Christian when he refused to give up his Church to the Arians denied the Emperor's power over truth and to determine in Doctrines The Emperor might force him out if he pleased neither might he resist the force his Weapons being only Prayers and Tears but the truth must not yield up to him and he give his consent or seem to do it by his own departure that the Arian Doctrine be there preached this was not then thought an Affront to the Magistrate and Law nor had St. Ambrose a Commission immediate from Heaven and abetted with Miracles or was he judged a hypocrite in so doing because he did not go and preach the Cause against Arius amongst the Goths and Vandals who subscribed to his Creed at their receiving Christianity though Mr. Dean of Canterbury tells us he that pleads Conscience and preaches it in England and does not go and preach it also in Turkey is guilty of gross hypocrisie pag. 203 213. We do not make them Judges and Deciders of Truth but Receivers and Establishers of it we say Princes be only Governors that is higher Powers ordain'd of God and bearing the Sword with lawful and publick Autority to command for truth to prohibit and with the Sword punish Errors and all other Ecclesiastical Disorders as well as Temporal within their Realms that as all their Subjects Bishops and others must obey them commanding what is good in Matters of Religion and endure them with patience when they take part with Error So they their Swords and Scopters be not subject to the Popes Tribunal neither hath he by the Law of God or by the Canons of the Church any Power or Pre-eminence to reverse their Doings nor depose their Persons and for this Cause we confess Princes within their Territories to be supreme that is not under the Popes jurisdiction neither to be commanded nor displaced at his pleasure pag. 215 216. There be two Parts of our Assertion The first avouching that Princes may command for Truth and abolish Error The next that Princes be Supreme i. e. not subject to the Popes judicial Process to be cited suspended deposed at his beck The Word Supreme ever was and is defended by us to make Princes free from the wrongful and usurped Jurisdiction which the Pope claimeth over them pag. 217. 219. Bishops have their Autority to preach and administer the Sacraments not from the Prince but Christ himself only the Prince giveth them publick liberty without let or disturbance to do what Christ hath commanded them he no more conferreth that Power and Function than he conferreth Life and Breath when he permitteth to live and breath when he does not destroy the life of his Subjects That Princes may prescribe what Faith they list what Service of God they please what form of Administring the Sacraments they think best is no part of our thoughts nor point of our Doctrine for external Power and Autority to compel and punish which is the Point we stand upon God hath preferr'd the Prince before the Priest pag. 223. touching the Regiment of their own Persons and Lives Princes owe the very same Reverence and Obedience to the Word and Sacraments that every private Man doth and if any Prince would be baptized or approach the Lord's Table with manifest shew of unbelief or irrepentance the Minister is bound freely to speak or rather to lay down his life at the Princes feet than to let the King of Kings to be provoked the Mysteries to be defiled his own Soul and the Princes endanger'd for lack of oft and earnest Admonition pag. 226. by Governors we do not mean Moderators Prescribers Directors Inventers or Authors of these things but Rulers or Magistrates bearing the Sword to permit and defend that which Christ himself first appointed and ordained and with lawful force to disturb the Despisers of his lawful Will and Testament Now what inconvenience is this if we say that Princes as publick Magistrates may give freedom protection and assistance to the preaching of the Word ministring of the Sacraments and right using of the Keys and not fetch license from Rome pag. 236. Princes have no right to call and confirm Preachers but to receive such as be sent of God and give them liberty for their preaching and security for their Persons and if Princes refuse so to do God's Labourers must go forward with that which is commanded them from Heaven not by disturbing Princes from their Thrones nor invading their Realms but by mildly submitting themselves to the Powers on Earth and meekly suffering for the defence of the truth what they shall inflict A private liberty and exercise of their own Conscience and Religion was not then thought enough if the Religion of a Nation be false and though autority do abet it nor would the Autority in Queen Elizabeth's days have own'd that Person asserting and maintaining of it though not stubbornly irreligious but only wanting information in so notoriously a known case of practice pag. 238. In all spiritual Things and Causes Princes only bear the Sword i. e. have publick Autority to receive establish and defend all Points and Parts of Christian Doctrine and Discipline within their Realms and without their help tho the Faith and Canons of Christ's Church may be privately professed and observed of such as be willing yet they cannot be generally planted or settled in any Kingdom nor urged by publick Laws and external Punishments on such as refuse but by their consents that bear the Sword This is that we say refel it if you can pag. 252. to devise new Rites and Ceremonies for the Church is not the Princes vocation but to receive and allow such as the Scripture and Canons commend and such as the Bishops and Pastors on the Place shall advise not infringing the Scripture or Canons and so for all other Ecclesiastical Things and Causes Princes be neither the Devisers nor Directors of them but the Confirmers and Establishers of that which is good and Displacers and Revengers of that which is Evil which power we say they have in all things be they Spiritual Ecclesiastical or Temporal the Abuse of Excommunication in the Priest and contempt of it in the People Princes may punish excommunicate they may not for so much of the Keys are no part of their Charge pag. 256. The Prince is in Ecclesiastical Discipline to receive and stablish such Rules and Orders as the Scripture and Canons shall decide to be needful and healthful for the Church of God in their Kingdoms It is the Objection indeed and undue consequence the Church of Rome makes against us and the Oath of Supremacy and which is urged by Philander in this Dialogue betwixt him and Theophilus or betwixt the Christian and the Jesuite pag. 124 125. That we will have our Faith and Salvation to hang on the Princes Will and Laws that there can be imagined no nearer way to Religion than to believe what our temporal Lord and Master list in the
Oath we make Princes the only supreme Governors of all Persons in all Causes as well spiritual as temporal utterly renouncing all foreign Jurisdictions Superiorities and Autorities upon which Words mark what an horrible Confusion of all Faith and Religion ensueth if Princes be the only Governors in Ecclesiastical Matters then in vain did the Holy Ghost appoint Pastors and Bishops to govern the Church if they be Supreme then they are superior to Christ himself and in effect Christ's Masters if in all Things and Causes spiritual than they may prescribe to the Priests and Bishops what to preach which way to worship and serve God how in what Form to minister the Sacraments and generally how Men shall be governed in Soul if all foreign Jurisdiction must be renounced then Christ and his Apostles because they were and are Forreigners have no Jurisdiction nor Autority over England But this is what only the ill Nature and Malice of our Adversaries would have us to believe and assert and give out to the World we do 't is what is and all along has been repell'd with scorn and indignation both by our Princes in their single Persons and in their Laws in Parliament and though some of our Divines have wished the Oath had been more cautiously Penn'd and think it lies more open to little obvious Inferences of this nature than it needs and which amuse the unwary less discerning Reader yet all own and defend it as to the substance and design and intent of it and which is throughly and sufficiently done by the learned Warden in this Treatise as appears by this Specimen or shorter account is now given of it and he that peruses the whole Treatise will find more and John Tillotson Doctor in Divinity and Dean of Canterbury is if not the only yet one professed conforming Divine in our Church that publickly from the both Pulpit and Press has given the Romanist so much ground really to believe we are such as they on purpose to abuse us and delude others give it out we are and complyes so far with their Objection and Calumny just now recited as by Philander drawn up against us gives so much of Force and Autority to it § XIX BISHOP Sanderson in his Treatise now mentioned has a different task from Bishop Bilson the one was to vindicate the Prince that he invades not the Church the other the Bishops or Church that from usurping on the Prince Bishop Sanderson among many other things urged by him and as his Subject requires is express in these Particulars pag. 121. That there is a supreme Ecclesiastical Power which by the Law of the Land is established and by the Doctrine of our Church acknowledged to be inherent in the Church pag. 23. That regal and Episcopal Power are two Powers of quite different kinds and such as considered purely in those things which are proper and assential to either have no mutual relation unto or dependance upon each other neither hath either of them to do with the other the one of them being purely spiritual and internal the other external and temporal albeit in regard of the Persons that are to exercise them or some accidental Circumstances appertaining to the exercise thereof it may happen the one to be some wayes helpful or prejudicial to the other pag. 41. that the derivation of any Power from God doth not necessarily infer the non-subjection of the Persons in whom that Power resideth to all other Men for doubtless the power that Fathers have over their Children Husbands over their Wives Masters over their Servants is from Heaven of God and not of Men yet are Parents Husbands Masters in the exercise of their several respective Powers subject to the Power Jurisdiction and Laws of their lawful Soveraigns pag. 44. The King doth not challenge to himself as belonging to him by virtue of his Supremacy Ecclesiastical the Power of ordaining Ministers excommunicating scandalous Offenders the power of Preaching adminstring Sacraments c. and yet doth the King by virtue of that Supremacy challenge a Power as belonging to him in the right of his Crown to make Laws concerning Preaching administring the Sacraments ordination of Ministers and other Acts belonging to the Function of a Priest pag. 69 70 71. it is the peculiar reason he gives in behalf of the Bishops for not using the King's Name in their Process c. in the Ecclesiastical Courts the occasion of the whole discourse and which cannot be given for the Judges of any other Courts from the different nature and kind of their several respective Jurisdictions which is That the Summons and other Proceedings and Acts in the Ecclesiastical Courts are for the most part in order to the Ecclesiastical Censures and Sentences of Excommunications c. the passing of which Sentences and others of the like kind being a part of the Power of the Keys which our Lord Jesus Christ thought sit to leave in the hands of the Apostles and their Successors and not in the hands of Lay-Men The Kings of England never challenged to belong to themselves but left the exercise of that Power entirely to the Bishops as the lawful Successors of the Apostles and Inheritors of their Power the regulating and ordering of that Power in sundry Circumstances concerning the outward exercise thereof in foro exteruo the Godly Kings of England have thought to belong unto them as in the Right of their Crown and have accordingly made Laws concerning the same even as they have done also concerning other Matters appertaining to Religion and the Worship of God but the substance of that Power and the Function thereof as they saw it altogether to be improper to their Office and Calling so they never pretended or laid any claim thereunto but on the contrary renounced all claim to any such Power or Autority And for Episcopacy it self the Bishop sets down his opinion in a Postscript to the Reader the words are these My opinion is That Episcopal Government is not to be derived merely from Apostolical Practice or Institution but that it is originally founded in the Person and Office of the Messiah our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ who being sent by his Heavenly Father to be The great Apostle Heb. 3.1 Bishop and Pastor 1 Pet. 2.25 of his Church and anointed to that Office immediately after his Baptism by John with Power and the Holy Ghost Acts 10.37 38. descending then upon him in a bodily shape Luk. 3.22 did afterwards before his Ascension into Heaven send and impower his holy Apostles giving them the Holy Ghost likewise as his Father had given him in like manner as his Father had before sent him Joh. 20.21 to exercise the same Apostolical Episcopal and Pastoral office for the Ordering and Governing of his Church until his coming again and so the same office to continue in them and their Successors unto the Worlds end Mat. 28.18.20 this I take to be so clear from these and other like Texts of
