〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let no Man be Can. 19. ordained Bishop without the presence of the Metropolitan or if any shall be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that his Ordination be null and invalid and that not only as to himself but as to all others that shall be afterwards ordained And this was the plea that Alexius made when they would unjustly have deposed him from his Patriarchship and which in probability prevented his deposition stoutly answering as Doctor Burnet relates the matter That if his Ordination was null then all Regal cap. 3. the Metropolitans whom he had ordained and all the Bishops whom those Metropolitans had ordained during the eleven years of his Administration ought to be likewise degraded From whence it is evident that if the Ordination be at first null it conveys and entails a nullity upon all its descent and what a miserable confusion this will bring in eleven years time upon the Church of England he that hath but half an eye may foresee Nay at this rate Archbishop John totius Schismatis Primas Metropolitanus will neither be Primate nor Bishop nor can it in the least justifie him from the Crime of Schism that the present Power backs him in his Invasion and Vsurpation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if any one saith the Apostolical Canon Can. 30. shall make use of any secular Power to thrust himself irregularly into the Possession of a Bishoprick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him be deposed and excommunicated together with all those that take part with him The like iâ— decreed in the Council held at Paris Si quis per ordinationem regiam if any Bishop shall unduly and with two much haste ascend to the height of Episcopal Honour by the strength and interposition of Regal Power let him no ways be recieved or owned by the Bishops of the Provâ—nce or if contrary to the Canon he shall be received by any of the Comprovincials then let such be separated from the rest of his brethren 32. I here foresee that the instance of Abiathar will be produced against me not only to overthrow the position of one Bishop in a Church or of one Primate in a Province but to shew that is in the Power of Kings upon good reason to depose any of them nay the highest of them all that do or can Priest it in their Dominions God say they appâ—inted but one High Priest at a time for the whole Jewish Church nâ—ither do we read of any farther order given for the displacing of him or for the putting of others upon him And yet none can deny but that in King David's days there were two High Priests together Zadock the Son of Ahitub and Abiathar the Son of Ahimelech 2 Sam. 15. 29. and this by the sole order and pleasure of the King neither do we read that he was ever the farther from being the Man after God's own heart for his doing so And it is as evident on the other hand that Solomon his Son deposed and degraded one of them to wit Abiathar 1 Kings 2. 26. after he had continued in the Office full forty years and that by no other Authority than his own Both which actions plainly demonstrate That if reasons of State so require the King may either multiply Bishops upon a Church or depose them especially as to us in England since we give the same Prerogative to our Kings as was given by Art 37. God to all Godly Princes in holy Scriptures And this they think will be a sufficient plea and cause for what they are doing But to this I answer and first as to the being of two High Priests at once 33. I think I may say that it is the only instance to be met with in Scripture from the time that the Priesthood was setled upon Aaron and his Family to the time that the Jews became Captives and were carried out of the Land And if it had been either convenient or necessary it would have been oftner practised and if it had been oftner practised we should have oftner heard of it So that it being a particular case it must have a particular reason and foundation proper and peculiar to it self upon which it stands and without which it falls Howbeit it was at a time when the High Priesthood was got into a wrong Chanel and possessed by a Family which according to the Law of Inheritance had no present right unto it I say no present right a right it had at large as bâ—ing of the Family of Ithamar one of the Sons of Aaron to Lev. 10. 7. whom no less than the other the Priesthood at first was given but however not without a Precedency to Eleazar as being the first born And hence we read that when Aaron was to be taken away by death Numb 20. 28. Moses was commanded to strip him of his Garments the Garments of Holiness which at his Consecration he had put upon him and to put them upon Eleazar signifying thereby the divesting Aaron of his Priesthood Lev. 8. 7. to array and invest Eleazar with it From him it was conveyed to Phineas his Son to whom and to whose Seed it was farther assured and Numb 25. 13. granted to be an everlasting Priesthood but so it happened at present that the Posterity of Eleazar was put by and the Posterity of Ithamar taken into their room and so it had been and continued for four Generations even from the time of Ely to this Abiathar's days who having escaped the Massacre made at the command of Saul upon Ahimelech his 1 Sam. 22. 18. Father and Family fled unto David and bringing the Ephod with him 1 Sam. 23. 6. was constituted High Priest in the room of his deceased Father and indeed in some measure meriting the same for it was upon David's account and for entertaining him in his necessities that his Father was put to death and the whole Family besides himself destroyed But 1 Sam. 22. 13. this appearing irregular to David because against the right of Inheritance and finding that the line of Eleazar was to be restored in his days even before the Temple should be built and Israel be in its full Glory he 1 Sam. 2. 32 35. puts Zadock the principal of the line at that time into the Priesthood and gives him the Precedency to Abiathar as being regularly the Heir and the person to whom by right thereof the Priesthood belonged continuing however Abiathar as a Copartner with him in it during life the whole afterwards to devolve upon Zadock and his Posterity as it was at first ordered So that all this was but a Pious and Righteous design in David to restore the Priesthood to its rightful owner and not unreasonably to divide the Church but reasonably to make up the Breach that had been made in the Inheritance A method commended by the Bishops of Sirmium to the Clergy of Rome upon their having
