were reformed in the last Age were Erroneous or Idolatrous than any supposed Irregularities that might be in the way of managing it can never blemish that Work. It is certain that all Rules are only for quiet times in the days of Peace and Order the transgressing of established Rules is without doubt a very censurable thing but this must not be applied to all times For tho in a setled time we know how much respect we owe to Judges and Ministers of State yet if these very Persons will go to set on a Rebellion and authorize it all that respect ought presently to be thrown off CHAP. II. Some general Considerations upon what is alledged of the uncanonical Proceedings in the Progress of our Reformation IT hath a very ill Grace to see a man of the Roman Communion talk so highly of the Obligation to obey the Canons of the Church so as almost to Vnchurch us upon some supposed Irregularities in our Reformation For what is the whole Constitution of the Papacy but one continued Contradiction to all the Ancient Cannons And what is the whole modern Canon Law but the Exaltation of the Papal Authority above all the Canons of the Church Is there any thing clearer in the Primitive times than the establishing the Authority of Metropolitans that was confirmed by the Council of Nice the equalling the Bishops of Constantinople to the Bishops of Rome which was done by the 2d and 4th General Council the establishing the Independency of those Churches that were in Possession of it and so freeing them from all Subordination to other Sees which was done by the 3d General Council And yet tho here we see the four first General Councils all concurring to establish this form of Government the Papal-power is no other than a breaking in upon all these Canons What is more uncanonical than the establishing Legatine Courts the receiving of Appeals the obliging of Bishops to sue for their Bulls in the Court of Rome the dispensing with all the Canons of the Church the exempting all the Regulars from Obedience to their Bishops which is not only contrary to the express Canon of the Council of Chalcedon but is plainly contrary to that Authority that Bishops derive from Christ to govern the Flocks committed to their care In short the whole System of the Church and Court of Rome is so direct a revolt from all the Primitive Canons that it is a degree of Confidence which I do not envy in our Author for him to talk of uncanonical Proceedings Canons are Rules established either by Provincial Synods or more General Councils which import no more but that they ought to be commonly observed for it is plain that there is no Church in the World that hath looked on the Canons of the former times as things so sacred and unalterable that they could never be dispensed with The Schism of the two Popes at Rome and Avignon and all that was done in consequence of it was uncanonical with a Witness and yet how was all that buried by the Council of Constanâ—â— And tho one of the two Obediences was certainly in a state of Schism yet all that was passed over and without any Submission of either side all was healed up The whole Constiution of Metropolitans with their Provincial Synods which was the ancientest and clearest of all the Primitive Rules arises only out of the several Divisions of the Provinces of the Roman Empire when then the Civil Constitution of all Europe is so much altered from what it was then all that Fabrick subsists now rather upon a respect to ancient Rules than from the Authority of those Canons which can no more remain the ground upon which they were built being now removed And one may as well pretend that we are bound to obey the old Roman Law or the Feudal Law because those Laws were once received amongst us as to tell us that we are bound to obey all the ancient Canons especially those that had a visible Relation to the Constitution of the Roman Empire Therefore the Subordination of Churches of Synods and Metropolitans and Patriarchs that was only the knitting into one Body and under several degrees of Subordination a Church that was all under one Civil Society and Empire hath sunk with the Roman Empire So that the tearing that Empire in pieces hath quite put an end to all that Ecclesiastical Subordination And if there is any thing of that yet kept up amongst us it is rather for the preserving of Order than that we are under any Obligation of Conscience to submit to such Constitutions And therefore as oft as a great Conjuncture of Affairs carries along with it considerations that are of more weight than the adhering to ancient Forms then all these may be well superseded For all Rules are temporary things and made according to several Emergences and Occasions which altering frequently it were a very unreasonable thing to expect that every Church should at all times conform it self to them And tho we condemn that Dissolution of all the Canons which the Church and Court of Rome hath brought into the World yet on the other hand we cannot acknowledg any such binding Authority in them that they can never be dispensed with The methods of those men with whom we deal are wonderful Now they reproach our Church with a Violation of ancient Canons and yet when we lay to their charge some of the Canons that their Councils have made in these later Ages such as those of the Lateran for the Extirpation of Hereticks and for the Pope's power of deposing Heretical Princes they tell us that great difference is to be made between the Decisions of the Church in the Points of Faith and the Decrees that are made in matter of Discipline since tho they assert an Infallibility in the one yet the other are transient things in which we ought not to admit of so absolute an Authority This is false with relation to Decrees that declare a Christians Duty or a Rule of Morality For Decrees in such matter do import an Article of Faith or Doctrine upon which they are founded And therefore a Church may indeed even in the Opinion of those who believe her Infallible err in a particular Judgment against such or such a Heretical Prince for that being founded on a matter of Fact she may be Infallible still even tho she were surprised in matters of Fact. But she cannot be Infallible if in declaring the Duty of Subjects towards Heretical Princes or of the Popes Authority in those cases she hath set Rules contrary to the Word of God. In such matters as these are I do acknowledg the Decrees of the Church are for ever Obligatory upon all those who believe her Infallible Therefore since our Author urges so much the Authority of the Canons I would gladly know what he thinks of these which are not I confess Ancient yet they were enacted by the Supream Authority of that Body
