Regeneration be altered in the Liturgy and Rubricks of it For this point is an instance how easily the substance of Faith necessary to Salvation may be questioned or abated or renounced by a Clause of such an Act. I grant it is clearly S. Pauls Opinion S. Peters Opinion our Lord Christs Opinion the Opinion of Gods whole Church Be it the Opinion of those whose Opinion is our Faith But he that would have it no more then Opinion must teach us a new Faith No Remission of Sins but by Baptism Entring us into the Covenant of Grace which the Vow of Baptism inacteth Entring us into the Church into which the Sacrament of Baptism introduceth Abate the Covenant which the Sacrament of Baptism inacteth and how shall a Christian be regenerate Abate the mention of it in the Service and where will be the Faith which this Church with the Whole Church hitherto professeth Shew me any Christian that ever questioned it till it was questioned what was to be Reformed in the Church and let it be abated Could Pelagius have questioned it his Heresie had not so easily been quelled He that travelled all the Church from Britain to Jerusalem had he found any Church any received Doctor of any Church that durst maintain Salvation due by the Covenant of Grace to any man that dyes unbaptized he had made the Church more work then he did No Baptism no Original sin no Cure for Original sin but Baptism no Salvation without the Cure They that think to confute Anabaptists abating this point of Faith no marvel if they make Anabaptists when they make men think that the Church hath no better Reason to confute them with then they will use Some perhaps that are not so well taught as they should be may think it unagreeable with Christianity that Salvation should depend upon a Bodily act as the washing of Baptism and that in the Power not of him that is Baptized but of the Church or of him that is to minister in behalf of the Church But S. Peter hath answered this Objection by distinguishing two things in Baptism 1 Pet. III. 21. the one the washing of the Body which saves not The other the Answer that is made out of a good Conscience to the Examination tendered him that is Baptized whether he will undertake Christianity or not And this saves if S. Peter say true And what account can any Christian give himself to ground the hope of his Salvation upon but 〈◊〉 Christianity which the Gospel tendreth which Baptism inacteth Or what can be necessary to Salvation if the ground of the hope thereof be not This is that one ground which overthroweth both those Heresies in which I said all the erroneous Doctrines of that Confusion which we have seen do resolve The Profession which we make at our Baptism is the Condition on our part upon which the Promise of the Covenant of Grace becomes due on Gods part The Profession so made nothing can defeat the hope of a Christian but the transgressing of it Being transgressed nothing can repair this hope but the restoring of it All Arts to disguise this Faith all over the Scripture signifie nothing but the hope of Salvation without living the life of Christians I will hope whatsoever Fanaticks or Atheists would have that there was never any intent to demand so great an Apostasie from the Faith to be inacted by a Law of the Kingdom I will hope much more that had it been demanded it would have been rejected with that indignation which so great Apostasie deserveth But I am glad and give God hearty thanks that I have lived to the day when I may and do testifie to my Country and to the Church of God in it that he who should demand of them to renounce this point must demand of them to unchurch themselves and to be for the future that which the See of Rome would have us to be CHAP. XVIII Conference for Satisfaction is Forbearance BUt is there then no effect of S. Pauls precept in our Case Can we break the Unity of the Church without breading the Charity of Christians Or can particular Christians be tyed to forbear one another and Christian Powers not be tied to cause both to do the same Here is indeed the Hinge upon which the truth turns and resolves all questions and clears all difficulties which must and will intangle the World in confusion upon the account of Christianity till it be owned Christian Powers may constrain their Subjects that profess Christianity to be Christians and punish them if they be not But they must protect them for their Subjects though they be not The reason of this hath not been declared by the Reformation though they have just cause to complain and do as they have cause complain of the See of Rome for authorizing capital Penalties upon Hereticks Under that name they comprize also Schismaticks And Schismaticks in their language as also in the language of all that claim the Authority of the Church signifies all that maintain Communion apart though the Cause make the Crime before God But if S. Paul have Reason when he commands every Christian to continue in the Estate in which he was called to be a Christian then can no mans Life or Estate become forfeit for not being a Christian And much less for not being Orthodox but an Heretick If the Life or Estates of Subjects should Eschete to the Soveraign for not being Christians that temporal Dominion of Soveraigns must be founded upon the Grace they have to be Christians All such Right S. Paul disclaims and discharges But shall Soveraign Power that is Christian be therefore disabled to give Law to Subjects professing Christianity That is our Case the whole Kingdom professing Christianity though the Whole cannot so properly be said to profess the Reformation For the Reformation setled by Law we see is refused as well by those that separate from it for a Reformation of their own as by those that adhere to the See of Rome Shall the Soveraign then lose the Right that all Christian Soveraigns have of giving Law to their Subjects in point of Religion because he is a Christian Or shall the Subject by being a Christian stand obliged to the Laws of his Soveraign commanding him to stand to the Christianity which he professeth Suppose the Christianity commanded to be Visible before Christian Powers command it and you inable their Laws to oblige their Subjects Not supposing it you cannot say how the Laws of Soveraign Powers should oblige Christian Subjects seeing the Papacy as well as the Reformation maintained by Christian Soveraigns For by the same Reason for which the Subjects of those Powers that maintain the Reformation are tied to their Laws by the same Reason should the Subjects of those that maintain the Papacy be obliged to obey the Laws by which they maintain it There can be no Reason for a difference if that which they maintain be not Visible before the
