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
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
to the Church dispersed over the face of the whole earth Again the Eastern Christians that are thought to come from Nestorius the Southern Christians under Prester John that maintain the memory of Dioscorus and condemn the fourth Council of Chalcedon cannot be admitted to be Catholicks by any man that owneth the four Councils But in regard it appeareth not that they owne the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches though they owne the memory of their persons and in regard there is cause enough to presume that they would with all their hearts be reunited to the Church did not the See of Rome refuse all terms of Re-union that include not the infinite power which it challengeth they cannot be included within the Catholick Church without reserving a liberty to exclude them whensoever in point of Faith it shall appear that they owne the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches As for the Canons of the Church it was never neceslary to the maintenance of Communion that the same Customs should be held in all parts of the Church It was only necessary that several Customs should be held by the same Authority Which is to say That the same Authority instituted several Customs which they thought to be for the best in several times and in several places For so they might be changed by the same Authority and yet Unity remain Whereas questioning the Authority by questioning whether the Acts of it be agreeable to Gods Law or not how should Unity be maintained This is the Reason of that which I said even now that the Fathers do not agree in any thing but in the Faith and the Laws of the Church For it is manifest that they could not have agreed in the Laws of the Church if any had excepted against any thing used in any part of the Church as if Gods Law had been infringed by it Seeing therefore it is manifest that there are certain Canons and Customs known to have been the Canons and Customs of the Primitive Church owned by this Church it followeth of necessity that nothing can be disowned by this Church as contrary to Gods Law which holdeth by the Primitive Church So it is not my intent to say that the Canons and Customs of the Primitive Church ought to be in force And that there is no other means to restore Unity in the Church But that nothing can cause a Breach in the Church that hath Authority from the Primitive Church And that nothing can have Authority in the present Church that infringeth the Authority of the Primitive Church as if Gods Law were destroyed by any Act of it Further there are two points in the Title and Cause of the late War Episcopacy and Sacriledge wherein the Cause of the Crown hath been so united to the Cause both of this and of the Catholick Church that I may well say that to disowne the same Cause in other points alike Primitive and Catholick would be to deny the Conclusion admitting the Premises Or to keep divers weights and measures in the same Budget The Plea for Episcopacy and for Consecrate Goods hath made out so much evidence for it self that it hath helped to recover the Laws of the Kingdom And shall not the Laws of the Kingdom so recovered maintain the same Plea in all other things For the Visible Unity of the Catholick Church as it never subsisted but in the consent of Bishops so was it never maintained but out of Consecrate Goods CHAP. VI. What Errours have followed because it is not so expresly BUt I do freely acknowledge that though this Church hath many Obligations to owne this Principle for their Rule yet it is not formally and expresly inacted by those Laws of the Land whereby Religion and the Rights of the Church are established For I do further claim that the want of inacting and inforcing it and driving it home to the true Consequence in every point is the Cause and Sourse not only of the disorders which divers pitiful plaisters have been tendred to cure But of all disorders imperfections and decays of Religion which have succeeded upon the Reformation having been made without limiting those bounds And that the present disorders in Religion are the Symptoms of a common disease which all men are offended with but cannot be cured without recourse to the Unity of the Catholick Church and the terms of it wherein that health of Christianity consisteth which all division impeacheth I do therefore freely acknowledge that I find two positions to be the sourse of all those Excentrical Opinions in Religion which caused that Confusion upon the issue of the War that helped to make way for his Majesties happy Return The first is that there is no Condition for the Covenant of Grace That there is no Contract in it but a meer Promise The second is that there is no such thing as a Visible Church instituted by God But that men are first Children of God by Faith then members of a Church of free choice Of these Positions the one necessarily dependeth upon the other For the Faith of the whole Church from the beginning requires Baptism to Salvation And therefore includeth it in that Faith which alone justifieth And by consequence requires that justifying Faith cannot be understood without that Profession of Faith which a man maketh at his Baptism And this will necessarily infer a Church therefore Visible because Catholick For it is agreed upon by the whole Church that Baptism in Heresie or Schism That is when a man gives up himself to the Communion of Hereticks or Schismaticks by receiving Baptism from them though it may be true Baptism and not to be repeated being given in the