Ministry of Priesthood And I need only set them down to shew that they do not at all concern the present Controversie And 't is the only instance of modesty which you have given us in your whole Book that you have not so much as mentioned this Argument as some miscall it But Further another plea whereby you endeavour to wash off the Clergy-mans obligation to labour among his People and which seems to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fundamental Error of your whole Book is that Ministers are not ordained to one Diocese or Parish but to the Catholick Church Pag. 43. passim Tho' you acknowledge so much of the truth viz. That good order and discipline do require that the exercise of their Office be confined to some certain limits and place as will determine every good man against the Conclusion you would draw from it For if he who sits not down on his Cures and will not confine the exercise of his Office to the Church or Churches intrusted with him do break discipline and good order 't is plain that he is guilty of a great crime But I shall further shew that this Notion of a Minister's being ordained not to this or that Parish or Diocese but to the Universal Church is false Not but that upon occasion he may exercise his Function in any part of the Church and upon whatever shore he is cast he ought not to be re-ordained but that when he enters into Orders he is design'd for the service of some particular Church or Diocese more than of the whole As for the Church of England she ordains none except in one or two special Cases which cannot break a rule fine certo Titulo And in the Office for ordering of Priests Can. 33. among other questions asked by the Bishop this is one Will you maintain and set forward Quietness Peace and Love amongst all Christian people and especially among them that are or shall be committed to your charge And your self I presume have made answer to it in the words of the Office I will do so the Lord being my Helper Now in this question other Christian People are contradistinguished to those of your Cure and in the answer you oblige your self to prosecute your duty more especially amongst the latter But you that would be called the true Sons of the Church of England write and act as if you were so much her fondlings as that you had a particular priviledge of contradicting her You can be very severe upon your Brethren of the Clergy who mutilate or disuse her Ceremonies but think it no fault in your selves almost or altogether to lay aside the exercise of your Functions at least in such places as the Canons and Constitutions of the Church do peculiarly require your labours I know no labouring Clergy of our Church who do mutilate or disuse her Ceremonies but if I did I should think them more excusable who do something of their duty than they who wholly neglect it And Sir 'T is such as these that betray her Cause that open the mouths of her Adversaries and give just occasion of scandal And let me tell you That you are partaker of these mens sins by pretending to justify them And take my word for it the Church is very little beholden to you for your doing so especially since you have made bold with her for a little arguments sake so far as to contradict her Offices and Canons But alas Canons and Rubricks and such like things were not made for Authors and Grand Pluralists They are so far from being obliged to obey them that one would think they never read or at least remembred them Otherwise how could any one who did not think himself above Canons confidently assert That Priests are not ordained to this or that Parish but to serve the Church of God in general when the Church has solemnly decreed That they are or ought to be ordained to some particular Cure and obliges them there more especially to prosecute their Office And even in the Primitive and Apostolical Churches Men were not ordained so much for the service of the whole as of one particular Diocese The Apostles themselves were indeed Catholick Bishops in the largest sence and had a Commission to teach all Nations and had every one of them the care of all the Churches But tho' they did not themselves sit down and take up their Residence in any particular Diocese yet they constituted distinct and setled Governours for every Church as soon as it was raised Thus St. Timothy was created Bishop of Ephesus Titus of Crete Linus or Cletus or both of Rome even during the Apostles lives And as Bishops were then design'd for every particular Diocese so as the Number of the Christians grew 't was absolutely necessary that they should have Presbyters subservient to them And 't is evident that those Presbyters did not only live in subjection to the Bishops of those distinct Dioceses to which they were ordained so long as themselves thought fit but were obliged not to leave them without the consent of the Diocesan And when the Levity of some prompted them to break this standing Custome of the Church there were Canons made to confine all Bishops and Presbyters to the Service of that Diocese to which they were first ordained And there is only this difference between the Primitive Platform and our own viz. That in the former Presbyters were ordained not for the Service of one particular Congregation but of the whole Diocese to serve the Bishop in the more full and perfect discharge of his Office to be sent to such parts of the Diocese and for such a time as the Bishop thought fit whereas by our Constitution every Presbyter has his particular Allotment and his distinct Dividend in the endowments and labours of the Church But they were no more designed for the Service of the Church at large in those days than they are now If we enquire why every particular Presbyter had not his distinct Cure allotted him in the primitive Church we must needs allow it to be its infant and unsetled State So that when the Empire came into the Church and Christianity began to be the Religion of Rome and Greece all Churches soon fell into a Parochial Division And that so early that at the Council of Chalcedon it seems to have been a general Establishment for there it is provided that No one shall be ordained a Priest or Deacon at large 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be at his own Liberty but should be assigned particularly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to some Church either in the City or in a Village Can. 6. or Martyrdome or Monastery I know you are not willing to allow Parish-Priests or Churches to have been generally constituted at this time but I think this is a better Authority for it than you can produce against it It could not indeed be so early in our Church which was
