were much to be wished that their Majesties and the Reverend Prelates of the Church would revive the Order to supply the want of the Episcopal Function in those Diocesses which are deprived of the benefit of their proper Bishops either through necessary absence or through age and infirmities And for this there needeth no new Law or Canon I have passed through those Considerations which do particularly relate to the Case of Bishops altho from these an invincible argument for the lawfulness of Plurality and Non-residence in Parish Priests may be raised For if it be lawful for a Bishop to obtain Pluralities and use Non-residence much more will it be lawful to a Priest whose duty is not so strict nor his office of so great concern to the Church But I proceed to prove what I before proposed That altho Plurality and Non-residence were Jure Divino forbid to Bishops yet it would not follow that it is in like manner forbid to Priests They who maintain the Residence of Bishops to be of Divine Right proceed upon this Principle That the Order of Bishops is of Divine Institution and therefore Bishops are Jure Divino obliged to perform their office in their Diocesses which office they suppose cannot be discharged without residence Upon this Principle the Spanish Bishops proceeded when they contended for the Divine Right of Residence in the Council of Trent This Principle we of the Church of England do allow yet it hath been already proved that the Divine Right of Residence in Bishops doth not follow from it But suppose it should necessarily follow from it yet would not this involve Parochial Priests in the same obligation unless their Parochial office also were of Divine right which we do not allow I know the Presbyterians do contend for this as making no distinction in Order or Office between a Bishop and a Presbyter But for a Church of England Divine to aâ—gue the jus divinum of Parish Priests Residence from the jus divinum of Bishops Residence is no other than to betray the cause of the Church and of Episcopacy to the Presbyterians Bishops in the very institution of them were designed by God to preside over the Church in certain Cities and the Territories of them to be assigned to every one of them So that not only the Order but the designation of them to some certain place is of Divine institution The extent of the Territories of that place and consequently the greatness or smalness of his Diocess doth indeed depend upon human Laws and no more The Office and Order of Presbyters is indeed also of Divine institution but not their designation to any certain place They were appointed and ordained to assist the Bishop in governing and instructing his flock not necessarily to preside in any one part of the Bishops Diocess or to take care of any certain number of the faithful but to assist in such a manner and method as the Bishop and the Church should direct So that altho the division of the whole Catholick Church into many Diocesses be of Divine institution yet the division of any Diocess into many Parishes is not so All this will be sufficiently evident if it be proved that the Division of Diocesses into Parishes and assigning those Parishes to the perpetual care of so many Priests was made by meer humane Authority and that in different methods and gradually and not began till some Ages after the time of the Apostles and the Institution of Bishops The proof of this will evince all that hath been laid down by us and not only overthrow the argument of our Adversaries drawn from the supposed jus divinum of Bishops residence but also demonstrate that neither Plurality of Parochial Cures nor Non-residence upon such Cures can be jure divino unlawful to a Presbyter it being absurd that the circumstances of any matter should be of Divine right when the substance of the matter it self is not so And upon this ground Judge Hobart well maintained the lawfulness of Pluralities however another great Lawyer Lord Chief Justice Coke was so far mistaken as to be of a contrary opinion I proceed therefore to prove That the division of Diocesses into Parishes and subjection of every Parish to a peculiar Priest was made by humane Authority long after the Institution of Bishops and foundation of Churches gradually and not uniformly When the Christian Religion was first propagated in the Cities of the Roman Empire for it was very late before it extended to the country villages we may suppose that for some time at least one Church supplied the necessities of all the Christians of that City That the Bishop presided in that one Church none will doubt All this while it is certain there could be no appropriation of certain Presbyters to certain Churches When the number of the Christians in any City or in the neighbouring Country multiplied so far that one Church could not contain them others were erected in the City or Country and the number of these encreased proportionably with the number of Christians of any Diocess These auxiliary Churches were no other than Chappels of ease to the Mother-Church at which the Bishop resided and were accounted as such until at least the middle of the fifth Century The Bishop himself resided at the Mother-Church attended by his Presbyters The auxiliary Churches were served by the Presbyters at the appointment of the Bishop either in common or by turns or in any other method which the Bishop in his prudence should