form of the Church yet is not available to Salvation making him accessory to Heresie or Schism that is so Baptized Now it is not my intent to say that these two Positions were expresly and formally professed by Companies distinguishing themselves from others by Ecclesiastical Communion in the Profession Which is the true signification of an Heresie in the eye of the Church But the Positions I maintain to be Heresies in so much that if there were such Companies they must of necessity be taken for Heresies in the account of the Church And my Reason is clear For it is acknowledged by the whole Church clearly delivered by our Lord in the Gospel that the taking up of his Cross is a necessary condition to Salvation Now since our Lord gave Commission to his Apostles to Baptize all Nations in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost it is evident that ever since we take up Christs Cross when we undertake at our Baptism to lay down our lives rather then deny the Faith of Christ or transgress his Commandments And since this Promise is not available unless it be deposited with the true Church it cannot be available to him that continueth not in the true Church that may exact the Promise deposited with it If any man ask whom I can charge
Law maintain it I suppose it will not be though a good Plea at the day of Judgment for a Subject to say that he was either Protestant or Papist because his Soveraign was so Now Christianity can be Visible by no other means but because it is the Visible Profession of the Visible Church If it become Invisible by differences betwixt Parties it must be in Soveraign Powers to bring the Parties to tryal Provided that there be no tryal but by the Visible Church This is the Forbearance that may be extended by Pastors and may be required by the Soveraign in our Case For the present dissension shews that the Reformation was well begun indeed but not perfected Does not the World know that there was an Act in force for nominating Commissaries to Reform the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Kingdom I am not to say why this Act took no effect I think I have said it when I have observed the rise of the Puritan Party and the seeds of the late War sowed in the beginning of Recusancy But I am to say it could not have taken good effect without taking in the Principle which I maintain What could be more just and discreet then to appoint Commissaries in equal number of Bishops Divines Civil and Common Lawyers But what could have had force but that which had been done to restore and maintain the Faith and Laws of the Primitive Church There are very great Reasons why those that desire to serve the Church should be satisfied in all that this Exception will allow There can be no Reason why more should be allowed To bring them into dispute with their Pastors is to put the Authority of the Church to compromise To compromise any Law of the Kingdom to dispute of Divines upon this Principle is no more then to oblige either Popish or Fanatick Recusants either to stand to the Result or to suffer Penalties competent to their disobedience and the hazard which the Publick Peace runneth when the Peace of Religion is disturbed If that which hath been pretended be all that is intended That some small things are scrupled Let the Legislative Power be satisfied that the preservation of Religion and of the Authority of the Church in which the preservation of Religion consisteth is only sought The Interest of the Parties to give and to receive mutual satisfaction is so great that if there can be ever hope of Peace by dispute this is the time and ours the Case wherein to hope for it CHAP. XIX Probability of recovering the Presbyterians FOr I cannot have so hard an opinion of men whose zeal for the advancement of Discipline in the Church I have always esteemed as to think them resolved to ruine the Common Christianity without hope of doing their own business seeing this to be the unavoidable consequence of holding up the difference on foot rather then taking up with so much of their own Pretensions as the State of the Catholick Church will allow Let them consider in the first place the Recusancy of the Fanaticks as well as those of the Church of Rome What hope their Principles can give them either to make their Recusancy punishable by the Law of the Land or to reduce them by convicting them of that sense of the Scripture which they only allow themselves to convict them with I set aside for the present those Prophesies of Daniel and the Revelation by which they pretend the Pope to be Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters For I must argue in due place that the Recusancy of the Papist cannot be punishable by Law upon this Account But how will they either reduce the Recusancy of the Papist by those punishments which the Recusancy of the Fanaticks must suffer or give the Kingdom God and the World a Reason for the why not which the best of them is here challenged to undertake Then let them consider the wantonness of these times and the wits of them that think it good sport to call in question the foundation of Christianity upon the belief of Original sin by introducing the praeexistence of Souls That think it but sport to make ready their studies in Divinity for the Pulpit by Episcopius his Works denying Original sin both name and thing and making the Faith of the Holy Trinity unnecessary to Salvation Or rather by the Works of the Socinians collected and united together in Holland on purpose to prepare us for the same Apostasie to Socinianism which they are in so much danger of there Let them consider