with them there is no reason to think that any other men should be punished in another World for the Non-performance of any other obligation whatsoever And yet that you are guilty of doing this appears from what you say in reference to the Spanish Bishops in the Council of Trent who would have had Residence of Bishops to be declared necessary Jure Divino Upon which if the Spanish Bishops â—ag 24 25. say you had been asked whether the Residence which they asserted to be of Divine Right included the whole year or only part of it they could not have agreed in it If Residence of the whole Year were required by the Law of God by what Authority did they appear in that place out of their Dioceses c. If only partial Residence were required who should define how much God would accept or how much might lawfully be spent out of their Dioceses It might have been alleged against them that since God himself had revealed nothing as to this matter it was an evident Argument that he intended no such obligation So that according to your wise way of arguing to reside even any the least part of a year in ones Bishoprick is not necessary Jure Divino And you do yet more openly assert this Doctrine when you bring the Incumbent before the great Tribunal at the last day and like a trusty Advocate for the Non-resident Pluralist you plead thus for him Pag. 33 34. And then as to a Proxy if the Priest allegeth that the same Authority of the Bishop which committed the Care of the Parish to him did disburden him of that Care and imposed it in whole or in part upon a Substitute there is no reason to believe that God will not accept this plea. Here you speak out indeed and all at once For if a Cure may be wholly served by a Substitute and if God at the day of Judgment will accept of such a Plea then 't is plain that all personal care and labour is unnecessary But Sir 't is to be hoped before that great and terrible day of the Lord's comes you will learn more Seriousness and Modesty than to think of preferring so thin and false an excuse to so great a Judge A false Excuse I say For what Statute or Canon of the Realm or Church of England doth authorize a Bishop to disburden an Incumbent of the Care of his Parish and impose it in whole upon a Substitute I know that Dispensations may be had for Local Non-residence But I challenge you or any Man else to produce any Authority that the Bishop hath either by our Canon or Statute-Law to transferr the Cure of Souls wholly from the Incumbent to another Though when I consider you as an Antiquary I have a good mind to revoke my challenge For you may have Rods in Brine and Canons perdue which a Countrey Gentleman never heard of before And we need not despair of having any thing made out by Men vers'd in such Studies since we have had such Doctrines published as the genuine Product of the Church of England represented in Convocation which the hundredth part of the Clergy themselves knew nothing of till they had layn in the dark about 80 years and were at last published either to prove some new Doctrine or else for nothing at all But let me as a Friend once more remind you of that wretched Plea which it seems you intend to make for your self and Brethren at the last day consider of it again and tell me whether you think it can pass in that great Court nay whether your own Conscience if you would let it speak out can vouch it or rely upon it I am so far from thinking that it will be accepted by him who is greater than our Consciences and knoweth all things That a Civil or Ecclesiastick Judge would or at least ought to reject it For 't is certain if any Bishop should pretend to a power beyond Law and Canon and the Nature of things all such pretensions would be vain both as to this World and another And I believe 't is as certain and true that no Bishop of the Church of England as now established did ever assume such a sort of Authority If any Prelate had a faculty of loosing Men from the obligations to their People I doubt not but he might have as much Custom amongst some of your Friends as 't is usually said that Priest might have who could procure a Commission for unmarrying People And for ought I could ever yet learn any Priest may as well and legally do the latter as a Bishop the former The Notion of transferring the Charge from the Incumbent to the Curate is new and I hope your own I do believe that 't was never heard of in General Council Parliament or Convocation And if you have no better thoughts to communicate to that Reverend Body last mentioned I hope you will never have the Vote of an honest Clergyman to sit in it But when you write again pray let us know by what Instruments Letters or Faculties a Bishop doth or can release an Incumbent wholly from his charge or in what Court such Letters Dispensatory can be procured For I believe I know some who would give money for them tho' I do not imagine any good Man would For I do not think that any Humane Power can take off that obligation which every Minister hath upon him of personal Labour amongst his People I shall reduce what I have to say on this subject to these following Propositions I. Tho' Plurality of Benefices be not in it self contrary to the Law of God yet for any one to take on himself such Charges as he cannot or will not perform is II. Tho' Curates may be used for the more full and perfect discharge of Duty yet the whole Care of the people is not intrusted with them III. Tho' perpetual Local Residence be not injoined by God yet to live so near the Cure and to be actually resident so far forth as effectually to answer all the ends of the Ministry is IV. Vicars by reason of their Oaths are obliged to Local Residence unless they be dispensed with by the Bishop I. Tho' Plurality of Benefices be not in it self contrary to the Law of God yet for any one to take on himself such Charges as he cannot or will not perform is It cannot indeed with any appearance of Truth be asserted that 't is unlawful to serve or have more Benefices than one The Scriptures do neither in express Terms nor by any Consequence fairly to be drawn from them prohibit it And thus far we are agreed I say as to the Conclusion tho' not as to the Premises For one of the arguments by which you would prove this is a meer Cavill I mean that pag. 37 c. where you undertake to conclude the Lawfulness of Pluralities from the Authority and Example of the primitive Church and that 't is lawful to
