Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n authority_n jurisdiction_n power_n 1,683 5 4.9363 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A26858 Against the revolt to a foreign jurisdiction, which would be to England its perjury, church-ruine, and slavery in two parts ... / by Richard Baxter ... Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. 1691 (1691) Wing B1182; ESTC R22132 311,021 600

There are 13 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Things or Causes as Temporal And that No Forreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have ANY JURISDICTION Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm And therefore I do utterly renounce and forsake all Forreign Jurisdiction Priviledges Preheminence and Authorities granted or belonging to the Kings Highness his Heirs and Successors or united or annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm Here all the Kingdom swears That none have or ought to have any Jurisdiction here who is Forreign Yet some Papists have been encouraged to take this Oath by this Evasion Obj. No Jurisdiction is here disclaimed of Forreigners but what belongs to the King But Spiritual Jurisdiction called the Power of the Keys belongs not to the King Ergo. Ans. For securing the King's Jurisdiction All Forreign Jurisdiction is renounced signifying that there is no such thing as a Jurisdiction over this Realm but the King 's and his Officers The Power of the Keys or Spiritual Power is not properly a Jurisdiction as that word includeth Legislation but only a Preaching of Christ's Laws and administring his Sacraments and judging of mens capacity for Communion according to those Laws of Christ And this under the Coercive Government of the King Much like that of a Tutor in a Colledge or a Physician in his Hospital What can be more expresly said than this here that No Forreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate have or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm Is that of Pope or Councils neither Ecclesiastical nor Spiritual Is not the word Prelate purposely put in to exclude that Power hence which Prelates claim Though the King claim not the Power of the Keys he knew that by the claim of that Power the Pope and Councils of Forreigners had been the disturbers of his Government And therefore all theirs here is excluded as a necessary means to secure his own 1. Popes and Councils have claimed a Legislative Power over us and all the Church But the Laws of this Land know no such but in Christ over all and in King and Parliament under him over this Land And therefore the Oath excludeth the Power claimed by Popes and Councils 2. As to Judicial Power these Forreigners claim a Power of Judging who in England shall be taken for a true Bishop and Minister who shall have Tythes Church-Lands and Temples whether the Kings Lords and all Subjects shall be judged capable of Church-Communion or be Excommunicate And our Laws declaring that all this Forreign Claim is Usurpation fully proveth that it was the sense of the Oath to exclude them They claim also a Power of Judging who shall pass here for Orthodox and who for Hereticks And in their Laws the consequence is who shall be burned for a Heretick or be exterminated or after Excommunication deposed from their Dominions and their Subjects absolved from their Allegiance But certainly the Oath excludeth them from all this The most of the Papists claim no Power directly due to their Pope but that which they call Ecclesiastical or Spiritual the rest is but by consequence and in ordine ad Spiritualia But if this be not excluded in the Oath then they intended not to exclude the Papacy And then what was the Oath made for or what sense hath it or what use And who can believe this If the meaning of the Oath be not to exclude the Pope's Ecclesiastical Power then they that take it may yet hold that the Pope is Head of all the Churches on Earth and hath the Authority to call and dissolve and approve or reprobate General Councils and may Ordain Bishops for England and his Ordinations and his Missionaries be here received and Appeals made to him and Obedience sworn to him his Excommunications Indulgences imposed Penances Silencings Absolutions Prohibitions here received All which our Statutes Articles Canons c. shew notoriously to be false It is evident therefore that this Oath renounceth all Forreign Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction II. The second proof is from many Acts of Parliament Those which prohibit all that receive Orders beyond Sea from the Pope or any Papists to come into England on pain of death Those that forbid the Doctrine Worship and Discipline both of Popes and Councils The words of 25 H. 8. c. 21. are these Whereas this Realm recognizing no Superiour under God but the King hath been and is free from Subjection to any man's Laws but only such as have been devised made and ordained within this Realm for the wealth thereof or to such other as the People of this Realm have taken at their free liberty by their own consent to be used among them and have bound themselves by long use and custom to the observance of the same not to the observance of the Laws of any Forreign Prince Potentate or Prelate but as to the accustomed and antient Laws of this Realm originally Established as Laws of the same by the said sufferance consent and custom and none otherwise It standeth therefore with natural equity and good reason c. that they may abrogate them c. Moreover the Laws of England determine that no Canons are here obligatory or are Laws unless made such by King and Parliament And if it be true which Heylin and some others say that the Pope's Canon-Laws are all here in force still except those that are contrary to some Laws of the Realm that is but as the Roman Civil Law is in force not as a Law of the Pope or old Romans but as made Laws to us by King and Parliament The Roman Senate and Emperor give us the Matter of the Civil Law and the Pope and Councils of the Canon-Law but the Soveraign Power here giveth them the Form of a Law as the King coineth Forreign Silver III. The Articles of Religion prove the same 1. The twenty first Article saith General Councils may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes And when they be gathered together forasmuch as they be an Assembly of Men whereof all be not governed by the Spirit and Word of God they may err and sometime have erred even in things pertaining to God Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation have neither strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that they are taken out of the Holy Scriptures Here note 1. That General Councils so called in the Empire had no power to meet much less to Rule without the Commandment of Princes And so those called by the Emperor had no power over the Subjects of other Princes 2. And true Universal Councils will never be Lawfully called till either all the Earth have One Humane Monarch or all the Heathen Infidel Mahometan Papist Heretical and Protestant Princes agree to call them For one hath not Power over the Dominions of all the rest And so the Aristocratical Party put the
Rule delivered by himself and by the Council of Trent c. P. 239. The Augustane Confession commodiously explained hath scarce any thing which may not be reconciled with those Opinions which are received with the Catholicks by Authority of Antiquity and of Synods as may be known out of Cassander and Hoffmeister And there are among the Jesuits also that think not otherwise P. 71. The Churches that join with Rome have not only the Scriptures but the Opinions explained in the Councils and the Popes decree against Pelagius c. They have also received the egregious Constitutions of Councils and Fathers in which there is abundantly enough for the Correction of Vices But all use them not as they ought And this is it that all the Lovers of Piety and Peace would have corrected as Borromaeus did Page 18. Speaking of false Doctrine These are the things which thanks be to God the Catholicks do not thus believe though many that call themselves Catholicks so live as if they did believe them But Protestants so live by force of their Opinions and Catholicks by the decay of Discipline Page 95. What was long ago the judgment of the Church of Rome the Mistress of others we may best know by the Epistles of the Roman Bishops to the Africans and French to which Grotius will subscribe with a willing mind Page 7. They accuse the Bull of Pius Quintus that it hath Articles besides those of the Creed but the Synod of Dort hath more But these in the Bull are New as Dr. Rivet will have it But very many Learned Men think otherwise that they are not new if they be rightly understood and that this appeareth by the places both of Holy Scripture and of such as have ever been of great Authority in the Church which are cited in the Margin of the Canons of Trent Page 35. And this is it which the Synod of Trent saith That in that Sacrament Jesus Christ true God and truely Man is really and substantially contained under the form of those sensible things Yet not according to the Natural manner of existing but Sacramentally and by that way of existing which though we cannot express in words yet may we by Cogitation illustrated by Faith be certain that to God it is possible The Councils expressions are that There is made a change of the whole substance of the Bread into the Body and of the whole substance of Wine into the Blood Which Conversion the Catholick calleth Transubstantiation Page 79. When the Synod of Trent saith That the Sacrament is to be adored with Divine Worship it intends no more but that the Son of God himself is to be adored Page 14. Grotius distinguisheth between the Opinions of School men which oblige no Man for saith Melchior Canus our Church alloweth us great liberty and therefore could give no just cause of departing as the Protestants did and between those things that are defined by Councils Even by that of Trent The Acts of which if any Man read with a mind propense to peace he will find that they may be explained fitly and agreeably to the places of Holy Scripture and of the ancient Doctors that are put in the Margin And if besides this by the care of Bishops and Kings those things be taken away which contradict that holy Doctrine and were brought in by evil Manners and not by Authority of Councils or old Tradition then Grotius and many more with him will have that with which they may be content Val. pro pace That which he blameth is 1. The School-mens liberty of disputing and Opinions not agreeable to Councils 2. And the Pride Covetousness and ill Lives of the Prelates and others which all sober Jesuits and Papists blame Page 16. That the labours of Grotius for the peace of the Church were not displeasing to many equal Men many know at Paris and many in all France many in Poland and Germany and not a few in England that are placid and Lovers of peace For as for the now-raging Brownists and others like them with whom Dr. Rivet better agreeth than with the Bishops of England who can desire to please them that is not touched with their Venom And whereas you may find Grotius and his Adherents yet disclaiming Popery and saying They are no Papists he tells you his