AN ESSAY ON Ecclesiastical Authority In which the Pretence of an Independent Power in the CHURCH to a Divine Right in the Election of Bishops To the Invalidity of Lay Deprivations To the Inseparable Relation of a BISHOP to his See To an Obligation of continuing Communion with the Deprived Bishops And several other Things relating to the Nonjurors Separation from our CHURCH are particularly and impartially Examined By JOHN TURNER D. D. Vicar of Greenwich and Chaplain to His Royal Highness the PRINCE LONDON Printed for JOHN WYAT at the Rose in St. Paul's Church-yard 1617. AN ESSAY ON Ecclesiastical Authority THE many irregular and dangerous Practices of the Romish Clergy under the Pretence of an exempt Jurisdiction and an Authority Independent on the Civil Power caused the Governors of our CHURCH to take that Doctrine into their serious Consideration at the Beginning of our REFORMATION and in our XXXVIIth Article they have determined and settled it thus That the Queen's Majesty for this was done in Queen Elizabeth's Time hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and all other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain And then to avoid Offence and prevent Misconstructions as the Queen had declared in her Injunctions so the said Article thus explains the forementioned Doctrine We give not hereby to our Princes the ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments but only that Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in Holy Scripture by God Himself that they should rule all Estates and Degrees of Men committed to their Charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal And this was so confirmed by the Canons in the Beginning of King James I's Reign that if the Authority of our CHURCH might be admitted to be decisive in this Matter we see plainly what that was and is But the giving so much Jurisdiction to Princes over Ecclesiastical Persons in Ecclesiastical Causes and Affairs is complained of by some among us as an Encroachment and a dangerous Compliance an enslaving Principle which controuls the Powers of the CHURCH that as they say ought to be exempt and Independent THIS Point then not being successfully enough determined by the declared Judgment of our CHURCH in Her Articles and Canons must it seems be brought under a farther Examination And it must be considered not only as a Subject of Debate and Speculation but at this Time it is become a Matter of the greatest Moment and Importance to our Peace both in CHURCH and STATE All the Enemies of the late happy REVOLUTION are gone into the Defence of that Independent Authority to say no more And all those other Notions and Opinions whereby the Non-jurors would vindicate their Separation from the Communion of our CHURCH are built upon this Foundation And it will not be easy to make them sensible that this their Separation is Unjustifiable and Wrong if this Claim be allowed good On the other Hand if it can be proved That the CHURCH has no such exempt and independent Authority as is pretended we shall strike at the very Root of their untoward Principles and Proceedings In our Inquiry into this Matter 1. THE first Thing that occurs to our Observation is That the STATE is found in the actual and full Possession of Authority over all their Subjects and in all Affairs whatsoever antecedently to the CHURCH'S Claim We are not born Priests as we are born Subjects but are made such upon a sufficient Maturity of Age and are therefore to consider what Share of Authority the Prince loses over any of his Subjects upon their Admission into Holy Orders and what is the Foundation of the pretended Change And as to this we shall soon be sensible 2. THAT there is Nothing in natural Religion to be pleaded as the Ground of such an Exemption or Independency For according to that Kings had a Right to the Priesthood also and were the undoubted supreme Judges and Determiners of all Affairs Melchisedech and Jethro we all know were such Nor does it appear that there ever was any Separation of the Ecclesiastical Authority from the Temporal before the Mosaic Dispensation which was a Type of the Evangelical and consequently no Room for any Debates or Disputes of this Nature in the first Natural State of Mankind It must therefore all be laid in Divine Revelation and Institution From whence I think it plainly follows 3. Thirdly THAT if the CHURCH has any Right to such an exempt and independent Authority as is now pleaded for it must be founded on that Divine Commission which CHRIST gave to his Apostles and their Successors and by them to his CHURCH to the End of the World The Way then to know what there is to be said for such a Claim is to consider well the Contents of that Commission which must be looked on as the great Charter of the Gospel upon which all Her appropriated Rights and Privileges Her Authority and Powers Her Immunities and