hold two Bishopricks because some Primitive Bishops presided over two several Cities Now did ever any one in his right Wits assert the Bounds and Limits of Dioceses and Parishes to be fixed by a Jus Divinum Do not you frequently throughout your Book suppose them to be constituted and determined by Laws Humane and Ecclesiastical And if it be left to men to bound out the precincts why may they not alter unite and divide them as they please The Primitive Examples you your self answer and prove them to be of no force by the Canon which you quote part of which says Civitates praedictae nunquam proprios Episcopos habuerunt For if those Cities were never two distinct Dioceses then he who held them could not be a Dualist even according to your own argument unless you take it for granted That a Christian City qua talis be a Bishop's See which I am sure you will never be able to prove Some of our present Dioceses do indeed contain such an extent of Land as formerly made two but how came they of old to be two was it not meerly from humane Authority and why may not things be altered by the same Power they were at first constituted And therefore I am asham'd to hear you trifle and cry out Pag. 39. No humane Authority can make that lawful which God and the Nature of things have made unlawful Whoever said that God and the nature of things divided Dioceses and Parishes And what Child's play is it to talk as you do Pag. 42. where you would prove the lawfulness of Pluralities from the lawfulness of one that is Bishop of one Diocese to undertake the Administration of another during its vacancy or the incapacity of him to whom it belongs I will only observe that you make the Bishop of Sarum to lead the Van in both Cases and look upon it not as an argument but a Jest ad hominem It ill becomes one who pretends so great a Reverence and Tenderness for the Order as you do always to be aiming at a Bishop and studying to expose him tho hitherto God be thanked you have exposed your self most of all But if you do not take more care of your self you will become one of the Traditors before you are aware of it And yet as I said though I agree not with you in this medium yet thus far I agree with you in the Conclusion That Plurality is not in it self against the Divine Law and considering the Poverty of some Churches 't is absolutely necessary and some men may better merit and serve two than others one and therefore in God's Name let them have ' em Yet No Man ought to have more Souls committed to his Charge than he can or will watch over This doth evidently appear both from the Law of Nature and the Gospel whatever you pretend to the contrary For I think it will be needless to prove that by them both we are oblig'd to perform our promises and execute the several Offices we undertake and unless you have forgotten your Vows and Engagements plighted to God and his People at your Ordination you cannot but know that 't is the Vow and Office of a Presbyter of the Church of England to watch over and instruct the People committed to his charge And he who shall say that he is not obliged to serve in the Church committed to his charge doth in effect renounce his Orders in the Church of England And he who shall further assert That he is not obliged by the Vows and Promises which he hath made if they are not unlawful doth in consequence renounce the Christian and even Natural Religion And he who undertakes any Engagements which he knows he cannot perform or makes any Vows he resolves not to fulfill in taking of them he doth worse than break them So that he who accepts so many or great Benefices as he cannot or will not look after transgresses the Law of Christ and Nature too But there are two things pretended in this Case 1. The Dispensation of the Bishop To which I answer That there is no Dispensation to be had for perpetual Non-residence and neglect of the People Tho' I must confess the Dispensations are larger than a good man would wish for yet they will not come up to your purpose You often indeed call upon the Bishops to execute the Discipline of the Church and to make Incumbents perform the Terms and Conditions of their Dispensation that is to Preach Thirteen times a Year in each Church and to reside two Months which is too little in all conscience and yet as little as it is I do not doubt but if the good Bishops should take you at your word and send you and your Brethren to labour amongst your Rusticks you would think your selves severely handled and look on it as a harder imposition than that which the Parliament lays upon you and be ready to cry out of an eleventh Persecution I should look on that Pluralist to have something of Conscience who having gotten two of the best Livings in Thirty Miles distance should do at least what the Canon and his Dispensation requires of him 'T is but a low pitch of vertue to be just so good as the Law of Man would have us and yet it were well if such as you defend especially your dear self could do but this Your Dispensations which you now plead in your own defence shall hereafter rise up in Judgment against you For I know many Pluralists and I believe Sir you know one at least who Preach not half so often and reside not half so much upon both their Livings as they ought to do in each And yet after all if the Dispensation were as full as you could desire it would certainly be invalid as tending to the Breach of Vows which no Christian Bishop can pretend to without usurping a Papal Power He who shall undertake to annull a Minister's Vows of feeding the People committed to his charge may by the same Authority dispense with my Oath of Allegiance or with those Natural duties which I owe to my Parents or Children But some have answered That these Vows and Promises are to be taken in a legal sence and are qualified by those words according to the Order of this Church of England so that he who takes no more Liberty than the Canons of this Church allow cannot justly be accused for violation of his Faith But 1st The Church allows no such liberty as that of perpetual Non-residence and neglect of labour as is already proved 2dly These words do not at all affect our obligation to personal labour and therefore cannot in the least mitigate or abate it And that this may appear I will set down the whole Question of which these words are part Do you think in your heart that you be truly called according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Order of this Church of England to the Order and
