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.
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
minds from the fâ—llowship of the Saints But on the other hand great caution must be had by all Subjects on what grounds they refuse obedience to the Laws that so they be not found following their own designs and interests under a colour of adhering firmly to their consciences They must deliver themselves from all prepossessions and narrowly examine all things ere they adventure on refusing obedience to the Laws But now consider if an unjust motive or narrative in a Law deliver tender consciences from an obligation to obey it or not Basil. If the Magistrate do couple his motive and narrative with our obedience so that we cannot do the one without a seeming consent to the other then certainly we are not to obey For actions being often signs of the thoughts an action how indifferent soever if declared a sign of concurring in a sinful design makes us guilty in so far as we express our concurrence by a sign enjoyned for that end But if the motive or narrative be simply an account of the Magistrates own thoughts without expressing that obedience is to be understood as a concurrence in such intentions then we are to obey a lawful command tho enacted upon a bad design For we must obey these in Authority ever till they stand in competition with GOD. If then their Laws contradict not GOD's Precepts neither in their natural nor intended siâ—nification they are to be obeyed whatever the grounds were for enacting them which is only the Magistrates deed for which he shall answer to GOD. Poly. This calls me to mind of two Stories not impertinent to this purpose The one is of Iulian the Apostate who to entangle the Christians that never scrupled the bowing to the Emperors Statue as a thing lawful caused to set up his with the Images of some of the Gods about it that such as bowed to it might be understood as likewise bowing to the Images which abused some of the simpler but the more discerning refused to bow at all to those Statues because he intended to expound that innocent bowing to his Statue as an adoration of the Gods about it A Christian likewise being brought to the King of Persia did according to the Law bow before him but when he understood that to be exacted as a divine Honor to the King he refused it Eud. This is clear enough that all actions are as they are understood and accordingly to be performed or surceased from But it seems more difficult to determine what is to be done in case a Magistrate enact wicked Laws Are not both his Subjects bound to refuse obedience and the Heads of the Church and the watchmen of Souls likewise to witness against it And may they not declare openly their dislike of such Laws or practices and proceed against him with the censures of the Church since as to the Censures of the Church we see no reason why they should be dispensed with respect of persons which S. Iames condemns in all Church Judicatories Basil. I shall not need to repeat what hath been so often said that we must obey GOD rather than man if then the Magistrates enjoyn what is directly contrary to the divine Law all are to refuse obedience and watchmen ought to warn their Flocks against such hazards and such as can have admittance to their Princes or who have the charge of their Consciences ought with a great deal of sincere freedom as well as humble duty represent the evil and sinfulness of such Laws but for any Synodical Convention or any Declaration against them no warrant for that doth appear and therefore if the Magistrate shall simply discharge all Synods I cannot see how they can meet without sin But for Parochial meetings of Christians for a solemn acknowledgment of GOD such Assemblings for divine Worship being enjoined both by the Laws of Nature and Nations and particularly commanded in the Gospel no consideration can free Christians from their Obligation thus to assemble for Worship if then the Magistrate should discharge these or any part of them such as Prayer Praisâ—s and reading of Scriptures preaching the Gospel or the use of the Sacraments they are notwithstanding all that to be continued in But for the consultative or directive Government of the Church till a divine Command be produced for Synods or Discipline it cannot lawfully be gone about without or against his authority Crit. For refusing obedience to an unjust command of surceasing visible Worship the instance of Daniel is signal who not only continued his adorations to GOD for all Darius his Law but did it openly and avowedly that so he might own his subjection to GOD. But for reproving Kings we see what caution was to be observed in it since GOD sent Prophets with express Commissions for it in the Old Testament and Samuel notwithstanding this severe message to Saul yet honored him before his people It is true there should be no respect of persons in Christian Judicatories but that is only to be understood of these who are subject to them and how it can agree to the King who is Supream to be a Subject is not easily to be comprehended Since then honor and obedience is by divine precept due to Magistrates nothing that invades that honor or detracts from that obedience can be lawfully attempted against them such as is any Church-censure or excommunication And therefore I cannot see how that practice of Ambrose upon Theodosius or other later instances of some Bishops of Rome can be reconciled to that Render fear to whom fear and honor to whom honor is due Phil. I am sure their practice is far less justifiable who are always preaching about the Laws and times to the people with virulent reflections on King Parliament and Council much more such as not content with flying discourses do by their writings which they hope shall be longer lived study the vilifying the persons and affronting the authority of these GOD hath set over them And how much of this stuff the Press hath vented these thirty years by past such as knew the late times or see their writings can best judge Eud. Now our discourse having dwelt so long upon generals is to descend to particulars That we may examine whether upon the grounds hitherto laid down the late tumults or the present Schisms and divisions can be justified or ought to be censured I know this is a nice point and it is to be tenderly handled lest all that shall be said be imputed to the suggestions of passions and malice Wherefore let me intreat you who are to bear the greater part of that discourse to proceed in it calmly that it may appear your designs are not to lodge infamy on any party or person but simply to lay out things as they are hoping withal that you will not take your informations of what you say from the tatles of persons concerned but will proceed on true and sure grounds And that we may return to this with
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
easily off I have subjoyned to it an account of the form and rules of Church Government as I found them to have been received in the first and purest ages of the Church But I add no more for Preface to that work since in the end of the last Conference enough is said for introduction to it I have divided my work in four parts and Conferences The first examines the opinion of resisting lawful Magistrates upon the pretence of defending Religion The second considers the Authority of Laws and the obedience due to them together with the Kings Supremacy in matters Ecclesiastical The third examines the spirit that acted during the late times and Wars and continues yet to divide us by Schism and faction And the fourth examines the lawfulness and usefulness of Episcopacy I must now release my Reader from the delay this Introduction may have occasioned him without the usual formality of Apologies for the defects the following papers are guilty of since I know these generally prevail but little for gaining what they desire but shall only say that this morose way of writing by engaging into Controversies is as contrary to my Genius as to any mans alive For I know well how little such writings prevail for convincing of any and that by them the most part are rather hardened into more wilfulness and exasperated into more bitterness Yet for this once I was prevailed on to do violence to my own inclinations by this Patrociny of the authority and laws of that Church and Kingdom wherein I live I am so far from thinking my self concerned to make Apology for the slowness of this Piece its appearance in publick that I encline rather to make excuses for its coming abroad too soon That it was ready near a twelve-month ago can be witnessed by many who then saw it Yet I was willing to let it lye some time by me and my aversion from the motions of the Press put it often under debate with me whether I should stifle it or give it vent at length I yielded to the frequent importunities of my friends who assaulted me from all hands and told me how much it was longed for and what insultings were made upon the delay of its publication And by what is near the end of the third Conference it will appear that it was written before the discovery of these who had robbed and wounded the Ministers in the West of Scotland I let what is there said continue as it was written before the discovery but shall