Franchises are built The Substance then of CHRIST'S Commission to his Apostles was That they should make Proselytes of all Nations Matth. xxviii 19 20. Joh. xx 21 c. by Preaching God's Word that they should Baptize them and by that Sacrament admit them into Christ's Church that they should afterwards instruct and train them up in the Pure Christian Worship and Holiness and in that Worship commemorate CHRIST'S Death in the Eucharist according to his Institution bind Offenders loose Penitents and by Ordaining Ministers make an effectual Provision for the perpetual Continuance of this Ministry which CHRIST has thus committed to 'em to the End of the World according to his Appointment So that Preaching and Performing Divine Service in the Worship of GOD Administring the Sacraments inflicting Censures and passing Sentence upon enormous Sinners Absolving the Penitent from such Sentences and Ordaining Ministers These and whatever other Particulars of Ministration in the Divine Offices of Religion are by the special Commission of CHRIST in any Part of it appropriated to the Spiritual Governors of the CHURCH become thereby the Peculiar sacred Powers of the Christian Priesthood Concerning all which it is allow'd and granted 1. That the CHURCH does not derive Her Authority to the Execution of them from any Temporal Powers or Potentates but from JESUS CHRIST alone by the forementioned Divine Commission 2. That as they were not originally derived from so neither can they be taken away or made to cease by any secular Authorities whatsoever 3. That neither can any secular Powers of themselves execute these Divine and Holy Offices The very End and Reason of taking these Holy Offices out of the Hands of the secular Powers who before had executed them and of vesting them in a distinct Set or Order of Men still requires that they should continue so separated And consequently all the Powers specify'd in
Church seems wholly Inconsistent with that Interest and Care and Concern for Religion which Christian Kings and Princes are alway supposed to have and the Regulation and Defence of which is one great End and Purpose of all their Authority Till I see farther Reason against it than what has yet been shewn I cannot but believe that the Civil Government in their Way and by a due Exercise of their Power is concerned for the Good of Mens Souls to promote Virtue and true Religion as well as the Bishops and Pastors of Christ's Flock And if they are then to exclude their Jurisdiction in all Ecclesiastical Causes and Matters is to rob them of one great Part of their Sovereignty It is in effect to confine all the Authority of Princes only to the Preservation of Peace and Order and Justice in Human Societies without any Regard to GOD and Religion And I know of no good Reason that can be given for this For altho ' GOD the FATHER for the Honour of our Blessed Redeemer and the more effectual Accomplishing our Redemption has given him a Church and a Kingdom within his own Dominions and allowed Him his Proper Ministers and Governors of this CHURCH under his own Divine Authority Yet I hope these Gentlemen will not say that this carries along with it a Devolution of all Power and Authority in religious Affairs from Princes to Bishops from the Governors of the State to those of the Church And if it does not then the Secular Powers ought not in any such Affairs to have their Authority and Jurisdiction excluded That would be to subvert one of the main Ends of their Institution which was That under them we might live peaceable and quiet Lives in Godliness as 1 Tim. ii 2. well as in common Honesty These Gentlemen I know will allow Kings and Princes to exercise all their Authority in the Defence of the Church and for the Protection of its Powers and the Support of it in the Execution of its Laws altho' nothing to its Disadvantage And is it so then at last that by virtue of Christ's Commission Kings and Princes have no more to do with Religious Matters than only under the Directions of the Church to minister to the Support of the Spiritual Jurisdiction when ever they think sit so to Modify their Power I hope that all Christian Emperors and Kings will be sensible what Honours and Favours such Churchmen intend them in admitting them to so great a Privilege And must they in all other Cases be discharg'd of all Regard and Concern for GOD and RELIGION in the Government of their People Sure I am that it was not so under the Jewish Dispensation when this Separation of the Priesthood from the Secular Powers first began Kings did then intermeddle in Ecclesiastical Causes and regulate the Affairs of Religion and had Jurisdiction in the Government of the Church The Ark of the Covenant which none might look into or so much as touch it but the Priests alone Was yet so far under the 2 Sam. vi Government and Authority of King David 2 Sam. xv that he commanded it