what hope they have to make the Vniversities good Presbyterians that have sowed the seeds of this danger in them by the dissatisfaction they had of their Doctrine when they were in Possession there Then let them tell me what we shall say to the Papists to perswade them to come to Church when as they shall say that they cannot be secured that their Curate is no Socinian or Origenist For the Arminian Congregations in Holland having admitted the Socinians into their Communion and the Canon of the Church making all Socinians in the eye of the Church that Communicate with Socinians how shall they be secured against those that take their Doctrine from the Socinians Or from them who communicate with Socinians Besides let them but remember the time when they had the Ball at their Foot an Ordinance of Parliament for setting up their Presbyteries And how much they gained upon the People whom they had disordered out of all Ecclesiastical Government when they came to be at what they would be at I think they will be at so great despair of reducing the World to their intent having nothing in the Law of the Land to favour it that they will think that they have cause to thank God of a good opportunity to bring them off from an ingagement in which they are like to gain so little by hazarding the common Christianity As for the Clergy of this Church I suppose there is none of them so little a Christian as to repute it a loss to the Party to see their Adversaries capable of that trust in the Church and those rewards of it which they have suffered for themselves For if the necessity of the Kingdom hath required an Act of Oblivion much more must the necessity of Religion which cannot be attained without a cordial conspiring of those that are to manage it inforce a mixture of Interest And that being considered let any man tell me how that can be made but by a Third in which all are alike Interessed That is by owning the Faith and the Laws of the Catholick Church whereby the Papist is either reduced or left punishable as the Fanatick CHAP. XX. The Cure by repairing the Revenue of the Church BUt all this is but a Cure for the Symptom Should such a Conference take effect the Cause of the disease would remain intire For the Cause of our Divisions is not these differences which are too inconsiderable to produce so incomparable a
mischief as that of Schism It rises and is fomented by those Interests which the imperfection of two Laws of Henry VIII hath created So that the Reformation is no way obliged to answer for them Only if it refuse not to mend them now that time hath discovered the mischiefs which they have produced I call them two Laws not as if they were comprised in two Acts of Parliament but because they concern one of them the indowment the other the Rights of the Church We all know that when the Monasteries were given to the Crown the indowment of those Churches which had been impropriated to those Monasteries was transferred by the Crown into those hands that could not Officiate the Cure of Parishes as the Monasteries by some of their Members or by their Vicars had done And though the Right of the Crown which could be no more then the Monasteries had could not abate the Original Right of the Bishop in setling a reasonable portion upon the Vicarages yet in the hands of those that claim under the Crown it hath appeared so strong that such Vicarages are generally impoverished But where the Cure lay upon the Covent there there now remains no indowment no Provision for the Cure of Souls Which falls out most in Cities and places that were most frequented with Monasteries as well as with People What the consequence hereof hath been it is plain enough Even a sort of Mungrel Clergie of Lecturers Who being Authorized by the Bishops Orders and License but payed by the People to supply the Office of Preaching which the Benefices of the Church were not able to maintain Like a Pack of Dogs that are ruled by the Huntsman that seeds them and sets them a work not by the Master that provides for them No marvel that they owne not the Bishops for Judge of their Preaching whether according to the Law or not He that sees not that this was the sourse of the late War of him is the Proverb that says No man so blind as he that will not see And the worst is that so great a part of the Gentry as have shared with the Crown in the spoils of the Monasteries think it their Interest to hold up that Party which they think would justifie their Title in point of Conscience Whereas it is found by experience that those very Preachers that would Reform the Church by force of the People would question their Tenure as soon as they saw themselves in condition to do it Now I intend not here to dispute that foundations to intents of false Religion as for redeeming Souls out of Purgatory are ipso facto forfeit to the true God himself hath recommended this Course to the Church in the Case of the Censers of Core Dathan and Abiram which he challenges for his own to the use of the Altar though consecrated to the use of their Schism But the Christian Emperors of the Primitive Churches inacting those Penalties upon the Conventicles of Hereticks and Schismaticks which we read in the last Book of Theodosius his Code the fifth Title de Haereticis have confiscated the places where they met in nine Laws and forfeited them to the Church in five Whereby it appears that the Primitive Church living under those Laws did not think that goods so consecrated do of necessity eschete to the Church My present purpose obliges me only to suppose that the Tithes which all the world saw that they had