Affairs and according to the Discretion or Approbation of the Governors Civil or Ecclesiastical as it doth concern them All these things may be and yet the Church continue still the same as the Queen in a Vesture of Gold-wrought about with divers Colours Yea Church-Censures may go on and Persons be Excommunicated and yet unless they wilfully continue under Excommunication no Schism be made because they do not cut themselves off from the Church but are cut off by others and therefore are not as Schismaticks A 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 T◠3.11 Condemned of themselves as the Apostle speaketh Schism therefore is a wilfull breaking off of that outward Unity which one or more Members ought to maintain with the rest A Schismatick or Schismaticks are that one or those many Persons who do publickly refuse to act according to his or their just Relations as Members of the Church in the station wherein they are placed Or to speak more briefly a Schismatick is that Member of the Church which disowns and cuts it self off from the rest either contemning and rejecting the other Members 1 Cor. 12.21 as if the Eye shall say to the Hand I have no need of thee or again The Head to the Feet I have no need of you Or else encroaching and breaking in upon the Rights of other Members as if the Foot shall say V. 15.16 because I am not the Hand or not the Head I am not of the Body and will not be of the Body Or Lastly refusing to communicate its Office to the rest not distributing to the Necessities of the Saints not suffering and rejoycing with the other Members the Members not having the same Care according to their different places and capacities one for another 1 Cor. 12.25 according to the Expression of the Apostle To know therefore who is a Schismatick and who not it will be necessary to consider in some general Terms at least the Relations wherein Men may be and the several Causes or Pretences of separating with regard to such Relations declaring withal so far as in a short Discourse of this Nature conveniently may be which are unlawful and which are good and sufficient And First As there is an Unity in general which ought to be maintained by all Christian Churches throughout the World they being all reconciled to God in One Body Eph. 2.16 1 Cor 12.13 and Baptized into One Body and made to drink into One Spirit and being called One Body 1 Cor. 10.17 1 Cor. 12 2◠whereof our Lord is the Head Eph. 4.15 16. from whom the whole Body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every Joynt supplyeth according to the effectual working in the measure of every part maketh encrease of the Body unto the edifying of it self in love So there may be a Breach made of this Unity by any particular Church and thereby whole Churches may become Schismatical Whole Churches in respect of the whole Body of Christians have such Relation as single Members have with Regard to any particular Church They therefore as well as single Members of particular Churches may fall into Schism when either in express Terms or by necessary consequence they break off their Communion and Friendly Correspondence with the rest which may be done several ways 1. By professing a different Faith Or 2. Different Agenda or Morals 3. By different Church-Government either as to the Species or kind of Government or as to the manner of exercising of it 1. They may become guilty of Schism by professing a different Faith or appointing different Creeds in any Material Point from other Churches For Christian Communion doth not require but forbid us to have Fellowship with those who do not hold the Truth as to the Substantials of Christian Religion The Body of Christ hath but One Faith and considering that the main Points of Faith have such Influence upon our Lives and Actions and are of so high importance to every one of us we ought to Contend earnestly for the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints Jud. 3. and to withdraw our selves from those who teach otherwise 1 Tim. 6.5 and consent not to wholesome words even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ 1 Tim. 6.3 and to the Doctrine which is according to Godliness Not but that Christians may differ and dispute and err about Matters of less Moment or ways of explaining the True Faith not so clearly delivered without either actually separating themselves from the Church or deserving to be cut off from it except they do oblige Men to concur with them and to profess a Belief of their Errors For then we may and ought to depart from them it being not lawful for any one to profess he believes that to be true which at the same time he takes to be an Error even in a matter of the smallest moment 2. They may become guilty of Schism by making wrong Professions de Agendis or concerning Morals For none ought to concur with any Man or any number of Men in that which is immoral Concord is only commendable in that which is good not in that which is evil To profess an Immorality is not only to do an