direct If any Bishop thought â—it to appoint certain Presbyters to attend constantly and without change upon certain Churches it was meerly because it was his pleasure Other Bishops took different methods as themselves judged best and might either appoint two Presbyters either co-ordinate or subalâ—ern to serve one Church or one Presbyter to serve two Churches or all Presbyters to take their turns in every Church There was no fixed or determinate rule herein The truth of all this is attested by Sozomen who wrote about the year 430 For he observes it as a singularity in the Diocess of Alexandria that therein Parochial Churches if I may so call those auxiliary Churches before mentioned were appropriated or committed to so many certain fixed Presbyters Petavius indeed contends that the same Custom obtained at this time as well in Rome as in Alexandria but his opinion and authorities are confuted by Valesius in his Notes upon this place of Sozomen and will be further overthrown by that Observation which immediately follows I will only add in this place that even in Alexandria the whole discharge of the Sacred Office was not yet entrusted to the Parochial Clergy but great part of it reserved to be executed only in the Cathedral Church For Socrates affirms that in his time the Presbyters were not permitted to preach at Alexandria It is not improbable that about this time the duty of the Presbyters began at Rome to be fixed
it conduceth more to the interest honour and support of Religion in general and the good of the whole Diocess in particular that according to the design of those Foundations ten or more Preâ—endaries persons of extraordinary merit and knowledge as they are supposed and ought to be should constantly attend at the Cathedral Church seated in the chief City of the Diocess to see the publick 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 Formerly therefore no doubt was made that they were more strictly obliged to attend the service of the Cathedral than any Incumbents were to attend the cure of Parochial Churches insomuch as when they had so far relaxed the obligation of their duty in the tenth Age as to pretend to execute it sometimes by Substitutes or Curates the Kings and great Persons of England would not endure it which the Monks taking advantage of in the time of King Edgar supplanted the Secular Canons and caused them to be ejected out of many Cathedral and Collegiate Churches The crime alledged by Edgar and the Monks against them as a reason of their ejection was that they did not execute their duty personally but per vicarios For some time after this it was thought the indispensable duty of all Prebendaries to give constant attendance upon the Cathedral Church either per se or per alium which obligation continued very long in the Church of England insomuch as frequent examples can be given of Coadjutors assigned to Prebendaries when by old age sickness or any infirmity they were disabled from personal attendance upon the service of the Church to which they belonged Which custom continued at least until the year 1300. All the abovementioned Canons Constitutions and jus commune of the Church concerning the Residence of Bishops and Archdeacons remain still in their full force The Case of Prebendaries is altred by particular Local Statutes and by later Ecclesiastical Constitutions And to the residence of Archdeacons and Prebendaries a new obligation is added by the Statute 21 H. 8. concerning Residence which includes every spiritual person promoted to any Archdeaconry Deanery or Dignity in any Monastery or Cathedral or other Church Conventual or Collegiate as well as Beneficed with any Parsonage or Vicarage To manifest yet more fully that it was never the design of the Church in the first institution of Parochial Cures that they should in all cases be supplied by the Incumbent in person I will add this observation That from the first beginning of Parechial cures Deacons were admitted to possess them alâ—ho it were notorious that they could not execute the Office personally since they could neither absolve penitents nor celebrate the Sacrament of the Eucharist For if we look upon the ancient Church of France by the example of which we have often observed the model of our Church to have been framed there Presbyters and Deacons were alike capable of enjoying Benefices So the tenth Canon of the French National Council held by Boniface the Popes Legate in the year 744. Quando Presbyteri vel Diaconi per Parochias constituuntur oportet eos Episcopo suo professionem facere and in the Capitulars it is decreed That a Priest or Deacon who forsakes his Church and takes another shall be deposed If we enquire particularly into the custom of the Church of England in this matter there the same practice did obtain insomuch as that it was ordered in the Council of Westminster in the year 1126 Can. 8. that none should be ordained Priest or Deacon but to some Title either of Benefice or Prebend Nullus in Presbyterum seu Diaconum nisi ad certum titulum ordinetur Indeed John Peckham Archbishop of Canterbury in the Council held at Lambeth in the year 1280. decreed That all Rectors of Churches having cure of Souls should cause themselves to be promoted to the Order of Priesthood within a year and that for the future none should be admitted to the cure of Souls nisi promotus ad Sacerdotium but a Priest upon