to the Church dispersed over the face of the whole earth Again the Eastern Christians that are thought to come from Nestorius the Southern Christians under Prester John that maintain the memory of Dioscorus and condemn the fourth Council of Chalcedon cannot be admitted to be Catholicks by any man that owneth the four Councils But in regard it appeareth not that they owne the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches though they owne the memory of their persons and in regard there is cause enough to presume that they would with all their hearts be reunited to the Church did not the See of Rome refuse all terms of Re-union that include not the infinite power which it challengeth they cannot be included within the Catholick Church without reserving a liberty to exclude them whensoever in point of Faith it shall appear that they owne the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches As for the Canons of the Church it was never neceslary to the maintenance of Communion that the same Customs should be held in all parts of the Church It was only necessary that several Customs should be held by the same Authority Which is to say That the same Authority instituted several Customs which they thought to be for the best in several times and in several places For so they might be changed by the same Authority and yet Unity remain Whereas questioning the Authority by questioning whether the Acts of it be agreeable to Gods Law or not how should Unity be maintained This is the Reason of that which I said even now that the Fathers do not agree in any thing but in the Faith and the Laws of the Church For it is manifest that they could not have agreed in the Laws of the Church if any had excepted against any thing used in any part of the Church as if Gods Law had been infringed by it Seeing therefore it is manifest that there are certain Canons and Customs known to have been the Canons and Customs of the Primitive Church owned by this Church it followeth of necessity that nothing can be disowned by this Church as contrary to Gods Law which holdeth by the Primitive Church So it is not my intent to say that the Canons and Customs of the Primitive Church ought to be in force And that there is no other means to restore Unity in the Church But that nothing can cause a Breach in the Church that hath Authority from the Primitive Church And that nothing can have Authority in the present Church that infringeth the Authority of the Primitive Church as if Gods Law were destroyed by any Act of it Further there are two points in the Title and Cause of the late War Episcopacy and Sacriledge wherein the Cause of the Crown hath been so united to the Cause both of this and of the Catholick Church that I may well say that to disowne the same Cause in other points alike Primitive and Catholick would be to deny the Conclusion admitting the Premises Or to keep divers weights and measures in the same Budget The Plea for Episcopacy and for Consecrate Goods hath made out so much evidence for it self that it hath helped to recover the Laws of the Kingdom And shall not the Laws of the Kingdom so recovered maintain the same Plea in all other things For the Visible Unity of the Catholick Church as it never subsisted but in the consent of Bishops so was it never maintained but out of Consecrate Goods CHAP. VI. What Errours have followed because it is not so expresly BUt I do freely acknowledge that though this Church hath many Obligations to owne this Principle for their Rule yet it is not formally and expresly inacted by those Laws of the Land whereby Religion and the Rights of the Church are established For I do further claim that the want of inacting and inforcing it and driving it home to the true Consequence in every point is the Cause and Sourse not only of the disorders which divers pitiful plaisters have been tendred to cure But of all disorders imperfections and decays of Religion which have succeeded upon the Reformation having been made without limiting those bounds And that the present disorders in Religion are the Symptoms of a common disease which all men are offended with but cannot be cured without recourse to the Unity of the Catholick Church and the terms of it wherein that health of Christianity consisteth which all division impeacheth I do therefore freely acknowledge that I find two positions to be the sourse of all those Excentrical Opinions in Religion which caused that Confusion upon the issue of the War that helped to make way for his Majesties happy Return The first is that there is no Condition for the Covenant of Grace That there is no Contract in it but a meer Promise The second is that there is no such thing as a Visible Church instituted by God But that men are first Children of God by Faith then members of a Church of free choice Of these Positions the one necessarily dependeth upon the other For the Faith of the whole Church from the beginning requires Baptism to Salvation And therefore includeth it in that Faith which alone justifieth And by consequence requires that justifying Faith cannot be understood without that Profession of Faith which a man maketh at his Baptism And this will necessarily infer a Church therefore Visible because Catholick For it is agreed upon by the whole Church that Baptism in Heresie or Schism That is when a man gives up himself to the Communion of Hereticks or Schismaticks by receiving Baptism from them though it may be true Baptism and not to be repeated being given in the form of the Church yet is not available to Salvation making him accessory to Heresie or Schism that is so Baptized Now it is not my intent to say that these two Positions were expresly and formally professed by Companies distinguishing themselves from others by Ecclesiastical Communion in the Profession Which is the true signification of an Heresie in the eye of the Church But the Positions I maintain to be Heresies in so much that if there were such Companies they must of necessity be taken for Heresies in the account of the Church And my Reason is clear For it is acknowledged by the whole Church clearly delivered by our Lord in the Gospel that the taking up of his Cross is a necessary condition to Salvation Now since our Lord gave Commission to his Apostles to Baptize all Nations in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost it is evident that ever since we take up Christs Cross when we undertake at our Baptism to lay down our lives rather then deny the Faith of Christ or transgress his Commandments And since this Promise is not available unless it be deposited with the true Church it cannot be available to him that continueth not in the true Church that may exact the Promise deposited with it If any man ask whom I can charge