to be removed first to this Place and then to that He also distributed the several Courses both of the Priests 2 Chron. xxiii xxiv xxiv and Levites and gave the Levites a new Law for their Offices that they who before began not their Attendance till the Thirtieth Year of their Age should now begin it at the Twentieth He took the Ark from the Tabernacle 2 Chron. i. 3 5. of the Congregation and leaving that behind at Gibeon he built a new Tent for it at Jerusalem How came he to meddle so much with that which was in the Peculiar Custody of the Priests The like was afterwards 2 Chron. xxiv xxiii 4. done by Hezekiah who also by his Royal Decree appointed the Passover to be kept and called all the Ten Tribes of Israel to Jerusalem to the Celebration of it who had been hindred from it for a long time before Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being 1 Kings ii 27 35. Priest unto the Lord. Which let the Adversaries say what they will to evade it was as much a Deprivation as any one of those they now complain of and when he had done this he put Zadock the Priest in the Room of Abiathar The Altar of Bethel was destroy'd by King Josiah Idolatry was frequently punished and suppressed by their Kings and the suffering Religion to be corrupted by introducing Evil and Idolatrous Novelties into the Worship of GOD is often charged as a Crime and a Blemish in the Administration of their Government Now as the Instances mentioned in which they did exert their Power were undeniable Acts of Church Government and Ecclesiastical Authority So the Charge and Imputation of Guilt upon them in their Neglects of this kind plainly shew that they had a just Authority and a rightful Jurisdiction therein And if the Jewish Kings were allowed to have Power and Authority in Ecclesiastical Matters and the Priesthood claimed no Independent Power in Church Government under that Dispensation in which the Administration of Divine Offices was as much separated from the Secular Magistrates as it is now under the Gospel Some very good Reason some strong Proof some very bright and clear Evidence should be produced to convince one that the Jurisdiction which Kings exercised under one Dispensation is quite taken away by the other ESPECIALLY too when this claimed Authority is not to be limitted to Articles of Faith and Matters of Divine Revelation only but is extended to a Judicial Cognizance in all our moral Actions as well as in those that are purely religious And for the Kings and Potentates of the World not to submit to the Sanctions and Determinations of such Men in all Cases of Morality is arrogantly called Disobedience to their spiritual Superiors Vindic. Prop. 21. and Rehellion against the Legates and Vicegerents of Christ And to restrain ecclesiastical Persons in any extravagant Proceedings of this Kind is represented by some Men as downright Persecution WHAT an Original Piece of spiritual Pride is this I would desire any Reader seriously to consider that if such Doctrines as these had been preached by the Apostles and Primitive Christians Whether it would not have been the greatest Disadvantage imaginable to the Propagation of the Gospel And whether it would not have given all the Secular Potentates of the World a great and invincible Prejudice against it What Heathen Emperor or King would have embraced this Religion or given any Countenance at all to the Profession of it who should have been told That in the very Minute that this Religion was professed by him and became established in his Dominions he was to lose one half of his Authority over his People That he was no longer to have that Fullness of Jurisdiction and Power which he had before and which other Kings and Emperors enjoy'd round about him but was
now to give up his Sovereignty and Supremacy in all Spiritual Ecclesiastical Causes and in all Moral Actions into the Hands of his spiritual Governors of that Church of which he was now becoming a Member He is now no longer to claim an universal Supremacy in his Dominions but himself becomes a Subject to his Subjects and their spiritual Inferior the Bishops in his Kingdom being as so many Kings and spiritual Monarchs who have a Divine Right to tye up his Hands from having any thing to do in the Government of the Church or in Matters of Religion Would not all the Secular Potentates in the World have spurn'd at and despised the Preachers of so senseless a Religion as an Imposture and a Cheat that under a Pretence of Godliness was contrived to wrest one great Part of their Authority out of their Hands And would not such an Attempt as this too deservedly have caused the Word of Truth to be evil spoken of Most assuredly it would And yet this is the very Thing that an Independent Authority in Church Government naturally and universally tends to DR Hickes is pleased to say Constit p. 76. That the Governors of the Church lose Nothing