A DISCOVRSE OF THE FORBEARANCE OR THE PENALTIES Which a Due REFORMATION REQUIRES BY H. THORNDIKE One of the Prebends of Westminster Church LONDON Printed by J. M. for James Collins at the Kings-Head in Westminster-Hall 1670. THE PREFACE ARistotle and Experience teacheth us that no Positive Law can provide for all the Cases that may arise upon the Terms of it Religion indeed in General is a Moral Vertue But the true Religion that bringeth Salvation is a Positive Constitution of Gods Grace requiring the Condition of Christianity to qualifie for the Promise of life everlasting But upon several Terms heretofore under the Law of Nature and Moses and now under the Christian Faith The Church of Christ in all Ages hath been constrained to provide new Decrees and seek new Laws for the quenching of new Heresies and Schisms They that ever hoped to do that by an Act of Comprehension which the Act of Uniformity hath not done would have proved themselves deceitful Workers They would have made many Breaches by stopping of One. That which I am able to propound I confess is rather possible than probable For were it so far advanced as to be inacted for a Law of the Kingdom I should never believe that it would take effect unless the Faith and the Laws of the Catholick Church might be received to give Bounds to all emergent Disputes No more then I can believe that the Reformation will ever prevail after one Breach in Germany after another since in the United Provinces and these last here amongst us unless we unite our selves upon the same Principle Whether I have said enough to prove it well grounded or not I must refer that to Judgment But he that excuses me not in such an innocent Proposition as this How would he have Almighty God to excuse me if having attained this Resolution I should not declare the Consequence of it in our present Case Especially considering the Duty which the Law of the Land justly and necessarily imposes upon all of my Order to Reduce Recusants to Church For there are now two sorts of Recusants And those that are bound to reduce them must do it upon such Reasons that by reducing the one sort they drive not the other sort from Church Let them that have more skill then I shew how it can be done without imploying my Principle I that am resolved it can by no other means be done must declare my Resolution though I were to suffer for it Which from a Christian Kingdom I cannot do One thing I have adventured upon my own Head Granting that the Government of the Church was Regular till after the sixth General Council And so that the the Acts of the Church before that time are effects of it But that is not to say that the Corruption of the Church which we Protest against and Reform began not till that time Religion began to be corrupted earlier in some and later in other Points But this Corruption had not the force of Law till after that time And especially till the Vsurpation of the See of Rome It is enough that there is difference Visible in any Point between that which was from the beginning according to the Scriptures and that which was when the Reformation was attempted That which can be made out hereof will serve to cramp both sorts of Recusants That which cannot should be no cause of difference He that reduces the sense of the Scripture within the Faith and the Laws of the whole Church warrants the Penalties of Recusants Let the Laws do their Office and make it a Disgrace to be out of the Church And then we may expect to see the Blessing of God upon his own Ordinance But without restoring Discipline without Canons and Laws to restore it without the Office of the Synods in providing those Canons let no man think that temporal Penalties will serve to do the business For though there can be no reason sufficient for violating the Vnity of the Church yet if the dissatisfaction that hath caused it resolve into a defect of the Laws it can no more be ended without redressing the Laws then a Disease can be cured without taking away the Cause of it Errata PAg. 10. lin 13. r. Prophesies sent since the Ground o Salvation was declared is p. 17. l. 5. the Church read this Church p. 20. l. 27. the Article of this Church r. the Law of this Kingdom p. 22. l. 3. Christians r. Christian p. 25. l. 27. decay r. decays p. 36. l. 1. or to be believed to r. to be believed or to p. 42. l. 29. Laws r. Law p. 63. l. 20. the best r. their best p. 99. l. 28. Churches r. Church p. 109. l. 28. making r. and making p. 113. l. 5. Christs r. Christ p. 121. l. 12. which r. of whom p. 125. l. 21. to come to r. come to p. 151. l. 17. Idolaters r. Idolatry p 153. l. 18. Invocations r. Invocation p. 263. l. 16. these r. those OF THE FORBEARANCE OR PENALTIES Which a due Reformation requires CHAP. I. The Case in which forbearance is pretended for weak Consciences IT is a long time that the forbearance due to tender Consciences hath been alledged for the means to restore Unity in this Church And certainly were the Case stated in which S. Paul prescribed it to the Church of Rome that so it might be drawn into Consequence in our Case the Scripture must needs produce that which would be of advantage for Peace without prejudice to Truth But when the bare Phrase of Scripture is tossed up and down in the discourse of them that care not to understand either the Reason upon which it is grounded or the Effect to which it sorteth no marvel to see the decay of Religion proceed from the abuse of the Scripture We need not the Heresies of the Primitive Times even the abominable Villanies of the Gnosticks to tell us what irreligious pretenses may be set forth in Scripture Phrase Our own Fanaticks would furnish sport enough with the fooleries which they pretend as from Gods Spirit because they can deliver their non-sense in the Phrase of Scripture could such irreligious madness move any thing but the compassion and lamentation of Christians It is enough for my purpose that unless the Precept of the Apostle be limited to that consequence which the reason of the Case will produce the two-edged Sword of the holy Scripture may prove an edge tool to cut their shins with who take upon them and have not the skill to handle it For the state of the Case to which S. Paul speaks I will say no more at present but this That he prescribeth only to the Church of Rome at that time when the care was not to loose the Jews by winning the Gentiles to be Christians There could then be no question of establishing a National Church by the Law of a Kingdom which Church and which Kingdom shall by that Law reform that which it protesteth
the Church is no further Visible then it is Catholick ANd thus shall the Church become Visible according to the Will and Ordinance of God which being in decay by the malice of man though not Invisible yet must needs become hard to be seen at least to the purpose of Gods goodness For by the discourse premised it appears why it pleased God to provide that the true Church should be Catholick That is to say that when it was so easie to discern the True Church from all that pretended being indeed Hereticks or Schismaticks the simplest were left without excuse if they made a wrong choice Which if it be true how can it be in the Power of any Church or of the secular Powers that maintain it being bound to continue a Member of the whole Church to introduce that for Reformation which cannot appear to be restored but may seem to be innovated Which how should it be done without owning that ground of Reformation which I have delivered and by consequence those bounds which the said ground inferreth And I do very well believe that none of those who decline Conformity with the Church would have the Face to deny this had they to do with the now Missionaries of the Church of Rome For it would not serve their turn in answer to them to plead that the Pope is Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters having Reason to challenge that God hath founded a Visible Church It would be absolutely necessary to plead though the goodness of God hath instituted a Visible Church yet that by the malice of man it might be and is become Invisible for the difficulty of finding Salvation by it though absolutely Visible because Salvation might always be had in it It is easie for him that would answer them with a good Conscience for Truth and not for Victory to maintain the Church to be Visible so far as the Faith and the Laws thereof continue Visible But that so far as the Faith and Laws thereof may be disguised from that which was from the beginning so far it may and is to be said that the Church which by Gods Ordinance is and ought to be Visible by humane disorder is become Invisible Which being said it follows immediately that as all estates in the Church are obliged in their several qualities to do their utmost that the Church may be Visible the Salvation of all Christians requiring them to Resort to the Communion of the Church which they believe to be Catholick so there is no other way to make it Visible but to restore the Faith and the Laws of the Church that from the beginning made it Visible And therefore no Christian Church or State can have Power to Reform the Church any otherwise then by restoring that Faith and those Laws which the Church may appear to have had from the beginning It would be Sacriledge and Vsurpation upon the Faith which God hath built his Church upon and upon the Laws which either the Apostles have delivered to the Church or inabled the Church to deliver to posterity to introduce any thing else for the Reformation of the Church Which seeing it must needs bind over the Church and Kingdom to the wrath of God as either destructive or at least prejudicial to the Salvation of the People must needs bind over him that hath this opinion to the same if upon so just an occasion he should forbear to publish and to plead it as he may without offense And therefore I take leave to blame all those who declare in behalf of this Church that it departeth and separateth it self from the Church of Rome For seeing it hath been granted in and by this Church ever since the Reformation that there is and always was Salvation to be had in the Church of Rome as a true Church though corrupted I am very confident that no Church can separate from the Church of Rome but they must make themselves thereby Schismaticks before God though before the Church they cannot be condemned for such because the Church of Rome the Authority whereof must needs be ingredient into the Sentence cannot oblige any Body to stand to the Authority which it so abuseth For if God have tied all Churches to Communion with all Churches how should it not be Schism to profess Separation from a true Church And it is every whit as easie to say that we intend only to Reform our selves and that the Separation hath come to pass by the rigour of the Church of Rome Excommunicating those that Reform themselves without her leave CHAP. V. How far this Rule is owned by this Church HEre it will perhaps be demanded whether or no the Law of this Land make this the Rule of the Reformation which we Profess And my Answer is that in effect and by consequence it doth For by maintaining the three Creeds to be part of the Service wherewith we glorifie God by Professing the Catholick Faith and by maintaining the four Councils whereby both the Faith and the then Canons of the whole Church are established it doth in effect maintain the Primitive Church not only till that time but beyond it For seeing it is evident that the fifth and sixth Councils are but appendances of the Fourth tending only to maintain and inforce the decree of it how can it be doubted that the Article of this Church receiving all Councils that have decreed according to the Word of God receiveth and inacteth those which tend only to inforce the Fourth which it owneth for decreeing that Faith which the Word of God teacheth Besides the prayers for the prosperity of the Catholick Church whereby we prove our selves no Schismaticks to the See of Rome when we repay the Curses of it with our prayers Besides that Injunction of Edward the VI which obligeth all Preachers to expound the Scripture according to the Consent of the Ancient Fathers Which as no man can say why it should not be in force So had it been in force we need not have come to the question now on foot And indeed it is in effect that which I demand For it will be found that the Consent of the Fathers is not to be had but in the common Faith and in those Laws which the whole Church either enjoyned or allowed particular Churches So that to expound the Scriptures according to the Consent of the Fathers is to expound them within those bounds and to trouble the heads of Christian people with nothing that is without the same As if their Salvation could be concerned all being safe within those bounds Here I must take notice that the reason why the Church Catholick is to be held may be miskenned if it be extended to all that is called Christians and not limited to that which maintaining the Faith violateth not the Vnity of the Primitive Church If the profession of Christ and Christianity were enough to make men members of the Catholick Church why should not Socinians and Anabaptists belong