Christendom have something else to do then to imploy the forces of their Dominions to that purpose And that if it prove for the Interest of some of them at some times it will prove not to be for the Interest of others at the same or other times Of which Interest as they are indeed and in Conscience to give account to God and not to the See of Rome so that they will ever make the See of Rome the Judge of them what appearance can there be So it is time of the day for them to hearken to Reason whether they regard God and Religion or Interest and themselves But is not our Case the same Or are not we transported as far with the conceit that they are limbs of Antichrist and Idolaters as they are with the conceit that we are Hereticks and Schismaticks Have we not as long expected when the Kings would joyn to strip the Whore of Babylon naked as they when they would joyn to reduce the Hereticks by force And is it not yet time of the day for us whatsoever opinion those that imploy their time in searching the meaning of a Prophesie may have at least to make it no Principle of our Profession nor to maintain Separation upon the Account of it Knowing that were the Pope twenty times Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters he can never be Antichrist nor they Idolaters for any thing that the consent of the Catholick Church either alloweth or injoyneth So that whatever become of any Prophesie in Gods Word and the sense of it the bounds of Reformation will be the very same And he will be no less an Heretick or a Schismatick that makes the Pope Antichrist or the Papists Idolaters for doing or believing any thing which the Church from the beginning hath injoyned or allowed to be believed or to be done then if he pretended no Prophesie to prove it If ever any people had cause to reflect upon the sad consequences of this conceit we are they that shall find no probable reason to impute the mischiefs of the late Vsurpation to but the hope of fulfilling this sense of this Prophesie It is a vain thing to think that a man who believed no God could Act a counterfeited Religion throughout as we have seen the Usurper do He that could hope to be saved either without Faith or without good Works by having Christ alive at the Heart why should not he think that all the foul way he went through was the Service of God having intended to strip the Whore of Babylon by his means Neither Manichaeus nor Mahomet nor any Enthusiast can be barred of the like aim with this if once he make his private Spirit parallel to the Scripture For that which the same Authority last dictates as in Wills and Testaments must take place I say not that this is the Case of those that interpret this Prophesie of the See of Rome I believe they follow their Reason in expounding Scripture by Scripture But if their Reason be not the Reason of Religion the Reason of that Christianity which we all have Interest in the private Spirit that follows it may take all for Gods Service though never so wicked that is done in prosecution of it In the mean time Division increasing among us as it does I think I gratifie our selves and not the See of Rome in proposing that truth which reconciles the Interest of Reformation to the Interest of Vnity in the Church For in Civil War as Schism is nothing but a Civil War in the Church that Party that divides is the likely to Ruine And though the first hopes of the See of Rome have proved addle yet if our Divisions prevail they must needs have fresh hopes to prevail by our Divisions CHAP. VIII That it is the Duty of this Kingdom and of all Christian Soveraignties ANd therefore I must freely profess my opinion without any manner of hope that ever the See of Rome will abate any thing of their rigour Though the Reformation should content themselves with these terms For I find by the proceeding of former times that it is their Maxime to stand to that which they have once done And to mark those Popes to posterity that have abated any thing from the rigour of their Predecessors For being arrived at this Greatness by this Rigour and obstinacy in all Pretenses right or wrong they will always think themselves obliged in Reason of State not to yield so much as the Cup in the Eucharist Though the Council of Trent leave it in the Popes Power to grant it Because granting that any thing is and hath been amiss who shall secure them that nothing more shall be questioned then is indeed amiss when we see no point in Religion remain unquestioned some time or some where Not considering all the While that this Rigor is the cause of Division and Division the cause of these Questions And that the Reason of Reformation being owned on both sides there is a Ground restored for Confidence that they who accept of it will stand to those Bounds which it setleth But if the See of Rome can have no Power against the Whole Church Much less can any other Church or any part of the Church or any Secular Power that protecteth it make that to be Reformation which the Whole Church alloweth not Or secure their Subjects Consciences of the Salvation they seek in exercising their Christianity according to their Laws but by confining the Reformation which they maintain within those Bounds which the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church either require or allow Now how can the Interest of the Nation be secured without due ground for hope of Gods blessing upon that which shall be done How can there be ground to expect Gods blessing till it appear how all Subjects of this Kingdom shall stand discharged at the day of Judgment following that form which the Kingdom inacteth rather then that which the See of Rome requireth For there are other Christian Princes and Soveraignties that command their Subjects to obey the See of Rome whose Subjects must as well stand discharged to God upon the same Plea as the Subjects of Reformed Princes and States And how shall the Consciences of them that make Laws be secured if they cannot secure the Consciences of them for whom they are made Or how can Gods blessing be expected if this security cannot be evidenced It is not yet time to ask how those that allow not the Reformation upon these Terms should be punished Because there are that pretend that no punishment can be inflicted for disobeying any Law of the Kingdom by which Religion is setled But it is time to say that they make it a very ridiculous thing for the Legislative Power to make Laws for the Kingdom which they can inact by no Penalty And how shall this difficulty be voided but by demanding nothing but that which Christianity will require of all Christians That no Christian Kingdom
