nascenti pagina Romae Ne vacet Egeriam consuluisse Numae Nôsset Sparta isthaec duro formata Lycurgo Secula mansisset quot stetit illa dies Nec tibi Parthenope gemino quater amplius anno Mutâsset dominos plebs malefida suos Nec sibi foedâsset fastos tam turpiter Anglus Mille per incertas mobilis usque vices Quam bene Lawsoni magni dignissimus haeres Nominis ille salo jura dat ipse solo Qui regnare doces qui parere libenter Imperium calami cedimus ecce tibi Te tantum genuit vicus brevis angulus orbis Langcliff nascenti conscia terra mihi Eborac invideant vel Athenae debeo plura Jam pro te patriae pro patriâque tibi J. Carr M. D. The Arguments of the several Chapters CHAP. I. THE Propriety of God acquired by Creation and continued by Preservation the ground of God's Supream Dominion and Power which is Vniversal over all Creatures more particular and special over Men and Angels who are capable of Laws Rewards Punishments not only Temporal but Eternal The exercise of this Power over men immediate or mediate Mediate in his Government by men over men is either Temporal and Civil or Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Of the Government Spiriritual before Christ's incarnation and after his Session at the right hand of God. Of the Church Christian Triumphant Militant Mystical Visible Vniversal Particular The particular parts of the Vniversal Church as visible the principal subject of the following Discourse Of our Differences and the Causes thereof of hope of better times and the Author's disposition and intention CHAP. II. Of a Community Civil What Politica is what a Common-wealth the subject of Politica What the parts of a Common-wealth what a Community in general which is the subject of a Common-wealth the name and nature of it Of a Community Civil the matter and the form thereof the Original of Civil Communities the members both natural and naturalized whether they be imperfectly or formally or eminently such The capacity of this Association to receive the form of a Civil Government Liberty Equality Propriety Adjuncts to this Community CHAP. III. Of an Ecclesiastical Community The Definition of it the explication of the Definition The distinction of the Members less or more perfectly such the manner of Incorporation Liberty Equality and aptitude to receive a form of Discipline Proprieties of this Society Where something concerning Children born of Christian Parents whether they be members of the Church or no. CHAP. IV. Of Power Civil The parts of Politica Constitution and Administration what Constitution is and what the parts of a Common-wealth both Civil and Ecclesiastical which are two 1. Soveraign 2. Subjects What Power in general what Power Civil what Supream Power or Majesty Civil the Branches thereof which are called Jura Majestatis the multitude of them reduced to order by several Writers and by the Author The Properties of Majesty which is real or personal What Soveraign real and personal may do The subject of Real Majesty in England the personal Majesty of the Parliament and of the King. CHAP. V. Of the Acquisition of Civil Power and the Amission thereof Civil Power not essential but accidental to any Person It 's acquired in an extrordinary or ordinary way In an ordinary way by consent or Conquest justly or unjustly as by Vsurpation Vsurpation no good Title The Person Vsurping Power at the first by subsequent consent may acquire a good Title Succession and the several ways of Succession Amission of Power by violence or voluntary consent or death Whether any can be made Soveraign by condition Whether Soveraign Power once acquired may be forfeited how and to whom the forfeiture may be made CHAP. VI. Of Power Ecclesiastical The Power is Spiritual not Civil Why it 's called the Power of the Keys as different from that of the Sword. Binding and loosing the same with shutting and opening and both belong chiefly to Legislation and Jurisdiction This Power is Supream and Independent in every particular Church constituted aright according to the Rules of the Gospel The Branches and several Acts of it as making of Canons the constitution of Officers Jurisdiction disposing of the Churches goods Of the extent and also the bounds of the Power Certain distinctions of Spiritual Government as Internal External Vniversal Particular Formal Material or Objective CHAP. VII Of acquiring or losing Ecclesiastical Power The just acquisition of this Power extraordinary in the highest measure as in Christ or in an inferiour degree as in the Apostles How ordinary Churches derive it from Christ by the Gospel-Charter in an ordinary way The Power of the Church and Church-Officers unequal The several ways of Vsurping and also of losing this Power CHAP. VIII Of the disposition of Power Civil from the several manners of which arise the several forms of Government General Observations premised The several ways of disposing Majesty or Supream Power in a State. Pure Forms Monarchies Despotical and Regal Pure Aristocracies and Democracies Mixt Governments when the Power is placed in the several States joyntly The Constitution of England Our Kings and their Title Peers Commons Parliaments and the limits of their Power The limits of the King 's personal Majesty Our late divisions and confusions Whether King or Parliament as separate could be justified by the fundamental constitution of England By what Rule the Controversie must be tried Whether Party at the first was more faithful to the English Protestant interest How the state of the Controversie altered The high and extraordinary actings of all Parties The good that God hath brought out of our Disorders and Confusions Whom God hath hitherto most punished What is to be done if we intend a Settlement of State and Church CHAP. IX Of the Disposition of Power Ecclesiastical and whether the Bishop of Rome be the first Subject of it under Christ. The many and great differences about the first subject of the Power of the Keys The Pope the Prince the Prelate the Presbyter the People challenge it as due unto them by a Divine Right Their several pretended Titles examined Whether that of the Bishop of Rome be good or valid His greatness state and pomp The opinions of some Authors concerning him The power he challengeth is Transcendent The reasons to prove his title taken from Politicks Ancient Writers the Scriptures The insufficiency of them though some may seem to prove the possession yet none make good the Title CHAP. X. Whether Civil Soveraigns have any right unto the power of the Keys Their power and advantage to assume and exercise this power Their power not spiritual but temporal The power of ordering Matters of Religion what it is and how it differs from the power of the Keyes Jus Religionis ordinandae rightly understood belongs to all higher Powers The Kings and Queens of England though acknowledged over all persons in all causes both Civil and Ecclesiastical supream Governours yet
strains and far from being any ground either of Logical or Theological proofs 2. Such as were proper might agree to that Church for that time when it was honoured with persons of eminent piety and learning which were found in it as being the seat of the Empire And such things might be true of that Church then which do not agree unto it now 3. It 's found by the searching of the ancient Manuscripts that some things have been foisted into the Books of these ancient Authors in favour of that Church For they who could even before the fourth Century was ended corrupt the Copy if not the Latine Original of the Nicene Council and put in a Canon for to warrant receiving appeals from Africk which was not found in the Greek Original are not much to be trusted 4. Suppose many or all of those ancient commendations which were proper should be true yet they will not amount to that plenitude of power which in after times was exercised and to this day is challenged by the Bishops of that See. 5. None of those honourable testimonies are of Divine authority or firmly grounded upon the Scriptures And what the Scriptures give them that we will not deny them 3. As for their arguments from Scriptures I have wondred that any rational man should ever use them as they are by them applied to the Pope To argue That because Christ said to Peter to thee I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and if thou lovest me feed my Sheep therefore the present Bishop of Rome is the Head and absolute Monarch of the Universal Church and invested with plenitude of power is very irrational There is such a vast distance between these Scriptures and the conclusion and so many mediums to be used before they can come at it and the same so uncertain that no man that will make use of his reason can assent unto the conclusion when all is said that can be said in behalf of this Universal Vicar from these Texts If we should maintain our cause against them by such arguments they would reject us with scorn and indignation Let his party plead and plead again for his Universal and transcendent power I am sure of one thing that if he loved Christ as Peter professed he did and had a mind sincerely bent to feed his Flock he would never challenge much less exercise such vast power That Christ left a power sufficient to the Church we verily believe but that he delegated so great a power or delegated it unto him we utterly deny and have great reason for it Yet because we will not submit unto his papal Majesty we must be condemned as Schismaticks and Hereticks deprived of all hope of Salvation as having no Communion with that Church whereof he is Head and lodged in Hell the lowest Hell. And all this is done upon the weakest grounds that ever rational man did use But we appeal to Heaven where Christ will be our Advocate and plead our cause and carry it too If it were needful I would single out the chiefest arguments used by them of Rome to maintain this Title and answer them distinctly But this is done already by many worthy and learned men Therefore I will take it for granted as that which hath been made good and evident that the Pope is not the first and proper subject of the power of the Keys CHAP. X. Whether the Civil State have any good Title to the Power of the Keys section 1 YET if the Pope cannot have and hold this power yet the Princes Soveraigns and civil States especially Christian will assume it and they have the strongest and the surest way of all others if they once get possession for to keep it and that 's the Sword. King Henry 8. did not only refuse to submit unto the Roman supremacy but took it to himself and became within his own Dominions over all persons in all causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil supream Head and Governour So the Priest by the Prince was divested of a considerable part both of his power and also his Revenue But whether he could be the proper subject of this spiritual Power or make good his Title to it was much doubted and that by many As King he was but caput regni non Ecclesiae and as such he might have some Civil but no Ecclesiastical Power at all Yet though it was called Ecclesiastical yet it was not such Grammatice sed Rhetorice not properly but by a Trope a Metonymie of the adjunct for the