Catholick unless it be in the visible universal Head and if it be said that a National Church may positively determine in this kind then why not a Provincial as well the one being a subordinate Church as well as the other But if the Decree be onely National as many various interpretations and sences may be put on a place of Scripture as there are Nations which will lay an ample foundation for variety of Sects Schisms Heresies c. Whereas if all National Churches were bound to one Catholick determination there must needs therehence ensue the admirable effect of Uniformity in Doctrine and Practice all Churches believing as the Vniversal Church believes and that as the Head doth Besides if it be of such dangerous consequence for Christians as private persons to put their interpretation on Scripture in laying the foundation of variety of Sects Schisms Heresies c. how much more dangerous for particular Churches because the determination of a Church reacheth further and is more attended unto and more become seduced and leavened with errour thereby if it be erroneous Hence to believe as the Catholick Church believes hath more concern in it than those imagine that endeavour to blast it with the ridicle of the Colliers Faith for it 's not as the National Church believes but as the Catholick Church believes Neither is it an implicit Faith in any things but controversal and dubious matters above ordinary scrutiny and vulgar capacity and therein we had better rest satisfied in Catholick Authority than run the risk of adhering to the Opinion of private persons and Churches which must be done also by an implicite Faith and who is likely to have the most unerring Spirit a Church or particular Person and if a Church the most Catholick is the most unerring § 13. Thirdly From the Necessity of a Catholick determination of Decency and Order That is decent which by the Universality is reputed and judged so for one Countrey doth usually call that decent which others repute undecent And there are no Protestant Prelates but have do and will say That Christ hath left it to the Church to determine all matters of Decency and Order and 't is absurd to say that this or that Church may do it when no such is the Church eminently When 't is said the Church determines Decencies What Church is that Is it a Parish-Church Nay then Parish-Churches should rule Diocesan by a Law Again if Diocesan Churches should have power to determine their Decencies either Provincials must be subject to some one Diocesan which might regulate all the rest or else Diocesan Churches would differ so much in their decencies that there would be no Uniformity in the Provincial Church And if Provincials might determine each one its Decencies and Order it must needs break Vniformity in National Churches But I know where the Protestant Prelate will be he will say presently it 's the National Church that he means when he speaks of the Churches determination of Decency and Order To which I reply that he may with as good ground say that he means a Parish-Church and that by giving this power to a National Church he gives a greater advantage to Schism and lays a greater bar against Vniformity For the more comprehensive the Church is in which the Schism is the greater it is and the more uniform the Schismatical Church is of the more dangerous consequence it is to the Catholick Church In vain do men plead for Vniformity in the Church who in asserting the principles of Vniformity in a National Church do thereby extirpate Vniformity in the Catholick for National Vniformity unless it be Catholick is but Vniformity in a Schism For if every National Church may determine of Decency and Order there will be as great a diversity if not contrariety in several Churches affairs as in the affairs of several States one Nation determining that Ceremony to be decent which another determines to be undecent absurd and disorderly and so Churches will be as divers in their Fashions as English Dutch Spaniard c. And there will be no end of Ceremonies and new-fangled Garbs in the Church if a Nation may of themselves and when they will constitute ordain and appoint them at their pleasure alter and null old Ceremonies and invent new and shall have as great difficulty intricacy and multiplicity of Church-Laws as State-Laws if at every Convocation Decency and Order may be determined § 14. From the necessity of a Catholick composure of Church-Prayers the more private and singular the conception of Church-prayers are the more Schismatical And divers Liturgies in one and the same National Church may not be allowed neither that every Province and Diocess compose their own Liturgy as being a matter of dangerous consequence to the National Church How then comes it to pass that our National Church may compose its own Liturgy distinct from another Is not this of as dangerous consequence to the Catholick Church And is' t not more conducing to the Peace Beauty Uniformity and Honour of the Church to have a Catholick Liturgy Whereas otherwise every Nation will be setting up the price of their own prayers above others whence ariseth heart-burning Divisions and Schisms National in the Catholick Church were it not much better that all Nations should bring their Liturgies and lay them down at the feet of Mother-Church and