meaning Ib. p. 15. In that Epistle Grotius by Papists meant those that without any difference do approve of all the sayings and doings of the Pope for Honour and Lucres sake as is usual By this description I suppose that many Popes even of late were no Papists such as condemned the Acts and Persons of their Predecessors and such as censured Liberius and Honorius nor Adrian the sixth that saith a Pope may be a Heretick nor Baronius Binnius Genebrard that exclaim against many of them Nor Bellarmine nor Queen Mary nor More or Fisher nor Bonner nor Gardiner nor any that ever I met with But others more moderately call only those Papists that are for the Popes Power above Councils And so the French are none nor the Councils of Constance and Basil were none Grotius addeth p. 45. that By Papists he doth not mean them that saving the Rights of Kings and Bishops do give to the Pope or Bishop of Rome that Primacy which ancient Customs and Canons and the Edicts of ancient Emperors and Kings assign them which Primacy is not so much the Bishops as the Roman Churches preferred before all other by common consent So Liberius the Bishop being so lapsed that he was dead to the Church the Church of Rome retained its right and defended the Cause of the Universal Church Ans. If it be a Primacy of Name and Honour only without any Governing Power it 's nothing to our case But seeing it 's a Governing Primacy that he means 1. It 's against the right of Kings and Kingdoms that Foreigners claim Jurisdiction over them 2. Emperors never gave Popes or Councils power over other Princes Dominions nor could give any such 3. Nor did ancient Councils nor could do Who gave it them And who knows to what Councils he will limit this power Councils these thousand years have been for much of Popery 4. If Common Consent give this power it binds not the Dissenters The Judgment of others concerning Grotius 1. Vincentius wrote a Book called Grotius Papizans 2. Claud. Saravius an Eminent Parliament-man in Paris in his Epistles p. 52 53. ad Gron. saith Heri invisi Legatum De ejus libro libello postremis interrogatus respondet plane Mileterio consona Romanam fidem esse veram sinceram solosque clericorum mores degeneres schismati dedisse locum Adferebatque plura in hanc sententiam Quid dicam Merito quod falso olim Paulo Festus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Sed haec tibi soli Infensissimus est Riveto Est sanè in praecipiti in quo diu stare non licet Deploro veris lacrymis tantam jacturam Deumque ex
a Universal Soveraignty or Legislative and Judicial Power And therefore uncapable of our Coalition more than an Impenitent Murderer is of Church Communion § 2. And there are not a few nor small Matters that are above Four hundred Years old that found Protestants will never Unite with And though Mr. Thorndike give us so much quarter as to say that It is the Authority that must necessarily be owned and not the Canons if that Authority will change them 1. It is the usurped Authority that we most disown 2. And we have no assurance what Canons that Authority will change And Mr. Thorndike's Mr. Dodwell's and such Mens great rule of Unity is that none of us must question whether any of the Canons of that Authority are contrary to God's Word nor appeal to God and Scripture against them Multitudes of Papists themselves renounce such Doctrine § 3. I. And first All this is built on the Sand I have largely proved long ago in several Books that it is impossible for them to certifie us who have this Authority Who it is that we must hear as the Catholick Church and take Universal Laws from when there is no General Council Or what Councils we may be sure are General or what not Besides none were General but of One Empire When they condemn each other and when each call the other Heretical or Schismatical and when as Great a Number were at one as at the other and the same Authority chose and called both sorts How shall we know which we must obey Is it by Scripture Reason or Authority of Councils themselves that we must Judge They cannot tell us § 4. II. The Cause which I am pleading against is exprest by their Champion the Lord Primate of Ireland Archbishop Bromhall in the words forecited viz. To wave their last Four hundred years Determinations is implicitely to renounce all the necessary Causes of this great Schism And to rest satisfied with their Old Patriarchal Power and Dignity and Primacy of Order which is another part of my Proposition is to quit the Modern Papacy both Name and Thing By this we see what the Protestant Church of England must be or else be Schismaticks in the Judgment of these Learned Men. I will here tell you why this will never Unite us and why the old Church of English Protestants could not close with Rome on these mens terms § 5. I. Salmasius de Ecclesiis Suburbicariis circa finem granteth them that by their Imperial Constitutions the Bishop of Rome was not a meer Patriarch but more than a Patriarch a Caput Ecclesiae This was not Christ's Institution but the Emperours and their Clergies in one Empire But call it Patriarchal or what you will it contained such Power as Christ having not given and Dead men of another Kingdom being none of our Rulers we are not obliged to obey nor indeed lawfully can do 1. A Patriarch and Primate hath some degree of Governing Power or else wherein doth his Primacy consist He calleth Councils Precedeth c. And if he cannot command Archbishops how can they command Bishops And if they are not Commanders of Bishops why do our English Bishops in their Consecration Profess Promise and Swear all due Obedience to the Archbishops And 1. We cannot yield to bring England under the guilt and brand of Perjury by submitting to the Foreign Jurisdiction of a Roman Primate or Patriarch contrary to the Oath of Supremacy 2. We know already how many false Doctrines and Practices the Roman Church and Patriarch have espoused And we can no more receive all these Errours from a Patriarch than from a Pope § 6. II. But we will freely confess to you that we neither are nor can be such a sort of Protestants as the Regnant Church of France is which persecuteth the Protestants nor as these Men called the Church of England in such Proposals would have us be I will give you a Catalogue of some Determinations of above Four hundred Years old which the Church of England before Bishop Laud could not receive § 7. I. Mr. Thorndike also consenteth to rest in the Canons sent by Pope Adrian to Carol. M. about An. 773. And C. 23. ex Clem. is That Arch-Bishop Presbyter or Deacon taken in Fornication Perjury or Theft be deposed but not Excommunicate II. Can. 28. is That a Bishop who obtaineth a Church by Secular Power be deposed And yet we are called Schismaticks for not obeying alas I dare not name the things the Bishops that have many Score or Hundred Churches by Secular Power And must we Unite in this III. Can. 11. is Condemned Clerks shall never be restored if they go to the Emperour And must we Confederate against such Bishops in England IV. C. Laodic there recited 33. is that None Pray with Hereticks or Schismaticks When we knowing how the Roman Party are counted at the best Schismaticks by Greeks Syrians and Protestants and all these counted Schismaticks by them it will be but Schism to separate from almost all Christ's Church on Earth as Schismaticks V. Ex Can. Sard. 2. That a Bishop that by Ambition changeth his Seat shall not have so much as Lay Communion no not at the end VI. Ex C. Afric c. 15. That there be no Re-ordaining or Translation of Bishops VII No man must receive the witness of a Lay-man against a Clergy-man VIII The Second General Council at Nice setteth up the Adoration of Images cursing all from Christ with Anathema that are against it or doubt of it IX Even the contrary Council at Constantinople of 338 Bishops anathematizeth all that do not with a sincere Faith crave the Intercession of the Virgin Mary as the Parent of God and Superior to every Creature visible and invisible And all that confess not that all who from the beginning to this day before the Law and under the Law and in the Grace given of God being Saints are venerable in the Presence of God in Soul and BODY and seek not their Intercessions Yet they conclude with the Conc. Nice 2. That Christ's Body Glorified is not proper Flesh Def. 7. X. The said Second Council at Nice saith Every Election of a Bishop Priest or Deacon which is made by Magistrates shall remain void by the Canon which saith If any Bishop use the Secular Magistrate to obtain by them a Church let him be deposed and separated and all that Communicate with him Thus our English Bishops and Parish Ministers are deposed and all their Communicants to be Excommunicated XI Ibid. Can. 4. Those that for Gain or Affection of their own shut out any Ministers or shut the Temples forbidding the Divine Ministry are sharply condemned which would fall on Silencing Bishops XII Can. 15. Forbiddeth one man to have two Churches which would break our Clergy specially the Bishops that have Hundreds XIII Can. 7. Forbiddeth any Temple to be Consecrated without Relicts and ordereth Temples that have no Relicts to be put down XIV A Council
sheweth that Councils have been against Councils and the Arrian Hereticks had more Councils than the Christians and sheweth their uncertainty Pag. 19. As to the Authority of Councils Augustine saith Ipsa plenaria Concilia saepe Priora ● posterioribus emandantur And of the Succession and Ordination of Bishops he saith Pag. 131. If there were not one of them that turned from Popery or of us left alive yet would not therefore the whole Church of England fly to Lovaine Tertullian saith Nonne Laici sacerdotes sumus Ubi Ecclesiastici Ordinis non est Consessus offert tingit sacerdos qui est solus Sed ubi tres sunt Ecclesia est licet Laici And frequently he saith The Church is found among few as well as among many And he was for Lay Mens Baptizing X. The first Canon commandeth Preachers Four times a Year to declare That All usurped foreign Power forasmuch as the same hath no Establishment nor Ground by the Law of God is for most just Causes taken away and abolished And that therefore No manner of Obedience or Subjection within His Majesties Realms and Dominions is due to any such foreign Power The 12th Canon Excommunicateth ipso facto any that shall affirm That it is lawful for any 〈◊〉 of Ministers to joyn together and make 〈◊〉 Orders or Constitutions in Causes Ecclesiastical without the King's Authority and shall submit themselves to be ruled and governed by them Therefore none may go beyond Sea to Councils without his Authority And the Canons of Foreigners are not to be made a Rule without his Authority And is not other Princes Authority as necessary in their Dominions The Canon which bids Prayer 55th describeth Christ's holy Catholick Church to be the whole Congregation of Christian People dispersed throughout the whole World But such a Church hath no Legislative or Judicial Power XI The Controversie is about an Article of Faith I believe the holy Catholick Church The Humanists say It is an universal Political Society Governed by one humane Supream Monarch Aristocracy or mixt under Christ. Protestants say It hath no universal supream Ruler but Christ. Now the