in the Objection the several Acts are these That no one Canon of the Church have the force of a Law but what is appointed by such Inspector of the Canons as he shall name and appoint That no Appeals be made to Rome upon the Penalty and Danger contained and limited in the Act of Provision and Premunire made in the 16th year of King Richard II. That all the Canons not repugnant to the Laws of the Realm or to the Damage of the King's Prerogative Royal are to be used and executed as they were before the making this Act. That no license is to be required from the See of Rome for the Consecrating and Investiture of Bishops That 't is in the King alone to nominate and present them That the Pope has no Power in Spiritual Causes to give Licenses Dispensations Faculties Grants c. all this is to be done at home by our own Bishops and in our own Synods and Councils cap. 21. and this Provision is particularly made Sect. 19. ibid. provided that this Act or any thing or things herein contained shall be hereafter interpreted or expounded that your Grace your Nobles and Subjects intend by the same to decline or vary from the Congregation of Christ's Church in any thing concerning the very Articles of the Catholick Faith of Christendom or in any other things declared in Holy Scripture and the Word of God necessary for yours and their Salvation but only to make an Ordinance by Policies necessary and convenient to repress Vice And for good conservation of this Realm in Peace Vnity and Tranquility from Ravine and Spoyl insuing much the old ancient Customes of this Realm in that behalf not minding to seek for any Relief Succor or Remedies for any worldly things and humane Laws in any case of necessity but within this Realm at the hands of your Highness your Heirs and Successors Kings of this Realm which have and ought to have an Imperial Power and Autority in the same and not obliged in any worldly Causes to any Superior § VII IN the 26th year of his Reign cap. 1. when declared Supreme Head of the Church of England in Parliament as before recognized by the Clergy the Power he thereby is invested with is also declared viz. To visit redress reform order correct restrain and amend all such Errors Heresies Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities whatsoever they be which by any manner of spiritual Autority or Jurisdiction ought or may lawfully be reformed repressed order'd redressed corrected restrained or amended most to the pleasure of Almighty God the increase of Virtue in Christ's Religion and for the conservation of Vnity Peace and Tranquility of this Realm cap. 14. he appoints the number of suffragan Bishops the Places of their residence and the Arch-Bishop is to consecrate them In the 28th year of his Reign cap. 10. The King may nominate such number of Bishops Sees for Bishops Cathedral Churches and endow them with such Possessions as he will In the 31th year cap. 14. he defends the Doctrine of Transubstantiation the Sacrament in but one kind enacts that all Hereticks be burnt and their Goods forfeited that no Priest may marry for Masses Auricular Confession c. in the 34 5. cap. 1. recourse must be had to the Catholick Apostolick Church for the decision of Controversies And therefore all Books of the Old and New Testament in English being of Tindal 's false Translation or comprising any matter of Christian Religion Articles of the Faith or Holy Scripture contrary to the Doctrine set forth sithence Anno Domini 1540. or to be set forth by the King shall be abolished no Printer or Book-seller shall utter any of the said Books no Persons shall play or interlude sing or rhime contrary to the said Doctrine no Person shall retain any English Books or Writings concerning Matter against the holy and blessed Sacrament of the Altar or for the maintenance of the Anabaptists or other Books abolished by the King's Proclamation There shall be no Annotations or Preambles in Bibles or new Testaments in English the Bible shall not be read in English in any Church no Women c. to read the New Testament in English nothing shall be taught contrary to the Kings Injunctions and if any spiritual Person preach teach or maintain any thing contrary to the King's Instructions or Determinations made or to be made and shall thereof be convict he shall for his first Offence recant for his second abjure and bear a fagot for the third he shall be adjudged an Heretick and be burnt and loose all his Goods and Chattels In the 37. year cap. 17. The full Power and Autority he hath by being Supreme Head of the Church of England is To correct punish and repress all manner of Heresies Errors Vices Sins Abuses Idolatries Hypocrises and Superstitions sprung and growing within the same and to exercise all other manner of Jurisdiction called Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Sect. 1. and Sect. 3. 'tis farther added To whom by Holy Scriptures all Authority and Power is wholly given to hear and determine all manner of Causes Ecclesiastical and to correct Vice and Sin whatsoever and to all such Persons as his Majesty shall appoint thereunto And so far is all this from deriving to himself and exercising any thing of the Priest-hood that he is totidem verbis declared and reputed only a Lay-Man in the first Section of that Chapter nor do any one of these Instances here produced amount to any more than to the defending and guarding by Laws Truth and punishing and repressing Errors whether in Doctrines or in Manners at least such as are so reputed by the Church and State § VIII 'T IS true and easily observable that just upon the assuming to himself the Title of the supreme Head of the Church there was ground enough for suspition that the Church her self and all her Power was to be laid aside and whereas the reason and end of every particular Parliament before and of each of his till then is still said to be for the honor of God and holy Church and for the Common-Weale and Profit of this Realm 't is abated and said only for the honor of God and for the Common-Weale and Profit of this Realm the benefit of holy Church is in words at least left out and in the room of it is once added to the conservation of the true Doctrine of Christ's Religion As if the design was according to the Models now adayes framed and endeavour'd by private Persons to be set up That the care was to be only of Doctrines in which and in charity and love and abatements to one another the Essence of Church-Unity in general and each Christian with another consists But yet however this so hapned or upon what design either in himself or others 't is certain he abridged not the Church-Men of any one Instance of that Secular worldly Power as that of the supremacie derived unto them is called 25
it self was not thought to be concerned 't was what was reputed only secular and the most eminent and very near all the Bishops were zealous Sticklers against the Pope or at least submitted to it then when zealous for the Roman Catholick Religion Doctrines and Worship and to which they adhered in King Edward's days and Queen Elizabeth's when the Reformation went on farther and was settled as now by Law in the Church The Supremacy was not then the Characteristical Mark though since to keep up the Parties it is so and which occasioned that warm Dialogue betwixt the Jesuite and Doctor Bilson of which I have given so large an account already the Doctor 's design being to vindicate our Church from the Opinions of Erastus urged in effect upon us by the Jesuite and that by asserting the Prince Supreme in all Causes over all Persons we give not to him any thing that is Church-Power enstated by Christ on the Apostles and by them derived to the Bishops their alone Successors herein this being thus settled and over-ruled against the Romanist another Enemy Man comes with his Tares and which are scattered in the seed-Plot and grow up together with it the Puritan starts up in the midst of us and the Point is That this Power of the Keys is in the Presbytery their Eldership made up of Lay-Men mostly call'd Lay-Elders and these for the greatest part as must be in abundance of Parishes Mechanicks and the meaner sort who have the Power of laying on of Hands Ordaining and Excommunicating nay more these inconsiderable Persons are not only invested with the Power of Bishops and Church-Men but with that Power and Supremacy is by us given to the Prince to Preside over and Govern all Persons and Causes by Process to Cite Summon and Convene before them to implead acquit or condemn amerce or punish even to confinement in their Consistories and no Cause or Person to be exempted if manageable in order to Religion they emulate and succeed the Pope himself and in the highest instances of his pretended Power and Soveraignty even to Summon and Censure Kings of whom Personal Attendance is required now against this it is these Worthies change and wield their Weapons accordingly as a good Fencer is ready at all against these New Popes as they call them and whoso please may read in Bishop Bancroft's Survey of the pretended holy Discipline cap. 22 23 24 25. and in his Book of Dangerous Positions and Proceedings published and practised within the Island of Britain under pretence for Reformation and for the Presbyterial Discipline In Bishop Bilson's Perpetual Government of Christ's Church Cap. 9 10. and Bishop Whitgift's Defence of the Answer to the Admonition Tract 17. pag. 627 628 629 630 c. against these it is their warmth and Argument is spent in Defence of the Rights of the King and Church in scorn and detestation of such those pretending Ignaro's Their words are these with a deal more to this purpose As though Christ's Soveraignty Kingdom and Lordship were no where acknowledged or to be found but where half a dozen Artisans Shoo-makers Tinkers and Taylors with their Preacher and Reader Eight or Nine Cherubins forsooth do rule the whole Parish So Bancroft Dangerous Positions c. l. 2. c. 2. That the King must submit to the Pastor and be content to be joyned in Commission with the basest sort of People if it please the Parish to appoint him and if over-ruled must be contented and the Prince loses all Autority in Ecclesiastical Matters and he must maintain and see executed such Laws Orders and Ceremonies as the Pastor with his Seniors shall make and decree So Bishop Whitgift ibid. p. 656 657. That the Church-warden and Syde-men in every Parish are the meetest Men that you can find to direct Princes in judging of Ecclesiastical Crimes and Causes a wretched state of the Church it must be that shall depend on such silly Governors as Husbandmen and Artisans Ploughmen and Craftsmen and we descend to the Cart for advice in Church-Government So Bishop Bilson Perpetual Government Cap. 10. and if thus in behalf of the Regal and Sacerdotal Power the Magistracy and the Ministry and which are the only Governors of the Church of Christ as they contend against these monstrous sort of People with their High-shoo'd feet and Clowns hands invading both the King and the Church be set as one man to oppose them and their distinct Powers not so nicely and distinctly stated at one time as they are and require an another and appear but as one Weapon that with present advantage it may be wellded against them this is to be imputed to the warmth and zeal of the Disputant whether as Aggressor or Defendant his settled particular judgment is to be fetch'd from his particular designed Decision and Determination in other Cases and when the naked Cause is alone and before him the immediate proper object of his Consideration and it must be confessed neither do I believe the great reason and choicer learning of that excellent Prelate were he now alive again could upon second thoughts extricate himself that Bishop Bilson's Argument against Lay-Elders Cap. 10. Pag. 148. and which Robert Parker so much twits him with is wide of a Conclusion and very ill laid it runs thus I cannot conceive how Lay-Elders should be Governors of Christ's Church and yet be neither Ministers nor Magistrates Christ being the Head and fulness of the Church which is his Body governeth the same as a Prophet a Priest and a King and after his Example all Government in the Church is either Prophetical Sacerdotal or Regal the Doctors have a Prophetical the Pastors a Sacerdotal and the Magistrates a Regal Power What fourth Regiment can we find for Lay-Elders All that can be said is this there appear'd an Argument against a Lay-Elder he was thought thus shut out from having any Place or Power as from Christ not considering the ill distribution of the offices of Christ in general and his bad-placed Successions and more especially the worser consequence that must attend a deriving the Magistrates Power from the Mediatorship and 't is what neither Whitgift nor Bancroft did Consider As a King Priest and Prophet he erected and settled his Church on Earth by virtue of that Commission and All Power given him of the Father Mat. 11. but he did not as such meddle with the Kingdoms on Earth as the Mediator he was himself a Subject and professed and practised Subjection and Obedience demanded only the Subjects right Protection by the Government he found established in the World by his Father But however the present Argument was wrong laid and whencesoever the Magistrates Power is derived 't is all along and by them all supposed and maintained quite different and apart from that of the Ministry or the Priesthood and they are asserted two quite diverse offices and their Powers do not reach to one another I 'le only now instance