submit them to her Judgment in the Supreme Head from whose blessed hands she may receive one of such Catholick composure that might produce a perfect Harmony in the affections and petitions of all the Churches in the world in good assurance of a Catholick Amen attending the conclusion of all Besides if a National prayer be more available than a Provincial or Diocesan Why should not a Catholick Church-prayer be most of all available § 15. Fifthly The necessity of a Catholick Canonization of Saints For supposing the Necessity of the Observation of Saints days as the Protestant Prelates zealously assert it is requisite to enquire who or what Church Canonized the Saints which are already honoured with Saintship Titular and Days devoted to their remembrance and who dedicated and consecrated Churches on the same account was it not the Catholick Church by her Catholick Pastors If every Church suppose National should have the like liberty to canonize Saints at their pleasure all the days in the Year yea in an Age would be little enough for All Hollan-tide And if the observation must be Anniversary there would be a necessity of robbing Peter to pay Paul which would be doing evil that good may come of it it being as great a sin to rob Peter of his fishing-nets as to rob Paul of his cloak and parchments Besides this Absurdity would fall in that one Nation would canonize that for a Saint which another would anathematize to the Devil As for Example Michaelmas-day is devoted to St. Michael the Archangel which Feast was instituted by Felix the Third the 48th Oecumenical
will upon false supposition allow the Popish Constitution or something like it As for Oecumenical Councils we see what insuperable difficulties have attended the calling of them in all Ages the just grounds of Exceptions in many things of the Determination of doubtful cases in Doctrine and in almost all they have done in their pretences to a Law-making Power in matters of Church-Order and Discipline We have not any ground to believe that Christ hath entrusted any Officers of his Church with a Catholick Power since the Apostes days and such as have pretended to it have always bin opposed by the purest and most reformed part of the Church and whatever mens attempts be or may be they will never finde a Catholick Ecclesiastcal Power here on Earth without a new manifestation of the Son of Man which can exercise such a power of changing Indifferencies into Necessities by a Law wherein the Minds and Consciences of particular Churches and Christians will or may rest satisfied to submit unto in active Obedience It 's as irrational to affirm that Christ hath committed such a power to particular Churches i. e. of making binding Laws Sub poenâ for other Churches or for their own Members or Churches subordinate to them not for other coordinate Churches will they say Christ never gave coordinate Churehes a coercive Power one over another for then all would aspire to Rule and none be Ruled for the power would belong to one as well as another And if any say as the Papists do that Christ hath advanced one Church in Dignity and Jurisdiction over all the rest let them prove it to the conviction of any intelligent Christian and they will do more than the Papists have done ever since their pretence thereunto But it will be pleaded by the Protestant party that Christ hath entrusted every particular Church with this power whereby it may determine of indifferent things of her own practice To which we answer 1. That Christ hath given no Legislative Power to any Church 2. A Judgment of Discretion to walk by the Rules of Expediency is no more to be denied to particular Churches than to particular Christians But for all this Judgment of Discretion Indifferencies loose not their nature though they may be necessary pro hic or nunc in these or those circumstances and are and must stand capable of dayly Alterations as the case shall require and a particular Church may determine of this or that part of the Indifferency as most expedient and so long as the Reasons thereof last it may be in some measure binding unto particular mens consciences but the Reasons ceasing the continuance of the Canon in force in foro Ecclesiae will binde no mans Conscience yea every one will complain of it as a needless Imposition neither will any noble-minded Christian be a Servant to the Wills and Humours of Man or sell the Birth-right the Liberty that Christ hath purchased for Pins and Points neither is it a sufficient Rule for Discretion to walk by because the Church commands and gives no Reason from the Law of Christ for it Besides What Church hath this power committed to them a Parish a Diocess a Province No 't will not be granted of either of them The great Assertors of this Power will say That it belongs to every National Church to make Laws in matters of Indifferency and so ordain their own Ceremonies This is an Assertion that introduceth a whole herd of Absurdities with it For first What is the great end pretended of such Laws but the making of Vniformity in the Church What is more destructive to it than this that every particular Church should be Independent and make Laws within themselves whereas one will ordain Ceremonies of one kinde and another of another and there will be as many sorts of Ceremonies