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
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
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
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-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
Judgment of all these positions which are laid down as the Foundation of this Work. The First is That the two principal Offices which the Clergy have received from Christ are 1. To determine Controversies in pure matters of Religion and to judg what is Truth and what are Errors in Faith and Worship 2. To teach and promulgate this Truth and to execute Church-censures on those who receive it not All this is true but since our Author doth not prove that the Clergy are infallible in their Decisions which is not so much as pretended by any with relation to National Churches this only proves that it is the duty of the Clergy to declare and publish the truth but as the Body of a National Clergy may err so in case it should actually err can it be supposed that the People and the Prince are bound to err with it Synods are of great use for the Unity of the Church and a vast respect is due to their Decisions but since our Author names the Synods of the Arrians the many Synods that they had which were very numerous and were gathered from all parts gave them all the advantages from this Authority that could be desired so that if the Council of Nice had not had truth of its side I do not see why the Visible Authority should not rather be thought to lye on the Arrian side The Princes Authorizing a Synod or his Opposing it is to be justified or condemned from the Decisions that are made by it if they are good he ought to support them and if they are bad he ought to oppose them and in this he must judg for himself as every other man must do the best he can as knowing that he must be judged by God. The Second is That the Clergy cannot make over this Authority to the Secular Governour being charged by Christ to execute it to the end of the World. Upon which he arraigns Two things 1. The Clergies binding themselves never to make any Decisions in matters of Faith or Worship till they had first obtained the consent of the Secular Governour 2. The Clergies Authorizing the Secular Governour or those whom he should nominate to determine those matters in their stead It is certain no Clergy in the World can make any such Deputation and if any have done it it was a Personal Act of theirs which was null of it self and did not indeed bind those who made it it being of its own nature unlawful but much less can it bind their Successors but if the Church of England never did neither the one nor the other what a Prevaricator and False Accuser is he who as he lied long to God and Man when he pretended to be of this Church so resolves now to lye concerning this Church as much as ever he did to it The submission of the Clergy related only to New Canons and Constitutions as the other Act empowering a select number to be nominated by the King to form a Body of a Canon-Law related only to the matters of the Government of the Church the Religion and Worship had no relation to it so a compromise as to matters of Government is very unjustly stretched when this is made a surrender of the Authority of determining and declaring matters relating to Doctrine and Worship which no Church-man without breach of the most sacred of all Trusts can deliver up but in the matters of Ecclesiastical Policy all States in the World have felt enough from the Yoke of the Papacy to give them just reason to assure themselves against any more of such Ecclesiastical Tyranny besides that in all the engagements tho made in Terms that are general such as are all Oaths of Obedience and in particular those that are made by Prelates to the Popes exceptions are still understood even when they are not expressed As long then as the Church enjoys a Protection from the Civil Authority she is bound to make returns of all engagements not only of Submission but of Obedience But tho the one is perpetual the other has its limits and when the Church finds its oppressions from the Civil Power really to over-ballance the Protection that she receives from it in that case she must resolve to fall into a state of Persecution and all the engagements that any body of the Clergy have made relating only to the maintaining a peacable Correspondence with the Civil Powers they do not at all bind up Church-men from doing their Duty in case the Civil Authority sets it self to overthrow Religion Besides when both Religion and the Worship and the Constitution of a Church is once established the adding new Canons may perhaps be of great use to a Church but yet it cannot be supposed to be so indispensably necessary but that rather than give any distaste to the Soveraign they may content themselves with what they have without asking new Canons and a Church under a Body of Canons may likewise resign up the compiling of these into a new System and the leaving out such as are found inconsistent with the Publick Peace to such persons as shall be nominated by the Prince but all this how general soever the words may be hath still a tacit exception in it which all that know the Principles of Law will grant The Third Thesis is That the Prince cannot depose any of his Clergy without the consent of the major part of the Clergy or their Ecclesiastical Superiors and in particular of the Patriarch In this the matter must still be reduced to the former Point Either the Grounds of such a Deposition are in themselves just or not if they are just the Prince may as lawfully hinder any Church-man from corrupting his Subjects while he is supported by a Publick Authority or a setled Revenue as he may hinder a man that hath the Plague on him from going about to infect his People for his deposing such a one is only the taking the Civil Encouragement from him but when this is done unjustly it is without doubt an act of high Oppression in the Prince and as for the Person Deposed and those over whom he was set they are to consider according to the Rules of Prudence whether the present Case is of such importance that it will ballance the inconveniences of their throwing themselves into a state of Persecution for it is to be confessed that Church-men have by their office an indefinite Authority of feeding the Flock which cannot be dissolved by any act of the Princes but the appropriating this to such a Precinct and the supporting it by Civil Encouragements is a humane thing and is therefore subject to the Soveraign Power The Princes of Iudah notwithstanding an express Law of God which appropriated the Priesthood and the High-Priesthood to such a Family and Race of men did turn them oft out and Iehosaphat sent to his Princes to teach in the cities of Iudah and with them he sent about also Priests and Levites