the Case before us Deprivation is declared to be an Ecclesiastical Crime inter poenas ecclesiasticis legibus constitutas and liable to Tit. de Depr c. 1. the Punishments assigned by the Ecclesiastical Laws and thereupon it orders that a Bishop in amittendi status sui periculum venit that falls under Cap. 2. the danger of being deprived be referred to the Archbishop and two other Bishops deputed thereunto by the King qui Judicium exercebunt who shall have Power and Authority to hear and determine the said Cause And in case of Appeals it is farther decreed that they may be made from Tit. de Appel c. 11. the inferior Courts to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Archbishop from the Archbishop to the King quo cum fuerit causa devoluta which if once brought thither it is then to be transmitted si gravis sit causa if it be a matter of great concern to a Provincial Synod if of a less to three or four Bishops appointed thereunto to put a final End unto it a Method purely antient and primitive and if any other were practised whilst these Constitutions were framing it was certainly contrary to the Designs of the Reformers and perhaps no more justifiable than the Sacrilege the filling of Ecclesiastical Places with Lay Persons or the Bishops taking Commissions for the Exercise of their spiritual Offices was and which I think no Clergyman that at this day wears a Cassock in England will advocate for However since the designed Book was never admitted and no Review made thereof from that time to this I cannot see but what Dr. Heylin hath asserted must hold good to wit That all Hist Edw. 6. p. 19. the said Canons and Constitutions so restrained and qualified as above must still remain in force as of old they did and so we leave the Matter for the present 28. And indeed a State Deposition whatsoever noise it makes in the World or how much soever it pleases the Ears of some is but a novel and wicked Invention If Bishops saith St. Clemens be once constituted Ep. ad Cor. 1. c. 44. and approved of by the Church and it appears that they have been faithfull in their Office constant to their Ministration and for the time past well thought of for their Episcopal Qualifications 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we cannot if such as these be laid aside but look upon it as a piece of great Injustice neither will it be a small Crime in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if they continue piously and blamelesly to offer up their Oblations for us to turn them out of their Bishopricks A thing never heard of in the Church for many Centuries of Years But if at any time the Bishop became so irregular as that the Church would no longer endure him in his Office they deposed as well as deprived him and reduced the first Bishop into a Layman before they advanced the second to his See and probably upon this very account to prevent the Inconvenience to which a State-Deprivation is subject of having two Bishops pretending to one See at once Nay saith Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pallad p. 20. de Vit. Chrys if such Proceedings prevail and it once become lawfull to invade and usurp another's Bishoprick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to cast out what Bps. they please for their own Interest and Humor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all things will speedily run to ruine and the whole Christian World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the casting out of some and the being cast out by others be turned upside down An Arian Constantius may then deprive all the Orthodox and fill the Church with that Doctrine Mahomet may pull down the Cross and its Followers and set up the Half-moon and his Musselmen in their stead The long Parliament must not be thought to have done amiss when they cast off not some but the whole Order of Bishops nor the Usurper Cromwell the C. L. Asses that were got into their room a Matter of such fatal consequâ—nce to the Church that the divine Hosius understanding that Constantius was putting it into practice against the Bishops that would not subscribe to his Arianism and in my opinion Socinianism and Aerianism are not much better steps in on the behalf of the deprived giving the Emperour to know that it belonged not to him to exercise such an Authority over the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I beseech you says he leave off these Attemps Athan. Ep. ad solitar Vit. Edit Commet 1600. of yours and remember that though you be an Emperour you are not immortal dread the Day of Judgment and keep your self unspotted against that day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inter meddle not with Ecclesiastical Affairs neither command us therein but rather take your Direction from us For God hath committed the Care of the Kingdom to you and to us the Care of his Church and as he who invades the Kingdom contradicts the divine Ordinance so be you carefull that you draw not into your Jurisdiction the things of the Church lest thereby you draw Guilt upon your self Give as it is written unto Caefar the things that belong unto Caesar and unto God the things that belong unto God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is neither lawfull for us to meddle in the Affairs of the Empire nor for you to meddle in the more sacred Affairs of the Church A Power certainly never designed by Christ since it is so affrontive to his Institution and so destructive to his Church However I would fain know of these Latitudinarian Statesmen who are so zealous to advance it among us 1. Whether since Christ's Kingdom is not of this World the Kingdoms of the World must have such Power in and over it as to deprive it and its Bishops of a Being and Existence in the World 2. Whether a Lay-Power purely such can operate upon Spiritual Persons in Matters purely spiritual so far at least as by their secular Laws and Sanctions to dissolve that spiritual Vnion that Christ hath made between them and their Church And whether it be not as absurd in them to attempt it and as great a Nullity in itself when effected as if the States of England should make Laws and enact Penalties for the States of Holland 3. Whether if the State hath such a Power to deprive a Bishop of his Church as they have put John upon William they may not put William upon John again and at length Jack Presbyter upon both as already they have done in Scotland 4. Whether the new made Bishops be not as much to be accounted State made as the other State deprived 5. Whether the deprived Bishops remaining Bishops of the Catholick Church as they are pleased to say they do they do not remain Bishops in and of the Church of England since that is a part of the Catholick Church 6. Whether if still Bishops in England there be not