immoral thing the profession of it being a sinful Act but it is worse than doing the same immoral thing that is agreeable to such Profession It is a sin committed with deliberation greater than commonly precedes the Act of Sin it makes us persevere and continue in sin it tends to the seducing and destroying others in a more eminent degree than the Act. If any Man therefore shall teach Doctrines manifestly contradictory to any part of the Moral Law if a Man says instead of Honour thy Father and Mother Thou shalt not honour thy Father or thy Mother Instead of Let every soul be subject to the Higher Powers Let some men not be subject to the Higher Powers and maintains this Doctrine in Opposition to the Members of his own or other Churches he is a Schismatick But he that allows of those Precepts and knows not who is his King or who is his Father is mistaken in the Person not in the Commandment or at most he is only mistaken about the Laws of the Land which tho' they do oblige in Conscience when known yet it is not every Man's business nor doth lye in every Man's power perfectly to understand And an Error in these does not always imply a misunderstanding the Commandments of God He that errs in Explication of some Moral Points as in shewing How a Man must honour his King or his Father or in setting the Bounds and Measures of Obedience to them or in such a matter as I am now about in stating the Case of Schism is not presently to be esteemed guilty of Schism For a Mistake though professed in Matters less principal either of Faith or Morals unless it makes void the general Commandment or some plain Article of Faith
according to our different Consideration of them as they do imply false Doctrine in Matters necessary to Salvation obstinately persisted in Heresie as the are accompanyed with Separation from the Church or do give a just Cause of Separation Schism Heresie and Schism are seldom long asunder There are few Hereticks but will endeavour by separate Congregations to propagate their Heresie or Schismaticks but will frame to themseves some New Doctrine the better to justifie their Separation from the Church as * On. Tit. 3. St. Jerom observed The Apostle seems to use both these Words in the same Sense 1 Cor. 11.18 19. I hear that there be Divisions the Word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among you and I partly believe it for there must be also Heresies among you c And certainly every Heretick openly professing and maintaining his Heresie whether he is able to get a separate Congregation or not may be called a Schismatick and a Schismatick persisting in his Schism will be very apt to fall into Heresie according to the forecited Passage of St. Jerom. 3. Whole Churches as well as single Persons may incur the Guilt of Schism by their differences about Church-Government sometimes as to the Species or kind of Government and sometimes as to the manner of exercising it Sometimes by a different Species or kind of Government As for Instance When they do recede from Episcopacy and break wilfully the Line of Apostolical Succession For in so doing they cause probably great Disorders within themselves and in other Churches also by loosing the Bands of Union among themselves and hindering good Correspondence with other Churches by taking away the chief Pillars and Supporters of that Correspondence and tacitly disappointing their sort of Government tempting some of them to dislike it and to endeavour a Change for that which is likely to prove much worse instead of it as on many other accounts so particularly because it hath not the Examples of the best and purest Ages to maintain it But tho' Churches may sometimes be Schismatical on this account yet they are not always so in this Case For there may be a just Cause of breaking off that outward Succession where the Profession of the true Christian Faith and of good Morals must be otherwise utterly wanting the preservation of which is declared in the Holy Scriptures necessary to Salvation not the manner of Government so declared consequently this cannot be equally necessary to all People This in case of a general Corruption or sometimes on the Account of the Members of the Church being dispersed abroad perhaps cannot be had And must Men Continue in such Corruption for fear of breaking off Succession Or fall into a state of Damnation for not being able to preserve it What Uncertainties will some Mens Doctrine make all the Advantages we can receive from Christianity and finally our Salvation to depend upon Sometimes on the Goodness of a a King 's sometimes of a Bishop's Title and sometimes on the Regularity of Succession How unreasonably are Men condemned whom God hath not condemned and declared to be in the state of those that never heard of Christ even although they do perform all the Gospel Conditions Only because they have not among them a certain Order which is not absolutely necessary to the Being * What hath perished of the Outward From or Body of Government being lost