Conscience should be pretended when the question is whether to turn Christian or not Is it possible that there should be such a doubt in that point that a man to whom the Reason why he ought to be a Christian is sufficiently proposed can be said to be under a light that convinceth him not Which if it be true then is there nothing in Christianity which there is not a sufficient light to convict that man of to whose Office it belongs Otherwise it could not being to his Office not being able to discern the Obligation of it It is therefore a horrible reproach to Christianity to say that any doubting Conscience is not under a light sufficient to resolve it Scruples of Conscience there may be which may eternally have recourse and that no disparagement to the Faith Because the Faith provides a Resolution that they who have scruples in Conscience are bound in Conscience to lay them aside Nay to act positively against them But he that says that being a Christian he is not under a light sufficient to clear him in any doubt of Conscience says that the Faith obligeth him to sin Whereas it is not the Faith but the want of it which obligeth not the erring Conscience to sin but intangleth him so that he must sin if the obligation of acting fall out before the errour be removed Suppose the Jews convict by the Epistle to the Romans that Salvation comes only by Faith and not by the Law also And you suppose them under a light that neither the Law nor any Ordinance then standing by virtue of the Law could oblige But suppose them in love with themselves and with their Ancestors and to have such an Opinion of Salvation intailed upon them and their issue by the Law as to think that they could not have it by God that gave the Law if the Gentiles might have it as well as themselves and they might very well for consequence of Reason though very ill for their own account oversee the light they were under Suppose we now those that make this Plea not to believe one Catholick Church and one Baptism for the remission of sins But had rather gratifie the Socinians and deny that any Christian can be obliged to any thing that appears not to his own Reason out of Canonical Scripture Then imagine he should gratifie the Papist if he should grant that Catholick Communion always made the Catholick Church Suppose them not to believe that the Faith which only saveth includeth Baptism in the Catholick Church And that this Church is not Reformed unless it be restored to the same form I say supposing them possest with such prejudices as these and marvel not to see them eternally doubting whether or no it be lawful for them to obey the Laws which this Church and Kingdom is able to make Nay to see them break out into Schism as all Parties now seem to do rather then obey them when they shall be out of hope to give their own Law to the Kingdom Never forecasting how it may appear to continue a Church when they have given such Laws to it CHAP. XIV That it is not Forbearance to allow their Orders I Suppose they who make this Plea will not grant that they are in any errour so near the Foundation as these which I name Nor do I think that those Christian Jews at Rome that doubted of transgressing the Law when they knew that Salvation comes only by Faith did deny the Foundation of Faith For as long as they lived in the Church they were in the way to learn and understand how both were true Neither will I say that any of those who desire Forbearance for the weak are in any errour destructive to the Foundation of Faith and the hope of Salvation till they break out into Conventicles When that is done I am thenceforth bound to charge them with all the Error which the Title of their Schism can signifie And therefore I charge them with Hypocrisie when they pretend to Forbearance because they are weak and yet break out into Conventieles when they do so then they can be counted no more the weak among Christians then those Jews which S. Paul will have to be forborn as the weak among Christians supposing them to have renounced the Faith afterwards rather then continue in the Church And therefore the Plea of weak Consciences cannot be allowed those that ingage in Conventicles They have cut themselves off from it by leaving the Church Let them return and then make the best of it As to them the Church is under a new Precept of S. Paul which says A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition avoid Knowing that such a one is out of the way and sinneth being condemned by himself Titus III. 10 11. Because saith S. Hierom after S. Cyprian Whereas other sinners are put out of the Church by those that manage the Keys of the Church Hereticks and Schismaticks put themselves out of the Church Therefore Titus that is all Titus his flock are to avoid them for Excommunicate persons who do Excommunicate themselves As for those that continue in the Church though with a pretense of giving such Laws to the Church as no man knows how soon they may unchurch it let them make their best of it But being grounded at least upon a pretense of weakness there can be no question made but some errour must be granted for the ground of this weakness Let themselves at their leisure assign what errour they will acknowledge if they like not that which I have assigned Only let them shew the world that is the Legislative Power of this Kingdom what errour it is that they have hitherto had which being avoided for the future all those difficulties will cease which this Discourse pretendeth cannot be met with but by bounding the Reformation within the Faith and the Laws of the Catholick Church In the mean time let me go on to shew that those who were Ordained in and for the late Schism composed by the Laws at his Majesties Return by Presbyters against their Bishops cannot claim by virtue of it to be owned for Presbyters Or in the terms of the Ancient Church to be received in their own Orders A thing which there can no question be made in by any body that understands what the Church or what a Schism signifies And it is marvel how they that would be thought to allow Episcopacy should question it To acknowledge the Authority of giving Orders in the Bishops according to the Laws by which we both maintain this Church to be Reformed and yet to allow those that are made Presbyters by those Bishops not to Ordain others but to Minister the Office of their Order according to the Reformation setled in this Church I say to allow them to Ordain others to Minister their Office by other Laws not only without but against the consent of the Bishops from whom they have their
these terms of our Reformation what shall we plead with a good Conscience to bring Recusants to Church It will be said that the Pope is Antichrist and the Church of Rome all I Idolaters that there can be no question of abandoning Idolatry and Antichrist But is there no question of holding the true Faith of continuing a true Church parting with Idolatry and Antichrist Were Papists Idolaters and the Pope Antichrist a thousand times the Reason and the Rule of Reforming the Church would be where it is and will require that it be so Reformed as to continue a Member of one Catholick Church as it was unreformed saving the Unity which cannot be held without the consent of those that will not be reformed Not that I grant the pretense of Idolatry and Antichrist Or that I intend to dispute against it at present being a question too large to be voided by so short a Discourse as this But that to ground our Reformation and Salvation upon the interpretation of Prophesies is a thing without the compass of Reason to do And also a departure from that Plea upon which our Reformation is hitherto stated Having therefore placed my business and spent my time in considering the Controversies which the Reformation hath occasioned Because the Disputes we have among our selves concern nothing but how far we are to depart from the Church of Rome I thought my self tyed in Conscience to publish the Resolution I had attained both under the danger that might be expected from the late Usurpation and at His Majesties happy return So that the publishing of my Opinion in the Case at this time in dispute is but a declaration of the consequences that have ensued because a palliative cure hath not served the turn If they that break Unity in the Church have liberty to plead for their their Conventicles which they Vsurp against Law why should not my Opinion expect a favourable Audience Protesting before God that how advantagious soever I think it to the Salvation of Souls yet I do not desire that it should take place but by the free Act of this Church and Kingdom CHAP. III. That the Rule of Reformation is the Catholick Church IN the first place therefore I hold my self bound in Conscience upon this occasion freely to declare to my Superiours That there is no Power in this Church and Kingdom to reform it self in matter of Religion but only by that Form and to that Form which may appear to have been held by the whole Primitive Church before the Corruption came in which we pretend to Reform And the reason hereof is unanswerable being immediately grounded upon the Article of our Creed whereby we profess to believe one Catholick and Apostolick Church For if there be such a thing in the world then must there be one Catholick Faith the Profession whereof is the condition of Communion with it And one and the same Laws the violating whereof is the forfeiture of the same And here I crave leave to call all Canons all Customs of the Church whether concerning the Rites of Gods Service or other Observations whether delivered in writing or received by silent Vse and Practice by one and the same general name of Laws of the Church Only that I may be the better understood Being therefore well assured that the Church cannot be Catholick but it needs must be Visible Because it cannot be Catholick till it may be Visibly distinguished from Heretick and Schismatick both I must also infer that it can never be Visible till it become Catholick That is the only way to justifie that which hath been always pretended that this Church is the same that it was before Luthers time For as the Church had never been Catholick had it been confined to one Nation as the Synagogue was So I do believe that it had never been called Catholick had there not been Heresies and Schisms before it was so called It had been One Church of all Nations by virtue of the Conversion of the Gentiles When Heresies sprung up as Tares among the Corn then was it called Catholick for distinctions sake It was visible that the true Faith was spread all over Heresies and Schisms prevailed but here and there where they were raised So if an Heretick or Schismatick were asked the way to the Catholick Church he durst not have shewed the way to his own saith S. Austin Nor is it a question to be asked a Christian why the true Church should be Catholick The answer being so obvious that it was Aposiolick Say why the Faith preached by the Apostles prevailed why the Communion setled by their Authority whereas Heresies and Schisms were known but here and there and you have said why the True Church was Catholick We that profess the Reformation are agreed that this provision of Gods goodness is no Promise of God against mans malice That corruption may become Catholick for the present Age though not from the Apostles This is the common ground of Reforming the Church If the measure and bounds which it limiteth were also common all our divisions were at an end Nor can any private Spirit expounding the Scripture without these bounds derogate from it It is a sufficient prejudice against any Interpretation of Scripture that it standeth not with the Faith and with the Laws of the Primitive Church S. Paul challengeth the prophets at Corinth to shew themselves Spiritual men by submitting to his Orders Having said that the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets and inferring that all their Spirits are to be subject to his being an Apostle 1 Cor. XIV 32 36 37. The same is the Case to the Worlds end the promise of our Lord Behold I am with you to the worlds end being made to the Apostles and to all that should be Christs Disciples and learn of the Apostles to do all that he hath commanded Mat. XXVIII 19 20. For who can think he continueth in the Doctrine of the Apostles departing from their Authority in any thing subject to their Authority Or what is not subject to their Authority excepting that which our Lord had commanded before he gave them their Authority His own Commands being the condition of Salvation Their Authority the means provided to inable us to attain it by observing and learning his Commands So as it is Heresie to depart from the Faith which they preached so is it Schism to depart from the Authority which they left in the Church till the Worlds end Were not the Catholick Church a Warrant to particular Churches they could not Reform themselves without the consent of the Whole But seeing abuses are and were Visible at the Reformation it is necessary to grant that particular Churches and secular Powers by whose Laws they subsist may restore that which may appear to have been decayed But it is also necessary to say that Reformation is the Restoring of that which was not the introducing of that which was not CHAP. IV. That