Generality of Protestant English and transmarine who write on the Creed expound this Article accordingly in the Protestant sence as he that will peruse their Books may find which sheweth what is the sence of the Church of England XII Though King Edw. VI. was but a Youth when he wrote his sharp Book against Popery lately printed It sheweth what his Tutors and the Clergy of his time who were called the Church then thought of these Matters XIII If the Parliaments of England all the days of Queen Elizabeth King James and King Charles I. and II. knew what was the Doctrine of the Church of England about a Forreign Jurisdiction it is easie to gather it in their Votes and Acts. Let him that would know whether they were for a Coalition with the French on such terms read Sir Simon Dewes Journals Rushworths Collections or Prins Introduction ad annum 1621. or any other true Historian and he will see how far they were from owning any Forreign Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction But the contrary minded would make the World believe that all these Parliaments were of some Sect differing from the Church of England But what call they the Church of England but that part of the Clergy who conform to the Laws And did not the Law-makers understand the Laws Or if they more regard the sence of the Clergy let them read A. Bishop Abbot's very plain and bold Letter to the King in Prin's Introduct pag. 39 40. and Dr. Hackwell's c. and they may know what was then the sence of the Clergy With whom concurred the Bishops of Ireland Insomuch that Bishop Downame expressing his sense of the Papists there and his contrary desires presumed to add And let all the people say Amen at which the Church rang with the Amen And though he was questioned in England for it he came safe off His Neighbour Bishops also declaring Popery to be Idolatry and the Pope Antichrist XIV The Bishops and chief Writers of England have taken the Pope to be the Antichrist Cranmer Whitguift Parker Grindall Abbot all A. Bishops of Canterbury Vsher Downame Jewel Andrews Bilson Latimer Hooper Farrar Ridley Robert Abbot Hall Allig and abundance more Bishops The Martyrs Sutcliffe Fulke Sharp Whittaker Willet Crakenthorp and most of our Writers against Popery Sure then they were for none of his Jurisdiction here XV. The Prayers have been and are to this day added in the end both to our Bibles and Common Prayer Books which shew how far the Church of England was from desiring a Coalition with the Papists by submitting to any Forreign Jurisdiction They say to God Confound Satan and Antichrist with all Hirelings whom thou hast already cast off into a reprobate sense that they may not by Sects Schisms Heresies and Errors disquiet thy little Flock And because O Lord we be fallen into the latter days and dangerous times wherein Ignorance hath got the upper hand and Satan by his Ministers seeketh by all means to quench the light of thy Gospel we beseech thee to maintain thy Cause against those ravening Wolves and strengthen all thy Servants whom they keep in Prison and Bondage Let not thy long-suffering be an occasion either to increase their tyranny or to discourage thy Children c. Though A. Bishop Laud put out all these Prayers from the Scots new Liturgy we had never had them still bound with ours to this day if the Church of England had not at first approved them There is also a Confession of Faith found with them describing the Catholick Church as we do XVI The Oath called Et Caetera of 1640. saith that The Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England containeth all things necessary to Salvation Therefore Obedience to any Forreign Jurisdiction is not necessary to Salvation And therefore not necessary to the avoiding of Schism or any Damning Sin XVII The Church of England holdeth that no Forreigners Pope or Prelates have Judicial Power to pronounce the King of England a Heretick Or Excommunicate though as Bishop Andrews saith in Tortura Torti even a Deacon may refuse to deliver him the Sacrament if uncapable much more that Pastor whom he chuseth to deliver it him For it 's known by sad experience how dismal the Consequences are exposing the lives of the Excommunicate to danger among them that believe the Pope and his Councils and rendering them dishonoured and contemned by their Subjects We know how many Emperors have been deposed as Excommunicate and what Queen Elizabeth's Excommunication tended to And if our Laws make it Treason to publish such an Excommunication sure the Law-makers believed not that either Pope or Prelates had a Judicial Power to do it In Prin's Introduct p. 121. the Papists that were unwilling to be the Executioners had no better plea than That no Council had yet judged
determinations is implicitely to renounce all the necessary Causes of this great Schism And to rest satisfied with their old Patriarchal Power and Dignity and Primacy of Order which is another part of my Proposition is to quit the Modern Papacy both Name and Thing Page 84. In the first place if the Bishop of Rome were reduced from his Universality of Sovereign Jurisdiction Jure Divino to his Principium Vnitatis and his Court regulated by the Canons of the Fathers which was the sence of the Councils of Constance and Basil and is desired by many Roman Catholicks as well as we 2. If the Creed or necessary Points of Faith were reduced to what they were in the time of the four first Oecumenical Councils according to the Decree of the third General Council admitting no additional Articles but only necessary Explications and those to be made by the Authority of a General Council or one so General as can be Convocated And lastly Supposing that some things from whence offence hath been either given or taken I say in case these three things were accorded whether Christians might not live in an Holy Communion and come in the same publick Worship of God free from all Schismatical Separation of themselves one from another c. We have no Controversie with the Church of Rome about a Primacy of Order but a Supremacy of Power I shall declare my sence in four Conclusions 1. That St. Peter had a fixed Chair at Antioch and after at Rome is a truth which no Man who giveth any credit to the Ancient Fathers and Councils can either deny or well doubt of 2. That St. Peter had a Primacy of Order among the Apostles is the unanimous voice c. 3. Some Fathers and School-men who were no Sworn Vassals to the Roman Bishops affirm that this Primacy of Order is affixed to the Chair of St. Peters Successors for ever c. Page 107. They who made the Bishop of Rome a Patriarch were the Primitive Fathers not excluding the Apostles and Christian Emperors and Oecumenical Councils What Laws they made in this case we are bound to obey for Conscience sake till they be repealed lawfully by virtue of the Law of Christ. Page 104. To my Objection that all Protestants must then pass for Schismaticks that take not the Pope for Principium Vnitatis and Patriarch c. he answereth still weaker and weaker Must a Man quit his just right because some dislike it Their dislike is scandal taken but the quitting of that which is right for their satisfaction should be the scandal given Whether is the worse 1. How are they forced to fall under the reproach of Schismaticks If they be forced any way it is by their own wilful Humours or erroneous Conscience Others force them not 2. I would have him consider which is worse and the more dangerous condition for Christians to fall under the reproach of Schismaticks or to fall into Schism it self Whosoever shall oppose the just Power of a Lawful Patriarch lawfully proceeding is a material Schismatick Reader I forbear confuting these things by the way being now but on the Historical relation of their Judgments You see how great necessity to avoid Schism they place in our subjection to a Forreign Jurisdiction The Confutation you shall have of all together Chap. IX The Judgment of Archbishop Laud as delivered by Dr. Heylin and by himself § 1. IN the Life of Archbishop Laud Pag. 414 415 416 412. Touching the Design of working a Reconciliation betwixt us and Rome I find it charged on him by another Writer Fuller Ch. Hist. lib. 11. p. 217. who holds it as unlawful to be undertaken as it was impossible to be effected Answ. If it be a Crime it 's Novum Crimen of a New stamp never coined before As to the Impossibility many Men of Eminence for Parts and Piety have thought otherwise Spalatensis and Sancta Clara are named as Reconcilers And if without prejudice to the Truth the Controversies might have been composed it is most probable that other Protestant Churches would have sued by their Agents to be included in the Peace If not the Church of England had lost nothing by it as being hated by the Calvinists and not loved by the Lutherans Admitting then that such a Reconciliation was endeavoured betwixt the Agents of both Churches Let us next see what our great Statesmen have discoursed upon that particular on what terms the Agreement was to have been made and how far they proceeded in it And first the Book entituled The Pope's Nuntio affirmed to have been written by the Venetian Embassador at his being in England doth discourse thus As to a Reconciliation saith he between the Churches of England and Rome there were made some general Propositions and Overtures by the Archbishop's Agents they assuring that his Grace was very much disposed thereto and that if it was not accomplished in his Life-time it would prove a work of more difficulty after his Death that in very truth for the last three Years the Archbishop had introduced some Innovations approaching nearer the Rites and Forms of Rome That the Bishop of Chichester a great Confident of his Grace the Lord Treasurer and Eight other Bishops of his Grace's Party did most passionately desire a Reconciliation with the Church of Rome That they did day by day recede from their ancient Tenets to accommodate with the Church of Rome That therefore the Pope on his part ought to make some Steps to meet them and the Court of Rome remit something of its rigour in Doctrine or otherwise no accord would be The Composition on both Sides in so good a forwardness before Pauzani left the Kingdom that the Archbishop and the Bishop of Chichester had often said that there were but two sorts of People like to hinder the Reconciliation the Puritans among the Protestants and the Jesuits among the Catholicks Let us see the Judgment and Relation of another Author in a Gloss or Comment on the former entituled The English Pope Printed at London the same Year 1643. And he will tell us that after Con had undertook the managing of Affairs the Matter began to grow towards some Agreement The King required saith he such a Dispensation from the Pope as his Catholick Subjects might resort to the Protestant Church and take the Oaths of Supremacy and Fidelity and that the Pope's Jurisdiction should be declared to be but of Human Right And so far had the Pope consented that whatsoever did concern the King should have been really performed so far as other Catholick Princes do usually enjoy and expect as their due and so far as the Bishops were to be Independent both from King and Pope There was no fear of breach on the Pope's part So that upon the Point the Pope was to content himself with us in England with a Priority instead of a Superiority over other Bishops and with a Primacy instead of a