without any fault or guilt of theirs their Infelicity which they could not prevent and not their Crime voluntarily brought upon themselves This sure will never be look'd on by God as any dangerous want of Order or as that which shall be any way chargeable upon them Order is required to the Well-being not necessary absolutely to the Being of a Church and orderless or secret Society of Brethren may be a Church still as any number of Converts in a City before the Apostle which was gone to some other City had yet placed any Governour over them Dr. Hammond's Second Defence of the Treatise of Schism Ch. 6. S. 11. but only to the Well-being of the Church It is no where commanded although it seems indeed to the approved of by our blessed Saviour in the Apocalypse ‖ ◠Rev. ch 2. and is plainly enough made out to have been instituted by the Apostles and hath been found by Experience a very strong Band of Union in respect of the Universal Church and particular ones too where it hath had its just Authority Not but that the Succession in some places hath failed or been interrupted I do not except the Church of Rome it self which doth boast so much of it and may fail again or we may depart from it when it cannot consist with Succession of true Faith and good Morals without an utter and irrecoverable loss of the Advantages of the Christian Religion the Church of Christ or the ordinary hopes of Salvation And although no Man ought to assume to himself a Power of Governing the Church of God but stay till it is regularly conferr'd upon him yet where there is a general Deficiency and Apostacy from the Profession of the true Faith and sound Morals and they who are to confer this Right are themselves corrupted also and will not give this Power to any that are willing to reform it in such extraordinary cases of general Apostacy which how far it may possibly reach I will not here dispute Persons Priests at least who have Gifts and Abilities for it have a sufficient Call to interpose themselves and are not to be blamed but highly commended for making use of it Sometimes again there may be a Schism made by the ill Exercise of Church-Government by a Churches refusing to hold Communion with the rest or unjustly censuring and excommunicating them or disobeying General Councils the Representatives of the whole Church in matters which they have a lawful Power to determine by usurping too great Authority over the rest by assuming the Name of Catholick to it self in opposition to all other Churches by making such unreasonable Terms of Communion as that others shall not be able to communicate with it by encouraging and upholding Persons excommunicated or deservedly declared Schismaticks by other Churches by wilfully continuing in Faults and under just Excommunication incurred thereupon by refusing to keep friendly Correspondence with other Churches as in Communicatory Letters which are in order to the well governing of the Church and the like And it is about the Exercise of Church-Government that Schism is generally conversant All Schisms of particular Members of the Church considered as distinct from Heresies are about Church-Government and commonly about the Exercise of it being occasioned either 1. By Superiors contending for Power or 2. Misemploying their Power or 3. By Inferiors Disobedience to the Power 1. By Superiors Civil or Ecclesiastical contending for Power The Civil Governors usurping that which belongs to the Ecclesiastical or the Ecclesiastical that which belongs to the Civil or the Ecclesiastical Governors
his Judgment And this would be such another Immorality as the Authors of these late Books of Schism talk of in paying Allegiance to one whom Men might mistake to be their King But they wave the question about the King's Title as I said before and insist on the invalidity of a Lay-deprivation the next thing to be considered by way of answer to the second Objection This Deprivation does not take away the Power conferr'd on them in Ordination but only of having such and such Dioceses or parts of the Kingdom to officiate in which why the Supreme Civil Power whether lodged in one or more Men should not be sufficient to do is altogether unintelligible The distribution or division of a Country into so many Dioceses is not Jure Divino but depends on the discretion and determination of the chief Governors of the Church i. e. in a Christian Country of the Supreme Legislative Power to the Preservation whereof it is necessary to have them well marked out and fixed and to the well-being of the Republick Bishops are Subjects and Kings may demand Allegiance of them and in case of refusal if they have the whole Legislative Power they may forbid them living in any part of their Dominions Such Power is necessarily annexed to or rather implied in the Imperial Dignity from which our blessed Saviour by his Gospel detracted nothing nor designed to uphold his Disciples or Apostles against it for his Kingdom was not of this World And though the Church did subsist