have been Postremianus However this Bishop upon Bishop so divided and subdivided the Party that it broke their Vnity and made as much Havock and Destruction in the Schismatical as it had done Id. Ep. 50. before in the Catholick Church Other Instances might be given and always producing the like effect as at Antioch when Paulinus was added Socr. l. 5. c. 2. to Meletius without his Consent at * Theâ—d sib 2. cap. 17. Rome when Foelix was put over the head of Liberius at †Sozom. l. 8. cap. 23. Constantinople when Arsacius invaded the Throne of St. Chrysostome In short Ambition Pride and Interest will never want a Bishop for any See or any Church Facite me Romanae urbis Episcopum make me but Primate or Metropolitane of Rome saith Praetextatus Hierom. ad Pameracb adv error Hierosol po 2. p. 165. that unbaptized Heathen and I will forthwith become a Christian and if once a Bishâ—p he will soon have his Altar and Party tho' assoon as ever he be in he by his Separation and Schism will put himself out of the Church again and turn as rank an Infidel perhaps as ever he was before 10 Now this Vnity of Priesthood and Altar was first commanded under the Law as the onely Preservative and Remedy against Schism in those days and therefore God to keep his People the Jews in one uniform way of Worship throughout the Land appointed but one Altar one Place of Sacrifice and one High Priest insomuch that to set up another High Priest against the High Priest already established though of the Seed of Aaron as in the case of Manasses against Jaddus or another Altar against the Altar of Jerusalem though built according to the Pattern of the other as in the case of Jeroboam was to multiply Sin as well as Priests and Altars because Ephraim as it is in Hosea hath made many Ch. 8. v. 11. Altars to Sin Altars shall be to him for a Sin Nay by this very Strategem it was that Jeroboam kept up the Rent and Schism which he had made between Judah and Benjamin and the other ten Tribes of Israel For saith he If this People go up to doe Sacrifice in the house of the Lord at Jerusalem 1. Kings 12. 27. as of old then shall the heart of this People turn again unto their Lord even to Rehoboam the King of Judah Whereupon he made an House set up an Altar and thereunto consecrated Priests of his own an action so infamous and criminal that though God permitted him to keep the Kingdom to his dying day yet he would scarce suffer his Name ever after to be mentioned without an eternal Blot upon it this is that Son of Nebat which made Israel to sin Yea and so hatefull and provoking that for that very cause and that cause onely the Lord rejected all the 2 Kings 17. 20 21. Seed of Israel and afflicted them and delivered them into the hand of Spoilers untill he had cast them out of his sight And to this St. Cyprian alludes when he would beat down the like Practices among Christians quam inseparabile Vnitatis Sacramentum how inseparable the band of Unity is and how without hope says he they pull down the wrath Cyp. Ep. 69. p. 182. Magno of God upon them who divide the Church and by casting off their own Bishops assume false ones to themselves they may sufficiently be admonished from the Scissure made in Israel by their making to themselves false Kings God never ceased plaguing them till he sent them away Captives and brought others into their room and without doubt tanta Indignatio adversus illos qui Schisma faciunt no less Calamity and Destruction will befall those who rend the Church and by setting up new Bishops of their own break the Unity of it 11. Thus far then it is plain and evident That in one Church or Diocess there can be but one Bishop at a time and that if more happen to be placed therein there will arise a Schism Let us then once more as the Prophet Jeremy adviseth ask for the old Paths and enquire for Ch. 6. v. 16. the old Way and we shall find it altogether as evident and plain that the first Bishop if canonically placed in the See was ever accounted the true and catholick and the second the false and schismatical Bishop and that the Church was ever adjuged to go along with those who by a lawfull Ordination were first set up in it and the Schism with those who were afterwards superinduced and clapt upon them Videndum est we are to observe saith Optatus who keeps Apostolical Succession and who deserts Ad. Parm. l. 1. p. 18. Edit Paris 1679. it quis Cathedram sederit alteram quae ante non fuit who sits in a Chair that none sate in before who it is that erects Altar against Altar quis Ordinationem fecerit salvo altero ordinato who ordains another when one was ordained before who it is that falls under the Apostle's Saying that many Antichrists should go forth because they were not of us And 1 John 2. 19. â—pâ— ad Parm. l. 2. p. 35 36. again We must be sure to observe qui prior Cathedra sederit who the first is that was placed in the Chair ut jam Schismaticus Peccator qui contra singularem Cathedram alteram collocaret for he is the Schismatick and Sinner who erects another Chair against that single Chair Hence was the Novatian Schism laid at the door of Novatianus Cornelius being in the Chair and first Bishop of the place Ecclesia una est the Church saith St. Cyprian is one and if it be with Cornelius who succeeded Fabian Ep 69. p. 181. Mag. and was first ordained Novatian cannot be in the Church neither is he to be accounted a Bishop thereof Evangelica Apostolica Traditione contempta for in as much as he contemns the Evangelical and Apostolical Tradition he succeeds none à scipso ortus but is self-begot and self raised Again Cornelins factus est Episcopus de Dei Christi ejus judicio Cornelius Ep. 55. p. 104. Antoniano is made Bishop according to the appointment of God and his Christ wherefore whosoever is made Bishop after him foris fiat must be without and not of the Church qui post unum qui solus esse debet he that is made Bishop after one which must needs be alone non jam secundus est ille sed nullus he is not a second but no Bishop at all The like was laid unto the Charge of Majorinus who was by a set of Traditors ordained over the head of Caecilian of Carthage Whereupon saith Optatus in Affrica sicut Advers Parm. l. 1. p. 17. in caeteris Provinciis una erat Ecclesia there was but one Church in Affrica as in all other Provinces till divided by the Ordainers of Majorinus For till then conferta