have proved Residence to be Jure Divino from those words Abraham begat Isaac Mat. 1.2 might not argue so much at random as you your self do And pray observe that you have proved more than I hope you designed if you have proved any thing at all For if neither Bishops nor Incumbent Presbyters be obliged to be resident in their Charges any part of the year pray who shall look after them what stipen diary Curates Why the Scriptures make no more mention of them than of Parochial Constables as you your self speak And therefore according to your way of talk there is no Provision made by the Law of God for the Cure of Souls You ought by all means to have shewed who they are who are Jure Divino obliged to take care of the People before you had dismiss'd the Bishops Incumbent Presbyters from that Service But that which you chiefly labour at and in proof of which half your Book was written is to shew that serving Cures by a Proxy and leaving all but the Tithes to the Curate is not contrary to the first design of Parochial Endowments And in order to this you present us with a long History of the first Institution of Parochial Churches which is the best part of your Book and therefore least to your purpose And to what end you tell us this Tale of about 100 pages long I can't Divine For I do not believe that one single Consequence can be drawn from this relation of yours which favours your conceits of unlimited Plurality and Total Non-residence You wisely excuse your self pag. 115. from framing the particular deductions lest you should seem to question or injure the Judgment of your Reader A man would rather think that you put this task upon your Reader because it was too hard for your self The chief Heads I shall mention and shew how they make for you pag. 58. You tell us 't was long e'er Parish-Churches were instituted longer before they were endowed What would you infer from hence that when they were instituted and endowed the particular persons design'd and collated to them were not obliged to serve and officiate in them Nothing else will serve your turn and yet no such conclusion can be drawn from these premises What tho the office of a Parochial Priest be new yet an Office it is and must faithfully be discharged or else those that have it conferred on them render themselves obnoxious both to the Laws of God and Man especially if any supervening obligations of vows and promises require it of us Any alteration in the Circumstances of affairs any new Commands of Superiors if they be not unlawful may lay new tyes upon our Consciences Ibid. You tell us that all Oblations made at these Churches were at first transmitted to the Bishop who generally divided them into four parts took one for his own maintenance assigned another to the Clergy a third to repair the Edifices and a fourth to the Poor Now if you could prove that the Bishop having all at his disposal allowed him a dividend who did not Preach or labour this would be for your purpose or if you had shewed that tho a Priest neglected the Business or People to whom he was sent and never came near the Church to which he was commanded had yet his share in the Dividend this would look your way I am perswaded 't is as easie to prove the unlawfulness of Non-residence from the first of Genesis as to conclude the non-necessity of it from such premisses as these But further you assert pag. 59. that the first and general design of endowing Parochial Churches was that a competent number of Clergy might be maintained who under the Bishop should supply the whole Diocese But if so what need these endowments be fixed to these Parochial Churches why were they not rather bestowed on the Bishop or the Mother Cathedral Church The end which you pretend had been altogether as well served by this means viz. the maintaining a competent number of Clergy to serve the Diocese in sacred matters It sounds very odly and improbably that our Ancestors endowed one particular Parochial Church that so by this endowment some Clergy-man might be enabled to serve in other parts of the Diocese Any one who had not a mind to impose on himself or others would rather think that when an Estate was settled on any particular Church the design of the Donor chiefly was that he who served in it should have the profit of it unless we imagine those Pious Men to have had such tricks in their Heads as those in the beginning of our late Confusions who pretending a zeal for the Revenues of the Church founded Lectures in the City out of Impropriations purchased in the remotest parts of the Kingdom But before I dismiss this point let me observe to you that by your own confession the Endowments of Parochial Churches were only designed to maintain the Clergy who were employed in that Diocese whereof the Church so endowed was a Member and therefore this if true would not justifie those who being Beneficed in one Diocese bestow their labour or live lazily in another The second design you say was to provide for the Convenience of every particular Parish and you might as well have call'd this the first reason this you say was permitted to the direction of the Bishop to alter it at discretion And you do not tell us upon what grounds you say this I suppose it was only to introduce what follows viz. pag. 61. if it be more for the good of the Diocese or Church in general That any Presbyter should retain Plurality of Benefices or be Non-resident at one or both of them then it 's more consonant to the first design of Endowments That such Plurality should be allowed and Non-residence dispensed with than otherwise but you ought to have proved that Bishops pretended to any such power as that of Dispensations