Independence upon any other superior Sees which was past Prescription We had likewise superior Councils justifying us in many of the Branches of our Reformation If we must seek the Sense of the Universal Church in her publick Liturgies then we have the Liturgies of the Greek Church for us in many other Points and the Corruptions of the Liturgies of the Roman Church were so gross that they themselves have been ashamed of a great many of them and have thrown them out tho a great many more remain still to be reformed And if the publick Liturgies are to be considered as the Standards of the Sense of the present Church as no doubt they are then all those Expositions and Representings that are now obtruded on us are to be thrown out of Doors and we must seek the Doctrine of the Church of Rome in her publick Liturgies The 5th Thesis That a Synod wanting part of a National Clergy unjustly deposed or restrained and consisting partly of Persons unjustly introduced and partly of Persons who have been first threatned with Fines Imprisonments and Deprivation in case of their Non-conformity to the Prince's Injunctions in matters merely Spiritual is not to be accounted a lawful National Synod nor the Acts thereof free and valid All this falls to the ground if the Reasons upon which such Persons were turned out were just And in that case such Vacancies may be justly filled But it is an impudent thing to found much on this when the number of those who were turned out was so very inconsiderable as it was in K. Henry's and K. Edward's time and if such a small terror as the loss of a Benefice is thought by our Author so dreadful a thing as it may be well judged by the operation it had upon himself for 25 years so that this derogates from the freedom of an Assembly then there never was any free even that at Nice not excepted For it is the same fear whether one is threatned with it before such a decision is made or if they knew that it must follow upon it Now this formidable business of losing a Benefice and a banishment upon the back of it was really the case of the Council of Nice since this was the condition of those who refused to subscribe their Definition So the Principle laid down by our Author taken from fear must either be false or this will annul all the Ecclesiastical Meetings that ever were The Sixth Thesis is That the Iudgment of the smaller part of the Clergy even tho the Metropolitan were of that number cannot be called the Iudgment of the Clergy of that Province and a Prince that follows the Directions of a few of his Clergy cannot be said to be guided by his Clergy but to go against it This is very true but yet Theodosius thought fit to give his Sanction to the Faith of two Bishops upon which all the Arrian Party might have as justly said that he acted against his Clergy for they were then by far the more numerous The Civil Power is bound to follow those whom they think are in the right and tho in common matters and in setled times it is fit to leave things to the majority yet if it is visible that the greater number is both ignorant and corrupt and that the matters under dispute are chiefly such things that are of great advantage to the Clergy both for encreasing their Wealth and for advancing their credit then the Secular Power hath just reason to be jealous of the greater number of the Clergy since Interest gives a mighty byass and their following the lesser number in such a case is very justifiable for humanely speaking it were impossible to find the greater number willing to go into such a change The Seventh Thesis is That tho Secular Princes had a decisive Power in such matters of Faith as are no ways formally determined yet in such Points as have been formerly determined no Secular Prince can define any such things contrary to those Councils or contrary to a National Synod It is not so much as pretended that a Secular Prince hath any Power to decide in matters of Faith whether they are already determined or not but as for the giving the Sanction of a Law and all secular encouragements a Prince must have a Judgment of Discretion by which he ought to determine himself for when he hath given his Sanction he hath made no sort of Decision in the matter which is neither more nor less to be believed than it was before but it is now become legal and all Princes must proceed in this matter according to the conviction of their Consciences It is not long since some of this Gentleman's Friends thought to have carried the King of the Abyssens to change the Doctrines and Rites of that Church upon the private suggestion of a few Missionaries against the whole Body of his Clergy upon which that Kingdom became a Scene of Rebellion and Bloodshed till the King himself grew to conceive a horror against those who had push'd him on so violently to overthrow the Laws and Establish'd Customs of that Church So that a Reformation effected by the King's Authority tho managed with ever so much fury and violence is yet driven on by these men when it is on their side and for their advantage The Eighth Thesis is That neither National Synod nor Secular Power can make any new Canons concerning the Government of the Church contrary to the Ecclesiastical Constitutions of former superior Councils nor reverse those formerly made by them This is such a crude Assertion that one would think that he who made it knew neither the History of Councils nor the nature of Canons and Constitutions which are all variable and are made upon such particular occasions as required them to be put in practice and another Scene of Affairs may make it as necessary to reverse them as ever it was to establish them The main subject of the Ancient Canons are Penitentiary Rules relating to the Censure of Offenders the Subordination of Churches founded on the division of the Roman Empire and the Duty and Behaviour of Church-men Of these the first is quite laid aside in the Church of Rome and by their means we were so accustomed to be without that Yoke that we have not been able to bring the World to it But we have never repealed these only we let them sleep too long The Second relating to the Constitution and the Subordination of Churches is quite sunk with the fall of the Empire for if a Town that was the Center of a Province to which it was easie to have recourse by Letters and to which the Road and Carriages were regularly laid and where the Civil Government was also exercised should after many ages either be separated from the rest of the Province falling under another Master or should become a poor and neglected Town it is a needless adhering to Ancient Custom to affert