pain of Deprivation However it is manifest that this Constitution never did obtain in the Church For Deacons were all along allowed to possess Benefices until the late Act of Vniformity being only obliged to receive the Order of Priesthood when their Age would permit and the Bishop should require it To the same purpose it may be observed That it was always allowed to Princes and Great Persons to retain Chaplains in their Service and in their Family who might possess Benefices conferred on them by their Patrons and consequently must supply the cure of them by Substitutes The Order of Domestick Chaplains in the Families and â— Retinues of Great Men is neither any innovation nor corruption in the Church as some would fancy For the Capitular of Karloman made in a full Synod in the year 742. directs Cap. 2. That every Governour should have a Priest with him Vnusquisque Praefectus unum Presbyterum secum habeat And in the first Capitular of Charles the Great made in the year 802. it is ordered Cap. 21. That the Priests and other Clergymen living in the service of the Counts should be subject to the Bishop according to the Canons Presbyteros ac caeteros Canonicos quos Comites suis in ministeriis habent omnino eos Episcopis suis subjectos exhibeant ut canonica institutio jubet In England in the Saxon times Plegmund Ethelnoth and Edsi were promoted from Domestick Chaplains of the King to the Archbishoprick of Canterbury and Stigand from Domestick Chaplain of Count Harold to the Bishoprick of the East-Angles In Wales the same practice was received early For in the Laws of Howel Dha made in the year 940. it is provided that in the progresses of the King and his Court lodgings for the Chaplain and Clerks of the King shall be taken up at the house of the Parish-Priest and so also for the Chaplain of the Queen In truth if men would judge without prejudice it must be acknowledged That it is more for the interest of the Church and of Religion in general that men of eminent learning and prudence should attend in the Courts of Princes and Noblemen to admonish instruct and advise them their relations and dependants in matters of Religion and publick concern than that the same persons should be obliged to attend personally upon the instruction of a few rusticks who may learn as much as they are capable of from the meanest Curate As for Archbishops and Bishops Chaplains are yet more necessary to them to be subservient to them in the government of the Church And this the Commons of England were so sensible of that in the Petition made in Parliament 2 H. 4. against Pluralities and Non-residence
to another as these from one Parish to another So the first Capitular of the year 789. cap. 21. Item in eodem Concilio Chalcedonensi nec non in Sardicensi praecipitur ut nec Episcopus nec Clerici transmigrent de civitate in civitatem This is exprest more fully in another Capitular De titulo minori ad majorem migrare nulli Presbytero licitum sit sed in eo permaneat ad quem ordinatus est Quod si inventus fuerit contra statuta id facere eâdem feriatur sententiâ quâ Episcopus qui de minori ad majorem transmigraverit Civitatem The same Constitution was made in almost the same words by the third Council of Tours and by the second Council of Rhemes But more effectually to prevent this inconvenience it was at length ordered that at their institution or before their ordination the Clergy should promise to remain at that place to the cure of which they were ordained Vt Presbyteri qui in titulis consecrantur secundum Canones antequam ordinentur promissionem stabilitatis loci illius faciant The like Constitutions were made and received in England I will produce but one of them made by Egbert Archbishop of York in the year 750. Nullus Presbyter à sede propriâ sanctae Ecclesiae sub cujus titulo ordinatus fuit ammonitionis causâ ad alienam pergat Ecclesiam sed ibidem de votus usque ad vitae permaneat exitum While the Foundation of Parochial Churches was thus far advanced by Lay-men and the profits of such as were founded by them were limited to their Incumbents the Bishops also in their Mannors and Demesnes and Advowsons both in City and Country built or gave leave to build Parochial Churches and restrained the profits of every one of them to the several Incumbents The same was done by the Kings in their Mannors and the practice being received generally at last an uniformity obtained in this innovation of Parochial right In the mean time the Bishops with their Canons resided at the Cathedral Church and attended the daily service of it The Bishops indeed not so constantly being obliged to frequent the great Councils of the Nation and often employed by the King in Embassies and great Offices but the Canons were bound to perpetual Residence and both Bishop and Canons possessed the Revenues of the Church in common which were received by the Bishop and by him such a portion was allowed to the maintenance of the Canons as he thought fit This community of possession in Cathedral Churches obtained for a long time For I do not find that in any Churches the portion or estate of the Bishops was divided from that of the Canons or Monks till after the Norman Conquest Till that time the first endowment of the Bishoprick remained in the joint possession of the Bishop and his Canons and not only those possessions wherewith the Bishop and all his Clergy were endowed