his Jurisdiction Now this is a Knavish malicious Trick to compare our Actions to the Popes the Pope directly challengeth a Supremacy over Kings indeed over all Men we only lay claim to a Christian Liberty not to comply with Sin and Wickedness though the Magistrate command it and a Power not to desert our Station wherein Christ hath fixed us for every humoursom or unjust Prohibition of the State but at our Peril and without Resistance and what Agreement hath this with the Popes Actions But if his Civil Magistrate may not any ways be controuled but must be complied with in all things then I leave any indifferent Persons to judge whether these two things be not the direct Consequences of his Arguments First This makes the Proceedings of the Apostles and all the Primitive Christians in propagating the Gospel for about Three hundered Years to be altogether unjustifyable For they were actually prohibited first by the Jews after by the Emperours so that if his Doctrine had taken place Christianity had never entered into the World Secondly This shuts out the Doctrine of the Cross not only as Foolishness but as Wickedness and Disobedience and puts it in the Power of the Civil Magistrate at his Pleasure to extirpate Christianity out of the World for if prohibited they must cease and comply because to do otherwise Were in their way to take up Arms against him and controul his Jurisdiction And thus if the Grand Signior should Silence all the Christian Ministers in his Dominions they must hold their Peace and no more speak in the Name of Jesus for if they do our Author will tell them they are Rebels I perceive this Author makes use of his Religion only for his Convenience and will put no more on than he can at any time put off again he is here a sort of a Christian and at Japan would be a Hollander But to make good his Argument he accuseth me of Ignorance as to the Primitive Times and instanceth in Eustathius of Antioch Athanasius of Alexandria and Paulus of Constantinople put out by the Imperial Power and this he says Was never questioned by the Orthodox though they complained of the Injustice of it c. Now I confess that I have not had those Advantages which some have been happy in and am content to be accounted Ignorant provided he will suffer me to be Honest But yet as Ignorant as I am I think no Man that had consulted his Cause or his own Reputation would have produced this instance in this case For it will either justifie our Proceedings or force him to condemn these Persons and in so good Company we shall the less value hard Censures For were they thrust out of their Diocesses What great difference is here Are not our Livelihoods and Cures taken from us Are not our Bishops Deprived of their Profits and the exercise of their Jurisdictions This we suffer and do not so much as compare the Power then and now whether lawful or unlawful If the Civil Authority wrongfully spoil us of our Goods and restrain our Persons we know no Resistance any more then those good Men did But did they forbear to exercise their Office and Ministry where they had oppâ—tunity No such thing Was there no Schism upon this account It is plain That the Orthodox refused to Communicate with the Bishops put over them the whole Christian World was concerned on one side or other in the Case of Athanasius at Constantinople the People were so troublesome that the Emperor was forced to recal Paulus though he was after again Banished and upon the Expulsion of Eustathius from Antioch the suspected Bishops set over them were disgusted by many and Theodoret says That plurimi Studiosi pietatis cùm Sacerdotes tùm Plebs desertis Ecclesiasticis caetibus privatim Conveniebant lib. 1. cap. 21. And this they continued to do though all the Churches were taken away from the Adherents to Eustathius in order to force them to Communion with those put in his place as may appear from that request of Athanasius to the Emperor for one Church to be granted to the Orthodox at Antioch when he desired the like of Athanasius for the Arrians at Alexandria Theod. lib. 2. cap. 12. I think a Man so Skilful in Antiquity might have made choise of some more lucky instance but that he may not be at too much trouble if he can have a little Patience it shall not be long ere I furnish him Next in order to an Answer to his Second Question he supposeth the Clergy-man not bound by the Deprivation but then saith he What is this to a Separation For is he so obliged that rather then not officiate he may and ought to break of from Communion with the Church If you will make that supposal which in our particular Case is a great Truth you of all Men were most unfit to put these Questions For when you joyn with those who make this unjust Deprivation when you take our Churches our Flocks our Livelyhoods and suffer us not to exercise our Ministry where you have the Profit of it unless we will do it to the dissatisfaction of our Consciences Do you complain that we do not maintain Communion with you If we were in fault in this Case yet Modesty if any be left you and the ill Usage we have from your Party might make you hold your Peace I freely grant That we ought to continue in the Communion of the Church we are of as long as we can and that Separation is like a Divorce which is the last Extremity c. But then I say That we still are of the same Church we were of for the Schism goes along with the Cause and there it is you not we are the Schismaticks the Separation I grant to be Unhappy and Mischievous but let them look to that who made the Divorce by justifying unlawful Proceedings and setting up sinful Terms of Communion as I have already proved and therefore will say no more of it here And this is sufficient for an Answer to that Slander as if we proceeded upon the same Grounds with the Dissenters which is manifestly false only I am bold to tell him That they have now put a Plea into the Mouth of the Dissenters which will justifie their Separation from them and were it not that they cannot justifie their Separation from us your Perfidiousness and other ill Acts had given up the Cause to them When he thought he had lost my Second Argument with multitudes of Questions he attacks that which he calls the Third And he says I argue from the Subjection the People and Clergy owe to the Bishops and the Bishops owe to their Metropolitan and I grant That I do so and the Argument must be good unless he can Dispute away all the Government and Orders of the Christian Church But to this he returns with all imaginable Scorn Our Author that undertakes to give us an account of the