stretching their Jurisdiction a little too much on the other hand those who have submitted so tamely to the one have no reason to reproach us for bearing the other Servitude even supposing that we granted that to be the Case And if in the time of our Reformation some of our Bishops or other Writers have carried the Royal Supremacy too far either in Acts of Convocation or in their Writings as those things are personal Matters in which we are not at all concerned who do not pretend to assert an Infallibility in our Church so their excess in this was a thing so natural that we have all possible reason to excuse it or at least to censure it very gently For as all Parties and Persons are carried by a Bias very common to Mankind to magnify that Authority which favours and supports them so the extreams of the Papal Tyranny and the Ecclesiastical Power that had formerly prevailed might have carried them a little too far into the opposite Extream of raising the Civil Power too high But after all we find that when Theodosius came to the Empire he saw the Eastern half of it over-run with Arrianism and as the Arrians were in Possession and were the more numerous so they had Synods of Bishops that had met oft and in vast numbers and had judged in their favours Their Synods were both more numerous than that of Nice and were a more just Representative of the Catholick Church since there were very few of the Western Bishops in that which was held at Nice And as for the Frauds and Violences that were put in practice to carry Matters in those Synods it is very like the Arrians both denied them and were not wanting to recriminate on the Orthodox So when there was a pretence of General Councils on both hands here was a very perplexed Case But Theodosius found a short way to get out of it and therefore instead of calling a new General Council or of examining the History of the several pretended Councils which ought to have been done according to our Authors System he pass'd a Law which is the first Law in Iustinians Code by which he required all Persons to profess that Faith which was profess'd by Damasus Bishop of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria and yet this Law which was a higher Invasion on the Ecclesiastical Authority than any that was committed in our Reformation was never so much as censured on the contrary Theodosius was highly magnified for it There is no reason to imagine that he paid any particular Respect to the See of Rome in this for his joining Peter of Alexandria with Damasus shews that he made the Faith of these Bishops the measures of that Doctrine which he resolved to protect not because of the Authority of their Sees but because he believed their Faith was Orthodox The Case was almost the same in England in which it was pretended that the Independent Authority of our Metropolitans ought to be asserted which was established by the Council of Nice and that many Corruptions in the Worship as for instance the Worship of Images that was condemned by two very numerous General Councils one in the East at Constantinople and another in the West at Francfort ought to be reformed If upon all this the Supreme Civil Authority of this Nation had enacted such a Law as Theodosius had done commanding all to follow the Doctrine profess'd by the two arch-Arch-Bishops of this Church it had been no other but a copying after that Pattern which Theodosius had set us with the Approbation of all Antiquity and yet it cannot be pretended that our Kings and Parliament acted in so summary a way For they went much more slowly and maturely to Work. Upon the whole matter the Civil Authority hath a Power to command every thing that is just and lawful and in that Case the Laws that flow from it ought to be obeyed And if the matter of the Laws is sinful we must not indeed obey in that case but we must submit and bear what we do not like and suffer where we cannot obey So that lawful or unlawful seem to be the only measures that ought to govern our Obedience And as in the matters of natural Religion and Morality no Body can deny that the Civil Authority hath a full Scope tho that is still limitted by this that there ought to be no Injustice Immorality or Turpitude in the Actions that are commanded but where this is not we are bound to obey all the Laws that relate to those matters and where it is we are bound to submit and to bear our burden without giving our selves the trouble to enquire how far the Civil Authority ought to be carried in such matters We set the same measures to our Obedience in matters of revealed Religion If the King passes Laws contrary to Scripture we cannot indeed obey them because of that higher Authority to which we are subject and in Obedience to which we pay all Submission to those who God hath set over us but if they are lawful and conform to the Scripture we ought to obey them without examining whether the King hath proceeded in the passing such Laws by the Rules that become quiet and regular Times And if a Hezekiah or a Iosias should rise up and finding the greater part of his Subjects the Priests as well as the People engaged in Idolatry if he should reform them and suppress that corrupt way of Worship we ought instead of examining critically the method or steps by which he had brought