add somewhat here In September last after a new robbery had been committed on another conformable Minister whose actors no search could discover some few days had not passed over when by a strange Providence one of them was catched on another account by a brave Soldier and being seized such indications of his accession to the robbery were found about him that he to prevent torture confessed not only his own guilt but discovered a great many more most of them escaped yet three were taken and had Justice done on them with him who had been their chief Leader and who continued to cant it out highly after he got his Sentence talking of his blood as innocently shed and railing against the Prelats and Curats though before Sentence he was basely sordid as any could be One of his complices who died with more sense acknowledged when he spake his last words that bitter zeal had prompted him to that villany and not covetousness or a design of robbing their goods Yet I shall not conceal what I was a witness to when a Minister of the Presbyterian perswasion being with them for two of them would willingly admit of none that were Episcopal after he had taken pains to convince the chief Robber of the atroâ—iousness of his crimes which was no â—asie task he charged him to discover if either Gentlemen or Ministers had prompted or cherished him in it or been conscious to his committing these robberies he cleared all except a few particular and mean persons who went sharers with him And by this fair and ingenuous procedure the Reader may judge how far the Author is from a design of lodging infamy on these who differ from him when of his own accord he offers a testimony for their vindication But I shall leave this purpose and the further prefacing at once If my poor labors be blessed with any measure of success I humbly offer up the praise of it to him fâ—om whom I derive all I have and to whom I owe the praise of all I can do But if these attempts bring forth none of the wished-for effects I shall have this satisfaction that I have sincerely and seriously studied the calming the passions and the clearing the mistakes of these among whom I live so that more lyes not on me but to follow my endeavours with my most earnest prayers that the GOD of Peace may in this our day cause us discern and consider these things which belong to our Peace THE HEADS TREATED OF in these Conferences THe first Conference examines the origine and power of Magistracy and whether Subjects may by arms resist their Sovereigns on the account or pretence of defending Religion against Tyranny and unjust oppression And whether the King of Scotland be a Sovereign Prince or limited so that he may be called to account and coerced by force The second examines the nature of humane Laws and of the obedience due to them and the Civil Magistrates Right of enacting Laws in matters Ecclesiastical The third examines the grounds and progress of the late Wars whether they were Defensive or Invasive and what Spirit did then prevail And the grounds of our present Schiâ—m are considered The fourth examines the origine lawfulness and usefulness of Episcopal Government which is concluded with an account of the Primiâ—ive Constitution and Government of the Churches that were first gathered and planted The COLLOCUTORS Eudaimon A Moderate man Philarchaeus An Episcâ—pal man Isotimus A Presbyterian Basilius An Asserter of the Kings Authority Criticus One well studied in Scripture Polyhistor An Historian The FIRST CONFERENCE Eudaimon YOU are welcome my good Friends and the rather that you come in such a number whereby our converse shall be the more agreeable Pray sit down Philarcheus The rules of Custom should make us begin with asking after your Health and what News you have Eud. Truly the first is not worth enquiring after and for the other you know how seldom I stir abroad and how few break in upon my retirement so that you can expect nothing from me but you have brought one with you who uses to know every thing that is done Isotimus I know you mean me the truth is I am very glad to hear every thing that passeth and think it no piece of Virtue to be so unconcerned in what befals the Church of GOD as never to look after it but you are much wronged if notwithstanding all your seeming abstraction you be
fightings and such like Truly Sir he that will found the Doctrine of Resistance on such grounds hath a mind on very easie terms to run himself upon Condemnation And yet such like are the warrants your Friends bring from Church History Therefore I see there is yet good ground to assert that Doctrine was unknown in the Christian Church till the times wherein the Popes pretended to the Temporal Power over Princes all whose plea was managed upon the grounds of the great Importance of Religion to be preferred to all human Interests and that Christ had told his Disciples to buy a sword and that Princes being the Ministers of God were to be no longer acknowledged than they observed that design for which they were set up Only in one particular less disorder may be apprehended from the pretensions of the Roman Bishops than from these Maxims that put the power of judging and controuling the Magistrate in the Peoples hands which opens a door to endless confusions and indeed sets every private Person on the Throne and introduceth an Anarchy which will never admit of order or remedy whereas these who had but one pretender over them could more easily deal with him and more vigorously resist him Isot. You have said very many things from History which I shall not at this time undertake to examine but I am sure it hath been both the Practice and Doctrine of the Reformed Churches that in case of unjust Tyranny the States of a Kingdom may put a stop to the fury of a King and therefore where the Reformation was opposed by Cruelty it was also defended by Arms. And let me add that I believe your great quarrel at this Doctrine is because the practice of it was so great a mean of preserving the Reformation which though in good manners you must commend yet I am afraid you hate it in your heart Philar. Whether you or we be greater friends to the Reformation let the world judge by this one Indication that you study to draw all can be devised for the staining it with blood which is the constant calumny of its adversaries whereas we offer with the clearest evidences to evince its Innocence But let me premise the distinction of Doctrine from Practices and tho some unjustifiable Practices appear these must never be charged on the Reformed Churches unless it be made appear they were founded on their Doctrine Besides the Reformers coming out of the corruptions of Poperâ— in which the Doctrine and Practice of Resistance upon pretences of Religion were triumphant it will not be found strange tho some of that ill-tempered Zeal continued still to leaven them But for their Doctrine I take the Standart of it to be in the Confessions of the several Churches all which being gathered in one harmony we are in the right scent of their Opinions when we search for them there Now the Doctrine of resisting of Magistrates is by divers of their Confessions expressly condemned but in none of them asserted It is true there were some ambiguous expressions in our Scots Confession registred in Parliament Anno 1567 for Art 14. among the transgressions of the second Table they reckon to disobey or resist any that God hath placed in authority while they pass not over the bounds of their office which seems to imply the lawfulness of Resistance when they so transgress but besides that it is not clearly asserted and only inferred this doth not determine what the bounds of the Magistrate's Office are And if it be found that his Office is to coërce with the Sword so as to be accountable to none but to God then no Resistance will follow from hence except of a limited Magistrate who is accountable to others The same Explication is to be given to that part of the 24. Art where all such are condemned who resist the Supream Power doing that thing which appertaineth to his charge But in the same Article the Magistrate is called God's Lieutenant in whose Sessions God himself doth sit and judge But with this it is to be considered when that Confession was ratified in Parliament even when no Sovereign was to look to the clearing of any ambiguities which might have-been upon design by some and through the neglect of others let pass The Confessions of the other Churches are unexceptionably plain and without restriction in the point of subjection For what seems like a Restriction in the French Confession that the yoke of subjection is willingly to be born though the Magistrates were Infidels provided that God's Sovereign authority remain entire and uncorrupted imports nothing but that our subjection to them which takes in both Obedience and Suffering is not to strike out the great Dominion God hath over our Souls whom we should obey rather than man And even the Confession of the Assembly of Divines ratified by the Scots General Assembly speaks of submission to Authority in absolute terms without the exception of Resistance in case of Tyranny Cap. 22. art 4. It is the duty of People to be subject to their authority for Conscience sake Infidelity or difference in Religion doth