when parish-Parish-Churches were first endowed or that the Founders did dream of a thing which was not in use till long after We have only your Ipse dixit for this whole matter beside what you writ over Night you contradict next Morning as you shall hear by and by Farther I look upon that which you call the good of the Diocese or Church in general to be no more than the enriching and easing some few of the Clergy 'T is surely most for the good of the Diocese and whole Church that such Clergymen as are most able to do good should be dispersed amongst the several parts and Regions of it And whatever was the design of the Clergy in receiving these endowments there is no Question to be made but the Thanes or great Men who were the givers of them and by whose intentions we are to be determined in this matter respected chiefly the convenience of those Parishes where they erected Churches The whole Diocese was in some measure provided for before out of the common Stock
or Treasury And therefore the main end that Founders could propose in setling Estates upon particular Parish-Churches could not be any other than the constant Supply thereof in Divine things And to make what I say more plain you tell us that Bishops endowed some parochial Churches for the convenience of their Tenants Pag. 90. Now how can it be reconciled to common Sence viz. That Bishops had this primary design in erecting and endowing these Churches not that the Parishes so endowed might have a Priest constantly attending so much as that the whole Diocese might be supplied with a competent Number of Clergymen when whatever he gave according to your Notion belonged before to the common Stock of the Diocese and so the design of maintaining a competent Number of Clergy was as well served before this Endowment as afterward The sum of what need be said on this matter is That whatever meaning the Bishop and Clergy had in accepting these Endowments which yet I believe were very honest and far otherwise than you would have us think for certain those who gave them did chiefly intend the good and convenience of that Parish where they setled a Maintenance And all Rules of Gratitude and Piety oblige us to apply all Endowments according to the Will of the Donours And at first they could not so much as suspect that their designs should be eluded Forasmuch as in that age the Notion of serving a Cure by Proxy was not started And that that this was their first Intention you your self after having made a great stir and bustle do at last humbly acknowledge For pag. 85 86 87. You tell us that Parish-Priests and Churches were not generally settled till the Bishops consented that the whole Revenue of the Endowment were perpetually annexed to the Church of that Clerk who received it i. e. in plain English till the Incumbent might have the Estate belonging to the Church in which he served and not only so but before these great Men could generally be brought to settle their Endowments Parish-Priests were forbid to quit their Cures without the leave of their Diocesan pag. 88. Now what is the reason that these good men would not part with their worldly goods to encrease the common Treasure of the Diocese since as you tell us pag. 59. the first and general design of these endowments was to maintain a competent number of Clergy to serve the Diocese what made them so shy and backward in their Benefactions till they were assured the Incumbent should have all and that he who ministred should have the Endowments that those who were at first instituted on a Benefice should not easily be dismissed from it Truth will out and after all your forced stuffe and whipt Creame you can't forbear to contradict your self and in effect to give up your Cause Formerly that is before the 8th Century as you tell us all Oblations and Profits were at the disposal of the Bishop so that no one who gave any thing to the officiating Minister or endowed a Church could be sure that he who laboured should have the Penny and besides Clergy-men were light and unconstant and often forsook their Cures and no one would stay at a Church any longer than he thought fit but pag. 85. Before the year 800 these two reasons which chiefly discouraged the Erection and Endowment of Parish-Churches were taken away But suppose these well-meaning Gentlemen had foreseen any such things as perpetual Non-residence and serving Cures by Substitutes would not this have stopt their Charity For by this means it is again brought about That the particular Endowments of any Parish do only increase the Common Treasure of the Diocese or some particular men sometimes in sometimes out of it and the Church is no better served than if it had no more than a bare Competence for the Curate Why should not the old Thanes be as well satisfied in haing the Revenues of the Church at the absolute disposal of the Diocesan as of one who was to do little or nothing for it and seldom see the Parishioners but when he came to poll them So that those who were the best Benefactors to the Church and to whose Piety under God the Clergy owe their present Subsistence were in no one thing more abused than by the Permission of enormous Pluralities and idle Incumbents For the time to come you had better keep your Antiquities in your Common Place-Book than gratifie your itch in vending of them when they so little serve your purpose that they do the quite contrary And I believe on reading over what you had writ you were sensible of it and therefore seem willing to compound the matter pag. 152 as supposing that in 1100 years time the circumstances of things may be altered But then what need all this Pother about the first Institution and Endowment of Parochial Churches Whether personal lâ—bour were required in the old Gallick or English-Saxonick Church or not 't is certain now it is You are indeed so inconsistent and unresolved in this whole matter That 't will be a very difficult thing to reconcile Anthony to Harmer Pag. 73. You tell us in the seventh Century there were none but Itinerant Preachers nay in the 8th Century or the year 731 there were no other but Pluralist Clergymen who had not the care of any particular Parish but executed their Office in this or that or all the Churches of the Diocese as the Bishop should direct them pag. 74. and yet before you had