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Flavianus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gennadius Evagr. Hist Eccl. lib. 1. cap. 8. lib. 2. cap. 11. lib. 5. cap. 16. So that if things by words are delivered to us which must be since we have not converse with one another as they tell us Angels have or private immediate infusions from God he speaks not to us inarticulately in Sounds and in Dreams as of old we have here the thing contended for in this Discourse viz. a real Autoritative Power in the Church independent equally as in the Empire neither Subordinate to one another The Argument and Evidence is as good as the Story is true and the reception of those Ages or as the truth of Matter of Fact can make it § XIII AND suitably the first and most ancient Councils which are come to our hands of the Christian Church have still owned the Empire and submitted to it in its full Latitude but yet still they reserved and asserted a Power within themselves which was neither derived from nor depended upon it in the execution and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the word they still express their Chair by they could make Sanctions and Constitutions oblige and bind the Conscience of themselves and without it the first great Council of Christendome they met indeed in the Name of the Emperor were summon'd by his Writ nor ought they personally and in Bodies collectively to Assemble without it but they acted and decreed in their own Names by their own Power and Autority were all their Synodical Determinations made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the great and first general Council of Nice and was the after-form of the Proceedings of the succeeding Councils which still confirm'd that first solemnly owning and receiving of it It seemed good to the Holy Synod to the Holy Bishops and Fathers there as the immediately following General Council at Constantinople explains it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a form but a little abating of that of the Apostles Synod Acts 15. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us and as their Power is distinct so is its Execution in different words and Penalties so as expressed for the most part by none else and in all never executed by any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arceri seu ejici ab Ecclesia à fraternitatis Communione relegari submoneri à limine omni tecto Ecclesiae Sacramento Benedictionis exauctorari Communione interdici abstineri depelli these are the words still expressing the Execution of this Church-Power as they are to be met with up and down in the Greek Councils and Greek and Latine Fathers many of which Mr. Selden has took the pains to Collect to our hands Lib. 1. De Synod Pag. 257. 259. and are to be seen also in an earlier Copy in the first Canon of the Seventh general Council held at Nicea there reckoned up and own'd as bottomed on the Autority of the Apostles Canons and the Six foregoing general Councils And the Bishops have a Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Con. 5. Concil Anciran 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as before in the first Nicene Council Can. 12. of absolving from and removing taking off such their Mulcts laid upon them either in whole or in part or adding farther degrees suitable as their repentance and amendment is perceiv'd and approved or not approved of and this Power asserted in the Church by the great Council of Nice and that of Ancyra is the great instance of the self-existing eminent independent underivable Power that is in the Church of Christ wholly in her self and in none else beside as having Power to punish and relieve to give Sentence and relax in her own breast this is what is not done in the Civil Judicatures where the Judge is in Deputation who cannot correct his Sentence once given make heavier or alleviate it that is only in Soveraign Power as the Lawyers speak but the Bishop can do it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Photius Nomocanon Tit. 9. cap. 1. 3. doctas videas nuperas Annotationes in Can. Niceae there was then believed and accounted a first and antecedent Right in the Church to make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Laws and Rules from which out of Contempt and Opposition there was not allow'd any Appeal to be made to the Empire or Secular Power or Judicatures unless by way of imploring Patronage for a better enquiry as not Canonically executed Can. 6. Concil 2. Gen. Constantinop Can. 107. Concil Carthag and he that proceeds otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not according to the Rules and Laws of the Church is to be cast out of her Communion if a Lay-man if a Presbyter or Deacon he is to be deposed never to be restored again never admitted but to Plead his Cause Conc. Antioch Can. 11 12. and the Clergy-man is not to leave his Bishop in Matters of Strife and go to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Power of the Realm is still call'd the Secular Judges or if he Appeal from his Bishop it may be only when the Case is with the Bishop himself as a Party and he is to appeal to the Provincial Synod or the Metropolitan Exarch or Patriarch Can. 9. Concil Gen. Chalcedon or he may ask and Petition the Emperor that he interpose with his Power over all Persons in all Causes for a farther Enquiry by the Bishop when Justice seems to be not understood or to be denied Can. 107. Conc. Carth. the Sin of Schism is still defined to be when a Presbyter makes a Congregation and makes an Altar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in despite and contempt of his Bishop Can. 31. Apost and so Can. 6. Concil Gen. Constantinopolit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they unite for Religious Services in opposition to their Bishop and Can. 31. Concil 6th in Trullo and Can. 5. Concil Antioch Can. 10. Concil Carthag 'T is more express If any Presbyter or Deacon contemns his own Bishop separates from the Church and makes a private Congregation and Altar and disobeys farther his Bishops Summons to render him accountable for so doing he is to be deposed and if he perseveres to make farther troubles in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Seditious Person the outward Secular Power is to Chastise him Can. 5. Concil Antioch where we have a thorow distinction of the two Powers with their Offices and the Canon goes before that of the Church is antecedent and therefore when Constantius went to cast some Bishops that were clamorous and contentious out of the Church Eleusius with Sylvanus and others told him That he had Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the outward Punishment what reach'd the Liberties and Advantage of his Person but 't was theirs to judge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Piety and Impiety Theodoret. Eccles Hist l. 2. c. 27. § XIV I know it will be here reply'd this was only the Judgment Declaration and Practice of the Churchmen themselves
that they had then been Excommunicated In Rom. 6.17 and in 1 Cor. 5.11 by the Keys of David he understands not only he that hath the Power of Death and Hell but he that hath Plenissimum Imperium the entire Power in the House of God as Eliachim had in the House of David Ad Apoc. 3.7 and then which what more can be desired by us and how consistent with himself any one may see I 'le only add the words of our Profound Mr. Thorndike in his Treatise of the Laws of the Church p. 395. He that in his Preface to his Annotations on the Gospel shall read him disclaiming whatever the Consent of the Church shall be found to refuse will never believe that he had admitted no Corporation of the Church without which no Consent thereof could have been observed And 't is I say from these his Annotations on the Gospels we are to find and know what are his Sentiments if any where he desires us to have recourse hither if we will read his other things with Profit in his Preface to the Reader Now that those above cited Treatises in which his Errors as to Church-Government are so visible were all wrote when he was young 't is certain and that he was too much pre-occupated and prejudiced by his Education and particular Converse and Business at Amsterdam in such his Youth follows in course and himself was afterwards sensible of and lamented it throughout his whole Life And thinks it less Candid and Ingenious in Andrew Rivette that he objects those things against him that he had wrote some times since Cum illi multarum rerum conspectum adimeret nimius Patriae amor cùm esset Parvulus loquebatur ut Parvulus when the over-much love to his Country did take from him the sight of many things When he was a Child he wrote as a Child Rivet Apol. Discuss Pag. 732. And it must be also very harsh and severe in us should we object against him that his particular Treatise of the Power of the Supreme Magistrate in Holy Things which that it is a Posthumous work 't is most apparent And farther That he disown'd it when it was wrote and never design'd it for the Press 't is more then probable especially if we give Credit to what account our Herbert Thorndike gives of it in his Laws of the Church the last Chapter That at his being in England he left it with two great Prelates of our Church Lancelot Lord Bishop of Winchester and John Lord Bishop of Norwich to peruse and both of them advising him not to Print it he rested in their Judgments and 't was laid aside till his Death And indeed that that Treatise was not the issue of a fixed Judgment but to serve a Party appears from the unevenness of the Discourse contradicting it self frequently and contending against the very design of it the great Argument of a raw imperfect confused Notion And particularly if we consider he was every ways an adherent to the Holland Remonstrants a sort of Men that in Prejudice to the Church so extremely flatter'd the Civil Magistrate as our Author makes it appear Ibid. suprà though he never drank so deep of the Cup as to take off the Dregs as he himself farther pleads to Rivet concerning some Presbyterian Tenents imbibed in his Youth Ibid. suprà and acknowledges much to the Mercies of God that when compassed round with their so great Power he could never be brought to Approve that which is proper to Calvinists Ibid. And how easily these things slide into Mankind how incredibly they work and how difficultly cast off Experience too much Evidences The Natural Love to a man's Country the Prejudice of his Education the higher Imployments in it its Applause and Acclamations All which Grotius had in a great measure The latter alone is able to spoil a Judgment it must do it where entertained and pursued and though he that reads over Grotius and says he is not the better for him such is his excellent and