the Ages of more Knowledg to pretend to keep up the Credit of a Book that was compiled in so dark and so corrupt a Time. The rest is yet worst made up of Papal Constitutions or the Decrees of those ignorant and packt Assemblies that had met for the three Ages preceding the Reformation If King Henry had abrogated the Ancient Canons our Author might have had some Colour for his Complaints But the total abrogating of that course Compilation of the Canon-Laws which never was founded on any good Authority was so just a thing that there are very few Learned Men in the Roman Communion at present that will not say it were well for the Church if it were quite laid aside since now all men but such as our Author are ashamed of it XX. Our Author writes as if he intended to do Honour to the Memory of King Henry For he cites these Words out of his Preface to his Injunctions Which Agreement of the Clergy for as much as we think to have proceeded of a good right and true Iudgment and to be agreeable to the Laws and Ordinances of God He thereupon ordered it to be published An ordinary man would be upon this induced to approve mightily of the King's method First to Authorize the Clergy to examine those Matters and after that to review their Determinations himself before he gave his Civil Sanction to them Would our Author have a Prince rely blindly on a National Clergy which is subject to Error as is acknowledged by all the World What Judgment then can he follow but his own The Civil Power must be applied in matters of Religion as is acknowledged on all hands upon the Judgment of the Prince For he can follow no other even in the Principles of the Church of Rome except when he is determined by an Infallible Court which is only in a General Council XXI Among the other Exorbitances of the King's Supremacy one reckoned up by our Author is his taking away the Pope's Authority as Patriarch in confirming the Metropolitan and his requiring his Clergy under the pains of Premunire to consecrate into Bishopricks any that he shall nominate It is great Ignorance or somewhat worse in our Author if he will pretend that the Authority of the Patriarchs over Metropolitans was of Primitive Antiquity for by the Council of Nice every Province was an intire Body within it self if the Clergy is under some servitude as to the promoting those nominated by the King the Pope is under the same to the King of France by the Concordate and our subjection in this Point does not bind our Consciences but lies only on our Persons and Benefices and therefore when a case of Persecution comes we must resolve to venture on a Premunire and worse things too if we are pressed hard XXII He adds to this another gross mistake in History intimating that the Suppression of Monasteries was done by virtue of this Supremacy upon which he runs out into a long deduction of many Particulars relating to that Affair but this is all so false that the Supremacy was not so much as once pretended in it it went all upon Acts of Parliament and the surrenders of the Monks If the King acted violently and unjustly in this matter it doth not at all concern the Reformation and much less his Supremacy and as for all the Topicks of Sacriledg and Profanation and the alienation of Things and the violation of Persons Sacred these are general and dreadful words which lose their Horror when it is considered That the vast endowments of Monasteries were the effects of the Superstition of those Ages in which the belief of the Redemption out of Purgatory by the saying of so many Masses together with many false Miracles had prevailed so far on the Ignorance and Credulity of the World as to draw the best part of the Wealth of Europe into those Houses when I say not only the scandalous Lives of many Monks which were indeed but Personal Things but their false Miracles and Relicks and above all the falshood of redeeming men out of Purgatory by their means were discovered no doubt it was lawful to dissolve all those Endowments and to turn their Wealth to better uses and if the King did not enough that way it was so much the worse for him but that doth not at all blemish the Reformation So that all the long digression he makes upon this Head is impertinent to the business in hand which is the Supremacy XXIII He says That the Pope pretends no such Power as to alienate the Church-Revenues for to spend them himself or to dispose of them in what manner or to what Persons he pleases but only for some just Cause that is in a prudential Arbitration for an equal or greater benefit accruing to the Church or Christianity I do not know if the D's of Parma or a great many other Princes that have been raised out of the Patrimony of the Church would judg this to be good Doctrine and if the Church is always a minor so that the Bargains made in her name may be ever recalled it would be hard to find what Benefit hath arisen to the Church or Christianity out of the Robberies that Popes have made to raise their Families and it is a strange piece of Impudence in these men who are always reproaching us with what some of our Princes did in the time of the Reformation when all that put together doth not amount to the Injustices that have been committed in one single Pontificate of those whom they would have us look on as God's Trustees and as Christ's Vicars if they are not concerned in those who are the Spiritual Heads of their Church much less are we bound to justifie all the Actions of those who are only