at first without the assistance of Heathen Emperors yet Kings when they embraced the true Faith became Members of the Church as well as any other Believers and are therefore as much obliged to act according to the Station wherein they are placed As did the Jewish Kings notwithstanding that the Church in Egypt and Babylon did subsist without them and as did the first and best of Christian Emperors And among the rest of those Powers that of depriving Bishops hath been one And this Power hath been exercised here among us with the Approbation of the Church of England and consonantly to the Articles Homilies and Canons thereof And among the Reasons of Deprivation the not acknowledging the Kings Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Causes was none of the least which yet is not so much as to deny his Civil Authority also which is the present * See the Vindication of their Majesties Authority to fill the Sees c. Case Indeed if we consider the Supreme Power only as having so much Authority as is absolutely necessary to preserve the Civil Government and to secure the outward Peace of the Kingdom we must own that it can judge also what shall be reasonable Security of any Subjects being true to the Government and that Ecclesiastical Persons as well as others for want of such Security given may be deprived of places of trust or places where they may have considerable influence on the People least they should pervert them to disaffection Cujus rei facilis est probatio c. Grotius De Imperio Summar Tot. circa Sacra Cap. 10. § 33. Hence follows a Power of removing Bishops from their Sees upon such occasions which that it belongs to the Sovereign Grotius thinks is a very easy matter to prove For he that hath power to banish a Man out of all parts of the Country or Kingdom hath by * Hoc enim illi inest aâ— cujus totum est in Potestate ejus in Potestate pars non esse non potest Idem ibid. Consequence a Power of forbidding him to exercise there the Episcopal Office This he can do as the same Grotius observes not only by way of Punishment but also by way of Caution if he finds the People tumultuous on the account of any Pastor though without the Pastor's fault And such Deprivation may be made not only without but even against the Consent of a Synod of whom Kings are so far from being obliged to ask the question whether they shall have their Subjects Allegiance or no that they are rather obliged especially here in England not to ask or enquire of them because it is a Violation of of the Laws of the Land and an injury done to the proper Judges of Allegiance And although in Cases of Heresy or Schism when there are matters of difficulty to be decided it is very fit and proper and agreeable to the most ordinary and usual practice of the Church to call Synods Yet even in those Cases they are to be convened only at the Sovereign's * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. Proaem lib. 5. Doce quis Imperator hane Synodum jusseâ—â—… Congregari Hieron Apolog. adv Ruâ—â—iâ—â—â— lib. 2. appointment and when they are come together they are all of them under the same Circumstances of Obedience to the Civil Power as they were singly before obliged to the same Duties and liable to the same Penalties upon refusal of them How then can this be a matter of Ecclesiastical Cognizance or how can it belong to them to determine it Examples of Emperors deposing Bishops without as well as with a Synod are many and that even in the Case of Heresy which doth most properly belong to the determination of a Synod and which they are best able to judge of not but that in plain Cases or Cases before sufficiently declared Heresy this may be done without them even as Kings in the Old-Testament brake down the Images destroyed the high Places and put down the Idolatrous Priests by their own Authority which Kings under the New-Testament having the entire Legislative Power do not come short of Thus Christian Emperors have deposed Hereticks and their Power to do so seems anciently to have been generally acknowledged on all hands All Parties seem to have been sensible thereof Sometimes the Emperor threatned to depose them and sometimes put it in Execution without any ones gain-saying To him Bishops brought their a Theodorit lib. 5. c. 23. Complaints against such other Bishops as they desired to have deposed Him they sometimes b Leo. 1. Ep. 99. praised for using this Power His Power they c Flavianus in Theodor. loco citato acknowledged though against themselves In his Sentence though sometimes unjust they acquiesced d Socrat. lib. 2. c. 12. And this is more than to depose them on the account of State-Crimes or for default of Allegiance Lastly As this is agreeable to Antient Practise so it is the constant and concurrent Sense of all the old Reformers and till of late it hath been denyed I think by none but Papists and some of the worst and maddest of Enthusiasts And thus Men may become guilty of Schism by contending for Power Whereby we may also discern how Persons in other Relations according as they happen to be concerned in some of these Circumstances may become guilty of the same fault 2. They may be Schismaticks by misimploying their Power and so cutting themselves off