incomparable Notion must be either a great Fool or very ill natur'd yet 't is to be doubted some of these never quitted him quite his Theological Works lately Printed together give too great a Presumption all Amsterdam somewhere or other being to be found in them and every one may pick out or very near it his own Religion So fatal is it for Men of great Parts to set out without some first Principles as he did and frame their Scheme of Divinity to the present Notion and Conception no regard had to something receiv'd and certain So in course does it follow what in him is to be found and nothing could have done him so much right as in the setting out of his Works to have given account to the World of the particular time when they were each of them Composed and first made Publick All that I shall add more concerning Grotius is this In the pursuance of his assumed Notion of Supreme laid down by him in the Entrance to his Treatise De Imperio summarum Potestatum in Sacris and which is the chief occasion of his following Mistakes As To be Supreme is to be above all indefinitely in the full Latitude of things and where fixed and attributed to any one Person or Subject the very Design and Nature of the Expression will allow none to be excluded or exempted from a Submission and Subjection no other Power can be supposed and not in Subordinacy and Dependency upon to be and subsist without and besides it He is so unhappy as to fall into and pursue the same Mistake the Jesuit had done in Doctor Bilson's Book of Christian Subjection and Obedience in the Second Part who there thus argues against the Oath of Supremacy If Princes be Supreme Governors over all Persons in all Causes then in vain did the Holy Ghost appoint Pastors and Bishops to govern the Church then are they Superior to Christ himself in effect being Christ's Masters then may they prescribe which way to Worship God And goes on a little farther and declares his dislike to Supreme in the Oath because that word maketh Princes Superior to God himself for Supreme is Superior to all neither Christ's own Person nor his Church excepted Now I say this one and the same Notion of Grotius and the Jesuit if adhered unto and both will continue to allow it they are upon equal Grounds and with the same advantage sight against one another and the Combat may be Eternal only of Skirmishes and some Blows but no Victory on either side When Grotius goes along with our Church of England and makes his Magistrate Supreme in all Causes and over all Persons the Jesuite tells him That to be Supreme is above all to be Superior to all and he sets up his Prince above God and Christ and the Church when the Jesuit asserts the Supreme Power of the Church of God Grotius upon the same Ground replies the self-same thing upon
him That he exalts the Church-Power above God and Christ and the Magistrate as all their Masters And indeed according to these Mens Notions to apply the Superlative to any Person or Thing is the height of Blasphemy For why God is not excepted And the most common Phrases of a most Mighty Prince a most Holy Place a most Wise Counsellor are all instances of it nor can any one Attribute of Gods be otherwise applyed to the Creature Whereas if the Word be understood and used as in common use it is to be and in complyance with things it must be suitable to the present Subject it is assign'd and limited to and the particular things it is conversant with as under such and such Heads and Orders all is easie and plain Thus God is the alone Supreme all Rule Governance and Autority being originally in him and eminently Christ is Supreme as Head of the Church to whom all Power is given of the Father for bringing Mankind to Heaven the Apostles and their Successors the Pastors of the Church were and are now Supreme on Earth in the same Power derived from Christ by the Apostles unto them The Prince is Supreme and hath all Power from God committed unto him as to Government relating to this World over all Things Persons and Causes to appropriate or alienate to Endow Limit Restrain Coerce or Compel as the alone Supreme Law-giver upon Earth and none may oppose and the great and gyant Objection that is only wrangling about and mistaking of words falls to the ground as it is in it self nothing CHAP. IV. Chap. 4. The Contents The Objections answer'd Selden's Error that there are to be no other Punishments by Christ than was before and under the Law the Query is to be what Christ did actually constitute He mixes the Temporal Actions of the Apostles and those design'd for Perpetuity Adam and Cain might have more than a Temporal Punishment Sect. 1. The great Disparity betwixt the Jewish and Christian State considered no Inferences to be drawn from the one to the other but what is on our side Sect. 2. Theirs is the Letter ours the Spirit They Punish'd by Bodily Death we by Spiritual Sect. 3. If Government was judged so absolutely necessary by the dispersed Jews that they then framed one of their own for the present Necessity and whose Wisdom in so doing Mr. Selden so much admires it must blemish our Saviour much to say he purposely call'd together a Church and design'd it none of its own to preserve it Sect. 4. The Jews Excommunication was not bodily Coercive and then there may be such a Punishment an Obligation to Obedience without force and that is not outward and this much more in the Christian Society Sect. 5. And this their Government abstracted from the Civil Magistrate is an Essay of Christ's Government so far of the same Nature to come into the World Sect. 6. The Christian Church might be both from Caesar and Christ as was the Jewish from God and Caesar and there is no thwarting The Jews and Christians distinct Sect. 7. In answer to his main Objection That all Government must be of this World Sect. 8. It is replied To assert Christ to have such a Kingdom is to thwart his design of coming into the World the whole course of his Actions and Government and those Ancients that expected him to come and Rule with them on Earth yet did not believe it to be accomplished till after the Resurrection Sect. 9. To say he therefore has no Power at all is as wide of Truth the way of Men in Error to run from one extreme to another and of Mr. Selden here Sect. 10. The Church is a Body of a differing Nature from others Sect. 11. With differing Organs and Members of its own in Subordination to one another Sect. 12. With different Offices and Duties Gifts and Endowments these either Common to all Believers or limited to particular Persons Sect. 13. As Christians in common they had one Faith into which Baptized and of which Confession was made the Apostles Creed and other Summaries of Faith and sound Doctrine Interrogatories in Baptism How Infants perform it Sect. 14. They had one and the same Laws and Rules for Obedience for which they Covenanted which is their Baptismal Vow the Abrenunciation of the World the Flesh and the Devil Sect. 15. One Common Worship and Service and Religious Performance to God in their Assemblies the particular Offices and Duties there the Priest and People officiate interchangeably as in Tertullian Justin Martyr c. Sect. 16. Common Duties and Services as to God so to one another in supplying one anothers Necessities as occasion Sect. 17. In the supply of such as attended at the Altar by a Common Purse deposited in the hands of the Bishop Sect. 18. Of the Poor and Indigent whose Treasurer was the Bishop Sect. 19. The Power Offices and Duties not promiscuous but limited to particular Persons are those of the Ministry distributed into the three standing Orders of Bishop Presbyter and Deacon and which make up that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Gospel Priesthood to remain to the Restitution Sect. 20. This Power and Jurisdiction though limited to and residing in these three yet it is not in each of them alike in the same degree force and virtue the Deacon is lowest the Presbyter next the Bishop the full Orders and Vppermost Supreme and including all Sect. 21. Against this Primacy of Bishops that of Metropolitans Exarchy Patriarchy and the Supremacy of Rome is objected Sect. 22. The Metropolitan c. is in some Cases above the Bishop but not in the Power of the Priesthood 't is the same Power enlarged No new Ordination in Order to it Sect. 23. The Vniversal Primacy of the Bishop of Rome is but Pretended not bottom'd on either the Scriptures or Fathers or Councils Sect. 24. 25 26. The Bishops Superiority or full Orders and Power in the Church is reassumed and farther asserted He with his Presbyter or Deacon or some one of them are to be in every Congregation for the Presbyter or Deacon or both to assemble the People and Officiate and not under him is Schism The several instances of this Power of the Priesthood Sect. 27. To Preside in the Assemblies Pray give Thanks for Teach and Govern there No Extempore Prayers in those Assemblies Sect. 28. To Administer the Sacraments the Consecration of the Lords Supper by Prayer and Thanksgiving and Attrectation of the Elements Baptism by Lay-Persons Rebaptizations on what terms in the Ancient Church Confirmation Sect. 29. To Vnite and Determine in Council The use of Councils and Obligation Their Autority Declarative Autoritative Sect. 30. To impose Discipline the several instances and degrees of it in the Ancient Church Indulgencies and Abatements Sect. 31. To Excommunicate or cast out of the Church a Power without which the Church as a Body cannot subsist a natural Consequent to Baptism Priests not excommunicated
Church of Christ all Christian Bishops by whomsoever Consecrated and his Arm is to rule them whosesoever's Hands were laid upon them and this solitary and by himself nor is any one a sharer with or out of subjection to him To which I shall reply that though the distinction in it self will with very much difficulty be admitted of and the ordaining and governing Parts will be very rarely found asunder Nor do I believe there can be an instance given of but one Bishop who at his Consecration had the Power of governing left out of the Office in which that other of Ordination together with this were not design'd at once and transmitted though the Objects have many times been changed either enlarged or limited as they have been both suspended altogether yet allowing the distinction it may possibly do Estius this present Kindness lookt upon as a Disputant and oppressed with an Argument giving him the opportunity of something like an Answer and with some shew he may escape that severity of words and blacker censure he there acknowledges to be passed by St. Gregory in several Occasional Epistles against whomsoever it is shall style himself Universal Bishop or Bishop of all Bishops That the very Name is Prophane Proud Sacrilegious Diabolical a Name of Blasphemy and the forerunner of Antichrist and all this Estius there tells us was occasion'd from this Holy Father by reason of the Patriarch of Constantinople's Ambition in that Nature declaring that as the Emperor did alone hold the Empire and all Inferior Governors were sent by him and held of him the Head and not to do it was Usurpation and Treason so did he alone hold the Episcopacy and all Holy Orders were to descend and flow from him and to receive them and not from him was to climb up the wrong way and by intrusion come in But then what more right he has on his side or better Autority than Bellarmine has on his or how he can prove a solitary peculiar Care and Government demandated to and in its special Constitution settled on St. Peter and by his Succession at Reme or which way soever else it was over the Universal Church or whole Gospel-Priesthood so as to constitute him and them its immutable perpetual Head to Govern though not to Ordain them and which was not in the rest of the Apostles Persons to be sure not in their Succession this does not readily appear the Scriptures are favourers of both alike and indeed give to neither any bottom at all Nor does any such thing appear in the best Antiquity or succeeding Matter of Fact in his behalf no ill Argument of ever a Divine Right were it on their side § XXV THE first instance we have from the Ancients of this Pretended Power is in Victor Bishop of Rome in the year One Hundred ninety four who threatned Excommunication against the Asiaticks because they complied not with him in the Observation of Easter The Succession of the Bishops of Rome is all along delivered down in Church-History from the beginning to this day each Bishop particularized under the Title of Romanae Vrbis Episcopus Antistes c. there 's no one note of Singularity affixed unto him and this is the