not make void the Magistrate's just and legal Aurity nor frâ—e the people from their due obedience to him If then the Doctrine of Resistance be to be owned as a Law of Nature and as a part of the Christian Freedom how came it that it was not more expresly owned in this Confession especially since it is known to have been the opinion of most of both these Assemblies But on the contrary it seems condemned and only the undiscerned reserves of just legal and due are slipâ— in for the defence of their actings Truly this seems not fair dealing and such an asserting of Subjection at that time looks either like the force of truth extorting it or intimates them afraid or ashamed to have owned that as their Doctrine to the World And by this time I suppose it is clear that the Reformed Churches ought not to be charged with the Doctrine of Resistance Poly. Nay nor the Reformed Writers neither with whose words I could fill much Paper and shew how they do all generally condemn the resistance of Subjects and when any of them gives any Caveat to this it is not in behalf of the People but of the States of the Kingdom who they say perhaps are impowered with authority to curb the tyranny of Kings as the Ephori among the Lacedemonians the Tribuns of the people and the Demarchs in Rome and Athens Now it is acknowledged that if by the Laws of the Kingdom it be found that the King is accountable to the States then their coercing of him is not the resistance of Subjects but rather the managing of the Supreme Power which lies in their hands If then you will stand to their decision in this Point of the Peoples resisting of their Sovereigns though Tyrants the debate will not run long they being so express And this will be nothing shaken by any thing
far as concerns him in his Parliament hath obliged himself in the word of a Prince and his Son the Earl of Carrict afterwards Robert the third being constituted by the King for fulfilling of the premises so far as touches him gave and made his Oath the holy Evangils being touched by him and then the States of Parliament did also swear to maintain the Earl of Carrict made then Lieutenant under the King Now the reason why these mutual Oaths were then given is well known since the King's Sâ—ccession was so doubtful But after that no Oath seems to have been given and tho King Iames the Second his Coronation be set down in the Records of Parliament there is not a word of an Oath given by any in his Name It is true in the 11. Parl. of that King cap 41. for securing of the Crown-lands from being alienated it is appointed That the King who then was should be sworn and in like manner all his Successors Kings of Scotland into their Coronation to the keeping of that Statute and all the points thereof But this is not such an Oath as you alledg Likewise in King Iames the Fourth his Reign 2. Parl. Ch. 12. where the Council was sworn it is added And our Sovereign Lord hath humbled his Highness to promit and grant in Parliament to abide and remain at their Counsels while the next Parliament But it is to be observed the King was then but 17 years old and so not of full age this promise was also a temporary provision Besides the very stile of it shews that it was below his Majesty to be so bound But the first Act for a Coronation Oath I can meet with is Cap. 8. of the 1. Parl. of King Iames the Sixth An. 1567. where the stile wherein the Act runs shews it was a new thing it bearing no narrative of any such former Custom the words of the Act are Item because that the increase of Vertue and suppressing of Idolatry craves that the Prince and the people be of one perfect Religion which of GOD'S mercy is now presently professed within this Realm Therefore it is statute and ordained by our Sovereign Lord my Lord Regent and the three Estates of this present Parliament that all Kings and Princes or Magistrates what 〈◊〉 holding their place which hereafter may happen to Reign and bear Rule over this Realm at the time of their Coronation and receipt of their Princely authority make their faithful promise by Oath c. Now you see the beginning of the Coronation Oath and I need not here reflect on the time when that Act passed it being so obvious to every one But I suppose it is made out that the Kings of Scotland have not their Authority from any stipulation used at their Coronation The next thing you alledg to prove the King of Scotland a limited Prince is because he must govern by Laws which cannot be enacted without the Authority of the three Estates in Parliament But this will not serve turn unless you prove that the Estates can cognosce on the King and coerce him if he transgress for which there is not a tittle in our Laws I acknowledg the Constitution of Parliaments to be both a rational and excellent Model and that the King becomes a Tyrant when he violates their Priviledges and governs without Law But tho his Ministers who serve him in such tyrannical ways are liable to punishment by the Law yet himself is subject to none but GOD. And from our Kings their Justice and goodness in governing legally by the Councils of their Parliaments you have no reason to argue against their absolute Authority for their binding themselves to such Rules and being tied to the observance of Laws enacted by themselves will never overthrow their Authority but rather commend it as having such a temperature of Sovereignty Justice and Goodness in it Isot. But was not King Iames the Third resisted and killed in the Field of Striveling and afterwards in his Sons first Parl. Act. 14. all who were against him in that Field were declared innocent and his slaughter was declared to be his own fault which was never rescinded As also Cap. 130. of Iac. 6. Parl. 8. the Honour and Authority of Parliament upon the free Vote of the three Estates thereof is asserted And are not you an impugner of the Authority of the three Estates who plead thus for the King 's Sovereign Power See Answer to the Letter written to the Author of Ius Populi Basil. I shall not engage far in the Story of King Iames the Third which even as it is represented by Buchanan lib. 11. no friend to Monarchy is very far from being justifiable on the side of those who fought against him nor was it the least part of their guilt that they forced his Son being then but fifteen years old to own their Rebellion And what wonder was it that they who had killed the Father and kept his Son in their power passed such an Act in their own favors But King Iames the Fourth quickly discovered what a sincere Penitent he was for his Accession to that Rebellion as appeared by the Iron Belt he wore all his life as a penance for this sin yet the meekness of his Spirit and the power of that Faction made that things continued in the posture they formerly were in It is true that Act was not expresly repelled which perhaps was not safe at that time to have attempted but it was really done by his Revocation ratified in his 6. Parl. cap. 100. wherein with consent of the three Estates He annuls and revokes all Statutes and Acts of Parliament which he had enacted in his former years that tended either to the prejudice of the Catholic Church his Soul or of the Crown declaring them to have no force but to be deleted and cancell'd out of the Books And it is not to be doubted but in this he had an eye to that former Act but for your Act asserting the Authority of Parliament look but what immediately precedes it and you will find the King's Authority and Supremacy fully established and I acknowledg that whosoever impugns the Authority of Parliament as the King 's Great Council doth incur a very high punishment but this will never prove an Authority in the States to coerce and resist the King One thing I must mind you of from that Act which is That none of the Lieges must presume to impugn the dignity and Authority of the said three Estates or to seek or procure the innovation or diminution of the Power and Authority of the same three Estates or any of them in time coming under the pain of Treason And can you be so ignorant of our Laws as not to know that the Church was one of these Estates for the small Barons which some called the Third Estate came not in till three years after Iac. 6. Parl. 11. cap. 113. And now from all these premises I think we
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