Subject circa quod For the power of a State Temporal is only Civil if properly and formally considered yet the Civil Soveraign had always something to do in matters of Religion concerning which it may make Laws pass Judgment and execute the same yet the Laws the Judgments the Execution were Civil not strictly Ecclesiastical Therefore such as maintained the Regal Supremacy in Ecclesiasticals were so wise as to say that it was but materially and objectively in the Crown In which sense it was always due to Civil Powers as Civil as appears from Deut. 13. and many other places of Scripture as also from many Examples not only of the Kings of Judah but of Ninivy Babylon and Persia. That many of these Heathen Princes and also of the Kings of Israel did abuse this power for the establishment or exercise of a false Religion and Idolatry is no argument to prove they had it not but that they did not use it aright 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 circa sacra did always belong and that by divine institution to the Civil Higher Powers section 2 For the better understanding of this point several things are to be observed 1. That as there is no people so barbarous but profess and practise some Religion so there is no State or orderly Government but acknowledgeth some Deity or Divine Power upon which they conceive their publick Peace Safety Prosperity and good Success doth depend as we may by the very Scriptures and also by other Histories be informed For every Nation had their publick gods besides their Family-tutelar Deities It 's true though by the light of Nature considering the Glorious works of Heaven and Earth they might have known the true God yet they changed the Glory of God into a Lye or false God and conceived that to be a God which was no such thing 2. The supream Governours of these States had a special care to order the matters of that Religion which they publickly received They made Laws appointed Priests for the Service and Worship of their Gods. This is also evident from Scripture and from other Histories too This ordering of Religion as publick was always held a right of the publick Power 3. Yet they had no power to establish or observe any Religion or Worship but that which God had instituted according to the Laws of Nature or divine Revelation if they did they abused their Power For that very power as from
God was nothing but jus ad recte agendum a right to do right in matters of Religion If they did otherwise they abused their power they lost it not And if an Heathen Prince or State should become Christian they acquire no new Right but are further engaged to exercise their power in abolishing Idolatry and establishing the true Worship of the true God. This may be signified by the Titles of Nursing-Fathers of the Church Defenders of the Faith Most Christian Most Catholick King. All which as they signified their Right so they also pointed at their Duty which was to protect the true Church and maintain the True Christian Catholick Faith. 4. Though Regal and Sacerdotal power were always distinct and different in themselves yet they were often disposed and united in one Person Thus Melchisedeck was both King and Priest Thus Romulus was Prince and the chief Pontiffe For he is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Halicar Antiqu. Rom. lib. 2. The succeeding Kings took the same place After the Regal power was abolished it was an high Office. When Rome became Imperial the Emperours took the Title of Supream Pontiffe and some of them after they became Christian retained it Yet still as the Powers so the Acts were distinct For Melchisedeck as King ruled his People in Righteousness and Peace as Priest officiated received Tithes and blessed Abraham As they were sometimes united so they were divided For God entailed the Sacerdotal power upon the house of Aaron and afterwards the Regal power upon the family of David Neither did Christ or his Apostles think it fit to make the Ministers Magistrates or the Magistrates Ministers Yet in this Union or Division you must know that this Sacerdotal and Ministerial power was not this Civil power of Religion which always belonged to the Civil Governours even then when these two powers were divided 5. If Civil powers stablish Religion and that by Law call Synods order them ratifie their Canons divest spiritual and Ecclesiastical persons of their temporal priviledges or restore them yet they do all this by their civil power by which they cannot excommunicate absolve suspend much less officiate and preach and administer Sacraments In this respect if the civil power make a civil Law against Idolatry Blasphemy Heresie or other scandal they may by the same power justly punish the offenders by the sword and the Church censure them by the power of the Keyes 6. This jus Religionis ordinandae this power of ordering matters of Religion is not the power of the Church but of the State not of the Keyes but of the sword The Church hath nothing to do with the sword nor the State with the Keyes Christ did not say tell the State and whatsoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven c. Neither did he say of the Church that she beareth not the sword in vain Therefore he must needs be very ignorant or very partial that shall conceive that the State is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the power of the Keyes section 3 These things premised give occasion to consider how the Oath of Supremacy is to be understood especially in these words wherein the Kings or Queens of England were acknowledged over all persons in causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil all supream head and because that word Head was so offensive it was changed into Governour For the clearing hereof it 's to be observed 1. That by these words it was intended to exclude all foreign Power both Civil and Ecclesiastical especially that which the Bishops of Rome did challenge and also exercise within the Dominions of the Crown of England 2. That the Kings and Queens of Enland had no power supream in making Laws and passing judgements without the Parliament Therefore by supream Governour was meant supream Administratour for the execution of the Laws in the intervals of Parliament In this respect the Canons and injunctions made by the Clergy though confirmed by royal assent without the Parliament have been judged of no force 3. That by Ecclesiastical causes are meant such causes as are materially Ecclesiastical yet properly civil as before For matters of Religion in respect of the outward profession and practice and the Parties professing and practising are subject to the civil power For by the outward part the State may be disturbed put in danger of Gods judgements and the persons are punishable by the sword even for those crimes Yet neither can the sword reach the soul nor rectifie the conscience except per accidens That by Ecclesiastical is not meant spiritual in proper sense is clear because the Kings of England never took upon them to excommunicate or absolve neither had those Chancellours that were only Civilians and not Divines power to perform such acts Yet they received their power from the Bishops and it was counted Ecclesiastical 4. In respect of these Titles those Courts which were called Spiritual and Ecclesiastical derived their power from the Crown And the Bishops did correct and punish disquiet disobedient criminous persons within their Diocess according to such authority as they had by Gods word and as to them was committed by the authority of this Realm These are the words of the Book of Ordination in the consecration of Bishops The words seem to imply that they had a mixt or at least a twofold power one by the word as trusted with the power of the Keyes the other from the Magistrate or Crown and that was civil Such a mixt power they had indeed in the high Commission Yet though this may be implyed yet it may be they understood that their power by the word of God and from the Crown were the same The act of restoring the ancient jurisdiction to the Crown 1 Eliz. 1. doth make this further evident For it 's an act of restoring the ancient jurisdiction in Ecclesiasticals especially to the Crown for that 's the Title Where it must be observed that the power was such as the Parliament did give 2. That they did not give it anew but restore it 3. They could not had no power to give it if it belonged to the Crown by the Constitution but to declare it to be due upon which Declaration the Queen might resume that which the Pope had usurped and exercised 4. It 's remarkable that not the Queen but the Parliament by that act did restore it as the act of the Oath of supremacy was made by a Parliament which by that act could not give the King any power at all which was not formerly due In respect of Testaments temporal jurisdiction Dignities Priviledges Titles as due unto the Church by humane Constitution and donation all Ecclesiastical causes concerning these were determinable by a civil power How tithes are a lay-fee or divine right hath been declared formerly Hence it doth appear that the Oath of Supremacy was not so easily understood as it was easily taken by many and the Oxford Convocation I believe but that they
commended or reproved and charged with divers sins and threatned with such punishments as must fall upon all After all these proofs from Scripture recourse is had to Antiquity and Universality as sufficient grounds of a prescription which is a good kind of title But 1. In divine things especially such as are of ordinary and universal obligation Antiquity and Universality without a Divine Institution will not serve the turn 2. The Hierarchy prescribes as much and as high as Episcopacy invested with power of Ordination and Jurisdiction as proper to it self yet it s confessed to be only of humane institution 3. What is it how is it defined What Divine Institution can be made evident of that which they say is so universal and ancient 4. Who are the witnesses by whose testimony this Antiquity and Universality is proved They are besides some of later times but few and all within the Roman Empire many of them Bishops themselves and some of them bitter Enemies one against another They are not one of an hundred amongst the Bishops not one of a thousand amongst others Yet the Church in the Apostles times was enlarged to the ends of the Earth And as then so now there were in every Century thousands that did never write or if they did they wrote not of Episcopacy and many of them might be as great Schollars as those whose books are extant 5. There was a special reason why there might be Bishops and the same Hierarchical in the principal parts of the Roman Teritory as shall be touched hereafter 6. Suppose these Bishops to have the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction yea the whole power of the Keyes which includes the Legislative in making Canons can any man prove that they had it always in all places and if so that they had it severally in their several precincts and not joyntly with their fellow Bishops as Representatives in Counsels and also with Presbyters and others too It s well enough known that other besides Bishops had their suffrage