of their Power Authority or Jurisdiction by admitting Sovereign Princes into the Church I beg leave to ask then Whether it is not altogether as reasonable both for the Honour and Interest of Christianity that Christian Princes should lose Nothing of their Temporal Authority by embracing this our Holy Religion And if it be I am sure that the Schemes which are now laid out for Kings and Princes to rule by under the Church's independent Power cannot be of GOD because they make Spoil and Havock of the secular Powers and rob them of one entire Branch of their Sovereignty and Dominion And yet this is not the worst Evil that attends this Claim For V. IT not only robs Kings of all Sovereignty in religious and spiritual Affairs but is extended also to their Administration of the Temporal I have already observed That these Gentlemen bring all the moral Actions of humane Life under the peculiar Cognizance of the spiritual Government of the CHURCH Every Thing in which the Consciences of Men are concern'd they claim as falling wholly within this spiritual Jurisdiction so much as a Judge between two private Luke xii 14. Men in the Division of a small Estate But our Modern Independents in Church Government make themselves Judges of Kings and of their Titles to their Thrones They in effect divide the Kingdoms of the Earth according to their Decisions and Determinations By a pretended Supremacy from CHRIST they put a Check upon the Legislature in the Laws that they provide for the Security of the Nation and labour to controul the States of the Realm in the Administration of their secular Affairs They sanctify even Sedition and Rebellion by their spiritual Authority and take upon them to absolve the Subjects from all the strictest Oaths whereby they have sworn Allegiance to their King They endeavour to bind it upon the Consciences of Men to set up one King and to dethrone another according to their personal Sentiments and Opinions Now I would willingly be informed by them what Part of CHRIST'S Commission it is that gives them this Authority or that in any disputable Titles to the Throne makes them the Judges of it And yet the Modern Independents in Church Goverment do not only assume all this to themselves but they also lay as much Stress on their own Notions and Assertions of this Kind as tho' they had a Spirit of Infallibility or an immediate Revelation from Heaven What less than this could induce them to charge all the Great Men of our Church however learned and equally pious with themselves as Teaching and Acting and Praying contrary to the essential Righteousness of GOD only because they teach and act and pray contrary to their particular Sentiments and Schemes in Civil Government What is this but to arrogate to themselves a Spirit of Infallibility in the Interpretation of those Scriptures on which they build their Notions and Opinions Will not the Reader stand still here and Pause a little and Question the Truth of what I say Will he not think it incredible that spiritual Men should approach so near to Blasphemy as to set up their own political Principles as the infallible Tests of Truth and Righteousness Certain it is that CHRIST'S Commission is of another Nature and never was intended to authorize the Governors of the Church to frame the Government of Nations too according to their disputable Models and controverted Schemes and to damn all Mankind as Hereticks and Schismaticks and Rebels who will not come in to them and desert the legal Constitutions of their Country This is foreign to the Business of the Gospel the Propagation of the Christian Faith by Preaching and Baptizing and Administring Sacraments and Training up Christians in Holiness and Devotion is a Sphere at so great a Distance from all this of Secular Government and Political Controversies that GOD certainly never gave the Governors of the Church any Divine Authority therein And therefore an Independent Authority in Church Governors which is industriously set up to this End must be an Imposture and a Cheat and contrary to the Will of CHRIST and of GOD. And Bishops and Clergymen by Virtue of CHRIST'S Commission may as well claim a Right to go into Westminster-Hall and turn out the Judges as giving Judgment contrary to the essential Righteousness of God as to teach the People that it is a Sin to be subject to the Laws and Constitutions of the Kingdom where they live This brings me to my VI. LAST Argument which is That this Independent Authority in the Government of the CHURCH is utterly inconsistent with the Supremacy and Sovereignty of all Secular Potentates Two such Independent Authorities in the Government of the same Body of Men appear utterly incompatible They so frequently interfere and thereby bring such Mischiefs and Distractions into the World that they cannot possibly be both of them from GOD. He who is a God of Peace and Order and not of