as there are particular Churches Is not this the great exception against the Dissenters from Prelatical Churches that the particular Pastors of each Congregation set up for themselves and Exercise Jurisdiction within themselves without dependence upon any Superiour Power There is no avoiding it upon this Hypothesis but National Churches must be reckon'd Independent Churches 2. Did Christ commit any such power to any such Churches on Earth 3. Again If National Churches may exert such a power then they may make binding Laws to all Subordinate Churches viz. Provincial Diocesan Parochial and if so then for this Reason because they are more comprehensive Churches including the less Then by the same Reason the most comprehensive Church viz. the Catholick should give Laws to the National and for a greater and more eminent end viz. to promote an Vniformity Catholick for if a National Vniformity be so splendid and so much conducing to the bene esse of the Church then a Catholick much more § 4. Argum. 3. To make a Law contrary to the revealed Will of Christ is unlawful and Sinful But for the Church by a Law to change Indifferencies into Necessities is to make a Law contrary to the revealed Will of Christ Ergo. The Major is granted for these Law-makers say they do not by their Laws establish any thing contrary to the revealed Will of Christ for hath he any where forbidden such Ceremonies We proceed therefore to the proof of the Minor If all Necessities in the Worship of Christ be made so by Christ's Will revealed and all Indifferencies become such because they are not restrained under Christ's Law then they are so because Christ would have them to be so For a Christian can take no measure of Indifferencies but by the Law of Christ for he cannot know them but by knowing the Law binding unto Necessities by Commands or Prohibitions So that Indifferencies are made so by the revealed Will of Christ as well as Necessities and the same Law that makes the one thing a Necessity makes another an Indifferency and Christ in his Wisdome sees it best for his Gospel-church that it should be so and he that undertakes to make these indifferent things necessary enters upon a high presumption no less than the altering the moral Nature of a thing constituted by the revealed Will of Christ and what is this less than making Laws contrary to the said Will of Christ That is only necessary in the Worship of Christ which he hath made so and that indifferent which he hath left so by his Will an Indifference in his Worship is no other than something not necessary in his Worship for there is no medium they are adversa Therefore he that wills something to be necessary which Christ willed not necessary doth will something contrary to the Will of Christ by all Rules of Logick and right Reason in the world I know it will be answered That they do not alter the nature of the thing it remains as it was but this or that determination for practice is to be obeyed when it is commanded as the Father commands a Child to take up a Pin it 's an
other Pastors subordinate infallible And it is the greatest reason that he that hath the greatest Charge should have the best understanding to know how to manage it And to what purpose is it for us to seek after further light by going to those that the Church hath further entrusted if they be not holier wiser and juster men than our selves yea than all their inferiour Officers And what is it we aim at most in such Enquiries is it Fallibility or Infallibility Would any one in his best wits be deceived and would the Church deceive any but use the best ways and means for enlightning mens Understandings and reducing them from darkness and errour § 9. Arg. 6. I argue from the nature of the Church in which this Subordination is required That Church must be understood to be the universal visible Church and not any particular Church 1. From the usual acceptation of Church in the like sence when we say The Church with an Emphasis 2. There is no more reason the Church should be understood of one kind of particular Church more than another a Provincial Church or Diocesan may be called the Church by way of eminency as well as the National and if there be more reason because the National is comprehensive of them then much more that the Catholick should be understood by it because it comprehends Nationals and is most comprehensive of all Churches on Earth So that it will unavoidably follow that if there be a Subordination of Pastors in the Church it is in the Catholick Church and the more large the Church is the more extensive is the power of the Pastor and the most comprehensive Church hath a supream Pastor to the Pastors of all other Churches subordinate to it Obj. But the universal Church Visible is not Organical and therefore not capable of an Oecumenical Pastor Answ It is Organical for it 's made up according to our present Phainomena of a Church of visible organized or organical parts comprehending each other and therefore must needs have a visible organical Head principium sensus motus animating all the parts in their respective Subordinations and Relations It 's absurd to say that the hand organized with fingers and joynts the feet with toes and all its parts and so of the other members that these united in one body make not up