can have Power to introduce any thing for Reformation in the Church but that which the Consent of the Whole Church either injoyneth or alloweth Not as if the least Tittle of Scripture were not enough to warrant that which it injoyneth to be the Reformation of the Church But whereas the sense of the Scripture is that which remains questionable not the Authority of it that nothing can be the true sense of the Scripture which the Consent of the Whole Church contradicteth And therefore that though there be an appearance of truth in such a sense yet it is not for a Christian Kingdom to inact it for Law till it be duely debated And that being done it will infallibly appear in all which in most things appeareth already that the Consent of the Whole Church cannot contradict the true sense of the Scripture And that it is nothing else but not knowing the one or the other that makes it seem otherwise If the Scripture it self is not nor can be owned for Gods Word but by the Consent of Gods people from the beginning attesting the Motives of Faith related in the Scripture to have been infallibly done by submitting to the Faith which they inforce Then must the same Consent be of force to assure common reason that the Faith and the Laws wherein the whole Church agrees came from the Authority setled by God not by any Consent of all Christians to fall from that which they Profess And therefore though a Kingdom may force the Subjects thereof to call that Reformation which they inact yet they can never make it Reformation in that sense which the Salvation of Christians requires if it be not within these bounds It may be called Reformation to signifie a New form but it can never be Reformation to signifie that form which should be unless it signifie the form that hath been in Gods Church For that being One and the same from the first to the second Coming of Christ can authorize no other form then that which it may appear to have had from the beginning CHAP. IX That it cannot be done without the Synods of this Church ANd therefore it being granted on both sides that the Soveraign Power of Christian Kingdoms and States proceeding duely obligeth the Subjects to submit to the Reformation of the Church and cannot exact Legal Penalties of them which refuse upon any other Terms I do except in the second place that it ought to proceed in all Reformation by and upon the Authority of this Church That is of the Synods For what doth the whole Church agree in so Visibly as in this That the Authority which God hath instituted in his Church should give Laws to his Church And how can a Christian Kingdom promise themselves Gods blessing upon such Acts as they have no Power nor Right from God to do For granting there is such a thing as a Catholick Church it is not possible that any Christian Kingdom which must be a part of it should have Power to inact any thing Prejudicial much less destructive to the Whole to the Visible Being which is the Visible Communion of it And therefore the Faith and the Laws of the whole being the Condition under which the parts are to communicate no Christian Kingdom can have Power from God to give New Laws in Religion to the Subjects thereof which the Church of the Kingdom warranteth not to be according to the Laws of the whole Church If any thing may appear to have been in force in the Primitive Church and by the abuse of succeeding times to have become void I do not deny that the Secular Power may Reform the Church by restoring it though the Church should refuse their Consent to it The reason is because the Church would be without help if there were no Lawful way to restore the decays of it Which we agree have come to pass without the consent of them that are chargeable for the decay of it Now the Faith and the Laws of the Catholick Church are the Birth-right of all Christians Purchased by undertaking to Profess one Catholick Church at their Baptism And Christian Powers are to protect their Christian Subjects in their Birth-right And the Authority of the present Church is not seen in the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church For it is meer matter of Fact what they are The evidence whereof praeexistent to the Authority of the present Church cannot be understood to require or to presuppose it And therefore the Authority of the Church cannot be violated by reducing the Faith and the Laws of the Primitive Church into force Nevertheless in regard that which is decayed can seldom be restored without determining new Bounds which the present state of the Church requires It is manifestly the Office of the Church to determine the same Nor can it be done by Christian Powers of this World without assuming to themselves that Authority in which they are to maintain the Church For though Soveraign Power hath Soveraign Right in all Causes and over all Persons Ecclesiastical yet is it capable of no Ecclesiastical Power or Right But is to maintain those that have it by the Laws of the Church in the use of it If any thing were done at the Reformation setting aside the Synods of this Church which I am here neither to deny nor to acknowledge it must be justified upon this Account that they refused the Authority of the Whole Church in authorizing the Reformation of this Church If any thing now may appear to be demanded upon the same Account let the Authority of the Synods be passed by for their punishment if they hinder the Reformation of the Church by refusing it But that cannot appear till it may appear First that the matter demanded ought to have the force of Law in the Church having been of force and since decayed by the injury of time or corruption of men Secondly that it is of such weight that Religion is like to have more advantage by restoring it then the Vnity of the Church shall suffer by violating the Regular Authority of the Church What thanks I shall have of my LL. the Bishops for this I know not For I deny that they themselves can have any Authority in the Case that shall not be confined within the same bounds But it is not possible for him that is the most jealous of the Rights of the Crown in Church-matters to say what danger there can be to this Crown in securing the Conscience of the Kingdom by the Authority of the Church For the acknowledging of those Bounds which the Authority of the Church is confined to as well in respect of Soveraign Power in the Dominions whereof it subsisteth as of the rest of the Church leaveth no Plea for it to Vsurp either upon the Crown or upon the Christian Subjects of it And all this I claim by S. Paul where he commandeth all Christians to abide in that state in which they are called