true as it is not which you say How shall all Christians know it to be true When such as I with all our searching cannot know it yea are past doubt that it is false It 's like you 'll say It is our obstinacy And so all shall be Schismaticks and condemned with you whom you are pleased to call obstinate for escaping that Ignorance which would better serve your Ends. § 7. Dr. S. But Mr. B. objecteth That the Nestorians Jacobites Abassines c. renounce some of the six Councils yes three of the six They had a personal Veneration for the Persons of Nestorius and Dioscorus and did believe them when they said that the Councils were mistaken in Matter of Fact and Condemned them for Opinions which they did not own and thereupon did reject those Councils But they did not then nor do not at this day reject the Catholick Faith and the Rules of Christian Unity which are contained in the six General Councils So that in effect they own them For the principal thing required is to profess the true Faith and hold the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace and Righteousness which those Churches do in that they own the Nicene and C. P. Councils and deny not the Doctrine of the other four Answ. Do you think that none of your Readers will see how much you here overthrow or give up your Cause 1. If holding the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace and Righteousness will serve while they renounce the Councils as erroneous and tyrannical and holding the same Faith and Doctrine will serve what have you been Pleading for we are for all this as well as you 2. And if the Council may erre in Matter of Fact which may be known by common sence and reason how much more may they erre in matter of right and supernatural Revelation as the Articles of the Church of England say they have done 3. You confess here that Men may reject three or four of your six Councils and yet be no Schismaticks but hold Faith Unity and Peace And are the other two more necessary than all the rest You say They hold the two first Answ. They hold not the Infallibility of Councils nor that they may not be rejected when they erre nor that we may not be discerning Judges when they erre For all this is renounced in their renouncing all save two or three 4. You say They reject not the Rules of Christian Vnity Answ. Therefore they judged not the Decrees of Councils to be that necessary Rule Else the Decrees of those renounced by them would be as necessary as the rest 5. It 's apparent by this that they held the same with those Councils not because of the Authority of those Councils but on other Grounds For it is not possible that they who renounced the Councils should believe the Christian Faith on their Authority They believed it as a Divine Revelation fide Divina and so do we 6. And dare you say that a Man that believeth the same things because they are revealed by God in his Word shall be damned unless he believe them fide humana because a General Council decreed them 7. Did your other Councils add any Decrees to the first If not what need of believing any thing as theirs If yea then receiving the Decrees of the two first is not a receiving the Decrees of the later 8. And on whose Authority did Christians believe the first 300 years before there was any General Council § 8. Dr. S. P. 346. Obj. Did the Catholick Church die or cease after the sixth General Council Answ. The Essence of the Catholick Church doth not consist in the being of a Council Their meeting is but an external means for better declaring the Catholick Faith and holding mutual Correspondence between the several Churches Ans. 1. Still you are constrained to destroy your own Cause You confess then that Councils are no constitutive Governing part of the Church as a Governed Society And if so it hath some other Humane constitutive Regent part or none If none we are so far agreed This is it that we contend for If any other you must come to your Lords College of the diffused Pastors who never made Law never heard a Cause or judged out of Council to this day nor possibly can do 2. What is this that you call an external means of Correspondence Is it a necessary Supream Legislative and Judicial Power or not If it be it must be a constitutive Essential part of the Church as Political For every Politick Society is informed by such And you argued before that Nations must be under such as well as Dioceses under Diocesans If not habetur quaesitum 3. And because your former words assert an Vniversal Soveraignty I wonder how any of common reason can think this necessary to the whole Christian World during the few Years that those two or six first Councils sate and never before nor after Are dead Men our Governors VVill a Power of Governing never exercised serve for a Thousand Years last and 300 before and not for the other 300 Or hath the Church had one Form of Government for 200 or 300 Years and another for all the other 1300 And when you tell us that Kingdoms must be judged as well as single Persons did those first Councils judge all the sinning Kingdoms since If you own no Councils since the first Six all Kingdoms that have sinned these 1000 Years had no such Judges And what Councils or other Church Power save the Popes judged the many Southern and Eastern Countries that revolted Or the Western Nations in their various Changes and Crimes Must we have such an Uuniversal Judge now who never judged any these 1000 Years 4. Your Lord saith at last that they are Mutable Laws which Councils make If so why must we needs obey the six Councils that were 1000 Years ago under another Prince May not 1000 Years time and another King's Government make a Change in the Matter and Reason of the Law If you say it stands till another General Council change it I answer 1. VVhat Council abrogated the 20th Nicene Canon against Kneeling on the Lord's Day in adoration and many such other 2. Then if ever there was a General Council it's Decrees are immutable and so you contradict your selves For it 's certain there never will be a General Council to abrogate what is done till all the VVorld be under one Christian Monarch 5. The Laws of England bind us not now as the Laws of the Kings and Parliaments that are dead that is not by Virtue of their Authority though made by them But as the Laws of the present Legislative Powers who own them and rule by them and can abrogate them when they will And when the Canon-makers are dead 1000 Years ago where now is the Ruling Power whose Laws those are There is no General Council to own them nor ever will be A thousand Years sure
that was bound to Govern Then it was they only that were Authorized or had the Office and Power For Obligation to the Work though not ad hic nunc is Essential to the Office as well as Authority Or will the Performance of the Bishops of the Fourth and Fifth Centuries excuse all that succeed them to the end of the World from any Performance Why then not from all Pastoral Guidance And are they not then degraded XVIII We are against Singularity in Matters of Faith We believe that all Christs Church shall never err from any one Essential of Christianity or Communion else it would thereby cease to be a Church But we believe General Councils such as the Empire had have erred so far as to condemn each other of Heresie We perswade all Men to believe as the Church believeth that is to receive that from the Apostles quod ab omnibus ubique semper receptum fuit which the Church received and delivered as from them with known common Consent and to suspect odd Opinions Novelties and Singularities But Protestants against Papists commonly use these Distinctions 1. Authority of a Governor by Legislation and Judgment or either is one thing 2. Doctoral Authority like a Philosopher in a School of Consenters is another 3. The Authority of Witnesses which is their Obliging Credibility is another 4. The Authority of a Steward or Keeper of Records is another 5. The Authority of a Herald or Cryer or Messenger to publish Laws is another 6. And the Authority of Contractors in Mutual Self-Obligation is another Accordingly they hold 1. That there is no one Universal Head Governour or Summa Potestas Ecclesiastica to Rule the whole by Legislation or Judgment Personal or Collective but Christ. 2. That there is no one Person Natural or Political that is bound or authorized to be the Teacher of the whole World or Church but that all Pastors must Teach and Guide in their several Provinces 3. That the larger and more uncontrouled the Testimony is the greater is the Credibility and Authority of the Witnesses And therefore if all the Churches in the World as far as we can learn agree de facto that these are the Books Doctrines and practised Ordinances which they received and especially when Hereticks or Infidels and Enemies that would gainsay it cannot with any probability we thus receive the said Books and Practices as Baptism c. ex Authoritate Testium and not ex Authoritate Judicis Regentis or else Lay-Men such as Origen when he was a more credible Witness of the Text than an Hundred unlearned Bishops and such as Hierom that was no Bishop of whom I say the same yea and Women yea Hereticks and Infidels such as Pliny c. would be Church-Rulers 4. All Pastors being by Office to Preach Christ's Word and Ministerially Officiate accordingly are thereby especially intrusted with the keeping of these Sacred Records as Lawyers while they daily use them are with the Laws and the Universal Testimony of such Officers is the most credible part of the Witnesses Work or if not Universal the more the better 5. Every Pastor is as a Cryer to proclaim Christ's Laws 6. And in Circumstances left to Mutable Humane Determination the more common Consent Caeteris paribus the better And this is the use of Councils this is enough But the Protestants that I have known and read do make it our first Controversie with the Papists Whether Christ ever Instituted any one Head or Ruling Power over all the Church under himself And 2. Whether Pope or Council be such Both which they deny XIX If you have not read it I intreat you read in the Cabal-Supplement King Henry the VIII's Letter to the Archbishop and Clergy of the Province of York where you will find ☞ 1. Your cited seeming Contradictions of Scripture answered by use of Speech and Reason without any Universal Judicature 2. That Dic Ecclesiae cannot be meant of the Church Universal 3. That the Universal Church hath no Head or Governor but Christ but the Clergy subserve him as Ministers by whom he giveth Spiritual Grace and quae Spiritu aguntur libera sunt nulla Lege astringuntur and if the Teachers do their Office with scandal Magistrates must punish them and that it is the Ecclesia quae non Constat ex bonis malis which the King is not the Head of But that in Spirituals as the word signifieth Spiritual Persons and their Goods and Works and the enforcing the Observances of Gods Laws the King is Head And the reason of the word Head notably vindicated with much more XX. I crave your Pardon both for the Prolixity and Boldness while I add this Question not as accusing you of Popery Perjury or Disloyalty How can I