in Synods Arles President of the Council of Basil proves stoutly that Presbyters have their Votes and without them he could not have carried the cause against Panormitan and his faction section 8 After the primitive and the Hierarchical Episcopacy comes in the English which hath something singular He that will understand the nature of it more fully must read Dr. Zouch Dr. Mucket Dr. Cosens the Civilian his Tables with him who calls himself Didoclavius upon him By all whom we may understand 1. It was not the primitive Episcopacy 2. It was clearly Hierarchical for we had Bishops and two Arch-Bishops of York and Canterbury the one the Metropolitan of England the other of all England The Bishops took their Oath of obedience to the Arch-Bishops as appeareth by the book of ordination They did arrogate the power of ordination to themselves though Presbyters did in the ordination impose hands with them and some of them confessed they had it only with the Presbyter joyntly Yet we know how that by others is eluded 3. Not to say any thing of their Titles Dignity Revenue Baronies annexed to their Sea their place in the house of the Peers in Parliament and their priviledges they had cast off in effect not only the people but Presbytery For though the Presbytery had their Clerks both in the Convocation of York and also at London if the Parliament sat there yet they took upon them in the end to nominate these Clerks and deprive the Ministers of their right of Election As for the Deanes and Chapters which should have been eminent Persons and chosen by the Presbytery in every Diocess to represent them they were degenerate from their original Institution and the Bishops who should have done nothing but joyntly with them did all things without them They in effect though unjustly engrossed the whole power of Administration 4. Yet this is observable that 1. They could make no Canons but joyntly in one Assembly 2. That joyntly amongst themselves without the Presbytery they had not this power 3. That no Canons were valid without the Royal Assent 4. Neither by the Constitution was the Royal Assent sufficient without the Parliament 5. That they derived much of their Ecclesiastical power from the Crown For by the Oath of Supremacy is declared that the King of England is over all persons even in Ecclesiastical causes Supream Governour In which respect all their secular Power Revenue Dignity and also their nomination and confirmation with their investiture is from him He calls Synods confirms their Canons grants Commissions to exercise Jurisdiction purely Ecclesiastical In the first year of King Edward the sixth by a Statute they were bound to use the Kings name not their own even in their Citations and as before they must correct and punish offenders according to such Authority as they had by the Word of God and as to them should be committed by the ordinance of this Realm So that if the Popish Bishops derive their power from the Pope and the English from the King neither of them could be jure divino And by this the title of most Bishops in Europe is meerly humane and that in two respects 1. Because its Hierarchial 2. Derived either from an higher Ecclesiastical or an higher secular power section 9 Thus far I have enquired though briefly and according to my poor ability into the definition and institution of a Bishop the subject of the Question which is this Whether a Bishop or Bishops be the primary subject of the Keyes The meaning whereof is 1. Whether they be the primary and adequate sole subject of the whole power of the Keyes whereof the principal though not all the branches are making Canons and receiving last appeals without any provocation from them For they may be subjects and not primary they may be subjects of some part and not of the whole power 2. Whether they be such subjects of this power in foro exteriori For in foro interiori the Presbyters have as much as they 3. Whether they be such subjects of such power in foro exteriori quatenus Episcopi reduplicative 4. Whether as such they be such a subject by Divine Institution For solution hereof it s to be considered 1. That except there be an Universal consent and the same clearly grounded upon Scripture both what a Bishop is and 2. That made evident that his Title is of Divine Institution the affirmative cannot be proved 2. That though a Bishop could be clearly proved to have the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction yet it will not follow from thence that he is the primary subject of that power For the negative many things may be said 1. Neither the papal nor the English Bishop so far as the one derives his power from the Pope and the other from the Crown can be the primary subject of this power the secondary they may be 2. For such as derive not their power from
and the parts the Soveraign and the Subject According to this method though mine ability be not much I have spoken of a Community both Civil and Ecclesiastical and of a Common-wealth 1. Civil then 2. Ecclesiastical In both the first part is the Soveraign where I enquire 1. Into his power civil and then into the spiritual power of the Keys in the Church 2. I proceed to declare how the Civil Soveraign acquires or loseth his power and how the Church derives her power or is deprived of it 3. The next thing is the several ways of disposing the power civil in a certain subject whence arise the several forms of Government civil and the disposal of the power of the Keys the primary subject whereof is not the Pope or Prince or Prelate or Presbyter or People as distinct from Presbyters but the whole particular Church which hath it in the manner of a free State. Here something is said of the extent of the Church After all this comes in pars subdita both Civil and Ecclesiastical where I speak of the nature of subjection and of the distinction division and education of the Subjects both of the State and Church All this is done with some special reference both to the State and Church of England desiring Peace and Reformation If any require a reason why I do not handle Ecclesiastical Government and Civil distinctly by themselves without this mixture the reasons are especially two 1. That it might be known that the general Rules of Government are the same both in Church and State for both have the same common principles which by the light of Reason Observation and Experience may be easily known but especially by the Scriptures from which an intelligent Reader may easily collect them Therefore it 's in vain to write of Church-Government without the knowledge of the Rules of Government in general and the same orderly digested The ignorance of these is the cause why so many write at random of Discipline and neither satisfie others nor bring the Controversies concerning the same unto an issue 2. By this joynt handling of them the difference between Church and State Civil and Ecclesiastical Government the power of the Sword and Keys is more clearly as being laid together apparent For this is the nature of Dissentanies Quod juxta posita clarius elucescunt This is against Erastus and such as cannot distinguish between the power of ordering Religion for the external part which belongs unto the civil Soveraigns of all States and the power of the Keys which is proper to the Church as a Church Yet if these two Reasons will not satisfie and some Reader may desire and wish they had been handled dictinctly he may read them as dictinct and several even in this Book I my self had some debate within my self what way I should handle them yet upon these reasons I resolved to do as I have done section 12 A Common-wealth once constituted is not immortal but is subject to corruptions conversion and subversion The Authors of Politicks following the Philosopher make these accidents the last part of their Political Systems and some speak of them more briefly some at large and declare the causes and prescribe the Remedies both for prevention and recovery Corruption is from the bad constitution or male-administration and both Soveraign and Subject may be and many times are guilty The conversion and woful changes and also the subversion and ruine is from God as the supream Governour and just Judge of Mankind who punisheth not only single and private Persons and Families but whole Nations and Common-wealths Of these things the Scripture humane Stories and our own experience do fully inform us But of them if it may be useful I shall speak more particularly and fully in the second Book the subject whereof in general is Administration in particular Laws and Canons Officers of the State and of the Church and Jurisdiction both Civil and Ecclesiastical The reasons why I desire to publish this first and severally from the latter part are partly because though the first draught of that latter part was finished above half a Year ago yet I intend to enlarge upon the particulars partly because I desire to know what entertainment this first part may meet withal for if it be good I shall be the more encouraged to go forward but chiefly because the most material Heads and Controversies are handled in this which is far more difficult The latter will be more easie yet profitable and useful especially if some of greater ability would undertake it The God of Truth and Peace give us Humility Patience Charity and the Knowledge of his Truth that holding the Truth in Love we may grow up unto him in all things which is the Head even Christ to whom be Honour Glory and Thanks for ever Amen FINIS * vid. Comin de bell Neap. lib. 5. Scope of the Work. Means to prevent Errors Sect. 1. The reason of differences in Church-Affairs What a Common-wealth in general is Foundation of the Work. Constitution Community in general De C. D. lib. 19. Cap. 21. Cap. 22. What Community Civil is Original of community Members of a Community Ecclesiast Community A good ground of Childrens right to Baptisme What hinders Reformation A Community formed is a Commonwealth De C. D. Lib. 19. cap. 13. Neighbour a notion of Society Majesty in the People really c. Real Majesty greater than Personal The mistake of Junius Brutus Buchanon Heno A Parliament cannot alter a form of Government A happy Community Majesty Personal Acts of Personal Majesty 1. Without Within Soveraigns must order Matters of Religion Civil matters Properties of Majesty Fundamental Charter of Civil Majesty Power how got Justly got extraordinary How Kings must govern Ordinarily By Election Best Government By Conquest Vsurpation Subjects may defend their Rights What destroys Personal Majesty Bracton Kings duty Binds not posterity Majesty when forfeited When Subjection ceases a Isa. 22.2 Vers. 21. b Rev. 1.18 1 Cor. 3.7 d Mat. 16.29 e Joh. 20.22 23. f 1 Cor. 5.12 g Ibid. h Ibid. 13. 11 Quaest. in vesperiis Dib 4. dist 8. Quaest. 