A TREATISE CONCERNING Schism and Schismaticks Wherein the Chief Grounds Principles Of a Late SEPARATION FROM THE CHVRCH of ENGLAND ARE Considered and Answered By Henry Hellier D.D. Fellow of C.C.C. Oxon. LONDON Printed by Richard Smith for Jo. Crosley Bookseller in Oxford MDCXCVII A TREATISE CONCERNING Schism c. THERE have been many Discourses published about Schism since the late Revolution and most of them by Men averse to the present Government who have quoted divers Sentences out of the ancient Fathers which they say make against us although they will serve according as the case is differently stated either of one side or the other They call us who do approve of the present Government Schismaticks and themselves the Church of England who have separated themselves from it accusing us of Immoralities in our Prayers of all the mischiefs that are done in the Wars of setting up Anti-Bishops concluding that we are without the Church and that there is no Salvation to be had among us in the ordinary way Wherefore it can be no unseasonable work to enquire into the nature of Schism impartially and into the ways whereby Men may become Schismaticks in order to the clearing such as are innocent from this Offence and to the charging it in the right place and on the Persons that are truly guilty of it And seeing our Adversaries have taken so much liberty of Speech against us as after they have called us Schismaticks and said we are in a state of Damnation to boast of and print Catalogues of their Books unanswered It is but reasonable that any Man on our part should be heard also that hath a mind to speak without being blamed only for writing against them much less for indifferent stating of the case for they have given sufficient cause for both But this latter is the thing which I principally intend to do namely to give a state of the Case or to consider the rational part of the Subject which seems hitherto to have been most neglected although it is of the greatest use For if the nature of Schism in general and the ways whereby Men do become Schismaticks are once well understood it will be easie to explain the Sentences commonly quoted out of the Fathers and to make use of them if we please against our Adversaries or it will be lawful to reject them although there will be no need of that for there are none of them that I know of which after a Man hath duly considered of the Subject will seem to favour them Therefore to make a general Discourse on this Subject and also to include particular matters within as short a compass as conveniently may be I shall endeavour to shew 1. What Schism is and how the Members of the Church may become guilty of it 2. I shall speak something also of the sinfulness and inconvenience of it to the intent that we may avoid it 1. Let us consider what Schism is and how the Members of the Church may become guilty of it As for the word Schism it signifies properly the cutting or cleaving of a solid Body from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hence it is translated to denote diversity of Opinions and Professions in those that once appeared at least to be agreed in them for they that never were united cannot be said to be cut asunder And according to this metaphorical Acceptation Schism is a breach of Unity in any Society whatsoever But common use and custom hath applied it only to that which divideth the Unity of the Church Yet not the bare Separation but giving the cause of Separation makes the Schism Wheresoever a Schism is each Party is divided or separated from the other but each Party is not in a state of Schism that is doth not give the cause of Separation unless it so falls out as it sometimes may that both of them are in fault neither doing its part towards the maintaining of Agreement so far as is necessary to be preservation of Unity in order to one common end Now as many ways as there are for the Members of the Church to profess themselves united one with another with relation to matters concerning them as they are the Church and Congregation of Christian People So many there are also for one or more Members to become Schismatical by breaking off that Union in outward profession which is a Duty incumbent on them I speak of Union which relates to Matters concerning them as they are Members of the Church Whence not every passionate Heat not every Quarrel not every Suit of Law not every War not every Faction or Sedition among the People doth make a Schism I speak also of Union in outward Profession For tho' there is an internal Union and Communion of all God's faithful People in regard they have the same Faith and the same Hope and do practice the same Christian Virtues and in default of these or any one of these a Man in some sort cuts himself off from those faithful