with these Positions which I cannot shew to have been Professed by Visible Bodies I discharge my self upon a number of Pamphlets of the time of that Confusion which was called the Blessed Reformation wherein free Grace was made to be the pardon of sin before it is done Justification to be the Revelation of predestination to Glory and no sin to be seen in Gods Elect. One particularly which I have cause to believe was printed by Cromwells own Appointment because it answered a Petition of Welsh Fanaticks which charged him to depart from his Principles answers expresly that the Principle of Salvation is neither Faith nor good Works but Christ living in the heart and abiding there whatever Principles the Godly may change And for the Church have we not seen our Independent Congregations or do we not see them in New-England refuse Baptism to all that will not take the Covenant which they appoint themselves to take and owne no other Churches but such Congregations I suppose no man in his right senses will imagine that there can be a Catholick Church consisting in the Communion of all such Congregations Or that there can be any Faith to give Law to their Communion who have the Law in their own hand to be to morrow Socinians if they please Or any other Sect that allows Independent Congregations For the Socinians may seem to have the Eldership of New-England for Independent Congregations On the other side do we not see the Leviathan that Monster of a Christian openly Profess that he is bound to renounce Christ with his mouth if his Soveraign command Though still bound to believe in him at the heart So utterly perswaded that there is no such thing as a Church of Gods Ordinance But only by the Act of Soveraign Powers within the respective Dominions of each of them That he had rather renounce his Baptism and so the Benefit of it then owne any Creed or any Catholick Church CHAP. VII That it is for the Interest of the Reformation as much as of the See of Rome HAving therefore observed upon due consideration as I hope that all the Errours which have had Vogue during our late Confusions are reducible to these two Positions destructive to two Articles of our Creed that Profess one Catholick Church and one Baptism for remission of Sins I am still led by the same Consideration to think my self tyed in Conscience freely to Profess that where these two Positions clearly renounced and the sense of those two Articles duely established and received by all Parties that owne the same Creed the Re-union of the whole Church must needs follow For the Power of the whole Church being so stated as to presuppose the whole condition of our Salvation and to extend only to the determining of those things which may promote edification in it without endangering the Unity of the Church why should not I think that there is found by the consent of the whole Church from the beginning so clear a resolution of all that is disputed to maintain Separation concerning the Condition of the Covenant of Grace that it cannot be refused by the Parties owning the common Faith There is great cause to fear that notwithstanding the mischiefs we feel by our own Divisions some would think it still a greater mischief that the Whole Church should be re-united Though upon just Terms and such as must needs re-unite our selves But if the Christian Religion oblige us to do men good against their will He that demands nothing but the Right Vnderstanding of two Articles in the Creed to the Re-uniting of Christendom intends the greatest Charity that those who love Division can receive Whether his demand be sufficient to do his Work or no he must leave it to the World to judge For it is to be acknowledged that when the Condition of our Salvation is setled and all that causes Division upon the Account of it there remains besides very many Disputes concerning Publick Orders as well in the Offices of the Church as in the publick Government of it and the Interest as well of the State as of the Church in the same But let not therefore those that love not Unity pretend Difficulty For they shall find such Principles laid to the determining of them all in the Visible Laws of that one Church which cannot continue One but by owning the same that the due bounds of Reformation cannot escape them that will not decline the thred and the grain of these grounds And yet in all this no man declines the Scripture for the only Rule of Faith But he that refuses the See of Rome for Judge in the Sense of it which is all that remains in question may well crave leave to decline the Judgment of any private Spirit not confined within the bounds which the Visible consent of the Church determineth Not as if the sense of the Scripture were not more and more to be discovered which is indeed discovered every day more and more But because the true sense of it will always fall within the compass of that which the Church hath always received I am very well perswaded that the See of Rome will never hear of any Terms of Reconcilement so long as they see our Divisions increase But I am very well assured that the Divisions of the Reformation can never be Re-united so as to prevent the like for the future but upon that Ground which being received will serve to re-unite the Whole Church There can never be One Visible Faith One Visible Church upon any other terms There can be no such sin as Heresie to violate Faith as Schism to violate Charity upon other terms And therefore it is out of Love to the Reformation that I insist upon such a Principle as may serve to re-unite us with the Church of Rome Being well assured that we can never be well re-united with our selves otherwise That not only the Reformation but the Common Christianity must needs be lost in the Divisions which will never have an end otherwise And he that can take measure how much of it is lost in thirty years time since these Troubles began even among them that inclose the Name of Saints and the Godly to themselves will easily believe that it hath not long to live unless Division be put to death And yet the vain hopes of the Parties ever since the Division may make it appear that both have Reason enough to be reconciled They of the See of Rome have long expected a hundred and fifty years or thereabouts that those Christian Princes that have looked upon the Reformation as dangerous to the Peace of their Dominions should give them assistance to reduce all that Protest against the abuses thereof by force of Arms to submit to their Will Which would be to make that Will the Law of Religion as well to themselves as to those that should be so reduced But the experience of so much time evidences that the Powers of
Christendom have something else to do then to imploy the forces of their Dominions to that purpose And that if it prove for the Interest of some of them at some times it will prove not to be for the Interest of others at the same or other times Of which Interest as they are indeed and in Conscience to give account to God and not to the See of Rome so that they will ever make the See of Rome the Judge of them what appearance can there be So it is time of the day for them to hearken to Reason whether they regard God and Religion or Interest and themselves But is not our Case the same Or are not we transported as far with the conceit that they are limbs of Antichrist and Idolaters as they are with the conceit that we are Hereticks and Schismaticks Have we not as long expected when the Kings would joyn to strip the Whore of Babylon naked as they when they would joyn to reduce the Hereticks by force And is it not yet time of the day for us whatsoever opinion those that imploy their time in searching the meaning of a Prophesie may have at least to make it no Principle of our Profession nor to maintain Separation upon the Account of it Knowing that were the Pope twenty times Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters he can never be Antichrist nor they Idolaters for any thing that the consent of the Catholick Church either alloweth or injoyneth So that whatever become of any Prophesie in Gods Word and the sense of it the bounds of Reformation will be the very same And he will be no less an Heretick or a Schismatick that makes the Pope Antichrist or the Papists Idolaters for doing or believing any thing which the Church from the beginning hath injoyned or allowed to be believed or to be done then if he pretended no Prophesie to prove it If ever any people had cause to reflect upon the sad consequences of this conceit we are they that shall find no probable reason to impute the mischiefs of the late Vsurpation to but the hope of fulfilling this sense of this Prophesie It is a vain thing to think that a man who believed no God could Act a counterfeited Religion throughout as we have seen the Usurper do He that could hope to be saved either without Faith or without good Works by having Christ alive at the Heart why should not he think that all the foul way he went through was the Service of God having intended to strip the Whore of Babylon by his means Neither Manichaeus nor Mahomet nor any Enthusiast can be barred of the like aim with this if once he make his private Spirit parallel to the Scripture For that which the same Authority last dictates as in Wills and Testaments must take place I say not that this is the Case of those that interpret this Prophesie of the See of Rome I believe they follow their Reason in expounding Scripture by Scripture But if their Reason be not the Reason of Religion the Reason of that Christianity which we all have Interest in the private Spirit that follows it may take all for Gods Service though never so wicked that is done in prosecution of it In the mean time Division increasing among us as it does I think I gratifie our selves and not the See of Rome in proposing that truth which reconciles the Interest of Reformation to the Interest of Vnity in the Church For in Civil War as Schism is nothing but a Civil War in the Church that Party that divides is the likely to Ruine And though the first hopes of the See of Rome have proved addle yet if our Divisions prevail they must needs have fresh hopes to prevail by our Divisions CHAP. VIII That it is the Duty of this Kingdom and of all Christian Soveraignties ANd therefore I must freely profess my opinion without any manner of hope that ever the See of Rome will abate any thing of their rigour Though the Reformation should content themselves with these terms For I find by the proceeding of former times that it is their Maxime to stand to that which they have once done And to mark those Popes to posterity that have abated any thing from the rigour of their Predecessors For being arrived at this Greatness by this Rigour and obstinacy in all Pretenses right or wrong they will always think themselves obliged in Reason of State not to yield so much as the Cup in the Eucharist Though the Council of Trent leave it in the Popes Power to grant it Because granting that any thing is and hath been amiss who shall secure them that nothing more shall be questioned then is indeed amiss when we see no point in Religion remain unquestioned some time or some where Not considering all the While that this Rigor is the cause of Division and Division the cause of these