hunt with the Hounds and such without doubt there will be amongst us my Prayer is that their number may be but small and like the before-mentioned Confessors they may soon see their Error and return 20. But of all the Sinners in the pack none more outrageously so than the Ordainers and their Complices those Bishops I mean that first dressed up the Ape set him in the Chair and bad God speed unto him Hence though Submission and Penance might reconcile the other Clergy yet nothing less than utter Deprivation and loss of their Sacerdotal Honour could attone for such Of the three Bishops saith Cornelius in his Synodical Epistle to Fabian that ordained Novatian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist lib. 6. cap. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of them repented and returned unto the Church and we received them into Communion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but no farther did we receive him than to the Communion of the Laity and as for the other two engaged with him in the Ordination we deposed them and ordained others in their room And so it faired with Trophimus one of those forward Bishops that received and congratulated Navatianus in his Election susceptus est Trophimus Trophimus upon his repentance was absolved and admitted but after all so admitted ut Laicus communicet non quasi locum Sacerdotis usurpet that he must thenceforth Cyp. 55. p. 105. communicate but as a Laick and no longer as a Priest or Bishop The severity of this Sentence came indeed afterwards to be more or less moderated wherefore Melchiades Bishop of Rome to whom the cause of the Donatists was referred would have none but Donatus himself quem totius mali principem invenerat whom he found as St. Austine records the matter chief Author of all the mischief to bear the burden alone offering Ep. 162. fol. 141. cap. 3. the rest upon their return to the Vnity of the Church the continuance of their Bishopricks and his Letters Communicatory though they had been ordained by Majorinus or any others in the State of Schism Ita ut quibuscunque locis duo essent Episcopi quos dissentio geminasset so that in all places where the Schism had caused two Bishops the prior ordained was to be established and the second removed to some other vacancy But then this was Sanitatis recuperandae optio with desire and design to heal the Breach and make up the Schism Thus again was Firminus Bishop of Istria admitted by St. Gregory without a deposition But then this was 300 years after the Greg. lib. 10. Indict 5. c. 37. Edit Paris 1551. Schism first commenced and at a time when it was grown inconsiderable the knot being broken almost 200 years before insomuch that some few scatterings onely were here and there remaining however not without due caution for the future for they were solemnly to swear se nunquam ad Schisma reversuros sed semper in unitate Ecolesiae Catholicae communione Romani Pontificis per omnia mansuros that they would never thenceforth depart from the Vnity of the Catholick Church and because more Greg. Iud. cad cap. 31. particularly belonging to the jurisdiction of Rome not from the Communion of the Roman See Such an Oath was not long after as Petrus de Marca in his Book de Concord Sacerdot Imp. informs us given to Adalbertus before L. 6. c. 3. n. 13. Edit Paris 1663. his Consecration by Hinemarus his Metropolitan Privilegio Metropolis Remorum Ecclesia ac ejus Praesulis secundum sacrosanctos Conciliorum Canones Decreta Sedis Apostolicae ex sacris Canonibus Legibus promulgata proscire posse absque dolo simulatione vel indebita pertinaci contradictione me obediturum profiteor I do promise from this time forward to the best of my skill and power without dissimulation and fraud and all manner of wilfull contradiction to be obedient to and observant of all the Rights and Priviledges of the Metropolitical Church of Rhemes of the Arch-Bishop thereof as they are established and set forth by the Holy Canons of the Church and by the Decrees of the Apostolical See therewith agreeing 21. An Oath much like that still in being and hitherto tendered by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury to all his Suffragans at the Consecration of them and it were to be wished that such as have been Consecrated by Form of Conscr of Bishops him or by any of his Antecessors would seriously consider the obligation it lays on them in reference to which I make bold to propose two eminent instances the one of Ivo the other of our English Bishops Ivo Carnotensis one of the Suffragans to the Arch-Bishop of Sena as Petrus de Marca relates the matter was desired by Hugo Bishop of Lyons and L. 6. c. 3. n. 14. Legate to the Roman Pontife to assist him at the Consecration of the Bishop of Niverna a Suffragan properly belonging to the said Arch-Bishop without any consent or approbation had from him or by whose appointment according to the Canon of the Church he ought only to be consecrated Ivo utterly refuses to give his assistance answering that if he should engage in such an Ordination reus fieret violatae sponsionis quam Sedi Metropolitanae fecerat he should become guilty of the breach of his Oath made at his own Ordination to his Metropolitan The other instance shall be in our own Bishops in the time of King William the Second and I take it from the Author of a Discourse concerning the Illegality of the late Commission and for which he quotes Eadmerus the case thus Anselm Arch-Bishop of Canterbury was complain'd of by the King to the Page 17. Parliament with order to the Bishops his Suffragans to depose him the Bishops sensible of what Oath they had taken at the time of their Ordination instead of proceeding to a Deprivation declared they could not deprive him to whom they had promised Obedience These things I propose to their considerations and wish they would seriously apply them 22. The nature of Schism being thus set forth and laid at the doors of them that cause it my next work shall be to show the Heinousness and Injustice of the present Schism a Schism perhaps capable of as great or greater Aggravations than any that ever happen'd in the Church from the first rise of a Schism in it 23. It is not the manner of the Romans saith Festus concerning St. Paul to condemn any Man before that he who is accused have the accusers Acts 25. 16. face to face and have licence to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him nor no more hath it been the manner of the Church Videmus quae res coegit fieri Altare contra Altare let us examin saith St. Austin what first caused the Dâ—natists to raise their Altar Si Hypopâ—al cont Donat. Tom. 7. f. 2. malus erat Sacerdos deponendus erat ante