People and from the Portion which doth belong to them and so the secret Infidel and the secret Sinner may be said to be separated now for they are none of Christ's and shall hear that Sentence in the separation of good and bad Men hereafter Depart from me for I know you not Yet this is a matter not peculiarly belonging to Schism but common to it with every other Sin and therefore in that Sense I shall not now consider it but only as it is a Breach of external Communion and Separation as to outward Profession although this may be committed as well as any other Sin in the Mind also by a Man's intending or purposing to leave the outward Communion of the Church when perhaps he hath not as yet actually done it Now as the outward Unity or Communion of every Society appears in the apt Order of the Members one with another and Demeanour one towards another according to their respective States and Conditions as in one House one City one Kingdom So does the Unity of the Church consist in Mens acting according to their just Relations as Members of the Church in keeping fair Correspondence and retaining a due Agreement in Doctrine of Faith and Morals and in Discipline that is to say Church-Government and the things that belong to it as being requisit to the due Administration and right Management of it And this Unity is consistent with several things seemingly dividing Persons as Members of the Church and that partly even in the aforesaid respects with diversity of Spiritual Gifts and Functions with diversity of Opinions as to Matters of Religion with Ecclesiastical Disputes and Contentions with various Judgments and Resolutions as to particular Circumstances and Cases relating to Moral Actions with Canons and Constitutions of divers kinds with difference in Ceremonies or other parts of Discipline in divers Countries or divers Parts of the same Country according to the several Exigencies of
contending with one another For the Contention of Civil Governors considered only as such i. e. about their own Rights and Titles will not constitute a Schism nor give a just occasion for a Separation although some have lately as it seems taken occasion to make a Schism on the account thereof whose Principles are partly considered in that which went before and will be farther in that which follows according as they shall be found under their proper Heads 1. It may be committed by Civil Governors invading the Power and Authority of the Ecclesiastical For although it be true that every one of the Clergy is subject to the Civil Governors I mean to that one or more Persons in whom the Supreme Power is lodged Yet there are some parts of their Office which no King or Prince can assume to himself as The Power of the Keys the Power of Ordination of administring the Sacraments of officiating as Priests in the Publick Worship of God and other such like which if they undertake without being lawfully called thereunto of God they are guilty among other sins of the sin of Schism and we may say unto them as the Priests did to Vzziah when he went to burn Incense upon the Altar It appertaineth not unto thee Uzziah to burn Incense unto the Lord but to the Priests the Sons of Aaron that are consecrated to burn incense 2 Cor. 26.18 II. There is a Schism made when Ecclesiastical Governors deny the Authority of the Supreme Civil Powers for they have the care of the Church also being Custodes utriusque Tabulae and appointed to be nursing Fathers of the Church Our Obligation to every Human Law is derived from the Divine and seeing Religion is the support of all Government and the foundation of all Justice * Quod in Religionem Divinam committitur in omnium fertur injuriam l. 4. â— de Hereticis and Peace it cannot but belong to their care They therefore that shall deny them that Power which is annexed to their Imperial Dignity To reform Abuses in the Worship of God and in the Clergy to constitute Bishops and Pastors on occasion to depose or deprive them to call together and to preside in Councils to dispense with their Canons to rescind or alter them as they see a just occasion All which things Christian Kings have done and that upon good grounds If these are indeed the Powers of the Sovereign as it may be proved †You may see all this very well proved in Grotius de imperio Summarum Potestatum circa Sacra And good part of it is owned by the Author of Christian Communion p. 26 27.29 and elsewhere they are then they who deny them these Powers and assume the same to themselves are Schismaticks Such are therefore the Papists who by virtue of their Ordination pretend to be gotten out of the power of Princes and independent on them yea to be above them and to govern them in temporalibus in ordine ad spirituale bonum ‖ Bellarminus de Rom. Pont lib. 5. cap. 6. Papa potest mutare regna uni auferre atque alteri conferre tanquam summus Princeps spiritualis si id necessarium sit ad animarum salutem ibid. by which Claim they shew the unreasonableness of all the rest in effect confessing that to the right management of the Spiritual there is a necessity of an over-ruling Temporal Power which they would therefore get unto themselves III. Ecclesiastical Governors become Schismaticks by contending for Power among themselves As for Example When one Bishop lays claim to the Diocese of another setting up himself or suffering others to set him up an Anti-Bishop erecting Altar against Altar according to the ancient Phrase And in some Elections indeed it hath been difficult to know who was the Anti Bishop and the Emperor upon such an occasion hath caused †The Case of Bonifacius and Enâ—â—lius Baron Ann. 419. §. 