Questions And that the Reason of Reformation being owned on both sides there is a Ground restored for Confidence that they who accept of it will stand to those Bounds which it setleth But if the See of Rome can have no Power against the Whole Church Much less can any other Church or any part of the Church or any Secular Power that protecteth it make that to be Reformation which the Whole Church alloweth not Or secure their Subjects Consciences of the Salvation they seek in exercising their Christianity according to their Laws but by confining the Reformation which they maintain within those Bounds which the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church either require or allow Now how can the Interest of the Nation be secured without due ground for hope of Gods blessing upon that which shall be done How can there be ground to expect Gods blessing till it appear how all Subjects of this Kingdom shall stand discharged at the day of Judgment following that form which the Kingdom inacteth rather then that which the See of Rome requireth For there are other Christian Princes and Soveraignties that command their Subjects to obey the See of Rome whose Subjects must as well stand discharged to God upon the same Plea as the Subjects of Reformed Princes and States And how shall the Consciences of them that make Laws be secured if they cannot secure the Consciences of them for whom they are made Or how can Gods blessing be expected if this security cannot be evidenced It is not yet time to ask how those that allow not the Reformation upon these Terms should be punished Because there are that pretend that no punishment can be inflicted for disobeying any Law of the Kingdom by which Religion is setled But it is time to say that they make it a very ridiculous thing for the Legislative Power to make Laws for the Kingdom which they can inact by no Penalty And how shall this difficulty be voided but by demanding nothing but that which Christianity will require of all Christians That no Christian Kingdom
Orders is nothing else but to imagine that God hath given Power to divide that is to destroy his Church For what is setting up Altar against Altar but to Usurp Power to Consecrate the Eucharist and give the Communion of it in despite of them whom they allow to have Power to do the same because they do it by Authority received from themselves In all the Records of the Church there is but one Case expresly remembred in which it can be said to have been done That fell out in Aegypt at the time when the Church was divided between the Arians and the Catholicks But before that trouble there was another division on foot about receiving back into the Church those that had fellen from the Faith in the persecution of Diocletian For Meletius Bishop of Lycopolis had proceeded to Ordain Bishops in as many Cities as he could in opposition to those Bishops that stuck to the See of Alexandria In these distractions Coluthus one of the XII Presbyters of Alexandria became the Head of a Party by himself and to propagate his Party took upon him to make Ordinations of Presbyters to Minister to those of his Sect. Aerius is the man that maintained the Authority of Bishops and Presbyters to be all one Yet do I not remember that it is any where said that Aerius took upon him to Ordain Presbyters being himself one Much less that he was able to hold up a Sect by such Ordinations Audius was a Presbyter that became the Father of one of those Sects that Epiphanius writes against But Epiphanius says expresly that he had Bishops that imbraced his Opinion and propagated his Sect by Ordination Tertullian became the Father of a Sect which continued at Carthage till S. Austines time by whom they were reduced to the Church And truly it is to be presumed that the Father of the Sect did propagate it by Ordinations made of his own Head For what should he stick at that takes upon him to divide the Church and to set up Altar against Altar But I have not found it said that he did do it Nor have I found that any Presbyter did ever undertake to do it but Coluthus At the Council of Nicaea to unite the Meletians to the Church the Bishops Ordained by him were allowed to succeed when the present Bishops should dye yet so as to be then lawfully Ordained though they had been Schismatically Ordained afore But when the Coluthians pretended the same priviledge Athanasius pleads for himself that all Coluthus his Ordinations were made void Which is thought to have been done by that Synod at Alexandria which Hosius was present at with Commission from Constantine This is the only Example of Presbyters Ordained by a Presbyter without and against his Bishop All the rest are meer conjectures which cannot stand unless we suppose the Canons of the Church were not observed because it is not recorded how they were observed Whereas all reason requires us to suppose that they were observed because they might be observed and because there followed no dissension upon their not being observed Such Ordinations then being meer nullities as presumed to be done by them that never received Authority from the Church to Ordain do further induce Irregularity by the Canons of the Church And who can deny that all reason and Conscience requires it For who can believe his Creed professing one Catholick Church and not think the Church more disobliged by Schism then by any other Crime that renders a man uncapable to be promoted to Orders Certainly if Rebellion be the Crime that is hardest to be reconciled to Civil trust then is Schism hardest to be reconciled to trust in the Church Nevertheless because Unity is to be preferred before Discipline and because experience shews that when men are taken off from an ingagement in division they prove the more trusty the more weary they were of their ingagement it hath been often practised by the Church to receive not only Schismaticks but even Hereticks also That is such as had received Orders of those that parted from the Church upon an errour in Faith in their respective Orders But always upon condition of renouncing the cause of their division Whereupon they were to receive the Blessing of the Church by Prayer with Imposition of Hands The reason was because neither is Baptism in Schism effectual to Salvation nor Ordination in Schism effectual to Grace by the Ministry of any Office in Schism But being renounced there remains no Cause why their Ministry should not be effectual to their people Their Baptism and their Ministry to their own Salvation supposing it sincerely renounced Therefore the Reason why they who are Ordained by Presbyters cannot be received in their respective Orders is peremptory Because the Schism consisting in Ordaining against Authority cannot be renounced unless the Ordination be voided For so long as the Ministry may be usurped upon such Ordination so long is the Schism on foot I do very well know that the Ordinations of Arians were allowed by S. Athanasius in a Synod at Alexandria who had made the Ordination of Ischyras by Coluthus void And I remember the high acclamation which S. Hierom applauds his Act with That thereby the world was snatched out of Satans jaws But I read that the Tertulliniasts were received into the Church not that they were received in their Orders I find difficulty made by Forreign Churches of receiving the Donatists in their Orders Notwithstanding the complaints of the African Bishops that without them they had not Clergy enough to serve the Church Hereby it is to be judged how severe this Church was with them that had received Ordination by Presbyters The Canon of the whole Church makes all Irregular Ordainers and Ordained Because they had concurred to bring back his Majesty Which was the restoring of the Laws and so of the Church the forfeiture was wholly passed by and nothing required of Ordainers more then of the Clergy Which is an utter Oblivion of the attempt made by those Ordinations And is not that a very great degree of Forbearance in our Case S. Paul when he injoyns Forbearance doth he injoyn that those who did not understand how men were saved by Faith alone that were saved under the Law should be promoted to Orders indifferently with those that did profess it That were indeed something like that which hath been demanded that Weakness should intitle to the Clergy which orderly supposes strength But does he injoyn farther that they should Minister without Orders That continuing Lay-men they should commit the Sacrilege of Usurping to Celebrate the Eucharist That if their Ordination be void by the Law of the Land there should be a new Law made to make their Ordination good and valid which was void when it was made Then must he injoyn that it be lawful for every Lay-man to celebrate the Eucharist Forasmuch as every Lay-man hath as much to do to celebrate the Eucharist as he whose
Ordination is void Surely S. Paul that commands Christians to be without offense to the Jews and Gentiles as well as to the Church commands them also to be without offense to Papists And will not we have those that would be inabled to consecrate the Eucharist by such a Law to shew us how to satisfie the Papists that such Orders are good At least those that by their sufferings have preserved Ordination by Bishops Let them at least be satisfied of the Validity of Ordination without Bishops At least let no man impose upon them that they cannot yield the Forbearance which S. Paul requires for tender Consciences unless they receive the Sacrament consecrated by Lay-men That is by those whose Ordination they believe to be utterly void CHAP. XV. That the Orders of the Reformed Churches are not void because these are NOw I am to look an Objection in the face which at a distance seems to admit of no Answer but if it be a little considered will appear to have neither Reason nor Religion at the bottom of it It is said that hereby we shall make void the Ordinations of the Reformed Churches of France and others Reformed according to Calvin And so make them no Churches Here we agree that it was necessary for the French as well as for our selves to Reform themselves That it was necessary for all to Reform themselves unto the Form of the Primitive Catholick Church I say not we do agree I say that till we do agree there remains no hope of Unity because no Rule for Reformation in the Church But to the Objection Who hath the Conscience to think or the Face to say that if Ordinations made by Presbyters against their Bishops be void Then Ordinations made by Presbyters where they could not be had by Bishops are void For that is the difference of the Cases It is manifest that the Bishops of this Church when they Ordain Presbyters Ordain them to Minister their Office according to the Laws That is under their Bishops And can any man imagine that hereby they give them Power to Ordain others to Minister their Office by what Laws they please themselves And had the French demanded of their Bishops to Ordain them Presbyters that should Minister their Office according to the Reformation does any man think they would have done it So the necessity of Reforming which we all agree in made the Ordinations of the Reformed Churches The Pride and Presumption which causeth all Heresie and Schism usurping Authority never received made the Ordinations of our Presbyters And shall they be as valid as those All that can be questioned is how it may appear that it was not of choice but of necessity that they imbraced that way of setling and propagating their Reformation which they imbraced And for that we have sufficient Presumption from the Albigenses Who secretly Reforming themselves under the See of Rome did certainly do it by the Authority of Bishops who propagated their Order by Ordinations This may be proved by other testimonies if need be But it is sufficient that the Case of the Bohemians is so well known They having resolved exactly to Reform themselves and having chosen the Persons whom they would have for their Bishops were at a stand how to compass their succession from the Apostles by having them Ordained by Bishops In this nonplus they understood that there were in Austria of the Albigenses that kept secret Communion among themselves under their Bishops notwithstanding that publickly to avoid the Laws they went to Mass To them they sent their Bishops elect protesting against their dissembling but desiring Ordination for their Bishops which thus were propagated And this may well seem to be the Reason why they that Reformed in the Empire according to Luther in the name of whom Melancthon hath offered to be subject to their own