writ three Pages more you were quite of another mind for you tell us that about the year 700 Oratories and Churches were erected and endowed with peculiar Maintenance for the Incumbent which should there reside and execute the holy Function pag. 77. And you say the reason why before the year 800 Parochial divisions were not generally received was because Incumbents thro' levity would often quit their Churches pag. 85. So that sometimes there were none but Itinerants before the 8th Century at other times you tell us there were notwithstanding this Incumbents too who were constantly to reside or when you have a mind to it there were Incumbents but when you think it for your purpose you can presently annihilate them again Nay do but put your two great impediments of the Parochial Settlement together and they will break one another in pieces For the first was that the Bishop had the Disposition of all the Oblations and Profits The second was that Presbyters would leave their Churches in hopes of getting richer pag. 85 87. But now if all were at the Bishop's disposal and he that officiated had not the Estate wherefore should he desire a richer Church If some Churches were richer to the Presbyter than other how was all at the Bishop's disposal When you have reconciled your self to your self and let me know where I may find you you may hear further from me You have here asserted I can't tell what but I am
sure palpable contradictions However you have sufficiently cleared these two points viz. That before Parochial Endowments were compleated the Bishop pag. 85 86. condescended to part with his right of disposing the Ecclesiastical Revenues because otherwise the Laymen would not condescend to Endow any more Churches and That all Parish-Priests were forbid to quit their Cures without the leave of their Diocesan and it was ordered that at their Institution or before their Ordination the Clergy should promise to remain at that place to which they were ordained pag. 88 89 which is contrary enough to what you undertook to prove That Plurality by which you mean holding any number of Benefices tho' at never so great a distance is not contrary to the first design of Parochial Endowments But hitherto you have only talked like a man that wanted to be drove to his Church where he is Incumbent but under the next Head you Discourse after so lewd a manner as that you deserve to be lasht out of it as shall presently appear IV. Vicars are by their Oaths obliged to local residence unless they be dispensed with For if they be they are obliged no more than Rectors The Oath of Residence injoined to be taken by Vicars at their Institution is You shall Swear to reside on your Vicarage of N. unless you shall be dispensed with to the contrary so that he who is dispensed with is not by virtue of this Oath tyed to residence But to be so far resident as effectually to answer all the design and ends of the Ministry is a thing in it self necessary whether this Oath be taken or not and therefore can't be dispensed The Law by residence never means any thing else but living in the Parish where you are beneficed Now tho' this be not always absolutely necessary yet 't is necessary for that person who having sworn thus to do except he be dispensed with is not dispensed withall And every one who knows any thing of an Oath hath therefore just cause to wonder at that brasen and wicked assertion of yours pag. 116 117. viz. Vicars can't in conscience be impleaded of Perjury against their Oath of Residence who being Non-resident maintain Curates constantly residing How not they guilty of Perjury who having sworn residence do not reside In God's Name who then can be guilty of that Sin If indeed you had said that Vicars having the Bishop's Dispensation are not forsworn if they are Non-resident you had said truth But the necessity of a Dispensation you neither suppose nor allow of For your reason is only this ibidem The Law is best interpreted by its known design and that the known design of this Canon was that no Parochial Church should be destitute of the presence of a Priest which must needs have happened if Vicars had been permitted to be Non-resident because they had but just enough to maintain themselves and the Canon makes no provision for Vicars able to maintain a Curate because then there were none such Now in all this the necessity of the Bishop's Dispensation is not so much as intimated or imply'd which yet is the only thing that can save Non-resident Vicars from down right Perjury Vid. Bp. oâ—… and W's Charge And all that you say to palliate it is but meer stuff and Sham. You tell us that when this Canon was made there were no Vicars able to maintain Curates but for this we have only your bare word and many probabilities to the contrary 'T is acknowledged that in the time of Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury Five Marks were determined to be a competent allowance for a Vicar But many Vicarages had been erected long before this time and those who had them were ab origine obliged to Residence And though there may some few instances be produced of Vicarages which were not above this value yet this doth by no means prove that there were none which had better maintenance Further though the Law may best be interpreted by the known design of it yet no plain express literal injunctions of any Law are disannulled by pretending that from the design of the Law no such Conclusions can be drawn The design of the Law may give us light in some particulars which would otherwise be obscure and difficult or may serve to explain the meaning of any Oath by it ordered to be taken But this sure is the first time that the intention of the Law was urged as a reason why an Oath prescribed by it should be of no validity And further it is plain that the design of that Canon by which it was injoyned was not only to secure the constant presence of a Priest in every Parish but that the Vicar himself should be constantly present This appears from the Oath it self For all Incumbents whether Rectors or Vicars if absent must maintain a Curate whether they will or no and whether the Revenue be small or great and if this had been the only design Rectors would have been injoyned to take it as well as Vicars And yet Rectors tho their Benefices were not above Five Marks