other instances When Ezra came from Artaxerxes he brings a Commission from him Ezra ch 7. ver 25 26. impowering him according to the wisdom of his GOD that was in his hand to set up Magistrates and Iudges who might judg them that knew the Laws of his GOD and teach them that knew them not and a severe certificate is passed upon the disobedient and one of the branches of their punishment which is by the Translators rendered banishment being in the Chaldaick rooting out is by some judged to be Excommunication which is the more probable because afterwards Chap. 10. ver 8. the Censure he threatens on these who came not upon his Proclamation is forfeiture of goods and separation from the Congregation Here then it seems a Heathen King gives authority to Excommunicate but be in that what will Ezra upon his return acted in a high Character he makes the Priests Levites and all Israel to swear to put away their strange Wives he convenes all the people under the Certificate of separation from the Congregation and enjoyns Confession of their sins and amendment and we find both him and Nehemiah acting in a high Character about the ordering of divine matters which could only flow from the King's Commission for neither of them were Prophets nor was Ezra the High Priest but his Brother and so no more than an ordinary Priest Mordecai likewise instituted the feast of Purim for which nothing could warrant him but the King's authority committed to him who gave him his Ring for sealing such Orders since he was neither King Priest nor Prophet And on the way let me observe what occurs from that History for proving what was yesterday pleaded for The Subjects ought not to resist no not the tyranny of their Superiours since a Writing was procured from Ahasuerus for warranting the Iews to avenge themselves and to stand for their lives and to destroy and slay all that would assault them which saith they might not have done this before that writing was given out and yet their killing of 74000 of their Enemies shews what their strength was But all I have said will prove that the Civil Powers under the Old Testament did formally judg about matters of Religion and that that priviledg belongs to Kings by vertue of their Regal dignity and not as they are in Covenant with GOD since even Heathen Kings give out Orders about divine matters Poly. If from Sacred you descend to humane practices nothing was more used than that the Emperors judged in matters of Religion neither was this yielded to them only after they became Christians but Eusebius lib. 7. cap. 30. tells how they made application to Aurelian a Heathen Emperor for turning Samosatenus out of the Church of Antioch who decreed that the Houses of the Church should be given to those Bishops whom the Christians of Italy and the Roman Bishops should recommend to them Constantine also when not baptized did all his life formally judg in matters both of Doctrine and Discipline and for the Laws they made about Church matters they abound so much that as Grotius saith One needs not read them but look on them to be satisfied about this And indeed I know not how to express my wonder at the affrontedness of that Pamphleter who denies this pag. 483. Pray ask him was the determining about the age the qualifications the Election the duties of Church-men the declaring for what things they should be deposed or excommunicated a formal passing of Laws in Church matters or only the adding Sanctions to the Church determinations And yet who will but with his Eye run through either the first six Titles of the Code or the 123. Novel besides many other places all these and many more Laws about Church matters will meet him But should I take a full Career here I am sure I should be tedious and Grotius hath congested so many instances of this that I refer the curious Reader to him for full satisfaction The Elections of Bishops which had been formerly in the hands of the people and Clergy with the Provincial Synods that judged of them became so tumultuary that popular Elections were discharged by the Council of Laodicea Can. 13. and the Emperors did either formally name as Theodosius did Nectarius or reserve the ratifying their Election to themselves And I must confess it is a pretty piece of History to say the Bishops consented to this either as diffident of their Office or out of ambition See p. 485. Tell your Friends that they must either learn more knowledg or pretend to less for can they produce the least vestige for the one branch of this alternative that the Bishops their allowing the Emperor such an interest in their Elections flowed from a distrust of their Office Let them give but one scrap of proof for this and let them triumph as much as they will Is it not a pretty thing to see one talk so superciliously of things he knows not Isot. But all you have brought will never prove that a King may at one stroke subvert a Government established in the Church and turn out all who adhere to it and set up another in its place neither will this conclude that the King may enact all things about Ecclesiastical matters and Persons by his own bare authority which is a surrender of our consciences to him certainly this is to put him in CHRIST's stead and what mischievous effects may follow upon this if all matters of Religion be determined by the pleasure of secular and carnal men who consider their interests and appetites more than God's glory or the good of the Church and of Souls Truly my heart trembles to think on the effects this both hath produced and still may bring forth See pag. 483. Phil. It is charity to ease your Lungs sometimes by taking a turn in the Discourse though you need none of my help But what you say Isotimus doth no way overturn what hath been asserted for either the change that was made was necessary sinful or indifferent the two former shall not be at this time debated but shall be afterwards discussed but if it be indifferent then the Kings Laws do oblige us to obedience and the mischief hath followed on the change falls to their share who do not obey the King's Laws when the matter of them is lawful And as for the thrusting out Church-men when they are guilty Solomon's precedent is convincing who thrust out Abâ—athar from the High Priesthood neither can the least hint be given to prove that he acted as inspired and not as a King and Nehemiah tho but commissionated by Artaxerxes thrust one out from the Priesthood for marrying a strange Woman For your prying into Acts of Parliament truly neither you nor I need be so much conversant in them Neither were it any strange matter if some expressions in them would not bear a strict Examen But that you now challenge about the King's enacting of all
matters will never infer a surrender of conscience to him for certainly that must relate to what goeth before of the outward Government and Policy of the Church Besides none will quarrel the phrase of the Kings authority in all things that are Civil yet that will not infer that he can enact the lawfulness of murther and theft So these expressions must carry with them a tacite exception Yea even without that allowance the phrase may be well justified since it only imports that the Kings enacting any thing in these matters makes them legal which differs much from lawful and saith only that such Orders issued forth by the King are de facto Laws which will not conclude they must be obeyed but only that his authority is to be acknowledged either by obedience if the command be just or by suffering if unjust As for the effects this may produce I am sure they cannot prove worse than these which have followed upon the pretences of the Churches absolute authority and intrinsick Sovereign Power And indeed since there is so much corruption among men nothing that falls into the hands of men can scape the mixtures of abuse at long run But I must add that the passions and pride of many Church-men in all Ages have been such that the decision of the plurality of Church-men seems the model of the World that is fullest of danger Isot. Three things yet remain to be discussed The one is if obedience be due to the Laws when they command things contrary to our consciences For sure you cannot pretend in that case to give a preference to humane Laws beyond conscience which is the voice of GOD. The next is when the Magistrate commands things just of themselves but upon unjust motives and narratives whether my obedience doth not homologate his bad designs And finally where the commands of the Magistrate are manifestly unlawful how far should the Church and Church men oppose and contradict them For a bare non-obedience seems not to be all we are bound to in that case When I am satisfied in these things I will quit this purpose Basil. To engage in a particular discussion of what is now moved by you would draw on more discourse than our present leisure will allow of yet I shall attempt the saying of what may satisfie a clear and unprejudged mind And to the first I shall not fall on any longer enquiry into the nature and obligation of conscience than to tell that conscience is a conviction of our rational faculties that such or such things are sutable to the nature and Will of God Now all Religion is bound upon us on this account that there is such evidence offered for its truth which may and ought to satisfie the strictest Examen of Reason And all certainty is resolved in this that our rational faculties are convinced of the truth of the objects that he before us which conviction when applied to divine matters is called Conscience But there may be great mistakes in this Conviction for either the prejudices that lie on our minds from our senses the prepossessions of Education interest or humors the want of a due application of our faculties to their objects or chiefly the dulness and lesion of our Organs the corruption of our minds through sin and lust occasion many errors so that often without good reason oft contrary to it we take up persuasions to which we stifly adhere and count such convictions evidences of the Will of GOD. I acknowledg when a Man lies under a persuasion of the Will of GOD he ought not to go cross to it for this opens a door to Atheism when that is contradicted of which we