an organized body and have not one Head common to the totum to communicate respective vigor to each of these members So to say that in the Church there is National Churches organized c. so Provincial c. Diocesan organized and not that the universal Church visible is organized with and influenced by a visible Head is most absurd Again there is the same and greater reason upon the forementioned grounds for the Organization of the Catholick Church than for the organizing of a National Provincial or of any of the inferiour Subordinate Churches for if Order and Uniformity and due administration of Government cannot be maintained in one but by Organization how can they by any other means be obtained in the other And if Order Uniformity c. be not onely comely and beautiful but most necessary to the well-being of a National Church and that the more because it is so comprehensive of other Churches subordinated to it how much more requisite is it to the well-being of the Catholick Church which comprehends National and all others § 10. Arg. 7. That this Catholick Headship is inseparable from a co-ordination of Pastors in the Church may be evinced from these following Necessities 1. A necessity of a Catholick judgment of Schism 2. Of a Catholick interpretation of Scripture it being not of private interpretation 3. Of a Catholick determination of Decencies and Order 4. A Catholick composure of the Prayers of the Church 5. A Catholick Canonization of Saints 6. A Catholick convention or call of Oecumenical Councils § 11. The first Necessity is for a Catholick judgment of Schism for if it be not determined by a Catholick judgment these absurdities will follow 1. National Churches may be Schismatical and no competent judge of them it being not fit that one National Church should judge another they being co-ordinate equally concerned of equal authority latitude and fallibility Neither may a Provincial be judge of National Schism they being subordinate to the National and included in it for they are bound up in the determination of the National and is accountable to it and if it declares against the National as guilty of Schism and upon that account separates from it she shall be judged as Schismatical from the National and so Schism will be committed on Schism and none healed 2. If there be no Catholick determination of Schism there can be no Catholick punishment of Schism from the Catholick Church for the punishment must be preceded by a Law-determination And hence if a National Church be Schismatical from the Catholick it cannot receive any Catholick punishment and it will follow that such a sin may be committed in the Church on which she is not capable to inflict a punishment in any measure proportionate to it 3. If a National Church hath power to judge of the Schism of a Provincial Church and a Provincial Church of the Schism of a Diocesan and a Diocesan of the Schism of a Parochial then by the same reason may the Catholick Church judge of the Schism of a National Church otherwise Schisms will be equally multiplied with National Churches and no redress to be made of them 4. If there be not a Catholick determination of Schism all Churches will not be agreed about Schism so that whilst there is a perpetual controversie in the Church what Schism is and what is not Schism perpetually remains and false judgment still passed upon some Churches these calling that a Schismatical Church which is not so others owning another Church as not Schismatical which is really so All which tends to a necessary and unavoidable confusion for want of a Catholick determination whereas if it may determine by its visible Head all those Controversies would be ended for if the members of the Body complain one of another the whole Body must determine the matter by the Head where there is a concurrence of all parts for the good of the whole § 12. Secondly From the necessity of a Catholick determination of dubious places of Scripture This can be done by none but the Church Catholick on Earth for no Scripture being of private interpretation where shall such an interpretation be found that is not private but in such as is of the Catholick Church where the concurrent judgment and faith of all Churches may be heard 2 Pet. 1.20 the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of private Solution i. e. not of particular persons or Churches private Solution but such as is universal and commonly received by all Churches and Christians according to the analogy of faith Now where can this be found and rested in as