first time we meet with any thing like a Superiority there practised and at the most he is but ranked with the other Metropolitans Now whether this was attempted by Victor purely out of Zeal for an Apostolical Custom and we have many examples of Eminent Bishops that have intermeddled without their own Districts or whether as supposing himself really invested with a Power for Inspection and Animadversion upon all other Christian Bishops certain it is this his Power was disown'd and rejected by an eminent Branch of the Church Catholick and as eminent Bishops as any She had the Autority and Practice of St. John is set up and Pleaded against that of St. Peter as what every way balances nor doth it any way submit unto it And Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in France and none of the Quartodecimane but one who comply'd with Victor in the Observation of Easter yet asserts the Asiaticks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Self-Autority nor is any Foreign Power to over-rule and controle them or the Peace of the Church to be broken on such occasions all which is to be seen in Eusebius Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 23 24. and if we descend some time lower we shall not find any thing really more advantageous to him Constantine the Great Complements indeed Eusebius of Caesarea and tells him he is worthy of the Episcopale or Government of the whole Church De Vita Constant apud Euseb l. 9. c. 6. but that such an extent of Power was then in the Person of any one Bishop is no where said nor is there any probability to suppose it 'T is true that some Privileges have belong'd to the Bishop of Rome and which have been claimed as their due in good times Julius is very angry with the Clergy of Antioch that they did not call him to a Synod and urges it as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Law of the Church that whatsoever is done without the Bishop of Rome is to be void Sozom. Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 10. and in an Epistle of his to some whom he accuses of Contention and want of Charity not consulting the Peace of the Church in the cause of Athanasius he farther adds Are you ignorant that this is the Custom that we are first to be wrote to that what is just may hence be defined Inter. Athanas Opera Tom. 1. Ed. Paris Pag. 753. But then whatever this Privilege was that it did not arise from any Connatural Right to his See but Ecclesiastical Canon is most plain out of Socrates his Church History l. 2. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and he may not have so much for what Vallesius in his Annotations there can produce for it Which is the alone Autority of Ferrandus that is Christian Ammianus Marcellinus an Heathen an Historian that concerns himself as little with Christianity and Church Affairs as any one can be supposed to have done that attempted an History of the Times in which so much of the Church concerns its Power and Autority was Transacted as in the days of Constantius and Julian and whose times make up the best part of his Story The latter he studiously affects to represent to the World with what advantages he can both living and dying And for the Christian Religion he does not I am confident so much as name it Twenty times in all his Books and then accidentally and very slightly and the greatest advantage that he gives us is we have his Testimony that such a Sect call'd Christians was then in the World and for that particular passage quoted by Vallesius it makes if any thing against himself for he tells us That when Constantius the Emperor who is known to be Athanasius his great and mortal Enemy and mov'd every
stone to ruine him had procur'd the Sentence of a Synod against him licet Sciret impletam and which he knew was sufficient and cogent of it self yet he endeavour'd all he could thereby to render him lower and more contemptible to have it corroborated and confirm'd by that Autority Quâ potiuntur Aeternae Vrbis Episcopi which the Bishops of the Eternal City or of Rome did enjoy which Autority what it was is still in the dark for him there 's no mention of it in any one Degree and 't is mostly agreeable that he endeavour'd it as the more great and popular Bishops of the World by reason of that Vrbs aeterna as the City of Rome for its Pompous Magnificence is all along through that History call'd that eminent City the seat of their Residence Lib. 15. Pag. 75 76. Ed. Lugdun in Duodecimo nor does it from this whole History appear that there was then as not any distinct Power so nor any but Title affixed to the Bishops of Rome which other Christian Bishops had not The Bishops in general are called Christianae legis Antistites and Liberius of Rome has but the same Title or that of Episcopus Romanus and Vrbis aeternae Episcopi is what the whole Succession is call'd by Ibid. suprà Et lib. 20. Pag. 261. lib. 22. p. 329. AND now the whole of the Matter is driven § XXVI into this one Point or narrower room what the Power and Extent of this Church-Law or Canon Ecclesiastical was in what sense it was imposed own'd and receiv'd in the Church If universally and what was design'd for all Christendom and obliging let them produce the Rule it is not to be found in any thing yet we have consider'd and then reconcile it with the general Practice of the Church which appears another thing and to enlarge this Power whatever that above mentioned is as claim'd by the Bishop of Rome beyond a limited Exarchy or Primacy or that it any ways reaches to Antioch is to go beyond the whole Story Ecclesiastical in any tolerable Age of it 'T is to go beside the Acts of every General Council upon every occasion and all the Imperial Courses and Proceedings in point of Jurisdiction when the state came into the Church engaged for its Governance and Jurisdiction and turnâ—d their Canons into Laws There is nothing in any one Council whether General or Topical that either refers to determines actually or but implies any such thing unless what was foysted into the Canons of the first Council of Nice and recommended to the Council of Carthage for an Approbation with the rest of those Canons by Faustinus an Italian Bishop and Legate of Rome be since made Canonical Sure we are it was then detected and exploded for a Cheat by the Holy Bishops of that Council and who there and then disown'd the Superior Universal Power in the Bishop of Rome all which with the several Circumstances is to be seen in the opening of the Synod The See of Rome is still represented as but equal and in the same rank with the other Four great Churches of Christendom and its Bishop neither Presides in the Councils nor Over-rules in the Definitions of Christendom nor is the Autority any ways defective upon his absence or if convented without his License than upon the absence of or when not licensed by any other Bishop There is not an Instance of any one Reference or Appeal in Church-Affairs but still the either Patriarch Exarch Metropolitan Primate or Private Bishop is to accommodate and rectifie all as the alone Judges and Determiners under a Synod of Bishops or a Council and if new Canons be wanting 't is the Imperial Direction that the Bishop of Constantinople and the Convention of Priests be convened to consider of and to make them Cod. Justin l. 1. Tit. 2.6 Et Cod. Theodos 16. l. 45. Tit. 2. As for that of the Council of Sardica Can. 3. 4. and which seems to favour the Bishop of Rome in the right of hearing and adjusting Foreign Causes not to make any Reflexions on the Synod it self whatsoever it is 't is bottomed neither on Scriptures nor ancient Tradition or Custom but seems in particular Cases to be allow'd him for the honour of St. Peter nor can we believe it could run against the different Determinations of general Councils if so 't is to be of no Autority particularly the first of Nicea considering also that Hosius was President both at Nice and here I shall add it cannot be conceiv'd to run against it self whose Tenth Canon places the top and uppermost of all Church-Power in the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which is not consistent with a Superior Order in the Church fixed and immutable whether as to Jurisdiction and Ordination or Government only As Bellarmine and Estius are not agreed and those several Exempts we have an account of in Church Story 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and govern'd within themselves as Cyprus Bulgaria Iberia Anglia whatever they relate to and so called in respect of whether Patriarchacies Exarchies or this pretended Monarchy Universal or howsoever they came so to be they are Evidence sufficient against this claim of Rome and that every Church is not therefore Schismatical because disowning a dependency upon her especially if we reflect how strongly these Privileges are contended for in the Eighth Canon of the Council of Ephesus occasion'd by some Usurpations attempted upon Cyprus in particular and 't is there made Law that no inrode be made upon them And that which is farther considerable is that among all the Orders and Directions issued out to Church-men by the Empire for the executing the Canons and preserving the Discipline of the Church the Persons in Charge are the Bishops Metropolitan or Patriarch the Bishop under the Metropolitan the Metropolitan under the Patriarch and the Patriarch is always last and uppermost and 't is very strange to reflect that if there was an Order above these a Power Universal residing in any one Person with a care over all the Churches in Christendom so setled by Laws Ecclesiastical and Superior to all the afore-mentioned Orders in Jurisdiction and Government and this Person and Power should still be overlook't and disregarded no one Direction and Application made unto him in the Affairs so immediately his of his Charge and Inspection and this too in the days of Justinian especially since whatever was done by the Empire was in Prosecution of what was Church-Law and Canon before according to the Appointments and Decisions of it And that this is all so 't is most manifest in our Church Story Acts of Councils and particularly the Proceedings Imperial in the two Codes and the Novels Vid. Cod. Justinian lib. 1. Tit. 3.43.2 Novel 5. Epilog Novel 6. Cap. 3. Epilog alibi saepius Not that the Empire was shye in giving the See of Rome any Power or Title was its due as it must be acknowledg'd very great things were
own'd and attributed as hers in those days of the Church Justinian writing to John Patriarch of Old Rome as he there stiles him and his See Novel 9. says enough of the See it self Sortita est ut Originem legum ita summi Pontificatûs apicem nemo est qui dubitet And he goes on and calls Rome Patriam Legum Fontem Sacerdotii veneranda Sedes summi Apostoli Petri. She is the venerable Seat of the chief Apostle St. Peter the top of the Pontificate the Mother of Laws and Fountain of the Priesthood By all which thus much is only imply'd That Eminent and Renowned was that See at that time great and huge her Care and Service in the Church of God something peculiar was effected but that the Original Power and Autority was special also and by which she acted none other equalling of her this cannot be granted The Applications and Instructions for Government had then in course been accordingly which we have observed was to none higher than the Patriarch And let but Justinian explain himself as 't is all the reason in the world he should have leave so to do and all will be plain and easie Papa veteris Romae est Caput omnium Sacerdotum Dei vel eò maximè quod quoties in iis locis haeretici pullularunt Sententiâ recto judicio illius Sedis coerciti sunt Cod. l. 1. Tit. 1.7 The Pope of Old Rome is the Head of all the Priests of God upon this account especially that in those Places or within his Districts Heresies did spring up and by the Sentence and right Judgment of that Venerable Seat they were Suppressed meaning he was more expedite and happy strenuous and successful than other Bishops in such those like Undertakings Otherwise Peter of Alexandria as well as Damasus of Rome are proposed as Leaders and Examples of the Catholick Faith in that very Code Title And the Four first General Councils of Nice Constantinople c. are the Conviction of Hereticks and such reputed Hereticks that refuse Communion not with the Bishop of Rome but with Procerius of Alexandria Tit. 5. Ibid. 8.3 And so 't is again Cod. Theodos 16. Tit. 1. l. 16. and this very often elsewhere and these very Complements or rather due Characters we have here given to the Bishop of Rome we find given also to much privater Bishops on the like Occasions for their particular learning Piety and Service in the Church So Acholius is called by St. Ambrose murus fidei And Gregory Nazianzen calls St. Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which are produced by Jacob Gothofred in his Comments on the fore-mentioned place and no Inserences of a solitary appropriate Power and Jurisdiction was ever thence inferr'd or but attempted But this is the usual proceeding with the Romanist Zelot from some one or more occasional Character Power Concession or particular Priviledge devolved granted and affixed on the Bishop of Rome to deduce general Rules and manage them to a Perpetuation give them in charge as standing marks and Laws immutable exclusive to all others What if Athanasius did Appeal to Rome in his Cause was it that none else could equally hear and legally determine it He fled thither perhaps as Sozomen tells us his Successor Peter did because of the same Faith with him Lib. 2. Hist Eccl. cap. 22. or rather because his Vogue and Autority was more in the World than that of Eugubium the far abler to Protect and give Autority to his Sentence given for him as no one in England but would fix upon Canterbury rather than Landasse had he the like occasion Besides each Bishop as such has the Care of the Universal Church committed unto him 't is given in his Orders And since the several Districts by after Laws particular Bishops have oft interposed and intermedled by their Care for some Churches and Proceedings foreign to their particular Exarchies or Bishopricks and 't is recorded as their true Zeal and Merit of which we have abundance of instances given us by Spalatensis De Repub. Eccl. l. 2. c. 7. Sect. 6 7 8 9 c. and which might be the Motive in the case of Holy Athanasius The Council of Sardica gives something to Rome for the honor of St. Peter And how the Cyprians have gain'd much for the honor of St. Barnabas because his Reliques were found in their Island with the Gospel of St. Matthew upon his Breast fairly written with his own hand we are informed Lib. 2. Tripart Hist Eccl. Theodori Lectoris set forth by Vallesius at the end of the Ecclesiastical Histories Their Metropolis thereby became free and independent as much as Rome it self not subject to Antioch as formerly Peter upon whom by the favour of our Lord the Church is founded This is the usual saying of St. Cyprian Peter James and John are the Pillars of the Church and upon them is the Foundation of the Church laid So St. Jerome Comment in Galat. Cap. 2. with more to the same purpose and any one that is but a little skill'd in St. Cyprian and the Church-Affairs by him transacted will not easily believe that he resolved his Faith into the Bishop of Rome his own Opinion together with them of Carthage where he was Arch-Bishop about Rebaptization are too notorious Evidences to the contrary and no one gives to St. Peter and his Succession more glorious Epithetes than he all along does And that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Privileges attributed to Rome and in which Constantinople is to be second Can. 3. Conc. Gen. Constantinop are not of real Power but only of Place and Honorary is plain from the 36 Can. Conc. in Trullo For the same Privilege Rome hath before Constantinople Constantinople has before Alexandria and Alexandria has before Antioch and Jerusalem is the lowermost Neither of which Four are pretended by any nor will the Church of Rome to be sure admit to have any thing of real Power over one another I shall end this Section and all that I have to say on this Head with that of the 42 Can. Conc. Carthag 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That the first Bishop or Bishop of the first Seat be not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prince of Priests or the chief Priest but only the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the first Seat and which first Seat that it is in no manner dependent on Rome and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so often mentioned in the following Canons ows not thither any Appeals nor can the Bishop of Rome wrest the Audience out of his hands is so clearly the sense of that Council that nothing can be more it being there Positively and on set purpose decided and determined against him upon the detection of that Fraud of the Bishop of Rome's design'd upon them in the very Case and but just now by me mentioned or more plainly in the Scholia on Aristenus upon that Canon The Dignity of the
Priesthood is one and the same in all and this shall not be called the chief Priest and that a Priest less Perfect but all are equally Priests all equally Bishops as who all have equally receiv'd the Gift of the Holy Spirit the Metropolitan Bishop as having the first Chair with addition shall be called Bishop Metropolitan or which seems mostly apposite for a present Conclusion if any thing can be more than that which is already brought in the sense of those three Bishops Can 8. Conc. Gen. Ephes Whatsoever is nominated contrary to the Ecclesiastical Laws and the Canons of the Holy Fathers and which toucheth the common liberty of Christians is to be renounced and rejected § XXVII I shall now therefore resume what I have already laid down and prov'd at large that those of the Bishop are the full Orders every one instance of Power design'd for the standing lasting use of the Church is in his and consequently is he uppermost in the Church can there be no one branch or design of Power above and beyond him this his Power in some instances of it hath been by consent and for weighty Reasons moving intermitted and suspended in the execution as to the Persons of particular Bishops where the Church increased and multiplied into various Bishopricks and occasions grew and causes arose betwixt one and the other or sometimes arose in one alone and within it self which could not be heard and determined but by different Persons thus Metropolitans were constituted but with no new Power which was not in Episcopacy nor was there any new Consecration only so much devolved upon one for the occasional business An occasion of which we have in part set down by Hosius in the entrance of the Council of Carthage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. if by chance an angry Bishop though such an one ought not to be is over-sharp against a Presbyter or Deacon or over-sudden care is to be taken for better satisfaction and he may appeal to a neighbour-Bishop who is not to deny him audience And that Bishop who first gave Sentence whether right or wrong is to bear the Examination and his Animadversions to be either confirmed or corrected as occasion or else the Bishop derives so much of this Power to the two Orders below him as the Presbyter and Deacon whose Power is more solemnly conveigh'd by laying on of Hands and Prayer and then conferr'd so fixing a Character indelible save only by that Power which devolved it and upon a succeeding Guilt and which for themselves to lay down and desert is Sacriledge and these sent out by the Bishop as is the Harvest great or small so more or less in number in subjection to and dependency upon him So that the standing Church Officers are these the Metropolitan which is only a Bishop with larger Jurisdiction and with the execution of a Power the Bishop has not and the naked Bishop with his Presbyter and Deacon in the ordinary course of officiating in order to Salvation and which three or some one or more of them as is the occasional Service are still to be present and in their spheres and courses according to their several proper Provinces and Offices as already described and particularized to attend and officiate in each Holy Assembly in every Congregation that is Publick and Christian where the Worship and Service of God is so performed as by the rules of the Gospel is order'd and appointed Thus Tertullian among the many absurdities of his time reckons up this Laicis munia sacerdotalia injunâ—unt the Lay-men undertake the Priestly office De Praescript cap. 41. the 〈…〉 the People united Sacerdoti suo to their Priest and a Flock with their Pastor Cypr. lib. 4. Ep. 9. that is no Church quae non habet Sacerdotem which has no Priest as St. Jerom. adv Luciferianos And he that reads over St. Austin's Sermon super gestis cum Emerito Donatist Episcopo Col. 631. will there find a great many Divine Services and all without acceptance and advantage because thus extra Ecclesiam without the Church no one belonging to the Priesthood there officiating for them The Church of God is either Episcopatus unus Episcoporum multorum concordi numerositate dâ—ffusus as St. Cyprian again speaks Ep. 52. that one Episcopacy diffused and overspreading the World in the Union and Concord of its numerous Bishops and these either make a general Council or are under their several Metropolitans and are the Church representative or else it is in Episcopo clero omnibus stantibus constituta as Cyprian again Ep. 27. Cum Episcopis Presbyteris Diaconis stantibus Ep. 31. in the Bishop and Clergy the Presbyter Deacon and Laity the latter expressed by the stantes the People standing without in the time of officiating according to the ancient Ecclesiastical Custom And so also Optatus lib. 1. adv Parmen Donatist speaks of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons and turbam fidelium the Believers in general Si tantummodo Christianus es hoc est non Apostolus Tertul. adv Marc. cap. 2. such as were Christians at large and not Publick Officers nor of the Priesthood and this as Members of a particular Church Parish or Congregation or however as relating to the publick Service of God to be discharged by all Christians and which cannot duly be perform'd without the Bishop in Person or in his Proxies by his Power lodged in the Presbyter or Deacon Thus he is called a Schismatick that erects an Altar without the consent of the Bishop Can. 3. Apost even though the Confession of Faith is otherwise sound If thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if thus dividing from and meeting against his Autority Can. 6. Conc. gen Constantinop the very Clergy themselves are not to administer in their Oratories without license had of the Bishop Can. 31. Conc. 6. in Trullo And to the same purpose is Schism again desined a recession from the Bishop erecting an Altar against an Altar Can. 13 14 15. Conc. 1 2. Constantin Can. 57. Conc. Carthag and Can. 6. Conc. Gangrens as the Church is there defined a Congregation of the Faithful with their Bishop so is it there peremptorily determined that the Anathema or Curse is due to those that privately and apart from these do convene and congregate themselves Nor is it Schism only but Heresie also so reputed by the imperial Constitution Sacram Communionem in Ecclesia Catholica non percipientes à Deo amabilibus Episcopis Hereticos justè vocamus We justly call them Hereticks that do not receive Communion in the Catholick Church from the Bishops which are beloved of God for as such they were then look'd upon and that more eminently than others in the then Christian account and it was the Bishop's common Epithete Deo amabiles Episcopi however the opinion and style of them is now alter'd Justinian Novel 109. Praefat. And now these Church-Officers being thus set out and enumerated what their peculiar