be cleared from the guilt of Perjury and Disloyalty if having taken the ☞ Oath of Supremacy and subscribed according to the Canons c. I shall plead for the subjecting of the King and all Subjects to a Foreign Power in Spirituals when the Oath disclaimeth it and the Can. 1. saith That all Vsurped and Foreign Power hath no Establishment or Ground by the Law of God and is for most just Causes taken away and abolished and therefore no manner of Obedience or Subjection within His Majesties Realms and Dominions is due to ANY SVCH Foreign Power And all Ministers subscribe Can. 36. against all Foreign Power as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Things or Causes as Temporal And Articl 21. General Councils may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes And when will all Princes Orthodox Heretical Mahometan Heathen Enemies in VVar c. agree to gather them out of all the VVorld And when they be gathered together for as much as they be an Assembly of Men whereof all be not Governed with the Spirit and Word of God they may err and sometime have erred even in things pertaining to God wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation have no Strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that they be taken out of the Holy Scriptures And doth Church-Unity Concord and Salvation lie on things not necessary to Salvation If you say that none of this speaketh against Foreign Ecclesiastical Power such as the Apostles had I answer 1. Not against a Foreigners Preaching and Baptizing and Celebrating the Lord's Supper if he be where we are and there he is no Foreigner But against all Foreigners proper Government of Men as their Subjects The Apostles Commission in that was extraordinary and yet they Ruled Doctorally none but Voluntary Consenters 2. The Law Oath Canon and Articles disclaim such Power as the Pope claimeth here But the Pope claimeth proper Ecclesiastical Government and most English and French Papists and half the rest I think claim for him only the power of the Word and Keys and not any forcing Power by the Sword XXI As hence I wonder not that Mr. Thorndike threateneth
speak for the clean contrary 4. What if we prove that Christ hath himself given the Church in the Scriptures an account of his own Institution of Church-Form and Government as much as is necessary to its Essence Unity and Salvation and that all altering Compacts contrary to this are diabolical Will Christ damn us for not breaking his Laws and serving the Devil Is it the sin against the Holy Ghost and unpardonable not to despise Christ's Laws and not to obey the Devil 5. What if we prove to him that the very Species of his Prelacy and specially of a Supreme Catholick Jurisdiction is condemned by Christ and Treason against him Are we Traytors for not being Traytors 6. What if we prove to him that according to his very Canons the Pope and Bishops that he damns us for not owning are no Bishops having no true Call and Title to that which they pretend to Will you have yet another of his Self-contradictions P. 7. I cannot but look on it as an Argument that God never intended to oblige Particular Churches to as great a dependence on other Churches as that is wherein he has obliged Subjects to depend on their own Churches because by his contrivance of things it does not follow that Separating Churches must be left as destitute of the ordinary means of Salvation on their separation from other Churches as particular Subjects are on their separation from their own Churches Abating what obligations they have brought on themselves by their own Compacts God has made them equal There is no way of judging who is in the right but by the intrinsick merit of the Cause I really believe that the true original design of those Compacts whereby particular Churches have voluntarily submitted to restrictions of their original Power was ONLY that every particular Church might have her Censures confirmed in all other Churches in reference to those who were originally her own Subjects not to gain a Power over any other Subjects but her own nor to submit to any other Power c. Alas And have Compacts by we know not who brought us all into the snare of the unpardonable sin Though Christ died for the World he saveth none but Consenters And can Men in Asia in Towns whose Names we poor Countreymen never heard of make Laws to Damn all to the Worlds end that obey them not and this without our own Consent To conclude this Gentleman hath yet an easie remedy against all this He doth indeed frequently prove if you will believe him that though you have Faith that works by Love and do all other duty that is in Love to God and Man you cannot be saved without external Communion that is subjection to this humanly compacted Catholick Church so said Pope Nicholas long ago yea and Aeneas Sylvius when Pius 2d that all other Graces and Duties will not save a Man that is not subject to the Bishop of Rome But saith this Man p. 13. They may easily avoid the danger only by returning to the Catholick Vnity Mark Catholick Vnity National Unity will not serve We grant it But what Catholick Vnity is and whether Catholick Councils with a Catholick President that hath an Antecedent Power to call and oblige them without which they are null rebellious and punishable and to whom all Power escheateth in the Intervals of Councils whether I say this be necessary to Catholick Unity or to Antichristian Church Tyranny is the doubt I will conclude this with Dr. Iz. Barrow's Theses p. 255. 1. Patriarchs are an Humane Institution 2. As they were erected by the Power and Prudence of Men so they may be dissolved by the same 3. They were erected by the leave and confirmation of Princes and by the same they may be dejected if great reason do appear 4. The Patriarchate of the Pope beyond his own Province or Diocess doth not subsist upon any Canon of a general Synod 5. He can therefore claim no such Power otherwise than upon his Invasion or Assumption 6. The Primates and Metropolitans of the Western Church cannot be supposed otherwise than by force or one of fear to have submitted to such an Authority as he doth Vsurp 7. It is not really a Patriarchal Power like that granted by the Canons and Princes but another sort of Power which the Pope doth Exercise 8. The most rightful Patriarch holding false Doctrine or imposing unjust Laws or Tyrannically abusing his Power may and ought to be rejected from Communion 9. Such a Patriarch is to be judged by a free Synod if it may be had 10. If such a Synod cannot be had by consent of Princes each Church may free it self from the mischiefs induced by his perverse Doctrine and Practice 11. No Ecclesiastical Power can interpose in the management of any Affairs within the Territory of any Prince without his Concession 12. By the Laws of God and according to ancient Practice Princes may model the Bounds of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction erect Bishopricks enlarge diminish or transfer them as they please 13. Wherefore each Prince having Supream Power in his own Dominion and equal to the Emperors in his may exclude any Foreign Prelate from Jurisdiction in his Territories 14. It is expedient for the publick peace and good that he should do thus 15. Such Prelate according to the Rules of Christianity ought to be content with his doing so 16. Any Prelate Exercising Power in the Dominion of any Prince is eatenus his Subject as the Popes and all Bishops were to the Roman Emperor 17. Those Joints of Ecclesiastical Discipline Established in the Roman Empire by the Confirmation of Emperors were as to necessary continuance dissolved by the dissolution of the Roman Empire 18. The Power of the Pope in the Territories of any Prince did subsist by his Authority and Favour 19. By the same Power as Princes have curbed the Exorbitancy of Papal Power in some Cases of entertaining Legates making Appeals disposing of Benefices c. by the same they might exclude it 20. The practice of Christianity doth not depend on the subsistence of such a form instituted by man As to Mr. Dodwell's fundamental Opinion that the Minister can have no Power which the Ordainer intended not to give him He overthroweth by it all the Reformation and all the English reforming Ministry as derived from the Roman Ordination For it 's certain that the Roman Bishops intended not to give them Power to reform or to Worship God as they have done And the Protestants are against him Saith Dr. Challoner in his Credo Eccles. Cath. p. 95. However the Priest at the Baptizing or the Bishop at the Ordination had another meaning yet the words wherewith they Baptized and Ordained being the words of Christ are to be taken in Christs meaning in as much as he which receiveth from another is to receive it according to the intention of the Principal Giver and not the Instrumental Giver He which confers Baptism and Orders as the Principal Donor
Persecuting Snares and against the Coalition of English Protestants on any possible healing Terms as ever and as fiercely seek the Continuance of our Slavery and Silence Chap. XXII How they have been stopt and in ●hat Danger we are yet of those that are for a Forreign Jurisdiction § 1. THe continual Endeavours of Parliaments to Suppress all the Relicts and Advantages of Popery in Queen Elizabeths and King James Days long kept this Papal inclination from appearing And when Laud raised it up and King James and Buckingham Countenanced it to promote first the Spanish and after the French Marriage the Articles of Liberty for Popery Consented to by King James and after Ratified by King Charles greatly Distasted the Nobility and Gentry and the People much more so that the Kings and Parliaments were never after easy to each other till King Charles II. got a Parliament fitted to his turn § 2. The new raised Impositions of King Charles I. and Laud first Exasperated the old conformable Clergy by ●uspending and vexing them for not reading the Book for Sports on the Lords Days and for Preaching twice a Day and by Altars and Bowing and other Innovations And the Severities against Burton Prin and Bastwick made a murmuring noise And the driving many hundred Families of Godly Men out of the Land much more And the newly Altered and Imposed Liturgy Exasperated the Scots who were Encouraged by the English Discontents Yet all this had done the less had not the same Church-Innovaters been against Parliaments and kept them out because Parliaments were against them And had they not Preached for and promoted the Kings power to Raise Taxes without a Parliament But this leavened the Nation with an Averseness to the Frenchified Reconcilers And the Scots knowing all this began Resistance which proceeded to a Mutual diffidence of King and People which brought forth after a Civil-War § 3. While the King and Parliament were Labouring under the Mortal Disease of mutual distrust the Irish by an Insurrection Murdered most Barbarously two hundred thousand Protestants just the day Twelmonth before Edghil Fight Dublin escaped And this Horrid Cruelty hastened the War in England and made Popery more odious than ever it was before and rendered the French Conciliators more distasted § 4. The Conciliators having the chief Ecclesiastical Power under King Charles I. and having