si non poterat deponi tolerandus intra rete if Cacilian had been a Traditor or done any thing else against the Canons meritting a Deposition he ought to have been deposed before another Bishop had been put upon him but if he were guilty of no such thing he ought to have continued sole Bishop there non judices consederunt non Sacerdotes de more There were no Bishops as usual it was to hear and judge the matter no Accusers no Witnesses no Libel whereby his crime might have been made out but instead thereof furor dolus tumultus qui regnant in falsitate nothing but Fury Fraud Tumult which ever rule in a bad cause Now-a-days saith Pope Innocent in reference to St. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 26. The innocent Bishops in a very preposterous manner are thrust out of their Churches for others to be put into their places having neither their crimes heard nor they so much as summoned to desend themselves A proceeding so novel and unjust that we never knew it practised by our fore-Fathers but rather forbad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as he cannot be a Bishop that is put over another unless he be deposed by due process of Law And so it was determined by the Fathers in the Constantinopolitan Council We hold it necessary say they for the avoiding of contentions and In Temp. Soph. Can. 16. tumults in the Church to decree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That none be made a Bishop in a Church where another presides and retains his Honour for though he may be every way faulty and justly deserve deposing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet after all his Cause ought first to be heard and his Crimes throughly examined and if upon that he be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then may another though he do survive be ordained and placed in his Chair But to pass Judgment against any without citing or hearing the Party accused is a procedure saith St. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without Pallad de vita Chrys p. 22. Precedent and contrary to Law and Canon never practised either by the Heathens or Barbarians in their Judicatories 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nay the very Scythians and Sarmatans the most uncivilized Nations of all never were so unjust cruel or unreasonable 24. Now the Judgment of these matters in the more early and purer days of Christianity was altogether referred to Episcopal Audience 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apos 74. We hold it necessary saith the Canon That Bishops should be conven'd and judg'd by Bishops and so the Carthaginian Fathers decree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Blast Synt. tit Δ in Can. 12. ex Edit Bevereg That the faults of Bishops be discussed and determined by a Synod of Bishops or if a full Synod cannot be had in time and it appear necessary that the Criminal be try'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that then his Cause be referred to twelve of them at least And so far did this Canon prevail that because John Bishop of Amathus was deposed by fewer his Deposition was declared as Balsamon relates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be invalid and void And for this end that matters arising and Controversies between Party and In praed Can. ex Edit Bevereg Party depending might timely be decided it was farther provided by the first Canons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That yearly Can. Apos 37. Con. Nic. 5. Ant. 20. twice in a year such Episcopal Synods should be held afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of the great fatigue expences and dangers they were put unto by their journeys that they should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but once in the year Can. 6 8 7 6. 25 Neither did the Emperors by becoming Christians alter the case for either they left the Judgment wholly to the Bishops as was formerly done or if they interposed it was ever in conjunction with them taking their advice and oftentimes their directions from them Thus when the Donatists petitioned Constantine the Great to grant them an hearing of the case between them and the Caecilianists he quia non est ausus de causa Episcopi judicare because he did not think it proper for him to sit Aug. Ep. 166. Judge over Bishops in Episcopal matters sent them to Melchiades Bishop of Rome and to three other Bishops from France Rheticius Marinus and Maternus to be judged by them But no ways satisfied with their judgment they desire a farther hearing whereupon he omnino cupienâ— tantam impudentiam cohibere willing to restrain and suppress so great an Aâ—â— Ep. 162. insolency dedit aliud Arelatense Concilium granted them another Synod at Arles adding that it was not for him ut de judicio Episcoporum qui Romae sederunt ipse judicaret to judge of the judgment passed by the Bishops at Rome But not yet contented because condemned as before they appeal to Constantine himself ut causam Constantinus audiret that he would be pleased to take the judgment upon himself and in some measure he did but as Bishop Parker observes it was not to judge but to Rel. and Royal. Part 1 p. 299. expose the Schismaticks or to suffer them to expose themselves For that he would not meddle with the business at all till he had the discovery of Ignatius his forgery in his pocket to confound them with And St. Austin by his charitable wish seems to insinuate something like it Vtinam ut eis ipse cessit ut de causa Episcopos judicaret would to God saith he he had accepted their Appeal and had judged the matter after the Bishops Ep. 162. à sanctis Episcopis veniam petiturus though he had excused himself afterwards for his so doing An undertaking that he ever declined and protested against quoties à me improbissimis additionibus suis sunt condigna responsione oppressi How often saith he have they been repulsed by me Coâ—st Ep. Cath. in t gest purgationis vid. Optat. Which if they would but have considered they would never have desired me to be their Judge I say and I say the truth Sacerdotum judicium ita debet haberi the judgment of Bishops ought as much to be regarded and followed as if Christ himself had sat in judgment with them neither was this the opinion of Constantine only but of all his Christian Successors I shall instance in Valentinian only though the same may be verified of Constantius Valentinian the younger Theodosius Gratian Arcadius Honorius Justinian Martian c. he was saith Sozomen a very Orthodox Hist lib. c. 20. and devout Man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and would not suffer any thing to be innovated nor imposed upon the Bishops that was any ways contradictory to the Laws and Canons of the Church One of his Edicts as it is given us by St. Ambrose runs thus In causa fidei vel Ecclesiastici