about that change rather to rejoyce in the goodness of God for blessing us with such a Prince So that let men men write and dispute as long as they will on these matters the whole Cause must be brought to this short Issue Either the things that our Princes and Legislators enacted at the Reformation were in themselves just and good and necessary or not if they were then they having an Authority over us in all lawful things as they did well to enact these Laws so we do well to obey them But if they were neither just nor good nor necessary then we acknowledg that as it was a Sin in them to enact them so it were a Sin in us to obey them And all other reasonings upon this Subject are but Illusions by which weak minds may perhaps be wrought upon but they will appear to be such evident Fallacies to men of Sense that without entring into a strict enquiry of what may be alledged for them they will easily shake them off In short if the Reformation appears to be a good thing in it self then all arguing against the manner of it is but meer trifling and looks like men who lie in wait to deceive and to mislead People by false Colours of Truth CHAP. IV. Reflection on the eight Theses laid down by our Author UPon the Grounds that have hitherto been opened it will not be hard to make a very clear
well as their Goods and Chattels to the King. These were the true Motives of repealing those Bloody Laws which our Author ought to have mentioned if he had not designed to deceive his Reader but when he comes to examine the matter of Burning Hereticks he does it so softly that it is plain he would rather lay us asleep than quiet us First he begins with that trifling Answer That the Secular Laws and not the Ecclesiastical do both appoint and execute it but if the Secular Arm is threatned by the Ecclesiastical not only with lower Censures but even with Deposition and that by a Council which he acknowledges to be General in case they do not extirpate Hereticks then this Extirpation is still the Act of the Church enforced upon the Civil Power with a dreadful Sanction which the Church was Able to execute in those Ages of Superstition and thus the Guilt of all the Blood-shed upon the account of Heresie lies at the Door of that Church In the next place he reckons up several Instances of severe Executions against Hereticks both in England and elsewhere which were practiced not only in Henry the Eighth's time but also under Edward the Sixth's and were carried on chiefly by Cranmer's Authority Executions made under Queen Elizabeth and King Iames are also mentioned to which is added a Law made by King Iames adjudging men Traytors for being reconciled to the Pope or See of Rome which is putting men to Death for pretended Heresie and to a Death worse than Burning But to all this I will only say That the Reformation being a work of time as men did not all at once throw off all the Corruptions of the Church of Rome so this being the received Doctrine of the Western Church for many Ages that all Hereticks ought to be extirpated if our Reformers did not so soon as were to be wished throw of this Remnant of Popery it is rather to be excused and pitied in them than to be justified their Practice Cranmer did also soften the Notion of Heresie as much as he could by reducing it to a plain and wilful Opposition to some of the Articles of the Apostles Creed and if the constant Clamours that the men of the Church of Rome raised against the Reformation as a Subversion of the Christian Religion because some that had been among the Reformers advanced some monstrous Opinions if these I say carried our Reformers to such a way of justifying themselves of this Imputation by some publick Executions they who gave the occasion to this severity which I do not pretend to justifie ought not to reproach us for that to which they drove our Ancestors As for King Iames's Law I will not examine whether the Death of Traitors or the Burning of Hereticks is the more dreadful it is certain Fire especially when it is slow is the most terrible of all deaths and that which gives the most formidable Impression but if the Provocation given to the King and Parliament at that time by the Gun-powder Treason be considered it will not appear strange if the King and Parliament after they had escaped so narrowly the greatest of all dangers took a little more than ordinary Care to secure themselves against the like Attempts in time coming And if the severe Canons of the Council of Lateran against Hereticks had lain as so many dead Letters in the Body of the Laws of their Church as that Law hath done in our Book of Statutes they had had much less Blood to answer for and less guilt than lies upon them at present After these softnings our Author comes to pass his own Censure on the Burning of Hereticks but the common Rules of Prudence should have led him in the present juncture of Affairs to have condemned it roundly and so to have laid our apprehensions a little yet he saw so plainly that this was a practise so clearly authorized both by Law and Custom in their Church that he durst not disown it in express words and indeed he understands so little how a tender point ought to be touch'd that by all the Rules of Prudence he ought not to have medled with it His Discourse in this is an Original and because I 'le do him no wrong in the manner of Representing it I will set it down in his own Words But whether this Law in it self be just and again if just whether it may be justly extended to all those simple People put to death in Queen Maries days such as St. Austin calls Hereticis Credentes because they had so much Obstinacy as not to recant their Errors for which they saw their former Teachers sacrifice their Lives especially when they were prejudiced by the most common contrary Doctrine and Practice in the precedent Times of Edward the 6th and had lived in such a condition of Life as neither had means nor leasure nor capacity to examine the Churches Authority Councils or Fathers