Confusion must not be supposed to have intended any two such Powers without a Subordination of the one to the other THE Supporters of that Claim being aware of this Argument would evade it by saying That the Mischiefs complained of proceed not from the Inconsistency of two such Powers but from the Encroachments of the two contending Parties And that all this would be prevented effectually if each would keep within their proper Limits and neither of 'em put their Sickle into the other's Harvest This is Regale Pontiff p. 15. smoothly and finely said indeed but Nothing to the Purpose because it is Arguing against plain Matter of Fact For they both of them claim a Right to the same Harvest and who then shall judge between them to preserve the Peace and Quiet of the Christian World Are
CHRIST'S Commission are the limitted and appropriated Powers which belong to the Spiritual Governours of the CHURCH alone and which no Temporal Potentates can take upon them to execute without breaking in upon CHRIST'S Institution and subverting the very Ends and Reasons of their original Separation And therefore if no more had been intended by the Independent Authority of CHRIST'S Church in the Execution of their Priestly Office than this That they who derived not this Authority from the State could not have it taken away by them and that the secular Powers are by CHRIST'S Commission excluded from the Performance of all the Divine Offices specify'd in it The Church of England has declared Her Judgment in Favour of such a Claim and we should have entred into no Disputes against it BUT then he who himself has no Authority to baptize may yet be a competent Judge of the Care and Fidelity of those who do And he who has no Power to administer the Sacrament of the Lord's-Supper or to ordain Ministers may yet be capable of taking Cognizance of the Neglects and of the Miscarriages committed in those Performances So that it is one Thing to minister in the Holy Offices and Service of the Church and another to have Rule and Government and a judicial Cognizance of the Care Fidelity and good or evil Conduct of those who do This leads me to consider 2. THAT besides the Ministration in Holy Offices the Power of the Keys and Ordination there are other Powers and Authorities claimed by the Church Such are all the General Powers of Government of Assembling in Synods of Consulting one another on important Occasions of making Laws or Canons of appointing to particular Churches or Districts their proper Pastors of determining religious Debates and Disputes of prescribing Rules of Order and Discipline c. All which as not being expressly mentioned in or appropriated by CHRIST'S Commission as the other divine Offices of Religion are can belong to the Church only of Common-Right as it is a Society and as such Acts of Government are the constant and common Rights of every Established Community A SOCIETY cannot subsist without Government as therefore the Christian Church is by CHRIST'S Commission constituted a spiritual Society there is no Doubt but that it thereby obtains a certain Right to the Exercise of all such Authority in Government as other Established Communities are usually possess'd of THE Question then is not whether the Church has a Right to the Exercise of such Authority for it is undeniably evident that she has But what is the Foundation of that Authority and how far it will hold good to the Exclusion of the secular Powers Now unless it could be made appear that these Powers of Government are by CHRIST'S Commission specify'd and appropriated to the Priesthood as the divine Offices of its Holy Ministration are There can be no other Reason or Ground of this Claim than that of common Right and Necessity to the Support of this spiritual Community and to the Attainment of the great End for which it was ordained WE see therefore that in this Controversy a great regard is to be had to the Distinction here made between the divine Offices of the Christian Priesthood and the more General Powers of Government The former are allow'd to be appropriated to the Orders of the Bishops and Clergy only The latter are those Powers and Authorities which our present Controversies and Dissentions are about And if I am right in Stating the CHURCH'S Claim and Title thereto I shall certainly be Right in the Determination of this dispute So far as they are Necessary to the due Execution of CHRIST'S Commission the CHURCH has undoubted Right thereto And if Dr. Hickes and his Friends had gone no farther in claiming a Right to the Exercise of Ecclesiastical Authority Independently on the secular than as that shall be found necessary to the Propagation and Establishment of Christianity I am apt to think that all Christians would have come into it I for my Part can make no Scruple to affirm that by Virtue of Christs Commission to his Apostles and their Successors to Preach