Orders is nothing else but to imagine that God hath given Power to divide that is to destroy his Church For what is setting up Altar against Altar but to Usurp Power to Consecrate the Eucharist and give the Communion of it in despite of them whom they allow to have Power to do the same because they do it by Authority received from themselves In all the Records of the Church there is but one Case expresly remembred in which it can be said to have been done That fell out in Aegypt at the time when the Church was divided between the Arians and the Catholicks But before that trouble there was another division on foot about receiving back into the Church those that had fellen from the Faith in the persecution of Diocletian For Meletius Bishop of Lycopolis had proceeded to Ordain Bishops in as many Cities as he could in opposition to those Bishops that stuck to the See of Alexandria In these distractions Coluthus one of the XII Presbyters of Alexandria became the Head of a Party by himself and to propagate his Party took upon him to make Ordinations of Presbyters to Minister to those of his Sect. Aerius is the man that maintained the Authority of Bishops and Presbyters to be all one Yet do I not remember that it is any where said that Aerius took upon him to Ordain Presbyters being himself one Much less that he was able to hold up a Sect by such Ordinations Audius was a Presbyter that became the Father of one of those Sects that Epiphanius writes against But Epiphanius says expresly that he had Bishops that imbraced his Opinion and propagated his Sect by Ordination Tertullian became the Father of a Sect which continued at Carthage till S. Austines time by whom they were reduced to the Church And truly it is to be presumed that the Father of the Sect did propagate it by Ordinations made of his own Head For what should he stick at that takes upon him to divide the Church and to set up Altar against Altar But I have not found it said that he did do it Nor have I found that any Presbyter did ever undertake to do it but Coluthus At the Council of Nicaea to unite the Meletians to the Church the Bishops Ordained by him were allowed to succeed when the present Bishops should dye yet so as to be then lawfully Ordained though they had been Schismatically Ordained afore But when the Coluthians pretended the same priviledge Athanasius pleads for himself that all Coluthus his Ordinations were made void Which is thought to have been done by that Synod at Alexandria which Hosius was present at with Commission from Constantine This is the only Example of Presbyters Ordained by a Presbyter without and against his Bishop All the rest are meer conjectures which cannot stand unless we suppose the Canons of the Church were not observed because it is not recorded how they were observed Whereas all reason requires us to suppose that they were observed because they might be observed and because there followed no dissension upon their not being observed Such Ordinations then being meer nullities as presumed to be done by them that never received Authority from the Church to Ordain do further induce Irregularity by the Canons of the Church And who can deny that all reason and Conscience requires it For who can believe his Creed professing one Catholick Church and not think the Church more disobliged by Schism then by any other Crime that renders a man uncapable to be promoted to Orders Certainly if Rebellion be the Crime that is hardest to be reconciled to Civil trust then is Schism hardest to be reconciled to trust in the Church Nevertheless because Unity is to be preferred before Discipline and because experience shews that when men are taken off from an ingagement in division they prove the more trusty the more weary they were of their ingagement it hath been often practised by the Church to receive not only Schismaticks but even Hereticks also That is such as had received Orders of those that parted from the Church upon an errour in Faith in their respective Orders But always upon condition of renouncing the cause of their division Whereupon they were to receive the Blessing of the Church by Prayer with Imposition of Hands The reason was because neither is Baptism in Schism effectual to Salvation nor Ordination in Schism effectual to Grace by the Ministry of any Office in Schism But being renounced there remains no Cause why their Ministry should not be effectual to their people Their Baptism and their Ministry to their own Salvation supposing it sincerely renounced Therefore the Reason why they who are Ordained by Presbyters cannot be received in their respective Orders is peremptory Because the Schism consisting in Ordaining against Authority cannot be renounced unless the Ordination be voided For so long as the Ministry may be usurped upon such Ordination so long is the Schism on foot I do very well know that the Ordinations of Arians were allowed by S. Athanasius in a Synod at Alexandria who had made the Ordination of Ischyras by Coluthus void And I remember the high acclamation which S. Hierom applauds his Act with That thereby the world was snatched out of Satans jaws But I read that the Tertulliniasts were received into the Church not that they were received in their Orders I find difficulty made by Forreign Churches of receiving the Donatists in their Orders Notwithstanding the complaints of the African Bishops that without them they had not Clergy enough to serve the Church Hereby it is to be judged how severe this Church was with them that had received Ordination by Presbyters The Canon of the whole Church makes all Irregular Ordainers and Ordained Because they had concurred to bring back his Majesty Which was the restoring of the Laws and so of the Church the forfeiture was wholly passed by and nothing required of Ordainers more then of the Clergy Which is an utter Oblivion of the attempt made by those Ordinations And is not that a very great degree of Forbearance in our Case S. Paul when he injoyns Forbearance doth he injoyn that those who did not understand how men were saved by Faith alone that were saved under the Law should be promoted to Orders indifferently with those that did profess it That were indeed something like that which hath been demanded that Weakness should intitle to the Clergy which orderly supposes strength But does he injoyn farther that they should Minister without Orders That continuing Lay-men they should commit the Sacrilege of Usurping to Celebrate the Eucharist That if their Ordination be void by the Law of the Land there should be a new Law made to make their Ordination good and valid which was void when it was made Then must he injoyn that it be lawful for every Lay-man to celebrate the Eucharist Forasmuch as every Lay-man hath as much to do to celebrate the Eucharist as he whose