which they account Infallible It is true some have thought they could get out of this difficulty by denying these to be the Acts of that Council But if our Author be the same Person with him that writ concerning the Adoration of the Eucharist he is of another mind and doth acknowledg that those Canons are the true Acts of that great Assembly and not only the Designs of the Pope It is true he saith the sense of the Canon concerning the secular Powers is by Protestants mistaken But he hath not yet given himself the trouble of laying before us the true sense of that Canon and one would think that he who writ the Treatise that is now under Examination had very favourable thoughts of the Doctrine of Subjects shaking off an heretical Prince for he reckons up the many risings that were in K. Edwards days chiefly for matter of Religion as a proof that the Body of the Clergy went not into that change Which rising saith he of the Laity in such numbers for their former way of Religion would not have been had not their Clergy justified it unto them Rising is a soft word for Rebellion and one would think that it would have afforded no small matter of reproach against us if we brought in a company of Rebels to make up a Muster of our Religion But to own that the Clergy justified it to them without adding the least Word expressing our Author's dislike of this shews plainly enough that how good a Subject soever our Author may be to a Prince of his own Religion yet he thinks a Catholick Clergy may be able to justifie to the Laity a Rising against a Heretical Prince upon the account of Religion And it seems our Author had a great mind to make a huge appearance of his Catholick Rebels in K. Edwards days For besides that he speaks of Risings in many more Counties then are mentioned by the Books of that time he also represents all those Risings to have been upon the account of Religion tho the History makes it clear that the Risings over England were chiefly occasioned by Parks and Enclosures and that it was a rage of the Peasants against the Gentry in most places chiefly in the Northfolk-Rebellion where Religion was not at all pretended nor doth it appear that any pretended Religion except those of Devonshire so that our Author would make his Party and the Clergy more Rebellious than indeed they were In this whole Period he seems to have been forsaken of common Sense CHAP. III. Some general Considerations on the Regal Supremacy that was raised so high at the Reformation OUR Author hath brought together many Acts of Parliament with their pompous Preambles that seem to carry the Kings Power in Ecclesiastical Matters to a very Indefinite degree and upon all this he triumphs often as if this was so improper that it alone is enough to blast the whole Reformation Our Author is much more concerned to justifie all Papal Bulls than we can be to justifie all the Words of our Laws especially the Rhetorick that is in their Preambles If he believes the Pope infallible the general Parts of Bulls that set forth the Doctrine of the Church are such solemn Declarations that he must be determined by them But at lowest he believes the Popes to be the Centers of the Catholick Unity and all Bishops are bound by Oath to obey all their Decrees and Ordinances Now when our Author will undertake to justifie all the Preambles of Bulls that are in the Bullarium then we may undertake to justifie all the flourishes that may be in any Act of Parliament When any Authority is asserted in general and indefinite Terms these are always to be understood with those Restrictions and Limitations that the nature of things require to be supposed even when they are not expressed St. Paul expresses the Obedience of Wives to their Husbands in terms so extreamly extended that as the Church is subject unto Christ so ought the Wives be to their own Husbands in every thing He expresses also the Duty of Children in as comprehensive terms Children obey your Parents in all things Now if one would draw Inferences from the extent of these words he might taking the liberty that our Author takes upon some of the Expressions that are in our Acts of Parliament represent the Authority that St. Paul vests both in Husbands and Parents as a very boundless and a very extravagant thing This is enough to shew that in all those large Phrases of Obedience there are some necessary Reserves and Exceptions to be understood and if this Qualification is necessary even in writings that were inspired it is no wonder if some of the Rhetorick of our Acts of Parliament wants a little of this Correction It is a very unreasonable thing to urge some general Expressions or some stretches of the Royal Supremacy and not to consider that more strict Explanation that was made of it both in K. Henry the 8th's time and under Q. Elizabeth That were so clear that if we had to do with Men that had not resolved before-hand not to be satisfied one would think there could be no room for any further cavilling In K. Henry's time the extent of the Kings Supremacy was defined in the necessary Erudition of a Christian man that was set forth as the Standard of the Doctrine of that time and it was upon this that all people were