been consecrated to God for maintaining the Cures of the Parishes These if there be any such thing as a Church could not be alienated from it without Sacriledge But I say not therefore that they can never be held bona side Which is that which makes the jealousie incurable in those that find their Estates consist much of them And yet I undertake not to warrant generally the holding of them Only think that in some particulars it may be warrantable For when they are come into such hands that the support of Estates depends necessarily upon them and that by mean contracts and originally such as had in them no ill Faith I say not I can warrant them I think they may be warrantable Now I know there may be an Act of Oblivion done by the Church as well as by the Kingdom And the Church of Rome knew it well enough when they reconciled this Kingdom under Q. Mary without restoring these Possessions By the same Reason for which Hereticks and Schismaticks were always dispensed with for Canonical Penalties leaving the Pardon to God that the Unity of the Church might be recovered By the same may the Church leave all to their own Consciences not warranting their pardon from God neither yet refusing them the Communion as unpardonable But alas what would this Act do in our Case did the whole Clergy understand themselves tyed in Conscience by it not so much as to mention much less to reproach any such Tenure So long as the mischief once done remains unprovided for by the Law which gives the Title and Possession the contradiction between the Canonical and Popular Interests can never cease But if the Kingdom consider that it was an Act of Parliament that did the wrong they must necessarily find that nothing but an Act of Parliament can repair it And if the People consider that a Parliament may transgress the trust which they repose in them which of necessity may come to pass unless we make the Parliament infallible and the Pope not they will easily find that a Parliament cannot repair the wrong that a former Parliament hath done but upon the Charge of the people For Church-goods under Christianity cease not to be the Goods of the People though the Church be trusted with managing them being founded by God for that purpose And he that admits of the necessity of all this will find it no considerable Charge for the whole Kingdom to furnish contribution necessary for the founding and indowing of Churches requisite for the Resort and Cures of all Assemblies requisite for a Reformation regulated by the Primitive Church And if this be one Cause of our Divisions and that the Kingdom cannot be counted a Christian Kingdom till it take a course in it let no man marvel to see the Judgments of God in our Divisions when he sees the Sin of the Kingdom continue And if this were considered the discourses that walk up and down in all Assemblies of relieving the Publick Charge by seizing the pitiful remainder of the Church-Revenue would appear to be as they are the productions of Atheism not of pity to the peoples purses CHAP. XXI By limiting and restoring Ecclesiastical Discipline THe other Law concerning the Right of the Church in the Supremacy of the Crown over all Persons and in all Causes as well Fcclesiastical as Civil may seem to extinguish the Right of the Church over the same Persons and in the same Causes Which could not be called Ecclesiastical if there were no such thing as a
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
which it professeth to use the Canon Law which it adopteth till time shew the way of amending those particulars which time shall shew that the Reformation pretended requires to be changed For instance we know that since Henry VIII it is not the custom to take any degree in Canon Law Notwithstanding the Law of the Land adopteth the Canon Law And accordingly we all know that Graduates in the Civil Law of the Romans are priviledged by the Ecclesiastical Law of the Kingdom I would fain have any of them that would wear the Face and the Conscience of a good Christian and a good English man both Give me a reasonable Account of these their Tenures waving that which I here set forth for them whom they will think too bold with their Freehold for it For my part who am no mans foe but my own in publishing my Opinion thus freely upon this Exigent I think I do good service to them with my Country to set forth this Account why and how the Roman Laws deserve to be adopted into the Laws of the Kingdom Namely that the Popes Canon Law which is already adopted may be limited within those Bounds with the Roman Laws And by consequence the Primitive Canons of the Church which the Roman Laws acknowledge and inforce do either prescribe or allow I would make a further Offer of introducing the Roman Laws both into the Study of the Law of the Land and into Authority in our Courts of Equity And of reconciling thereby the Cross-Interests of the Professions upon competence of Jurisdictions But though I must needs have that Opinion my self which I can see nothing against seeing much for it yet I will trouble no man with an Opinion which neither my Profession obliges me nor my skill inables me to make out It shall be enough for me to observe that they shall deserve to be counted Professors of the Roman Laws that are trusted to minister the Canon Laws by those Bounds which the Roman Laws allow As for the Concurrence of that Jurisdiction which is proper to the Clergy by Gods Law and that which is resumed by the Crown to be ministred by the Professors of the Roman Laws I do acknowledge it cannot be ended but by Appeals The issue whereof whither it ought to resort