are convinced But if this persuasion be false it cannot secure a Man from sinning in following of it For it is a Man 's own fault that he is thus imposed upon since if his rational faculties were duly applied and well purified they should prove unerring touchstones of truth If therefore through vanity wilfulness rashness or any other byass of the mind it be carried to wrong measures a Man is to blame himself and thus his errour ought to aggravate and not lessen his guilt If then a Man's conscience dictate to him the contrary of what GOD commands in that case he is in a visible hazard for his error can never tâ—ke away GOD's Authoâ—ity and so his wrong informed conscience doth not secure him from guilt if he be disobedient On the other hand nothing in Scripture can bind a Man to act a-against the convictions of conscience since we are bound to believe the Scriptures only because of the evidence of their authority to our rational faculties If then our belief of the Scriptures rest on that foundation no part of Scripture can bind us to walk contrary to that evidence for then it should destroy that Principle on which our Obligation to believe it self is founded which is the evidence of reason and so in that case a Man sins whatever he do Neither is this to be accountd strange since that erroneous conscience is from man's own fault And that which some alledg to escape this that in such cases a Man ought to forbear from acting will not serve turn to excuse a Man from sin For in these Precepts which exact a positive obedience such a â—orbearance and surceasing from action is a sin Upon these Evidences then it will follow that if the conviction of our conscience run contrary to the Magistrates commands these convictions are either well grounded or ill If the former then the Magistrates command being contrary to the nature and Will of GOD aâ—e not to be obeyed If ill grounded then that mistaken persuasion cannot secure us from sin no more than in the case of conscience contradicting the Law of GOD for the Laws of the Magistrates in things lawful are the Laws of GOD being the application of his general Laws unto particular instances by one cloathed with authority from him Therefore tho I do not say the Laws of the Magistrate can warrant our counteracting an erroneous conscience yet on the contrary a misinformed conscience will not secure us when we disobey the Magistrates lawful commands And thus I think your first Question is clearly answered End You have a great deal of reason to say so your discourse being so closely rational that I cannot see any escape from any paâ—t of it yet I must add that certainly it is a piece of Christian tenderness which obligeth all in Authority to beware of laying gall-traps and snares in the way of tender consciences And the best way to get an undisputed obedience is that their commands be liable to as few exceptions as is possible and that the good of any such Laws be well ballanced with the hazards of them that so the Communion of the Church in all outwards particularly in the Sacraments may be had on as easie terms as is possible whereby nothing be enacted that may frighten away weakâ—r
Privileges of Parliament and preserving the King's Person and Authority And when His Majesty was murdered what attempts made they for the preservation of His Person or for the resenting it after it was done This was the Loyalty of that Party and this is what all Princes may expect from you unless they be absolutely at your Devotion Let these things declare whether these Wars went upon the grounds of a pure defence But if next to this I should reckon up the instances of Cruelty that appeared in your Judicatories for several years I should have too large a Theme to run through in a short Discourse What cruel Acts were made against all who would not sign the Covenant They were declared Enemies to GOD the King and the Country Their persons were appointed to be seized on and their goods confisâ—ated And in the November of the year 1643. when some of the most eminent of the Nobility refused to sign the Covenant Commissions were given to Soldiers to bring them in Prisoners warranting them to kill them if they made resistance And praâ— whether had this more of the cruelty of Antichrist or of the meekness of IESUS Or shall I next tell you of the bloody Tribunals were at S Andrews and other plâ—ces after Philips-haughs And of the câ—uelty againâ—t those Priâ—oners of War who bore Arms at the King's command and in defence of his authority What bloudy Stories could I here tell if I had not a greater horror at the relating them thaâ— many of these high Pretenders had at the aâ—ting of them And should I here recount the procedure of the Kiâ—k Iudicatories against all who were thought disaffected I would be look'd on as one telling Romances they being bâ—yond credit What Processes of Ministers are yet upon Record which have no better foundation than their not preaching to the times their speaking with or praying before My Lord Montrose their not railing at the Engagement and the like And what cruelty was practised in the years 1649. and 1650 None of us are so young but we may remember of it A single death of one of the greatest of the Kingdom could not satisfie the bloudâ—thirsty malice of that Party unless made formidable and disgraceful with all the shameful pageantry could be devised Pray do you think these thâ—ngs are forgotten Or shall I go about to narrate and prove them more particularly I confess it is a strange thing to see men who are so obnoxious notwithstanding that so exalted in their own conceits and withal remember that the things I have hinted at were not the particular actings of single and private persons but the publick and owned proceedings of the Courts and Judâ—catories These are the grounds which persuade me that with whatsoever fair colours somâ— mâ—y vaâ—niâ—h thâ—sâ— things yet the â—pirit that then acted in that Party was not the Spirit of GOD. Isot. Truly you have given in a high charge against the proceedings of the late times which as I ought not to believe upon your assertion so I cannot well answer those being matters of fact and done most of them before I was capable of observing things And therefore when I see men of great experience I shall ask after the truth of what you have told me But whatever might be the design of some Politicians at that time or to whatever bad sense some words of the League may be stretched yet you cannot deny but they are capable of a good sense and in that I own them and so cleave to that Oath of GOD which was intended for a solemn Covenanting with GOD and the people meant nothing else by it but a giving themselves to Christ to whose truths and Ordinances they resolved to adhere at all hazards and against all opposition and in particular to oppose every thing might bear down the power and progress of Religion which was the constant effect of Prelacy therefore we are all bound to oppose it upon all hazards And indeed when I remember of the beauty of holiness was then every where and consider the licencious profanity and â—coffing at Religion which now abounds this is stronger with me than all arguments to persuade me that these were the men of GOD who had his Glory before their eyes in all they did or designed whereas now I see every one seeking their own things and none the things of IESUS CHRIST And all these plagues and evils which these Kingdoms do either groan under or may apprehend ought to be imputed to GODS avenging wrath for a broken Covenant which though taken by all from the highest to the lowest is now condemned reviled abjured and shamefully broken These things should afflict our souls and set us to our mournings if haply GOD may turn from the fierceness of his anger Phil. As for these Articles that relate to the combination for engaging by arms in prejudice of the Kings Authority or may seem to bind us to the reacting these Tragedies they being founded on the lawfulness of Subjects resisting their Sovereigns if the unlawfulness of that was already evinced then any obligation can be in that compact for that effect must be of it self null and void and therefore as from the beginning it was sinful to engage in these wars so it will be yet more unlawful if after all the evils we have seen and the judgments we have smarted under any would lick up that vomit or pretend to bind a tye on the Subjects Consciences to rise in arms against their Lawful Sovereâ—gn And let me tell you freely I cannot be so blind or stupid as not to apprehend that GODS wrath hath appeared very visibly against us now for a tract of thirty years and more neiâ—her doth his anger seem to be turned away but his hand is stretched out still But that which I look on as the greater matter of his controversie with us is that the Rulers of our Church and State did engage the ignorant multitude under the colors of Religion to despise the LORDS anointed and his Authority and by Arms to shake off his yoak and afterwards abandon his Person disown his interest refuse to engage for his rescue and in the end look on tamely and see him murdered Do you think it a small crime that nothing could satisfie the Leaders in that time without they got the poor people entangled into things which they knew the vulgar did not and could not understand or judge of and must implicitly rely upon the Glosses of their Teachers For whatever the General Assembly declared was a duty following upon the Covenant which was an easie thing for the leading men to carry as they pleased then all the Ministers must either have preached and published that to their people with all their zeal otherwise they were sure to be turned out The people being thus provoked from the Pulpits they were indeed to be pitied who being engaged in an oath many of them no doubt in singleness of heart having the fear