Bishops admitting the Reformation set up such a Form of Episcopacy as they could of themselves For they had cause to think that the Bohemians had not advantaged themselves enough by that Ordination which they had been able to procure For it is to be noted that they the Bohemians had sent all over the World to learn how to get such Ordination as might authorize their Ministry according to the Reformation which they pretended And are not we hereupon to presume that the French by these degrees finding a necessity of balking the Authority of the Episcopacy which they were under did think themselves thereupon free to cast themselves into that Form which they use For if it be said That by this time they had profited beyond their Predecessors in discovering the Whore of Babylon that they found Episcopacy to be the Body of Antichrist and therefore renounced it It will appear by many Reasons that this cannot serve the turn First how can the common sense of men endure to believe that the Pope is Antichrist by reason of that Greatness which it is certain and evident that he hath attained by Usurping the Rights of his inferiour Bishops And yet those inferiour Bishops be the Body of Antichrist by suffering those Usurpations which they cannot help Secondly it is manifest that they who should hold this Plea could not pretend by virtue of their Orders received from the Bishops of this Church to Ordain Presbyters Unless they would say that they may have their Authority from Antichrist This Plea therefore must remain for the Independents to authorize them that think themselves in the State of Grace before they are members of the Church to make their their Congregations Churches and Usurp the Authority of Apostles in Ordaining their own Ministers Lastly it appeareth sufficiently that very many learned and religious persons of those Churches have not only approved the Episcopacy here setled But have wished the benefit of it to themselves Whereby it is manifest that those Churches cannot owne this Reason when another so far from it is owned by their principal Members I have another Reason to alledge which weighs as much with me as all these And that is the Communion which hath always been used between this Church and the Reformed Churches For should they hold Communion with us and yet think our Ordinations authorized by Antichrist how could they expect to be believed so grosly contradicting themselves And therefore though I must not take upon me either to justifie or to condemn their Ordinations Averring on one side that they are not according to Rule Seeing on the other side that they are owned by my Superiors yet I must acknowledge that there are very great Reasons to hope and to presume that God accepteth of their Ordinations though not made according to Rule In consideration of the necessity that drove them to it and of the Reformation which they were used to propagate Whereas those that Vsurp the Power of the Keys and the Consecrating of the Eucharist by virtue of Ordinations made in despite of those Bishops from whom they have all the Authority which
they can challenge by their Orders what pretense is there to imagine that there can be any such Crime as Schism if this be not it That God should bless that which is done by such gross Vsurpation as this is And when all this is said it remains free for me to say That there is no other way to restore and to preserve Vnity within the Reformation but by establishing and maintaining Episcopacy in that Authority which it hath always had for the determining of differences Nor maintain that Authority but by confining it within the Bounds which the Faith and the Laws of the whole Church do limit As for the Fanaticks which make our Orders void because the Pope is Antichrist and the Mass Idolatry whence our Bishops received and where they exercised their Orders I will only consider the Case of the Donatists forejudged by the whole Church They pleaded in point of fact that Caecilianus was Ordained by Apostates A thing which the Church was so clear in that the African Bishops offered to give up their Sees if it were proved But besides in point of Right had it been proved and Caecilianus owned by the Church because it did not appear or because they thought the Canons ought to be dispensed with for Unities sake those that Ordained Caecilianus having repented of their Apostacy shall we imagine that the Church was lost by owning those that had been Apostates and their Ordinations The Donatists are branded for Hereticks and Schismaticks maintaining all the Laws of the Church but that of Unity And shall Lay-Christians presuming to authorize Lay-Christians to consecrate the Eucharist and set up Churches be esteemed less then Hereticks and Schismaticks Let those that pretend to Unity find that Forbearance which a favourable construction of their actions signifies But Charity to the sound obligeth to take the profession of Schismaticks in the worst sense which if we do the making of Independent Congregations Churches will be the denying of One Catholick Church and the making of them Hereticks that do it CHAP. XVI That changing the Laws for the Weak is not Forbearance BUt if it be a thing absurd in common sense to allow them their Orders much more absurd will it be to change the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Land for their sakes Which is nothing else but to purchase their Ministry at the price of our Religion which the Ecclesiastical Laws contain Here we must distinguish two questions For it may be lawful for Christian people to live by those Laws which it was not lawful for Superiors in Church and State to make A thing evident to all that believe that it was possible for our Ancestors before the Reformation to be saved under the abuses of the Church of Rome But our question is whether or no the Laws of Superiors injoyn that which Gods Law forbids Inferiors to do Otherwise it is pernicious to all Government that Inferiors should take upon them to judge the Acts of Superiors But if the matter of the Law be within the Power that makes it to require an Exception for tender Consciences is to say that there is no Power in the World to give any Law to those tender Consciences Was there ever any Heresie any Schism any Religion pretending Christianity that did not alledge Scripture for themselves Did ever any man alledge it that would not be thought to be touched at the heart with it What is there for a Christian to doubt at where the Exception of tender Consciences lyes not Or how shall we that agree against the See of Rome but agree not in the terms and grounds of Reformation be tryed in the sense of the Scripture Can any man imagine that S. Paul intended to destroy his own Authority of giving Law to the Church which he exercised when he ordered the Jews and Gentiles at Rome to forbear one another Or is this Authority dead with the Apostles What Church then can there be alive if there be no Authority deriyed from the Apostles to give Law to it But the Authority is not questioned so it provide for weak Consciences Episcopacy will be owned if the Secular Power will force it to take them for their Presbyters whose Ministry they cannot give account to God of Being both authorized and exercised by Laws made without and against their Authority This no Christianity can justifie Christianity maintains the Estates of the World in all the Right they had when they became Christians And cannot justifie it self to the World otherwise How should the World receive it upon other terms But if the World stand upon the same terms having received Christianity as afore then must Christianity and the Church continue in the same Rights which it had before the World received it No exception to be allowed but as afore If it appear that the Faith and Laws of the Primitive Church be decayed Not if it seem to private Spirits that the Scripture is not fulfilled In the mean time is it for the honour of the Religion we profess that Weakness which at the best is negative ignorance in truth perhaps wilful ignorance should give Law to it Is it reason that they who have failed to destroy both Church and Kingdom should give Law to both As if a Child should govern the House because he will be framfold and disquieted otherwise Surely it is that which the Emperor said to his Niece Put as tibi injuriam fieri nisi imperas But is that the way to have Peace in Religion When Inferiors shall be made to tread upon the necks of their Superiors they will be so modest for the future as to stay there They will be content to have their Doctrine regulated by them as the Law of the Kingdom requires Or they will think fit that the Bishops be content with their Revenues and leave them to Preach what they please Surely they that can carry the dispute of a hundred years wherein the Bishops had so visibly the better that Club-law was found requisite to get the advantage will not lay down the Cudgels here So they that agree in conforming to the Laws differing every day in that which the Law determines not the Recusants on both sides may make hay in the heat of our Contentions and profit more by such a Law then by the War which destroyed this Church But especially the Atheists who have profited so well under these Contentions as to make that visible which was but foreseen under the Usurper That no Religion would in time stand to be the Religion of the Kingdom They having the Priviledge of the Laws and not liable to any Infamy when the differences maintained make Religion contemptible shall have cause to thank all that shall have done their work by solliciting such Laws CHAP. XVII Of the Opinion of Regeneration by Baptism ONe point I must not pass over in silence which hath been named for a point to be changed That all passages seeming to determine the Opinion of Baptismal
Church as one of the Articles of our Creed professes indowed by God with a Right in and over the same And therefore I do not attribute the cause of our divisions to it as unjust but as indefinite and unlimited And I instance in the Tenure of our Ecclesiastical Courts Which by a branch of this Law are declared to be the Kings Courts and the Judges of them the Kings Judges A thing necessarily following upon the Resumption of the Rights of the Crown usurped by the See of Rome into the Crown But which hath turned so great dissatisfaction in the establishment of Religion by the Law of this Land because the Right of the Church in that part of their Jurisdiction which necessarily ariseth from the Founding of the Church by our Lord Christ hath not been reserved to the Church by express Provision of Law Thereupon followed another Law which gave the Judges of these Courts the Priviledge of being Married At such time as the Law of the Land allowed not the Clergy to Marry And by consequence made them no Clergy-men whom the Law owned for the Kings Judges of these Courts Exempting them thereby from the Canonical Obedience which they of Clergy owe their Bishops And leaving their Ministring of the Laws in their respective Jurisdiction to their own discretion as well against as without the consent of their Bishops It is true they subsist by Patents granted by their Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Dignities indowed with Jurisdictions But the Law having declared them the Kings Judges I refer it to Judgment whether it were any marvel that the Bishops and other Dignities with Jurisdiction should discharge themselves of their Jurisdiction upon such Judges as the Law had qualified rather then cross the Law in taking them upon their own charge Part whereof in ministring the Power of the Keys and in correcting the inferior Clergie is essential and necessary to the Office which Ordination makes the Clergy Bishops and Presbyters capable of For it is resolved upon by the Sages of our Laws that such a Patent being granted for term of life the Patentee is inabled to exercise the whole Jurisdiction without and against the consent of him that grants it and shall be maintained against him in so doing by the Law of the Land I am neither to blame nor to excuse them that have not done their utmost to redeem the Office which we are consecrated to a capacity of managing out of that Possession which the Law of the Land thus ingageth For it is granted and it is to be granted that the Church cannot pardon sin As if it could pardon him that is not qualified for pardon Or keep him from pardon that is But the Church pardons sin by bringing him to be qualified for pardon that is not And declaring him pardoned that is If we were Fanaticks and believed no Condition of pardon