when it is time to say it will be then time to say also how these Interests are reconcileable In the mean time Episcopacy being owned by the Law of the Kingdom and the Law of God both to be that which the whole Church from the beginning acknowledgeth I think I do my Country and the Church of God in it no disservice to propose a plaister large enough for the Sore of it that shall come within the bounds which I have proposed For the Chapters of Cathedral Churches are by their Birth-right Counsellors to the Bishops and Assistants in his whole Office The Archdeacon his Minister and principal Commissary Those by the Rule first set on foot by the Apostles and observed always by the Church of planting Cathedral Churches in Cities and making the Churches planted in Cities Cathedral Churches for the Government of all Christendom within the Territories of those Cities This being by his Order Ministerial to them as well as to the Bishop when both have part in the same Office And here I place the hinge upon which I hang the Reconcilement of the presumed Interest of the Presbyterians with the true Interest of the Clergy Supposing the Conference proposed to have taken effect and produced a Request of both Parties to the Legislative Power of the Kingdom to make a Law of those particulars upon which they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 come to agreement to be received and to exercise their Ministry For the Office of the Clergy being separated from the Interest of the Crown by an Act of the Kingdom And the Professors of the Roman Laws trusted to manage this Interest in behalf of the Subject Only assisting the Clergy in that part of the Jurisdiction proper to the Church which will concern the Interest of Subjects as Members of the Church as well as the Office of the Clergy What shall hinder them the Presbyterians as well as the rest of the Clergy to exercise the Zeal which they have always professed towards the Reforming of the conversation of the People in assisting that Discipline as well over the Inserior Clergie as the People which the Chapters of Cathedral Churches and the Archdeacons shall by the Bishop and under the Bishop be trusted with For what need all this hinder the Prerogative of the Bishops Negative Vote when as there will be more to do under him then hands will be found for reserving to him those causes which he would chuse to reserve For that will be found no more then requisite to preserve his Prerogative that nothing be done without him when nothing is done without him but that which he shall chuse to be eased in He that knows what the Hierarchy signifies must needs understand that the same means which preserved the Whole Church in Vnity so far and wide for place so long for time as Unity prevailed in the Church and Christianity with it and by it knows that the same must be used to preserve Unity in the Church of this Kingom The Question being how to Reform it so that it may continue a Member of the Whole CHAP. XXIV Some Principal Canons to be restored in our present State FOr let no man think that any Law can be effectual to this purpose till the Case be stated which the Law is provided for We are in the State of Schism in spite of our teeth Though we are to clear our selves of the crime of Schism upon the Terms setled which cannot clear us if it be possible that any other should clear us King Henry the VIII had reason to declare that he and his Kingdom should have nothing to do with the Pope that Excommunicated him for his Divorce So many Popes having discharged the Subjects of Princes Excommunicate of their Allegiance But to make good the Protestation that he intended no further change in Religion I need not say what he did to give succeeding Popes occasion to recal the folly of that Pope which Excommunicated him by a timely Reconcilement In the mean time the way to preserve the Kingdom in Peace was to have nothing to do with the See of Rome But had he been so well advised as to have maintained his Divorce upon the terms which I plead for What could the Pope have said to that Code of Canons which Pope Adrian the I. sent to Charles the Great which I would have this Church to owne For it concludes with a Synod of the Province of Rome under Pope Gregory the II. which pronounces Anathema to whosoever shall marry his deceased Brothers Wife Let Julius II. Pope that dispensed with Henry the VIII and his Marriage with the Lady Katherine of Spain have bethought himself how to
come clear of this Anathema the Authority of the See of Rome being intire For K. Henry the VIII or at least for his Kingdom it was and is enough that so long as he owned the Authority of that See he must needs be troubled in conscience at that Marriage by which he must needs incur it preferring the former Act of a Council under Gregory the II. Pope before a Bull of Julius the II. Pope dispensing in an Anathema of the said Council For as the Primitive Canons are to be preferred in Church-Law before the loosness of succeeding Ages being still further from the Apostles So the Act of the Council under the Regular Power of the Pope is to be preferred before a Bull which now passeth without the Consistory as the Popes personal Act after the unlimited absolute Power of the Pope hath taken place As for King Edward the VI. professing the Reformation and protesting it as he did so that the See of Rome could have no pretense of correspendence without owning it themselves there succeeds the necessity of a State of Schism upon the Excommunication following The Crime of Schism remaining on that side that Excommunicates for vindicating and restoring