obliged to take their measures and not upon some Expressions either in Acts of Parliament or Acts of the Convocation nor upon some stretches of the Kings Jurisdiction In this then it is plainly said That with relation to the Clergy the King is to oversee them and to cause that they execute their Pastoral Office truly and faithfully and especially in those Points which by Christ and his Apostles was committed to them And to this it is added That Bishops and Priests are bound to obey all the Kings Laws not being contrary to the Laws of God. So that here is expressed that necessary Reserve upon their Obedience it being provided that they were only bound to obey when the Laws were not contrary to the Laws of God. The other Reserve is also made of all that Authority which was committed by Christ and his Apostles to the Bishops and Priests and we are not ashamed to own it freely that we see no other Reserves upon our obedience to the King besides these So that these being here specified there was an unexceptionable Declaration made of the Extent of the Kings Supremacy yet because the term Head of the Church had something in it that seemed harsh there was yet a more express Declaration made of this matter under Q. Elizabeth of which indeed our Author hath taken notice tho I do not find he takes notice of the former which he ought to have done if he had intended to have represented this matter sincerely to the world which I confess seems not
stretching their Jurisdiction a little too much on the other hand those who have submitted so tamely to the one have no reason to reproach us for bearing the other Servitude even supposing that we granted that to be the Case And if in the time of our Reformation some of our Bishops or other Writers have carried the Royal Supremacy too far either in Acts of Convocation or in their Writings as those things are personal Matters in which we are not at all concerned who do not pretend to assert an Infallibility in our Church so their excess in this was a thing so natural that we have all possible reason to excuse it or at least to censure it very gently For as all Parties and Persons are carried by a Bias very common to Mankind to magnify that Authority which favours and supports them so the extreams of the Papal Tyranny and the Ecclesiastical Power that had formerly prevailed might have carried them a little too far into the opposite Extream of raising the Civil Power too high But after all we find that when Theodosius came to the Empire he saw the Eastern half of it over-run with Arrianism and as the Arrians were in Possession and were the more numerous so they had Synods of Bishops that had met oft and in vast numbers and had judged in their favours Their Synods were both more numerous than that of Nice and were a more just Representative of the Catholick Church since there were very few of the Western Bishops in that which was held at Nice And as for the Frauds and Violences that were put in practice to carry Matters in those Synods it is very like the Arrians both denied them and were not wanting to recriminate on the Orthodox So when there was a pretence of General Councils on both hands here was a very perplexed Case But Theodosius found a short way to get out of it and therefore instead of calling a new General Council or of examining the History of the several pretended Councils which ought to have been done according to our Authors System he pass'd a Law which is the first Law in Iustinians Code by which he required all Persons to profess that Faith which was profess'd by Damasus Bishop of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria and yet this Law which was a higher Invasion on the Ecclesiastical Authority than any that was committed in our Reformation was never so much as censured on the contrary Theodosius was highly magnified for it There is no reason to imagine that he paid any particular Respect to the See of Rome in this for his joining Peter of Alexandria with Damasus shews that he made the Faith of these Bishops the measures of that Doctrine which he resolved to protect not because of the Authority of their Sees but because he believed their Faith was Orthodox The Case was almost the same in England in which it was pretended that the Independent Authority of our Metropolitans ought to be asserted which was established by the Council of Nice and that many Corruptions in the Worship as for instance the Worship of Images that was condemned by two very numerous General Councils one in the East at Constantinople and another in the West at Francfort ought to be reformed If upon all this the Supreme Civil Authority of this Nation had enacted such a Law as Theodosius had done commanding all to follow the Doctrine profess'd by the two Arch-Bishops of this Church it had been no other but a copying after that Pattern which Theodosius had set us with the Approbation of all Antiquity and yet it cannot be pretended that our Kings and Parliament acted in so summary a way For they went much more slowly and maturely to Work. Upon the whole matter the Civil Authority hath a Power to command every thing that is just and lawful and in that Case the Laws that flow from it ought to be obeyed And if the matter of the Laws is sinful we must not indeed obey in that case but we must submit and bear what we do not