whatever by Treaty one State yields over to another that Promise Donation and Oath is indeed the ground on which the Kings right may be supposed to have been first founded But now his Title to our Obedience proceeds upon the rules of Justice of giving him what is his by an immemorial Possession passed all prescription so many ages ago that the first vestiges of it cannot be traced from Records or certain Histories and not of fidelity of observing the promises of our Ancestors to him though I do not deny a pious Veneration to be due to the Promises and Oaths of Parents when they contain in them adjurations on their Childern And thus the Gibeonites having a right to their lives confirmed to them by the Compact of the Princes of Israel they and their Posterity had a good title in Justice to their lives which was basely invaded by Saul and had this aggravation that the compact made with them was confirmed by oath for which their posterity should have had a just veneration But though that Oath did at first found their title to their Lives and their Exemption from the forfeiture all the Amorites lay under yet afterwards their title was preserved upon the rules of Iustice and the Laws of Nature which forbid the invading the lives of our Neighbors when by no Injury they forfeit them Thus your confounding the titles of Inheritance and prescâ—iption with the grounds upon which they first accresced hath engaged you into all this mistaking But from all this you see how ill founded that reasoning of the Answerer of the Dialogues is for proving the posterity of these who took the Covenant tied by their fathers oath which yet at first view promised as fair colors of reason as any part of his Book had he not intermixed it with shameful insultings and railings at the Conformist which I suppose do now appear as ill grounded as they are cruel and base But I am not so much in love with that stile as to recriminate nor shall I tell you of his errors that way of which I am in good earnest ashamed upon his account For it is a strange thing if a man cannot answer a discourse without he fall a fleering and railing To conclude this whole purpose I am mistaken if much doubting will remain with an ingenuous and unprejudged Reader if either we or our posterity lye under any obligation from the Covenants to contradict or counteract the Laws of the Land supposing the matter of them lawful which being a large Subject will require a discourse apart But I will next examine some practices among us and chiefly that of Schism and separation from the publick worship of GOD to which both the unity of the Spirit which we ought to preserve in the bond of peace and the lawful commands of these in authority do so bind us that I will be glad to hear what can be alledged for it Isot. A great difference is to be made betwixt separation and non-compliance the one is a withdrawing from what was once owned to be the Church the other is a with-holding our concurrence from what we judg brought in upon the Church against both Reason and Religion and any thing you can draw from CHRIST's practice or precept in acknowledging the High Priests or commanding the people to observe what the Pharisees taught them is not applicable to this purpose For first these were Civil Magistrates as well as Ecclesiasticks and Doctors of the Civil and Judicial Law which is different from the Case of Churchmen with us Further the Iewish Church was still in possession of the privileges given them from GOD and so till CHRIST erected his Church they were the Church of GOD and therefore to be acknowledged and joined with in Worship But how vastly differs our Case from this See from p. 189. to p. 204. Phil. You have given a short account of the large reasonings of the late Book on this head only he is so browilled in it that there are whole pages in his Discourse which I confess my weakness cannot reach But to clear the way for your satisfaction in this matter which I look upon as that of greatest concernment next to the Doctrine of Non-resistance of any thing is debated among us since it dissolves the unity of the Church and opens a patent door to all disorder Ignorance and Profanity I shall consider what the unity of the Church is and in what manner we are bound to maintain and preserve it All Christians are commanded to love one another and to live in peace together and in order to this they must also unite and concur in joint Prayers Adorations and other acts of Worship to express the harmony of their love in Divine matters Sacraments were also instituted for uniting the body together being solemn and federal stipulations made with God in the hands of some who are his Ambassadors and Representatives upon Earth by whose mouths the Worship is chiefly offered up to God and who must be solemnly called and separated for their Imployment Now these Assemblings of the Saints are not to be forsaken till there be such a Corruption in the Constitution of them or in some part of the Worship that we cannot escape the guilt of that without we sepaâ—ate our selves from these unclean things Wherefore the warning is given Come out of Babylon that we be not partakers of her sins and so receive not of her plagues But though there be very great and visible corruptions in a Church yet as long as our joining in Worship in the solemn Assemblies doth not necessarily involve us into a Consent or Concurrence with these we ought never to withdraw nor rent the unity of the body whereof CHRIST is the head Consider how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity And our Saviour sheweth of what importance he judged it to his Church since so great a part of his last and most ravishing Prayer is That they might be one And this he five times repeats comparing the unity he prayed for to the undivided Unity was betwixt him and his Father How shall these words rise up in Judgment against those who have broken these bonds of perfection upon slight grounds With the same earnestness do we find the Apostles pressing the Unity of the Body and Charity among all the members of it which is no where more amply done than in the Epistles to the Corinthians whom the Apostle calls the Churches of GOD and yet there were among them false Teachers who studied to prey upon them and to strike out the Apostles authority Some among them denied the resurrection there were Contentions and Disorders among them in their meetings such confusions were from the strange Tongues some spake that had one unacquainted with them come in upon them he had judged them mad some were drunk when they did receive the LORD's Supper they had an incestuous Person in their Society and it seems he was
all the upright in heart shall follow it And in the mean while shall study to bless when you curse and pray for you who do thus despitefully use us We trust our witness is on high that whatever defects cleave to us and though may be we have not wanted a corrupt mixture as you know among whom there was a son of Perdition yet we are free of these things you charge on us promiscuously and that these imputations you charge us with are as false as they are base But all this will not serve the turn of many of your dividers whose Ministers continue with them as formerly and meerly because they hold themselves bound in Conscience to obey the Laws they are separated from Truly if you can clear this of separation you are a Master at subtil reasoning For you know it is not the third part of this Church which was abandoned by the former Ministers upon the late change and yet the humor of separating is universal And though some few of your own Ministers have had the honest zeal to witness against this separation yet how have they being pelted for it by the censures and writings of other Schismaticks which have prevailed so much upon the fear or prudence of others that whatever mislike they had of these separating practices yet they were willing either to comply in practice or to be silent spectators of so great an evil But if separation be a Sin it must have a guilt of a high nature and such as all who would be thought zealous watch-men ought to warn their people of And what shall be said of these even Church-men who at a time when the Laws are sharply looked to do join in our Worship but if there be an unbending in these they not only withdraw and become thereby a scandal to others but draw about them divided Meetings are not these time-servers For if concurrence in our Worship be lawful and to be done at any time it must be a duty which should be done at all times and therefore such Masters of Conscience ought to express an equality in their ways and that they make the rules of their concurrence in worship to be the Laws