not onely to the power of Godliness but to common Honesty and Morality 2. If it had been Political Wisdom or Justice to annex such Penalties to Ecclesiastical Laws of any kind sure Christ in whom are all the Treasures of Wisdom would not have been wanting in annexing Penalties of that kind to his own Laws of the greatest and weightiest concern to his Church 3. We judge of the greatness and weighty concern of any Law usually by the greatness of the Penalty annexed in case of transgression and therefore herein we may apprehend that the Churches own Laws challengeth a preheminency before the Laws of Christ's own composure and would this King of kings make onely Laws of lesser concern and substitute others to make the greater this is absurd to believe 4. It is a great piece of pride in mother-Mother-Church to advance her self so far above the Civil State that the Magistrate should become the Executioner of her Laws for the Law-maker hath always a great priority and dignity above the Executioner If it be replied That the Church onely craves the Magistrates assistance to compleat her Ecclesiastical censures and make them stick closer on upon the backs of Offenders Answ Herein the Church bewrays her own weakness in that she confesseth she is not a compleat Polity neither hath power enough to reform her self or effectually enough to execute her own Laws without being beholding to an Exotick power As if a Master of a Family had not power enough to execute Domestick Laws in correcting a Child or Servant without asking his neighbours leave and calling for his assistance But in case the Church saith as indeed she doth that she goeth to the civil Magistrate by way of Appeal and the said Magistrate hath power at his pleasure to supersede her proceedings This is to set the State above the Church in Ecclesiasticks whereas the civil State is Subordinate to the Ecclesiastick ecclesiastically and the Ecclesiastical to the Civil civilly and both in respect of the exercise of Jurisdiction in each particular Orb parallel or co-ordinate § 9. Lastly such Penalties that cannot answer the natural end and designe of Church-censures may not be annexed or used by the Church but such a Penalty answers not c. The Major is undoubted the Minor thus appears 1. Because the Sword of the Magistrate reacheth but the outward man whereas the end of Church-censures is to reach the Conscience 2. The natural use of Church-censures is the exercise of them in foro Ecclesiae but the Coercive power of the Magistrate may not be exercised in foro Ecclesiae upon any allowable pretence whatsoever CHAP. XVII Of the Limits of Magistratical Power in matters of Religion § 1. THe third Enquiry propounded is concerning the true bounds and limits of the Magistrates power in matters of Religion a great and difficult Question but of very great concern to us that it be rightly resolved I do not expect to be so happy as to give others full satisfaction in it I being not able to do it to my self so far as I would I shall onely go as far as I can and is convenient for this undertaking with all possible brevity and demonstration We spake before in the two former Questions concerning the Magistrates power in matters of Indifferency both Legislative and Executive on the behalf of the Church This Question is of larger extent concerning his whole power in matters of Religion and enquire how far he may and ought to go and how far he may not go i. e. he cannot go without Usurpation § 2. Matters of Religion is a large word and it comprehends not onely Religion it self but all circumstances and attendances thereof which are Indifferencies in themselves neither moraly good or evil but in regard of their tendency and respect they are so Concerning the Magistrates Legislative power in these things we have spoken somewhat already I shall speak no more here of the nature of Religion than to make way for my present Undertaking Religion is usually understood to comprehend all moral Duties and all instituted Worship to which if we adde the aforesaid attending circumstances we use a larger way of expression and call them matters of Religion § 3. The Moral Law is a general standing Rule to all sorts of Actions Persons and Societies of the children of men whereby God himself hath challenged the first right of dominion as of particular men so of all necessary Fabricks of Rule and Government in the world So that all Actions Persons and Societies duely measured and squared thereby are rightly called Religious and the contrary Irreligious Hence particular Domestick Ecclesiastick and Civil Jurisdictions in a Christian Commonwealth are in proper sence called all of them Religious § 4. Religion taken in a stricter and more limited sence is understood of a holy life and conversation of particular Persons and Societies not onely according to the general Rules of moral Obedience but according to the more particular and special appointments and Gospel-institutions of our Lord Jesus Christ whereby he separates unto himself the most choice and peculiar Societies in the world under his proper and more immediate Rule and Government which are called his Church § 5. Therefore 1. The civil Christian Magistrate hath no power in the strict sence in matters of Religion quatenus Magistrate no more than a Heathen hath for though the embracing the Christian Religion doth much capacitate the civil Magistrate as to his inclinations and endeavours for the improvement of his Magistratical power toward the advantage of Religion yet it adds no new power or jurisdiction to him over Churches Families Christians or others for a Heathen Magistrate is as much in his place the supream Head and Governmnour of the Church considered in a civil capacity under his Government as the most Faith-defending Christian or Catholick Prince in the world Neither by his embracing Christianity doth he attain any augmentation of his Magistratical Power Headship or Supremacy A Christian is no more bound as a Subject by the Rules of the Gospel to a Christian Magistrate than to a Heathen or