and Propagate the Gospel and to gather Him a Church thereby They have an undoubted Right and Authority to do every Thing in the Exercise of their Spiritual Offices which shall be found necessary to the Support of the Christian Faith and CHURCH But if Men will not content themselves with this without going farther if they will claim an Universal Inherent Authority of doing every Thing in Matters of Religion if they please by themselves and to be the sole Proper and Rightful Judges of all Ecclesiastical Causes and Matters with a divine Right to exclude the Secular Authority at their Pleasure and to make Null and Invalid every Thing that is done by the Temporal Powers in these Affairs without the Clergy's Approbation and Consent This I think a most Unreasonable and Unrighteous Demand and I have these six Things to plead against it I. SUCH a Claim seems contrary to the very Nature of the Powers that we are now reasoning about They are not the peculiar appropriated Offices of the Priesthood such as Ministring in the Divine Service administring Sacraments c. which we have already owned Kings and Princes to be excluded from But they are the CHURCH'S common Powers of Government which belong to Her only of common Right and to the General Exercise of which other Societies are entitled as well as the CHURCH Now these general Powers of Government are no otherwise to be exercis'd exclusive of and Independently on the Secular Authority than the Necessity of Affairs requires them so to be And that Authority which has no other Reason or Foundation then its Usefulness or Necessity as a Means to the attaining to such an End certainly loses a great deal of its Force and Obligation in all those Instances in which it ceases to be useful or necessary and where the End may be as effectually obtained without it And this is the true Reason of all that Difference which is observable in History in the Practice of the Bishops and Governours of the Christian Church in the Exercise of these very Powers under Heathen and under Christian Emperors and Governours When their Heathen Governours cast them off and left them to themselves they then manag'd all Things by themselves the Necessity of their Affairs requiring that they should so do But when the Christian Emperors took the Affairs of Christians into their Cognizance and made Laws and passed Sentences and executed Judgment therein The Christian Bishops and Clergy unanimously gave Way and very readily submitted thereto IT may possibly have some weight with some of my Readers to observe that even Dr. Hickes in the Collection of Papers lately Published by his Friends and which were Written and Published on purpose to carry up the Powers of the Priesthood and an Independent Authority as high as possibly he could Yet comes in
such a Divine Relation between a Bishop and the People of his District as no Secular Powers can take away II. THAT the Authority in spiritual Affairs here allowed to Kings and Princes is contrary to the Practice and Principles of the first three Hundred Years III. THAT this is bringing the Church and its Clergy into Slavery I. As to the Divine Relation pretended to be between a Bishop and the People of his See or District Pray how comes that about It is compared I know by some Reg. Pont. p. 3. Men to Marriage But who made that Match or gave the divine Sanction to the Contract Or if that were true how comes there to be so many common Causes of Divorce In short this is the Notion of those only who make every Thing that has been occasionally done by the Governors of the Church to have been done by a divine and unchangeable Authority But the only Way to judge rightly of this Matter is to consider what is the original Ground of that Relation and by whose Designation and Authority it has been made Now as to this 1. I BELIEVE that every Body will grant That in promoting Bishops to such and such Sees and Clergymen to their Districts or Parishes a Regard ought and will be had to the Sentiments and the Judgment of the Spiritual Governors of the Church who as I said above in Consequence of their Commission from CHRIST to plant and govern it must be supposed Invested with a Trust as to the spiritual Qualifications of the Persons to be employed in Holy Offices And this Care and Trust and just Authority they are supposed to discharge in their Admission of Persons into Holy Orders In which they have Authority to provide that no Persons unqualified should be admitted into the Service of GOD. But then when the Church has effectually taken this Care it must certainly be granted also in the 2. Second Place THAT Christian Princes and States have both an Interest in this Affair and a Trust also committed to Them in providing proper Spiritual Guides and Pastors for their People And where they have both an Interest and a Trust it will be very hard to say that they have no Authority Suppose