Ordinis cum Lib. 5. Ep. 32. judicare debet qui nec manere impar sit nec jure dissimilis they and they only are to be deputed Judges over Ecclesiasticks who are of the same Order and therefore to be presumed the most competent Judges because most knowing in those Affairs Hoc est Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus voluit judicare that is as St. Ambrose comments upon it he would have Bishops to be the onely Judges of Bishops An Authority though partly Temporal yet of that nature that instead of laying waste the Church of supplanting the Bishops or of subverting the Canons it became a real defence and patronage to them all and no sooner experienced but was as frankly and freely consented to in reference to the succeeding Emperors Placuit ut quicunque ab Imperatore it seemeth good say the Bishops in the Milevitan Council that if any shall appeal to the Emperor to have Cen. 19. his Cause tried before Secular Judges he be deprived but if he appeal to have an Hearing thereof before a Synod of Bishops it shall no ways displease Thus did Pope Innocent address himself to Honorius to have the Schism between St. Chrysostome and Arsacius ended First he writes to Theophilus that great Promoter of it to challenge him to a Council We cannot saith he either in Reason or Justice withdraw our selves from Chrysostom 's Pallad de Vit. Chrys c. 3. p. 24. Communion and therefore if you dare abide by the Judgment you have made of his Deposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make your Appearance before the next Synod And after that he with the rest of the Italian Bishops sends to Honorius that he would write to his Brother Arcadius Co Emperour with him that a Council for that end might be convened where both Eastern and Western Bishops might conveniently meet which Honorius accordingly did sending his Letters by five Bishops two Presbyters and one Deacon assuring him That if either he or his Bishops could satisfie them that Chrysostome was duly and justly deposed he for his part would withdraw all Communion from him but if not that he then hoped He would be prevailed with to desert their Communion and their new made Patriarch Whence it is obvious to infer 1. That where two Bishops are placed at one time in a See a Schism must necessarily ensue 2. That Synods onely are the Deposers of Bishops and the onely Judges of a Deposition 3. That neither Emperour Senate Privy Council or Secular Power whatsoever can do it without making a Schism 4 That till a Synod be called and hath determined the Matter the first must be accounted the lawful Bishop and the second with his Adherent the Schismatick 26. And as this was the Usage Practice and Custome of all foreign Churches so it was one of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those antient Customs that the English Church hath observed Ego Constantini vos Petri Gladium habetis in Manibus I saith K. Edgar as cited by Twisden wear the Sword of Vind. Chur. 2. p. 94. Constantine and you of St. Peter Now how far the first exercised his Authority in reference to the case before us is already shewn and if K. Edgar went no farther we are sure there was no seizing upon Bishops or of putting others into their Bishopricks before they were heard and condemned by Bishops Indeed the Author of the Discourse concerning the Illegality of the late Ecclesiastical Commission tells us That P. 11 12. the Saxon Laws are a plain Evidence that Church Matters were in those times determined in the same Assemblies wherein the other Laws of the Kingdom were determined and I am apt to think that in a great measure they were But then as the learned Spelman observes Episcopuâ— jura Gloss Tit. Gemot divina enuntiabat Comes secularia alter alteri auxilio the Bishops declared and vindicated the Ecclesiastical Laws and the Nobles the Secular each supporting and assisting the other the one according to the Canons of the Church and the other according to the Municipal Laws of the Land Nay I cannot see but in some cases their actings might be separate sure I am that in the Synod held at Bacanceld and in that other soon after held at Clovesho for the restoring the Jurisdiction of the Metropolitical See of Canterbury to its Archibishop of which it had been despoiled by K. Offa contra Canones Apostolica Statuta in duas scissa Paroechias and contrary to all Canons and Constitutions Apostolical divided into two and Spel. Conc. in Ep. Kenul ad Leon. 3. in part given to Adulphus his Favourite there was none of the Laity in them no Earls no great Men of the Nation the one being held as we see in Spelman Praesidente Kenulso Rege by the King Archbishop Bishops Conc. Brit. an 709 803. and Abbats multis aliis idoneis personis and many other not great Men or Nobles but fitting persons the other ab Athelardo Archiepiscopo cum duodecim Episcopis potiori Clero by the Archbishop of Canterbury and twelve other Bishops with the chiefest of their Clergy as may appear by their respective Subscriptions and Spelman's Notes upon them adding this severe and terrible Denunciation Hear oh Heavens and give ear oh Earth Siquis quod omnino absit If any one which God forbid shall at any time hereafter presume against the Apostolical Precepts and this our Determination Tunicam Christi scindere Vnitatem ejus Ecclesiae dividere to tear the seamless Coat of Christ and thereby to divide the Vnity of the Church of Canterbury sciat se esse aeternaliter damnandum let him know that if he repents him not of that his fault he shall be eternally damned But be it so or not as the Authour avers yet in this we shall not much dissent that K. William I. having brought England under the power of his Sword separated Judicatures referring as it was in Constantine's days Ecclesiastical Matters to Ecclesiastical Judges Thus in a Council held at Winchester he himself being present with three * Spelm. anno 1070. Legates from Rome totius Cleri populus the whole Synod of the †Antiq. Brit. de Sâ—igand Clergy after they had heard divers things objected against Stigand then Archbishhp of Canterbury eum Episcopatu Ordinibus abdicabant deprived him both of his Archbishoprick and his Office The Crimes were chiefly these quod Archiepiscopatum Roberto vivente neque amoto possidisset because he had possessed himself of the Archbishoprick Robert the Archbishop being alive and not deposed and had worn the Pall which he left behind him being by Force most unjustly driven from thence Crimes every way deserving Deposition and because done by a Synod justly so punished and if Crimes then they are and must be so now let Stigand and his Party think what they will At the same time and by the same Synod was Agelmar Bishop of the East Angles deposed