like and suffer where we cannot obey So that lawful or unlawful seem to be the only measures that ought to govern our Obedience And as in the matters of natural Religion and Morality no Body can deny that the Civil Authority hath a full Scope tho that is still limitted by this that there ought to be no Injustice Immorality or Turpitude in the Actions that are commanded but where this is not we are bound to obey all the Laws that relate to those matters and where it is we are bound to submit and to bear our burden without giving our selves the trouble to enquire how far the Civil Authority ought to be carried in such matters We set the same measures to our Obedience in matters of revealed Religion If the King passes Laws contrary to Scripture we cannot indeed obey them because of that higher Authority to which we are subject and in Obedience to which we pay all Submission to those who God hath set over us but if they are lawful and conform to the Scripture we ought to obey them without examining whether the King hath proceeded in the passing such Laws by the Rules that become quiet and regular Times And if a Hezekiah or a Iosias should rise up and finding the greater part of his Subjects the Priests as well as the People engaged in Idolatry if he should reform them and suppress that corrupt way of Worship we ought instead of examining critically the method or steps by which he had brought about that change rather to rejoyce in the goodness of God for blessing us with such a Prince So that let men men write and dispute as long as they will on these matters the whole Cause must be brought to this short Issue Either the things that our Princes and Legislators enacted at the Reformation were in themselves just and good and necessary or not if they were then they having an Authority over us in all lawful things as they did well to enact these Laws so we do well to obey them But if they were neither just nor good nor necessary then we acknowledg that as it was a Sin in them to enact them so it were a Sin in us to obey them And all other reasonings upon this Subject are but Illusions by which weak minds may perhaps be wrought upon but they will appear to be such evident Fallacies to men of Sense that without entring into a strict enquiry of what may be alledged for them they will easily shake them off In short if the Reformation appears to be a good thing in it self then all arguing against the manner of it is but meer trifling and looks like men who lie in wait to deceive and to mislead People by false Colours of Truth CHAP. IV. Reflection on the eight Theses laid down by our Author UPon the Grounds that have hitherto been opened it will not be hard to make a very clear
by Queen Mary were Ejected because the greater part of them were Married upon which he gives some grounds to justifie that Sentence I will not here examine the Point of the Unlawfulness of the Marriage of the Clergy It is not so much as pretended to be founded on Scripture and the Discipline of the Church hath been and is to this day very various in that Matter But this is certain that a Law being made in King Edward's days allowing the Marriage of the Clergy the Queen upon the repeal of that Law granted a Commission to some Bishops to examine four of King Edward's Bishops and to try if they were Married and upon that to deprive them This was an Act of the Queen Civil Power so that the Deprivation according to our Author 's own Principles was done by Virtue of that Commission and was by consequence void It was also most unjust with Relation to the Civil Power For these Bishops having been married under the Protection of a Law that warranted it that Law must still justifie them for what was passed and the repeal of it tho it might Impower the Queen to proceed for the future against those of the Clergy that should contract Marriage yet it was against all the Rules of Justice to deprive them by Virtue of a Commission from the Queen for an Action that was warranted by a Law then in being But there was another more extravagant Commission by which three other Bishops are represented as not having behaved themselves well and that as the Queen credibly understood they had both Preach'd erroneous Doctrines and had carried themselves contrary to the Laws of God and the practice of the Universal Church And therefore She orders these Persons to proceed against them either according to the Ecclesiastical Canons or the Laws of the Land and declare their Bishopricks void as they were indeed already void Now our Author will shew his great reading in an instance that cannot be disputed if he can find a President for such a Commission as this is in all History or a Warrant for it among all those Canons for which he pretends so much Respect and Zeal And thus he hath A Deprivation of seven Bishops done by the Civil Authority and without so much as the Colour of Justice XVI The second Reason he gives for their Deprivation was their not acknowledging of any Supremacy in the Roman-Patriarch and here as elsewhere he seems to plead for no higher Authority to the Pope but that of a Patriarch But not to repeat what was said upon this in the general Considerations the acknowledging of that Power in the Pope would not have served turn It was never demanded of the Clergy and would certainly not have been accepted XVII