Heretical Magistrate The Rules are indefinite to a Magistrate as such though a Christian Subject will be the better man and Subject and a Christian Magistrate the better man and Magistrate Christianity making every one the better man and better qualified for the performance of the relative Duty of his place that he is set in § 6. Secondly No civil Magistrate can be an Ecclesiastical Head and Governour of the Church as such It 's Christ's Prerogative to be the Supream and to constitute what other Heads and Governours he in his wisdom thinks best But I finde not that he ever made any Magistrate a constitutive Ecclesiastical Head or Governour to his Church virtute Officii for if so in every Christian Dominion the Prince should be the Metropolitan and the true Pastor to that National Church § 7. Thirdly No civil Magistrate can by virtue of
contrary to the truth of the Word of God 6. The Magistrate cannot be conteded to be such a Judge nor is useful as such unless he may be acknowledged to be infallible A supream Judge in our sence and that which must be here understood is one into whose judgment our Faith hath its last and utmost resolution but we cannot acquiesce in a humane fallible determination And besides what Prerogative hath the Magistrates judgment above another mans and what ease and advantage is it to us if our minds lie open to doubt as much after as before the determination No Christians minde can rest satisfied in a humane fallible opinion of divine things the authority causing Belief must have the same original that the Revelation hath therefore Faith built upon a Testimony must be onely on his own fidelity as one infallible as we believe that Truth also which carries its own Evidence with it axiomatically delivered or evinceth it self from the light of another Truth dianoetically § 11. The second Case consists in Causes disciplinarily debated being Differences arising within one particular Church or between Church and Church or between Pastors and Churches c. All Causes usually handled and determined in Ecclesiastical Courts The Question is Whether the civil Magistrate be the supream Judge or Head and Governour By Causes Ecclesiastick are without doubt meant in the Oath of Supremacy all disciplinary Causes handled in Spiritual Courts the supream Head and Governor whereof was the Pope in whose name and authority those Courts were called and managed and to whom it was lawful for any grieved party to appeal before the reign of King Henry the 8th who by the Oath of Supremacy cut off the Popes Supremacy and established his own Now I thus resolve as followeth § 12. If Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Courts be not jure divino nor held jure divino Episcopacy as it 's setled in the Hierarchy and all its Offices and Appurtenances being onely a humane politick device as hath been abundantly by the Opposers thereof proved and by many of the Asserter and Defenders confessed then I say it 's fitter that man should be supream Head there and if any man the supream civil Magistrate within whose Realm or Dominion their Courts and Causes Ecclesiastical be The nature of this Supremacy is or should be that 1. That all Ecclesiastical Courts be called and kept in the Kings Magisties name 2. That the Sentence denounced should be also grounded on some penal Law of the King for all the Kings Courts should judge by his Laws 3. That any party grieved may appeal to a superiour Court of the Kings or to himself from whom there is no Appeal 4. That the King hath power by himself or Judges to prohibit or supersede the proceedings of the said Court at his pleasure This is the true sence of the Oath of Supremacy which the Bishops notwithstanding all the noise they make against Dissenters from their Church will least subscribe unto whereas most others of the Kings Subjects that refuse to own the divine right of Episcopal government will willingly swear the Kings Supremacy in their Ecclesiastical Courts and Causes in the largest extent And though that sort of ruling men use all endeavours to suggest the disloyalty of the said Dissenters yet I doubt not but most Puritans in England would rather refer themselves to the Kings judgment and stand or fall at his Tribunal than at the Churches and have generally found more relief from under the severities of Excommunication in the Kings Courts than in the Ecclesiastical Supposing that all Ecclesiastical proceedings in Spiritual Courts of Judicature and the whole Fabrick of Church-government as now it stands is a humane Polity as is not denied by the most ingenious I know not why any Puritan or Papist should refuse for to take the Oath of Supremacy for it is no more than to acknowledge the King to be supream Head and Governour in his own Courts which is but Reason Justice and Religion that he should be § 13. But if Ecclesiastical Causes be understood of disciplinary Controversies such as follow upon the execution of Laws and administration of the Institutions of the Lord Jesus in the visible Gospel-churches of such Ecclesiastical Causes it is not the Magistrates part to be the determinating Judge of for 1. To judge and determine a Cause in the Church of Christ is to judge Ecclesiastically and such an act of Judicature is a Church-act which is always preceded by a Church-Officer