but only to imagine that we are pardoned There would be no Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Keys of the Church to manage If we believed as some understand the Council of Trent That sin is pardoned by submitting it to the Keys of the Church And that the mortification of the flesh serves only to redeem the temporal Penalty remaining due when the sin is pardoned A Lay Judge having knowledge might manage the Keys of the Church as well as a Priest But because a notorious sinner becomes qualified for pardon when the Concupiscence is mortified which his sin gratifies And because he undergoes his Mortification because he cannot have the Communion otherwise Therefore are they only that consecrate the Eucharist to judge whether he be qualified or not and to give or refuse him that which they consecrate And Commutation of Penance when it supposes not the inward contrition of the heart performed by outward mortification of the flesh is but the betraying of that Soul to damnation whom it admits to Communion not being qualified for it True it is nothing hinders him that is discharged of Excommunication to become qualified by his own private endeavours But God would never have founded his Church upon the Power of the Keys if the Office thereof were only not to hinder and not also to procure notorious sinners to be fit for Communion with the Church And that to procure must be the Office of those who by the Foundation of the Church are to judge who is fit and who not If therefore the Law of the Land provide not that that Office of the Church may be in force to that effect for which the Power of the Keys is given them that consecrate the Eucharist Is it any marvel that the Judgment and Vengeance of God should lye so heavy upon the Land professing Reformation and not inabling that which it professeth to take place My present business therefore is now to say That the Interests which cause our Divisions are so far imputable to these Laws as without the Reforming of the Laws they cannot be cured Two of these Interests I name contradictory the one to the other in their Pretenses For what doth the World complain of but of the abuse of Excommunication daily imployed to inforce the contentious Jurisdiction of these Courts Never imployed to the correction of sin and recalling of sinners Which being the Office of those that receove the Power of the Keys by Ordination cannot be exercised by the Laity without Sacriledge Now granting that the Usurpation of the See of Rome or the Indulgence of Christian Princes and States have procured or granted to the Clergy a larger Jurisdiction then their Office required It would have been no Inconvenience that the whole Jurisdiction should be inforced by Excommunication signifying imprisonment by the Law of the Land If a difference had been made between the proper Jurisdiction of the Church and the Accessory For in this part of it it is an oppression to Christian Subjects that they should be barred the Communion for maintaining themselves and their Right by Law in matters of any Right of this World Though the Clergy were Judges by the Law of the Land But it would be no oppression to them that the Jurisdiction of the Kings Courts should be inforced by imprisonment which Excommunication might signifie by the Law of the Land without signifying a Bar to the Communion of the Eucharist if these were duely distinguished In the mean time the whole indowment of the Church in a manner being irrecoverable by these Courts without Excommunication the scandal of these Jurisdictions becomes a Popular Plea to strip the Clergy of their maintenance Tyths being no farther paid then it please Frantick Fanaticks or contentious neighbours to do right of good will Knowing that Excommunication being odious Imprisonment is not like easily to follow upon it I said that there is another Interest on foot upon a Pretense contradictory to this And I mean that which vulgar Professors of the Laws of the Land set up to themselves out of these scandals To reduce the whole
Jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical Courts under the Jurisdiction of the Laws of the Land and those Courts that minister the same This Interest espouseth the Opinion which voids the Article of our Creed that professes One Catholick Church making Excommunication and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction founded by our Lord Christ a meer Imposture declareth it uncapable of any Sacriledge to be committed in the using of it In the mean time the Clergy whose Interest is no ways concerned in the Scandals which the Ecclesiastical Courts may give Further then as they are hindred by the said Courts to cure their Scandals by the due Use of their own Office do suffer not only the Scandals which are done under colour of their Patents But even the affronts of the Ecclesiastical Courts themselves Receiving Appeals from the Censure of their Bishops upon the Clergy For a few examples serving the Bishops not to imploy that Jurisdiction which is so easily affronted it must be acknowledged that the debauches of the Clergy are come to that height that till they be Reformed Reformation is not duely pretended against the See of Rome CHAP. XXII The ground of the proper Interest of the Church BUt perhaps there be those that are perswaded by the Leviathan that a Church is nothing else but a Christian Common-wealth And that the Civil Power thereof which is Soveraign hath full Right to injoyn whatsoever it please for the Christian Religion exacting what Penalties it please of Recusants There be others besides the Leviathan that have maintained some branches of the same Opinion but he is the only man that hath looked the whole Question in the Face with this Answer I will but relate the Issue which his own Resolution hath driven him to and leave him to Judgment For having objected to himself in his Latine Book de Cive that which is obvious to all Understandings That then a Christian may be justly punished for his Christianity He answers that it is no inconvenience that he should Because by suffering he purchases an abundant reward I know not whether any man told him or whether himself took notice that this was the answer of Julian the Apostate making himself sport with the complaints of the Christians That they were beholding to him for the Kingdom of Heaven which they gained by suffering his Persecutions But that it was not for the credit of his doctrine to bring Christian Princes into the predicament of Julian the Apostate And therefore upon second thoughts his Leviathan answers That a Subject is bound to obey all that his Soveraign commands in Religion whether he be Christian or not Insomuch that if he command him to renounce Christ he is bound to do it with his mouth and shall be saved believing in him with his heart nevertheless This answer shews the necessary issue of this Opinion That he who holds it if he be as bad as his word is as necessarily an Apostate as Julian the Apostate The hope of Salvation and the Right of Communion with the Church lyes not only in the heart which believes to righteousness but in the mouth which professeth to Salvation The Profession which is made at our Baptism is a Condition without which it cannot be had It is the taking up of Christs Cross which the Gospel requireth He that declares himself free in any Case whatsoever to renounce Christs though he hath not done it hath declared himself free of the Bond which he entred into at his Baptism And as he is no more a Christian to God no more should he be to the Church If further he say As the Propositions first maintained and afterwards recanted by his late Disciple at Cambridge do import That there is no difference between good and bad before Civil Power that is Soveraign inact it Then must it be said further that he is properly an Atheist For if God govern not the World if he reward not the good if he punish not the bad though man do not pardon me God and all good Christians if I repeat Blasphemy that it may never more be repeated then is he not God Particularly if Civil Power can oblige a man to say or swear that which he means not there remains not that Ground for Civil Society which the Heathen themselves whom nevertheless S. Paul truly calls Atheists maintained For what Ground for Civil trust if there be no Law before Civil trust to punish the falsifying of it Let him that considers this Consequence necessary upon all Opinions that distinguish not the matter of Ecclesiastical Law consequent to the State and Constitution of the Church from the Force it hath to be a Law of the Kingdom by the Act of the Kingdom I say let him answer in Conscience whether those Laws by which the Rights of the Crown Usurped by the See of Rome are Resumed into it did proceed upon this Opinion or not For my part I remember very well a solemn Protestation which one of them makes that the intent was not to innovate any thing in Religion by vindicating the Rights of the Crown And therefore do infer that none of them can be understood to extinguish the Rights of Religion concurrent with the Rights of the Crown in Church-matters which it doth not distinguish Knowing how difficult it is to distinguish between them As not knowing that ever the ground upon which they are to be distinguished was delivered till now But there is an Act of the V. of Q. Elizabeth by which that abatement in the sense of the Supremacy of the Crown in Church-matters which had been declared by her Injunctions from the beginning of her Raign to prevent misconstructions was made a Law of the Land This Act because it undertaketh not to limit the Supremacy by distinguishing the Interest of the Crown from the Interest of the Church for the difficulty of satisfying all Consciences gives the Subject leave to declare the sense in which he takes that Oath reserving to himself that which Religion requires a Christian to reserve for the Church Which was not the sense of them that believed no Catholick Church no Visible Right of it And by vertue of this Declaration it is that my self have undertaken to declare that limitation which the Catholick Church requireth For how many Prelates and Divines of this Church King James of excellent Memory in particular have done the same But it is no other then that which the Canons of K. James declare when they describe this Supremacy to be the same which the Godly Kings of Gods Ancient People which the Roman Emperors of the Primitive times before that corruption came in which we Protest against did exercise Here have you the due bounds of this Supremacy setled by Law upon the true ground of it For it is manifest that it cannot be derived from the Rights of the Kings of Gods Ancient People alone Because there could be no Catholick Church before the calling of the Gentiles But the Empire imbracing the Faith when the Church