ordinarily such Persons being only to be reduced as they were perverted by the contrary fashion and course of the times and by Example and not by Argument either from Reason or from Authority and the same that I say of these Laity may perhaps also be said of some illiterate Clergy whether I say this Law may justly be extended to such and the highest suffering Death be inflicted especially where the Delinquents are so numerous rather than some lower Censures of pecuniary Mulcts or Imprisonment these things I meddle not with nor would be thought at all in this place to justifie Here is a long Period of 208 Words before the Verb comes to close it but there is small comfort in all this for even after our Author hath put the Case with all possible Abatements and as soft as may be of the ignorances the strong prejudices and the numbers of the Delinquents and intimated his merciful inclinations only towards the Laity and some of the illiterate Clergy and that only with relation to Death Fines and Imprisonments being left out of the Grace that he would shew us yet in conclusion he only tells us He will not meddle with this matter nor would he be thought at all to justifie it in this place for he is only concerned what we think of him and whether he justifies it or not he only tells us he would not be thought to do it and yet lest that seem too much he adds a further Qualification that he would not be thought to justifie it in this place So that he hath fully reserved all his Rights entire to a fitter opportunity and then he well may without the least Reproach justifie that in another place which he doth not think fit to do at present Yet it seems he hath a very narrow heart in matters of Grace for this same scanty measure of Favour that he had clogg'd with so many Reserves is yet retrenched considerably in the following Words Tho some among those unlearned Lay-people I confess to have
which they account Infallible It is true some have thought they could get out of this difficulty by denying these to be the Acts of that Council But if our Author be the same Person with him that writ concerning the Adoration of the Eucharist he is of another mind and doth acknowledg that those Canons are the true Acts of that great Assembly and not only the Designs of the Pope It is true he saith the sense of the Canon concerning the secular Powers is by Protestants mistaken But he hath not yet given himself the trouble of laying before us the true sense of that Canon and one would think that he who writ the Treatise that is now under Examination had very favourable thoughts of the Doctrine of Subjects shaking off an heretical Prince for he reckons up the many risings that were in K. Edwards days chiefly for matter of Religion as a proof that the Body of the Clergy went not into that change Which rising saith he of the Laity in such numbers for their former way of Religion would not have been had not their Clergy justified it unto them Rising is a soft word for Rebellion and one would think that it would have afforded no small matter of reproach against us if we brought in a company of Rebels to make up a Muster of our Religion But to own that the Clergy justified it to them without adding the least Word expressing our Author's dislike of this shews plainly enough that how good a Subject soever our Author may be to a Prince of his own Religion yet he thinks a Catholick Clergy may be able to justifie to the Laity a Rising against a Heretical Prince upon the account of Religion And it seems our Author had a great mind to make a huge appearance of his Catholick Rebels in K. Edwards days For besides that he speaks of Risings in many more Counties then are mentioned by the Books of that time he also represents all those Risings to have been upon the account of Religion tho the History makes it clear that the Risings over England were chiefly occasioned by Parks and Enclosures and that it was a rage of the Peasants against the Gentry in most places chiefly in the Northfolk-Rebellion where Religion was not at all pretended nor doth it appear that any pretended Religion except those of Devonshire so that our Author would make his Party and the Clergy more Rebellious than indeed they were In this whole Period he seems to have been forsaken of common Sense CHAP. III. Some general Considerations on the Regal Supremacy that was raised so high at the Reformation OUR Author hath brought together many Acts of Parliament with their pompous Preambles that seem to carry the Kings Power in Ecclesiastical Matters to a very Indefinite degree and upon all this he triumphs often as if this was so improper that it alone is enough to blast the whole Reformation Our Author is much more concerned to justifie all Papal Bulls than we can be to justifie all the Words of our Laws especially the Rhetorick that is in their Preambles If he believes the Pope infallible the general Parts of Bulls that set forth the Doctrine of the Church are such solemn Declarations that he must be determined by them But at lowest he believes the Popes to be the Centers of the Catholick Unity and all Bishops are bound by Oath to obey all their Decrees and Ordinances Now when our Author will undertake to justifie all the Preambles of Bulls that are in the Bullarium then we may undertake to justifie all the flourishes that may be in any Act of Parliament When any Authority is asserted in general and indefinite Terms these are always to be understood with those Restrictions and Limitations that the nature of things require to be supposed even when they are not expressed St. Paul expresses the Obedience of Wives to their Husbands in terms so extreamly extended that as the Church is subject unto Christ so ought the Wives be to their own Husbands in every thing He expresses also the Duty of Children in as comprehensive terms Children obey your Parents in all things Now if one would draw Inferences from the extent of these words he might taking the liberty that our Author takes upon