experienced the advantage of their Communion for a good while would be sensible of the loss be apprehensive of the sorrow and burden of it and that all Excommunications were not to take effect in the first times of the Church we have Origen for an example who when excommunicated by Demetrius with the assistance of other Bishops continued still a Presbyter and publickly associated as such And Vallesius annot in Euseb hist l. 6. c. 23. gives these two Reasons for it because his Sentence was denounced when absent and he had not legal Citations and it was not confirmed by the Bishop of Rome though to me a more probable reason may be given than either for the illegality of the proceeding and the no effect it had the ancient Canons of the Church still forbidding any one of the hieratical Order whether Bishop Presbyter or Deacon to be excommunicated Excommunication was the Punishment for the Laity the Clergies was Deposition nor were the Clergy subject to the other till removed from the Priesthood And certainly then much less can it be conceived in reason and as agreeable with the common courses of foresight and discretion that other things are managed in the Gospel with that this Ordinance should on such terms be instituted and put in execution as to reach Kings themselves and with less regard and consideration than to Persons in Holy Orders and be concluded more peremptorily and immediately to take effect upon them as if inconveniences and that over-ballance whatever the proposed advantage may be may not here be a consequent also Princes 't is true are equally subject to the Laws of Christ and his Church and they must come to Heaven in the same Path that the meanest of their Subjects do come in they are to be urg'd and taught publickly as are others and particularly in private and where due opportunity to be severely warned of but then upon a supposed failure to proceed to an open publick Exclusion this if in any one instance else ought first to be weigh'd and consider'd whether it be likely to have due effect to be for the good of the Church in general which his outward arm alone can protect and whether instead of reducing him as to his Person it may not much more harden him and especially since his Person falls under no farther Coercion than his engagements to Christianity lay upon him Examples of Kings are strangely influential and prevailing and whether a greater deluge of Prophaneness may not be let in by so doing or again whether the exposing him to shame and contumely would not withal expose his reputation to the contempt of his People and thus not only Religion and Morality but the outward Peace and Quiet of the Realm might be exposed to danger and the both Church and State be liable to inrodes and violence thereby we believe it to be what was appointed by God and supposed by our Saviour in the lay and frame of our Christianity that the Secular Power receive no abatement but on the contrary every of its Prerogatives be strengthen'd by its spreading over and reception in the World Since every other relation is to continue and be obliging so also must this of Kings which came into the World with the first is connate and coaevous with Paternity the Foundation was laid for both at once and Kings and Subjects are to remain so long as Fathers and Children the race of Mankind is on Earth continued and suitably to this first contrivance no sooner did the Empire come in to the Church and engage in Christianity but Emperors declared themselves and the Church joyfully receiv'd them for its Nursing Father and the Prince is the Supreme Governor there the Laws and Judicatures are the Kings and our Bishops give Citations in their own Names but by an antecedent Power derived from and by the Prince devolved unto them And the Bishops of old were so far from assuming to themselves any such outward Coercive Power as to make Citations of mens Persons to proceed by Court Process and Penal Mulcts that when they laid the Plot for Lay-Deputies Chancellors Commissaries Officials or whatever title they went under to sit in their Courts and give occasional Judgments for what private reasons I cannot tell but the pretended is this that it was less decent that they being Spiritual Persons should mingle themselves in Secular Affairs they could not constitute such their Deputies nor erect such an Order but by a special Grant and Seal from the Emperor a firm Argument that the Power was not originally theirs and they suitably supplicate him in order to it and he yields to their demand but gives a Caution that the Church be not dammaged thereby a thing in course to be suspected and perhaps the advantage the Church has since had that the Courts for her Justice are the Bishops and her Causes fall not immediately under a Secular Cognitor are so little and inconsiderable that though the first Piety and royal Indulgence is apparent yet the present benefit is hardly discernible at this day among us Vid. Cod. 16. Theodos Tit. 2. l. 38. and the Story is to be seen at large in the Commentaries of Jacob Gothosâ—red upon that Law And can we now with any shew of Reason suppose that in the design of our Saviour and the execution of Church Power no regard is to be had to the Prince and that Proceedings are to be alike as upon other Persons and promiscuously though all so far under the same Circumstances as equally Members of the same Association for Heaven Those rules of Policy which were contrived complyed with and submitted to in the first planting the Gospel seem not consistent with such an after-practice a Presbyter was not to be Excommunicated till first deposed and yet then shall each single Presbyter Excommunicate his Prince I do not say till deposed as was by the ancient Canons the Presbyter to be and then Excommunicated for that is what no Power on Earth can do and the Church of God never pretended to it 't was what she always abhorred but that the Considerations must needs weigh more and be much rather cogent that the censure go not out against a Prince and greater inconveniences must hence follow whatever they were the ancient Church did apprehend to be a consequent to the other and the common foresight of things could not also allow it The single Corinthian was Excommunicated by St. Paul when the whole Body of them each one full of iniquity had not the like Animadversions from him and what may not be connived at in him who is more than ten thousand and by which there is less Security that the edge of the censure will not be more abated and dulled thereby in whom is all Strength and Power in whose hand it is to expose all to the malice and violence of the Enemy to reduce the Church so near to the first state under the Heathens and which condition though it is
Constitutiones Ecclesiasticae 1597. ut homines idonei ad sacros ordines admittantur IT were needless Pains to insist on and § IV shew the particular judgment of our Church Whether this Power be in her Pastors alone exclusive to as the People so the Prince also the Rubricks in the Common-Prayer Book suppose and farther invest all Offices there in the Hieratical Order what ever relate to the Divine Worship and Service and which are by them alone to be perform'd the Prjest is still distinguished from the People or Laity nor is the Prince there considered but as of the Laity in attendance in Common with the other Worshippers and to be sure in the Book of Ordination 't is the Bishop lays on Hands and Consecrates he the origin and head of all Power derived whether to Bishop Presbyter or Deacon and in what degree soever of Power it is that is given That Person which by open denunciation of the Church is rightly cut off from the Vnity of the Church and excommunicate ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the Faithful as an Heathen and Publican until he be openly reconciled by Penance and received into the Church by a Judg that hath Autority thereunto as among the Articles of Religion 1562. Article 33. and this Judg is neither Chancellor Official nor Commissary c. but a Bishop or Presbyter the Arch-Deacon cannot do it if not a Presbyter and but in Deacon's Orders in these alone is the Power of both retaining and absolving in the Articuli pro clero 1584. and the libri quorundam Canonum c. and in the constitutiones Ecclesiasticae 1597. and all set out by Queen Elizabeth he that would once for all be satisfied what is the sense of our Church let him but once read over our seven and thirthieth Article of Religion together with the occasion of it and he must be convinced that her Judgment is on our side however 't is received whether as Orthodox or Erroneous by him Among other Articles agreed upon by the Bishops and other learned Godly Men in the Convocation held at London 1552. this was one The King of England is supreme Head in Earth next under Christ of the Church of England and Ireland Many bad Inferences were made and sinister Consequences affixed and particularly that the King was declared a Priest impower'd to administer in Divine Service In the Reign of Queen Elizabeth 1561. and till which time during the Reign of Queen Mary the Objection to be sure had been urged sufficiently and improved a Convocation being called and Articles agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the 37th Article and in answer to the Objection they more fully explain themselves in these Words and declare The Queens Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes do appertain and is not nor ought not to be subject to any foreign Jurisdiction Where we attribute to the Queens Majesty the chief Government by which Titles we understand the Minds of some dangerous Folk to be offended We give not our Princes the ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testifie but that only Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all Godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himself that is that they should rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their Charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restraining with the Civil Sword the stubborn and Evil doers AND this is all is laid claim to by our § V Princes themselves and that the Statute-book or any other claim of theirs entitles to and invests them withal in the late collection of Articles Canons c. made by Anthony Sparrow now Lord Bishop of Norwich I meet with nothing done by King Henry VIII save what is mentioned by King Edward VI. in the entrance to his Injunctions 1547. and which are there transcribed with his own additions the design and end of which is only to procure publick and general obedience to the Laws and Duties of true Religion and that every Man truely observe them as they will avoid his Displeasure and Penalties annexed All that Henry VIII got by the submission of the Clergy in the five and twentieth year of his reign cap. 19. was this as there set down in the Statute That the Clergy would not for the time to come assemble in convocation without the King 's Writ That they would not enact promulge or execute any new Canons Constitutions Ordinance provincial or other or by whatsoever Name they shall be called in Convocation unless the King 's Royal license be had his Assent and Consent in that behalf That all Canons Constitutions before made prejudicial to the King's Prerogative Royal repugnant to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm or overmuch onerous to the Subject be abrogated and of no value all other standing in their full strength and power the King's Assent first had unto them The meaning of all which appears only to be this That nothing relating to Church-Affairs and Proceedings is to be made Law or to be proceeded for or against in any outward Court whatever in a forensick judicial way but by the leave and autority of the King without his Royal Assent first had and his hand set to it And this is that Title of the supreme Head of the Church of England which he hereupon assum'd to himself and which some little time afterwards confirm'd to him in full Parliament his Heirs and Successors the Power of the Church it self is not at all abated as purely such and from our Saviour only brought to a dependency upon the King which before was upon the Bishop of Rome and who had exercised here that headship and still claims it § VI AND that this was really all the King then aim'd at by the submission of the Clergy viz a Right and Supremacie of Inspection over all Persons in all Causes within his Realms and Dominions and that no Pleas of Religion or the service of Christ is to exempt them from the judicial Cognizance and Jurisdiction of their Prince this will appear more plain and evident by the several Proceedings and Acts concerning Church-Affairs made by this King in that 19 cap. and five and twentieth year of his Reign where the submission of the Clergy is turned into an Act and in the several Acts ensuing in all which it does not appear that he ever assumed to himself and exercised any other than such like external Power and Autority in spiritual Matters he intermedles not with any one Instance of Priestly Power as purely such but on the contrary cautions with Clauses and Preventions lest any such thing should be or be supposeable so