too much Modelled the Churches and Universities to their Minds the Parliament began a Reformation before the War and carryed it on after and cast out many Hundred for Insufficiency through gross ignorance and for Drunkenness and Vicious Lives And some for being against the Parliament and prospering till Cromwell cast them out and Cromwell going much further against Prelatical Tyranny and an ignorant Vicious Ministry than they thirteen or fourteen or fifteen years time not only stopt the French design of Coalition but also wore out the chief designers and promoters of it To which the Death of Laud with all the Accusations against him struck deep of which see Prins Introductions and his Canterburies Tryal And many old Conformists which was all the Westminster Assembly of Divines saving eight were the Men that chose rather to put down the English Prelacy than to run the hazard of the change of Civil Government and Introduction of Popery So that both Popery and the favorers of it seemed quite cast out in England But Cromwell and his Armies Usurpation and Treasons so Exasperated the two Kingdoms both Episcopal and Presbyterians that after his Death his Army having cast themselves and the Land into Confusion they brought in King Charles II. who by his Declaration from Breda and his Treaty in 61 with the Nonconformists and his Declaration 1662. called Bristols and by his Treaty with us by the Lord Keeper Bridgman and by his Declaration for Toleration still laboured so Strenuously to give Popery a Toleration that discerning Men were satisfied that he was then of the Religion that he dyed in if he had any or at least had engaged himself to introduce it To which ends 1. The dividing of the Protestants 2. The Ejecting Silencing Ruining Imprisoning or Banishing those of them that were most unreconcileable to Popery 3. The keeping such out by new Impositions of Oaths Subscriptions Professions and Practices were found to be the fittest means 4. To which was added the Exasperating the long Parliament of Men before Exasperated against them 5. And the Declaring and Swearing the People against the Lawfulness of any Military Defence of Parliament or Kingdom against any Commissioned by the King 6. And to bring all those that scrupled such Oaths under the odious Name of Nonconforming Rebels Though they were all against Defensive War by any private Men or Faction or for any Cause less than the saving of the Kingdom from apparent Ruine Subversion or Alienation 7. To which was added the taking away of all Legislative Power from Parliaments and appropriating it only to the King the strenuous Endeavour of Bishop Morley's last Book against me and of many others 8. Which were all thought an unresistible force while the King of whatever Religion had the choice of all the Bishops Deans and Dignitaries and consequently of that called The Church of England 9. And also the choice of Judges and the making of Lords 10. And the changing of Corporation Charters § 5. To these uses that we may not accuse the Innocent it was comparatively but a few men that were the visible prime Instruments besides the non-appearing Jesuits or other Papists That is Chancellor Hide Dr. Sheldon Dr. Morley Dr. Guning whom not only Dr. Hinchman Dr. Cousins Dr. Lany Dr. Sterne and several others followed ex animo but also most of the worldly sequacious part of the Clergy and Laity for Interest and Preferment sake when they saw that the Interest of Sheldon and Morley with the Chancellor was a great and necessary means of obtaining their desires § 6. But the bringing us to French Popery by the Grotian way proved so slow by many stops that it hath by God's Mercy been hitherto much frustrate and prevented For the King must not make professed Papists to be Bishops Deans and Convocation Men lest the notoriety of the Design should raise unconquerable Offence and Opposition The Name of Popery was to be renounced even by those that were for a Foreign Jurisdiction And a Government like that of the French Church must be said to be no Popery but only that which made the Pope Arbitrary or Supereminent above Councils And the very retaining of the Name of Popery in their Renunciation spoil'd their Game And specially being necessitated to avoid Suspicion to make divers firm Protestants Bishops Deans and Judges Yet the slow way of K. Ch. II. was like to have been the surest could their Patience have held out § 7. But God used K. James II. as the great Instrument of frustrating all the Plot till now by his and his Instigaters Impatience of this delay and confidence
bounds of Civil jurisdiction The many Councils which have been for Arians Eutychians Nestorians Monothelites Adoration of Images Papal tyranny c. and the many that have contradicted and condemned them tell us that the Right of Councils must have a better proof than their own affirmation And the far greater number of Christians that have approved or received the Erroneous tell us that they need a better proof than the reception of the greater part How great a part received Greg. 7th dictates and the Councils that Hereticated Royalists as Henricians But that proved not that these things were just Pope Vrbans Letter to King Lewis 13th of France 1629. in the 2d part of the Cab. p. 213. saith Your Ancestors have ever born as much respect to the exhortations of Popes as to the Commandment of God But do these words prove that this is true No more doth it that Leo the first was Caput Ecclesiae Vniversalis because he so called himself The Grand Signiour in his Defiance of Maximilian the Emperor ibid. p. 12. calls himself God in Earth Great and High Emperor of all the World the Great Helper of God King of Kings the only Victorious and Triumphant Lord of the World and of all Circuits and Provinces thereof And more Persons are Mahometans than Christians and more Heathens than either or both and yet none of this proveth Truth and Right § 10. I have marvelled that Carol. Boverius should think it a fit Argument to move our late King Charles 2d in Spain to turn Papist that Monarchy is the best Government in the State Ergo the Papal Monarchy in the Church Did he think the King so dull that he could not distinguish Particular Kingdoms and Monarchs from Vniversal How would the King have taken it if he had said Sir an Vniversal Monarchy is the best humane Government therefore you must subject your self and Kingdom to one Vniversal Monarch But the pretence of an Universal Democracy Aristocracy or Church-Parliament is more absurd and worse as I have proved § 11. Do our Changers of Government think that it is a small matter of which King and People will take no notice but be decoyed into by degrees in the dark to make King Lords Bishops and all the Kingdom the Subjects of a Foreigner and of a Parliament of Prelates who are themselves the Subjects of a Multitude of Foreign Princes Mahometans Heathens Greeks Papists c. As the Child said My Mother ruleth my Father and I rule my Mother and my Father ruleth the City Therefore I rule the City So we may then say the King ruleth England and a Council of Foreign Prelates rule the King and Heathen Mahometan Moscovian Armenian Papist c. Princes rule most of the Bishops in Council Ergo these Princes rule the King Do they know what it is for Pope or Prelates abroad to be made Judges Ecclesiastical of all persons and causes here and to have Power to Excommunicate King and Lords and depose Bishops and silence Ministers and Hereticate Dissenters and Interdict the Kingdom c. Again and again I say that I wonder if those men that have promoted so many Oaths and Promises in the Acts of Corporations Uniformity Vestries Confinement Conventicles Militia never to endeavour any alteration of Government in Church or State can possibly blind the Nation to think it no alteration to Subject King Church and Kingdom to a Foreign pretended Universal Ecclesiastick Jurisdiction Whether it be Perjury or Treason is no debate for me but I am sure that in ordine ad Spiritualia great temporal power will follow and Excommunicating and Anathematizing Kings and People hath not hitherto been a Toothless thing But quos perdere vult Jupiter hos dementat § 12. And what if they had found Ancient Councils Excommunicate some men without the Empire What pitty is it that any where Lords yea Bishops and Clergy men should be bred up in such Ignorance as to think that all Excommunicating is an act of Government I said before any Neighbour Prince Nation or People any number of Bishops when they hear another Nation turned notorious Hereticks may renounce Communion with them and declare the reason of it because they have made themselves uncapable Governing Excommunication per judicium publicum id est per personam publicam seu Rectorem is one thing and a declared renunciation and refusal of Communion per judicium privatum that is by an equal or private person is another thing I am not bound to stay till Turk or Pope is Excommunicated by their Governours before I renounce Christian Communion with them Paul's charge 1 Cor. 5. With such a one no not to eat and Tit. 3.10 A Man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition avoid and St. John's Bid him not good speed c. may bind equals that have but judicium privatum discretionis when no Superior Ruler Excommunicateth the Sinner Chap. X. Some Questions about General Councils to be resolved before all the World can subject Kings Kingdoms Souls and Scripture to their Government or Decrees and take them for the Vnifying Ruling-Power over the Vniversal Church NOthing can be more necessary to all Christians Learned and Unlearned than to be sure of the truth of that which must be the foundation of all our obedience and our hopes And therefore if it be the General Councils Actual or Virtual in the chief Patriarchs and Metropolitans or supposed College of Bishops which is the Unifying or Constitutive Regent part of the Universal Church and on whose credit we must take the Scripture to be God's Word and from whose Judgment we must not appeal to Scripture or to God it 's the primum necessarium that we be sure of the Authority and Infallibility or Credit of such Councils And first we are to consider the matter of their Determining Power 1. There are Things 2. Words 3. The signification of words to be judged of 2. There are Truths of Natural and of Supernatural Revelation to be judged of 3. There are the Essentials of Christianity the Integrals and the Accidents to be judged of 4. And the Judgment is 1. Witnessing 2. Teaching 3. Or judicially Deciding We must first know who are the Judges 2. What is their work 3. How certain they are Qu. 1. Did not Apostles and other Preachers singly convert men even thousands before there was any General Council and that by such evidence as the single Preacher brought Or was it by the Argument of Universal Consent that every one then was converted e. g. the Eunuch Act. 8. The Jailor and Lydia Act. 16. Cornelius and his house Act. 10. The three thousand Act. 2.37 c. Q. 2. Did none that St. Paul wrote his Epistles to believe them till they were told that all the Teachers and Bishops of the Churches gave them their Authority Were the Gospels written by Matthew Mark Luke and John received only by the Argument of the Councils or Colleges Authority Q.