of the same fatal Consequence if the Clergy had not subscribed c. if they had not declared their Assent and Consent c. if they had not taken the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy in former Kings Reigns and he might have added if People should Renounce Christianity which I fear many are strongly tempted to whilst they hear the Ministers of it Preach away God's Commandments and those who ought to be the severest Enemies of all Wickedness to Canonize Perjury and Injustice for Christian Virtues But to answer his particular Instances Will he say That either the things commanded or the Authority commanding then was unlawful If not how comes it up to our Case or how could they justly be made a ground of Separation But he would not see wherein the Fatality of the Consequence I urged lay which if he had pleased to do he might have spared all his Instances though he had had Forty more Suppose the Case thus a Government requires something to be done which is sinful and unlawsul with which if the Clergy will not comply they shall be discharged from the Exercise of their Function and Duty Now in such a case God forbids Compliance and if they are bound to submit to the Government and cease from the Exercise of their Ministry upon Non-compliance then it will lye in the Power of the Civil Government whether God shall be worshipped in the Land or not For sin we must not and yet if we must acquiesce under the Penalty for not complying then it is in their Power to discharge every Man from his Duty And therefore in such a Case I say we must do out Duty at our Peril we must do well and be content to suffer Ill we have no Remedy in such Case but to bear our Cross And to avoid or explode the Doctrine of the Cross here were in the consequence to thrust Christianity out of the World Of this not a word and indeed our Author 's great Skill lyes in avoiding not answering Arguments He farther adds That the Penalties though great are neither unjust or merciless if the Government is not otherwise to â—e secured What! not though the thing commanded be Sinful May a Government then enjoyu Wickedness under the severest Penalties if it be thought for its Security and yet be blameless There are a sort of Men are strangely careful for some Governments and what a small ado is required to establish a Throne in Unrighteousness and after all it will never be done but either this will not secure the Government according to your Principles or it may be without it For I must intreate you to remember a common Distinction amongst your selves I mean that between Government and Governours and then be pleased to call to mind who it is that expresly says That the Oath is to the Government not to the Person Now suppose a Man should take the Oaths with a design at the same time to secure the Government by putting it into other Hands I cannot see but that a Man may lawfully do thus upon your Principles and yet this were to make an Oath the most detestable Cheat that ever was known or heard of Sure the Eyes of Governours will one time or other be opened to see that these Men really strip them of all Security All our Churches saith he are open p. 8. and every one furnished with a bold Swearer But what 's this to the purpose Or how does it answer the Case I put For may they not on that account be shut at any time and for a longer time than they were in the Reign of King John And let me desire you Sir to remember though you have shut us out That the Church is not tyed to the Walls but follows the Authority of which we shall Discourse anon What he means by his Proportions of 12000. to 16000. and 2000. to 10000. I cannot imagine unless it be to expose the Apostacy and Iniquity of these Times which none before can parallel If he mean to upbraid us with the fewness of our Number it is only to encrease their own Shame and Reproach for Argument in this Case it is none or of no Force for it might as well have been pleaded against the Church in Elijah's time and he might for the same Reason have condemned all Christians in general because Christ calls them his Little Flock Whereas I alledged and proved That the Oaths were made a condition of Communion to us quatenùs Ministers He could not deny this only it seems we must be like Pelicans in the Wilderness and none must come near us For if we will separate we may but then we must separate alone For the People cannot joyn with us without being guilty of a notorious Schism p. 8. But if Ministers fall under a Deprivation which hath neither Cause for the Ground nor Authority for the Act and consequently is null and void in it self May not a Minister's own Flock joyn with him without being guilty of notorious Schism And if other Ministers will not only justifie such unjust Proceedings but greedily rob them of their Livelyhoods and enter upon their Charges May not those who receive the Wrong separately do their Duties But here he objects That this is nothing to the People of whom as Church Members this is not required And this he says is a tender Point and what I durst not touch upon The Point indeed is tender and though I had not Courage enough to swear i. e. to be Perjured yet my noble Hector shall find that I dare do any thing that is Honest It is not the Oaths in themselves nor their taking or our refusing upon which we merely justifie the Separation but it is the influence those Oaths have upon Communion and that is such as will not only justifie but oblige the People as well as the Papists to separate And if this be so then it is your selves must Separate alone because the People ought not to joyn with you For though the Oaths themselves are not imposed on the People as condition of Communion yet the Matter and Substance of those Oaths is put into the Prayers of the Church and so far it becomes a condition of Communion to all Persons For to every Prayer the People are required to say Amen and they are not left at their Liberty to joyn in what Prayers they will and not in others but are required not only to joyn but to testifie their joyning in all their Amen supposes their joynt consent concurrence and approbation What People are enjoyned in the solemn Worship to pray for is made a condition of Communion to them and if it be Sinful will not only justifie but require a Separation For what I may not swear though but once I may much less pray for daily nor can there be a greater affront offered to the Divine Goodness than by solemn Prayer to endeavour to engage it for that which at the same time I condemn as