that the Governors of the CHURCH should incline to appoint such Persons as the STATE can have no Confidence in or no Security from must they be allowed no Authority even where their Peace and Safety appear to be very deeply concern'd Sure this is too unreasonable and absurd to be believed Or again Suppose that the Governors of the CHURCH should be careless and neglect providing for their Sees would not the Temporal Powers be bound to supply that Defect and to take Gare that the People should not want proper Guides and Pastors It is absurd then to think that they have no Authority in a Matter which they are bound in Conscience to take Care of Now as all this seems very agreeable to common Reason let us go on and consider 3. WHAT has been the Practice of the CHURCH in this Particular And here we shall find that generally speaking every One who appeared to have an Interest in the Management of Ecclesiastical Affairs were allowed to have an Influence and some Power in the Designation of the Person to be employed in such a Place or District THE CHURCH commits a Catholick Power or Authority in Consecration or Ordination which Authority is to be exercised so far as lawfully it may thro' the whole CHURCH of CHRIST without any Assignment of this or that particular Jurisdiction So the Form of Consecration runs with us Receive ye the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Bishop in the Church of GOD. And that such was the Manner of Primitive Ordinations the Reverend and very Learned Dr. Potter Ch. Gov. p. 452. now Lord Bishop of Oxford proves from hence That Ministers were then sometimes ordained without any Designation at all to particular Districts And indeed without this general Commission in Ordination I do not see how they could be said to be invested with a Spiritual Power or Authority thro' the Whole Christian Church This Power then being thus convey'd by the Church the Designation of the Persons to this or that particular District was made several Ways In the Apostles Time such and such Persons were sent by them to such and such Cities and great Towns to minister therein and govern the CHURCH according to the Directions given But afterwards the Clergy of the vacant Diocese sometimes chose their own Bishop and sometimes the eldest Presbyter succeeded in Course But then to shew that every Thing which the Bishops and Clergy at that Time did was not done by a Divine Authority What was sometimes done in this Affair by the Clergy was sometimes done by the People also when the Bishops of another Province advanced any new Bishop to a vacant See it was always done with the Consent and Approbation of the People Usually this Approbation and Consent of the People was had as to the Person before his Consecration The forementioned Right Reverend Bishop has cited a Passage out of the VIIIth Book of the Apostolical Constitutions c. 4. in which it is decreed That such a Bishop must be ordained as was elected by the People for his eminent Merit and their Consent was to be a third Time asked And to the same Purpose there are several Passages in St. Cyprian whereby it plainly appears that the People had so much Authority that they were usually consulted and their Vote and Consent asked in the Designation of the Bishop that was to preside over them Which shews most plainly that such a Designation was not made by the divine appropriated Powers of the Bishops and Clergy only And it is very well known that what the People had at the Beginning came by Degrees into the Hands of Kings and Princes They had the Nomination of Bishops to their several Sees and I would therefore have a very good Reason given why those Rulers who had Authority in Promoting them should not be allowed the same in Removing them Or how such a Removal can be called an Invasion of the sacred Rights of the Priesthood when they were promoted by the Election or Nomination of the Laity as well as of the Bishops I KNOW it will be said That all this was only a prudent Condescention and Compliance with the People of their Flock without any Authority But to this I answer Does not Voting and Electing and an almost constant and establish'd Usage of Consigning Persons to such and such Districts by Voting and Electing look like a good Degree of Authority in the Matter And would the Fathers of the Church have suffered all this if they had had the same Notions with some in our Days Would they have condescended so far if they had known it to be an Invasion of the CHURCH'S Independent Powers No certainly their Practice in this Case is a sufficient Demonstration