and no other in foro Ecclesiae and if the agrieved party appeal it must be to an Officer of the same kind it 's not to an Officer of another State 2. He that is supream Judge of a Church-cause on Earth must be an Officer substituted by Christ for none can hold any Place or Office in the Church but by Subrogation from Christ much less the highest Authority but none can shew that Christ hath substituted the Magistrate his Church-Vicar on Earth 3. If the civil Magistrate be supream Head to the Church Ecclesiastically then because he was always so since Christ was on Earth then there was times when Heathen Magistrates in whose jurisdiction the Churches was were his Vicars and Christ himself when on Earth was subject Ecclesiastically though Head of his Church to Heathen Church-Officers for he was no civil Magistrate disclaim'd it nor could be appeal'd unto as such 4. If the civil Magistrate be supream Judge he is the supream Church-Officer for he cannot be denied to be an Officer of that state wherein he doth acts of Judicature as his right And if a Church-Officer then the civil State hath power to chuse and constitute a Church-Officer and that of the highest rank for if he become a Church-Officer his Calling and Constitution must needs be Civil and not Ecclesiastical So that the civil State hath the power of Peter's Keys both to dispose of them and give them to whom she will and the Church cannot be entrusted with them they must still be kept in the Magistrates pocket Hence it will follow that Christ hath not left power enough in the Church for the management of its own political affairs nor wisdom enough for the determining her own Controversies § 14. Seventhly No civil Magistrate can imposse Articles of Faith on any of his Subjects to be owned subscribed or sworn to by a Penal Law for quatenus a Magistrate he is not an universal competent Judge for it 's not necessary that he should be religious understanding found in his principles because he is a Magistrate 1. If he can do it as a Church-Officer we have shewed that Christ hath made no such Officers in his Church 2. If he were Christ never empowered any Church-Officer to use a Magistratical Sword he never put Temporal Crowns on their heads nor Scepters into their hands if any of them out of ambition have got Miters and Crosier Staffs they had them from Antichrist and not from Christ
indifferency of any thing to impose it as necessary But in Spiritual concerns the indifferency of any thing is a reason against the imposition of it as necessary because such an imposition takes away the Formal use as an indifferency 3. What Christ hath revealed as indifferently requisite he hath required a Christian to use indifferently by the judgment of discretion for every action concerning Christ's worship is to be performed as Christ hath prescribed the nature of it necessary things to be done necessarily by us but not to be imposed on us and indifferent things indifferently Therefore an Imposition to enforce the use of indifferent things necessarily and necessary indifferently is unlawful as contrary to the Will of Christ 4. We have before proved that neither Church nor State can change an Evangelical Indifferency in the Worship of Christ into a Necessity § 10. Arg. 3. To exercise Dominion over Mens Faith is unlawful but for Church or Magistrate to impose a set Form of Prayer is to exercise Dominion over Mens Faith Ergo. The Major is without question and to exercise such a Dominion is to prescribe what we shall believe and practice or to enforce us to practice in Sacred things without believing The Minor is true because there can be no greater exercise of Dominion over Faith than in imposing on us a Form of Prayer for every Prayer is to be prayed in Faith or else it is sin Now to impose a Form on me being to enforce me to that Prayer that I be not satisfied in is to impose on my Faith i.e. to prescribe what I should believe for practice in Prayer or to enforce me to practice that which I do not believe i. e. to pray that Prayer and that constantly in such a part of Worship which I cannot do believingly § 11. Arg. 4. If one Church may enforce a Form of Prayer by a Penal Law then another may i. e. if a National Church may enforce a Form of Prayer on all her Subordinate Churches and Members then the Vniversal visible Church may on the National which are her Members and if the National can punish the Diocesan or Parochial for Non-conformity in this kind why may not the Catholick punish the National for the same fault i. e. for using a Form of Prayer not sufficiently allowed or prescribed by the Catholick and if the National can interdict an inferiour Church or Excommunicate a particular person for refusal of such Obedience why may not the Catholick deal with the National in the same kind This must needs be conceded but that it will be said we do not know Where to find the Catholick Church and though the Church of Rome calls herself so yet she is not to be believed she bears witness of herself and that witness is not true I only reply We can as easily and more find the Catholick Church as a National for there hath been always a Catholick Church but there never hath been nor will be a National Gospel organized Church in the world And we may as well believe a pretending Church