for want of due abilities and they will find cause I doubt not to prefer the Whole Church before a late Party and abate the Sermon to restore the Eucharist Especially seeing the Law of this Land must be changed to bear out what others have done though it is manifest they never gave any reason for it They will see cause to think that the best Preaching is that which may fit the people for the Eucharist by understanding the Covenant of Baptism and the importance of daily renewing and restoring it by Communion in the Eucharist The other Instance shall be the Psalms that are sung in Cathedral Churches but allowed to be read where there is not company to sing them For it is plain enough what excuses are made and what indeavours used to silence this part of Gods Service and to turn the Psalms which this Church with the Whole Church appointeth for devotion into Lessons of Instruction only Hence all the Plea against the Old Translation with points all the indeavors to crowd in the Psalms in Rhime instead of the Psalter and all use which the Church hath always made of it But did not partiality and faction prevail over that Reason which all Christendom before the Reformation hath always owned there could be no question of using the Psalter of David for an Instrument to tune the devotion of Christian people by transforming the expressions of David unto our Lord Christ in the first place and according to the Figure of Christ to the Whole Church first and then to every particular member of it He that hath learnt this from the Whole Church will never think it reason to put this part of Gods Service to silence whosoever they be that desire or desing it He will rather indeavour to reduce the singing of them into Parish Churches being evidently so much easier then the singing of the Psalms in Rhime But howsoever retain the reading of them by Antiphones and not quench the Spirit of God which breatheth forth that transformation whereof I spake Having thus instanced I will not propose the Ground upon which I maintain that all Reformation is to proceed for the condition of the Conference which I propose I will think it a point of that Forbearance which S. Paul commandeth the Romans not to insist upon those terms which the Authority of the Apostles doth inforce Because I see him not insist upon the Authority of an Apostle with them but having infallibly proved his ground of Justification by Faith alone forbear the consequence of it charging the Romans to hold that indifferent whatsoever his Authority so grounded declareth such yet charging them to forbear those that for all his Authority and Reasons understood it not For I believe verily that his reason and mine is the very same Namely to keep both Parties in the Unity of one Church a Member of the Whole Hoping that by Gods blessing upon the advantages which the communication of the Faithful one with another and with their Clergy affordeth those that are now most keenly set against these little things that are excepted at in the Act of Uniformity may by that condescension which the Interest of Christianity obliges all Parties to come to understand the only Principle of Reformation and Unity both The Authority of the Catholick Church in all things not determined by Gods Law which is only the Gospel under this time of Christianity And I set before them to that purpose the example of the Jews Who for all the Forbearance commanded by S. Paul having stopped their ears at all his charms with the Unity of the Church have forfeited the Faith hitherto irrecoverably For being fully perswaded that without this Principle it is not possible either for this Church or for any part of the Reformation long to subsist Can I fear any less then the utter loss of Religion for my dearest Country and for the dearer Church of God in it CHAP. XXVII How Recusants may or may not be punished as Idolaters IT remains that I say what Penalties this Position makes competent to those that refuse the Reformation thus limited A thing easie for me to do having declared the Ground upon which the refusing of Christianity is punishable Which the Reformation hitherto hath not been able to do The Position of punishing Hereticks capitally is generally decryed by them And yet we see Servetus and Gentilis put to death at Geneva and Bern and others elsewhere If because sentenced for Hereticks by them that put them to death Why should not the Powers that adhere to the Church of Rome execute the Sentence thereof upon those whom they pronounce Hereticks If because so sentenced by the Primitive Church in which we both agree Why owne we not the Primitive Church in the rest as well as in that If because they that gave the Sentence are competent Judges in Religion What remains but that contrary Sentences be executed by the Sword and Religion be no otherwise judged But supposing Religion and the Church and the sense of the Scripture Visible so far as the preserving of Unity requires Christian Powers must both protect Subjects in their Civil as well as natural being though not true Christians and yet punish them for not being true Christians Only if they pretend freedom from Allegiance by Christianity and we know it is false Christianity that so pretends there will be also fit time to declare why they may be capitally punished But those who declare the Pope Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters in the exercise of their Religion have not declared what Penalty is competent to their Idolatry And yet till that be cleared we are in the clouds This difficulty I find my self able to look in the face without ever disputing whether the Papists by their Religion are bound to commit Idolatry or not The Law of Moses indeed seems to shew that by the Law of Nature Idolaters may be put to death for their Idolatry For there is no appearance that the Law of God would have injoyned that which the Law of Nature allows not But the Case is otherwise under Christianity then under the Law of Moses The people of Israel held the Land of Promise upon Condition not to suffer any other God to be worshipped within the Bounds of it but the true God that gave it them upon those terms Therefore they committed a forfeit whensoever they suffered Idolatry in it But the Gospel was preached to the Roman Empire consisting of two Religions of Jews and Gentiles Maintaining the State of the World upon the same terms which it found saving that which if they imbraced the Faith they must voluntarily change When therefore the Soveraign Power of the Empire came to profess the Faith and thereupon an obligation to maintain and propagate it by all means which the Right of Soveraign Power furnishes they could not answer God for the right use of their Power using any other means then the Interest of Christianity allows They might