15. both of the Contenders to depart out of the City yea after having called a Synod * Henricus Secundus in italiam cum magno exercitu veniens habitâ Synedo cum Benedictum nonum Sylvestrum tertium Gregorium sextum tanquam tria teterrima menstra abdicare se inagistratu coegisset Syndegerum Bambergensem-Episcopum cui Clementi secundo appellatio fuit Pontificem creat Platina de vitis Pontif. 155. Pont. Clemens Secundus Syndegerus antea vocatus Bambergensis Episcopus in Synodo Pontifex creatur annuente Henrico Secundo vel impoâ—ante coâ—â—nâ—e potius â—â—â—m 156. Pont. he hath deposed at one time three that have pretended a Right to the Papacy and created a fourth instead of them to preserve the Peace of the Church But there is not always the same difficulty to know who is the true Bishop As for instance If a Bishop resigns or gives up his Diocese and after the vacancy thereof another be put in his room he cannot afterwards come back and lay claim to a Diocese so given up any more than to one that he never presided over at all And therefore in that case it is plain enough that he is the Schismatick or the Anti-Bishop that comes to put in any such claim And a Bishop is under the same Circumstances who is put out of his Diocese by sufficient Authority and is under the same guilt of Schism if he comes to make a second claim to the same Diocese For it is very clear that if he be deprived by a sufficient Power he is in the same condition as if he never had been their Bishop Such an one therefore who has been so deprived if he shall return and say to the People I am your true Pastor still you ought to obey not this Man that hath succeeded but me He is justly to be esteemed a Schismatick and so are consequently all they that do defend him and adhere to him I know there have been two things urged and are chiefly insisted upon in defense of a Separation of this nature 1. * This is the Summ of what is objected in the first Part of Christian Communion That Bishops though deprived to Temporalities are not divested of their Spiritual Power that it is their Duty express'd by their Titles of Watchmen Messengers Shepherds c. in holy Scripture to make use of that their Power in order to the Extirpation of Immoralities which according to the Opinion of those who hold the present King to be only King de facto and the other to be King de jure whom they suppose to be the major part must necessarily as they say follow by praying for the King de facto the unjust Possessor as they understand it against the King de jure the rightful King in the publick Prayers especially on the more solemn days of Fasting Thanksgiving c. 2. They having * Christian Communion pag. 8. professedly waved the Question about the King's Title do urge that the Deprivation of Temporalities merely by a
‖ This objected in the Second Part. Lay-power is invalid †This is inferred from the fomer Principles in the Third Part. Therefore the old Bishops retain still their Right the others are Anti-Bishops and Schismaticks that are set up against them As to the First of these Objections I answer 1. That the Author who makes it seems to have misunderstood the Treatise called The Vnreasonableness of a new Separation on the account of the Oaths c. which he quotes in divers places and deservedly commends Wherefore I shall repeat something out of it An Vsurper is one The Unreasonableness of a new Separation c. pag. 30. who comes in by Force and continues by Force A King de jure is one who comes in by lineal Descent as next Heir and whose Right is owned and Recognized by the Estates of the Realm A King de facto is one who comes in by consent of the Nation but not by virtue of an immediate Hereditary Right but to such a one being owned and received by the Estates of the Realm the Law of England as far as I can see requires an Allegiance So then a King de facto doth not signifie an unjust Possessor for he is King jure optimo By such a Right as supersedes the bare right of Inheritance not recognized by the Estates of the Realm By such a Right as all the Laws which make our Allegiance due to a King de facto do confirm by such a Right as implies sometimes and particularly in the present Case an express and free Consent of the People by their Representatives which is better than a tacit Consent implied in Prescription which in these days is the only thing that can make Succession