2. What a King is What the King cannot do Parliament best Assembly Parliament Members qualified Wittena Gemote What the House of Commons is The End of calling the House of Lords What Barons called to Parliament Power of Parliament without the King. Why Kings Consent required First subject of Personal Majesty What the Parliament cannot do Who gave Crown Prerogatives and Parliament-being Kings of England no absolute Monarchs Cause of England 's Miseries What observable in our sad Divisions How to judge of our Divisions What charged on the King. Disobedience to King unlawful Parliament accused acquitted The cause changed Treaty at the Isle of Wight The 〈◊〉 works 〈◊〉 God among us Sect. 22. What may be the best way of settlement Qualification of Parliament members What to be looked into by a Parliament first * Non assumit Rex vel jus clavium vel censurae sed quae exterioris politiae Tort. Torti pag. 318. Rex qua Rex habet primatum Ecclesiasticum objective qua Christianus effective qua Rex actu primo qua Christianus secundo Mason de Minist Angl. l. 3. pag. 312. Primitive Bishop His Power Hierarchical B. B. His Power Hierarch Jure Humano * De Repub Eccles. lib. 2. c. 3. sect 7 8 9. Sect. 7. * Act. 8.14 * Ludovicus Arabelensis Lewis Arch-Bishop of Arles President in the Council of Basil. English Bishops What Dean and Chapters were English Bishops not Jure Divino * Lib. 3. c. 3 4. Tit. de praescript adversus haereticos Job 37.12 Prov. c. 12.5 * Gal. 1.1 * De. polit Ecclesiastica l. 3. c. 7. p. 26. * Tort Tor. p. 41. * Vignierus de excommunicatine venatorum The Church the Subject of the Keyes As in the Fundamental Office of Christ. Church-government what Who guilty of Schism Who Schismaticks Parish no Congregation Christian What Church the primary subject of the Keys The supposed end of the Congregational notion The subject of the whole Treatise * Isa. 49.23 Chap. 60.16 22. * Chap. 55.34 * 1 Cor. 11.34 * In his Book of the Church c. 8. p. 63. Best means to reform and unite a Church Divided What 's the chief interest of a Nation as Christian. Soveraign real Personal Measure of subjection rightly bounded The rational part of a people the heir of real Majesty The Sacrament what Education What makes a Church-Member Who a Visible Saint Division Subordination of that Church when Subordination of Bishops prudential Episcopal Hierarchy not of Divine Authority Bishops over Presbyters uncertain The Pope the Man of Sin c. Prelacy the occasion of Hierarchy and that of Papacy England under no foreign Primate What a Bishop was at first No Divine Testimony for Bishops Bishops of good use not of necessity A special Work of the Levite
or land in time of Peace or Warre To these may be referred Heralds Ambassadours publick Agents with the rest which shall be mentioned in the second Book of this Treatise And because he is no Officer which hath not some publick power and this he cannot have of and from himself therefore all Officers are made such by the Soveraign who by granting Commissions and other wayes derives their power unto them And as he gives them power so he may remove them and revoke their power or translate them or call them to account To chuse nominate propose them may be an act of the people or some of them yet to constitute them and give them their political being is an act of Majestie either mediate or immediate And because the personal Soveraign and his Officers cannot do their duty and discharge their places without sufficient maintenance therefore in this respect there is a right to command the purse For as they say he that bears the sword must have the purse And if there be not a sufficient standing Revenue and Treasury determined in the constitution the Soveraign must have a power to raise monies to defray the publick necessary charges Hence that Vniversale eminens dominium of Majesty in every State so much mentioned in the Authors of Politicks The reason of this is clear in the very light of nature that the people maintain their Governours because the benefit of the Government redounds unto them according to that of the Apostle For this cause pay you tribute also for they are Gods Ministers attending continually upon this very thing Render therefore to all their dues tribute to whom tribute is due custom to whom custom Rom. 13.6 7. It 's true that Soveraigns may have their private purse therefore some distinguish inter aerarium fiscum Aerarium is the publick Treasury which is maintained by Tribute Custom and other Impositions and this is to be raised and disposed of by the supream for the preservation of the publick Fiscus as some tell is the Soveraigns private purse whereof he may dispose at will and pleasure This publick propriety presupposeth every mans several propriety and no wayes prejudice it This right is reckoned by some amongst the lesser Prerogatives but there can be no minora Jura Majestatis in proper sense For because Majestas is Maxima potestas therefore all the essential parts and rights are so too section 13 The last is the Power of Jurisdiction whereby Justice is administred and it 's over all persons in all causes both Military Civil and Ecclesiastical so far as they fall under the Soveraigns cognisance Under this Head I comprehend not only the power of those acts of Judgement more strictly so called as Convention Discussion Decision of the cause upon evidence of the merit or demerit but the Execution To which last may be referred all penalties as well capital as not capital with Dispensations in Judgement suspension of Execution pardons To this of Jurisdiction also belongs all reservations of certain causes the receiving last appeals the final determinations and irrevocable sentences By vertue of this Power Commissions for judicial proceedings Courts the order of trial from first to last all calling of Assemblies general and provincial Civil and Ecclesiastical are determined From all this it 's evident that all Jurae Majestatis may be reduced to the Legislative Judicial and Executive Power if we understand Judicial and Executive in a larger sense than they are commonly taken And here it 's to be noted that Majesty Real is before and above all Majesty personal And by personal Majesty or personal Soveraign I do not mean only one single person as a Monarch but all Aristocratical and Polyarchical Soveraigns who are many Physically but considered as one person morally as joyntly invested with one Power Soveraign section 14 Thus far concerning the nature of Majesty after which follow some Epithets given to Majesty by Authors to signifie the properties thereof These are either included in the essence or flow from it For 1. It 's absolute and so Arbitrary Absolute soluta legibus It cannot be bound by any Lawes nor judged because the Soveraign is the Lawgiver himself and the Fountain of Jurisdiction He may bind himself by Oath to govern and judge according to the Lawes not to be governed or judged by the Lawes Yet no Soveraign personal is free from the Obligation of the natural and positive Lawes of God in force and how far he is inferiour to the real Soveraign who is subject to the same Lawes I will not here discuss 2. It 's universal not only in respect of all acts of Government but of all persons within that Territory For it must be coadequate to the whole body which it must act and animate it 's neither greater nor less No persons things or actions within can be exempted from this Power nor can it extend to any thing person action without but per Accidens 3. It s supream not in respect of God nor of the power of other States but in respect of the power of Fathers Masters Officers Corporations and Societies within every several State. For by vertue of Majesty it is that Soveraigns are equal in respect of themselves superiours in respect of their Subjects and inferiours unto God whose servants and subjects they are trusted with a particle of his power and accountable unto him 4. It 's Independent yet not in respect of God upon whom all Soveraigns do not only chiefly but wholly depend but in respect of all subordinate Powers within but coadequate to them without For all power civil within the Territory is derived from Majesty Fiduciary Princes therefore as such are not Soveraigns though they may have the title of Soveraignty yet a Soveraign may be fiduciary for some part of a Country within and part of the Dominions of another Soveraign Neither can the chief Magistrate of a Commonwealth trusted at certain times with the general exercise of the Power be such Protection and Vassalage are conceived by some not to destroy Independency neither doth confederation For though the League between several States as in Switzerland and the united Netherlands Provinces may be strict and Commissioners may be made and trusted with great power in things which concern the several States jointly such the states-General of the Low-Countries be yet this is thought to be no diminution of Majesty For it remains entire in the several Republicks 5. It s indivisible for though it hath several branches which may be distinguished yet they cannot be separated For if you take away but one much more if you take away more you make it imperfect and essentially defective and insufficient to Govern For as in Philosophy Essentia est indivisibilis so in Politicks Majestas est indivisibilis sic Majestatis Jura sunt inseparabilia As these Rights are indivisible in respect of themselves so they are in respect of the Subject For divide and separate some of
and expedient aecording to the general Rules of order decency unity and edification according to that distinction of Laws into declarative and constitutive section 8 After Laws are made and established they must be put in execution otherwise though they be both wisely and justly enacted and in themselves very excellent yet they are in vain and to no purpose This cannot be done without Officers therefore there must needs be a power of making Church-Rulers Under this Head we must comprehend Election Examination Ordination Suspension Degradation and whatsoever concerns the making reforming or disposing of Offices When Canons are made Officers with power of jurisdiction be constituted yet all is to no purpose except they proceed to hear and finally determine all Causes and Controversies within their Spiritual jurisdiction Therefore there must be Jus jurisdictionis cum ultima provocatione Hitherto appertain all Ecclesiastical Tribunals Judges judicial proceedings the discussion of all causes within their Cognisance sentences of Authoritative admonition Suspension Excommunication Absolution and Execution of all Besides all these because the Church whilest on Pilgrimage towards her Heavenly City hath need of these earthly and temporal goods neither can the publick Worship of God or her Officers be maintained nor her poor Saints relieved without them therefore every particular Church should be furnished with a Revenue and have a kind of publicum aerarium of her own which is not to be disposed of according to the will and pleasure of any private person or persons But there must be a power as to make Officers for other things so for this particular to receive keep and dispense the Church's Treasure this of themselves without publick consent they cannot do Therefore though the making of Deacons belong unto the second part of this Independant power yet jus dispensandi bona Ecclesiae publica is a distinct power of it self Christ and his Apostles had a common purse Joh. 13.29 so had the Church Act. 6.1 2 3 c. For this end they had their Collections at set times 1 Cor. 16.1 2. This Treasury belonged to the Church