be a Church Conviction which is the Act of the Law making the Crime notorious how can Christianity be protected and the Church not able to renounce them that renounce it by their deeds The increase of sin so flagrant in this Nation since the War began makes the necessity of this Law flagrant I was speaking of the Leviathan that Monster of a Christian that with one Book allowed by the Act of Oblivion because the Doctrine was not damned when the Person was pardoned hath introduced that Deluge of Atheism and Prophaneness which we are ready to be drowned with Let Publick Justice have the convicting of the Blasphemies which he hath taught if the Church be not in Case to bear the envy of such a trust But to account for such a crime by a pecuniary mulct is to sell our Christianity at the price at which it is defied Unless Infamy follow and Excommunication to bring it on farewel Christianity which compoundeth with Apostasie The Father of the Sect thinks I believe that he hath as good Right to the Communion as the rest of His Majesties Subjects Who though he should profess Penitence for his crime could not be believed having given the World warning that he may be bound to say and to swear that which he doth not believe What course but this to suppress the Vanity of committing Murther under the name of a Duel For in all Common-wealths where mens memory is not liable to Infamy sin is not out of countenance In that which is Christian what can be infamous if to forfeit Communion with the Church be not As for Adultery what punishment hath this Kingdom left for it Or how shall it be counted a Christian Kingdom having none Be the tryal of it as Civil Interest shall require If it pass without Excommunication though the Law of the Land lay no hold on it what can clear the Kingdom of the expectation of Gods vengeance By consequence hereof they that are convicted of Simony in Civil Justice must remain Irregular to the Church That is though their Ordination can never be void yet their persons must remain incapable of any trust which their Clergy should make them capable of And why should not the Priviledge of their Clergy cease and they remain Excommunicate for such a Crime The other Law concerning the Clergy is the confining of every one to one Diocese Which is but the Restoring of that Order which the See of Rome had disordered on purpose to ingage in the disorders of it all that they obliged by such Priviledges For the Priviledges reserved to the Crown Nobility and Bishops whereby the abuse is but displaced will not be considerable in comparison with the Reformation which it hindreth It seems strange to those that find themselves Interested that two Benefices with Cure should be allowed in one Diocese not in several Dioceses though at less distance But the Law cannot be understood to allow all that it forbids not Because there may be Reason why the Publick good will not allow the forbidding of that which is left to the Conscience of particular persons Were all Benefices restored to that Provision which the Cures might require perhaps Priviledges of Pluralities might be extinguished In the mean time is it not enough that whatsoever the Quality be the Office of Priest and Deacon is relative to their Respective Bishops that no man can be answerable to one Bishop for a Charge in which he is answerable to another for the same Which if it hold not in one and the same Diocese the Reason of the difference is both sufficient and evident Always the Ground being laid that the Reformation of the Church is to be Ruled by the Canons of the Primitive Church there can be no more question in this then is in any thing where the Primitive Institution is as Visible as the decay and abuse But this will principally concern Archdeacons and the Dignified Clergy which are to bear a part in the Bishops Office For how should they be charged with that which they are not charged to execute CHAP. XXVI Of Forbearance due or not due in two Instances I Have proposed a Conference I have determined that all is to be tryed by the agreement of the Catholick Church But if we stay till the Parties agree to that there must be no Conference What have we to overcome this difficulty with Considering how the necessity of losing all Religion presses all Parties and considering how slight the pretenses of dissatisfaction at the Act of Uniformity are though I cannot depart from my claim that the Reformation cannot duely be made but by and to that Pattern yet I see it may be laid aside in the Tryal not supposing that the Will of God is declared by it But if the advantage be not allowed which the consent of Christendom from the beginning hath in the judgment of common Reason above any Opinion of this time or any Party pretending Reformation what course can they hold that have not reasonable Creatures to deal with For how can they be counted reasonable that prefer their own Reason before the Reason of Christendom Or how shall they distinguish their private Spirits from the Enthusiasms of Fanaticks that insist upon those Interpretations and Consequences of Scripture which had any man seen before them the Church had never been as it hath been In fine the Case being stated I see no cause to apprehend any obstinacy in the Parties to prefer any faction or partiality before Reason so manifested and so concerning the common Christianity I will insist upon two Instances All the World knows that one of the abuses which made the necessity of Reformation most appear was that of private Masses where the Eucharist was celebrated and the people did not communicate It is as well known that the Reformation according to Calvin contents it self with four Communions a year but no Assembly without Preaching The Church of England hath aimed at the Communion every Lords-day and Holy-day at Sermons as frequent as can be had so as to maintain the reverence due to Religion to Preaching and to the Church What question can there be in Religion that the Eucharist is the principal Office of Religious Assemblies What pretense of Reformation in restoring Preaching by silencing the Eucharist It will be said that there is fear of prophaning so Religious an Office But where is Reformation if it make not the people fit for it The Papists say Private Masses are not commanded they would have the people communicate and incourage them to it But what do they do to bring them to it Surely more then they do that silence the Eucharist for the Sermon That are not contented till so much Preaching be commanded that they know the Eucharist must be silenced Let them think what abilities are requisite to maintain so frequent Preaching that there shall be no time for the Eucharist Let them think of the Scandals that must needs fall out
for want of due abilities and they will find cause I doubt not to prefer the Whole Church before a late Party and abate the Sermon to restore the Eucharist Especially seeing the Law of this Land must be changed to bear out what others have done though it is manifest they never gave any reason for it They will see cause to think that the best Preaching is that which may fit the people for the Eucharist by understanding the Covenant of Baptism and the importance of daily renewing and restoring it by Communion in the Eucharist The other Instance shall be the Psalms that are sung in Cathedral Churches but allowed to be read where there is not company to sing them For it is plain enough what excuses are made and what indeavours used to silence this part of Gods Service and to turn the Psalms which this Church with the Whole Church appointeth for devotion into Lessons of Instruction only Hence all the Plea against the Old Translation with points all the indeavors to crowd in the Psalms in Rhime instead of the Psalter and all use which the Church hath always made of it But did not partiality and faction prevail over that Reason which all Christendom before the Reformation hath always owned there could be no question of using the Psalter of David for an Instrument to tune the devotion of Christian people by transforming the expressions of David unto our Lord Christ in the first place and according to the Figure of Christ to the Whole Church first and then to every particular member of it He that hath learnt this from the Whole Church will never think it reason to put this part of Gods Service to silence whosoever they be that desire or desing it He will rather indeavour to reduce the singing of them into Parish Churches being evidently so much easier then the singing of the Psalms in Rhime But howsoever retain the reading of them by Antiphones and not quench the Spirit of God which breatheth forth that transformation whereof I spake Having thus instanced I will not propose the Ground upon which I maintain that all Reformation is to proceed for the condition of the Conference which I propose I will think it a point of that Forbearance which S. Paul commandeth the Romans not to insist upon those terms which the Authority of the Apostles doth inforce Because I see him not insist upon the Authority of an Apostle with them but having infallibly proved his ground of Justification by Faith alone forbear the consequence of it charging the Romans to hold that indifferent whatsoever his Authority so grounded declareth such yet charging them to forbear those that for all his Authority and Reasons understood it not For I believe verily that his reason and mine is the very same Namely to keep both Parties in the Unity of one Church a Member of the Whole Hoping that by Gods blessing upon the advantages which the communication of the Faithful one with another and with their Clergy affordeth those that are now most keenly set against these little things that are excepted at in the Act of Uniformity may by that condescension which the Interest of Christianity obliges all Parties to come to understand the only Principle of Reformation and Unity both The Authority of the Catholick Church in all things not determined by Gods Law which is only the Gospel under this time of Christianity And I set before them to that purpose the example of the Jews Who for all the Forbearance commanded by S. Paul having stopped their ears at all his charms with the Unity of the Church have forfeited the Faith hitherto irrecoverably For being fully perswaded that without this Principle it is not possible either for this Church or for any part of the Reformation long to subsist Can I fear any less then the utter loss of Religion for my dearest Country and for the dearer Church of God in it CHAP. XXVII How Recusants may or may not be punished as Idolaters IT remains that I say what Penalties this Position makes competent to those that refuse the Reformation thus limited A thing easie for me to do having declared the Ground upon which the refusing of Christianity is punishable Which the Reformation hitherto hath not been able to do The Position of punishing Hereticks capitally is generally decryed by them And yet we see Servetus and Gentilis put to death at Geneva and Bern and others elsewhere If because sentenced for Hereticks by them that put them to death Why should not the Powers that adhere to the Church of Rome execute the Sentence thereof upon those whom they pronounce Hereticks If because so sentenced by the Primitive Church in which we both agree Why owne we not the Primitive Church in the rest as well as in that If because they that gave the Sentence are competent Judges in Religion What remains but that contrary Sentences be executed by the Sword and Religion be no otherwise judged But supposing Religion and the Church and the sense of the Scripture Visible so far as the preserving of Unity requires Christian Powers must both protect Subjects in their Civil as well as natural being though not true Christians and yet punish them for not being true Christians Only if they pretend freedom from Allegiance by Christianity and we know it is false Christianity that so pretends there will be also fit time to declare why they may be capitally punished But those who declare the Pope Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters in the exercise of their Religion have not declared what Penalty is competent to their Idolatry And yet till that be cleared we are in the clouds This difficulty I find my self able to look in the face without ever disputing whether the Papists by their Religion are bound to commit Idolatry or not The Law of Moses indeed seems to shew that by the Law of Nature Idolaters may be put to death for their Idolatry For there is no appearance that the Law of God would have injoyned that which the Law of Nature allows not But the Case is otherwise under Christianity then under the Law of Moses The people of Israel held the Land of Promise upon Condition not to suffer any other God to be worshipped within the Bounds of it but the true God that gave it them upon those terms Therefore they committed a forfeit whensoever they suffered Idolatry in it But the Gospel was preached to the Roman Empire consisting of two Religions of Jews and Gentiles Maintaining the State of the World upon the same terms which it found saving that which if they imbraced the Faith they must voluntarily change When therefore the Soveraign Power of the Empire came to profess the Faith and thereupon an obligation to maintain and propagate it by all means which the Right of Soveraign Power furnishes they could not answer God for the right use of their Power using any other means then the Interest of Christianity allows They might