some of the Expressions that are in our Acts of Parliament represent the Authority that St. Paul vests both in Husbands and Parents as a very boundless and a very extravagant thing This is enough to shew that in all those large Phrases of Obedience there are some necessary Reserves and Exceptions to be understood and if this Qualification is necessary even in writings that were inspired it is no wonder if some of the Rhetorick of our Acts of Parliament wants a little of this Correction It is a very unreasonable thing to urge some general Expressions or some stretches of the Royal Supremacy and not to consider that more strict Explanation that was made of it both in K. Henry the 8th's time and under Q. Elizabeth That were so clear that if we had to do with Men that had not resolved before-hand not to be satisfied one would think there could be no room for any further cavilling In K. Henry's time the extent of the Kings Supremacy was defined in the necessary Erudition of a Christian man that was set forth as the Standard of the Doctrine of that time and it was upon this that all people were obliged to take their measures and not upon some Expressions either in Acts of Parliament or Acts of the Convocation nor upon some stretches of the Kings Jurisdiction In this then it is plainly said That with relation to the Clergy the King is to oversee them and to cause that they execute their Pastoral Office truly and faithfully and especially in those Points which by Christ and his Apostles was committed to them And to this it is added That Bishops and Priests are bound to obey all the Kings Laws not being contrary to the Laws of God. So that here is expressed that necessary Reserve upon their Obedience it being provided that they were only bound to obey when the Laws were not contrary to the Laws of God. The other Reserve is also made of all that Authority which was committed by Christ and his Apostles to the Bishops and Priests and we are not ashamed to own it freely that we see no other Reserves upon our obedience to the King besides these So that these being here specified there was an unexceptionable Declaration made of the Extent of the Kings Supremacy yet because the term Head of the Church had something in it that seemed harsh there was yet a more express Declaration made of this matter under Q. Elizabeth of which indeed our Author hath taken notice tho I do not find he takes notice of the former which he ought to have done if he had intended to have represented this matter sincerely to the world which I confess seems not
who went about and taught the People He did also set up in Ierusalem a Court made up of Levites Priests and the chief of the Fathers of Israel for the iudgment of the Lord and for the controversies among the people and appointed Amariah the Chief-Priest to be over them in the matters of the Lord Hezekiah when he came to Reign commanded the Priests and the Levites to sanctifie themselves in order to the reforming the Worship in which he went on tho a great many of the Priests were not very forward in doing it but he made use of those who had sanctified themselves and as he bore with those that did this slowly so no doubt he would have turned out any that had been refractory and finding that the Priests could not be ready to keep the Passover in the first Month he with his Princes and the whole Congregation put off the Feast from the 1st to the 2d Month. Now the distinction of days and the observance of those Festivities being so great a part of that Religion and it having been so expresly regulated by the Law of God that it should be kept on the first Month a Provision being made only for such as were unclean or such as were on a Iourney that they might keep it on the 2d Month yet here the Civil Authority makes a Law appointing the Passover to be entirely cast over to the 2d Month because of the Uncleanness of some of the Priests Ezra took a Commission from Artaxerxes impowering him to set up Magistrates and Iudges who might judg them that knew the Laws of his God and teach them who knew them not and one of the Punishments on the Disobedient is Separation from the Congregation to which our Excommunication answers And we see what a Reformation Ezra made in the virtue of this Commission Nehemiah by virtue of such another Commission turned out a Priest for having married a strange Woman These were all as high stretches of the Civil Power as any that can be objected to our Reformation But in the next place it ought to be consider'd that suppose this turning out of the Clergy had been an illegal and unjustifiable thing yet that doth not strike at the Constitution of our Church The High-Priesthood among the Iews by the Law of God was setled on the eldest Branch of the Family of Aaron and it went so during the first Temple and likewise for some considerable time under the second Temple and yet tho afterwards this sacred Function came to be set to Sale so that Dr. Lightfoot hath reckoned up fifty three that purchased it for Money by which prophane Merchandize one might infer that those Mercenary High-Priests were no more to be acknowledged yet our Saviour and after him St. Paul owned them to be High-Priests Our Saviour answered to Caiaphas when he adjured him upon Oath and it is said by St Iohn that Caiaphas as High-Priest for that year prophesied From all which it is clear that tho these wretched men were guilty of the highest Profanation and Sacrilege possible yet that was a personal Sin in them but since they were in Possession of the Dignity and adhered still to the Law of Moses and performed the Offices of their Function according to his Institution the solemn yearly Expiation was still made by them which was the highest Act of the whose Jewish Worship and they were to be submitted to and acknowledged as High Priests by the People for which our Saviour's practice is an undisputed warrant Now if all this was lawful under the Old Testament in which all the smallest parts of that Religion