at the first foundation of the Episcopal See but also those which after the institution and particular dotation of Parochial Churches were added to the Cathedral Church by the liberality of following Princes to increase the honour and dignity of the Bishop that he might be enabled to live in a quality equal to the Great men of the Nation For it must not be imagined that the endowments of the Bishopricks were made all at once But in every Age accessions were made to the original endowment of them by the gift of Princes and pious persons even till the end of the 13th Age that so as the riches of the Nation and therewith the state of Great men did gradually encrease the possessions and riches of the Bishops might arise in proportion and enable them to maintain a port equal to the other Peers of the Realm The Parishes into which Diocesses were at first divided were but few in comparison of the present number of them For it may be supposed that altho the Kings or great Lords might possess very large Territories in any country yet they built but one Church for the use of one single Territory Afterwards themselves found it convenient or necessary to build several Churches in several parts of it one perhaps in every Mannor or these large possessions being in time cantoned out and divided into several lesser possessions every one of the new possessors erected Churches or Chappels within their own limits Thus every Parish was divided into many subordinate Parishes and these in procâ—ss of time became distinct Parishes and so by degrees that Parochial division was setled which we now find in England The difference of our present Parishes in quantity and extent arising originally from the difference of the several circuits of the Demesnes or Territories possessed by the Founders For some time these Churches of the second foundation were but Chappels of ease to those of the first foundation During that time the Mother-Church was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Senior Church and still reserved the sole right of baptism and burial to her self and continued in the possession of all the Tithes and profits which were due to her before the foundation of the Chappels Thus the Constitutions of Egbert Archbishop of York made in the year 750. provide That the ancient Churches should not be deprived of any part of these Tithes and possessions to give them to new Oratories Vt Ecclesiae antiquitùs constitutae nec Decimis nec ullâ aliâ possessione priventur ita ut novis Oratoriis tribuantur A like Constitution is found in the Capitular of Charles the Great made at Salz in the year 804. cap. 3. Quicunque voluerit in fuâ proprietate Ecclesiam aedificare unà cum consensu voluntate Episcopi licentiam habeat Veruntamen omnino providendum est ut aliae Ecclesiae antiquiores propter hanc occasionem nulla tenus suam justitiam aut decimam non perdant sed semper ad antiquiores Ecclesias persolvantur And to the same purpose is the Capitular in the year 813. This Constitution is still observed in as many Churches of the second foundation as yet remain under their first condition and title of Chappels of ease but the other Priviledges of the Mother-Churches viz. the sole right of baptism and burial are now discontinued altho they were so strictly observed in England until the year 1300. that if in any Pleas about the right of particular Churches it could be proved that any Church had from time immemorial right of baptism and burial it should be adjudged to be a Parochial Church and not a Chappel of Ease But to return to the former times the convenience and good of the Church in general requiring such subdivision of Parishes to be made and the Lands and Salaries wherewith the new Patrons had endowed the Churches of the second foundation being not sufficient to maintain their Incumbents without the Tithes and hereby all persons being discouraged from
Nursing-Fathers and Queens her Nursing-Mothers Which Prophecy may well be expounded to denote among other things the Favour and large Rewards which Secular Princes when converted to the Faith should bestow upon the Ministers of the Church for the increase and continuance of the Faith This was abundantly performed in our Church by the Kings and Queens and Noble Personages of England whose Memory is for ever blessed and the Endowment made by them confirmed by innumerable subsequent Laws Then the Endowment was so large and the number of extraordinary Provisions in Conventual Cathedral and Collegiate Churches and from Chauntries and Oblations so very great that the assistance of Pluralities was not so very necessary to uphold the Honour of Religion and of the Clergy But when by Impropriations at first and afterwards by the Alienation of Abbey and other Church-lands almost all the extraordinary Provisions were taken away and the ordinary Provision reduced to less than half it is impossible to maintain the design of those Endowments that is the flourishing condition of the Church without the assistance of Pluralities In the continuance of this benefit to the Church we doubt not but their present Majesties will imitate the Piety and Devotion of their Ancestors and as they once preserved this Church from eminent danger of Ruin by their Wisdom and Valour will also maintain the well-being and the flourishing estate of it by countenancing and continuing all those Institutions Customs and