not to the State and did arise from the free gifts of such as were of ability and well disposed before there was any Tenure in Franke Almoigne as afterwards there was section 9 Before I conclude this Point concerning power lest instead of a well-composed body I make an indigested lump of heterogeneous stuff I will enquire how far it doth extend what be the limits wherewith it 's bounded what measure and degrees thereof a particular Church as such by Scripture-Charter may challenge For this purpose we may take notice of the subject of Power which is primary or secondary In the primary it 's primitive total supreme In the secondary it 's derivative partial and subordinate The power in both is the same essentially yet in the one as in the Fountain in the other as in several Channels This seems to be intimated by that submission required by the Apostle unto the King as supreme or unto Governours sent by him 1 Pet. 2.13 14. The King is Emperour who was the immediate subject of Supremacy Governours were Presidents and Vicarii Magistratus who are the instruments of the supreme as principal in government Coincident with this seems to be that distinction so frequent with Mr. Parker inter statum exercitium According to which he defines the government of the Church quoad statum to be Democratical because the power of the Keys is in the whole Church which with him is a Congregation as in the primary subject But quoad exercitium to be Aristocratical in the Rulers who derive their power from Christ by the Church This shall be examined hereafter This difference of the primary and secondary subject is to be observed lest we make every one who hath power and is trusted with the exercise thereof the prime and immediate receptacle of Church-power from Christ which is not to be done section 10 In the second place we must repeat a distinction taken up in the beginning of this Treatise which may briefly be contracted in this manner Ecclesiae Regimen est Internum Externum Vniversale Particulare formale Objectivum The Internal is Gods. The external Universal as such Christ doth justly challenge The external particular formally and properly Ecclesiastical is committed to particular Churches The external particular materially considered is the Christian Magistrate's due because the matters of the Church in this respect are an object of his Civil Power That distinction of Cameracensis potestas est ordinis aut Regiminis the same with that of Biel and many other Schoolmen hath some affinity with this For the power of Order with them is the power of a Minister as an Officer under Christ of the Universal Church and is exercised in foro poenitentiali or interiori The power of Government and Prelation which Defensor pacis saith the Bishops had per accidens is the same with this external Government of the Church as exercised in foro exteriori Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. Rev. 2.2 or judiciali as they term it All the power of a particular Church is confined to matters Ecclesiastical as such in that particular community and is exercised only in foro exteriori This must needs be so because the internal Government of the Church which by the Word and Spirit immediately rules the conscience so as to cast the impenitent both soul and body into Hell belongs to God as God. The external government of the Universal Church as Universal is purely Monarchical under Christ in which respect all particular Churches are meerly subjects and no ways independant no nor governing section 11 Yet in the third place if this be not so manifest and satisfactory the point may be illustrated if we parallel the Government of the Church with that of Israel As that was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Theocratie of Israel God was pars imperans and the absolute Monarch and reserved to himself the jura Majestatis For he made their Laws appointed their chief Officers Generals Judges he anointed their Kings proclaimed their Wars concluded Peace and received last Appeals Yet in many petty causes and matters of State and that often he trusted their Elders Officers and Princes and committed to them exercise of power and actual government And their Kings were but a kind of Vicarii Magistratus under him So Christ hath retained to himself the government of the universal Church as such as also the Legislative power of particular Churches in all Essentials and Necessaries and hath enacted general Statutes for Accidentals and Circumstantials He hath the principal power of making Officers for he determines how many kinds of necessary Officers there should be limits their power prescribes their qualification sets down their duty and gives them their Commission Their judicial proceedings run in his name and their sentence is so far valid on earth as he shall
had already sworn could have found as many reasons against it as against the Covenant especially if it had been new as the Covenant was Many wise men at the first did scruple it and some suffered death for refusal Amongst the rest Sir Thomas Moor a learned and a very prudent man could not digest it and though he might have an high conceit of the Papal Supremacy yet that might not be the only reason of his refusal but this because he knew the Crown had no Ecclesiastical power properly so called Though this was not thought to be the true but only the pretended cause of his death For in his Vtopia he seems to dislike the Indisputable Prerogative which was a Noli me tangere and to touch it so roughly as he did might cost dear as it did Yet I have taken the Oath of Supremacy in that sense as our Divines did understand it and I was and am willing to give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's section 4 That which hath been said in this point in brief is this That though the Civil Powers have a right to order matters of Religion in respect of the outward part and so far as the Sword may reach it according to Divine Law yet they have no power of the Keys which Christ committed to the Church For if we consider all the power exercised in matter of Religion by David Solomon and the pious Kings of Judah by the Christian Emperours and Princes by the Kings of France and England it was but civil Neither is the power of our Parliaments any other For though they make Acts concerning the publick Doctrine and Discipline yet these are but civil They are not Representatives of the Church but of the State whether the Convocation was an essential part of the Parliament or a full representative of the Church I will not here debate I find some great Lawyers which deny both And if their denial be true then England had no general Representative of the Church in latter times As for Erastians and such as do give all Ecclesiastical power of Discipline to the State and deny all power to the Ministers but that of dispensing Word and Sacraments it 's plain they never understood the state of the Question and though a Minister as a Minister have no power but that of Word and Sacraments yet from thence it will not follow that the Church hath not a power spiritual distinct from that of the State in matters of Religion CHAP. XI Whether Episcopacy be the primary subject of the Power of the Keys section 1 THE Prelate presumes that the power of the Keys is his and he thinks his title very good and so good that though he could not prove the institution yet prescription will bear him out For he hath had possession for a long time and Universality and Antiquity seem to favour him very much Yet I hope his title may be examined and if upon examination it prove good he hath no cause to be offended except with this that I of all others should meddle with it But before any thing can be said to purpose we must first know the nature and institution of a Bishop which is the subject of the Question Secondly Put the Reader in mind that the Question is not in this place whether a Bishop be an Officer of the Church either by some special or some general Divine Precept but whether he be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the primary subject of the power of the Keys For he may be an Officer and yet no such subject Concerning a Bishop the subject of the Question two things are worthy our consideration 1. What he is 2. How instituted at the first The Definition and Institution seem rather to belong unto the second part of Ecclesiastical Politicks where I shall entreat of Ecclesiastical Officers and the constitution of them Yet I will here say something of both in order to the Question though I be the briefer afterward section 2 What a Bishop is may be difficult to know except we do distinguish before we do define For we find several sorts of Bishops in the Church Christian. There is a Primitive a Prelatical or Hierarchical and an English Bishop distinct and different in some things from both the former for whom I reserve a place in the end of this Chapter The Primitive Bishop is twofold 1. A Presbyter 2. A President or Superintendent 1. A Presbyter in the New Testament is a Bishop For the Elders of Ephesus were made by the Holy Ghost Bishops or Superintendents over God's flock Acts 20.28 And the qualification of a Bishop 1 Tim. 3.1 2 3 c. is the qualification of an Elder Tit. 1.5 6 7 c. For whatsoever some of late have said to the contrary yet Presbyter and Bishop were only two different words signifying the same Officer And this is confessed by divers of the Ancients who tell us that the word Bishop was appropriated to one who was more than a Presbyter in after-times 2. A Bishop signified one that was above a Presbyter in some respects as a Moderatour of a Classis or President of a Synod But such a Presbyter might be only pro tempore for the time of the Session and after the Assembly dissolved he might return to be a bare Presbyter again For to be a Moderatour or President was no constant place The word in this sense we find seldom used if at all 2. A President was a kind of Superintendent with a care and inspection not only over the people but the Presbyters too within a certain precinct and this was a constant place and the party called a Bishop and by Ambrose and Austine with divers others called primus Presbyterorum and these were such as had no power but with the Presbytery joyntly and that without a negative voice And the Presbytery might be a Representative not only of the Presbyters strictly taken but of the people too For we may read in Cyprian and other Authours that these Bishops in more weighty matters of publick concernment did nothing without the counsel and consent not only of the Presbyters but the people This I call a primitive Bishop not only because he is ancient but also because the place or office is agreeable to the rules of Reason of Government and the general Rules of the Apostles concerning Order Decency Edification There is also an Hierarchical Bishop who may be only a Bishop or an Archbishop and Metropolitan or a Patriarch and these challenge the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and in Jurisdiction include and engross the power of making Canons This kind of Episcopacy is ancient as the former This last Bishop is he upon whom Spalatensis and many others do fix and though they grant that he should do nothing without the Counsel of the Presbytery yet they give him full power without the Presbytery which they joyn with him only for advice The English Bishop is in