for such when divers Churches and Countries may have divers such Accidentals and the same Churches may change them as they see cause Q. 80. If it be not Legislation but Judicature that we must have an Universal Judge or Power for what are the Cases that they must Judge Sure it is not whether John or Thomas shall be judged capable of Baptism or of the Lord's Supper or whether he be an Adulterer a Drunkard and impenitent therein and so to be Excommunicate Must all the World come before all the World Shall Millions of Sinners be unjudged till all the Bishops of the World Judge them If it be Persons accused of Heresie Schism or any Sin that must be judged must they not be heard and their witness heard before they can be judged justly But if they Judge not of Persons but of Doctrines whether they be Heresie or not this will make no Alteration or Reformation till it be judged what persons are guilty of such Errors or Heresies And if particular Pastors on the place must judge all such persons is not the Scripture the Rule of Faith a sufficient Rule to judge of Heresie by Q. 81. If it be whole Churches that are to be judged will not a brotherly power of disowning their Communion serve without a Governing Power Had every one a Governing Power to whom the Apostles commanded with such not to eat nor bid them good speed May not Princes renounce Communion with Neighbour Princes and Nations without being their Governour Q. 82. In conclusion doth it not remain that this pretended Universal Soveraignty Monarchical or Aristocratical is the device of the Prince of Pride a Treasonable Usurpation over all Princes disobedience to Christ Luke 22. and Antichristian Usurpation of his Prerogative and a base Captivating of the Souls and Reason of Mankind to a pretended Power which common sense reason and experience fully proveth to be a natural impossibility or that which in practice no Mortal Man or College is capable of Chap. XI A Breviate of the Papists Faith and Church Doctrine both the Monarchical and Aristocratical sort § 1. WE must believe that Christ hath a Church before we believe that he is Christ the Redeemer § 2. VVe must believe that this Church is Infallible or our Governour before we can believe that Jesus is Christ and our Governour § 3. We must believe that Christ Promised Infallibility or Governing Authority to this Church before we can believe that he is Christ. § 4. We must believe that this Promise is true and shall be fulfilled before we believe the Gospel Promise of Pardon and Salvation that is before we are Christians or believe the Scripture § 5. We must believe that the Pope is Christ's Vicegerent or Vicar General or General Councils at least before we can believe that Christ is Christ. § 6. We must believe that the Words of the Apostles were Intelligible else why did they speak but their Writings are not till a General Council make them so by an Exposition § 7. We must believe that it is intelligible which be true Bishops and Councils and what is the meaning of their Voluminous Decrees but it is not intelligible what is the sense of the Scripture till Councils tell us § 8. We must believe that God is the great Deceiver of the World by sense and things sensible e. g. by sense which takes Bread to be Bread and Wine to be Wine § 9. We must believe that all men are Hereticks who deny not their senses and all that believe sense even of all the sound men in the World shall be Damned That is All that believe God speaking by things sensible § 10. We must believe that God who is the great Deceiver of the World even to and by the senses yet hath given a Spirit of Infallibility to those Popes and Prelates in Council who live in worldliness and wickedness § 11. We must believe that an unlearned Pope and Prelates who never understood the Original Tongue but are ignorant men are by Miracle in Council inspired with the gift of right expounding the Scriptures which they never studied or understood before § 12. We must believe that every Priest how ignorant or wicked soever doth by pronouncing the bare words of Consecration work many Miracles turning Bread into no Bread Wine into no Wine making quantity and other Accidents to exist without Substance c. And that he can work such Miracles every hour of the day and if he can but get into a Bakers Shop or Vintners Celler to say Mass may in malice undo the poor men when he will by turning all their Bread and Wine into none § 13. We must believe that the Roman Empire was all the Christian VVorld or that a Council General as to that Empire was General as to all the VVorld And that the Roman Emperor or the Pope called the Bishops of all the VVorld together And that the humane Primate of one Empire was Governour of all the VVorld § 14. VVe must believe that now that Empire is dissolved the Laws then made bind all the Princes and Churches on Earth viz. that a defunct power still ruleth even those that never owed them obedience § 15. VVe must believe that we in England are rightfully under a Foreign Church Jurisdiction contrary to the Oath of Supremacy § 16. VVe must believe that all Temporal Lords must be sworn to extirpate all Protestants and to perform it if able on pain of Excommunication Deposition and Damnation And that if they do not the Pope may execute this penalty of Excommunicating and Deposing them and giving their Dominion to others and may Absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance Concil Later sub Innoc. 3. Can. 1 2 3. § 17. VVe must Swear never to expound the Scripture but according to the Concordant sense of the Ancient Fathers who never expounded much at all much less ever agreed in any Exposition of them all § 18. VVe must believe that God hath given the Church that is the Pope and Councils a Power to Expound hard Scriptures and to end Controversies and that this is a great Blessing to us VVhen yet neither Pope nor Councils will give us a Commentary on the Bible or exposition of hard Texts nor will determine most of the Controversies that now trouble us § 19. VVe must believe that the Governing part of the Church is to be obeyed and Gods VVord received but by their Proposal when yet it is not known who is the Governing part Pope or Council nor which Councils be true and which but false Conventions nor can they assure us how we may ever come to know it § 20. VVe must believe those Councils to be true and credible which contradict and condemn each other and that both are in the right § 21. VVe must believe both that all Gods VVord in the Sacred Scripture is true and that Councils and Popes say Truth when they contradict it § 22. VVe must believe
is King and the Law is his Law he being by the Constitution by Contract obliged to own it and Govern by it 2. And Parliaments have their part in the Legislation as Representatives or Trustees of the People and therefore the Laws are called those quas vulgus elegerit But the People die not at the dissolving of a Parliament 3. At least it 's of apparent necessity that the Supreme Executive Power survive or else the Laws die For whose Laws are they if we had no King or Soveraign Whom do we obey or disobey in obeying or disobeying such Laws But our opposers say that even the Supreme Executive as well as Legislative Power is in General Councils If so their Laws are dead a thousand years and we cannot disobey or obey dead men Therefore why do you press us to obey their Laws Arg. 5. If God would have had such Councils to be the Universal Soveraigns he would have notified this plainly in his Word or in Nature it being supposed the Constitutive Form of the Church or at least necessarily to be known for the common Duty and Concord of Christians Our opposers say There is no Concord nor avoiding damnable Schism but by obeying the Vniversal Governing Church But God hath notified no such thing in Nature or Scripture Arg. 6. If God would have his Church Universal to have had such a Soveraign he would have empowered some one or more to call such a Council and told us who hath the power to call them that we may know which have Authority and are to be obeyed For there have been many false and heretical General Councils so called and they have cursed and condemned one another But God hath given us no notice of any empowered to call such a Council nor any means how to know which of them is true and which false which to obey and which not whatever the Pope pretendeth Arg. 7. All the Inferior Officers derive their Power from the Supreme But all the particular Bishops and Presbyters do not derive their Power from General Councils ergo they are not Supreme The Major is undoubted with all Politick Writers It is one of the Jura Majestatis to be the Fountain of Inferior Power The Minor is notorious de facto in the common History of the Church By the National Orders of the Roman Empire Councils had a chief Power in case of difference to determine of the five Patriarchs but not necessarily to chuse them nor did they consecrate them nor was this without the Empire nor did these Patriarchs make the other Bishops The Papists dare not determine whether Election or Consecration necessarily make a Bishop or whether it must be both For which ever be necessary distinguished from invalid acts their Popes and Bishops are nulled much more if both But neither of them was appropriate to General Councils Arg. 8. The Soveraign Government of the Universal Church is supposed necessary to its Unity and to avoiding of Schism and deciding Controversies and therefore its Laws are necessary to be Preached to all the Flocks But none of this is true as to the Soveraignty of a Council ●or the Church had Unity mostly without it and subsists without it at this day and few Subjects know its Laws and few Preachers preach them or People think they are bound to learn them Arg. 9. Christ hath appropriated the Soveraignty and Universal Legislation and Judgment to himself alone Therefore it is not committed to a Council The Antecedent is proved fully by 1 Cor. 11.3 1 Cor. 12.27 c. Col. 1.18 2.10 17 19. Eph. 1.22 23. Eph. 4.3 4 5 6. to 16. 