Practises which are necessary to that end I might insist upon many other Conveniencies and Benefits which accrue to the Church from the use of Pluralities as that hereby young Clergy-men are trained up in Curacies under others more grave and experienced and fitted for the Service of any Parochial Church in their own Right who if at their first admission into Holy Orders the Cure of Souls and Government of Parochial Churches had been committed to them would be apt to commit many indiscreet acts and execute their Trust unskilfully Yet the present circumstances of things make it necessary to admit those who are educated to the Clergy into Orders as soon as their Age permits otherwise the Church would soon want a competent number of Candidates to supply her Service since Fellowships in Colledges do not satisfie for the tenth part of them And from the finishing of their Studies to their Presentation to a Benefice there is no other Provision made for them than by Curacies That by the same benefit Provision is made for Deacons who are incapable of possessing a Benefice themselves That hereby the Cure of Souls in many Parishes is executed by two Persons which is a great advantage to those Parishes and to Religion in general For it may happen that the Incumbent of any one Parish be negligent in his Duty or unlearned but it can scarce happen that in a Parish held by a Pluralist and served alternately by the Incumbent and his Curate that both Incumbent and Curate should be alike negligent or unlearned That hereby Provision is made for Chaplains attending and assisting Bishops in the execution of their Office and Government of their Diocesses or maintaining and preserving Religion and Vertue in the Families of Noblemen CONCLUSION I Have now finished what I had to say in defence of Pluralities and submit the whole to the Consideration of indifferent Judges Having done this I hope I may be allowed to speak to the Pluralist Clergy whose Cause I have all this while defended with all freedom Them I must conjure by the Honour of God and which to ingenuous Persons ought also to be an irresistable Argument by the sense of their Duty to make such use of the favour of Plurality granted to them that Religion and the Church may receive no inconvenience thereby and no just occasion of Scandal may be given by them I have proved indeed that Plurality doth not in its own Nature beget any Inconveniencies or Scandals But if it be not rightly used if the terms of the Dispensation be not fulfilled if they so behave themselves as if they cared not for the Souls of either Parish or if they live wholly at one and seldom visit the other if they think themselves wholly disburthen'd of the Cure of Souls by the delegation of it to a Curate if they put no bounds to their desire of Pluralities hold two by Union a third by Sequestration and perhaps a fourth under the Name of another Man by Simoniacal Contract if they neglect to give Alms and to use Hospitality in both their Benefices according to their Abilities if they suffer their Houses to be dilapidated and have no regard to the good of their Successors much more if without any reasonable Excuse they are continually or frequently absent from both their Cures either to hunâ— after better Preferment elsewhere or to follow their Pleasure and live more at ease in great Cities and Towns If they are not excused by Personal Attendance in the Families of Bishops or Great Men or by prosecution of their Studies in the Universities or by designs of publick Service to the Church more advantageous to Religion in general than the Personal supplying any two Country Cures would be or by indisposition of Body real and not pretended If without any of these Lawful Excuses they absent themselves from the Cure of Souls committed to them or do not immediately betake themselves to the Personal execution of it When any of these Reasons cease which did before excuse them in all these cases Plurality will in them be the occasion of great Inconveniencies to the Church and Scandal to Religion It was never my design to defend such Practises nor can they be excused by any Principles laid down in this Treatise But because all Men will not be perswaded to do their Duty I beg leave in the next place to address my self with all Reverence to the Arch-bishops and Bishops of our Church and entreat them to force such Pluralists to do their Duty This they are empowered to do by the Canons and Laws of our Church and Nation still in force By the due execution of which they may regulate all such disorders and all other corruptions which have crept into the Church It is not the fault of her Constitution which occasions any of these Inconveniencies but the neglect of her Orders and non-execution of her established Discipline If these were vigorously revived if their Lordships would please diligently to attend and inspect their Dâ—ocesses force their Arch-deacons to do their Duty the Chapters of their Cathedral Churches to observe their Statutes the Pluralist Clergy to fulfil the terms of their Dispensations and all their Clergy to obey the Canons and to do their known Duty all that Benefit and Reformation would follow which some not knowing the excellence of the present Constitution propose to obtain by such new Laws and Projects as would perhaps shake and endanger the whole Fabrick of the Church What the Lord Bacon observed concerning