the State was setled or contributed to the setling of it upon expectation of being tolerated in their Religions when it should be setled But when the Vnited Provinces were in danger to break in pieces upon a Dispute in Religion in the year 1618. and when the point of Religion was decided by the point of that Sword which decided by the point of that Sword which inabled the States General to give Law to the States of Holland Let him that now may see more Aprons then Clokes come from their Arminian Gongregations tell me whether the point were decided by a Penalty or not But let him tell me also whether it had not been better to have decided it no further then the Catholick Church had decided it then to indanger the Reformation as now it is in danger by admitting the Socinians into Communion with the Arminians in case the Penalty should prove insufficient As for the Discourses that threaten the transporting of Estates upon Penalties for Religion and that would incourage strangers to plant and improve Trade here Who knows not that the Conventicles now Usurped were first erected by the late War And therefore must be presumed to cherish the pretense of it And how easie is it for those that inact Penalties for Religion to provide that it be for no mans ease to declare himself an enemy to his Country Nor let any man think that strangers are affected in Religion as those at home are who pretend by Religion to give Law to their Country The dissensions on foot among us may well discourage them from planting among us to improve Trade with us The improving of the Reformation and the setling of it would be but an incouragement to them to pass by those frivolous pretenses which carry us to these frantick distances In the mean time be it considered that Independency which was not in rerum natura at the planting of New England being once setled there by the pretense which their Patent or Patents gave became so fruitful that within twenty years they were able to cut off their Prince For. all that love truth must acknowledge that they were Independents that did that horrible Act. And then consider how you would hope to have it restrained if S. Pauls precept of avoiding Sectaries that Excommunicate themselves be not in force by Canonical Penalties upon them that are to avoid And by temporal Penalties upon them that are to be avoided For conversing together otherwise then for Trade and Commerce experience shews that infection is unavoidable And therefore the Protection which the Kingdom owes the Religion which it professeth necessarily requires not only that it be maintained at the Charge of the Schismaticks in it For as that is the proper Penalty for them to redeem their Recusancy with So is it the Justice which they owe their fellow-Subjects whom they have hitherto kept in that Aegyptian Bondage And this Reason will extend the same obligation to all other Plantations and Residences of English To wit that if they be suffered to live in another Religion there account may be taken of them here that they be not admitted to Communion here without renouncing that which they lived in there That they be not suffered there without maintaining the Religion professed here It extends also to French and Dutch and all Forreign Churches that for Trade or otherwise may be allowed to plant here For either they hold Communion with this Church or not If not it must be Penal both for those of this Church to Communicate with them and for them to admit those of this Church If so yet so long as there is cause of jealousie there must be provision that neither Church be declined upon any pretense of such jealousie I will here add one thing before I make an end Because it may be demanded how the Law of the Land may make Excommunication turn to disgrace and to some degree of Infamy The answer is Let the Law of the Land provide that no man may have Christian Burial that is be buried in Consecrate ground and with the Office of the Church but he whom his Curate knows to have received the Communion within the year And I believe the most part of them that Excommunicate themselves will return of themselves But then it must be provided and the Bishop must be inabled by Law to discharge that Curate of Office and Benefice that shall falsifie his trust in that point Now give me leave to demand whether the Church be under Protection or under Persecution If the Curate be not inabled by Law to refuse Christian Burial to those of whose Salvation he can give no account because they withdraw themselves from his Cure CHAP. XXX The Condition of reconciling Recusants BUt this not all There is one point yet behind For whensoever the Church Excommunicates for notorious and scandalous sin to restore him that is so Excommunicate to Communion would be to murther his Soul and Christianity both at once not supposing some proportionable presumption of amendment in him that is restored This therefore must hold as the Reason of it holds in those that Excommunicate themselves In the reconciling of Hereticks and Schismaticks to the Church And this the practice of the Whole Church of God from the beginning shews them that are willing to understand the reason of it before they tread that Authority under foot which the common Christianity obliges all to follow Shew me any Heresie or Schism ever restored to the Church without renouncing the same and I will confess that the Church it self turned Heretick or Schismatick from the same date Only there is a difference to be put between Heresie and Schism and other Personal Crimes For I see no reason why we should not call other Crimes Personal in opposition to Heresie and Schism Because we call it not Heresie or Schism till Scparation be made A false Belief in Fundamentals is Heresie before God a Resolution to divide the Church is Schism before God both destructive to Salvation before Separation be made But Separation is the disease we pretend to cure without prejudicing the health of Gods Church And therefore should Separation be made to maintain a Profession that Simony for example or Sacriledge or any other deadly Crime is no sin the Party so formed would be ipso facto an Heresie Personal Crimes then must be restored to Communion upon presumption of Personal Conversion from the same But Heresies and Schisms becoming Bodies by professing an Ingagement may be re-united to the Church in Body renouncing the Separation in which they stood ingaged For there is reasonable presumption that the Leaders would not renounce if they did not repent them of it As for the People that only follows and leads not it is most true and just to maintain that Heresie and Schism is a Bar to Salvation though we allow hope of Salvation to the simple that follow malicious Leaders out of invincible ignorance It is therefore no
to have been decayed and depraved in the Faith and Laws of the then present Church We have a Reformation established by certain Laws of the Kingdom which all men know how great a part of the Kingdom declineth because the See of Rome disclaimeth it And therefore the question is what that Law should be that may oblige Recusants to the Reformation which we profess For division in Religion can never so deprave mens senses as to punish them for refusing that which they are not obliged to embrace And yet who would have the Kingdom to establish that Reformation which they would not have it inact by competent Penalties Now such is our Case that since the afflictions which this Nation hath been visited with have revived the humor of departing into Conventicles Independents and Fanaticks decline Communion with this Church as much as Recusants And if we will speak properly to be understood according to the Laws we must distinguish them by the addition of Popish or Fanatick Recusants Whereupon the question arises what Penalties are competent to the one to the other whether the same or diverse For as there can be no Law if there can be no Penalties to enact it with So there can be no Penalty unless the Legislative Power be Judge of the Cause why the Parties decline the Law and may secure them in Conscience that they ought not to decline it Can any Christian Power punish the disobeying of that Law concerning which it cannot secure the Consciences of them that obey But there is a further difficulty in our Case in regard of the Presbyterians Who whatsoever they may do or may have done since the time of disorder have always pretended to the service of the Church so far from disclaiming Communion with it For grant they do usurp the liberty of Conventicles to hold their People at the more distance from being reduced to Law their pretense is not to be obnoxious to the Law for violating it but to make the Law obnoxious to themselves by reforming it Suppose we them then comprehended with the Clergy whose Authority is included in the present Laws in the same Priviledge of ministring in and to the Church Our Case is not stated till we consider that which all Pulpits ring of that no Religion stands to be the Religion of the Kingdom The Case was like to come to this when Cromwell first usurped For then it began to appear that this would be the fruit of his Course in maintaining all Parties in the Religions which the licentiousness of the War had allowed them to exercise The Laws having recovered possession and the dispute remaining by what Penalties to be exercised whether any or none whether those that are or what others I need not say that there is any Profession of Atheism which could never be professed among the very Gentiles This I say that whosoever favours it will necessarily shelter himself under the Law professing that which it maintaineth And therefore that it is to come into the state of our Case in which Forbearance is demanded for tender Consciences how it is to be limited That those who have No Religion if any such should be may not have the Benefit of it So the question now in hand is of the same consequence as if it were demanded upon what terms the Reformation of the Church is to be stated For whatsoever comes to debate the question will always be how far we ought to depart from the Church of Rome The other part of the question What Penalties the Reformation duly stated may or is to be inacted with will depend upon this for the greater part of it For what can render the subject of this Kingdom liable to Penalty for not obeying the Law which our Reformation is established with but that he is first bound in conscience to embrace the Reformation and to do the duty of a Christian according to it Only what Penalties and how great or or how grievous it is to be or may be inacted with This will further require the reason which makes it the duty of Christian States to joyn in Reforming the Church CHAP. II. That a private Person may be obliged to declare in it THis is that which obliges a private person as I am to declare his Opinion when so great a concernment of his Conscience is at stake For who could ever think the Reformation could stand were not the Clergy obliged as the Law obliges them every one in his place to reduce Recusants to the Church Or how should they either do this or stand obliged to do it if the Reason upon which the Reformation and the Law by which it is stated proceeds inable them not to convince them that they are bound in Conscience to embrace it These hundred years hath the dispute been on foot Very nigh so long it is since the Bull of Pius V. acquited the Subjects of the Kingdom of their Allegiance to Q. Elizabeth The Government being then jealous of that Party those that had appeared before in the Troubles of Francford to challenge a share in the Government of the Church thought this the time to set their pretensions on foot It is to be seen by Camdens Annals that when the Recusants first forbore coming to Church about that time did this Party begin to be known by the name of Puritans Ever since that time did these embers lye raked up in deceitful ashes still most appearing when the State was most solicitous till at length the Party appeared in Arms against the late King and prevailing in those Arms became divided into those several Parties which remain united in the Plea for tender Consciences For the Laws recovering by His Majesties return the same embers which it was then thought fit to rake up again in the same deceitful ashes upon the first rub have flamed out again to demand Law to justifie that which they usurp by way of Fact against Law Both pleading that their Consciences cannot be subject to any Law in the Case and that Christianity hath not wherewith to clear up those doubts against which if they proceed they are damned It must therefore needs be said that the present Laws have been justified beyond all contradiction that may pretend any thing to be commanded by the Laws which Gods Law forbids So that the demand of new Laws seems to be a demand that the Conclusion be contradictory to that which is inferred by the Premises And what should Weakness demand of Reason that is to give Law but inconsequence Only let not inconsequence in Reason draw mischief upon us in effect We have hitherto answered the demand Where was your Church before Luther That it was where it is The same Church Reformed which was decayed and depraved afore Neither can we ever answer otherwise till we renounce our Creed and deny that One Holy Catholick Church which we must be saved by believing and by continuing in the Vnity of it Depart we once from