per annum value were never obliged to take this Oath And I conceive the true reason of Vicars being sworn to Residence was that old rule Vicarius non habet Vicarium a Curate for such were all Vicars originally is not allowed to have a Curate And though the reason of this Canon now ceases since Vicars are properly Incumbents yet the Canon it self remains in force or else all our Bishops and Vicars General are mistaken Some indeed are of opinion that Desuetude Remotio cansae when they meet together are sufficient to abrogate any Law But so long as it is daily executed no one must say that 't is abolished tho the occasion of it seemeth to be taken away You indeed seem to argue as if you thought the Canon it self antiquated But no Subject of any Society must take the Liberty of interpreting away Laws which he sees his Governours daily to exercise upon pretence that the reason of them ceases That the Law was at first made to oblige Vicars to actual Residence you your self acknowledge and the Law remaining the same 't is not in the Power of any single Clergyman though he be a Pluralist nay though he were Universal Incumbent of all the Benefices in Christendom to alter the sense and first intention of it And residence by a Curate is such a Residence as neither Law nor common sense admits of Thus you see the Canon is in force and therefore to be obeyed whether enforced with an Oath or not And whether the Canon be in force or otherwise yet I am sure the Oath is with all such as have taken it and have any Conscience at all A man who hath upon Oath promised to do any thing is obliged without all controversie to perform it whether it were a Canonical Oath or not unless the thing he promised were sinful And indeed you act and
talk as if you thought Residence to be so Thus Sir I have endeavoured truly to state the Case of Plurality and Non-residence And tho' I have not done it with so much Art and Cunning as you yet I am satisfied that I have placed it upon a better foundation and used much more impartiality than you though I have written some things with a just resentment But before I part with you I must take leave to reflect on some passages in your Book which I have not yet touch'd upon You say pag. 134. Certainly it conduceth more to the Interest Honour and support of Religion in general and the good of the whole Diocese in particular that ten or more Prebendaries Persons of extraordinary merit should constantly attend at the Cathedral Church seated in the chief City of the Diocese to see the Worship of God performed with decent solemnity to instruct the Inhabitants of a Populous City and to advise the Bishop upon all occasions than that ten little Country Villages should be supplied by the constant personal attendance of the Incumbents of their Churches This may all be very well allowed except the supposition that these extraordinary persons must needs be Incumbents of Country Churches For why should these excellent men who are capable of doing more good elsewhere encumber themselves with Rectories or Vicarages so far remote from the Cathedral that they cannot attend them both It is very requisite that City-Churches should be supplied by the most able and Eminent of the Clergy But then why do these great men usually decline City Cures For 't is not the Dean and Chapter but the Incumbents of the several Parish-Churches who are generally interested in the Cure of Souls in Cities By supplying the City Churches they might indeed do great service to Religion But this is not to be effected by only officiating and that rarely in the Cathedral If you object that the Livings in lesser Cities are usually very mean and unworthy of such deserving men it may be answered that their Prebends would make good amends for that generally speaking And though Country-Livings are oftentimes of greater value yet it must be considered that when the Curate is paid the remainder will very little exceed the usual allowance of a City-Minister And I do not know any one thing wherein the High-Court of Parliament could do a greater Benefit to the Church than in annexing a Church or two of the Neighbouring City to every Prebend of the Cathedral and indispensably obliging the Clergymen who injoyed them to perform personal Service in them For I cannot believe that faction could lead Captive so great numbers of men in these populous Cities if such deserving men as many Dignitaries are did but bestir themselves and do their best in countermining the designs of our adversaries by their Zeal and industry in watching over the People And if we look into such places we shall find very little sign of care and pains that hath been used by the Clergy in retaining or reducing men to the sober principles of the Church of England for Dissenters are scarce any where more numerous than in these Cities And though I know several other reasons may be given for it yet I cannot help believing that one great occasion of it is that such Parish-Churches are not generally served by the ablest men and oftentimes by good Choristers rather than good Ministers A good Song or Antheme may render a man very agreeable company and a good neighbour but such persons cannot usually compose themselves to that seriousness of mind and earnestness of Piety and Study as to make themselves successful in their labours in populous and censorious Cities I shall not take further notice of those particular good designs which our reformers had in continuing these Corporations you reckon them up well enough and I wish you could say that these great ends were served by them at this time And till they are I am sure that they had better be doing good in their Rural Benefices if they have any than spend their time in the Cathedral in doing nothing at all or at most in only seeing Divine Worship perform'd with decent Solemnity That nothing can excuse them from personal labours in their Cures but some invincible Necessity I have already show'd and few of them think themselves obliged to reside in the Cathedral above two months in the year or thereabouts And for the remaining part of their time I do not know where they can better be disposed of than amongst their Parishioners Another passage is pag. 138 139. It is more for the Interest of the Church and Religion in general that men of eminent Learning should