those thus Associated may have Communion in Divine Things and Actions and their Pastors with their Flocks before any form of Discipline be introduced or setled and these Believers may by Word and Sacraments receive Heavenly Comfort and attain Eternal Life without such Discipline and before it can be established amongst them and so I hope it is at this time in this Nation with many a faithful servant of God who by the benefit of a good Ministry with God's Blessing upon their Labours are truely converted and continue and go on in a state of Salvation as happily as many who are under a form of Government And here it is to be observed 1. That though the Apostles were extraordinary Officers infallibly directed by the Holy Ghost which Christ gave them yet ordinary Ministers lawfully called and succeeding them if they preach their Doctrine truly have a promise to convert and save the Souls of sinful Men. 2. That the Work of these ordinary Ministers is not only to feed the Flock of Christ already gathered but to convert and gather Sinners unto Christ and this not by the Rod of Discipline but the Word of God which is the Power of God unto Salvation 3. This gaining Souls to Christ is not the gathering of Churches out of Churches and Christians out of Christians to make a party of their own under pretence of a purer Reformation but it 's a far more excellent Work and of another kind tending directly to an higher end 4. After a Minister becomes a Pastour of a Flock and hath relation unto them as his Flock and they to him as his People he must needs have some Power over them and they must be subject unto him and obey him in the Lord and he hath power to remit Sins to shut and open and what he doth in this kind according to his Commission will be made good in Heaven Yet these Acts of his are not Acts of External Discipline but of his Ministerial Office as he is a Servant to Jesus Christ. This I speak not against Discipline which if agreeable to the word of God is a great Blessing but against all such who under pretence of this or that form of Church-Government disturb the Church and discomfort and discourage many a precious Saint of God. The end of this is to manifest that these places of Scripture Mat. 16.19 John 20.22 23. are no grounds whereon to build Church-Government section 5 Because former places are not so pertinent I proceed in the next place to the Words of Institution of Church-discipline you may read them Mat. 18.17 18. De exteriori foro ibi agitur Exterioris fori jurisdictio illo nec alio loco fundata est That 's the only place for the Institution and no other saith Dr. Andrews in that most learned and exact piece far above his other Works To understand this place we must observe 1. The Parties subject to this Tribunal 2. The Causes proper to that Court. 3. In what manner and order Causes are brought in and prepared for Judgment 4. The Judge 5. The Acts of Judgment upon Evidence of the Cause 6. The Ratification of these Acts and so of the Power 7. How this Ratification is obtained and the Judgment made effectual 1. The party subject to this Tribunal is a Brother If thy Brother offend thee verse 15. This may be explained from 1 Cor. 5.11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator or covetous or an idolater c. There are covetous Persons and Idolaters of the World verse 10. and Fornicators and Idolaters which are called Brethren The former are without the latter within the Church The former are subject to the Judgment of God but not of the Church the latter are subject to the Judgment of the Church Do not thou judge them that are within So that the Subjects in this Common-wealth are Brethren Disciples such as profess their Faith in Christ. 2. The Causes are Spiritual and Ecclesiastical and must be considered under that Notion For it 's a Trespass an Offence committed by a Brother as a Brother against a Brother as a Brother whether it be a wrong against a Brother or a sin whereby a Brother is offended grieved displeased For if a Brother be a Fornicator or Idolater c. he must tell the Church and not the State he must be made as an Heathen or Publican if he will not hear the Church this is no Sentence of the State or Civil Judge it 's made good in Heaven so is not the Judgment of the Civil Magistrate It must be the Judgment of a Brother as a Brother within the Church which the Church as a Church must judge and in the name of Christ not of the Civil Soveraign and the Party offending must be delivered up to Satan not to the Sword. Yet one and the same Crime may make a person obnoxious both to the temporal Sword of the Magistrate and the spiritual Censure of the Church and may be justly punishable and punished by both though some of our English Lawyers have delivered the contrary who might ground their Opinion upon Ecclesiastical Supremacy of the King For tho' the Laws of England might determine so yet the Laws of God and Christ do not 3. The manner and order of proceeding is 1. Privately to admonish and if that take effect to proceed no further 2. If upon this the party will not reform he must be charged and convinced before two or three Witnesses and if he shall persist impenitent then he must be convented before the Ecclesiastical Tribunal upon Information and Accusation and the same once made good and evident the Cause is ripe prepared for Judgment section 6 The Judge in the fourth place is the Church Tell the Church where we must know what this Church is The word in the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and we find it used in the Old Testament about seventy times by the Septuagint who so often turn the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by that name Upon perusal of the places we shall find that it signifies Assemblies and of many kinds as good bad holy prophane greater less festival civil military Ecclesiastical and Religious occasional standing orderly confused ordinary extraordinary It 's observable that very seldome some say but once as Psal. 26.5 it signifies a wicked and prophane Society Sometimes not often it 's a Military body But most of all by far a few Texts excepted it notes an holy and religious Convention or Assembly For sometimes it 's a National Polity of Israel under a sacred Notion and very often a religious Assembly for Prayer Fasting Dedications renewing their Covenant with God Praises Thanksgivings and such like Acts of Worship so that the word seems to be appropriate unto Religious Assemblies and though it signifie other Societies yet these most frequently and principally And this is confirmed from the
or for him and that is loosing The former is called binding because it more strictly doth bind him to suffer that punishment to which he was liable upon the Transgression of the Law. There was an Obligation upon him 1. To Obedience 2. Upon Disobedience there follows a Guilt which is an Obligation to Punishment 3. Judgment doth continue this Obligation and makes the Punishment unavoidable The latter is a loosing because upon some condition performed it frees him from the punishment and the bond of guilt Of this binding there be several degrees For as in a Civil Government there be several degrees of punishment according to the several degrees of the offences so it 's in the Church One of the highest punishments and degrees of binding is to make one as an Heathen and a Publican These words are differently understood and expounded Grotius thinks that our Saviour in them did not intend Excommunication Many take it for granted that to be censured and judged an Heathen and Publican is to be cast out of the Church and excommunicated And from these two words Heathen and Publican divers and amongst the rest Quinquecclesiensis and D. Andrews do observe a twofold Excommunication The one is the greater and that is to be as an Heathen the other the less which is to be as a Publican The Heathen was out of the Church the Publican was not The Heathen might not the Publican might come into the Temple the Heathen were strangers to the Common-wealth of the Israel and were Loammi the Publican being a Jew was in the Church but like a scandalous Brother Whether this distinction be here intended or no it 's certain 1. That there are degrees of Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Penalties 2. That by this being as an Heathen and Publican is meant an Ecclesiastical not a civil punishment in matter of Religion 3. Both were deprived of Ecclesiastical Communion In the text If he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican Three things are to be observed 1. The Penalty and the Execution 2. The Sentence to be Executed 3. The Crime or Cause The Execution is to account him as an Heathen and a Publican which is not to take away his House Lands Goods Civil Liberty Life but to separate from him and have no Communion with him in matter of Religion and Spiritual Society and to testifie their dislike of him by shunning his company 2. The sentence is the judgement of the Church whereupon this Separation and Non-communion is grounded For the Church must judge and pass the sentence before we can have any sufficient warrant for refusal of society 3. The crime or cause must be made evident before the Judge pass Sentence and it is not only the trespass or offence but impenitence manifested to the Ecclesiastical Judge Not to hear the Church is for the guilty Brother not to confess and reform upon the Churches publick admonition This puts him in an immediate capacity of condemnation and punishment But more of Ecclesiastical censures in the second Book section 8 The Ratification of this sentence of the Church which is the sixth thing followeth in these words Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven c. which are added as Hillary saith well in terrorem metus maximi to strike a terrour into the hearts of all such as shall make themselves liable to the censures of the Church Yet they are not only for terrour but for the sweetest consolation of the penitent absolved by the Church and so also for the encouragement of the Church to proceed in Discipline against the greatest For though she hath not the sword nor any coactive force to imprison fine banish put to death and the prophane and worldly wretches do not fear her censures yet her censures shall be executed from Heaven and be more terrible than any punishments inflicted by sword of civil Sovereigns This Ratification includes two things 1. That when this judgment is once past according to the Rules of Christ the supream Judge doth approve and decree it to be irrecoveverable 2. That he will by a Divine and never failing power execute it so that neither can any appeal or complaint of a nullity make it void nor any contrary strength or force hinder the execution In this respect Hillary saith its Judicium immobile and cannot be reversed Hierom that it s corroborated and cannot be infringed Tertullian that its Prejudicium ultimi judicii and stands good as that ever shall section 9 The means whereby this Ratification is