1 Cor. 6.16 17. Gal. 3.28 1 Cor. 3.3 4 5. 4.6 1 Cor. 10.16 17. Matth. 22.25 26. Luke 22.26 Arg. 10. They that will claim so great a Power as to be the Soveraigns of the Christian World must shew a clear Commission for it But Universal Councils can shew no such Commission Arg. 11. If an Universal Council of Bishops be the Supreme Governours of the Universal Church they that call them not or they that come not together live in most damnable sin For all Office consisteth in Obligation to do the duty as well as Power to do it And to neglect so many hundred years a work of such unspeakable need must be more damnable than to neglect a particular Flock so that this casts either all the Bishops of the World into damnation as most perfidious men or the Pope for not calling them Arg. 12. The necessity of such an Universal Supreme Senate is feigned and false therefore none such is of God 1. The great pretended necessity is of Universal Legislation But that is not necessary For Christ hath already given his Church as many Laws as are universally necessary No man can prove the necessity of one more 2. Nor is their Universal Judging Office necessary For Arg. 13. A General Council is not capable of Universal Supreme Government Therefore they were never by God appointed to it I. They are not capable of Universal Legislation 1. Because Christ hath made perfect Universal Laws and forbidden all addition to them that is at least all of the same kind To say that Christ hath left out any of universal necessity is to say that he hath done his work by the halves and men must mend it especially if it be in necessary things If it be but undetermined Circumstances or Accidents then 1. None can know which of them agree with all Countries on Earth 2. Those that agree this year may not be agreeable the next 3. Nor is an Agreement in more than Christ hath determined necessary at all So that here is no work for them to do 2. And what is the Judiciary Power that they can use No man can tell what 1. They cannot judge of particular Persons to be Baptized whether they are fit All the Bishops of the World must not meet to try a Catechumen 2. Nor yet of Persons that are to be Confirmed and admitted to adult Communion 3. Nor of Persons accused of Heresie or Scandal No one is so mad as to say that an Universal Council must be gathered out of all the Earth to judge whether A. do justly accuse B. of these Crimes and to hear all men speak for themselves and to Examine the Witnesses c. And whole Cities and Kingdoms are not fit for Church Censures because they are mixt of righteous and unrighteous and noxa Caput sequitur Every man must answer for his own Sin and every one must have his own Repentance And if whole Countries are to be Judged whole Countries of Witnesses must be heard And shall the Council come to them or they all go to the Council and whither and when If it be Causes and not Persons that they must judge what are they if they be no Persons Causes If only Cases of Doctrine and Conscience in general as the Expounding hard Texts of Scripture or Points of Divinity This is not properly
a Judiciary Executive Power which is ever subsequent to the Subjects actions but it is a part of the antecedent Power If it be but Instructing it is the act of a Teacher If generally obliging it is the act of the Legislator's For it is his Prerogative to be the universally obliging Expositor of the Law who is the Maker of it And it 's more to Give the sence than to endite the bare words So that here is no Universal Legislation or Jurisdiction left for a Soveraign Council Nor any that they are capable of LV. Much less can all the Bishops out of Council living all over the Earth as one College Senate or Aristocracy be the Supreme Governing Power of all the Churches and Christians on Earth having no possible Capacity thereof If our new Church Bishops and Drs. had not fixed on this as the Universal Supremacy I should have expected a sharp censure for judging any so as to own it The same Arguments forementioned confute it Arg. 1. The diffused College of Bishops out of Council never did make Laws for the Church Universal Therefore they are not its Law-makers or Supreme Legislative Rulers Arg. 2. They have never much less always exercised an Vniversal decisive Judiciary Power Therefore they were never appointed to exercise it The Church could not obey that Power that was never used by such as Judges Arg. 3. If God had given them this Power he would somewhere have plainly told us of it and directed them and us how to use it But this he hath not done Arg. 4. The Assertors of this while they would extoll the Clergy cruelly Judge them by Consequence to Damnation for never performing so great a Duty as Universal Legislation and Jurisdiction if God did oblige them to it Arg. 5. For the diffusive Clergy or Bishops of all the Earth out of Council to Govern all Christians on Earth as one College or Senate which all must obey is a thing of such notorious natural Impossibility that I once thought I should never have heard a Man much less a Christian yea a Dr. and Bishop yea many maintain 1. For must they all agree that their acts may be valid in Legislation or Decisive Judgment or must it be a Major Vote No doubt they 'l say the latter And who shall propose and draw up the Laws 2. Who shall carry them all over the World to procure Votes 3. Who shall gather the Votes and Judge of the Majority 4. Shall they Vote and Judge without ever consulting each other and hearing what be said on every side 5. How many Messengers must there be to go into all the World And who shall bear their Charges 6. How shall we be sure when they come home that they have truly taken the Votes Will not all our Faith be resolved into the Credit of these Messengers 7. Must accused Persons and Witnesses travel all over the World to be Judged or must all the Bishops on Earth come to them 8. How many Millions of Criminals will a Bishop have to hear at once or Judge The Case is so gross that I am afraid you will say I feign Reverend Men to be Mad. That which they say is That there is no Concord to be had nor avoiding of Schism but by obeying the Universal Governing Church which is the College of all the Pastors and Bishops on Earth who have as such a Supreme Power under Christ of Legislation and Judgment which they exercise per literas formatas There is no way to excuse this but by feigning that this College of Bishops is to do these great works not by themselves but by a College of Delegates or Representatives viz. Either Cardinals or Patriarchs or else by reducing the whole Church on Earth to the narrow compass of some little Sect and condemning most of the Christian World that they may not seem to need them for Legislation or Judgment And these I have sufficiently confuted before LVI The Universal Supreme Government either of Council or the College of the diffused Clergy is more impossible and unpracticable and much worse than the Soveraignty of the Pope For 1. The Pope is a known Person and it 's possible to find him to send to him to hear from him 2. He is One and it 's possible to know his Mind without gathering Votes or Literas formatas all over the Earth 3. Most may send to him and hear his decision at least in an Age. 4. What he cannot do by himself he can depute others to do 5. He is almost always in being and the Church need not be so many Hundred Years headless or without it's Soveraign Power 6. He hath some Cob-web shadow of right in the Tu es Petrus and Tibi dabo Claves and Pasce oves But as to the said College and Council all this and more is contrary So that I do deliberately profess that if I did believe that there were any Universal Supreme Rector or Ministerial specifying Vnifying Constitutive Head or Governour under Christ I should soon resolve that it is the Pope there being no Competitor so little uncapable as he And all the Papists save a few Flatterers acknowledge that the Popes Power is not absolute and unlimited and that he hath need of Councils as the King hath of Parliaments not for constant Government but partly for Legislation which belongs not to the Pope alone and partly for Medicinal reparation and execution when the Church is diseased So that they that are for the Pope as the stated Supreme are for Councils also and would use Councils better than the Aristocratical that give them the Supreme Government would use them All men know that they are rarely in being Even Bishop Guning saith he receiveth but the first Six General Councils To say the Church hath been headless or without it's Supreme Government just a Thousand Years and is so still is to make it invisible in an Essential Part. Is there now a visible Catholick Church or is there none If none why would they silence and damn us all for not obeying that which is not If there be where and what is the Pars regens the constitutive visible Supremacy If in a Council there is none If in the College of diffused Bishops all over the World they are no Governors they never so made Laws they Govern not as such and so are no such Governors They only Govern per partes in their several Precincts as all the English Justices of the Peace Mayors Bailiffs and Judges do and not as an Aristocracy But if it be a Church now because there is a Pope say so and hide not your opinion We say It is a Church because there is a Christ and Christians and we know no other Matter and Form LVII They that assert a Supremacy in a Council or College of Bishops do unavoidably introduce a Pope If they will call none a Pope but him that is absolute and unlimited and no Man a King but an absolute