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
the Civil and Temporal Heads of our Church XXIV He tells us that the Monks could not give away that which they had only for term of Life I know not how this comes to be delivered by our Author at a time when the surrender of so many Charters to the King hath been judged Legal though it was made by men who had no Title to these and who were so far from having a Right to them for Term of Life that they had only the Administration of them in an Annual Magistracy so that our Author had best consider how he advances such Positions lest he doth as much hurt one way as he thinks to do service another In a word our Author hath pleaded the Cause of the Monasteries and hath arraigned the Suppression of them severely tho as he said concerning the burning of Hereticks he would not be thought to plead for it in this place XXV He accuses King Henry for giving Dispensations in matters of Marriage against Ecclesiastical Canons and because he declared all Marriages to be lawful that were not against Gods Law Here if in any thing the perverseness of the Church of Rome appears or rather their design to oblige the World to have oft recourse to them to pay them well and to depend much on them they have prohibited Marriage in many degrees that were not forbid by the Law of God and to ballance this they have suffered Marriages to be contracted in the Degrees forbid by God for the Pope's Power of Dispensing is promoted both ways they have added a new Contrivance of Spiritual Kindred and as the Prohibitions that they have set up were unknown to the Ancient Church so the Degrees that they have declared dispensable were believed by the Ancient Church to be moral and indispensable And yet after all this corruption of Ecclesiastical Discipline they are in great wrath at the Reformers because they thought it was fit to return to the Degrees forbid by the Law of Moses and to cut off these superadded Prohibitions which were inventions to bring grist to that Mill where all things were to be had so men will come up to the Price There follow here a great many Instances in which King Henry exercised his Supremacy which our Author aggravates all he can But the Considerations that were proposed in the first Part seem fully to satisfie all the difficulties that can be thought to arise out of them XXVI He tells us that such of the Privy Council as complied not with the Changes made in King Edward's Days were turned out after some time and names Bishop Tonstal Wriothesly the Chancellor and the Earl of Arundel and he adds That the King had but one Parliament continued by Prorogation from Session to Session till at last it ended in the Death of the King. Here are Matters of no great Consequence I confess but these shew how careless our Author was in examining the Story of our Reformation and how easy he was to take up any Reports that might blast it It will not appear a very extraordinary thing to see Privy Counsellors turned out that do not concur with the Designs that prevail Some such things have possibly fallen out in our own Time and Men have no great cause to complain of a severe Administration when this is all the Rigour that is shewed to those who oppose themselves to the Tide But our Author was misinformed in all these Particulars Tonstal went along with all that was done and was contented to protest in Parliament against some Laws but as soon as they were made he gave a ready Obedience to them and continued to be still in the Council during the Duke of Somerset's Ministry Wriothesly was not turned out till after some time but immediately upon King Henry's Death he had past an illegal Patent upon which to prevent a severer Sentence he resign'd his Place but he continued still to be of the Privy Council And the Earl of Arundel continued to be of the Privy Council for many Years and long after fell to be in ill terms with the Duke of Northumberland and upon that an Enquiry was made into his Administration and he was fined 12000 Pounds But it is no wonder to find our Author mistaken in matters of this Nature when in so publick a thing as that King Edward had but one Parliament in his whole Reign he hath not been at the pains to turn over the Book of Statutes for there he would have found that King Edward's first Parliament was dissolved the 15th of April 1552 and a Second Parliament was called and opened the First of March following and was dissolved the last Day of that same Month. So that there were two Parliaments in this Reign and the Second was dissolved by an Act of the King 's and not by his Death I do confess these are not great Matters yet this may be drawn out of them that our Author who pretends to have examined the Transactions of that Time with so much exactness took things upon trust without giving himself the trouble to enquire into them so critically as was necessary for one that was resolved to pass a Judgment upon them XXVII He expostulates upon the Inhibition of preaching put upon the Bishops except in their own Cathedrals which agrees ill with the Censure that Fox passes upon them as Dumb Prelates And after this there was a general Inhibition on the whole Clergy hindring them to preach till a Uniform Order of Doctrine should be set out in which some Bishops and other Learned Men were then employed by the King's Order As for this Inhibition upon Bishops to preach except in their Cathedrals it is a Fiction of our Author's for which he can give no Voucher they were not so much as restrained from giving Licences to preach much less to preach themselves over their Diocess The second and general Restraint as it was but for a very short while so the Thing is very doubtful and stands only on Fuller's Credit who was too careless a Writer to be appealed to in any Matter of Consequence XXVIII Our Author cites here the Discourse of Communion in one kind which by all appearance is that lately writ by the Bishop of Meaux This shews that the Author and the Publisher is the same Person though others pretend that the Author is dead many Years ago But it seems the Publisher thought fit at least to add some new touches and since he did that he might have thought it worth the while to have examined at least the Records published by Dr. Burnet and his History it self might have been considered as well as Mr. Fullers and Dr. Heylins But since it seems our Author thought the Discourse of the Communion in one kind fit to be recommended by him I will take the liberty to recommend the Answer to it in French by Monsieur Larroque and that lately writ in English in which the disingenuity of the Discourse