a good Title considered as distinct from other Titles or a forced Consent i. e. Consent subsequent upon Conquest which only doth make Conquest a good Title 2. As for any other meaning of a King de facto I shall not concern my self with it but only take notice that whether Men call the present King King de facto or de jure if they hold him to be their Sovereign to whom Allegiance is due which can never be due from the same Person to two opposite Kings at once the Prayers for his Preservation Victory over his Enemies c. do not contain any Immoralities but only that which is their bounden Duty and that which is implyed if we should use no other than the Apostles own words Praying For Kings and for all that are in Authority 1 Tim. 2.2 that we may lead a quiet and peaceable Life in all Godliness and Honesty Nor is then the using but the omission of such Prayers on days by their Superiors appointed for solemn Meetings rather to be esteemed an Immorality 3. But if Men should use those Prayers against their Consciences and profess they did so which it is to be hoped few or none do or if they should be guilty of other open and acknowledg'd Immoralities must He that is not Bishop of the Diocese come thither to reform them Then for the Extirpation of Immoralities which are to be found more or less in every Diocese any Bishop might invade the Diocese of another saying he came to take away Immoralities to teach Men their duty c. And though the Commission of the Apostles when the Labourers were few was indefinite over all the World and that of Bishops and Pastors is so in some sort now in regard they are according to their Places and Stations to give assistance to and promote the Edification of the whole Church of Christ and are in that sense Bishops over all the Church yet they are to be under certain Orders and Rules and within bounds such as may be consistent with the good Government and Peace of the Church and therefore not to make their Dioceses as large as they please or go a A 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disorderly beyond their own Precincts or proper Districts Whence it was justly forbidden if not by express b Act. 20.28 Tit. 1.5 Scripture as some think yet by the Canons called c Can. Apost 14.35 Apostolical by the two first General d Conc. Nic. Can. 6 7.8 Conc. Constantinop Can. 2. Councils by the Council of Antioch e Can. 13.22 and by the Imperial Laws f â— 14 l. 36. C. de Episcopis Clericis that one Bishop should g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. see Zonaras Invade the Diocese of another whereby in understood doing the Episcopal Offices therein without h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consent of the Bishop of the Place when he is not i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bâ—â—â—â—mon in Can. 2. Constantinop gone off or deprived without being appointed k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by other Bishops so to do not being in l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Barbarous Nations where Bishops and Pastors are wanting Without some of which Reasons specified and excepted by the Councils prohibiting them no Man therefore ought to return back to officiate in a Diocese of which he is deprived notwithstanding any pretence of Immoralities Fourthly and Lastly Schism is a great Immorality and hath many others evidently consequent upon it so that if by such proceedings they make a Schism the just Imputation whereof I know not how they can avoid then instead of bringing Men out of they bring them into Immorality and therefore by their Titles of Messengers Watchmen c. they are obliged not to return It may be 't will be said that these Dioceses are their own and that they come to recover their own Rights But 1. If these were indeed their Rights they cannot by thus returning hope to recover them neither are they capable by the present Establishment of having them although the others should be willing to resign or deliver the Dioceses up to them 2. Where the fore-mentioned Cause is wanting or insufficient viz. that of ill Morals this latter of Right by a true lover of Peace will be parted with of Course John 10.11 The good Shepherd giveth his life for the Sheep much more is he content to part with the profits of his Pastoral Office to do them good And as the true Mother of the Child in the Case brought before Solomon would rather suffer her Child to go to another Woman then let it be divided So will a true Pastor rather suffer his Flock to go to any other Orthodox Bishop than let it be crumbled and broken into Factions only for the sake of him The pretended Mother of that Child might have made her excuse with the Schismaticks of our days that she had rather her Child should be cut in pieces than guilty of an Immorality in Honouring a false Mother and witholding due Honour from the true One. And yet she that had not that Scruple was the best Woman and the true Mother of the Child as Solomon judged and the Scripture approves