attend in the Courts of Princes c. This may very well be allowed of but doth it from thence follow that these men must undertake other charges inconsistent with this attendance But if you hereby mean the King's Chaplains I do not think that the time of their attendance will be any great impediment to the Cure of Souls elsewhere And if these eminent men vouchsafe to take on them the charge of a few Rusticks as you in contempt call them who should be your care and Crown surely they will not think it below themselves to take care of them too What tho' they may learn as much as they are capable of from the meanest Curate Yet it may be well supposed that such great and good men as you speak of may have a greater Influence over them that what they say may make more impression may be received with a more attentive mind and fall with a greater weight and by doing more good amongst them than a poor Curate can they may more effectually win and reconcile them to their Duty And they may do this and yet not be wanting to their Prince at the stated times and courses of attendance But if they affect to be at Court when they have no business there but their own and when that is nothing else but to solicite for preferment to wriggle into the favour of great men to injoy better company or indulge their Genius more than they can amongst their Rusticks it must be acknowledged that this will be a great hinderance to the serving their Cures and doing their real business And is it not pity that men should not be dispensed with for thus prosecuting the good of the Church elsewhere As for Noblemen's Chaplains who being beneficed do actually attend the number of them is so small that you might have sav'd your self the trouble of apologising for them If they have Benefices or Cures they are generally so near their Lords Houses that they may attend both together And Noblemen generally are unwilling to take men off from the business of their Cures and make more conscience of being the occasion of Ministers not residing than perhaps you would have them You give us some Instances of Great Men and Honourable Personages who retained Domestick Chaplains in times of old
Pag. 138. but you are at a loss it seems in that which you ought to have proved viz. That any of these Domesticks had charges elsewhere And till you can shew this you say nothing to the purpose You plead likewise for Archbishops and Bishops having Chaplains in their Houses pag. 139. And sure no good-natur'd man would abate them that Privilege But that they are so necessary to be subservient to them in the Government of the Church is a new Notion I believe the Prebendaries and experienced Clergymen of the Diocese might do the Bishops better Service in this particular You have found out an Office for them which the Canons and Constitutions of the Church never gave them As for the governing of the Church 't is to be hoped that every Diocese affords men better qualified to assist the Bishop in it than his Chaplains who are just come from ruling Lads in the Universities and who themselves sometimes are hardly of age to be Church-wardens But tho' Bishops ought to be allowed Chaplains yet it doth not necessarily follow that they ought to continue in their attendance after they are well beneficed Prelates are generally in a Capacity to confer or procure Benefices for their Domesticks so near their Houses that they may in some measure attend both together And if they cannot do this yet they have usually either Prebends though the Archbishop have but three pag. 18. as you seem with some concern to observe or sine Cures to gratifie their Chaplains with which one would think might suffice till they could with convenience dismiss them A little care and resolution might soon take off this objection Now I suppose by this time you have put me down if you know my Name for one of the Traditors And I thank you for providing me such excellent company For it seems Archbishop Williams was one of them pag. 12. and the present Bishop of Salisbury is in your account a notorious one nay and the Archbishop himself must come into the number for Licensing his Book V. Bp. of S's Pastoral Care pag. 250. and encouraging the Author to write it But let me tell you Sir that I neither understand your manners nor wit in fixing such an odious Character upon so deservedly great men Nor can I see how the compellation fits them For I never heard that they or any other of the Clergy whom you are so severe upon ever resigned their Bibles or renounced their Religion as the Traditors of old did Nay they have given greater demonstrations of their Courage and Zeal in maintaining them than ever can be expected from you So that I cannot make Sence of the expression unless you take it for granted that the permission of Pluralities and Non-residence be as necessary to Religion as the old and New Testament You say they betray the Outguards of Religion I know not what you mean by the Outguards But I am sure enormous Plurality and neglect of Cures cannot justly be so called This is rather the Breach at which Seducers enter in For if the most Eminent of the Clergy would once in earnest set about their proper business I should not doubt but that Schism and Confusion would gradually lessen and perhaps at last altogether disappear Your charity runs high when you say you will not lay the imputation of Infidelity upon all Antipluralists pag. 12. because some you hope acted upon a mistaken zeal and false prejudices But it should seem as for the rest you cannot abate them an Inch of this Charge So that all are Infidels with you who do not believe the Lawfulness and Convenience of Pluralities and Non-residence unless invincible ignorance excuse them Now this is an Article which the Church of Rome hath not yet got into her Creed but probably they will put it into the next Edition especially since you have silenced the Spanish Bishops who were the main opposers of it The bitterness of your stile and your unchristian way of writing would provoke a man to retort the accusation and throw back the ill language upon your self and your Brethren But in meer pity to you I forbear as knowing that Grand and Non-resident Pluralists are the most unfit men in the World to undergo such severe Penances as were of old inflicted on the Traitors Your c. FINIS