obtained and the manner how it is effected come in the last place to be observed The means is their consent and prayer For if two of them shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask it shall be done for them by my Father which is in Heaven which words do signifie that they should agree upon the sentence and pass the same with prayer The manner how it comes to pass to be effected is that when two or three of them are gathered together in Christs name he will be in the midst of them ver 20. For it s not to be done in their own name or by their own power but they must assemble and proceed in Christs name and in his name give the definitive sentence According to this Law the Apostle gave direction in Christs name to gather together and with the power of Jesus Christ to deliver the scandalous person to Satan 1 Cor. 5.4 So that Christ will be present with them direct them and assist them and the work shall be more his than theirs section 10 Having 1. Examined two places not pertinent 2. Enlarged upon the words of the Institution I will thirdly confirm the proposition from such places as treat of the exercise of this power 1. These are such as speak of Legislation 2. Of making Officers 3. Of Jurisdiction The first of Legislation and making of Canons concerning matters controverted As for Canons concerning things not controverted we find single Apostles especially Paul and he most of all in his first Epistle to Timothy declaring and delivering them without any other joyned with them The exercise of this Legislative power we find in that famous Synod held at Jerusalem Acts 15. The difference of the interpretations of this text is no less than of the former For some question whether it was a formal Synod having power to bind or only an Assembly for advice Some make it not only a Synod invested with a binding force but judge it to be a most excellent pattern for all Synodical Assemblies in time to come yet these are not certain whether it was general in respect of all Churches then extant But let it be a Synod having a binding force it s doubted how the Canons could bind other Churches who sent no delegates to represent them and Act for them Whether did they bind because it was a general Council in
is that neither Peter nor any of the eleven do take upon them to elect or design any person or persons by themselves alone but commit it to the whole Assembly and the whole Assembly elected prayed cast losts 6. That though these persons very eminent and full of the Spirit could and might design the persons but not give the power of Apostleship To this Head belongs the constitution of Decons Acts 6. Where we read of the occasion and in some sort of the necessity of this Office. For 1. The Apostles knew there was a kind of necessity of such an Officer as a Deacon and it was no ways fit to distract themselves in serving of tables and neglect the great business of word and prayer 2. That they call the multitude together 3. They propose the matter unto them and signifie what manner of persons Deacons should be and commit the election of persons amongst them rightly qualified to them 4. They elect persons fit for the place 5. They present these persons 6. The Apostles pray and lay hands on them Whether they used any form of words in this imposition of Hands we do not read The thing principally to be considered in this business is that the Apostles themselves alone do not take upon them to chuse and constitute these Deacons To this may be added that Paul doth not take upon him to send the charity and benevolence of the Corinthians collected for the poor Saints at Jerusalem but refers it to themselves to approve by Letters such as they would use as their Messengers 1 Cor. 16.3 section 12 The third branch of the power of the Keyes is that of Jurisdiction which we find exercised in the Church of Corinth or rather a command of the Apostles binding them as having that power to exercise it reproving them in that they had not done it already in a particular case and giving directions how it should be done Out of the Apostles directions 1 Cor. 5. we might pick a model of Church-government for there we have an Ecclesiastical community under a form of Government and that is the whole Church of Corinth 2. We have the members of this community and they are the sanctified in Christ Jesus and such are called to be Saints 3. We have the relation of these one to another they are Brethren yet every particular brother subject to the whole Church 4. We have the power of Jurisdiction and the same in the whole body 5. We have the power of Excommunication and by consequence of absolution and other Ecclesiastical censures and these in the whole Church which is reproved because they do not exercise it upon so great an occasion and for so great a cause They are commanded to purge out the old leaven and to cast out and put from amongst them that wicked person because they had power to judge 6. The persons subject to this Jurisdiction is every one that is a brother of that Church 7. We have the causes which make these persons and brethren of that Church liable to censure and they are scandals whereof we have a catalogue whereby we may understand by analogy others not expressed 8. We have the form of the sentence of Excommunication which must be solemnly passed in a publick Assembly convened proceeding and passing Judgement in the Name of Christ. 9. In this Judgement we have the Apostle passing and giving his vote by Writing with the rest of that Church 10. We find that neither the Apostle nor they can judge them that are without but they are reserved to Gods Judgement 11. We have the end of Excommunication which here is twofold 1. In respect of the party Excommunicated 2. Of the Church and his fellow-members In respect of the person Excommunicated the destruction of the Flesh by some punishment for a time that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. In respect of the Body of the Church the preservation of the same from infection of the old leaven of malice and wickedness that so not only single persons but the whole Society may be continued pure This is the rule of Excommunication the rules of absolution we find 2 Cor. 2. where we may observe first the person capable of it and it is such an one as having been punished by many and the punishment proves sufficient because by it he is grieved humbled for his sin in danger to be swallowed up with over much sorrow and by Satan to be tempted to despair in a word when the party is penitent and he appears really to be so 2. The nature of Absolution which is to forgive and confirm our love unto him 3. This sentence of Remission and Reconciliation must be pronounced in the Person of Christ. 4. The Persons who must pass this Sentence and see it executed are the same who Excommunicated him who here were Paul and the Church of Corinth 5. The end of this Act of Judgement which is to comfort and restore the party Penitent yet in this you must conceive all this is to be done in an orderly and not in a confused and tumultuous manner both for the Time the Place the Order of Proceeding and the Persons who manage the Business and denounce the Sentence For these things must be committed to some eminent Persons who are fit for such a work For though all must agree yet some must exercise the Power in the Person of the Church We might further Instance in the seven Churches of Asia For Ephesus though reproved for her falling from her first love yet is commended for her severity against the Nicolaitans Rev. 2.6 The Church of Pergamos is blamed for suffering such amongst them as taught the Doctrine of Baalam and the Nicolaitans so is the Church of Thyatira because she suffered that woman Jezabel who called her self a Prophetess to teach and seduce Christs Servants to commit Fornication and to eat things Sacrificed to Idols This was the remisness of Discipline and neglect of the exercise of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction wherewith not only though perhaps principally the Angels but the whole Churches are charged section 13 The total Summ of all these particulars is this That the Primary Subject of the Power of the Keyes is the whole Church This appears From the Institution acording to which we must Tell the Church The Church must bind and loose 3. Her Judgment shall be ratified in Heaven Exercise thereof in Legislation by the whole Church Constitution of Officers by the whole Church Jurisdiction by the whole Church If any shall say that the power is in the Apostles or Bishops or Superintendants lawfully constituted its true if that its in the Presbyters it s so if that its in the Brethren or People it cannot be denied Yet if any will argue from these places that its in the Bishops alone or in the Presbyters alone or in the Brethren alone or in the Officers or Representatives of the whole Church primarily it cannot be true If
let us keep communion and heartily serve our God humbly imploring his Divine Majesty in the name of Christ to open our eyes and sanctifie our hearts that at length we may be united in the same Judgement and Affection and with one Mind and with one Mouth glorifie God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. section 8 After the consideration of a Congregational extent as too narrow and of an Universal as too large I proceed to say something of a National extent as a man between The Congregationalist will censure it as too great by far the Universalist as too little by much Yet I shall willingly as in other things refer my self to the Judgement of Moderate Pious Judicious Impartial Men Let them condemn me or acquit me as they shall see just cause First it must be remembred that the subject of this whole Treatise is the Government of men by men under God and Jesus Christ our Blessed Saviour Of Gods more immediate Government I have spoken in my Divine Politicks where I shew it 's Monarchical Supream Universal and cannot be bounded to any part of the whole Universe For he being immense and not only virtually but actually present in all places at all times is only fit to govern all Nations and the whole World as the Universal Soveraign but this is far above the power not only of Men but of Angels Therefore whatsoever he doth in Heaven we know that when through his blessing mankind was multipled and especially after the Flood and had replenished the Earth they were divided into several Societies and were subject to several independent Tribunals We never find them under one neither do we in his word or works read of a Catholick King over all Nations nor of an Universal Bishop over all Churches Howsoever some have pretended such a Title yet they could never shew their Patent subscribed by the Hand of Heaven But suppose they could have acquired the possession of the whole earth which never any did yet no one Man no one Council no one Consistory had been able sufficiently to manage so vast a power and in any tolerable manner to govern all mankind at one time living upon Earth It seemed good indeed to our wise God both in former and latter times to enlarge the power of some States and especially that of the Romans Yet that very Empire of so large extent took in but