of GOD and not the fear of civil punishments Finally such as think it lawful to join in our Worship and yet that they may not displease the people do withdraw shew they prefer the pleasing of men to the pleasing of GOD and that they make more account of the one than of the other For if it be lawful to concur in our worship what was formerly said proves it a duty Are not these then the servants of men who to please them dispense with what by their own concession must be a duty Besides such persons withdrawing gives a great and real scandal to the vulgar who are led by their Example and so a humor of separating comes to be derived into all whereby every one thinks it a piece of Religion and that which will be sure to make him considerable and bring customers to him if he be a Merchant or Trades-man that he despise the solemn Worship and rail at his Minister and if he but go to Conventicles and be concern'd in all the humors of the Party he is sure of a good name be he as to other things what he will Eud. Much of this we know to be too true and certainly nothing deserves more blame for all the disorders are among us than this separation Discipline goes down Catechising is despised the Sacraments are loathed the solemn Worship deserted I know the poor Curates bear the blame of all and all of them must be equally condemned if a few of them have miscarried for which when ever it was proved they were censured condignly In end you charge their gifts and that their People are not edified by them But I pray you see whether the prejudices you make them drink in against them occasion not that For it is a more than humane work to overcome prejudices Read but the complaints of the Prophets and you will confess a Churchmans not being profitable to his People will be no good argument to prove him not sent of GOD And when I consider that even the Apostles call for the help of the Churches Prayers that utterance might be given to them yea and desire them to strive together in their Prayers for them I must crave leave to tell you that the defect of that utterance and power in preaching you charge on the present Preachers may be well imputed to the want of the concurrence of the Peoples Prayers whom prepossessions have kept from striving together with them in Prayer that they might come among them with the fulness of the blessing of the Gospel And if there be any of such tender and miâ—led Consciences who have been smitten with remorse for such concurrence in Worship as their tenderness is to be valued so their ignorance is to be pitied and they who thus misled them deserve the heavier censure since they have involved simple and weak Consciences with their pedling Sophistry into such straits and doubts In fine you cannot say that a Minister is by a Divine right placed over any particular flock If then it be humane it with all other things of that nature is within the Magistrates cognizance so that when he removes one and leaves a legal way patent for bringing in another upon which there comes one to be placed over that flock what injustice soever you can fancy in such dealing yet certainly it will never free that Parish from the tie of associating in the publick Worship or receiving the Sacraments from the hands of that Minister whom they cannot deny to be a Minister of the Gospel and therefore no irregularity in the way of his entry though as great as can be imagined will warrant the peoples separating from him Neither can they pretend that the first Incumbent is still their Minister for his relation to them being founded meerly on the Laws of the Church it is as was proved in the Second Conference subject to the Magistrates authority and so lasts no longer than he shall dissolve it by his commands unless it appear that he designs the overthrow of true Religion in which case I confess Pastors are according to the practice of the first Ages of the Church to continue at the hazard of all persecutions and feed their flocks But this is not applicable to our Case where all that concerns Religion continues as formerly only some combinations made in prejudice of the Supreme Authority are broken and order is restored to the Church instead of the confusions and divisions were formerly in it And if this change have occasioned greater disorders wherever the defect of Policy or Prudence may be charged yet certainly if the change that is made be found of its own nature both lawful and good the confusions have followed upon it are their guilt who with so little reason and so much
are by your Friends asserted But I shall dismiss this point with one Sentence of S. Augustin lib. 2. contra Parmen Quisquis ergo vel quod potest arguendo corrigit vel quod corrigere non potest salvo pacis vinculo excludit vel quod salvo pacis vinculo excludere non potest aequitate improbat firmitate supportat hic est pacificus And let me freely tell you that when I consider the temper the untractableness the peevish complainings the railings the high cantings of the Donatists which are set down by him and others I am sometimes made to think I am reading things that are now among our selves and not what passed twelve Ages ago And indeed some late practices make the parallel run more exactly betwixt our modern Zealots and the Circumcellions who were a Sect of the Donatists that was acted by a black and a most desperate spirit For St. Augustin tells us how they fell on these who adhered to the Unity of the Church beating some with Cudgels putting out the Eyes of others and invading the lives of some particularly of Maximinus Bishop of Hagaia whom they left several times for dead And what instances of this nature these few years have produced all the Nation knows How many of the Ministers have been invaded in their Houses their Houses rifled their goods carried away themselves cruelly beaten and wounded and often made to swear to abandon their Churches and that they should not so much as complain of such bad usage to these in Authority their Wives also scaped not the fury of these accursed Zealots but were beaten and wounded some of them being scarce recovered out of their labor in Child-birth Believe me these barbarous outrages have been such that worse could not have been apprehended from Heathens And if after these I should recount the Railings Scoffings and floutings which the Conformable Ministers meet with to their Faces even on streets and publick High-ways not to mention the contempt is poured on them more privately I would be looked on as a forger of extravagant Stories But it is well I am talking to men who know them as well as my self From these things I may well assume that the persecution lies mainly on the Conformists side who for their Obedience to the Laws lie thus open to the fury of their Enemies Isot. Now I dare say you speak against your conscience For do you think any of the LORD's people have accession to so much wickedness which is abhorred by them all and this is well enough known to you though you seem to disguise it For you have often heard our honest Ministers express their horror at such practices do not therefore sin against the generation of the Lord's Children so far as to charge the guilt of some murdering Rogues upon these who would be very glad to see Justice done upon such Villains Phil. You say very fair and I am glad to hear you condemning these Crimes so directly and I am as desirous as any living can be to be furnished with clear evidences of believing as much good as is possible of all mankind But let me tell you plainly that the constant concealing of these murderers whom no search which those in Authority have caused to make could discover tho the Robbers carried with them often a great deal of furniture and other goods which must have been conveyed to some adjacent Houses but could never be found out after so many repeated facts of that nature forceth upon the most charitable a suspicion which I love not to name Next let me tell you that these things are very justifiable from the principles your Friends go upon for if we be by Oath bound to discover all Malignants or evil instruments that they may be brought to condign punishment and if our Conformity be so notorious a wickedness and such a plain breach of Covenant in the punishment whereof the Magistrate is supine and backward then let every one compare the doctrine of the late Pamphlets from p. 282. to p. 408. chiefly 404. and 405. and declare whether by the Rules laid down in them any private persons upon heroical excitations may not execute vengeance on these who are so guilty of gross and notorious backsliding and defection and what may not be expected of this nature from him who hesitates to call the invading of the Bishop with a Pistol an accursed act and will only condemn it as rash precipitant and of evil example and that not simply neither but all circumstances being considered and their exigences duly ballanced Which makes me apprehend his greatest quarrel with that deed was that it misled the designed effect and so was done inadvertently or too publickly or upon some such particular ground which may have occasioned its miscarriage But to deal roundly with you I shall freely acknowledg if the Doctrine of Resistance by private Subjects against these in Authority be lawful I see no