Vessels of Gold out of the Temple caused Onias the Ch. 4. v. 32. 2 Mac. 5. 15. deposed High Priest to be slain and was Guide to Antiochus when he went to the Temple to risle it of its holy Vessels A wicked and impious man saith Josephus who for his ambitious Desire of Authority had enforced Ant. l. 12. c. 15. our Nation to revolt from their Religion He was slain and succeeded by Alcimus who also is said to have defiled himself wilfully in the time of their 2 Mac. 14. 3 c. mingling with the Gentiles and was the cause of all that Mischief that afterwards happened to Judas Razis and the Temple The next Instance shall be in Herod and his Successors after he was by the Roman Emperor created King of the Jews In the Roman Times saith the Annotatour Ham. in Luc. c. 3 2. quoting Josephus for it it is manifâ—st that the Roman Prefect did ad libitum when he would and that sometimes once a year put whom he please into the Pontificate to officiate in Aaron 's Office instead of the lineal Descendant from him And this was as Bp. Overall in his Convocation-Book suggests Lib. 1. c. 34. to keep them from entring into Rebellion suspecting that if the Priesthood should have been held by Succession or for term of Life by the chief Persons of Aaron's Posterity it might have grown dangerous unto their Government The last Instance touching the Jews shall be of the Zealots not long before and hastening on the Destruction of Jerusalem and of the Temple there They saith Josephus not respecting De Bell. Jud. l. 4. c. 5. the Families out of which it was onely lawfull to chuse the High Priest elected strange and base Persons to that sacred Dignity and such as would be Partakers of their Villanies and Impietieâ— for they who not deserving it attained to such Dignity were as it were obliged unto their Will in all things by whom they were so exalted A Fact says ne contrary to the most firm Custom that was amongst the People and onely a Device to get all Government into their hands From all which we may remark and inferr 1. That the Reason and End of such Actions is purely to serve the Interest of Government and to have such Persons in the Head of the Priesthood that will own their Actions and execute their Commands though never so wicked and sinful 2. That Religion is so far from gaining by it that it is generally forced to give place to Atheism Profaneness Heathenism 3. That it is a sad Prognostick and Forerunner of an utter Desolation to the Church and shews that her Enemies the Zealots on the one hand and the Romans on the other are either come or coming upon her which makes me with Faustinus almost to wish That since the high Dignities of the Church Libel Prec p. 21. Oxon. 1678. prove so tempting and do so debauch the Priesthood she had never been so richly endowed sed ut apostolico more vivens fidem integram inviolabiliter possideret but that her Clergy living more after the Apostolick Manner might the more inviolably hold the Apostolical Faith and not for the love of Honour or Wealth be rempted to decline or withgo it 36. The like Instance of this Abomination of Desolation may be taken from the Greek Church In Andronicus 's long Reign saith the Author of the Burnet c. 3. Edit 1682. Regalia many were put in and out to the great Scandal of the Church and he makes this Remark upon it from the Historian which he quotes That Niceph. Greg. lib. 7. Princes chuse such Men to that Charge who may be their Slaves and in all things obsequious to what they shall prescribe and lie at their Feet and not so much as have a Thought contrary to their Commands I might have told you before from Josephus that Onias had never been De Mac. c. 4. turned out of his Priesthood at least Jason not put in had it not been for an annual Payment of three thousand six hundreed and threescore Talents of Silver to Andronicus And from the Book of Maccabees That Menelaus 2 Mac. 4. 24. had never got over Jason's Head had he not promised three hundred Talents more than what Jason gave So bewitching are the Rewards of Divination when proferred by Kings that Balaam the Prophet though perhaps his Conscience doth boggle at them at first no less than his Ass afterwards did at the sight of the Angel yet rather than not be fingering of them he will remove from Mountain to Mountain from Hill to Hill to try whether from some place or other he may not venture to curse Israel Nay I am apt to think that if the chief Dignities of the Church come once to be sold by Inch of Candle all the burning and shining Lights thereof will soon be turned out of their Candlesticks for dim and stinking Snuffs to be put in their rooms and of what ill consequence this may prove to a Church without being a Prophet or a Prophet's Son we may easily guess The forementioned Author of the Regalia informs us of the Mischiefs and Misery it hath brought upon the Greek Church The Turks saith he having taken this matter into their Hands have so exposed Ch. 3. p. 99. all unto Sale and I may add Interest and have found so many base minded and ambitious Churchmen that are as ready to buy as they are to sell that those Churches which were once the Glory of the World are now become Dens of Thieves and Robbers adding that as those Miseries are to be lamented in them so we who hear of them ought to remember the words of our Saviour If these things be done in the green Tree what shall be done in the dry 37. But what need I aggravate the Mischiefs that attend these Alterations especially when continued and daily renewed There are none so blind but may see them none so hardy but must lament them none so senseless but as far as in them lies will endeavour to prevent them But say some what meaneth the Bleating of the Sheep and the Lowing of the Oxen we hear Why so much noise of Schisme Why such breaking of Communion Why such running from our Churches Must all be Schismaticks that take in with the new Bishops and follow them Is not this to make the Jewish Church schismatical after the High Priesthood became annual and the Greek Church too as often as the Grand Seignior changes the Patriarch Sure we are that our Saviour himself at that time communicated with the Jewish Church which we presume he would not have done if it had been schismatical and no Man for ought as we do know blames the Patriarch who succeeds nor yet the Church which receives him And yet though it be so I cannot see that either of these Cases run parallel to ours for the Jews for many years before had been under