a little part of the whole Earth and this appears plainly now since by Navigation some of the remote parts of the Globe and both the Hemispheres thereof have been discovered Yet in the greatest extent it was thought by some of their wisest Princes the best Policy Cogere terminos Imperii to limit and bound it because they thought the body of too big a bulk to be well ordered either by Prince or Senate or People or by all together But to return to the matter in hand the Question is Whether a national Community of Christians may not lawfully be subjected to one supream Judicatory Ecclesiastical To understand the Question the better it 's to be observed 1. That a Community of Christians may be said to be national several ways or in several respects as 1. When all the Christians of one and the same Nation do associate and unite in one body 2. When these Christians are the major part of the people 3. When the whole Nation or the generality thereof have received and do profess the same Christian Faith. I will here suppose the major part or generality to be Christians and the association and incorporation to be made by a tacit or explicit consent which sometimes may be confirmed by the Laws of the Supream Power Yet this generality may be so understood as that there may in the same Nation be found Turks or Mahumetans Pagans Atheists Jewes which cannot be of this body and that also there may be some Schisms and Separatitions amongst such as profess themselves Christians and sometimes they may be none This in my sense is a national Community of Christians and a Church-confident before any form of external Discipline be introduced 2. When I speak of subjection I do not say that they are always in all Nations bound by any Divine Precept to be so but that they may and that lawfully according unto the Scriptures 3. I understand that this subjection so as that every several member be subject not to one man or one party but to the whole and that either properly taken or virtually for a Representative of the whole which shall have power in the name of the whole body to make Canons and in Judgement to receive last Appeals 4. I understand the Question of Nations indefinitely taken for if any be of so vast extent as that one independent Court may be either insufficient or inconvenient I rather exclude then include such For suppose all Tartary should be counted one Nation or all Chinae I conceive they are too large 5. I mention only a national Community for if that be granted the Classical and Provincial must needs come in The Congregational party I know holds the Negative And here upon the by I will take the liberty for to answer Mr. Parker's seventh argument for his Congregational way It 's taken from Politicks and to this purpose That as little States are more easily and better governed then great ones so is a Congregational Church which is but of a narrow compass than a Classical Diocesan or Provincial or National which is far greater Answ. Though less Communities may be better governed than one too great yet a great one of moderate extent may be better governed and defended than one that is too little For Gods one peculiar People and Nation which was first under Judges then under Kings was subject to one Supream Tribunal for a long time above five hundred Years and afterwards it was divided into two Yet it was better governed under one than under two when subject to one individual Tribunal than when to two but of this more hereafter section 9 For the confirmation of this we must note 1. That there is no Divine Precept in the New Testament which particularly determines either the extent of place or number of persons to which a particular independent Church is confined we do not find their either the minimum or maximum quod sic Therefore some Latitude must needs be granted 2. That the History of the New Testament doth not reach those times wherein it pleased God to fulfil those Prophesies which promised That Kings should become Nursing-fathers and Queens Nursing-mothers of the Church and she should suck the breasts of Kings who should come unto her light 2. When one should become a thousand and a small one a strong Nation I saith the Lord will hasten it in its time Where one saith he alludes to the Creation which he finished in six days hastening and could not rest and keep his Sabbath till all was ended and
from an inferiour to a provincial Synod and from the Provincial to the Patriarchal which was the highest Court except the Christian Emperours call a General Council And that was said to be a General Council which extended beyond the bounds of one Patriarchate especially if it included all 9. After these Patriarchates began to be such eminent places many ambitiously sought them and there was great contention amongst themselves who should be greatest and have the precedency Neither could General Councils by their determinations prevent them for time to come 10. The Patriarch of Rome though but at the first one of the three and afterwards of the five and according to some of the seven if you take in Justiniana Prima with Carthage did challenge the precedency and preeminency of them all And though the Council of Chalcedon gave the Constantinopolitan See equal priviledges with his yet he would not stand to their determination but afterward challenged greater power then was due began to receive Appeals from Transmarine parts beyond the bounds of his Diocess and to colour his Usurpation alledged a Canon of the Nicene Council which was not found in the Greek Original He will be President in all General Councils no Canons must be valid without his Approbation His Ambition aspires higher when the title of Universal Bishop had been denied the Patriarch of Constantinople by Gregory the Great Boniface his Successour assumes it And by degrees they who follow him usurpe the Power and at length the civil Supremacy is arrogated and the Roman Pontiffe must dispose of Kingdoms and Empires and will depose and advance whom he pleaseth And is not he the Man of Sin and the Son of Perdition who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God shewing himself that he is God 2 Thes. 2.3 4. From all which words he that goes under the name of M. Camillas defines Antichrist in this manner Antichristus est Pontifex maximus Elatione vicariatu assimulatione Christo oppositus lib. 1. c. 3. de Antichristo As the Roman State subdued and subjected unto themselves the former Empires and Monarchies of the World and this in themselves after that became Vassals and Servants unto one Absolute Imperial Monarch and by him Rome-Heathen raigned over the Kings of the Earth Revel 17.18 So in tract of time Rome-Christian usurped Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical over all Churches and her Patriarch swallowing up all the power of the former Patriarchs became Universal Monarch and Visible Head of the Universal Church The occasions true causes of this Usurpation and the means whereby he by degrees aspired to this transcendent power are well enough known Some will tell us that Episcopacy or rather Prelacy was the occasion at least of the Hierarchy and the Hierarchy of the Papacy For if there had not been a Bishop invested with power in himself and a provincial Jurisdiction given to one Metropolitan and many Metropolitans subjected to one Patriarch the Bishop of Rome could have had no advantage nor colour for his Usurpation This makes many prudent men jealous of Episcopacy especially as many understand a Bishop to be one invested with the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and that by divine Law without the Presbytery Division and Subordination which are essential to Government could be no proper cause of the Papal Supremacy But the trusting of power Ecclesiastical in one man extending and enlarging the bounds of one particular Church and independent Judicatory too far and subordinating the People and Presbyters to the Monarchical Jurisdiction of one Bishop the several Bishops to one Metropolitan the several Metropolitans to one Patriarch and several Patriarchs to one Roman Pontiffe did much promote and effectually conduce to the advancement of one man to the Universal Vicarage At the first institution of the Hierarchy neither the people nor Presbytery were excluded the Patriarchates were of a reasonable extent the Patriarchs independent one upon another and the end intended was Unity and the prevention of Schism and the subordination seemed to be made out of mature deliberation Yet humane Wisdom though never so profound if it swerve from the Rules of divine Institution proves Folly in the end Let not all this discourage any Ecclesiastical Community or disswade them from division co-ordination subordination if so be they keep the power in themselves as in the primary Subject and reserve it to the whole and not communicate it to a part and keep themselves within a reasonable compass From all this we may conclude that a Secession from Rome and the rejection of his Ecclesiastical Supremacy if so be we retain the true Doctrine and pure Worship of God is no Schism especially in England For 1. there were many Provinces out of the great Patriarchate and no ways subject to any of them but they had their own proper Primates and Superindendents Amonst these England was one and by the Canon of Nice had her own Jurisdiction and was under no Patriarch but a Primate of her own 2. The Bishop of Rome was at first confined to that City and after he was made Patriarch he had but the ten Suburbicarian Provinces and the rest of the Provinces of Italy had Milan for their Metropolis 3. That after the Conversion of the Saxons that that Bishop should exercise any power in England was a meer Usurpation And to cast off an usurped power and the same Tyrannical could be no Schism at all There is a Book printed at Oxford in the year 1641 wherein we find several parcels of several Authors bound up in one The first Author is Dr. Andrews the second Bucer the third Dr. Reynolds the fourth Bishop Usher the fifth Mr. Brerewood the sixth Mr. Dury the seventh Mr. Francis Mason The design of the whole is to maintain Episcopacy and in part to prove the Hierarchy 1. Some of the formentioned Authors do grant with Hierome that the Church was first governed by the common advice of Presbyters though this position in strict sence is not true as hath been formerly proved 2. Some grant that at the first Institution of Bishops a Bishop was nothing else but a President or Moderator in Presbyterial Meetings 3. That afterwards these were constant and standing with a power of Suderintendency not only over the people but the Presbyters within a City and the Territory thereof 4. That when a Church was extended to a Province in the Metropolis thereof they placed a chief Bishop called a Metropolitan who had the precedency of all the other City Bishops 5. That these Bishops could do no common act binding the whole circuit without the Presbytery 6. That there were such Bishops and Metropolitans in the Apostles times thus Dr. Usher doth affirm and he quotes Ignatius to this purpose 7. That there was an imparity both in the State and Church of Israel under the Old Testament and so likewise