Castelvetrus her second Husband as Mr. Selden suggests or by the Archbishop himself what is necessarily hence to be inferr'd I 'le here again give in the words of our always to be reverenced Mr. Herbert Thorndike of the Laws of the Church Cap. Vlt. Pag. 394. Neither is the Publishing Erastus his Book against Excommunication at London to be drawn into the like Consequence that those who allow'd and procur'd it allow'd the substance of what he maintain'd so long as a sufficient Reason is to be rendred for it otherwise for at such time as the Presbyterian Pretences were so hot under Queen Elizabeth it is no marvel if it was thought to shew England how they prevail'd at home first because he hath advanced such Arguments as are really effectual against them which are not yet nor never will be answered by them though void of the Positive Truth which ought to take place instead of their Mistakes and besides because at such times as Popes did what them listed in England it would have been to the purpose to shew the English how Machiavel observes they were hamper'd at home and for the like Reason when the Geneva Platform was cried up with such Zeal here it was not amiss to shew the World how it was esteem'd under their own Noses in the Cantons and the Palatinate § XVII I am now to shew the concurrency of our Doctors in the Church and who still go along with me and say the same thing that Church Power as such is not from the Civil Magistrate and his supremacy in all Causes and over all Persons infers it not an induction would be too numerous the Particulars being so many I 'le only instance in two the one is Thomas Bilson then Warden of Winchester and afterward Bishop there in his Book entituled The true difference between Christian Subjection and un-christian Rebellion perused and allowed by publick Autority and dedicated to Queen Elizabeth and for writing of which he had his Bishoprick the other is Robert Sanderson then the King's Professor at Oxford and after Bishop of Lincolne in his Book called Episcopacie as establed by Law in England not prejudicial to the Regal Power written in the time of the long Parliament by the special Command of King Charles the I. but not published by reason of the Iniquity and Confusion of the Times and since printed and dedicated to our present gracious Soveraign King Charles II. two Divines as they flourished in our Church at a great distance of time from one another so are they at as great distance for their Worth and Merit beyond the generality of the Divines of their times and by which as we have the advantage of their greater Autority as to themselves to which add That they acted herein as publick Persons by Autority appointed to write in the Name of the Church of England and in such Cases Men generally are more careful how they vent their own private Niceties and Conceptions so also have we a farther benefit hereby that this was and is the continued constant Doctrine of our Church and Church-Men from Queen Elizabeth to King Charles II. Bishop Bilson thus speaks part 2d pag. § XVIII 124. printed at Oxford It is one thing who may command for truth and another who shall direct unto truth We say Princes may command for Truth and punish the refusers this no Bishop may challenge but only the Prince that beareth the Sword no Prelate has Autority from Christ to compel private Men much less Princes but only to teach and instruct them these two Points we stand on pag. 125. 126. he tells the Jesuite the Prince is Supreme to establish those things Christ has commanded and so he all along shews it the design of the Oath of Supremacy against the pretended outward Jurisdiction of the Pope claiming as Christ's Vicar on Earth a coercive Power in order to spiritual things over the Persons of all Christians whatsoever whose Subjects soever and in whatsoever Causes even our Kings themselves And that it is no more thence to be inferr'd that Princes because supreme Governors over all Persons in all Causes are therefore supreme Judges of Faith Deciders of Controversies Interpreters of Scripture Appointers of Sacraments Devisers of Ceremonies and what not then if it should be inferr'd Princes are supreme Governors in all Corporal things and causes ergo they are supreme Guiders of Grammar Moderators of Logique Directors of Rhetorick Appointers of Musick Prescribers of Medicines Resolvers of all Doubts and Judges of all Matters incident any wayes to reason art or action We confess them to be supreme Governors of their Realms and Dominions and that in all Spiritual things and causes not of all Spiritual things and causes we make them not Governors of the Things themselves but of their Subjects we confess that her Highness is the only Governor of this Realm the Word Governor doth sever the Magistrate from the Minister and sheweth a manifest difference between their Office for Bishops be no Governors of Countries Princes be these bear the Sword to reward and punish those do not pag. 127. They have several Commissions which God signed those to dispense the Word and Sacraments these to prescribe by their Laws and punish by the Sword such as resist them within their Dominions pag. 128. That no Clergy-Man by God's Law can challenge an exemption from earthly Powers pag 129. Princes have full Power to forbid prevent and punish in all their Subjects be they Lay-Men Clerks or Bishops not only Murders Thefts Adulteries Perjuries and such like Breaches of the second table but also Schisms Heresies Idolatries and all other Offences against the first Table pertaining only to the Service of God and Matters of Religion pag. 130. as the Kings of Israel did who are the Christian Princes example pag. 132. and it is the duty of Christian Kings to compel from Heresies and Schisms to the confession of the truth consent of Prayer and Communion of the Lord's Table to compel Hereticks and Schismaticks to repress Schism and Heresie with their princely Power which they receive from above chiefly to maintain God's glory by the causing the Bands of Virtue to be preserved in the Church and the Rules of Faith observed pag. 133. this is the Prince's charge to see the Law of God fully executed his Son rightly served his Spouse safely nursed his House timely filled his Enemies duely punished and he tells the Jesuite if he grants this he will ask no more And these the causes and things that be Spiritual as well as Temporal the Princes power and charge doth reach unto or in the words of St. Austin that Princes may command that which is good and prohibit that which is evil within their Kingdoms not in Civil Affairs only but in Matters that concern divine Religion Cont. Crescon l. 3. c. 51. pag. 134. to page 145. and this or power of the like nature was what was claimed and used in causes Ecclesiastical which
be in part a great untruth and both Athanasius Synod Nicen. Cont. heres Arian decreta p. 277 278. Ed. paris et Ep. de Synod Arimini et Seleuciae p. 889. Ep. ad ubique Orthodoxos c. p. 943. and Theodorit Eccl. hist l. 1. c. 5. 12. refer them to the Writings of the eminent Bishops and Doctors who lived an hundred and twenty years before the Synod of Nice and then used this Word Consubstantial in explaining the Divinity of the Father and the Son and 't is what Sandius in effect confesses only he thinks it for the dishonor of the Cause that all the Hereticks that were in the Church before Arius were Homousians hist Enucleat l. 1. and which in truth is only this the worst of Hereticks did not arrive to that height of impudence as to deny so received an acknowledgment in the universal Church Yet what Athanasius replyes upon Arius himself Tom. 1. disputat cum Ario pag. 134. making the Objection is a better answer here that what was in the Council asserted and declared was alwaies in the Scriptures by way of consequence and occasion was not given the Church till the rise and spreading of that Heresie for that particular and precise explication Heresies and Novelties must be and 't is the work of Councils to detect and determine against them but there would be mad work in the Church should that go for Innovation which an upstart Heresie forces the Church in new Terms to state and declare against and explain themselves thereby it must be declamed against as defective in Autority and Precedents because former Doctors had not sagacity enough the very Apostles had not Spirit of Prophecy enough to anticipate the Fictions of every Brain so to word it before-hand that the particular Heresie in its Nicety must be antidated and pre-abide upon Record bassled and contradicted He that reads over St. Jerome lib. 1. Cont. Jovinianum will find him there so urging Chastity as if Marriage it self was a sin and which that Father never design'd as his Opinion and Dailee confesses that he only speaks comparatively and is so to be understood as do and are to be many more of the Fathers cap. 5. de usu patrum though he will not allow it him in other Cases and when to serve his own particular Design of him I mean as to his Judgment of Episcopacy and will have his Epistle ad Evagrium and his Comments on Titus to the same purpose to be absolute and with no regard to those great even just Provocatious from the Bishops in preferring the Deacon before the Presbyters who as he well argues are of so much more Power and higher Order in the Church as that a Bishop is oft call'd a Presbyter in Scripture and Antiquity when so injurious were the Bishops to the Presbyters and so partial to the Deacons and indulgent that the Deacons scorn'd the Presbyters Order qui ignorantes humilitatem status sui ultra Sacerdotes hoc est Presbyteros intumescunt 〈◊〉 putent si Presbyter ordinetur Their nearer attendance on the Bishops Person and familiarity with him with other advantages attending occasioned that they found it an Injury to be promoted to the Presbyters Order as he tells us Comment in Ezek. cap. 48. and which together with the great superciliousness and insulting pride of John Bishop of Jerusalem exercized over him and giving some disturbance to his Monastick ease in the holy Land Ep. 60 61. something raised his spleen and in vindicating his own Order he spared not some little flourishes or Arguments abating of the Episcopate if thereby these indecencies might cease What effects all this had at that time we read not and that it was afterwards lookt upon by the Church as his alone Passion and particular Provocation we have all the reason in the World to believe it all ceased with his Person to be sure if not with the Passion nor do we find any one follower he had or is his Autority ever used against the solitary appropriated Power of a Bishop above a Presbyter 'till of late in these parts of Christendom who thence take the rise for their Schism and 't is the ground they stand upon for the battery and abolishing the whole Order and with-drawing their obedience and which to be sure St. Jerome never did nor attempted and herein they are particularly unlucky they beat down Bishops by St. Jerome's Autority to bring in their Schism and 't is the main Argument they still urge against them in the height of these Divisions and Distractions are now on foot in Europe and then too when they contend that St. Jerome knew no other occasion or use of Bishops but ad tollenda Schismata because Schisms and Divisions cannot be kept out of the Church but by them So that St. Jerome's Autority if any thing in their present Case must be against them and if complying with him they must for the present expedience submit unto Bishops whom they 'l allow to have acknowledged this necessity and usefulness of them what ever reasons else he saw for their institution and continuance 'T is that which Doctor Durel pleads for Arch-Bishop Cranmer that admitting him guilty of Erastianism and he did resolve the Power of the Keys into the Prince as Doctor Stillingfleet says he was and did his present Circumstances will plead much for him and the other Doctors of his time if of the same mind then with him he had been educated in many Errors with which the Church the whole Age at that time abounded and though a Reformation was on foot no wonder if in some Instances he was in the wrong 't was then their work to abdicate the Bishop of Rome and case him of that Primacy and usurpation he had exercised over this Church and it might so happen that in giving to the King what was his he abated too much of the Power of the Priesthood and the Church and which was hers and not to be given to any other and yet even this Error did he see at last acknowledged it to Doctor Leighton submitted to and subscribed the truth against it as the Dean of Windsor tell us he read it in Doctor Stillingfleet's Manuscript and in his presence And there is enough to be pleaded of this nature in the behalf of those inconsiderable Offers are made against our three eminent Bishops Whitgift Bilson and Bancroft and which will so thoroughly acquit them of the but suspition of Erastianism that the Bill must in course be flung out that is drawn up against them every one knows that is conversant in those their Writings whence Parker's Objections are taken The Point under debate was mostly very near altogether in King Henry VIII day 's betwixt the King and the Pope whether was supreme in the forensick outward Ecclesiastical Courts and Proceedings on the Persons of Men within this his Majesties Kingdom the Pope had usurped it for some time the King reassumes it Religion