Another Reason was their refusing to officiate according to the Liturgies received and used by the whole Catholick Church for near a 1000 years There is some Modesty in this Pretension which carries up the Abuses no higher than a 1000 years Tho as to the greater part of them and the greatest of them all which is the Adoration of the Host there is no just claim to the half of that Antiquity Yet if the Church of Rome will give us the first 500 years we will not be much concerned in the 1000 that comes next Our Author spake too wide when he named the whole Catholick Church he should have said the Western-Church if he would have spoke exactly And for this Pretension to a 1000 years any that will compare the Missals that have been printed by Card. Bona and F. Mabillon with the present Roman Missals will soon find that the Roman Missal of the last Age was far different from what it had been or a 1000 years before There is one Particular in which indeed they seem both to agree and yet by which the change of the Doctrine of the Church is very conspicuous in the so much disputed Point concerning the Presence in the Sacrament After the 5th Century that a sort of an Invocation of Saints was received by which tho they were not immediately prayed to yet Prayers were put up to God to hear us upon the account of their Intercession There are some Prayers in some Ancient Missals that mention the offering up of that Sacrifice to their Honour and that pray God to accept of it on the account of their Intercession Now in the Opinion of the Church of England that considers the Communion as a commemorative Sacrifice of the Death of Christ and as a Sacrifice of Praise that is offered up to God upon it these Words bear a good Sense which is that to honour the Memory of such Saints their Holy-days were days of Communion and this Action is prayed to be accepted of God on the account of their Intercession In which there is nothing to be blamed but the Superstition of praying to God with regard to their Intercession But one sees a good Sense in those Collects Yet these very Collects are Nonsense or down-right Blasphemous in the present State of the Roman Church in which the Sacrifice of the Mass is believed to be the very Body and Blood of Christ which are there offered up so as to be a Propitiatory Sacrifice for the Dead and the Living Now to say That this is offered up to the Honour of a Saint or to Pray that it may be accepted by Virtue of their Intercession is the most extravagant and impious thing that can be imagined So that this change of Doctrine hath rendred the Canon of the Mass even in those things for which they can pretend to some Antiquity both Impious and Blasphemous in the Opinion and Sense which is now generally received in that Church XVIII Our Author censures a Clause in an Act passed in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign in which it is declared That in all time coming Doctrines are to be judged and determined to be Heresies by the High Court of Parliament with the Assent of the Clergy in their Convocation as if by this the Clergy could not pass a Judgment of Heresy without the Concurrence of the Parliament But Heresy being declared a Crime that inferred a Civil Punishment the Parliament had all possible Reason to make their own Concurrence necessary to a Judgment upon which many Civil Effects were to follow If the Judgment of Heresy went no further than Spritual Censures then this Limitation upon the Clergy might be blamed a little What is this but what is practiced at present in France in which the Censure that the present Pope passed in May 1679. condemning some of the impious Opinions of the modern Casuists was declared to be of no force because it flowed from the Pope with the Court of the Inquisition which is not received in that Kingdom And neither the Bulls of Popes nor the Decrees of Council are of any force there but as they are verified in Parliament tho their Parliaments come far short of the Authority
by the unanimous Consent of the Second Council of Chalons And Radulphus Glaber tells us that in the 11th Century an ill Custom was creeping in that none was ordain'd Deacon till he had first sworn Obedience to his Bishop Among the Rituals published by Morinus in the 4th there is only mention of a Promise of Submission and Obedience to the See in the 9th Ritual which he believes to be about 700 Years old there is an Oath of Obedience indeed to the Patriarchal See but this is far from any claim to Antiquity since it is plain it did not begin to be exacted till the Popes began to raise their Pretensions far beyond that of a Patriarch and so this Oath was soon formed to so high a strain that no Temporal Prince whatsoever had his Subjects more strictly bound to him than all Bishops were subjected to the Pope as their Temporal as well as their Spiritual Head which will appear to every one who will give himself the trouble of reading it XXXV He quarrels our Liturgy for leaving the Oblation to God of the Holy Eucharist as propitiatory or impetratory of any Benefits for the Living or to the Dead contrary to the Belief of former Churches and Councils If by former he means the Ages of Darkness that had preceded the Reformation this we esteem no Reproach but if he will carry this matter higher it is easie to shew they had no other Notion