consequently they have nothing in 'em to exclude the Jurisdiction of temporal Governors Because those temporal Governors have the very same natural and common Right over all their Subjects and in all Cases and Causes to do every Thing that shall be found necessary to the Support and Preservation of the STATE which the others can pretend to Claim for the Support and Preservation of the CHURCH Nay farther That it would be no certain Advantage to Religion for the CHURCH to be possess'd of such Authority That it would rob Kings and Princes of one great Branch of their Sovereignty and may be and often has been used to defeat even their Civil Administrations and to shake their Thrones and to Ruin their Dominions And in a Word that such an Independent Authority is Incompatible with the Supremacy of Secular Princes whose Affairs must inevitably be influenced and controul'd thereby Therefore too such inconsistent Supremacies cannot be believed to be derived both from GOD. IN Consequence of all this I have shew'd That Princes have an Authority both in the Election and also in the Deprivation of Bishops if they be disloyal and disaffected to them That without such a Power Government may be made too weak to subsist and may be in Danger of being Overturned by the Power of the Clergy That as this is what Christ's Commission never was intended for so consequently all such Deprivations made by the legal Authority of the STATE are good and Valid to all Intents and Purposes and oblige the Consciences of all the Subjects THE Conclusion of all this is That the Deprivation of the late Non-juring Bishops was in all respects Valid that the People of their several Sees are thereby discharged from all Submission and Duty and spiritual Communion and Relation to them That they have no longer any lawful Authority in our CHURCH but we as Christians are bound to adhere to the Religious Communion of those whom the King by the Laws of the Land shall Promote into their Places And in a Word that the contrary Practice in leaving the Communion of this established CHURCH and setting up Religious Assemblies under the pretended Authority of such Deprived Bishops or their Adherents Is very Wicked and sinful in the Sight of GOD and an undoubted Schism from the Communion of the Church of England I WILL only add that as these have been the constant Doctrines and Principles of the Church of England from the Beginning of the Reformation down to our Times So they had not now been disputed had it not been in favour of the Pretender and of Popery FINIS THE CONTENTS THE Occasion and Importance of this Debate page 1. The State has a supremacy in all Cases antecedently to the Church's Claim 3 Natural Religion gives no Independent Authority to the Priesthood 4 Christs Commission appropriates only the Ministration in Holy Offices 5 The General Governing Powers of the Church founded only on Common Right and not Appropriated to the Clergy by Christ's Commission 8 Therefore not to be Executed by an Authority Independent on the State This proved by Six Arguments 10 I. From the nature of the Powers in Dispute 11 Where Christ has not appropriated the Power the State is not excluded ibid. Dr. Hickes admits this in Part 12 How the Church's pretended Independency is to be understood 16 The Practices of the three first Centuries were of mere Necessity pag. 17 The Royal Preisthood Nothing to this Controversy 18 The Non-jurors lofty Style and Pretensions unsuitable to the Temper of the Gospel 20 The Church's real Authority must not be judg'd of by high Strains and Metaphors but by the Powers actually convey'd and appropriated 22 II. Such an Independency in the Church not consistent with the Subordination of Christ's Kingdom to that of the Father 23 III. Not at all Serviceable to Religion 25 IV. It robs Secular Powers of one Branch of their Sovereignty 29 That secular Princes and States have Authority in Matters of Religion proved from the Jewish Kings 31 32 V. Such a Claim dangerous to all Kingdoms as Weakening and Ruining their Authority in their Temporal Affairs 36 This Evidenced by the Practices of the Non-juring Schismaticks 37 VI. Two Independent Powers in the Government of the same Body of Men breeds inevitable Confusions and therefore cannot be of GOD pag. 41 The Necessity of granting that Christ has given the Church no Authority that interferes with Civil Powers 43 The State must have as ample a Power for its own Preservation as the Church has for Hers ib. This necessarily gives them an Authority  1. In the Election of Bishops and Clergymen 44. 2. In their Deprivation 47 No Persecution in depriving the Nonjuring Bishops 50 No real Invasion of Ecclesiastical Authority 53 Three Objections answered shewing  I. That the Relation of a Bishop to his Flock is not Divine or Unalienable 54 II. The Principles and Practices of the Cyprianick Age altogether foreign to this Controversy 62 III. No real Detriment to the Christian Church or Priesthood from the Principles of this Essay 69 The properest Method of Advancing the Character and Interest of the Clergy 70 The Conclusion 75 ERRATA Page 14. line 21. read Modification p. 15. l. 6. r. Powers p. 50. l. 25. for their r. the.