was setled upon that Faith and those Laws that are now as Visible as the Laws of England from which present Titles are derived can be Visible must needs have that Right from which the Right of all present Soveraignties must be derived Because the Church whose Interest concurreth with the Interest of them all in the same matters is always One and the same and ought so to be from the first to the second Coming of Christ And that answers any difficulty that may be objected when any Law of any Roman Emperor or other Christian Prince or State seems to infringe the Canons of the Church For the Protection of the Crown being of such advantage as it is both for the inlarging and maintaining of Christianity It is enough that the Church can continue One and the same Visible Church by one and the same Visible Laws Though the force and effect of them be hindred now and then here and there by some Acts of Secular Power which in some regards may advance the Church as much as they hinder it in others It was necessary for the Crown under Henry the VIII to vindicate the Supremacy from the pretense of the Popes Secular Power which had been on foot divers Ages afore And therefore not to have to do with him that pretended to assoil the Subjects of Princes whom he should excommunicate of their Allegiance till they might owne him upon terms consistent with the Protection they owe their People And it was still more necessary under Edward the VI. when the Reformation was inacted which they knew well enough that the Pope would not endure But when the Right of the Crown in Church-matters is declared by Law to be the same which the Kings of Gods Ancient People and the first Christian Emperors did exercise the ground of that Interest and the bounds of that Interest which the Church must challenge if it will continue a Church are declared to be the same which the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church from the beginning do allow CHAP. XXIII Of restoring and reforming the Jurisdictions of the Crown and of the Church in Ecclesiastical Causes ANd this makes the Reformation of our Ecclesiastical Laws as easie as it is visibly the cure of all distempers in Religion among us It is in brief this That the Jurisdiction which may by this means appear to the Kingdom to be invested in the Church by Gods Law be by a Law of the Kingdom restored to the Clergy To the Bishops in chief then to the Chapters of their Cathedrals and to their Archdeacons And to these not without the Assistance of the Principal Clergie of their Respective Jurisdictions the Judges of the Ecclesiastical Courts continuing the Kings Judges as they are now by Law to manage the Interest of the Crown in all the Rights thereof resumed into the Crown by the Acts of Supremacy according to the Roman Laws in those Ages of Christendom which passed before the Usurpation of the See of Rome had taken place If it be said That it is not Visible when those Usurpations took place I shall allow all the time which that Code of the Canons contains that Pope Adrian sent to Charles the Great In whose time there can be no pretense of Usurpation upon the Temporalties of Princes by the See of Rome This Code is yet read under the Name of Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Romanae I have commended the Justice and Wisdom of that Commission which was designed under Henry the VIII and Edward the VI for the qualities of Persons limited by it But I do not think it possible for any Commission to Reform the Alterations introduced by the Popes Canon Law after that time in one Kings Raign with that circumspection which is requisite The Jurisdiction which the Church challenges by Gods Law can not be distinctly stated with more satisfaction to all Interests preserving that of Religion then by a Commission so qualified The Interest of the Kingdom in preserving the study of the Roman Laws hath always been thought considerable But how shall the study of them be maintained if the Authority of them be not maintained Or how shall that Authority be maintained but by adopting them into the Law of the Kingdom in matters necessary to be provided for by Law but not provided for by the native Law of the Kingdom Or what provision can there he by the native Law of the Kingdom for those Causes which for so many hundred years before the Reformation the Popes Canon Law had sentenced by the Authority of the Kingdom There is an Interest of Religion in Matrimonial Causes in Testamentary Causes in Causes arising upon Elections of Corporate Clergie in Causes of Dispensation in Canons in Causes of Tithes in divers sorts of Causes besides those which the Power of the Keys in the Discipline of the People and the Correction of Inferior Clergy occasioneth Let me not say that it were Barbarous for a flourishing Kingdom in a flourishing Age for all other Learning to reduce the Tryal of them to the Arbitrary Verdicts of Juries Who can never understand the Grounds upon which the matter of Fact is to be stated when I can so clearly say that there can be nothing more like to meer Tyranny then Arbitrary Justice nor Justice more Arbitrary then where it is manifest that there can have been no other Law provided because the Canon Law hath been hitherto used As for those Causes which are proper to the Church as rising from the Constitution of it how can it stand with Religion and Reformation in Religion which we pretend to try them otherwise then by those which the Kingdom shall be satisfied by such a Commission that they are by Gods Law capable of Authority to do it And the Interest of the Crown and of the Subjects which it is bound to protect shall be secured when provision is made by adopting the Roman Laws for managing the Rights of the Crown resumed by the Act of Supremacy within those Bounds which the Roman Laws maintained before the Usurpation of the See of Rome It cannot be denied that the Popes Canon Law which the Law of the Land hath already adopted so far as it contradicteth not the Law of the Land provideth for many things not provided for by the Primitive Canons within the Compass of the Roman Laws And it would be too much rashness to recal that Adoption and to leave so much matter to arbitrary Justice rather then retain a Provision which the Law and Religion professed by the Kingdom owns not the Original of though it owne the matter it hath adopted For whatsoever shall prove by time and tryal to hinder the Reformation which we pretend thus to ground and thus to bound the faults that shall be found by experience must open the way of mending it because the Cure must be as particular as the disease is And upon these Terms it can be no dishonour to the Kingdom and to the Reformation