were marked and enacted much more expresly than they are under the New then it will be a hard performance for any to perswade us that the Civil Authority may not make such Reformations in the Christian Church as the Kings of Iudah did in the Jewish In this matter I have not so much as mentioned the Orders and Regulations made by David and Solomon tho they are very clear Precedents for justifying all that Supremacy to which our Kings have pretended But since I know some have endeavoured to set all this aside by saying that they being assisted by immediate Inspirations acted in those matters not as Kings but as Prophets Tho it were easy to shew the falshood of this Allegation yet since I would shorten matters all I can I will not digress into a controverted Point Under the Protection that the Christian Church received from the Emperors that became Christians we see that they appointed Triers to examine the Matters that were objected to Bishops and these under Constantine judged in Cicilian's Matter upon an Appeal made by the Donatists after it had been already judged in several Synods Constantine did likewise by his own Authority put Eustathius out of Antioch Athanasius out of Alexandria and Paul out of Constantinople It is true these Matters were much complained of as unjust and as flowing from the false Suggestions of the Arrians But it is as true that it was not so much as pretended that the Emperor had no just Authority to do it For the disputing the Justice of the Exercise of an Authority is very different from their disputing the Authority it self It was afterwards a common Practice of the Christian Emperors to have a Court of some selected Bishops who waited on them and to whose Cognizance most Causes relating to Bishops were left who acted only by Commission from the Emperor I have enlarged a little upon this Point because it seemed necessary to dissipate many of those Prejudices which arise out of it The 4th Thesis is That a Provincial or National Synod cannot lawfully make Definitions in Matters of Faith and concerning Heresies or Abuses in Gods Service contrary to the Decrees of former superior Synods or to the Iudgment of the Vniversal Church in the present Age shewed in her publick Liturgies This is founded on the Supposion of the Infallibility of the Church so if that is not true then this falls to the ground and that is not pretended to be proved by our Author who seems only to proceed upon the Subordination that is in the Ecclesiastical Body But if the majority of this Body is not Infallible then that Obligation to submit to it must be only a matter of Order and by consequence it hath its limits If this had been the Rule of the Church in Theodosius's time how could the several Provinces have reformed themselves from Arrianism after so many General Councils had declared for it or at least had rejected the word Consubstantial but in our condemning the Papal Authority over us we had both the Council of Nice for us that had established the Independent Authority of the Metropolitans with the Bishops of their Province for all Matters relating to their Province and the Decree of the Council of Ephesus which appointed all Churches to continue in the Possession of that
by Queen Mary were Ejected because the greater part of them were Married upon which he gives some grounds to justifie that Sentence I will not here examine the Point of the Unlawfulness of the Marriage of the Clergy It is not so much as pretended to be founded on Scripture and the Discipline of the Church hath been and is to this day very various in that Matter But this is certain that a Law being made in King Edward's days allowing the Marriage of the Clergy the Queen upon the repeal of that Law granted a Commission to some Bishops to examine four of King Edward's Bishops and to try if they were Married and upon that to deprive them This was an Act of the Queen Civil Power so that the Deprivation according to our Author 's own Principles was done by Virtue of that Commission and was by consequence void It was also most unjust with Relation to the Civil Power For these Bishops having been married under the Protection of a Law that warranted it that Law must still justifie them for what was passed and the repeal of it tho it might Impower the Queen to proceed for the future against those of the Clergy that should contract Marriage yet it was against all the Rules of Justice to deprive them by Virtue of a Commission from the Queen for an Action that was warranted by a Law then in being But there was another more extravagant Commission by which three other Bishops are represented as not having behaved themselves well and that as the Queen credibly understood they had both Preach'd erroneous Doctrines and had carried themselves contrary to the Laws of God and the practice of the Universal Church And therefore She orders these Persons to proceed against them either according to the Ecclesiastical Canons or the Laws of the Land and declare their Bishopricks void as they were indeed already void Now our Author will shew his great reading in an instance that cannot be disputed if he can find a President for such a Commission as this is in all History or a Warrant for it among all those Canons for which he pretends so much Respect and Zeal And thus he hath A Deprivation of seven Bishops done by the Civil Authority and without so much as the Colour of Justice XVI The second Reason he gives for their Deprivation was their not acknowledging of any Supremacy in the Roman-Patriarch and here as elsewhere he seems to plead for no higher Authority to the Pope but that of a Patriarch But not to repeat what was said upon this in the general Considerations the acknowledging of that Power in the Pope would not have served turn It was never demanded of the Clergy and would certainly not have been accepted XVII Another Reason was their refusing to officiate according to the Liturgies received and used by the whole Catholick Church for near a 