calling herself Catholick as a pretending Church calling herself National when as they are equally to be accounted as no Churches of Christs Ordination as I can easily manifest when time shall serve Well then the National Church lyes liable to the censure of the Church Catholick for using a distinct set Form of publick Prayers established by her self whereby she renders herself a gross Non-Conformist to the Catholick Church and an Independent in respect of all other National her Form of Prayer being not Uniform with theirs If it be said the Church may compose and impose a Form of Prayer we must know what Church that is and not be deluded with a Name Is it the Catholick Church if so why have we not a Catholick set Form of publick Prayers and all National Churches bound to the use of it And why on the contrary doth every National Church make and use Forms of their own And if it be said The National is the Church it 's false for it 's not the Church by way of Eminency it 's not the most Generical Church because it 's not the only Church there are many National and there are many other sort of Churches that will put in for as good a right as the National and if every National under the Name of the Church may do this and have a distinct Form of Prayer what will become of Catholick Vniformity And if the Church as Provincial or Diocesan what will become of National Vniformity And if this power be granted to any or all these subordinate Churches Actum erit de Vniformitate Catholicâ § 12. But the great plea for a Form of Prayer in the Church is Vniformity for this cannot be say some Men without it Answ Uniformity in the Church cannot be by particular National Forms it must be by a Form Catholick 2. Can there be no Vniformity in the Church without a sameness in Words and Sentences in prayer there scarcely being two Scripture-Prayers that are altogether the same in Words and Sentences Doth not Uniformity consist rather in agreement in Principles and the Analogie of Faith submission to and closing with the same King Priest and Prophet conforming to and walking by the same rule of the Gospel an influence and guidance by the same Spirit 3. If Uniformity of the Church lyeth in such Externals why is not a set Form of Preaching established that none shall use any other besides such Homilies 4. If a set Form of some Prayers be necessary to Vniformity why not of all as well of private as publick for if the Church be not close tyed in bond of Vniformity by uniting Families and Individuals it will break to pieces for all a publick Form The first and main Union in the Church is that which knits every purticular Member to the whole by joynts and bonds and that there may be true Uniformity this must be carefully maintained but it 's 〈◊〉 which the great contenders for a pretended Uniformity least 〈◊〉 themselves about § 13. Another great plea for publick Forms of Prayer is the 〈◊〉 ness ignorance and laziness of many Ministers Rep. The 〈…〉 holds for set Forms of publick Sermons the necessity of which for a time was well considered at our first coming out of Antiâ—â—â—â—an darkness and any one that could read but a Chapter Prayer and Homily in the Mother-Tongue did a great deal of service to God and the people But there is not the same reason now the Church is better provided with able Labourers or at least might be if she would 2. It is the ready way to fill the Church with this sort of Cattle those lazy ignorant scandalous Priests for Mother-Church not only to connive at them but to countenance them and maintain them in their pride and sloth and by making their Exercisâ—s for them whilst they be idle debauched and prophane minding nothing but the profits pleasures and Honours of this Life 2. The only way Ignavum fucos pecus a praecipibus arcent is to banish these droans from the Church and not to turn all the Church unto droans and nothing starves them sooner than to leave them to their own stock for Praying and Preaching and it 's best that their Ignorance be bewrayed that they may be ashamed and get better instruction and exercise in Spiritual things which are to be guides to other Mens Souls or if they be not ashamed the people may have a full knowledge of them and be wiser than to entrust their Souls in their hands Therefore it 's good that the Props be taken away and it will soon appear whether such pretended Church-pillars be sound or rotten § 14. What is alleadged about Ministers abuse of parts in publick Prayers or want of sufficiency is no forcing Argument for imposing a Form for the abuse of good things is no argument against the use we may as well say Because some will be Drunk therefore none must drink Wine or Beer 2. Insufficient Ministers are to be removed or further instructed if they be capable and willing as Apollo was 3. Are not Church-Prayers lyable also to abuse when used by sottish Priests in a formal customary slovingly and prophane 〈…〉 and a hundred times more wrong done thereby to the honour of Religion and the poor Souls of the people than by some weak expressions and sentences or words struck out of joynt by the laborious faithful and zealous Ministers that conscientiously endeavour to use and improve the Talents given them to the service of Christ the conversion and edification of the Souls of the people FINIS