ground to condemn such practices For if we may rise in Arms against those in Authority over us and coerce and punish them why not much rather against our fellow Subjects and those to whom we owe no obedience especially when we judg them to have transgressed so signally and to have injured us to a high degree which is the case as most of you state it with the Ministers that are conformable And from this let me take the freedom to tell you that the whole Mystery of Iesuitism doth not discover a principle more destructive of the peace and order of mankind than this doctrine of the lawfulness of private persons executing vengeance on gross offenders where the transgression is judged signal the Magistrate is judged remiss and the actors pretend an heroick excitation This puts a Sword in a mad mans hands and arms the whole multitude and is worse than theirs who will have such deeds warranted by some supreme Ecclâ—â—â—astical Power or at least by a Confessarius and Director of the Conscience Indeed this may justly possess the minds of all that hear it with horror it being a direct contradiction of the Moral Law and an overturning of all the Societies of Mankind and Laws of Nature Eud. I am more charitable than you are for though I must acknowledg what you have alledged to be the native consequence of what is asserted in that Book yet I am inclined to believe he intended not these things should be drawn from it since he in plain terms pag. 402. condemns these outrages I confess his zeal to defend all Naphthali said and to refute every thing the Conformist alledged hath engaged him further than himself could upon second thoughts allow of And as for the instances of Phineâ—as Elijah or other Prophets the argument from them was so fully obviated in our First Conference that I am confident little weight will be laid upon it But now methinks it is more than time we considered the importance of that difference about which all this ado is made
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
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
which provoked GOD's Jealousie so much against us that it was unlawful to unite with it or so far to comply with its adherents as to unite with them in Worship If these things be made clear to us we need not amuse our selves nor entertain one another with farther janglings and therefore may break off our Conference Isot. Since you will break off I shall not struggle about it for it is a confession of your weakness that you pass over so many things with this slight silence Basil. This is the genuine Spirit of the party which you now express to the life but when ever the Author of the Dialogues undergoes the penance of examining what you desire it will perhaps appear you have as little ground for this as for your other boasting But I am sure no scruple sticks with me about these great heads we have examined so that upon a narrow survey of these matters it appears he had more reason for what he asserted than he then vented And I have as little doubt of his being able to clear himself about other matters which are snarled at by these Pamphlets But one thing I have not forgot about which I am more sollicitous which was a promise Polyhistor made of sending when our Conference were ended an account of the model and forms of the ancient Government which I desire with such earnestness that I wish we weâ—e gone that he might be as good as his word Poly. I know not if it shall answer your hopes but your curiosity shall be quickly satisfied after I have given you some account of my design in it When I considered the ruines of Religion and the decays of Piety through the World I have often bent my thoughts to seek out the most proper remedies and means for the Churches recovery and that which seemed the most promising was to consider the constitution the rites and forms of the Châ—rch in her first and purest ages and to observe the steps of their decâ—ning from the primitive simplicity and purity which being once fully done great materials would be theâ—eby congested for many useâ—ul thoughts and overtures in order to a Reformation And this is a work which for all the accurate enquiries this age hath produced is not yet performed to any degree of perfection or ingenuity therefore I resolved to pursue this design as much as my leisure and other avocations could allow of But as I was doubtful what method to follow in digesting my observations the Canons vulgarly called Apostolical offered themselves to my thoughts I thereupon resolved to follow their tract and to compile such hints as I could gather on my way for giving a clear view of the state of the Church in the first ages As for the opinions of the ancient Fathers these have been so copiously examined by the Writers of Controversies that scarce any thing can be added to those who went before us bet few have been at such pains for searching into their practices and rules for Discipline and Worship wherein their excellency and strength lay In this inquiry I have now made good advances but at present I will only send you my Observations on the two first Canons and as you shall find this task hath sucâ—eeded with me I will be encouraged to break it off or to pursue it farther Only on the way let me tell you that I am so far from thinking these Canons Apostolical that nothing can be more evidâ—nt than that they were a collection made in the Third Century at soonest for the matter of almost every Canon discovers this when well examined and therefore that Epistle of Zephirâ—us the Pope who lived about the year 20 that mentions â—â—â—or as others cite it 70. of the Apostles sayings is not to be consider'd that Epistle with the other Decretals being so manifestly spurious that it cannot be doubted by any who reads them and the number sixty agrees with no Edition for they are either fifty or 85. Tertullian is also cited for them but the words cited as his are not in his Book contra Praxeam from which they are vouched Nor can they be called the work of Clemens Romanus though they were vented under his name For Athanasius in his Synopsis reckons the work of Clemens Apocryphal And Eusebius tells us that nothing ascribed to Clement was held genuine but his Epistle to the Corinthians But the first Publishers of these who lived it is like in the Third Century have called them Apostolical as containing the earliest rules which the Apostolical men had introduced in the Church And afterwards others to conciliate more veneration for them cal led them the Canons of the Apostles compiled by Clement And this drew Pope Gelasius's censure on them by which the Book of the Canons of the Apostles is declared Apocryphal which some who assert their authority and antiquity would foolishly evite by applying that censure only to the 35. added Canons whereas the censure is simply passed on the Book and not on any additions to it And this shall serve for an Introduction to the Papers I will send you how soon I get home Phil. I doubt not but all of us except Isotimus will be very desirous to understand the particular forms of the Primitive Church but he is so sure that they will conclude against him that I believe he is not very curious of any such discovery Isot. You are mistaken for I doubt not but much will be found among the Ancients for me but if otherwise I will lead you a step higher to let you see that from the beginning it was not so For Antiquity when against Scripture proves only the error ancient And if you quit the Scriptures to us we will yield those musty Records to you Eud. Pray speak not so confidently after all your pretences have been so baffled that we are ashamed of you for you are like the Spaniard who retained his supercilious Looks and Gate when he was set to beg But I will not be rude in a place which owns me for its Master though really your confidence extorts it Isot. You are a proud company and so elevated in your own eyes that you despise all who differ from you and think you censure them gently if you call them no worse than ignorants and fools Is there any arrogance in the World like this Phil. Pray let us not fall out now that we are to part but I confess it is no wonder the smart of all the foils you have got provoke some passion in you and so I pity you for I know none of your Party who would have carried so discreetly Therefore Adieu I must be gone and leave this good company Isot. You will have the last word of scolding but I perhaps will find out one that will be too hard for you all and will call you to account of all you have both argued and boasted Basil. I will break ofâ— next since the design of your meeting is finished only Polyhistor mind your promise Poly. I go about it and therefore Eudannon I beg your pardon to be gone Eud. Though Retirement and Solitude be ever acceptable to me yet it will not be without some pain that I return to it when I miss so much good company as have relieved me these four days but the truth is on the other hand I am glad to see an end put to this painful Engâ—gement of which I suppose we are all weary It remains only that I return you my sincere and hearty thanks for the favor you have done me which I wish I could do so warmly as might engage you frequently to oblige me with the like civilities Adieu my good friends FINIS