1000 years There is some Modesty in this Pretension which carries up the Abuses no higher than a 1000 years Tho as to the greater part of them and the greatest of them all which is the Adoration of the Host there is no just claim to the half of that Antiquity Yet if the Church of Rome will give us the first 500 years we will not be much concerned in the 1000 that comes next Our Author spake too wide when he named the whole Catholick Church he should have said the Western-Church if he would have spoke exactly And for this Pretension to a 1000 years any that will compare the Missals that have been printed by Card. Bona and F. Mabillon with the present Roman Missals will soon find that the Roman Missal of the last Age was far different from what it had been or a 1000 years before There is one Particular in which indeed they seem both to agree and yet by which the change of the Doctrine of the Church is very conspicuous in the so much disputed Point concerning the Presence in the Sacrament After the 5th Century that a sort of an Invocation of Saints was received by which tho they were not immediately prayed to yet Prayers were put up to God to hear us upon the account of their Intercession There are some Prayers in some Ancient Missals that mention the offering up of that Sacrifice to their Honour and that pray God to accept of it on the account of their Intercession Now in the Opinion of the Church of England that considers the Communion as a commemorative Sacrifice of the Death of Christ and as a Sacrifice of Praise that is offered up to God upon it these Words bear a good Sense which is that to honour the Memory of such Saints their Holy-days were days of Communion and this Action is prayed to be accepted of God on the account of their Intercession In which there is nothing to be blamed but the Superstition of praying to God with regard to their Intercession But one sees a good Sense in those Collects Yet these very Collects are Nonsense or down-right Blasphemous in the present State of the Roman Church in which the Sacrifice of the Mass is believed to be the very Body and Blood of Christ which are there offered up so as to be a Propitiatory Sacrifice for the Dead and the Living Now to say That this is offered up to the Honour of a Saint or to Pray that it may be accepted by Virtue of their Intercession is the most extravagant and impious thing that can be imagined So that this change of Doctrine hath rendred the Canon of the Mass even in those things for which they can pretend to some Antiquity both Impious and Blasphemous in the Opinion and Sense which is now generally received in that Church XVIII Our Author censures a Clause in an Act passed in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign in which it is declared That in all time coming Doctrines are to be judged and determined to be Heresies by the High Court of Parliament with the Assent of the Clergy in their Convocation as if by this the Clergy could not pass a Judgment of Heresy without the Concurrence of the Parliament But Heresy being declared a Crime that inferred a Civil Punishment the Parliament had all possible Reason to make their own Concurrence necessary to a Judgment upon which many Civil Effects were to follow If the Judgment of Heresy went no further than Spritual Censures then this Limitation upon the Clergy might be blamed a little What is this but what is practiced at present in France in which the Censure that the present Pope passed in May 1679. condemning some of the impious Opinions of the modern Casuists was declared to be of no force because it flowed from the Pope with the Court of the Inquisition which is not received in that Kingdom And neither the Bulls of Popes nor the Decrees of Council are of any force there but as they are verified in Parliament tho their Parliaments come far short of the Authority
here while he is in England he will condemn these treasonable Doctrines The ground upon which he condemns them is also suitable to the Condemnation it self For he says that this is the Opinion of several Catholicks This was modestly expressed For tho it is true that several of those he calls Catholicks are of this mind yet all Catholicks are not of it So that the Doctrine of murdering Kings is at least a probable one and since the Decrees of the Church of Rome for the deposing of Princes fall not only on those that are Hereticks themselves but even on the Fautors and Favourers of Hereticks I do not see how his Majesty's Life is secured For besides the Protection and Liberty that he grants to Hereticks of his own Dominions he hath received and encouraged the Refuges of another Prince which is to be a Favourer of Heresy of the worst sort So that if Innuendoes were in fashion I do not see how our Author could defend himself against an Indictment of Treason or at least against an Information Our Author to let us see how wary he is in his Concessions as he calls them ends the Paragraph with another It shall be granted here For it is plain he will not loose an inch of all the Papal Pretensions but will preserve them entire to a better time XXXIX Our Author pretends that Q. Elizabeth's Supremacy was carried much higher than had been granted by the former Clergy under K. Henry the 8th The Allegation is false for the Supremacy was carried much higher under King Henry than it was under Queen Elizabeth who as she would not accept of the Title of Head of the Church so she explained her Supremacy both in her own Injunctions and in the Acts of Convocation and Parliament that followed in so unexceptionable a manner that our Author himself hath nothing to object to it He seems also to infinuate as if the King's Supremacy were asserted by us as a Grant of the Clergy whereas we pretend to no such thing The Civil Supremacy that we ascribe to our Princes is founded on the Laws of God on the Rules of Humane Society on the Laws of England and on the Practice of the Church for many Ages and King Henry receiv'd no new strengthning