Sense Judgment and Practice of the Primitive Times would have done well to have given us a touch or two of his Skill that way by some credeble Authorities and particularly of such a Subjection of the Bishop to the Metropolitan to the Confutation of some of St. Cyprian 's Epistles It being very likely that in a small time the whole Controversie may turn upon this hinge and it being most becoming Church Men to direct Ecclesiastical Proceedings by Ecclesiastical Authority I shall take a little more pains in this place to answer not only what he now objects but to take in what he hath at any time dispersedly spoken as to this Matter If this scornful Gentleman will so give up all to the Civil Power that their Commands and Orders must be actually obeyed and complyed with in every thing he in effect grants two things which done by any Clergy-man to have his Gown pulled over his Ears were too mean a Punishment First That it is in their Power to destroy Christianity and in the room of it to plant any other or none at all Secondly That Religion is only an Artifice or Sham to be made use of so far as it is serviceable to the Civil Power and no otherwise By this you may perceive what a Friend the Erastian is to the Atheist and though our Author doth not speak out yet he hath many Expressions that look earnestly that way But he will allow That the blessed Jesus who instituted the Christian Church did by a published Gospel and Succession of authorized Pastors provide for the Directing Ordering and Governing of that Church which they are to stand by in all Ages and Difficulties then he must grant That there are some Duties of a Christian which no Civil Power can supercede and though we are not allowed to resist the lawful Civil Power how hardly so ever it use us yet we must practice our Duty at our peril and if the Civil Power would obstruct it we must then take up our Cross and follow Christ And if this be not our Case we are mistaken Sufferers but if it be it will very much call in question their Sincerity To fear God and honour the King and not meddle with those who are given to change I think was not only laid down as a wise Man's Advice but designed as a Duty and Obligation upon every particular Person But not to urge here matters of Justice Fidelity and common Honesty which yet by the way I think are never to be slighted we are here to consider what Obligations we may lie under with respect to the Government and Orders in the Church And if he will allow me to reason either from the Practice of the Church or the Canons of the Church or the Writings of those who best understood both particularly St. Cyprians whom he himself Magnifies and than whom no Man better understood this Cause then I doubt not but we may go a considerable way in it That Episcopacy is the highest Order in the Christian Church and that there is nothing which one Bishop as a Bishop may do but another may do the same I readily grant and consequently That there can be no such thing as Episcopus Episcoporum But then that there are withal certain Rights Priviledges and Prerogatives belonging to the Metropolitan which have been always thought to have been inseperably annexed to him and from the exercise of which other Bishops have been ever ordinarily debarr'd and that upon this account that the Peace and Unity of the Church cannot be otherwise preserved nor the Government managed this I say I think to be as plain as the High way Whatever the Rights or Priviledges of Metropolitans may be I shall only Discourse of some which were universally allowed by the Ancient Church and confirmed by Canons or Practice universally received and which may at least in some measure affect our Case of which one is this That no one was to be Ordained a Bishop without the concurrence or consent of the Metropolitan In the 19th Canon of the 1st Councel of Antioch it is thus determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That a Bishop shall not be Ordained without a Synod and the Presence of the Metropolitan And when in the same Canon they had made the actual Presence of the Metropolitan as necessary as such a case could permit they add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That if any thing be done otherwise then as was than determined the Ordination shall be invalid Now this very Canon was only pursuant to a Canon of the Councel of Nice and because most Men especially those with whom we have now to do have at least formerly pretended a great Veneration for that Ancient Councel we will see what was their Judgment which in the 6th Can. you may find expressed thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let this be universally known that if any one be Ordained a Bishop without the consent of the Metropolitan This great Counsel doth determine that such a one ought to be no Bishop Perhaps it was for this Reason That Eusebius as far as I remember in reckoning up the Ecclesiastical Succession except Jerusalem for which there might be particular Reasons mentions only Metropolitical Sees For whilst the Rights of the Metropolitan were preserved and his Succession undoubted it was scarce possible that the other Bishops of the Province should come in any other way but at the right Door for he was either to be actually at or consent their to Ordination by Bishops summoned by him for that purpose so that as the being sure concerning him removed away all doubt of the rest so the being uncertain concerning him of course makes all the Ordinations in his time uncertain This I say that you may consider what will be the effect of Setting up a Metropolitan against a Metropolitan and how it is a fair way to render the validity of the Ministerial Function called in question But of what force such an Act would be if done I shall consider presently Another matter appropriated by the universal Church to the Metropolitan was that nothing of Moment which might concern the Province or be of general Concernment should be done without his privity and consent so that unjustly to set a Metropolitan aside and for other Bishops to neglect him is to make matters of greatest Moment and nearest Concernment to the Church to become impracticable and to draw a Scandal upon the Actions of all Bishops as to any thing they shall do in such Cases and when I have offered Authorities for the Proof of this I leave others to judge whether they are Credible enough for such a Huff as our Author Amongst those Ancient Canons collected and received before the Councel of Nice which are vulgarly called the Apostles Canons the 34th runs thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. The Bishops of every Country ought to observe him who is their First or Chief and to esteem him as their Head and to do