said when he gave the Advice and upon that account as much to be presumed to be knowing to the Intent and Design of the Advice and Adviser as either Mr. Hody or his Prefacer can be presumed to be Secondly Neither was this the Humour of the People onely but of the Bishops as well as of them Hence Atticus Successor to Arsacius in the Usurpation Chrysostom being still alive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perceiving as Palladius relates the matter that De vit Chrys p. 95. none of the oriental Bishops would communicate with him and that the very People of the City where he was rejected his Communion procured the like Prescript of Severity as Arsacius his Predecessor had done before Id. p. 26. him which was either to communicate with him or to be deposed from their Bishopricks and to have their Estates and Goods confiscated But how little this Edict prevailed the Issue and Event thereof will shew Some of them saith Palladius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for continuing their P. 193 194. Communion with John were imprisoned and there dyed some were sent into Banishment of whom Palladius to whom the Advice was given was P. 66. one some of them were beaten and some slain Nay notwithstanding all the Severities that these Edicts occasioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meetings of those that were Lovers of Chrysostom or rather of those that were Lovers of God were not at all lessoned but as it is written saith he in Exodus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 86. the more they slew the more they grew And certainly if these or any other of the Bishops to whom St. Chrysostom gave the Advice had thought that he had designed it should have took place before his Death or that it had been fitting it should they would never have lost their Bishopricks run such hazards or undergone such Difficulties for him Thirdly And that this and no other was the meaning of the Advice will appear from the Advisers own Behaviour in the case for being demanded De vit Chrys p. 81. by the Emperour to leave his Church Palladius tells us that he refused to do it answering 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I received this Church from Christ to take care of the Souls thereunto belonging and I must not relinquish it but the Care of the City is yours and if I must be gone force me thence by your Authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that I may have some Excuse at least from being absent from my Station Nay when driven away so far was he from seeming to have given up and from blaming others who adhered to him that writing to the Bishops and Clergy at Chalcedon who for his sake were there imprisoned he commends them for their undaunted Behaviour in their Sufferings and Chrys Ep. 174. encourages them to be constant and under all to concern themselves for the Good of the Church and for the allaying that Storm that was risen in it telling them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that though their Care and Study might want Success it would not want its Reward at the hand of God And in another to them he not onely commends them but their Cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you says he for adhering to the Ep. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tom. 4. p. 186. Laws and Constitutions of the Fathers which others invade and contaminate are made to suffer these things The like Letters he wrote to the Bishops sent from the West to procure a Synod for the further hearing more righteous determining his Cause with all Thankfulness acknowledging their Id. Ep. 157. c. pious Care and generous Charity for undertaking so tedious and dangerous a Voyage upon his Account The like also he wrote to the Bishops and Presbyters that attended them in their Journey the like to many other Bishops Id. Ep. 161 165 166. by name to all the Bishops throughout Macedonia thanking them all and every one in particular for the mighty Care and Compassion they had for him and telling them that not only he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 149 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but all the Bishops throughout the East together with the Clergy and Laity of the several Cities thereof were mightily transported with their stout Behaviour in reference to him and the Church's Concerns the like Letter of Thanks he sent to Innocent Bp. of Rome one of the last saith Dr. Cave that ever he wrote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus englished by the aforesaid Dr. Cave We cannot thank you enough for Vit. Chrys p. 522. Chrys Tom. 4. p. 684. that Kindness and Compassion you have shewed us beyond the tenderest Bowels of a Father for what in you lies you have taken care that all things be duly performed and rectified and run in a proper Chanel and neither the Laws be subjected to Contempt and Force nor the Constitutions of the ancient Fathers violated And though some have hindred your Designs from taking any effect that they now seem incurably disordered and uncapable of a Reformation yet I beseech you still endeavour to reclaimt hem and not give the Affair over in Despair considering of what mighty Importance it would be to bring it to an happy Issue and indeed in some measure the whole World is interessed and concerned in this Matter The Churches are wasted and brought low the People dispersed the Clergy subdued and trampled on the Bishops banished and the Ecclesiastical Canons trodden down Once therefore and again I beseech you to use your utmost Care and Diligence and the greater the Storm is let your Study and Endeavour be so much the more This methinks doth not look as if he had relinquished his Bishoprick or that he ever designed whilst living to give place to another nay I am apt to think that if he would have relinquished as Mr. Hody and his Prefacer would have him to have done he needed not to have been banished or sent out of the way for another to be put in 4. Nay I cannot find but that the foreign Bishops were as deeply concerned for his return and restauration to his Bishoprick as either himself or any of his own Bishops and Clergy were not regarding his advice or at least not thinking it sit or that ever it was designed to take place till he was dead and gone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the design of the Roman Church as it is in Palladius was not to commâ—â—icate p. 214 215. with the Oriental Bishops and more especially with Theophilus the Author of these Mischiefs till God should please to give place to an Oecumenic Council that the sores and wounds which are made in the Church might be healed for though John should sleep yet truth for which in quisition ought ever to be made will awake And I would says he faiâ— know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where is the Priesthood for the present to be found where Religion Nay where common