the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church This being the state of our Case and the Laws of the Whole Church and the Faith thereof necessary to the Title that must justifie Reformation without the Consent of the Whole Is it not manifest to all Understandings that the Law by which this State is to be Governed must be such a Provision as the Laws of the Whole Church inable a part of it to make for it self in the Case And therefore we must affirm as many of us as would have no share in the Schism as to God being thus secured that to the Church we are not chargeable with it That there is nothing to hinder such a Provision but the misunderstanding of them And that we see not what the Consequence of our own Profession requires A reason that presses me so hard that I do willingly expose my self to the displeasure of all that shall find themselves disgusted with this freedom Only to give my self the satisfaction of publishing it whatsoever displeasure it procure me As being satisfied that there is no other cure for our present distempers For in the first place it must be said that it is in vain to talk of Regular Government by the Canons of the Church without restoring the liberty of Synods to the respective Provinces Not as if the Church needed any abatement in the Act of Henry the VIII which forbiddeth making and perhaps advising of Canons to be made without the Assent of the Crown But because the World knows it was the Usurped Legatine Power that had brought Synods to nothing by Usurping upon the Ordinary And therefore it is but Justice in the Crown finding the Right of Synods the Subjects thereof Usurped by the See of Rome to restore it to the Subjects upon whom the Usurpation had been made The Supremacy of the Crown being sufficiently provided for by the said Act And the force of all Acts of Synods depending upon the Legislative Power of the Kingdom In the next place it is to no purpose to talk of Reformation in the Church unto Regular Government without restoring the Liberty of chusing Bishops and the Priviledge of injoying them to the Synods Clergy and People of each Diocese I say not depriving the Crown of the due Interest of a Negative to any Person to be promoted a Bishop in any instance of his Promotion God forbid it should come into my thought But the Supremacy being so provided for so evident is the Right of the Synods Clergy and People in the making of those of whom they consist and by whom they are to be governed that I need mark no other Reason for the neglect of Episcopacy but the neglect of it For the neglect of Cathedral Churches but the neglect alienation of their Office under and with their Bishops This for certain had not the See of Rome introduced so much disorder in the creating of Bishops that we have not yet cured it we should have heard of it with both ears from their Advocates And if I may credit a person of unquestionable credit his late Majesty was so convinced hereof when he was at Oxford that he offered to part with it if a way were shewed how to do it As for the translating of Bishops which done as it is of course must needs render the Office unfruitful to their People As no man can deny that there ought to be a course for dispensing in the Canon for publick good So cannot this pretense of publick good come to effect unless it be maintained by the Office of Synods to whom the State of the Church vindicates the Right of it That which I said afore of Appeals belongs to this place For what Law can provide that in Causes reserved to the Bishop parties shall rest content always with his sentence Or whether can Ecclesiastical Causes resort from him but to the Synod of the Province Again what Christian Kingdom could ever prevent a mixture of Causes That is a concurrence of Interest between the Soveraign Power and the Office of the Church Or what danger can be imaginable to this Crown in doing Right to the Church Having only its own Subjects to deal with Or what can be more ready to receive Appeals of this Nature then a Commission of Judges delegate as well by the Synods as by the Crown for the expedition of such Causes in which the pretense of the Subject as well as the Interest of Religion may be concerned As for matter of Faith Having admitted all that hath been decreed within the time of the six truly General Councils I dare say that there is nothing that the See of Rome can charge upon the Socinians or Anabaptists or any Sect of our Fanaticks that is not condemned in the Arians Pelagians or other Sects which the Whole Church hath condemned during that time So that there can be no cause why Christianity should not be maintained by the Reformation during this State of Schism but neglecting the true consequence of that which we our selves profess CHAP. XXV Two Laws more necessary to the Reformation of the Church THese are the principal points in the Canons of the Whole Church which the Profession of Reforming the Church obliges us to restore There are two points more the one concerning the People the other the Inferior Clergy which till they be restored our Reformation cannot be that which it pretendeth That all who shall be convicted in Law of capital or infamous Crimes stand Excommunicate ipso facto and if Execution pass be deprived of Christian Burial unless they reconcile themselves to the Church Unless the Law make this good how should the Kingdom be counted a Christian Kingdom For if scandalous Crimes that are notorious be allowed Communion with the Church how can it
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
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