of a Sacrifice in the Eucharist than such as we still retain which is a Commemoration of that one Sacrifice by which we were reconciled to God and a Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving upon it which we still retain and according to the Spirit of the Ancient Church we use the term Sacrifice And here our Author betrays that malignancy of Spirit which he bears our Church in accusing us for some Changes that our Reformers made in the Liturgy as if these had been such heinous things Whereas the Changes that the Roman Church hath made have been of another nature and they have so altered all their Books of Divine Offices that if any will compare the Ordo Romanus which was a Ritual of the 10th or 11th Century with the Missals at present it will appear how inconsiderable the Changes that our Reformers made are when compared to those of that Church If any will take the Pains to examine the Books of Ordination that are collected by Morinus he will see that the Prayers which in one Age were esteemed the Forms of Ordination came to be considered in another but as preparatory Devotions And that the Prayers which in one time were only Blessings after Orders given were at another time looked on as the formal Words by which they were given Since then all Churches chiefly that of Rome have so often changed their Divine Offices it is a very unreasonable thing to reproach the Church of England for having done it once or twice in the beginning of the Reformation XXXVI Our Author it seems thinks he hath a privilege to reproach our Church in spite of the clearest Discoveries that can be made so though that Worthy and Learned Person that answered his two Discourses concerning the Real Presence and the Adoration of the Sacrament had from the light given in Dr. Burnet's History answered the Objection he had made from the Alteration in the Article of the Sacrament concerning the Presence a great deal of the Explanation that was made in Edward the Sixth's Time being left out under Queen Elizabeth Yet it is clear by the Original Subscription which I my self viewed in Bennet Colledg Library that all the Clergy were of the same mind with those of King Edward's Time only upon a prudential Consideration it was not thought necessary to publish it so that it was not cast out but suppressed Common Decency should have obliged our Author not to have mentioned this any more or to have answered that which had been said upon it But it seems with the new Religion he hath got he hath received a most indelible degree of Impudence XXXVII Our Author engages into a long enquiry concerning the Articles of Religion that were printed in King Edward the Sixth's Time and hath indeed offered some Things that seem to leave it doubtful whether they were agreed to in a Convocation or not But all this is a Matter of very small Importance if these Articles were not passed in Convocation in King Edward's Reign we are sure they were agreed too in Convocation in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign And it is no great matter to us whether they are ten Years older or later that is whether they were agreed to in the Year 1552 or in the Year 1562. It is more likely they were agreed to in King Edward's Time for they were printed then with that Title and though Impostures are but too ordinary to be determined by the baldness of a Title Page yet things are seldom printed as flowing from such a publick Authority when it is known that they are the Projects of a few Heads that would impose upon the World It cannot now be known from the Records of the Convocation they being all burnt but it is certain that soon after in Queen Elizabeth's Time these Articles were ever looked on as the Work of the Convocation in King Edward's Time. Nor is there any reason to think otherwise for by that time 〈…〉 said they 〈◊〉 made the Bishopricks were so filled and the Clergy were every where so compliant that there is no reason to think that the regular way was not taken in a Matter of this nature As long as the Popish Party was the Majority our Reformers were obliged to carry Matters by some selected Bishops and Divines whose Propositions were enacted by the Civil Authority but when the Clergy was by degrees wrought to give a more universal concurrence in the Reformation which was done before the Year 1552. we have no reason to think that the regular Method was neglected But it is to very little purpose to spend many words concerning a matter of small consequence and in which there is so little certainty XXXVIII Our Author shews how dry all his Concessions are in favour of the Civil Authority in opposition to the Papal Pretensions not only for deposing but even for assassinating Heretical Princes in these words It shall here be granted as being the Opinion of several Catholicks that no general Council hath any Authority to make any Ecclesiastical Law which any way intrenches upon any Civil Right nor any Foreign Prelate hath Authority to use a Temporal Power over Princes when judged Heretical to kill or depose them or absolve their Subjects from their Allegiance The King is certainly much obliged to our Author who hath given him such an Assurance of enjoying his Crown and his Life For he grants it here as he said elsewhere he would not be thought to justify the burning of Hereticks in this place So