be a Church Conviction which is the Act of the Law making the Crime notorious how can Christianity be protected and the Church not able to renounce them that renounce it by their deeds The increase of sin so flagrant in this Nation since the War began makes the necessity of this Law flagrant I was speaking of the Leviathan that Monster of a Christian that with one Book allowed by the Act of Oblivion because the Doctrine was not damned when the Person was pardoned hath introduced that Deluge of Atheism and Prophaneness which we are ready to be drowned with Let Publick Justice have the convicting of the Blasphemies which he hath taught if the Church be not in Case to bear the envy of such a trust But to account for such a crime by a pecuniary mulct is to sell our Christianity at the price at which it is defied Unless Infamy follow and Excommunication to bring it on farewel Christianity which compoundeth with Apostasie The Father of the Sect thinks I believe that he hath as good Right to the Communion as the rest of His Majesties Subjects Who though he should profess Penitence for his crime could not be believed having given the World warning that he may be bound to say and to swear that which he doth not believe What course but this to suppress the Vanity of committing Murther under the name of a Duel For in all Common-wealths where mens memory is not liable to Infamy sin is not out of countenance In that which is Christian what can be infamous if to forfeit Communion with the Church be not As for Adultery what punishment hath this Kingdom left for it Or how shall it be counted a Christian Kingdom having none Be the tryal of it as Civil Interest shall require If it pass without Excommunication though the Law of the Land lay no hold on it what can clear the Kingdom of the expectation of Gods vengeance By consequence hereof they that are convicted of Simony in Civil Justice must remain Irregular to the Church That is though their Ordination can never be void yet their persons must remain incapable of any trust which their Clergy should make them capable of And why should not the Priviledge of their Clergy cease and they remain Excommunicate for such a Crime The other Law concerning the Clergy is the confining of every one to one Diocese Which is but the Restoring of that Order which the See of Rome had disordered on purpose to ingage in the disorders of it all that they obliged by such Priviledges For the Priviledges reserved to the Crown Nobility and Bishops whereby the abuse is but displaced will not be considerable in comparison with the Reformation which it hindreth It seems strange to those that find themselves Interested that two Benefices with Cure should be allowed in one Diocese not in several Dioceses though at less distance But the Law cannot be understood to allow all that it forbids not Because there may be Reason why the Publick good will not allow the forbidding of that which is left to the Conscience of particular persons Were all Benefices restored to that Provision which the Cures might require perhaps Priviledges of Pluralities might be extinguished In the mean time is it not enough that whatsoever the Quality be the Office of Priest and Deacon is relative to their Respective Bishops that no man can be answerable to one Bishop for a Charge in which he is answerable to another for the same Which if it hold not in one and the same Diocese the Reason of the difference is both sufficient and evident Always the Ground being laid that the Reformation of the Church is to be Ruled by the Canons of the Primitive Church there can be no more question in this then is in any thing where the Primitive Institution is as Visible as the decay and abuse But this will principally concern Archdeacons and the Dignified Clergy which are to bear a part in the Bishops Office For how should they be charged with that which they are not charged to execute CHAP. XXVI Of Forbearance due or not due in two Instances I Have proposed a Conference I have determined that all is to be tryed by the agreement of the Catholick Church But if we stay till the Parties agree to that there must be no Conference What have we to overcome this difficulty with Considering how the necessity of losing all Religion presses all Parties and considering how slight the pretenses of dissatisfaction at the Act of Uniformity are though I cannot depart from my claim that the Reformation cannot duely be made but by and to that Pattern yet I see it may be laid aside in the Tryal not supposing that the Will of God is declared by it But if the advantage be not allowed which the consent of Christendom from the beginning hath in the judgment of common Reason above any Opinion of this time or any Party pretending Reformation what course can they hold that have not reasonable Creatures to deal with For how can they be counted reasonable that prefer their own Reason before the Reason of Christendom Or how shall they distinguish their private Spirits from the Enthusiasms of Fanaticks that insist upon those Interpretations and Consequences of Scripture which had any man seen before them the Church had never been as it hath been In fine the Case being stated I see no cause to apprehend any obstinacy in the Parties to prefer any faction or partiality before Reason so manifested and so concerning the common Christianity I will insist upon two Instances All the World knows that one of the abuses which made the necessity of Reformation most appear was that of private Masses where the Eucharist was celebrated and the people did not communicate It is as well known that the Reformation according to Calvin contents it self with four Communions a year but no Assembly without Preaching The Church of England hath aimed at the Communion every Lords-day and Holy-day at Sermons as frequent as can be had so as to maintain the reverence due to Religion to Preaching and to the Church What question can there be in Religion that the Eucharist is the principal Office of Religious Assemblies What pretense of Reformation in restoring Preaching by silencing the Eucharist It will be said that there is fear of prophaning so Religious an Office But where is Reformation if it make not the people fit for it The Papists say Private Masses are not commanded they would have the people communicate and incourage them to it But what do they do to bring them to it Surely more then they do that silence the Eucharist for the Sermon That are not contented till so much Preaching be commanded that they know the Eucharist must be silenced Let them think what abilities are requisite to maintain so frequent Preaching that there shall be no time for the Eucharist Let them think of the Scandals that must needs fall out