of his Title by the Act of the Clergy which did not confer any new Authority on him but only declared that which was already inherent in him XL. Our Author enters into a long Discourse to prove the Invalidity of Orders granted in our Church which he doth so weakly and yet as he doth all other things so tediously and with so much Confusion that I have no mind to follow him in all his wandrings He seems to question the Authority of Suffragan Bishops who though they were limited as to their Iurisdiction yet as to their Order they were the same with the other Bishops The Proceedings in Queen Mary's Time were too full of Irregularity and Violence to be brought as Proofs that the Orders given by King Edward's Book were not valid In a word the Foundation of that false Opinion of some of the Church of Rome was that ever since the Time of the Council of Florence the Form in which Priests Orders were conferred was believed to be the delivering the Sacred Vessels with a power to offer Sacrifices for the Dead and Living So they reckoned that we had no true Priests since that Ceremony was struck out of our Ordinal But the folly of all this is apparent since Men began to examine the Ancient Rituals and those which have been published by Morinus shew that as this Rite is peculiar to the Roman Church so it was not received before the Ninth Century And since all Ordinations during the first Eight Centuries were done by the Imposition of Hands and Prayer then there can be no reason to question our Orders since we retain still all that the Ancient Church thought necessary As for the common Observation of our Ordinals not being enacted by Queen Elizabeth before the Eighth Year of her Reign it hath been so oft made and answered that I am 〈…〉 see our Author urge it any further Would he that hath disputed so much against the Civil Authorities medling in Matters Sacred annul our Orders because the Law was not so clearly worded with relation to that part of our Offices The most that can possibly be made out of this is that the Ordinations were not quite legal so that one might have disputed the paiment of the Fruits But this hath no relation to us as we are a Church in that the Book of Ordinations having been annexed to the Book of Common-Prayer in King Edward the Sixth's Time the reviving of the Book of Common-Prayer in Queen Elizabeth's Time was considered as including the Book of Ordinations Though it s not being expresly named this gave occasion to Bonner to question the validity of them in Law. Upon which the Explanatory Act passed declaring that it had been the Intention of the Parliament to include that in the Book of Common-Prayer So that this Act only declared the Law but did not create any new Right I have now gone over all that I judged most material in this tedious Book The darkness of the stile the many unfinished Periods the frequent Repetitions the many long Quotations to very little purpose above all the intricate way of Reasoning made it a very ungrateful thing to me to wrestle through it In it one may see how much a Man may labour and study to very little purpose For how unhappy soever the Author hath been in his pains it cannot be denied but he hath been at a great deal to compass it But a Man that neither sees things distinctly nor judges well of them the more he toils about them he entangles himself and his Reader so much the more So that never was so much pains taken to less purpose If our Author gives us many more Books of this size both as to Sincerity and good Reasoning he will quickly cure the World of the Mistake in which they were concerning him He passed once for a Learned Man and he had passed so still if he had not taken care to let the World see by so many repeated Essays how false a Title he hath to that Reputation which had fallen upon him But it seems his Sincerity and good Judgment are of a piece Otherwise as he could not obtrude on the World the falsehoods concerning latter times and the Ignorance of Antiquity that appears in all his Books so when so many have been at the pains to discover both his Mistakes and his Impostures He would either have confessed them or some way excused them But it is no wonder to see a Man that dissembled so long with God and that lied so oft to him serve the World now as he did his God for so many Years I pray God touch his Heart and give him a Repentance proportioned to the heinousness of his Sins by which he hath given so much Scandal to the Atheistical sort of Men who from him must be tempted to draw strange Consequences And he hath certainly brought a greater Reproach on that Church to which he hath gone over than all the Services he can ever render them in his useless and confounded Writings will be able to wipe off But to whom sovever he hath been a Reproach our Church hath no share in it since of him and of such as he is we must say They went out from us but they were not of us For if they had been of us they would no doubt have continued with us but they went out that it might be made manifest that they were not all of us FINIS P. 82. ad finem From p. 140. Page 141. Adorat of the Euchar. p. 28. P. 139. Ephes. 5. 24. Col. 3. 20. Page 87 88. 2 Chron. 17. 7. 2 Chron 9. 5 8. V. 11. 2 Chron. 29. 5. V. 34. 2 Chron. 30. 23. Numb 9. 10. Ezra 7. 25. Nehem. 13. 28. Ludolph P. 20. lin 12. P. 21. Hist. Reform P. 1. Re◠Bo. 2. n. 10. Ibid n. 24. Nam qui Reginae odio vel speratae sec dum forsan notae futurae conjugis illecib◠titillatione Regem agi putant ij ex cordes plane toto quod aiunt coelo errare videntur Ibid. P. 22. Cott. Lib. Vit. B. 13. P. 23. ◠25. Printed in the Cabala P. 26. P. 28. P. 39. 25 Henry 8th n. 14. P. 41. Hist. Reform Rec. b. 2. n. 37 38 39. P. 51. P. 78 79. P. 57. P. 58. P. 64. P. 68. P. 71. P. ibid. P. 72. P. 84. P. 90. P. 93. P. 9◠P. ibid. P. 108. P. 110. P. 111. P. 119. P. 127. P. 134. P. 135. P. 142. P. 157. P. 160. Ibid. Tolet. can 10. §. 75. c. 13. 1040. Vita Gul. Abb. Dijon c. 4. P. 162. P. 176 273. P. 187. P. 208. P. 120. P. 2.